Spirituality
09 Feb 14
16 Feb 14
Originally posted by black beetleI would think the mother tongue of the Hebrews would be Hebrew rather than Aramaic.
OK RJ, this is my 1 cent: we have the v. “worship” and we have “do obeisance” too. The v. worship is used in a positive sense when talking about God, whilst “obeisance” is mostly used in reference to the general respect given to people held in high regard. Therefore, according to "The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language" we have:
v. Wo ...[text shortened]... es (Ethiopia to the south of the Caspian Sea, and probably also Persia, Macedonia and Syria)
😵
16 Feb 14
Originally posted by black beetleHELLENISM - "to speak Greek," or "to make Greek
Then kindly please present your sources😵
Word used to express the assimilation, especially by the Jews, of Greek speech, manners, and culture, from the fourth century B.C. through the first centuries of the common era. Post-exilic Judaism was largely recruited from those returned exiles who regarded it as their chief task to preserve their religion uncontaminated, a task that required the strict separation of the congregation both from all foreign peoples (Ezra x. 11; Neh. ix. 2) and from the Jewish inhabitants of Palestine who did not strictly observe the Law (Ezra vi. 22; Neh. x. 29). This separation was especially difficult to maintain when the victorious campaign of Alexander the Great had linked the East to the West. The victory was not simply a political one. Its spiritual influence was much greater. The Greek language became a common language for nearer Asia, and with the language went Greek culture, Greek art, and Greek thought. The influence thus exerted did not entirely drive out the local languages or the local civilization.
Except in Egypt, Hellenic influence was nowhere stronger than on the eastern shore of the Mediterranean. Greek cities arose there in continuation, or in place, of the older Semitic foundations, and gradually changed the aspect of the country. Such cities were Raphia, Gaza, Ascalon, Azotus, Jabneh, Jaffa, Cæsarea, Dor, and Ptolemais. It was especially in eastern Palestine that Hellenism took a firm hold, and the cities of the Decapolis (which seems also to have included Damascus) were the centers of Greek influence. This influence extended in later times over the whole of the district east of the Jordan and of the Sea of Gennesaret, especially inTrachonitis, Batanæa, and Auranitis. The cities in western Palestine were not excepted. Samaria and Panias were at an early time settled by Macedonian colonists. The names of places were Hellenized: "Rabbath-Ammon" to "Philadelphia"; "Armoab" to "Ariopolis"; "Akko" to "Ptolemais." The same occurred with personal names: "Ḥoni" became "Menelaus"; "Joshua" became "Jason" or "Jesus." The Hellenic influence pervaded everything, and even in the very strongholds of Judaism it modified the organization of the state, the laws, and public affairs, art, science, and industry, affecting even the ordinary things of life and the common associations of the people.
A glance at the classes of Greek words which found their way into the Hebrew and the Jewish-Aramaic of the period, shows this with great clearness. The Hellenists were not confined to the aristocratic class, but were found in all strata of Jewish society, though the aristocrats naturally profited more from the good-will of Hellenistic rulers than did other classes.
Herod's theater, his amphitheater, his hippodrome, and his palace, though such buildings existed also in Jericho, Tiberias, and Tarichæa, were thoroughly Greek buildings in the very midst of Jerusalem; his Temple also showed this influence in its architecture. The inscription forbidding strangers to advance beyond a certain point in the Temple was in Greek; and was probably made necessary by the presence of numerous Jews from Greek-speaking countries at the time of the festivals (comp. the "murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews," Acts vi. 1). The coffers in the Temple which contained the shekel contributions were marked with Greek letters. It is therefore no wonder that there were synagogues of the Libertines, Cyrenians, Alexandrians, Cilicians, and Asiatics in the Holy City itself (Acts vi. 9).
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/7535-hellenism
16 Feb 14
Originally posted by RJHindsOh RJ my man, you are a bit confused; Greek Koine was the lingua franca during the period we are talking about, however the day-to-day language of the Jews was Aramaic.
HELLENISM - "to speak Greek," or "to make Greek
Word used to express the assimilation, especially by the Jews, of Greek speech, manners, and culture, from the fourth century B.C. through the first centuries of the common era. Post-exilic Judaism was largely recruited from those returned exiles who regarded it as their chief task to preserve their religion ...[text shortened]... oly City itself (Acts vi. 9).
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/7535-hellenism[/b]
Here you are:
"Aramaic Displaces Hebrew.
Aramaic was destined to become Israel's vernacular tongue; but before this could come about it was necessary that the national independence should be destroyed and the people removed from their own home. These events prepared the way for that great change by which the Jewish nation parted with its national tongue and replaced it, in some districts entirely by Aramaic, in others by the adoption of Aramaized-Hebrew forms. The immediate causes of this linguistic metamorphosis are no longer historically evident. The event of the Exile itself was by no means a decisive factor, for the prophets that spoke to the people during the Exile and after the Return in the time of Cyrus, spoke in their own Hebrew tongue. The single Aramaic sentence in Jer. x. 11 was intended for the information of non-Jews. But, although the living words of prophet and poet still resounded in the time-honored language, and although Hebrew literature during this period may be said to have actually flourished, nevertheless among the large masses of the Jewish people a linguistic change was in progress. The Aramaic, already the vernacular of international intercourse in Asia Minor in the time of Assyrian and Babylonian domination, took hold more and more of the Jewish populations of Palestine and of Babylonia, bereft as they were of their own national consciousness. Under the Achæmenidæ, Aramaic became the official tongue in the provinces between the Euphrates and the Mediterranean (see Ezra iv. 7); therefore the Jews could still less resist the growing importance and spread of this language. Hebrew disappeared from their daily intercourse and from their homes; and Nehemiah—this is the only certain information respecting the process of linguistic change—once expressed his disapproval of the fact that the children of those living in mixed marriage" could no longer "speak in the Jews' language" (Neh. xiii. 24).
How long this process of Aramaization lasted is not known. About the year 300 B.C. Aramaic makes its appearance in Jewish literature. The author of Chronicles uses a source in which not only documents concerning the history of the Second Temple are reproduced in the original Aramaic (Ezra iv. 8-22; v. 1-6, 12; vii. 12-26), but the connecting narrative itself is written in Aramaic (Ezra iv. 23, v. 5, vi. 13-18). In the time of Antiochus Epiphanes, the authorof the Book of Daniel begins his narrative in Hebrew, but when he introduces the Babylonian sages and scholars as speaking Aramaic to the king, as if only awaiting this opportunity, he continues his history in Aramaic (Dan. ii. 4, vii. 28).[Other explanations have been attempted in order to account for the appearance of both Aramaic and Hebrew in Daniel and Ezra. Prof. Paul Haupt supposes that Daniel was originally written in Hebrew, that portions of it were lost, and that these portions were supplied later from an Aramaic translation. See A. Kamphausen, "The Book of Daniel" ("S. B. O. T."😉, p. 16; J. Marquart, "Fundamente der Israel. und Jüd. Gesch." p. 72.—G.]The employment of the two languages in these Biblical books well illustrates their use in those circles in which and for which the books were written. In point of fact, at the time of the Second Temple, both languages were in common use in Palestine: the Hebrew in the academies and in the circles of the learned, the Aramaic among the lower classes in the intercourse of daily life. But the Aramaic continued to spread, and became the customary popular idiom; not, however, to the complete exclusion of the Hebrew. Nevertheless, while Hebrew survived in the schools and among the learned—being rooted, as it were, in the national mind—it was continuously exposed to the influence of Aramaic. Under this influence a new form of Hebrew was developed, which has been preserved in the tannaitic literature embodying the traditions of the last two or three centuries before the common era. So that even in those fields where Hebrew remained the dominant tongue, it was closely pressed by Aramaic. There is extant an almost unique halakic utterance in Aramaic ('Eduy. viii. 4) of Yose b. Joezer, a contemporary of the author of Daniel. Legal forms for various public documents, such as marriage-contracts, bills of divorce, etc., were then drawn up in Aramaic. Official messages from Jerusalem to the provinces were couched in the same language. The "List of the Fast-Days" (Megillat Ta'anit), edited before the destruction of the Temple, was written in Aramaic. Josephus considers Aramaic so thoroughly identical with Hebrew that he quotes Aramaic words as Hebrew ("Ant." iii. 10, § 6), and describes the language in which Titus' proposals to the Jerusalemites were made (which certainly were in Aramaic) as Hebrew ("B. J." vi. 2, § 1). It was in Aramaic that Josephus had written his book on the "Jewish War," as he himself informs us in the introduction, before he wrote it in Greek. That he meant the Aramaic is evident from the reason he assigns, namely, that he desired to make this first attempt intelligible to the Parthians, Babylonians, Arabs, the Jews living beyond the Euphrates, and the inhabitants of Adiabene. That the Babylonian diaspora was linguistically Aramaized is shown by the fact that Hillel loved to frame his maxims in that language."
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/1707-aramaic-language-among-the-jews
😵
16 Feb 14
Originally posted by black beetleBeing a vernacular tongue simply means an informal converstaional tongue. Obviously, Greek was the formal common language used in Israel during the time of Jesus.
Oh RJ my man, you are a bit confused; Greek Koine was the lingua franca during the period we are talking about, however the day-to-day language of the Jews was Aramaic.
Here you are:
"Aramaic Displaces Hebrew.
Aramaic was destined to become Israel's vernacular tongue; but before this could come about it was necessary that the national independence ...[text shortened]... anguage."
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/1707-aramaic-language-among-the-jews
😵
16 Feb 14
Originally posted by RJHindsObviously, Koine was the lingua franca of the time; and Aramaic was the day-to-day language of Israel (of the Jews) during the whole Second Temple period;
Being a vernacular tongue simply means an informal converstaional tongue. Obviously, Greek was the formal common language used in Israel during the time of Jesus.
😵
17 Feb 14
1 edit
Originally posted by black beetleI have read that Greek had been the official language for business and government in Israel for about 300 years before Rome conquered it and the Romans did not change that. Even though Aramaic may have been spoken by many at that time, there is no indication that it was commonly written by the Jewish people.
Obviously, Koine was the lingua franca of the time; and Aramaic was the day-to-day language of Israel (of the Jews) during the whole Second Temple period;
😵
17 Feb 14
Originally posted by RJHindsCan you explain why you fail to understand what the case is as regards Greek Koine, Aramaic and their use by the Jews during the period we are talking about? Are you unable to read and understand the pieces of information contained in my 3rd post at page 3 of this thread?
I have read that Greek had been the official language for business and government in Israel for about 300 years before Rome conquered it and the Romans did not change that. Even though Aramaic may have been spoken by many at that time, there is no indication that it was commonly written by the Jewish people.
😵
17 Feb 14
3 edits
Originally posted by black beetleYes I read that, but I am concentrating on the common written language used in Israel at the time of Jesus and when the New Testament scriptures were written. I accept that there was a mixture of Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic spoken and written during that time. However, the only evidence we have is that the New Testament was originally written in Greek even though there may have been many people that understood the semetic languages.
Can you explain why you fail to understand what the case is as regards Greek Koine, Aramaic and their use by the Jews during the period we are talking about? Are you unable to read and understand the pieces of information contained in my 3rd post at page 3 of this thread?
😵
17 Feb 14
Originally posted by RJHindsKoine back then was the lingua franca of the whole known world, it was like English today. I am sure you understand that this doesn't mean that the Jews, the AtticoIonians, the Romans and the other nations were not using their mother tongues as their respective day-to-day language. Hence, if Eusebius is right, the apostle gave to the Jews his prototype gospel written in the mother tongue, which was Aramaic.
Yes I read that, but I am concentrating on the common written language used in Israel at the time of Jesus and when the New Testament scriptures were written. I accept that there was a mixture of Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic spoken and written during that time. However, the only evidence we have is that the New Testament was originally written in Greek even though there may have been many people that understood the semetic languages.
NT was written in Greek because this were the language of scholarship during 50 to 100 AD. However, the version of the Greek NT was Koine and not the version of Greek that was used by both the Greek philosophers Aristotle and Plato, and by the contemporary native Greek scholars. That latter version was the AtticoIonian Greek, and the AtticoIonian Greek native speakers and the AtticoIonian scholars were constantly ridiculing the NT’s Koine because the use of it was in too many cases plain wrong or quite strange as regards the grammar, the syntax and the vocabulary of the AtticoIonian. This problematic use of Koine is the root of the differ understandings and the different hermeneutics of the Bible, which in turn in addition with other social reasons and conditions caused all these Christian denominations;
😵
17 Feb 14
Originally posted by black beetleYes I can understand that because I live in American and speak and write American English which picks up many words from other languages. We have many Spanish speaking people living in the USA and we sometimes speak Spanish - English when talking to each other.
Koine back then was the lingua franca of the whole known world, it was like English today. I am sure you understand that this doesn't mean that the Jews, the AtticoIonians, the Romans and the other nations were not using their mother tongues as their respective day-to-day language. Hence, if Eusebius is right, the apostle gave to the Jews his prototype ...[text shortened]... addition with other social reasons and conditions caused all these Christian denominations;
😵
However, when you say prototype, it suggests to me that you do not merely mean a translation from the Greek to Hebrew or Aramaic, but that you mean that the original was in Aramaic and then translated into Greek. I do not think that is the meaning of Eusebius.