NT in Aramiaic?

You are HIGHLY misinformed, the Yiddish language was created to preserve the holiness of the original Hebrew so that it could not be used for bad words etc. A few Jews may in time forget their mother tounge, but to say they all did at one point in their own country is ridiculas. So why did you avoid all the arguements posed?

Shalom and G-d bless
~Hix~

How many american born Jews speak or understand Hebrew except fot the few odd words read by the rabbi on shabbat?

Click to expand...

You're comparing apples to oranges. Doesn't work that way, sorry.

You're comparing a group of Jews literally thousands of miles from their homeland, having been out of HaEretz for dozens of centuries, and who are thousands of years removed from the timefram we are referencing.

I'm sorry, but this just doesn't fly in the topic we are discussing.

\What language did the Messiah speak in the Scriptures?[Aramaic]

Click to expand...

Most likely, yes, they spoke aramaic as the natural tongue. This doesn't mean they did not know Hebrew. In fact, just the opposite is true. If Y'shua was reading from the scrolls in the synagogue he obviously knew Hebrew... and funny thing about this story, he was very young.

What language did Paul use to address the crowd in Acts? [Aramaic]

Click to expand...

Yep, he addressed the crowd in their natural tongue.

NO ONE is arguing that Hebrew was the natural tongue, we all are in agreement that Aramaic was the common language of the day. However, we also argue that Hebrew was not forgotten, and used widely.

Back to your paul example... did he not study under Hillel's grandson? Was he not a great Prushim student? Obviously paul too knew Hebrew. To say otherwise is complete and utter ignorance.

\Hellenic means just that, and is not another term for diaspora, as the Jews went to many lands, not just Greece.

Click to expand...

This is a classic example of a 'strawman' argument. No one said that hellenistic was in reference only to Greece. That is a fake argument you made up to strengthen what you present.

Hellenistic refers to one of many things;
1) A time frame.
2) The Diaspora.
3) A culture.

When speaking of hellenistic Jews on eis referencing the Jews who have left Israel and lived in the diaspora.

Shalom,
yafet

theseed said:

I if recall, somebody earlier said that Luke was the only one who would have know Greek. I think Matthew would have also, being a tax collector.

Does anybody think that Yeshua had sribes to write this teachings down when he was alive?

Click to expand...

All of the NT writers knew Greek. Some have better proficiency than others. Luke knew Greek perfectly. You can see this by reading the Greek in the "We Section", ch. 16 on, of Acts, were he writes FLUIDLY in proper Greek. (Which is NOT the case in Acts 1-15, were he is copying sources that go back to Hebrew. Luke's gospel is also written in "translation" style.)

I am constantly amazed how people (Americans) presume a person can't speak three or more languages in a multi-lingual society! Scholastically, the view that Jews could only speak only Aramaic or just Greek is increasingly outdated.

On your question, I believe the sources of the gospel were penned in Hebrew a few years after Yeshua's ascent. Jews in those days had amazing memories, they would have transmitted teachings orally first, so I don't think that Yeshua had scribes. He had the minds of his Jewish talmidim, which is just as good.

Btw, for those that know Greek, a good rule of thumb for distinguishing "Translation Greek" from documents originally written in Greek is the repeating presence of the "Kai + aorist verb" syntax structure beginning the sentences, although this is not always the case. But 80% of the time it is, especially in narrative.

In normal Jewish-Greek narrative, the "and" is usually the second word in the beginning of the sentence, and it is usually switched between "kai" and "de", in order not to sound "repetative". Good Greek writers like to vary as much as possible and they like to use lots of non-aorist verbs.

You will immediately notice the "kai + aorist verb" predominance in Luke's Gospel and Revelation.

From The Hebrew Union College Jewish Institute of Religion:

Biblical Aramaic

Aramaic displaced Hebrew for many purposes among the Jews, a fact reflected in the Bible, where portions of Ezra and Daniel are in Aramaic. Some of the best known stories in biblical literature, including that of Belshazzar's feast with the famous "handwriting on the wall" are in Aramaic.

Jewish Aramaic Literature

Aramaic remained a dominant language for Jewish worship, scholarship, and everyday life for centuries in both the land of Israel and in the diaspora, especially in Babylon.

Among the Dead Sea Scrolls, the remains of the library of a Jewish sect from around the turn of the Era, are many compositions in Aramaic. These new texts also provide the best evidence for Palestinian Aramaic of the sort used by Jesus and his disciples.

Since the Jews spoke Aramaic, and knowledge of Hebrew was no longer widespread, the practice arose in the synagogue of providing the reading of the sacred Hebrew scriptures with an Aramaic translation or paraphrase, a "Targum" In the course of time a whole array of targums for the Law and other parts of the Bible were composed. More than translations, they incorporated much of traditional Jewish scriptural interpretation.

In their academies the rabbis and their disciples transmitted, commented, and debated Jewish law; the records of their deliberations constitute the two talmuds: that of the land of Israel and the much larger Babylonian Talmud. Although the talmuds contain much material in Hebrew, the basic language of these vast compilations is Aramaic (in Western and Eastern dialects).


Christian Aramaic Literature

Although Jesus spoke Aramaic, the Gospels are in Greek, and only rarely quote actual Aramaic words. Reconstruction of the Aramaic background of the Gospels remains a fascinating, but inordinately difficult area of modem scholarly research.

Christians in Palestine eventually rendered portions of Christian Scripture into their dialect of Aramaic; these translations and related writings constitute "Christian Palestinian Aramaic".

A much larger body of Christian Aramaic is known as Syriac. Indeed, Syriac writings surpass in quantity all other Aramaic combined. Syriac is originally the literary language of the city of Edessa (now Urfa in SE Turkey). The language became the tongue of the entire eastern wing of the church, from about the third century C.E. down until well past the Muslim conquest.

Syriac writings include numerous Bible translations, the most important being the so-called Peshitta (simple) translation, and countless devotional, dogmatic, exegetical, liturgical, and historical works. Almost all of the Greek philosophical and scientific tradition was eventually translated into Syriac, and it was through this channel that most found their way into the Islamic World and thence, into post-Dark Ages Europe.

The complete page for the above excerpt can be viewed at:

http://cal1.cn.huc.edu/aramaic_language.html

Main webpage:

http://www.huc.edu/faculty/faculty/index.shtml

Hix:

A few Jews may in time forget their mother tounge, but to say they all did at one point in their own country is ridiculas.

HT said earlier:

It has also been said that many Jews read the Torah from the septuagint, because the hebrew language had been lost to many at that time.

HT:

I did not say ALL, I said many.

From the site that I posted:

Among the Dead Sea Scrolls, the remains of the library of a Jewish sect from around the turn of the Era, are many compositions in Aramaic. These new texts also provide the best evidence for Palestinian Aramaic of the sort used by Jesus and his disciples.

*Since the Jews spoke Aramaic, and knowledge of Hebrew was no longer widespread,* the practice arose in the synagogue of providing the reading of the sacred Hebrew scriptures with an Aramaic translation or paraphrase, a "Targum" In the course of time a whole array of targums for the Law and other parts of the Bible were composed.

HT:

Once again, your argument is not with me, it is with the scholars from Jewish Institutions of higher learning that you need to contact and correct.

HT stated earlier:

What language did the Messiah speak in the Scriptures?[Aramaic]

Simchat responded:

Most likely, yes, they spoke aramaic as the natural tongue. This doesn't mean they did not know Hebrew. In fact, just the opposite is true. If Y'shua was reading from the scrolls in the synagogue he obviously knew Hebrew... and funny thing about this story, he was very young.

HT:

He was there when ALL languages were created at the tower. He could speak any language He wanted to.


HT said earlier:

What language did Paul use to address the crowd in Acts? [Aramaic]

Simchat:

Yep, he addressed the crowd in their natural tongue.

NO ONE is arguing that Hebrew was the natural tongue, we all are in agreement that Aramaic was the common language of the day. However, we also argue that Hebrew was not forgotten, and used widely.

Back to your paul example... did he not study under Hillel's grandson? Was he not a great Prushim student? Obviously paul too knew Hebrew. To say otherwise is complete and utter ignorance.

HT:

I never said that Paul didn't know Hebrew. He was of the educated and a Pharisee. I was saying that many in the crowd that he spoke to did not know it, so he chose to speak to them in Aramaic, after he addressed the centurion in Greek.

simchat_torah said:

Oh yeah, and you can add to the list:
6) The Essene community spoke Hebrew as the common language.

Click to expand...

Many documents that survive from the Essene community show very ARAMAICIZED Hebrew, which suggests that Hebrew was not their first language.

Shlomo,
-Steve-o

simchat_torah said:

Most likely, yes, they spoke aramaic as the natural tongue. This doesn't mean they did not know Hebrew. In fact, just the opposite is true. If Y'shua was reading from the scrolls in the synagogue he obviously knew Hebrew... and funny thing about this story, he was very young.

Click to expand...

The scrolls would have probably been in Targum, as the sole reason for the Targumim existing was due to the fact that Hebrew ceased to be a language that people understood. The Torah would have been read in the Synagogues in Hebrew, then the Targum read afterwards so that the people could understand what was said (hence why they also included interpretation).

Shlomo,
-Steve-o

Additionally, it looks like Paul wrote his letters in Aramaic, rather than Hebrew. In Romans we see a rather interesting quirk that could only take place with a strictly Aramaic script.

http://www.AramaicNT.org/index.php?PAGE=Romans/RighteousMan

Shlomo,
-Steve-o

theseed said:

I if recall, somebody earlier said that Luke was the only one who would have know Greek. I think Matthew would have also, being a tax collector.

Does anybody think that Yeshua had sribes to write this teachings down when he was alive?

Click to expand...

Luke also shows a working knowledge of Aramaic, which baffles all of the claims to his strict knowledge of Greek.

http://www.AramaicNT.org/index.php?PAGE=Luke/SimonTheZealot

Shlomo,
-Steve-o

Shalom respected Thadman scholar:

due to the fact that Hebrew ceased to be a language that people understood.

Click to expand...

I ask you to please address what has been laid out before making broad claims. It seems that the proofs I have laid out are simply being ignored.

I grant you the idea that the common tongue was Aramaic. However, Hebrew was not forgotten by any means... even among the commoner.

thanks!
yafet

Also remember that as these 'letters' were written, they most likely weren't being considered as scripture at the time. So, why would there be a need for Hebrew manuscripts? Thus, even though Hebrew may have been known for scriptural purposes (at the least), it would not have been used in letters sent back and forth in communication, nu?

simchat,

funny you use the word "nu"...its made its way into simple hebrew...

did you know its actually russian?

so is bellagon - mess

the hebrew word "achla" is actually arabic

so is "kef" which is fun in arabic but hebrew uses it now

so is al ha kef fach

so is sachbach ( arabic for a good friend now used in hebrew)

and taxi
and auto
and lift
and atomic
and bomb
and literally 1,000 other words

what ever their equivlant in Hebrew it brought from another language - but this is modern revived Hebrew - a miracle in itself!

Thadman wrote:

Additionally, it looks like Paul wrote his letters in Aramaic, rather than Hebrew.

HT:

You know Steve-o, that I respect your scholarship, and the way you dig for information with such zeal, but on the above statement I have to disagree with you. Here are some scriptural reasons why:


From the mouth of the Messiah:

Acts9
15 But the Lord said to him, "Go, for he is a chosen instrument of Mine, *to bear My name before the Gentiles* and kings and the sons of Israel;

Acts 26

15 And I said, Who are you, Sir? And He said, I am Jesus whom you persecute;
16 but rise up and stand on your feet, for it is for this reason I appeared to you, to appoint you a servant and a witness both of what you saw, and in what I shall appear to you,
17 having delivered you from the people and the nations, *to whom I now send you,*
18 to open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the authority of Satan to God, in order that they may receive remission of sins, and an inheritance among those being sanctified by faith in Me.

And later on:

Acts13
46 Paul and Barnabas spoke out boldly and said, "It was necessary that the word of God be spoken to you first; since you repudiate it and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, *we are turning to the Gentiles.*

Acts15
12 All the people kept silent, and they were listening to Barnabas and Paul as they were relating what signs and wonders *God had done through them among the Gentiles.*


Acts18
5 But when Silas and Timothy came down from Macedonia, Paul began devoting himself completely to the word, solemnly testifying to the Jews that Jesus was the Christ.
6 But when they resisted and blasphemed, he shook out his garments and said to them, "Your blood be on your own heads! I am clean. *From now on I will go to the Gentiles."*

Scripture tells us that Paul made the statement about preaching to the nations in Corinth , which occurred approximately 2/3 of the way through his second trip of four total.[approx 50-53 ce] Historically speaking, Paul wrote as many as 12 of his fourteen books after he made his statement to the Jews about going now to teach the nations.

And then we have this statement:

Eph3
1 For this reason I, Paul, the prisoner of Christ Jesus for the sake of you Gentiles

HT:

The above passage clearly says that he was writing to the gentile population. The language of commerce was Greek. To write these letters in Aramaic would not be logical. I have heard the arguments for the Gospels in Aramaic, which I watch quite closely for evidence, but we also have to weigh the historical and archaeological proof.

oh, so all gentiles spoke Greek?

haha.. that's only one of many many flaws in this argument.