Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Jack Kilmon" <jkilmon AT historian.net>]

Jesus was not writing anything.  The tetragrammaton was often written in the
proto-Mishnaic texts (such as found in the DSS), in paleo-Hebrew script and
sometimes in red ink.  This was to "flag" it so the reader would voice it,
either aloud or mentally, as "adonai" (Lord).  When the LXX (Pentateuch) and
the Old Greek texts came about there were a number of conventions.  If Jesus
ever wrote anything it would have been Aramaic but the sources we have
record his use of ABBA/ABUNAN for God.  The New Testament authors all wrote
in Greek and used Aramaic sources, either written or oral, for Jesus' words.
If Matthew 4:7 is historical to Jesus Ἕφη αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰησοῦς, πάλιν γέγραπται,
Οὐκ ἐκπειράσεις Κύριον τὸν Θεόν σου , he would have said, "tub ktib: d'la
tnasse l'MARYA, alahak."  MARYA is the Aramaic for the Hebrew ADONAI and
both could refer to God, a teacher, a husband, a servant to the master and
was a title that Jesus' disciples and followers would use of him.
In the first temple period there was no prohibition against speaking the
name of God, YHWH, and it became blasphemy sometime in the 2nd temple
period.  This is why the theophoric components of names such as YEHO- in
YEHOshua (Joshua) were shortened in the 2nd temple period to Y'shua
(Yeshua/Jesus) to prevent accidentally voicing the Shem haMeforash.

Jack Kilmon
San Antonio, TX

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Doug Belot" <dbelot AT bigpond.net.au>
Sent: Saturday, October 16, 2010 4:08 PM
To: "Yigal Levin" <leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il>; <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] the hellenization of isaiah

> This is an interesting admission , if this is so , that the NT was 
> originally in Greek , and we know that the tetragrammaton was considered 
> by Jesus and Luke and Paul to be best written as Kupiou , why do you think 
> later scholars prempted those obviously better scholars than any of us by 
> ignoring the teaching of Jesus and Paul and bringing in confusion such as 
> YHWH , if Jesus was writing Kupioz , and Paul was writing Kupioz , why 
> dont we all follow their pattern.
>
> Do we think we know more than they.
>
> doug belot
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Yigal Levin" <leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il>
> To: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
> Sent: Sunday, October 17, 2010 5:47 AM
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] the hellenization of isaiah
>
>
> > Dear Fred,
> >
> > In short, yes. The vast majority of scholars believe that most, if not 
> > all,
> > of the NT was originally written in Greek, within a Greek-speaking Jewish
> > and non-Jewish milieu. But even if parts were written in either Hebrew or
> > Aramaic, the original texts have been lost. Since the best we have in 
> > hand
> > is translations from the Greek into Hebrew or Aramaic, all we would be 
> > able
> > to discuss is why the translators used this word or another.
> >
> >
> > Yigal Levin
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > [mailto:b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of fred burlingame
> > Sent: Saturday, October 16, 2010 5:47 PM
> > To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > Subject: [b-hebrew] the hellenization of isaiah
> >
> > Isaiah 61:1 appears in classical hebrew format.
> >
> > A. An introductory clause: "spirit of Lord of me on me because:"
> >
> > B. followed by a couplet in parallel: (i) "He annoints me to bear tidings 
> > to
> > afflicted ones; and (ii) He sends me to bind up ones being broken of 
> > heart;"
> >
> > C. followed by a couplet in parallel: (i) "to proclaim to ones being
> > captive, liberty; and (ii) to ones being bound, opening."
> >
> > The subsequent, septuagint, greek, translation, in its wisdom, alters the
> > original hebrew and changes clause "C(ii)" to: "to the blind, recovery of
> > sight."
> >
> > The subsequent, greek, translation of the original hebrew new testament 
> > in
> > luke 4:18 then proceeds to further change the hebrew by: (1.) retaining 
> > the
> > septuagint old testament, new clause "C(ii);" (2.) deleting clause 
> > "B(ii);"
> > and adding another new clause "C(iii):" "to send to ones being oppressed 
> > a
> > release."
> >
> > With the symmetry, balance and substance lost in and by the hellenization 
> > of
> > the hebrew new testament, a question arises. Why is the hebrew new 
> > testament
> > discussed not here? Does the opinion continue to hold sway that the new
> > testament orginally authored in greek?
> >
> > regards,
> >
> > fred burlingame
> > _______________________________________________
> > b-hebrew mailing list
> > b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > b-hebrew mailing list
> > b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 9.0.862 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3199 - Release Date: 10/16/10 
> 04:34:00
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew