posted 12-08-1999 05:13 AM            

I have some questions regarding Aramaic and Hebrew. Perhaps someone with greater knowledge than myself on this subject can answer.

Before anyone comments on this, I acknowledge that Aramaic was a common language of the Messiah's time. I also acknowledge that the New Covenant Scriptures have Aramaic roots, and that parts of the Tanakh are written in Aramaic. And of course the Good News shall spread to all languages, but I still have some questions.

Why does there seem to be a sudden shift towards Aramaic in the "New Testament"? All the while at the expense of "Biblical Hebrew".

Why, when the Messiah's Name was prophesized in Hebrew (Zekaryah 6:11-12) as Yahushua, is the Aramaic "shorter form" of Yeshua more readily accepted as His Name?

Many say that Hebrew was only spoken in the synagogues or at the Hekal at Messiah's time. Or that it was a "dead language".

But why are the majority of the biblical scrolls found at the Dead Sea written in Hebrew if it was a "dead language"? While only a few manuscripts such as the book of Daniel, the book of Tobit, a fragment of a targum (translation) of the book of Iyob, and fragments of the book of Hanok are in Aramaic?

Yn. 19:20
19. And Pilate wrote a title too, and put it on the stake, and it was written: YAHUSHUA OF NAZARETH, THE SOVEREIGN OF THE YAHUDIM.
20. Many of the Yahudim therefore read this title, for the place where Yahushua was impaled was near the city, and it was written in Hebrew, Greek, Latin.

Why wasn't it written in Aramaic also?

Why did Yahushua choose to speak to Shaul in the Hebrew language and not Aramaic or even Greek (Acts 26:14)?

Why does the NIV Bible translate Yn. 19:20, Acts 21:40, Acts 22:2, and Acts 26:14 as Aramaic, while all other versions I checked say Hebrew? These were the sons of Eber (Ibrim/Hebrews), not the sons of Aram/Syrians.

If the Greek words Hebrais, Hebraios, Hebraikos, and Hebraisti can mean Hebrew or Aramaic, why is it always translated as Hebrew and never as Aramaic, except in the NIV? Surely these two languages though related, are not interchangeable.

-Basically, just where/why/how does the Aramaic language replace Leshon HaKodesh? Or does it?

posted 12-09-1999 03:33 PM            

I find your questions very legitimate and I also would like to see some answers to them.

posted 12-09-1999 09:45 PM            

------------------
ShaniYah

posted 12-11-1999 03:54 AM            

I had not noticed a "sudden shift". Certainly not at the expense of Biblical Hebrew. I recomend learning both.

In what circles do you believe this shift is taking place?

>
>Why, when the Messiah's Name was prophesized in Hebrew (Zekaryah 6:11-12)
>as Yahushua, is the Aramaic "shorter form" of Yeshua more readily accepted
>as His Name?
>

This is why it is nice to know these languages. I have heard the false information you just gave many times in Sacred name circles. It is simply not true.

Both the names Yahushua and Yeshua are Hebrew.

Yahushua in Hebrew means "Yah saves"

Yeshua in Hebrew means "salvation".

Also "Yeshua" as a name is used as short for "Yahushua"
just as we use "Bill" as short for "William" yet some
people are actually named "Bill" and not "William".

The root word from which YESHUA and YAHUSHUA are derived
does not exist in Aramaic. It is Hebrew and only Hebrew.

The Aramaic word for salvation is not YESHUA but PURKANA.

In Aramaic "Yeshua" is just a name but not a wordwith meaning.
The name "Yeshua" is pronounced in Aramaic "Yeshu" or
in later dialcts "Ishu".

Also the name "Yahushua" always appears in the shortened form
of "Yeshu" in the Aramaic Peshitta Tanak.

>
>Many say that Hebrew was only spoken in the synagogues or at the Hekal at
>Messiah's time. Or that it was a "dead language".
>

More recent research has shown that Hebrew was a living
language in the first century. Most Jews of the time were
likely bi-lingual speaking Habrew and Aramaic.

>
>But why are the majority of the biblical scrolls found at the Dead Sea
>written in Hebrew if it was a "dead language"?

Because they are Biblical scrolls.

Many, perhaps even a majority of the non-Biblical Scrolls are in Aramaic.

> While only a few manuscripts
>such as the book of Daniel, the book of Tobit, a fragment of a targum
>(translation) of the book of Iyob, and fragments of the book of Hanok are
>in Aramaic?

There are MANY more Aramaic documents.

>
>
>Yn. 19:20
>19. And Pilate wrote a title too, and put it on the stake, and it was
>written: YAHUSHUA OF NAZARETH, THE SOVEREIGN OF THE YAHUDIM.
>20. Many of the Yahudim therefore read this title, for the place where
>Yahushua was impaled was near the city, and it was written in Hebrew,
>Greek, Latin.
>
>Why wasn't it written in Aramaic also?
>
>
>Why did Yahushua choose to speak to Shaul in the Hebrew language and not
>Aramaic or even Greek (Acts 26:14)?
>
>
>Why does the NIV Bible translate Yn. 19:20, Acts 21:40, Acts 22:2, and Acts
>26:14 as Aramaic, while all other versions I checked say Hebrew? These were
>the sons of Eber (Ibrim/Hebrews), not the sons of Aram/Syrians.
>

The word in question is HEBRAIKOS wich means simply "The language spoken by the Hebrews" Josephus often uses the word to describe Aramaic words. Since HEBRAIKOS can refer to either Hebrew or Aramaic scholars are divided on how to render it in the NT.

>
>If the Greek words Hebrais, Hebraios, Hebraikos, and Hebraisti can mean
>Hebrew or Aramaic, why is it always translated as Hebrew and never as
>Aramaic, except in the NIV? Surely these two languages though related, are
>not interchangeable.
>

see above.

>
>-Basically, just where/why/how does the Aramaic language replace Leshon
>HaKodesh? Or does it?
>

It does not replace Hebrew but it is a closely related
language in which part of the Tanak is written.

It is also the language of: The Talmuds, the Targums, the Zohar and many of the Dead Sea Scrolls.

It is also the language of most of the New Testament.

James Trimm

PS: Check out my Aramaic/Syriac webpage:
http://www.nazarene.net/aramaic

posted 12-11-1999 12:51 PM            

----------------------------------------------------------------
I had not noticed a "sudden shift". Certainly not at the expense of Biblical Hebrew. I recomend learning both.

In what circles do you believe this shift is taking place?
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Maybe the shift is not at the expense of Biblical Hebrew, but there is still a shift nonetheless. For as you yourself know, the "New Testament" language background is Aramaic. While most of the Tanakh was in Hebrew, how many N.T. books are known to be originally written in Hebrew? That seems like a shift from Hebrew to Aramaic. Was this a reflection on the time period?

----------------------------------------------------------------
>Why, when the Messiah's Name was prophesized in Hebrew (Zekaryah 6:11-12)
>as Yahushua, is the Aramaic "shorter form" of Yeshua more readily accepted
>as His Name?
>

This is why it is nice to know these languages. I have heard the false information you just gave many times in Sacred name circles. It is simply not true.

Both the names Yahushua and Yeshua are Hebrew.
----------------------------------------------------------------

It is nice to know these languages, I am currently learning Hebrew. Aramaic will hopefully come at a later time. I can assure you the "false information I gave" was given out of ignorance, nothing else.

----------------------------------------------------------------
The root word from which YESHUA and YAHUSHUA are derived
does not exist in Aramaic. It is Hebrew and only Hebrew.

The Aramaic word for salvation is not YESHUA but PURKANA.

In Aramaic "Yeshua" is just a name but not a wordwith meaning.
The name "Yeshua" is pronounced in Aramaic "Yeshu" or
in later dialcts "Ishu".

Also the name "Yahushua" always appears in the shortened form
of "Yeshu" in the Aramaic Peshitta Tanak.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
How did Yeshua get in the Aramaic language if it does not have any meaning in that language?

Yeshu is not derogatory?

posted 12-11-1999 04:11 PM            

It got in only as a name. But Aramaic pronounciation differs somewhat.

Just like the name "John" is pronounce "hwan" in Spanish.

> Yeshu is not derogatory?

YESHU is still spelled YUD-SHIN-VAV-AYIN in Aramaic just as it is in Hebrew.
However since it is pronounced YESHU/ISHU in Aramaic that Aramaic pronounciation
(which is what Yeshua would have been called in Galilee) would be transliterated
into a Hebrew document as YUD-SHIN-VAV.

This points us to Gen. 49:10. This is a well known Messianic prophecy.

The numerical value of "shilo comes" is the same as "Messiah" thus the Targums have "until Messiah" in this passage and the Talmud calls "Shiloh" one of Messiah's names.

The first letter in each word starting with the phrase "until shiloh comes" spells
out YUD-SHIN-VAV (Yeshu).

In reaction to this fact Rabbinic Judaism developed an alternate explaination for these letters. They have them each being the first Hebrewe letter in a Hebrew phrase meaning "May his name be blotted out and forgotten".

posted 12-12-1999 01:10 PM            

"Both the names Yahushua and Yeshua are Hebrew.

Yahushua in Hebrew means "Yah saves"

Yeshua in Hebrew means "salvation".

Also "Yeshua" as a name is used as short for "Yahushua"
just as we use "Bill" as short for "William" yet some
people are actually named "Bill" and not "William".

The root word from which YESHUA and YAHUSHUA are derived
does not exist in Aramaic. It is Hebrew and only Hebrew.

The Aramaic word for salvation is not YESHUA but PURKANA.

