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

Re: [XTalk] JUDAS THE SICARIOS

Expand Messages
  • Jack Kilmon
    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
    Message 1 of 15 , Feb 8 7:17 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      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
    • Dennis Goffin
      Thank you for your note, Jack. If you transliterate Sicarius into Greek, you would get a noun sikarios, sikariot- which merely requires moving the first
      Message 2 of 15 , Feb 9 4:36 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        Thank you for your note, Jack. If you transliterate Sicarius into Greek, you would get a noun sikarios, sikariot- which merely requires moving the first vowel to get Iscariot. Why would the Gospel writer wish to conceal this identity ? For the same reason that Mark and Matthew talk of Simon the Cananean, not the Zealot. After the Jewish revolt, the early Xians wanted at all costs to appear benign to the Romans, not involved with violence.
        Dennis
        ---------------------

        Dennis Goffin

        Chorleywood UK

        To: crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com
        From: jkilmon@...
        Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2012 21:17:28 -0600
        Subject: Re: [XTalk] JUDAS THE SICARIOS




























        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]
      • Sid Martin
        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
        Message 3 of 15 , Feb 9 7:41 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          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]
        • Ronald Price
          Dennis and Jack, Davies & Allison survey the suggested origins of Iscariot with their usual thoroughness ( Matthew , Vol II, p.157). They mention ten
          Message 4 of 15 , Feb 9 9:11 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            Dennis and Jack,

            Davies & Allison survey the suggested origins of 'Iscariot' with their usual
            thoroughness ("Matthew", Vol II, p.157). They mention ten possibilities,
            including at least three based on Aramaic. I'm left as baffled as D&A seem
            to have been!

            Ron Price,

            Derbyshire, UK

            http://homepage.virgin.net/ron.price/index.htm




            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Jack Kilmon
            Hi Ron, Dennis and Sid: The name of this person, if indeed he was historical, would have been Yehudah Bar Shymeon under normal convention of the times. It
            Message 5 of 15 , Feb 9 1:07 PM
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi Ron, Dennis and Sid:

              The name of this person, if indeed he was historical, would have been
              Yehudah Bar Shymeon under normal convention of the times. It would also not
              be uncommon for him to be identified by his place of origin, "feller from
              Kerioth" much like Yeshua haNotsry rather than the name on his driver's
              license, Yeshua Bar Yahosef. Maryam Migdal-ytha, Yahosef haRamathaim,
              Shymeon Kanan-ytha. Although Aramaic was the common language, Hebrew was
              preserved in certain social pockets like the yahad at Qumran or the Beyt
              Hillel or Shammai, in place names and in personal names, as the IAA
              collection of ossuaries reveal. I would bet my matonnaise farm that these
              guys didn't sashay about Roman occupied Palestine in the 1st century with a
              name like "Jude, the guy with a big knife under his tunic for killing
              Romans" nor "Simon, a card-carrying zealot." Almost certainly they used
              their ordinary patronyms or toponyms but the NT books are overflowing with
              Ya'qubs (Jameses), Yahosef's (Josephs), Shymeons (Simon), Yehudahs
              (Jude/Judases) and Yeshua (Jesus) was the 6th most common name (Simon was
              the 1st). As I read the writings of the Gentile churchy types of later
              times, I can tell they were totally confused on which Jude, which James,
              which Simon was which. The first mention of our Judas, Ἰσκαριώτην (a Greek
              syntactic form of Ἰσκαριώθ) at Mark 3:19 in its Semitic form is an
              acceptable name and not a Latin loan. Among the multiple Ya'qubs (Jameses)
              I don't know if Jesus' brother was known as haTsaddik (the Righteous) and
              his two cousin/disciples as haGadol (the Great) and haZaor (the Lesser) or
              whether these are just back-reconstructions of Greek or Latin names given to
              them by the churchies to tell them apart. Even muckety-muck ecclesiastical
              types mix up the "Jameses" because some of them still get apoplectic over
              Jesus having siblings.

              I guess the bottom line is we don't know if this person was real (Jesus
              Barabbas wasn't, IMO), what his name was and how it was derived but "Judas,
              the knife" would have been crucified before Jesus was.

              Regards,

              Jack

              Jack Kilmon
              Houston, TX

              -----Original Message-----
              From: Ronald Price
              Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2012 11:11 AM
              To: CrossTalk
              Subject: Re: [XTalk] JUDAS THE SICARIOS

              Dennis and Jack,

              Davies & Allison survey the suggested origins of 'Iscariot' with their usual
              thoroughness ("Matthew", Vol II, p.157). They mention ten possibilities,
              including at least three based on Aramaic. I'm left as baffled as D&A seem
              to have been!

              Ron Price,

              Derbyshire, UK

              http://homepage.virgin.net/ron.price/index.htm




              [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
            • Dennis Goffin
              Correct me if I m wrong, Jack, but what I found extremely interesting about the IAA ossuaries was that about two thirds had nicknames and only one third
              Message 6 of 15 , Feb 9 2:27 PM
              • 0 Attachment
                Correct me if I'm wrong, Jack, but what I found extremely interesting about the IAA ossuaries was that about two thirds had nicknames and only one third patronymics. Geographical origins came nowhere. Simon is called "rock", the Zebedees " sons of thunder", Thomas "the twin" and Simon "the zealot". So what's wrong with Judah "the daggerman" ? I've even read it seriously advanced that Jesus was called "the anointed" before his death, which is why Christ was so quickly appended to his name after his death.Dennis

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

                Dennis Goffin

                Chorleywood UKTo: crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com
                From: jkilmon@...
                Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 15:07:55 -0600
                Subject: Re: [XTalk] JUDAS THE SICARIOS




























                Hi Ron, Dennis and Sid:



                The name of this person, if indeed he was historical, would have been

                Yehudah Bar Shymeon under normal convention of the times. It would also not

                be uncommon for him to be identified by his place of origin, "feller from

                Kerioth" much like Yeshua haNotsry rather than the name on his driver's

                license, Yeshua Bar Yahosef. Maryam Migdal-ytha, Yahosef haRamathaim,

                Shymeon Kanan-ytha. Although Aramaic was the common language, Hebrew was

                preserved in certain social pockets like the yahad at Qumran or the Beyt

                Hillel or Shammai, in place names and in personal names, as the IAA

                collection of ossuaries reveal. I would bet my matonnaise farm that these

                guys didn't sashay about Roman occupied Palestine in the 1st century with a

                name like "Jude, the guy with a big knife under his tunic for killing

                Romans" nor "Simon, a card-carrying zealot." Almost certainly they used

                their ordinary patronyms or toponyms but the NT books are overflowing with

                Ya'qubs (Jameses), Yahosef's (Josephs), Shymeons (Simon), Yehudahs

                (Jude/Judases) and Yeshua (Jesus) was the 6th most common name (Simon was

                the 1st). As I read the writings of the Gentile churchy types of later

                times, I can tell they were totally confused on which Jude, which James,

                which Simon was which. The first mention of our Judas, Ἰσκαριώτην (a Greek

                syntactic form of Ἰσκαριώθ) at Mark 3:19 in its Semitic form is an

                acceptable name and not a Latin loan. Among the multiple Ya'qubs (Jameses)

                I don't know if Jesus' brother was known as haTsaddik (the Righteous) and

                his two cousin/disciples as haGadol (the Great) and haZaor (the Lesser) or

                whether these are just back-reconstructions of Greek or Latin names given to

                them by the churchies to tell them apart. Even muckety-muck ecclesiastical

                types mix up the "Jameses" because some of them still get apoplectic over

                Jesus having siblings.



                I guess the bottom line is we don't know if this person was real (Jesus

                Barabbas wasn't, IMO), what his name was and how it was derived but "Judas,

                the knife" would have been crucified before Jesus was.



                Regards,



                Jack



                Jack Kilmon

                Houston, TX



                -----Original Message-----

                From: Ronald Price

                Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2012 11:11 AM

                To: CrossTalk

                Subject: Re: [XTalk] JUDAS THE SICARIOS



                Dennis and Jack,



                Davies & Allison survey the suggested origins of 'Iscariot' with their usual

                thoroughness ("Matthew", Vol II, p.157). They mention ten possibilities,

                including at least three based on Aramaic. I'm left as baffled as D&A seem

                to have been!



                Ron Price,



                Derbyshire, UK



                http://homepage.virgin.net/ron.price/index.htm



                [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]
              • David Mealand
                Sicarius was used in latin to refer to an assassin (sica being a curved dagger). The term was used in latin at least as early as Cicero, so 1st C BCE. It
                Message 7 of 15 , Feb 10 4:37 AM
                • 0 Attachment
                  Sicarius was used in latin to refer to an assassin
                  (sica being a curved dagger). The term was used
                  in latin at least as early as Cicero, so 1st C BCE.
                  It appears in Greek in Acts 21.38 and in Josephus
                  with reference to the troubles in the time of Felix
                  and Festus i.e. after 52 CE, around 20 years or so
                  after the demise of Judas.

                  Does anyone have to hand the earliest instance of
                  the use of this latin loan word in Greek? Does someone
                  have a pre-Neronian example? That would seem to be
                  a relevant piece of evidence which might either support
                  or tend to disconfirm some of the assumptions behind
                  the discussion.

                  David M.


                  ---------
                  David Mealand, University of Edinburgh


                  --
                  The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
                  Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
                • Dennis Goffin
                  Thanks to David, we have established that sicarius does exist in transliterated Greek form from the time of Acts and the writings of Josephus, which I would
                  Message 8 of 15 , Feb 10 7:02 AM
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Thanks to David, we have established that sicarius does exist in transliterated Greek form from the time of Acts and the writings of Josephus, which I would judge to be approximately contemporary. Greek, however was not the earliest language in which anecdotes of Jesus and his followers were told. I submit therefore that it is unnecessary to require proof of the Greek word's existence at the time of Jesus. Peter's nickname Cephas was after all Aramaic. All that is rquired is to be able to accept that Judah's nickname in Aramaic, among his companions was something like "the blade" for this to be taken over into earlier accounts which finally were subsumed into the Gospels we have. The desire not to upset the Romans, as in the case of "zealot" would have been sufficient motive for the subsequent obfuscation.
                    Dennis--------------------Dennis GoffinChorleywood UK
                    To: crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com
                    From: D.Mealand@...
                    Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2012 12:37:59 +0000
                    Subject: RE: [XTalk] Judas and the sicarii ?






























                    Sicarius was used in latin to refer to an assassin

                    (sica being a curved dagger). The term was used

                    in latin at least as early as Cicero, so 1st C BCE.

                    It appears in Greek in Acts 21.38 and in Josephus

                    with reference to the troubles in the time of Felix

                    and Festus i.e. after 52 CE, around 20 years or so

                    after the demise of Judas.



                    Does anyone have to hand the earliest instance of

                    the use of this latin loan word in Greek? Does someone

                    have a pre-Neronian example? That would seem to be

                    a relevant piece of evidence which might either support

                    or tend to disconfirm some of the assumptions behind

                    the discussion.



                    David M.



                    ---------

                    David Mealand, University of Edinburgh



                    --

                    The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in

                    Scotland, with registration number SC005336.


















                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Matson, Mark (Academic)
                    David: A quick check of TLG using search string sikar found extensive use by Josephus (AJ and BJ), and then Acts 21:38, and then by church historians and
                    Message 9 of 15 , Feb 10 8:16 AM
                    • 0 Attachment
                      David:

                      A quick check of TLG using search string "sikar" found extensive use by Josephus (AJ and BJ), and then Acts 21:38, and then by church historians and fathers (Eusebius, Origen, Chrysostom, etc...).

                      Earlier than Josephus (and after in secular Greek authors) the string returned primarily wlesikarpos.... where the search string is buried in the middle of this word...

                      Doesn't appear to have been much used outside of Josephus and later fathers, and always to mean assassin.

                      Mark A. Matson
                      Milligan College, TN
                      http://www.milligan.edu/administrative/mmatson/personal.htm
                      ________________________________________
                      From: crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com [crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of David Mealand [D.Mealand@...]
                      Sent: Friday, February 10, 2012 7:37 AM
                      To: crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: RE: [XTalk] Judas and the sicarii ?

                      Sicarius was used in latin to refer to an assassin
                      (sica being a curved dagger). The term was used
                      in latin at least as early as Cicero, so 1st C BCE.
                      It appears in Greek in Acts 21.38 and in Josephus
                      with reference to the troubles in the time of Felix
                      and Festus i.e. after 52 CE, around 20 years or so
                      after the demise of Judas.

                      Does anyone have to hand the earliest instance of
                      the use of this latin loan word in Greek? Does someone
                      have a pre-Neronian example? That would seem to be
                      a relevant piece of evidence which might either support
                      or tend to disconfirm some of the assumptions behind
                      the discussion.

                      David M.


                      ---------
                      David Mealand, University of Edinburgh


                      --
                      The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
                      Scotland, with registration number SC005336.




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

                      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



                      http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                    • Bob Schacht
                      ... Oh boy. The implications of that information are pretty serious. Judas the Assassin? Maybe he did more than turn Jesus over to the Romans? Bob Schacht
                      Message 10 of 15 , Feb 10 9:11 AM
                      • 0 Attachment
                        At 09:16 AM 2/10/2012, Matson, Mark (Academic) wrote:
                        >David:
                        >
                        >A quick check of TLG using search string "sikar" found extensive use
                        >by Josephus (AJ and BJ), and then Acts 21:38, and then by church
                        >historians and fathers (Eusebius, Origen, Chrysostom, etc...).
                        >
                        >Earlier than Josephus (and after in secular Greek authors) the
                        >string returned primarily wlesikarpos.... where the search string is
                        >buried in the middle of this word...
                        >
                        >Doesn't appear to have been much used outside of Josephus and later
                        >fathers, and always to mean assassin.

                        Oh boy. The implications of that information are pretty serious.
                        Judas the Assassin? Maybe he did more than turn Jesus over to the Romans?

                        Bob Schacht
                        Northern Arizona University


                        >Mark A. Matson
                        >Milligan College, TN
                        >http://www.milligan.edu/administrative/mmatson/personal.htm
                        >________________________________________
                        >From: crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com [crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com] On
                        >Behalf Of David Mealand [D.Mealand@...]
                        >Sent: Friday, February 10, 2012 7:37 AM
                        >To: crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com
                        >Subject: RE: [XTalk] Judas and the sicarii ?
                        >
                        >Sicarius was used in latin to refer to an assassin
                        >(sica being a curved dagger). The term was used
                        >in latin at least as early as Cicero, so 1st C BCE.
                        >It appears in Greek in Acts 21.38 and in Josephus
                        >with reference to the troubles in the time of Felix
                        >and Festus i.e. after 52 CE, around 20 years or so
                        >after the demise of Judas.
                        >
                        >Does anyone have to hand the earliest instance of
                        >the use of this latin loan word in Greek? Does someone
                        >have a pre-Neronian example? That would seem to be
                        >a relevant piece of evidence which might either support
                        >or tend to disconfirm some of the assumptions behind
                        >the discussion.
                        >
                        >David M.
                        >
                        >
                        >---------
                        >David Mealand, University of Edinburgh
                        >
                        >
                        >--
                        >The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
                        >Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >------------------------------------
                        >
                        >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
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                        >
                        >------------------------------------
                        >
                        >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]
                      • Jack Kilmon
                        Good Morning, Dennis: Ossuaries were family things and family members would not refer to their fathers, husbands, sons, etc as Dennis from Hertfordshire
                        Message 11 of 15 , Feb 10 9:25 AM
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Good Morning, Dennis:
                          Ossuaries were "family things" and family members would not refer to their
                          fathers, husbands, sons, etc as "Dennis from Hertfordshire" or "Jack from
                          Houston." Nicknames were given by family members, hence understandable on
                          ossuaries. Nicknames were also used in social groups to distinguish one
                          Yahosef, Ya'qub, Yeshua, Yehudah or Shymeon (most popular name) from
                          another. One example of an ossuarial inscription giving a location is the
                          "Simon of Cyrene" tomb excavated by Sukenik and Avigad in 1941. The ossuary
                          of Simon's daughter Sara bears the Greek inscription "Sara (of) Simon of
                          Ptolemais" Ptolemais is one of the 5 main cities in Cyrenaica. Other than
                          Caiaphas, this is one of the only ossuaries most probably of a known New
                          Testament figure given the additional evidence of an ossuary in that tomb
                          for Simon's known son, Alexander. I realize cynicism is the current
                          scholarly fad but you can only stretch coincidence so far. There is also a
                          point where you have to appeal to the cultural anthropology of the time and
                          place and nicknames were of family or social group use. I cannot fathom
                          "Jude the guy with a knife" when there is a village called Kirioth just down
                          the road. The Hebrew ISH Kirioth instead of the Aramaic Kirioth-itha
                          suggests to me that it is a designator used by the family for a long time,
                          perhaps some priests in the family...IF, again Judas "Iscariot" was an
                          historical figure.

                          There are so few clues, either archaeological or textual, about the
                          prosopography of the New Testament, including Jesus himself, that we have to
                          sink ourselves into the social and cultural anthropology and languages of
                          the time.

                          Best Regards,
                          Jack

                          Jack Kilmon
                          Houston, TX


                          -----Original Message-----
                          From: Dennis Goffin
                          Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2012 4:27 PM
                          To: crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com
                          Subject: RE: [XTalk] JUDAS THE SICARIOS


                          Correct me if I'm wrong, Jack, but what I found extremely interesting about
                          the IAA ossuaries was that about two thirds had nicknames and only one third
                          patronymics. Geographical origins came nowhere. Simon is called "rock", the
                          Zebedees " sons of thunder", Thomas "the twin" and Simon "the zealot". So
                          what's wrong with Judah "the daggerman" ? I've even read it seriously
                          advanced that Jesus was called "the anointed" before his death, which is why
                          Christ was so quickly appended to his name after his death.Dennis

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

                          Dennis Goffin

                          Chorleywood UKTo: crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com
                          From: jkilmon@...
                          Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 15:07:55 -0600
                          Subject: Re: [XTalk] JUDAS THE SICARIOS




























                          Hi Ron, Dennis and Sid:



                          The name of this person, if indeed he was historical, would have been

                          Yehudah Bar Shymeon under normal convention of the times. It would also not

                          be uncommon for him to be identified by his place of origin, "feller from

                          Kerioth" much like Yeshua haNotsry rather than the name on his driver's

                          license, Yeshua Bar Yahosef. Maryam Migdal-ytha, Yahosef haRamathaim,

                          Shymeon Kanan-ytha. Although Aramaic was the common language, Hebrew was

                          preserved in certain social pockets like the yahad at Qumran or the Beyt

                          Hillel or Shammai, in place names and in personal names, as the IAA

                          collection of ossuaries reveal. I would bet my matonnaise farm that these

                          guys didn't sashay about Roman occupied Palestine in the 1st century with a

                          name like "Jude, the guy with a big knife under his tunic for killing

                          Romans" nor "Simon, a card-carrying zealot." Almost certainly they used

                          their ordinary patronyms or toponyms but the NT books are overflowing with

                          Ya'qubs (Jameses), Yahosef's (Josephs), Shymeons (Simon), Yehudahs

                          (Jude/Judases) and Yeshua (Jesus) was the 6th most common name (Simon was

                          the 1st). As I read the writings of the Gentile churchy types of later

                          times, I can tell they were totally confused on which Jude, which James,

                          which Simon was which. The first mention of our Judas, Ἰσκαριώτην (a Greek

                          syntactic form of Ἰσκαριώθ) at Mark 3:19 in its Semitic form is an

                          acceptable name and not a Latin loan. Among the multiple Ya'qubs (Jameses)

                          I don't know if Jesus' brother was known as haTsaddik (the Righteous) and

                          his two cousin/disciples as haGadol (the Great) and haZaor (the Lesser) or

                          whether these are just back-reconstructions of Greek or Latin names given to

                          them by the churchies to tell them apart. Even muckety-muck ecclesiastical

                          types mix up the "Jameses" because some of them still get apoplectic over

                          Jesus having siblings.



                          I guess the bottom line is we don't know if this person was real (Jesus

                          Barabbas wasn't, IMO), what his name was and how it was derived but "Judas,

                          the knife" would have been crucified before Jesus was.



                          Regards,



                          Jack



                          Jack Kilmon

                          Houston, TX



                          -----Original Message-----

                          From: Ronald Price

                          Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2012 11:11 AM

                          To: CrossTalk

                          Subject: Re: [XTalk] JUDAS THE SICARIOS



                          Dennis and Jack,



                          Davies & Allison survey the suggested origins of 'Iscariot' with their usual

                          thoroughness ("Matthew", Vol II, p.157). They mention ten possibilities,

                          including at least three based on Aramaic. I'm left as baffled as D&A seem

                          to have been!



                          Ron Price,



                          Derbyshire, UK



                          http://homepage.virgin.net/ron.price/index.htm



                          [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]



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

                          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
                        • Jack Kilmon
                          ... From: Bob Schacht Sent: Friday, February 10, 2012 11:11 AM To: crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [XTalk] Judas and the sicarii ? ... Oh boy. The
                          Message 12 of 15 , Feb 10 10:14 AM
                          • 0 Attachment
                            -----Original Message-----
                            From: Bob Schacht
                            Sent: Friday, February 10, 2012 11:11 AM
                            To: crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com
                            Subject: RE: [XTalk] Judas and the sicarii ?

                            At 09:16 AM 2/10/2012, Matson, Mark (Academic) wrote:
                            >David:
                            >
                            >A quick check of TLG using search string "sikar" found extensive use
                            >by Josephus (AJ and BJ), and then Acts 21:38, and then by church
                            >historians and fathers (Eusebius, Origen, Chrysostom, etc...).
                            >
                            >Earlier than Josephus (and after in secular Greek authors) the
                            >string returned primarily wlesikarpos.... where the search string is
                            >buried in the middle of this word...
                            >
                            >Doesn't appear to have been much used outside of Josephus and later
                            >fathers, and always to mean assassin.

                            Oh boy. The implications of that information are pretty serious.
                            Judas the Assassin? Maybe he did more than turn Jesus over to the Romans?

                            Bob Schacht
                            Northern Arizona University


                            Hi Bob:

                            I guess I have made my position as clear on this as I can. As you know,
                            Greek did not have a SH (I wonder how they told someone to hush?) so they
                            used a sigma as they did for Yeshua. We have to guess what the sigma in
                            Ἰσκαριώθ transliterated. Was it a shin or a samekh? If it was a shin, it
                            is a perfect transliteration for "Man from Karioth" but if it’s a sigma for
                            "Sikar" than we have to dance around the flag pole explaining an
                            transposition of the iota and sigma and that’s too much for me. If Karioth
                            wasn't just past the MacDonald's south of Hebron and a right at Walmart's,
                            it would be different but Mr, Ockham is tapping me on the shoulder.

                            Best Regards,

                            Jack
                          • Matson, Mark (Academic)
                            Bob: More likely this points to the fact that the meaning is really man from Kerioth as Jack has proposed. One other thing that is worth noting. For
                            Message 13 of 15 , Feb 10 10:15 AM
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Bob:

                              More likely this points to the fact that the meaning is really "man from Kerioth" as Jack has proposed.

                              One other thing that is worth noting. For Iskariwth to be referring to sicarii we have some phonetic difficulties:

                              1. The unnecessary addition of the "is-" on the front. This is more likely to be a hellenished version of "ish"
                              2. The word "sicarios" has the strong iota between the sigma and the kappa, and that seems hard for me to imagine simply being elided.
                              3. The form "iskariwth" has the long omega, which I guess could be an semitic feminine plural ending, but that seems odd.

                              So what you would have to imagine is that (1) a Latin word (sikarius) had been Aramaized (no evidence that this Latin word did come over as a loan word in Aramaic -- I did a quick double check of Jastrow and couldn't see anythign quickly, but could stand to be corrected on this), (2) the loan word then went through some phonetic changes -- adding an "is- or ish-" on the front, and dropping a vowel in the middle, and then (3) that this then became the nickname for Judas in such a way that people knew he was really some kind of assassin or wielder of the short curved knife..

                              I dunno. Sounds like the guy hailed from the town of kerioth.


