From: Andrew Kulikovsky (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Mon Mar 03 1997 - 22:51:38 EST
Isidoris wrote/replied to:
>We'll start with the statements made immediately above:
>>(That) Aramaic was (or was not) the lingua franca of Jesus(?)
>PROOF, please, and note that these are my parentheses, since,
>having seen the above stated by you as fact before, I take the question
>- - and in the context of this "discussion" - as purely rhetorical.
Jesus most probably spoke Aramaic as his first language since it was the
primary language spoken at that time in that region and the gospels
several instances of Jesus's Aramaic words. That's good enough for me.
If you want proof......Sorry - I wasn't there and neither was anyone
Prove that it wasn't....
Rejecting everything that can't be proven is essentially positivism,
been shown to be methodologically flawed.
>>(That) he also knew Greek as a second language(?)
Greek was probably spoken frequently at that time in Palestine, hence
inscription above Jesus on the cross was written in Aramaic, Latin and
>PROOF (and, parenthetically speaking, the same.)
Again, prove that it wasn't...
>And, continuing with the originally questioned text, where after
>Adrian Popa on 28 Feb 1997 11:39 Jack Kilmon wrote,
>>Jesus spent the majority of his mainly unchronicled life as one of
>>the sons of a "builder" with each of the boys probably speciallizing is
>>some craft of artificing. [...] in Galilee...
>Really?! I 'd have much to "ask" on the above, but that, belonging to
>another thread, would only side-track us here from the question of
>>Greek was the language of commerce.
>A half-truth, if that. Which is meant to ... "mean" what? (Or, was it to
>"de-mean"?) That Greek was not the lang of ordinary life? In Galille?
>Or, was it not also of the religious life??
>PROVE that, too, by the way.
>Or that the Greeks were merely *passer-by,* businessman, merchants?
>PROOF, kind Jack. We'd be much obliged.
Proof Proof Proof! Sigh!
Demanding proof for things that can't be proven is foolish and a waste
time. It does not advance the discussion at all.
> Almost certainly, he had a working grasp of Greek.
>Again, how generous!! "a working grasp..." and "almost crtainly".
>And, by ... generocity, I mean, he might not had been *not* certain of that,
>at all, or almost certain that he did *not*.
>But, PROVE, that he had, merely, "a working grasp of Greek"!!
>Or - PROVE - that he did not speak Greek fluently, not to say....
>Masterfully!! of which you seem ("almost") certain (?!)
>> He is recorded reading the scriptures (in Hebrew)
Haven't you read the gospels, Isidoros? Jesus read from the scroll of
in the synagogue and then proclaimed that the scriptures were fulfilled
the people's presence... (can't remember the reference and don't have a
Bible on me - sigh)
>> His sermons to the "common folk" among whom he moved and spoke
>>would have been in Aramaic....
Prove it wasn't..
>>as would his interchange with his family and friends.
Prove it wasn't...
>>In short, I would pose that he was trilingual
>>but at home in his native Middle Aramaic
>>which also was probably ornamented with Greek "loan words."
>PROVE - the "probability" of the first clause, and I assume the certainty
>of the second.
>Looking forward to the learned statement of facts and of evidence.
And I'm looking forward to yours, Isidoros....
Andrew S. Kulikovsky B.App.Sc(Hons)
Module 6 Endeavor House
Fouth Ave, Technology Park
Ph: +618 8343 3837
Fax: +618 8343 3777
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:08 EDT