Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Read, James C" <K0434995 AT kingston.ac.uk>]

I think it is possible to find books which support just 
about every thought in the world conceivable. But it is clear 
from the ancient writings what their opinions were on these 
things, whether a person accepts them as authentic or not.
Putting magic overtones on the declaration which was clearly 
directed to the El $aDai of the hebrew bible is ludicrous at 
best and can only be entertained by lovers of controversy.

I can't remember my sources but I thought it was quite plain 
that in this period Aramaic had firmly supplanted the Hebrew 
language in everyday use. This is a change which commenced with 
the exile of the Jehudans in Babylonia and in the days of Ye$ua 
had already taken a firm root. The fact that the text remains 
in Aramiac amongst Greek text is a matter of prose style and 
effect. At such an emotional moment in the story the use of 
direct quotation in the original language the words were spoken 
gives the story a greater effect of realism because the reader 
is taken to the scene exactly how it happened. It is clear (to 
me) that this was the desired effect of the author and NOT to 
promote magical practises which would contradict the entire efforts 
of the composers of such material.


-----Original Message-----
From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org on behalf of Jim West
Sent: Fri 7/22/2005 7:05 PM
To: Peter Kirk; b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Aramaic - Abba
 
You are clearly mistaken from a purely historical point of view.  You 
should read Marvin Meyer's Ancient Christian Magic.  Further, it is no 
attack on the faith to tell the truth.  That for some people prayer is 
"magical" is utterly indisputable.  Utterly. 

Jim


Peter Kirk wrote:

> On 22/07/2005 18:45, Jim West wrote:
>
>> ... If some early Christians believed in magic (and some clearly 
>> did!)... and prayer is the most "magical" of all vocalizations.
>>  
>>
>
> I know this is well off topic, but I can't allow this attack on the 
> Christian faith to pass without comment. Christian prayer is not 
> magic. The early Christians clearly distanced themselves from magic, 
> as is clear in Acts 8 and 19. The two have nothing in common. 
> Christians, along with most other religious believers, believed and 
> still believe that (at least in some circumstances) a personal God 
> acts when asked to in prayer. That is quite different from magic which 
> is a belief in some kind of impersonal supernatural force.
>

-- 
D. Jim West

Biblical Studies Resources -  http://web.infoave.net/~jwest
Biblical Theology Weblog -  http://biblical-studies.blogspot.com

_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew

This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.


This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.
>From k0434995 AT kingston.ac.uk  Fri Jul 22 14:30:45 2005
Return-Path: <k0434995 AT kingston.ac.uk>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from mail58.messagelabs.com (mail58.messagelabs.com 
[193.109.255.35])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3A4824C006
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Fri, 22 Jul 2005 14:30:45 -0400 
(EDT)
X-VirusChecked: Checked
X-Env-Sender: k0434995 AT kingston.ac.uk
X-Msg-Ref: server-5.tower-58.messagelabs.com!1122057043!83628338!1
X-StarScan-Version: 5.4.15; banners=kingston.ac.uk,-,-
X-Originating-IP: [141.241.2.22]
Received: (qmail 29474 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2005 18:30:43 -0000
Received: from kuexim3.king.ac.uk (141.241.2.22)
        by server-5.tower-58.messagelabs.com with SMTP;
        22 Jul 2005 18:30:43 -0000
Received: from [141.241.17.18] (helo=KUDBEX01.kuds.kingston.ac.uk)
        by kuexim3.king.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.50)
        id 1Dw2IE-0008QM-VQ; Fri, 22 Jul 2005 19:30:43 +0100
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 19:29:39 +0100
Message-ID: 
<6B84A53BD25BCA46B070A05DD8C8C9F813A399 AT KUDBEX01.kuds.kingston.ac.uk>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [b-hebrew] yhwh pronunciation
Thread-Index: AcWO5PCjM8+ubhRqTOqOZcmPLMfBcgABmGLh
From: "Read, James C" <K0434995 AT kingston.ac.uk>
To: "Alexander Oldernes" <alexander AT oldernes.no>
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.6
Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] yhwh pronunciation
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.6
Precedence: list
List-Id: Hebrew Bible List <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 18:30:45 -0000


Exactly! 
I couldn't have worded it better than your reasoning below and am
compelled to agree with your logical conclusions.

-----Original Message-----
From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org on behalf of Alexander Oldernes
Sent: Fri 7/22/2005 5:44 PM
To: b-hebrew
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] yhwh pronunciation
 
This subject can be (and has been) explored and discussed for decades, and 
still there is no end of the arguments and possibilities.
We can bury ourselves down in history, archaeology, ancient grammatical 
rules, and a great many books written on this subject.

Since we don't have 100% proof for a specific pronunciation, it ends up in 
which proof and pronunciation we find most logic for ourselves, according to 
our personal 'logic', in connection with the facts presented. (Sometimes our 
personal 'logic' may be too influenced by what we wish to be true, and that 
may prevent ut from investigating all the facts the right way).

I know some of you are able to say a million arguments against this, but 
this is what I personal find logic, based only on the biblical text (the way 
we have it today, with the pronunciation we know today)...

- When I read all the theophoric names:

Jehoaddah, Jehoaddan, Jehoahaz, Jehoash, Jehohanan, Jehoiachin, Jehoiada, 
Jehoiakim, Jehoiarib, Jehonadab, Jehonathan, Jehoram, Jehoshabeath, 
Jehoshaphat, Jehosheba, Jehozabad, Jehozadak - and all the names that ends 
with -jahu

...my personal logic tells me that the YHW in the tetragrammaton can be 
pronounced Yeho- or Yahu-.

- When I see that the shortened form of YHWH, that is YH, is to be 
pronounced YaH

...my personal logic tells me that the tetragrammaton may have a vowel "a".

When I see name Jehudah, YHWDH, I see that the difference from the 
tetragrammaton is the Daleth.
If I remove the Daleth from YeHUDaH, and keep the vowel "a", I get YeHUaH / 
YeHUWaH.

...my personal logic tells me that the pronunciation may not be very 
different from Jehudah.

( One interesting detail is the 3rd person masculine HaWaH in Ecclesiastes 
11:3, which is pronounced YeHU[a] )


I'm sure my 'logic' is not perfect, and neither my knowledge. But I like to 
keep it simple, and simple is often the best.
These were just some thoughts, based on only the biblical text.


Alexander Oldernes
Norway


_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew

This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.


This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.
>From dwashbur AT nyx.net  Fri Jul 22 14:32:57 2005
Return-Path: <dwashbur AT nyx.net>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from S4.cableone.net (s4.cableone.net [24.116.0.230])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED1204C006
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Fri, 22 Jul 2005 14:32:56 -0400 
(EDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.105] (unverified [24.119.169.114])
        by S4.cableone.net (CableOne SMTP Service S4) with ESMTP id 26093332
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Fri, 22 Jul 2005 11:34:01 -0700
From: Dave Washburn <dwashbur AT nyx.net>
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 12:32:44 -0600
User-Agent: KMail/1.7
References: <auto-000079297005 AT mail.link77.net>
        <004001c58eda$2a611f70$11664684@xp> <42E11E54.2060009 AT qaya.org>
In-Reply-To: <42E11E54.2060009 AT qaya.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200507221232.44306.dwashbur AT nyx.net>
X-IP-stats: Incoming Last 1, First 199, in%9, out=0, spam=0
X-External-IP: 24.119.169.114
X-Abuse-Info: Send abuse complaints to abuse AT cableone.net
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Aramaic - Abba
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.6
Precedence: list
List-Id: Hebrew Bible List <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 18:32:57 -0000

On Friday 22 July 2005 10:27, Peter Kirk wrote:
> On 22/07/2005 17:10, Yigal Levin wrote:
> >Okay, then, assuming that Mark records the tradition faithfully, the
> >question is whether Jesus would have been using Aramaic or Hebrew, and
> >whether the form ABBA at that time would have been more formal or less.
> > Or, on the other hand, what Mark intended by putting the word Abba in
> > Jesus' mouth. I really don't think that we have enough information to go
> > on.
>
> Well, there are several apparently Aramaic words recorded in
> transliteration in Mark's gospel, e.g. TALIQA in 5:41 and SABACQANI in
> 15:34 (Q = theta, C = chi), and an apparently Hebrew one, ELWI = Elohi
> in 15:34 (W = omega). Translations into Greek are given for all of them,
> just as for "Abba". One interpretation is that Jesus was always speaking
> Aramaic. Another is that Jesus was normally speaking Hebrew which was
> translated into Greek, and the few Aramaic words preserved are preserved
> to show their distinctively Aramaic nature.

Another possibility is that he spoke Greek a fair bit of the time, since it
was the trade language of the empire.  We have several recorded examples of
him talking with Romans, at least one Phoenician, and so forth, so it seems
very possible that he spoke Greek at least in his public speeches etc. and
that the Aramaic words and phrases are rendered into Greek because he didn't
use Aramaic all that much, relatively speaking.

--
Dave Washburn
http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
"Well, if I'd wanted a safe life, I guess I wouldn't have
married a man who studies rocks." - Betty Armstrong (Fay Masterson)