Steven Avery
Administrator
This first post will place a lot of the original material, as it has been written over the years.
More planned to tweak and summarize.
==========================================
POST THAT SUMMARIZES HEBRAISTI SCHOLARSHIP
Followup post on the Facebook thread
Facebook - Sept 1, 2015
More on the Hebrew-Aramaic topic - the resources, placed here:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/purebible/permalink/854829001275657/?comment_id=855529351205622&comment_tracking={"tn":"R"}
Here is a summary of what we have from Ken Penner:
Here is the very fine endorsement of the Ken Penner scholarship (and my comments) by Randall Buth placed on the b-greek forum.
[B-Greek] Aramaic or Hebrew in NET Bible
Randall Buth - July 31, 2009
https://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-greek/2009-July/049973.html
And I thanked Randall and responded:
[B-Greek] Aramaic or Hebrew in NET Bible
Steven Avery - July 31, 2009
https://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-greek/2009-July/049977.html
Steven Avery
More planned to tweak and summarize.
Facebook - August 31, 2015
Hebraisti == Hebrew & the "Aramaic" blunder in modern versions
https://www.facebook.com/groups/purebible/permalink/854829001275657/?match=ZG91Z2xhcyBoYW1w
==========================================
Can't anybody here play this game? The modern versions can't even get the name of a language right .. not even Hebraisti (note the small clue in the sound.)
==========================================
A post placed here:
Do We Need to Get Inside the Hebrew Minds of the NT Authors?
Walter Varnar
(not currently up)
After noting the comment in
Nerdy Language Majors
https://www.facebook.com/groups/NerdyLanguageMajors/permalink/634221546680518/
==========================================
POST THAT SUMMARIZES HEBRAISTI SCHOLARSHIP
While, I agree with your general sentiment, I am surprised about this about Papias:
"(either Hebrew or more likely Aramaic)"
As Ken Penner showed rather effectively in two papers:
“What language did Paul speak in Acts 21–22? Ancient names for Hebrew and Aramaic,” Canadian Society of Biblical Studies Annual Meeting, Halifax, May 2003.
“Greek Names for Hebrew and Aramaic: A Case for Lexical Revision,” Society of Biblical Literature Annual Meeting, Greek Language and Linguistics Section, November 2004.
Hebraisti is Hebrew in the NT, including verses like this one referencing τῇ Ἑβραΐδι διαλέκτῳ:
Acts 21:40 (AV)
And when he had given him licence,
Paul stood on the stairs,
and beckoned with the hand unto the people.
And when there was made a great silence,
he spake unto them in the Hebrew tongue, saying,
(Penner notes that there are other words available for Aramaic, ie. Syristi or Chaldee.)
While Ken Penner was especially writing of the NT, the same should be the application from Papias, of hebraidi dialekto: Ματθαῖος μὲν οὖν Ἑβραΐδι διαλέκτῳ.
And all this is also the view of other informed modern writers including:
[B-Greek] Aramaic or Hebrew in NET Bible
Randall Buth - July 31, 2009
https://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-greek/2009-July/049973.html
...
EBRAISTI means, surprise, EBRAISTI, i.e. Hebrew,
and SYRISTI means, Aramaic, like at Daniel 2.4.
And NET would need updating if still propagating incorrect views.
Douglas Hamp discusses a little of how this how tinged modern translations into error:
The Language Of Jesus: Hebrew or Aramaic? (2005)
Douglas Hamp
https://books.google.com/books?id=12KTD95EhQcC&pg=PA4
Followup post on the Facebook thread
Facebook - Sept 1, 2015
More on the Hebrew-Aramaic topic - the resources, placed here:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/purebible/permalink/854829001275657/?comment_id=855529351205622&comment_tracking={"tn":"R"}
More on the Hebrew-Aramaic topic - the resources, placed here:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/NerdyLanguageMajors/permalink/634221546680518/?comment_id=635033536599319&offset=0&total_comments=17&comment_tracking={"tn":"R"}
===================
The reference on the cross is circular to the Aramaic theory. The proper names can be either language. From the first paper below:
"Proper names are not reliable indicators of language. Aramaic names appear in Hebrew texts, and vice-versa."
Here are the Ken Penner papers that show the error in the Hebraisti is Aramaic equation.
==================
Ancient names for Hebrew and Aramaic: A Case for Lexical Revision
Ken Penner
https://www.academia.edu/1669907/Ancient_names_for_Hebrew_and_Aramaic_A_Case_for_Lexical_Revision
What language did Paul speak in Acts 21-22? Ancient names for Hebrew and Aramaic
Ken Penner
https://www.academia.edu/1669906/What_language_did_Paul_speak_in_Acts_21-22_Ancient_names_for_Hebrew_and_Aramaic
==================
See also:
The Language Environment of First Century Judaea: Jerusalem Studies in the Synoptic Gospels—
Jerusalem Studies in the Synoptic Gospels—Volume Two (2013)
Hebraisti in Ancient Texts: Does Ἑβραϊστί Ever Mean “Aramaic”?
Randall Buth and Chad Pierce
https://books.google.com/books?id=F5QXAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA66
p. 66-109
========================================
ADDED HERE: Note that these may not be meant as public papers.
Note also that another related paper in the book is online from
The Origins of the “Exclusive Aramaic Model” in the Nineteenth Century: Methodological Fallacies and Subtle Motives
Guido Baltes
http://www.guidobaltes.de/Medien/PDF/Guido_Baltes_-_Origins_Exclusive_Aramaic.pdf
p. 9-34
==================
Also from the book:
The Use of Hebrew and Aramaic in Epigraphic Sources of the New Testament Era
Guido Baltes
http://www.guidobaltes.de/Medien/PDF/Guido_Baltes_-_The_Use_of_Hebrew_and_Aramaic.pdf
p. 35-65
Distinguishing Hebrew from Aramaic in Semitized Greek Texts, with an Application for the Gospels and Pseudepigrapha
http://www.biblicallanguagecenter.c...4/05/9789004263406_08-Buth-Distinguishing.pdf
.P. 247 -319|
Here is a summary of what we have from Ken Penner:
Ken Penner Hebrew in the NT Bibliography
Those two papers will give us good summaries of the material originally called:
“What language did Paul speak in Acts 21–22? Ancient names for Hebrew and Aramaic,” Canadian Society of Biblical Studies Annual Meeting, Halifax, May 2003.
“Greek Names for Hebrew and Aramaic: A Case for Lexical Revision,” Society of Biblical Literature Annual Meeting, Greek Language and Linguistics Section, November 2004.
Ancient names for Hebrew and Aramaic: A Case for Lexical Revision (2003)
Ken Penner
https://www.academia.edu/1669907/Ancient_names_for_Hebrew_and_Aramaic_A_Case_for_Lexical_Revision
What language did Paul speak in Acts 21-22? Ancient names for Hebrew and Aramaic
Ken Penner
https://www.academia.edu/1669906/Wh...ts_21-22_Ancient_names_for_Hebrew_and_Aramaic
Here is the very fine endorsement of the Ken Penner scholarship (and my comments) by Randall Buth placed on the b-greek forum.
[B-Greek] Aramaic or Hebrew in NET Bible
Randall Buth - July 31, 2009
https://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-greek/2009-July/049973.html
> Mitch Larramore Augusta, GA
>As I read the NET Bible, the translators simply can not decide whether or not to translate hEBRAISTi "Hebrew" or "Aramaic." What is
>going on behind the scenes that is causing this confusion? Should it be Hebrew or Aramaic? It can't be both, can it?
Steven Avery
Ken Penner did an excellent SBL presentation on this question, which includes language and history and culture, presented at the SBL in 2004.
One post on b-greek was at:
[b-greek] Hebrew =/=Aramaic
http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-greek/2003-May/025398.html
These materials used to be online in various forms. Essentially I believe it is safe to say that his case that Hebraisti == Hebrew and that the Greek word for Aramaic would be distinct, (a form of Chaldee or Syriac) was very strong. I may have a summary in my archives, but better would be to ask Ken Penner for the full material.
The Reformation Bible scholars, eg. the Geneva and King James Bible, always understood this as Hebrew as well. Apparently it changed when a non-discarded theory (partly due to DSS) of Hebrew atrophy in the 1st century became popular in the 19th century. However modern texts do not always catch up so quickly to modern rediscoveries.
Shalom,
Steven Avery
Steve is essentially correct on all points, including the "now-discarded" theory (that still serves as the matrix viewpoint for many in NT studies). However, the view that 'Hebrew' EBRAISTI means 'Aramaic' is older than the 19th century and goes back to the reformation era when contact with Eastern Syriac churches brought the 'Aramaic' view. The 'Aramaic' view is formed on four and more misconcalculations,
1) a lack of knowledge that words/forms like RABBOUNI were Hebrew, since they didn't find them in the Hebrew Bible, and
2) forgetting that names of a foreign etymology cross language borders, (Ian is an English name, a Scottish name, a Hebrew name, all of the above. A person could use Golgotha as a Hebrew word), and
3) not recognizing that Greek replaced Hebrew forms with Aramaic ones as a matter of preference, e.g. sikera instead of sekar when 'translating' the LXX, or writing PesaH as PASXA instead of PESAX when translating from Hebrew. Greek interfaced with Aramaic over the whole mideast but only interfaced with Hebrew in Yehud.
4) an assumption that people were relying on targums in Israel as their scripture in the first century. Something that the DSS have shown to be false. (DSS only have "Job" for certain, and that from an Eastern source.)
5) Josephus and others did not confuse the languages as is alleged by moderns who seem to confuse them. When Josephus said that SABBATA meant 'rest' in Hebrew he was correct. Shabat is not a verb in Aramaic (they used naH) and the -A ending of SABBATA comes from the processes behind point 3 above'. Josephus even knew that the 'patriarchal language' was Hebrew, see War 5:272, which shouldn't be surprising for a highly educated tri-lingual.
So, contra BDAG,
EBRAISTI means, surprise, EBRAISTI, i.e. Hebrew, and SYRISTI means, Aramaic, like at Daniel 2.4.
And NET would need updating if still propogating incorrect views.
ERRWSQE
Randall
--
Randall Buth, PhD
www.biblicalulpan.org
randallbuth at gmail.com
Biblical Language Center
Learn Easily - Progress Further - Remember for Life
And I thanked Randall and responded:
[B-Greek] Aramaic or Hebrew in NET Bible
Steven Avery - July 31, 2009
https://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-greek/2009-July/049977.html
Note that it still would be good to find out what Reformation Bible texts or writings supported the Aramaic theory.Thanks, Randall. for the summary and additional information. First here are some notes from Ken Penner. They are still on the Net, very nicely.
Ken Penner -
What language did Paul speak in Acts 21-22? Ancient names for Hebrew and Aramaic.? (old url gone, use new)
==================
Some additional notes, there are about five different b-greek threads going back to the 1990s.
[biblical-studies] Aramaic was called "Hebrew"? - 2003 forum
discussion - Ken Penner
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/biblical-studies/message/3376
[B-Greek] PASXA and SIKERA --transliteration from Hebrew - Ken Penner
http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-greek/2007-April/042555.html
Hebraisti == Hebrew - What language did Paul speak in Acts 21:22 ? -
my summary notes of the articles above
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic/message/7527
====================
Second we, could mention the book by Alan Millard about literacy, although he does not address this translational issue so cogently he does emphasize Hebrew as a common language of the day.
Reading and Writing In the Time of Jesus. (Sheffield Academic Press, 2000)
http://www.bibleinterp.com/articles/Millard_Jesus.shtml
http://books.google.com/books?id=TCrfgC6QWp0C
And some of the historical scholarship on Hebraisti is mentioned
in the summary by Douglas Hamp
Discovering the Language of Jesus Hebrew or Aramaic?
http://www.ccsom.org/languageofjesus/
===============================
Randall
>However, the view that 'Hebrew' EBRAISTI means 'Aramaic' is older than the 19th century and goes back to the reformation era when contact with Eastern Syriac churches brought the 'Aramaic' view.
I would be interested in any specific references on this. Afaik, there were no actual Reformation Bibles that translated the word Hebraisti as Aramaic (or anything other than Hebrew) but it was a type of very invigorating scholarship.
Randall
>The 'Aramaic' view is formed on four and more misconcalculations (snip)
Thanks for this fine summary !
Randall
>So, contra BDAG, EBRAISTI means, surprise, EBRAISTI, i.e. Hebrew,
>and SYRISTI means, Aramaic, like at Daniel 2.4.
>And NET would need updating if still propogating incorrect views.
Agreed.
En passant, the Bar Kochba letters might be worthwhile to mention, and the poetry at Qumran (this is emphasized by Dr. Norman Golb). These were discoveries that helped current the scholarship misemphasis.
Acts 21:40 (KJB)
And when he had given him licence, Paul stood on the stairs,
and beckoned with the hand unto the people.
And when there was made a great silence,
he spake unto them in the Hebrew tongue, saying,
Steven Avery
Last edited: