From: Jack Kilmon (email@example.com)
Date: Sun Mar 09 1997 - 15:20:33 EST
> In responce to a Robert Petry post on 5 Mar 1997 Carl Conrad wrote:
> >(1) [...]
> > IHSOU, which seems to come as close as Greek can get to the Aramaic
> >form of the name, which some want to transliterate directly as English
> >"Yeshua," others as "Y'shua."
> Or _rather_ as close as Aramaic come to the Greek form of the name...
> >(2) [...]
> >the historical Jesus whose name in his native tongue was, scarcely in
> >doubt, in Aramaic form.
> As to the form I have noted above the difference. What I would like to
> understand (sorry but it is not quite clear to me) is what is meant by
> Jesus "native language." And so that I may not impose on you Professor
> Conrad twice: if you meant by the above "Greek," it's alright,
> I understand, and need not be any further comment. But if you meant
> "Aramaic", I would appreciate any precise (not circumstantial) evidence
> as for it.
I would like to see this thread go beyond the issue of whether or
not the nuance "style" of Isidoros' now famous "PROVE it!" post
an unscholarly element of sarcasm and focus on the issue more relevent
to B-Greek exchange.
As I attempt to distill the positions, Isidoros seems to be claiming
Jesus' name was a Greek one, IHSOUS, and not Y`shua, and his primary
language was Greek in which he taught and preached.
I claim that this Jewish Judean emigre to the Galilee answered to
his Hebrew name, Y'shua, and his vernacular was Aramaic, regardless of
degree of competence he probably/may have had in Greek.
I have offered a number of evidentiary indicators from the NT accounts
the histories as well as multiple literature citations. I would now
know what the basis is for the position that Jesus of Nazareth delivered
homilies, sermons, in Greek.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:09 EDT