spin

You cannot argue from authority. I'm spin. I make no claims. I say, don't trust me; interact with my evidence.

Because Andy cannot do the job and trusts sources that are encrusted in clap-trap. There is no point in trying to get him out of this. Until he starts interacting with evidence he will only reiterate christian scholars' views.

For me because it is incredibly assumption laden. It is not the way to do research, ie a priori assumptions. Jesus spoke Aramaic, so when a text says "Hebrew" they meant "Aramaic". Logical isn't it?

Of course when Josephus in AJ 1.1.2 says that "adam" was Hebrew for "one who is red", he must have meant Aramaic. When Rev 9:11 calls "abaddon" Hebrew, the writer must have meant Aramaic, and so the writer of Job (26:6) must have borrowed the word from Aramaic as well. Perhaps Jn which tells us "Golgotha" is Hebrew meant Aramaic and the writer of Judges (9:53) borrowed the word glglt from Aramaic. Maybe, when Josephus reported the biblical story about the rabshekah talking to the people of Jerusalem, AJ 10.1.2, he was confused by the fact that the rabshekah wanted to speak in Hebrew, while Eliakim wanted him to speak in Syrian (2 K 18:26 has Aramaic) so that the people wouldn't understand. Perhaps Josephus thought that while Hebrew meant Aramaic, Syrian meant umm, ummm...

Andy hasn't got the idea of what "freethinker" means. He's still at the stage of: if the bible guys say it's so...


spin

Pilate

[QUOTE=spin]Encyclopedia britannica: Article Aramaic:
Aramaic dialects survived into Roman times, however, particularly in Palestine and Syria. Aramaic had replaced Hebrew as the language of the Jews as early as the 6th century BC. Certain portions of the Old Testament--i.e., the books of Daniel and Ezra--are written in Aramaic, as are the Babylonian and Jerusalem Talmuds. Among the Jews, Aramaic was used by the common people, while Hebrew remained the language of religion and government and of the upper class. Jesus and the Apostles are believed to have spoken Aramaic, and Aramaic-language translations (Targums) of the Old Testament circulated. Aramaic continued in wide use until about AD 650, when it was supplanted by Arabic.
In the early centuries AD, Aramaic divided into East and West varieties. West Aramaic dialects include Nabataean (formerly spoken in parts of Arabia), Palmyrene (spoken in Palmyra, which was northeast of Damascus), Palestinian-Christian, and Judeo-Aramaic. West Aramaic is still spoken in a small number of villages in Lebanon.
East Aramaic includes Syriac, Mandaean, Eastern Neo-Assyrian, and the Aramaic of the Babylonian Talmud. One of the most important of these is Syriac, which was the language of an extensive literature between the 3rd and the 7th century. Mandaean was the dialect of a Gnostic sect centred in lower Mesopotamia. East Aramaic is still spoken by a few small groups of Jacobite and Nestorian Christians in the Middle East. See also Syriac language.

spin

Chris Weimer

Pilate - from the looks of it, you've never done serious research before. Here are some mandatory academic rules that they teach you in college (and should even before!).

1. Don't use an encyclopedia
2. Don't have a priori assumptions

Now, the reason for number two is obvious, or I should hope so, but you are confused on number one, so let me explain it a little better for you. The encyclopedia does not actually deal with evidence on its own. Instead, it takes the current or prior consensus or the bias of the editor(s) and writes a general summary of what they perceive the evidence to conclude. Instead, profressors want you working with primary and secondary evidence, that is, the actual texts themselves or scholars working on the texts themselves, never summaries and very rarely ever reviews of works. Those are most unhelpful considering they don't explain anything. So, be a nice researcher and go get some good, clean journal articles or a book discussing the language of Palestine (most beneficial if you could get one taking the DSS into account).

However, you still ignore the evidence spin has presented, mainly the argument from the Dead Sea Scrolls and the lack of evidence that Aramaic was the primary language in culture-conscious Judaea.

judge

To be fair,Spin provided no evidence (except perhaps Josephus). He made some assertions.

spin

Reading skills: D

This student has long shown problems in the area. Suggest remedial work otherwise he will continue his poor showing.


doctor spin

judge

Physician heal thyself.

spin

I'm healthy, matey. But do you need a bedside visit? Standard fee.


doctor spin

Pilate

You are making an assumption here.
That I quoted encyclopedias, does not indicate anything more than that.
The encyclopedia quotes were to show you that the consensus of scholars agree that the common language in Palestine during the times of Jesus was Aramaic.
You are going against the scholarly consensus armed with the following evidence:
1. a quotation from Josephus, that in one instance he spoke Hebrew (which is questionable, on the grounds that I have explained in the previous posting.)
2. That the majority of the DSS texts are in Hebrew (which I explained:the reason they are in Hebrew is because the are copies of previous Hebrew manuscripts. Hebrew was the working language of the scribes. The DSS contain also some Greek manuscripts and several Aramaic manuscripts. the Aramaic manuscrips were new material created duirng the Hellenistic Era.)
Fist, one has to know himself: Know his limitations. I realize that I am not an expert in dating ancient manuscrpipts and in the evolvement of the ancient Semitic languages. Therefore, I depend on the judgment of the experts.
I suggest you do the same. This forum is not the place to introduce linguistic discoveries. You do that in a scholarly seminar of ancient Semitic languages. Likewise: if you want to introduce a new treatment for cancer, you present your research to a convention of cancer specialists and let them test the validity of your discovery.
The subject of how the Jews switched form Hebrew to Aramaic is a very complicated issue, because the Jews did not wake up one day and said "Lets us all speak Aramaic!" Remember, the Jews went into captivity in Babylon, where they initially learned the Aramaic language. Major scholarly works were done in Babylon. Most of the Pentateuch was edited or augemented In Babylon (in Hebrew). Then the Jews returned to Israel and continued to be under the control of their captors, who spoke Aramaic. Eventually, they started to write Aramaic. Some words were fused, others were twisted, and others replaced. (I know a little bit about languages.) After a while, there comes a point where you don't know whether a certain word is Aramaic or Hebrew.
The bottom line is: this is a very complex field, and unless you are a real expert in Hebrew/Chaldee/Armaic, don't make extraordinary claims.

spin

You didn't "explain" anything on the subject. You responded out of obligation, Andy.

The Greek at Qumran amounts to less than 1%. The Aramaic about 12% and there is very little outside already well-known standard, or related, works in that 12%. 60% of the DSS represent new content, not written in biblical Hebrew. You are simply not interacting with the evidence.

Unsustainable obeisance to opinions that cannot be defended.

"The Jews" here means the nobility of the Jews. Some thousands. The rest of the population continued living in their traditional land.

That (the bulk of the) texts existed at the time of the exile needs to be demonstrated, not assumed. Cutting back on the immense facade of encrusted assumption is a slow and ugly affair, as the more scholarly of your christian sources have painfully shed the patriarchs, the exodus, and the conquest, while the united monarchy is still heavily debated and it will take ages before one comes to facing the fact that Jerusalem until the Assyrian assault on Samaria was nothing more than a small town in the mountains which became a surrogate centre when Samaria fell followed by Lachish.

One clings to as much as they can.

The Persians used Aramaic as a lingua franca. They did not speak it as their own language.

It's time to learn, otherwise you will be gulled on the matter.

Does that go to explain why 60% of the DSS were written in a Hebrew dialect (or two)? No.


spin