Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>]

On 22/07/2005 19:22, Harold R. Holmyard III wrote:

> ... The Aramaic behind Matthew is 
> êlî êlî lmâ ”vaqtanî. Whereas Mark has elohî 
> elohî.
>  

The former is Aramaic, but the latter is surely Hebrew. The Aramaic, if 
not êlî, might be elahî, but not elohî. So I think the author you quote 
here is simply confused. And, although it would be unusual, I will have 
to assume that the NET Bible editors and the guy from Emory were 
similarly confused - at least unless they can offer more than a bare 
assertion of what seems on the face of it to be an obvious untruth. Of 
course their common confusion is not coincidental, as sadly one untruth 
can very easily be copied from person to person in this field with no 
one bothering to think about the truth of the matter.

--
Peter Kirk
peter AT qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/



--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.9.2/55 - Release Date: 21/07/2005