Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: ABH "wrist(s)" in the Bible

Expand Messages
  • Kim
    Can I thicken the plot??? In ancient times....yes, Rome, too.... there was a method of chaining prisoners that not only manacled the wrist but wove the chain
    Message 1 of 10 , Sep 1, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      Can I thicken the plot???

      In ancient times....yes, Rome, too.... there was a method of chaining
      prisoners that not only manacled the wrist but wove the chain around the
      hand and through the fingers. The idea of doing this was:

      They couldn't use their fingers to work at loosening themselves or if they
      were allowed to walk around, they couldn't work at whatever kind of lock was
      holding the door shut.

      Also, they couldn't use their hands to dig themselves out. Jail cells back
      then had poorly made walls and dirt floors and unless the prisoner was
      incapacitated in some respect, they could find all sorts of methods to get
      free.

      Notice that Peter is lying down sleeping in this story. (As opposed to
      being chained standing against a wall.) Now I'll playing devil's advocate
      and suggest that unless he was on a really short set of links, he could
      have -had he chosen to - been a busy boy; unless of course his hands weren't
      usable.

      However, the truth of the matter is, he was chained to a soldier on either
      side of him so he had to be good.

      My point is, if the old English fellows had a knowledge of this type of
      chaining --that included wrist and hand-- (which I am betting that they did
      as they use alot of archaic military terms) perhaps their
      translation/understanding of the word 'cheir' is not too far off in that in
      means hands but can include the wrists as well.

      Just a thought
      Kim



      > Thanks, Russ, that's *exactly* what I was looking for (remember when I
      said 'my hands are tied'? This is a beautiful illustration). In the KJV,
      Acts 12:7 reads:
      >
      > "And, behold, the angel of the Lord came upon him, and a light shined in
      the prison: and he smote Peter on the side, and raised him up, saying, Arise
      up quickly. And his chains fell off from his hands."
      >
      > Now, the words for "hands (KJV) and "wrists" (NIV) here, 'cheir', is
      precisely the same used here in John 20:27 when Jesus says:
      >
      > "...reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy
      hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing."
      >
      > In fact, it is used twice in John 20:27, one time unambiguously as 'hand'
      since no one would 'reach thither thy wrist'.
      >
      > Now, since in Acts, there is no doubt that the chains were on Peter's
      wrists, and in Jn 20:27 there is no doubt that Thomas reached forth his
      hand, and they use the same word, then the Greek word 'cheir' must be used
      for both wrist and hand. The translators of the KJV used 'hands' for both
      translations, the NIV used 'hands' in John and 'wrists' in Acts for the same
      word.
      >
      > From which it follows that the nail may have been through either Jesus'
      wrists or hands, and the Greek word 'cheir' would not necessarily make the
      distinction. The idea that it was through his hands as opposed to wrists
      must have some other origin.
      >
      > Make sense?
      >
      >
      >
      > Ancient Bible History Community
      > http://www.egroups.com/group/AncientBibleHistory
      >
      >
      >
    • Jay Johnston
      Bill its totally irrelevant. The fact of the matter was he was crucified. The translation could be made that way as Jesus wouldn t have spoke Greek to let them
      Message 2 of 10 , Sep 1, 2000
      • 0 Attachment
        Bill its totally irrelevant. The fact of the matter was he was crucified.
        The translation could be made that way as Jesus wouldn't have spoke Greek to
        let them know how to write their bible a hundred years later. He was Hebrew
        and would have spoken his native tongue or even bits of Latin. His apostle's
        would have spoken the same. Those accounts would have been repeated and
        spoken many times before being written down. Don't get hung up on language
        too much. Think how many AMERICAN words (not English) have the same sound or
        wording and mean different things.


