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

24062Re: [XTalk] JUDAS THE SICARIOS

Expand Messages
  • Sid Martin
    Feb 9, 2012
      Jack,
       
      Are there any other examples in the ancient Jewish world where an individual is identified as the "man" from somewhere?  Why Hebrew and not Aramaic?  Seems like a strange surname to me.
       
      Sid Martin

      --- On Thu, 2/9/12, Jack Kilmon <jkilmon@...> wrote:


      From: Jack Kilmon <jkilmon@...>
      Subject: Re: [XTalk] JUDAS THE SICARIOS
      To: crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com
      Date: Thursday, February 9, 2012, 3:17 AM



       



      Hi Dennis:

      I have never been convinced that the Ἰσκαριώθ came from the Latin
      Sicarius and I have never been able to make sense of it from a linguistic
      standpoint. Why couldn't Yehudah have simply been a man אִישׁ from Kerioth
      קְרִיּ֔וֹת or ish qyrioth, a town about 10 miles south of Hebron which
      ruins are called el-kureitein? Ish Kerioth transliterates perfectly to
      Greek with did not have SH. I think the Sicarius thing is only due to the
      confusion over Simon the "Canaanite" שׁמעון קנניא because
      of the word for "Zealous" קנא which is too blurry.

      Jack

      Jack Kilmon
      Houston, TX

      -----Original Message-----
      From: Dennis Goffin
      Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2012 7:02 AM
      To: gpg@yahoogroups.com ; crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com ;
      synoptic@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [XTalk] JUDAS THE SICARIOS

      It is interesting that amongst the followers of Jesus there was not only
      Simon the Zealot but there was also Judah the Sicarius.
      The Pharisaic movement was a broad church which included not only those who
      were prepared to try to bring in the kingdom of God by force of arms but
      also those, the Sicarii, who were prepared to assassinate those Jews who
      they regarded as collaborators.
      Jesus himself was clearly a Pharisee, since his views regarding the
      afterlife matched theirs entirely. Where he differed however was that he
      belonged rather to the quietistic side of the movement which was happy to
      accept Roman rule as long as the Jews retained religious freedom. This
      attitude however would have been unpopular with the more hotheaded
      nationalistic members of the movement who could not even stomach a half Jew
      as a king, let alone the Romans.
      It is easy to see therefore that if it became a choice for the general
      population between Jesus bar Abbas, a guerilla leader and stalwart patriot
      who had risked his life with his companions fighting the Romans and Jesus of
      Nazareth, the Jews were always going to choose the fighter against the
      pacifist.
      It was no good Jesus preaching that his kingdom was not of this world, a
      popular wonder worker such as he was easily aroused the messianic hopes of
      the multitude, much to the discomfiture of the Jewish establishment. It is
      unsurprising therefore that the Jewish authorities took the opportunity to
      remove him from circulation by passing him over to the Romans for
      condemnation on a charge of sedition. It would seem also that Judah the
      Sicarius became disillusioned with the pacifist approach of Jesus, which is
      why he was prepared to assist the Jewish authorities.
      Dennis
      ---------------------

      Dennis Goffin

      Chorleywood UK

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

      ------------------------------------

      The XTalk Home Page is http://ntgateway.com/xtalk/

      To subscribe to Xtalk, send an e-mail to:
      crosstalk2-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

      To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to: crosstalk2-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

      List managers may be contacted directly at:
      crosstalk2-owners@yahoogroups.com

      Yahoo! Groups Links








      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Show all 15 messages in this topic