Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>]

On 23/07/2005 07:06, Dave Washburn wrote:

> On Friday 22 July 2005 18:57, Peter Kirk wrote:
>  
>
> > 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. 
> >    
> [snip]
>
> Not necessarily.  ... It is also likely, as 
> I have said before, that Jesus' words were rather slurred, considering his 
> physical condition by the time he reached this point. ...

Fair enough, Jesus could have said something rather slurred which can be 
understood as either Aramaic or Hebrew. The position I object to is the 
one which claimes that ELWI is Aramaic but not Hebrew. Perhaps it could 
be either, but it certainly could be Hebrew.


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