        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: Bill Hoyt [mailto:elborak@...]
        > Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2000 10:22 PM
        > To: AncientBibleHistory@egroups.com
        > Subject: Re: ABH "wrist(s)" in the Bible
        >
        >
        >
        > On Thu, 31 August 2000, Russ Conte wrote:
        >
        > > It was questioned whether the word wrist appears in the Bible. Check
        > > these references out (NIV) and decide for yourself:
        > > ...
        > > Ac 12:7 Suddenly an angel of the Lord appeared and a light shone in the
        > > cell. He struck Peter on the side and woke him up. "Quick, get up!" he
        > > said, and the chains fell off Peter's wrists.
        >
        > Thanks, Russ, that's *exactly* what I was looking for (remember
        > when I said 'my hands are tied'? This is a beautiful
        > illustration). In the KJV, Acts 12:7 reads:
        >
        > "And, behold, the angel of the Lord came upon him, and a light
        > shined in the prison: and he smote Peter on the side, and raised
        > him up, saying, Arise up quickly. And his chains fell off from his hands."
        >
        > Now, the words for "hands (KJV) and "wrists" (NIV) here, 'cheir',
        > is precisely the same used here in John 20:27 when Jesus says:
        >
        > "...reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach
        > hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not
        > faithless, but believing."
        >
        > In fact, it is used twice in John 20:27, one time unambiguously
        > as 'hand' since no one would 'reach thither thy wrist'.
        >
        > Now, since in Acts, there is no doubt that the chains were on
        > Peter's wrists, and in Jn 20:27 there is no doubt that Thomas
        > reached forth his hand, and they use the same word, then the
        > Greek word 'cheir' must be used for both wrist and hand. The
        > translators of the KJV used 'hands' for both translations, the
        > NIV used 'hands' in John and 'wrists' in Acts for the same word.
        >
        > From which it follows that the nail may have been through either
        > Jesus' wrists or hands, and the Greek word 'cheir' would not
        > necessarily make the distinction. The idea that it was through
        > his hands as opposed to wrists must have some other origin.
        >
        > Make sense?
        >
        >
        >
        > Ancient Bible History Community
        > http://www.egroups.com/group/AncientBibleHistory
        >
        >
      • Jay Johnston
        Yes I agree completely. I know who cares, but I read this post after the one I sent and wanted to let Russ know as I didn t mention his.
        Message 3 of 10 , Sep 1, 2000
        • 0 Attachment
          Yes I agree completely. I know who cares, but I read this post after the one
          I sent and wanted to let Russ know as I didn't mention his.

          > -----Original Message-----
          > From: Jim Macey [mailto:j.macey@...]
          > Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2000 11:17 PM
          > To: AncientBibleHistory@egroups.com
          > Subject: Re: ABH "wrist(s)" in the Bible
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > ----- Original Message -----
          > From: "Russ Conte" <rconte@...>
          > > the word wrist appears in the Bible. Check
          > > these references out (NIV) and decide for yourself:
          >
          > Ah, Russ, be careful. Remember everybody, we're not reading The Bible,
          > actually, we are reading a TRANSLATION of the biblical writings which have
          > been deemed canonical. Not necessarily the same thing, which is why it's
          > important to hold the distinction between the two.
          >
          > Russ showed us the NIV rendering, and it is interesting that the
          > KJV - which
          > became the RSV, uses "hands" for several hundred years, and then in the
          > 1980's they change to "wrists" for Acts 12:7. One has to ask what brought
          > about the change? Bear in mind that the Greek word hasn't
          > changed, just our
          > portrayal of that word in our language has changed. Maybe it has
          > to do with
          > the fact that the KJV(1610) authors only knew _classical_ Greek as spoken
          > about 350-400BCE; whereas today we know that Acts was written in
          > a very good
          > form of Koine Greek.
          >
          > Ah, the problem of translation: don't ya just luv it!
          >
          >
          > Jim... in New Mexico
          > We have enough youth: how about a "fountain of SMART"?
          >
          >
          >
          > Ancient Bible History Community
          > http://www.egroups.com/group/AncientBibleHistory
          >
          >
        • Kim
          Actually the crowd that Jesus moved among probably spoke Aramaic on a daily business. (It came into use during the Babylonian captivity and Hebrew began to
          Message 4 of 10 , Sep 1, 2000
          • 0 Attachment
            Actually the crowd that Jesus moved among probably spoke Aramaic on a daily
            business. (It came into use during the Babylonian captivity and Hebrew
            began to die out.) The more nationalistic Jews probably spoke or knew some
            Hebrew. And those folk who engaged in business or government work should
            have known
            Greek and some Latin as both were spoke throughout the empire.

            You're probably right that Jesus didn't speak Greek, but it is pretty safe
            to assume that he had a basic understanding of many of the words.


            Kim


            > The translation could be made that way as Jesus wouldn't have spoke Greek
            to
            > let them know how to write their bible a hundred years later. He was
            Hebrew
            > and would have spoken his native tongue or even bits of Latin.
          • John Rogers
            ... It was my impression that a vernacular Greek called Koine(?) was used by the Hellenized (educated?) Hebrews? I ve also read a few books that suggested that
            Message 5 of 10 , Sep 1, 2000
            • 0 Attachment
              >From: "Kim" <AncientBibleHist@...>
              >Reply-To: AncientBibleHistory@egroups.com
              >To: <AncientBibleHistory@egroups.com>
              >Subject: Re: ABH "wrist(s)" in the Bible
              >Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 09:20:54 -0700
              >
              >-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
              >Find out Anything about Anyone!
              >NET DETECTIVE 2000
              >Use the internet to investigate anyone!
              >http://click.egroups.com/1/9016/13/_/_/_/967824846/
              >---------------------------------------------------------------------_-
              It was my impression that a vernacular Greek called Koine(?) was used by the
              Hellenized (educated?) Hebrews? I've also read a few books that suggested
              that Jesus was of the aristocracy and that his occupation was construction
              ;^). Since he had relatives that were apparently wealthy might he not have
              been part of the Hellenized Hebrews? Lots of speculation here, I know. John
              R.
              >
              >
              >Actually the crowd that Jesus moved among probably spoke Aramaic on a
              >daily
              >business. (It came into use during the Babylonian captivity and Hebrew
              >began to die out.) The more nationalistic Jews probably spoke or knew some
              >Hebrew. And those folk who engaged in business or government work should
              >have known
              >Greek and some Latin as both were spoke throughout the empire.
              >
              >You're probably right that Jesus didn't speak Greek, but it is pretty safe
              >to assume that he had a basic understanding of many of the words.
              >
              >
              >Kim
              >
              >
              > > The translation could be made that way as Jesus wouldn't have spoke
              >Greek
              >to
              > > let them know how to write their bible a hundred years later. He was
              >Hebrew
              > > and would have spoken his native tongue or even bits of Latin.
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >Ancient Bible History Community
              >http://www.egroups.com/group/AncientBibleHistory
              >
              >

              _________________________________________________________________________
              Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com

              Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
              http://profiles.msn.com
            • June
              Hi John, the sacrifices offered at Christ s presentation (a pair of turtledoves or two young pigeons.....see Luke 2. v 24 - 27 and Leviticus 12 v.8) indicates
              Message 6 of 10 , Sep 2, 2000
              • 0 Attachment
                Hi John, the sacrifices offered at Christ's presentation (a pair of
                turtledoves or two young pigeons.....see Luke 2. v 24 - 27 and Leviticus 12
                v.8) indicates he was of lowly birth. He was certainly born of a royal line.
                Awaiting the resurrection day.......June
                Minster Books,
                20, Wansford Grove,
                HULL
                HU9 5TP
                United Kingdom
                ----- Original Message -----
                From: "John Rogers" <jor45@...>
                To: <AncientBibleHistory@egroups.com>
                Sent: 01 September 2000 21:16
                Subject: Re: ABH "wrist(s)" in the Bible


                >
                >
                >
                >
                > >From: "Kim" <AncientBibleHist@...>
                > >Reply-To: AncientBibleHistory@egroups.com
                > >To: <AncientBibleHistory@egroups.com>
                > >Subject: Re: ABH "wrist(s)" in the Bible
                > >Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 09:20:54 -0700
                > >
                > >-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
                > >Find out Anything about Anyone!
                > >NET DETECTIVE 2000
                > >Use the internet to investigate anyone!
                > >http://click.egroups.com/1/9016/13/_/_/_/967824846/
                > >---------------------------------------------------------------------_-
                > It was my impression that a vernacular Greek called Koine(?) was used by
                the
                > Hellenized (educated?) Hebrews? I've also read a few books that suggested
                > that Jesus was of the aristocracy and that his occupation was construction
                > ;^). Since he had relatives that were apparently wealthy might he not have
                > been part of the Hellenized Hebrews? Lots of speculation here, I know.
                John
                > R.
                > >
                > >
                > >Actually the crowd that Jesus moved among probably spoke Aramaic on a
                > >daily
                > >business. (It came into use during the Babylonian captivity and Hebrew
                > >began to die out.) The more nationalistic Jews probably spoke or knew
                some
                > >Hebrew. And those folk who engaged in business or government work should
                > >have known
                > >Greek and some Latin as both were spoke throughout the empire.
                > >
                > >You're probably right that Jesus didn't speak Greek, but it is pretty
                safe
                > >to assume that he had a basic understanding of many of the words.
                > >
                > >
                > >Kim
                > >
                > >
                > > > The translation could be made that way as Jesus wouldn't have spoke
                > >Greek
                > >to
                > > > let them know how to write their bible a hundred years later. He was
                > >Hebrew
                > > > and would have spoken his native tongue or even bits of Latin.
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >Ancient Bible History Community
                > >http://www.egroups.com/group/AncientBibleHistory
                > >
                > >
                >
                > _________________________________________________________________________
                > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
                >
                > Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
                > http://profiles.msn.com
                >
                >
                > Ancient Bible History Community
                > http://www.egroups.com/group/AncientBibleHistory
                >
                >
                >
              • Russ Conte
                John asked if Jesus was of the aristocracy. Not only was he not of that group, but the decedents of his brothers and sisters did not do very well saving money
                Message 7 of 10 , Sep 2, 2000
                • 0 Attachment
                  John asked if Jesus was of the aristocracy. Not only was he not of that
                  group, but the decedents of his brothers and sisters did not do very
                  well saving money either. Here's an account from Hegesippus that
                  happened in the early second century, and discusses the grandchildren of
                  Jude, Jesus' half brother:

                  “OF the family of the Lord there were still living the grandchildren of
                  Jude,
                  who is said to have been the Lord’s brother according to the flesh.
                  Information was given that they belonged to the family of David, and
                  they
                  were brought to the Emperor Domitian by the Evocatus. For Domitian
                  feared the coming of Christ as Herod also had feared it. And he asked
                  them
                  if they were descendants of David, and they confessed that they were.
                  Then he asked them how much property they had, or how much money
                  they owned. And both of them answered that they had only nine thousand
                  denarii, half of which belonged to each of them; and this property did
                  not
                  consist of silver, but of a piece of land which contained only
                  thirty-nine
                  acres, and from which they raised their taxes and supported themselves
                  by
                  their own labor.” Then they showed their hands, exhibiting the hardness
                  of
                  their bodies and the callousness produced upon their hands by continuous

                  toil as evidence of their own labor. And when they were asked concerning

                  Christ and his kingdom, of what sort it was and where and when it was to

                  appear, they, answered that it was not a temporal nor an earthly
                  kingdom,
                  but a heavenly and angelic one, which would appear at the end of the
                  world, when he should come in glory to judge the quick and the dead, and

                  to give unto every one according to his works. Upon hearing this,
                  Domitian did not pass judgment against them, but, despising them as of
                  no
                  account, he let them go, and by a decree put a stop to the persecution
                  of
                  the Church. But when they were released they ruled the churches because
                  they were witnesses and were also relatives of the Lord. And peace being

                  established, they lived until the time of Trojan. These things are
                  related by
                  Hegesippus.

                  I hope this helps.

                  Russ Conte

                  (original in Eusebius' History, 3.19.20)
                • Kim
                  Hi Russ. I was very interested in this post. I can not find a reference to this in my library. My Eusebius is second-hand and missing some. (Yes I need to buy
                  Message 8 of 10 , Sep 2, 2000
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Hi Russ.

                    I was very interested in this post. I can not find a reference to this in
                    my library. My Eusebius is second-hand and missing some.

                    (Yes I need to buy a new book, but tuition is cleaning me out.)

                    Sooooo GOT A URL for all of us who what it now? Please.

                    Kim




                    ----- Original Message -----
                    From: "Russ Conte" <rconte@...>


                    > Here's an account from Hegesippus that
                    > happened in the early second century, and discusses the >grandchildren of
                    > Jude, Jesus' half brother:
                    >


                    Thanks, Kim






                    > "OF the family of the Lord there were still living the grandchildren of
                    > Jude,
                    > who is said to have been the Lord's brother according to the flesh.
                    > Information was given that they belonged to the family of David, and
                    > they
                    > were brought to the Emperor Domitian by the Evocatus. For Domitian
                    > feared the coming of Christ as Herod also had feared it. And he asked
                    > them
                    > if they were descendants of David, and they confessed that they were.
                    > Then he asked them how much property they had, or how much money
                    > they owned. And both of them answered that they had only nine thousand
                    > denarii, half of which belonged to each of them; and this property did
                    > not
                    > consist of silver, but of a piece of land which contained only
                    > thirty-nine
                    > acres, and from which they raised their taxes and supported themselves
                    > by
                    > their own labor." Then they showed their hands, exhibiting the hardness
                    > of
                    > their bodies and the callousness produced upon their hands by continuous
                    >
                    > toil as evidence of their own labor. And when they were asked concerning
                    >
                    > Christ and his kingdom, of what sort it was and where and when it was to
                    >
                    > appear, they, answered that it was not a temporal nor an earthly
                    > kingdom,
                    > but a heavenly and angelic one, which would appear at the end of the
                    > world, when he should come in glory to judge the quick and the dead, and
                    >
                    > to give unto every one according to his works. Upon hearing this,
                    > Domitian did not pass judgment against them, but, despising them as of
                    > no
                    > account, he let them go, and by a decree put a stop to the persecution
                    > of
                    > the Church. But when they were released they ruled the churches because
                    > they were witnesses and were also relatives of the Lord. And peace being
                    >
                    > established, they lived until the time of Trojan. These things are
                    > related by
                    > Hegesippus.
                    >
                    > I hope this helps.
                    >
                    > Russ Conte
                    >
                    > (original in Eusebius' History, 3.19.20)
                    >

                    >
                    >
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.