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

[tc-list] RE: The Semitic Origin of the New Testament

Expand Messages
  • Robert D. Haslach
    On the language of Jesus - Mr. Washburn addresses one of the most interesting issues: how did Jesus communicate with people who would not have
    Message 1 of 11 , Jan 6, 1972
    • 0 Attachment
      On the language of Jesus - Mr. Washburn addresses one of the most
      interesting issues: how did Jesus communicate with people who would not
      have wanted/bothered/needed to learn Aramaic or whatever Galilean dialect
      used at home or down at the fishing boats.
      Since anyone could have walked (I aver) from Philadelphia to Spain and
      obtained food, drink and lodging, using Koine, and Jesus dealt with a
      range of non-natives, I issue the open question to my Koine students -
      did Jesus speak Greek?
      As always, absence of facts and documents does not prove any particular
      point of view.

      Robert Haslach
      Washington, DC
      On Wed, 5 Jan 2000, Dave Washburn wrote:

      > Jim WEst wrote:
      > > >
      > > >Secondly, how can we hope to "establish" a new textual criticism for the
      > > >N.T. based upon a complete dirth of Semitic New Testament manuscripts?
      > >
      > > this is precisely the heart of the problem. there are a few semitic words
      > > in the nt and there is little doubt, at least to me, that jesus spoke
      > > aramaic. but where is the ms evidence for the claim that the nt was written
      > > in some semitic dialect? does anyone know of a single manuscript of any nt
      > > text in aramaic?
      >
      > Agreed. I would go even further and suggest that Jesus also spoke
      > Greek, since we have reports that He spoke to Romans,
      > Syrophonecians and others would likely would not have bothered to
      > learn Aramaic. And aside from the total lack of manuscript
      > evidence, I would also suggest that the Greek of the NT shows no
      > signs of being translation Greek. I second Jim's DOA conclusion.
      >
      >
      > Dave Washburn
      > http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
      > Teach me your way, O Lord, and I will walk in your truth;
      > give me an undivided heart that I may fear your name.
      > Psalm 86:11
      >
      > ---
      > You are currently subscribed to tc-list as: rhaslach@...
      > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-tc-list-445P@...-certr.org
      >

      Regards,
      Robert D. Haslach
      Bye


      ---
      You are currently subscribed to tc-list as: ListSaver-of-tc-list@...
      To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-tc-list-445P@...-certr.org
    • James Trimm
      Some of them date back as far as the 4th century. I should add that age is really not a very important factor. Before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls,
      Message 2 of 11 , Jan 5, 2000
      • 0 Attachment
        Some of them date back as far as the 4th century.

        I should add that age is really not a very important factor.

        Before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the oldest Hebrew Tanak
        manuscripts
        only dated to the middle ages. At that time the oldest manuscripts of any
        TANAK books by far were Greek LXX manuscripts dating to the 4th century.
        Yet NO ONE would have argued based on that fact, that the TANAK had first
        been written in Greek and was only later translated into Hebrew.

        James Trimm

        >At 12:30 PM 1/5/00 -0600, you wrote:
        >
        >>Yep. And my book tells you exactly what their manuscript numbers are and
        >>where
        >>they are deposited. It also discusses internal evidence that the text of
        >>these manuscripts stands behind our Greek text.
        >
        >well i dont want ya to give away all your book's info- but what are the
        >dates of these mss?
        >
        >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
        >
        >Jim West, ThD
        >jwest@...
        >http://web.infoave.net/~jwest
        >
        >
        >
        >---
        >You are currently subscribed to tc-list as: jstrimm@...
        >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-tc-list-445P@...-certr.org




        ---
        You are currently subscribed to tc-list as: ListSaver-of-tc-list@...
        To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-tc-list-445P@...-certr.org
      • Jim West
        ... so nothing really to compare with the papyri as far as age is concerned. ... it is an exceedingly important factor. if you have a copy of the declaration
        Message 3 of 11 , Jan 5, 2000
        • 0 Attachment
          At 05:13 PM 1/5/00 -0600, you wrote:
          >Some of them date back as far as the 4th century.

          so nothing really to compare with the papyri as far as age is concerned.

          >
          >I should add that age is really not a very important factor.

          it is an exceedingly important factor. if you have a copy of the
          declaration of independence that dates to the year 1788, and one that dates
          to the year 1850, which one will be most important? which will have greater
          intrinsic value?

          >
          >Before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the oldest Hebrew Tanak
          >manuscripts
          >only dated to the middle ages. At that time the oldest manuscripts of any
          >TANAK books by far were Greek LXX manuscripts dating to the 4th century.
          >Yet NO ONE would have argued based on that fact, that the TANAK had first
          >been written in Greek and was only later translated into Hebrew.

          in fact that has been argued. not succesfully to be sure, but it has been
          argued.

          best,

          jim

          ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

          Jim West, ThD
          jwest@...
          http://web.infoave.net/~jwest



          ---
          You are currently subscribed to tc-list as: ListSaver-of-tc-list@...
          To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-tc-list-445P@...-certr.org
        • Dave Washburn
          ... Agreed. I would go even further and suggest that Jesus also spoke Greek, since we have reports that He spoke to Romans, Syrophonecians and others would
          Message 4 of 11 , Jan 5, 2000
          • 0 Attachment
            Jim WEst wrote:
            > >
            > >Secondly, how can we hope to "establish" a new textual criticism for the
            > >N.T. based upon a complete dirth of Semitic New Testament manuscripts?
            >
            > this is precisely the heart of the problem. there are a few semitic words
            > in the nt and there is little doubt, at least to me, that jesus spoke
            > aramaic. but where is the ms evidence for the claim that the nt was written
            > in some semitic dialect? does anyone know of a single manuscript of any nt
            > text in aramaic?

            Agreed. I would go even further and suggest that Jesus also spoke
            Greek, since we have reports that He spoke to Romans,
            Syrophonecians and others would likely would not have bothered to
            learn Aramaic. And aside from the total lack of manuscript
            evidence, I would also suggest that the Greek of the NT shows no
            signs of being translation Greek. I second Jim's DOA conclusion.


            Dave Washburn
            http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
            Teach me your way, O Lord, and I will walk in your truth;
            give me an undivided heart that I may fear your name.
            Psalm 86:11

            ---
            You are currently subscribed to tc-list as: ListSaver-of-tc-list@...
            To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-tc-list-445P@...-certr.org
          • Dave Washburn
            ... I would also wonder about the linguistic flavor of these mss. If the 1850 copy of the Declaration is in French that shows clear signs of having been
            Message 5 of 11 , Jan 5, 2000
            • 0 Attachment
              Jim West wrote:
              > At 05:13 PM 1/5/00 -0600, you wrote:
              > >Some of them date back as far as the 4th century.
              >
              > so nothing really to compare with the papyri as far as age is concerned.
              >
              > >
              > >I should add that age is really not a very important factor.
              >
              > it is an exceedingly important factor. if you have a copy of the
              > declaration of independence that dates to the year 1788, and one that dates
              > to the year 1850, which one will be most important? which will have greater
              > intrinsic value?

              I would also wonder about the linguistic flavor of these mss. If the
              1850 copy of the Declaration is in French that shows clear signs of
              having been translated from 18th century English, that's a
              significant factor as well.


              Dave Washburn
              http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
              Teach me your way, O Lord, and I will walk in your truth;
              give me an undivided heart that I may fear your name.
              Psalm 86:11

              ---
              You are currently subscribed to tc-list as: ListSaver-of-tc-list@...
              To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-tc-list-445P@...-certr.org
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.