                              Mark A. Matson
                              Milligan College
                              Milligan College, TN
                              http://www.milligan.edu/administrative/mmatson/personal.htm
                              ________________________________________
                              From: crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com [crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Bob Schacht [r_schacht@...]
                              Sent: Friday, February 10, 2012 12:11 PM
                              To: crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com
                              Subject: RE: [XTalk] Judas and the sicarii ?

                              At 09:16 AM 2/10/2012, Matson, Mark (Academic) wrote:
                              >David:
                              >
                              >A quick check of TLG using search string "sikar" found extensive use
                              >by Josephus (AJ and BJ), and then Acts 21:38, and then by church
                              >historians and fathers (Eusebius, Origen, Chrysostom, etc...).
                              >
                              >Earlier than Josephus (and after in secular Greek authors) the
                              >string returned primarily wlesikarpos.... where the search string is
                              >buried in the middle of this word...
                              >
                              >Doesn't appear to have been much used outside of Josephus and later
                              >fathers, and always to mean assassin.

                              Oh boy. The implications of that information are pretty serious.
                              Judas the Assassin? Maybe he did more than turn Jesus over to the Romans?

                              Bob Schacht
                              Northern Arizona University


                              >Mark A. Matson
                              >Milligan College, TN
                              >http://www.milligan.edu/administrative/mmatson/personal.htm
                            • Gary Greenberg
                              John indicates that Iscariot was a family name of some sort and that Judas’ father Simon was also an Iscariot. It seems unlikely that multiple family members
                              Message 14 of 15 , Feb 10 10:36 AM
                              • 0 Attachment
                                John indicates that Iscariot was a family name of some sort and that Judas’ father Simon was also an Iscariot. It seems unlikely that multiple family members would publicly be known by the same anti-Roman, and Herod or Pilate wouldn’t crack down. And how likely is it that a member of a family bitterly opposed to collaboration with the Romans would go to the Sadducee collaborators and work out a deal to betray a religious teacher who urges his followers to accept Pharisee teachings (per Matthew.)

                                Gary
                                Gary Greenberg
                                Web site: Bible Myth and History

                                Author of the following books

                                101 Myths of the Bible
                                The Moses Mystery
                                The Judas Brief
                                King David Versus Israel
                                Who Wrote the Gospels?
                                Manetho: A Study in Egyptian Chronology

                                From: Dennis Goffin
                                Sent: Friday, February 10, 2012 10:02 AM
                                To: crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com
                                Subject: RE: [XTalk] Judas and the sicarii ?


                                Thanks to David, we have established that sicarius does exist in transliterated Greek form from the time of Acts and the writings of Josephus, which I would judge to be approximately contemporary. Greek, however was not the earliest language in which anecdotes of Jesus and his followers were told. I submit therefore that it is unnecessary to require proof of the Greek word's existence at the time of Jesus. Peter's nickname Cephas was after all Aramaic. All that is rquired is to be able to accept that Judah's nickname in Aramaic, among his companions was something like "the blade" for this to be taken over into earlier accounts which finally were subsumed into the Gospels we have. The desire not to upset the Romans, as in the case of "zealot" would have been sufficient motive for the subsequent obfuscation.
                                Dennis--------------------Dennis GoffinChorleywood UK
                                To: mailto:crosstalk2%40yahoogroups.com
                                From: mailto:D.Mealand%40ed.ac.uk
                                Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2012 12:37:59 +0000
                                Subject: RE: [XTalk] Judas and the sicarii ?

                                Sicarius was used in latin to refer to an assassin

                                (sica being a curved dagger). The term was used

                                in latin at least as early as Cicero, so 1st C BCE.

                                It appears in Greek in Acts 21.38 and in Josephus

                                with reference to the troubles in the time of Felix

                                and Festus i.e. after 52 CE, around 20 years or so

                                after the demise of Judas.

                                Does anyone have to hand the earliest instance of

                                the use of this latin loan word in Greek? Does someone

                                have a pre-Neronian example? That would seem to be

                                a relevant piece of evidence which might either support

                                or tend to disconfirm some of the assumptions behind

                                the discussion.

                                David M.

                                ---------

                                David Mealand, University of Edinburgh

                                --

                                The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in

                                Scotland, with registration number SC005336.



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





                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.