In Aramaic "Yeshua" is just a name but not a wordwith meaning.
The name "Yeshua" is pronounced in Aramaic "Yeshu" or
in later dialcts "Ishu"."
-------

Solomon Zeitlin states:

"YSUA (Yeshua) is not Hebrew. In Hebrew the name is written YHUSUA (Yahushua)."
(Jewish Quarterly Review, 60, p. 194)

Also according to "The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 8 vols., 1965",
the form YSUA (Yeshua), is Aramaic and was from Aramaic transliterated into the Greek
as Iesous (Yesus; Jesus).
-------

On the one hand Trimm states:

"Both the names Yahushua and Yeshua are Hebrew."

Then on the other hand he states:

"In Aramaic "Yeshua" is just a name but not a wordwith meaning."
-------

Is the name Yeshua both Aramaic and Hebrew? Is the name Yeshua the Aramaic form
of the Hebrew name Yahushua or not? What gives?

posted 12-12-1999 07:01 PM            

There are two major dialects, Western (also refered to as “palastinian dialect” (the dialect of EESHO (Jesus)) and Eastern (also referred to as "Syriac dialect" ("Syriac" is a dialect of Aramaic, NOT a language)).

This info refers to Jesus as EESHO according to the Aramaic.

posted 12-12-1999 09:09 PM            

Not at all. but since you obviously do not know Aramaic you are misunderstanding your sources.

>He
> states:
>
> "Both the names Yahushua and Yeshua are Hebrew.
>
> Yahushua in Hebrew means "Yah saves"
>
> Yeshua in Hebrew means "salvation".
>
> Also "Yeshua" as a name is used as short for "Yahushua"
> just as we use "Bill" as short for "William" yet some
> people are actually named "Bill" and not "William".
>
> The root word from which YESHUA and YAHUSHUA are derived
> does not exist in Aramaic. It is Hebrew and only Hebrew.
>
> The Aramaic word for salvation is not YESHUA but PURKANA.
>
> In Aramaic "Yeshua" is just a name but not a wordwith meaning.
> The name "Yeshua" is pronounced in Aramaic "Yeshu" or
> in later dialcts "Ishu"."
> -------
>
> Solomon Zeitlin states:
>
> "YSUA (Yeshua) is not Hebrew. In Hebrew the name is written YHUSUA
> (Yahushua)."
> (Jewish Quarterly Review, 60, p. 194)

I do not know the complete context of your quote but if
that is in context then your source is just plain wrong.
The Hebrew word for "salvation" is YESHUA.

For example "YHWH my ELOHIM is my strength and my song
he also has become my SALVATION [my YESHUA)

>
> Also according to "The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 8 vols., 1965",
>
> the form YSUA (Yeshua), is Aramaic and was from Aramaic transliterated into the
> Greek
> as Iesous (Yesus; Jesus).

Again I do not know the context of this short quote bit if it is not being taken out of context it is wrong. The word YESHUA does not appear in Aramaic. In Aramaic the word is PURKANA.

The NAME Yeshua does appear in Aramaic only as a name and NOT as a word. The NAME "Yeshua" is pronounced differently in Aramaic however as YESHU or ISHU.

At any rate Yeshua is the common Hebrew word for "salvation" and appears all through the Tanak for "salvation".

> -------
>
> On the one hand Trimm states:
>
> "Both the names Yahushua and Yeshua are Hebrew."
>
> Then on the other hand he states:
>
> "In Aramaic "Yeshua" is just a name but not a wordwith meaning."
> -------

No contradioction here. The first statement refers to the MEANING of the words. The second statement refers to the pronounciation of the names.

Unlike many debates that take place on this forum this is not a debatable point of opinion. These are simple facts to anyone
who is truely familiar with Hebrew and Aramaic.

>
> Is the name Yeshua both Aramaic and Hebrew?

The "name" Yeshua can appear in ANY language.

> Is the name Yeshua the Aramaic form
> of the Hebrew name Yahushua or not? What gives?

No. YESHUA is the Hebrew word for "salvation" throughout the Hebrew Tanak (which you obviously are unfamiliar with or you would know that). The word YESHUA does not exist in Aramaic as a word (The Aramaic word for Salvation is PURKANA) but only as a name which is pronounced "Yeshu" or "Ishu".

posted 12-12-1999 09:11 PM            

Not at all. but since you obviously do not know Aramaic you are misunderstanding your sources.

>He
> states:
>
> "Both the names Yahushua and Yeshua are Hebrew.
>
> Yahushua in Hebrew means "Yah saves"
>
> Yeshua in Hebrew means "salvation".
>
> Also "Yeshua" as a name is used as short for "Yahushua"
> just as we use "Bill" as short for "William" yet some
> people are actually named "Bill" and not "William".
>
> The root word from which YESHUA and YAHUSHUA are derived
> does not exist in Aramaic. It is Hebrew and only Hebrew.
>
> The Aramaic word for salvation is not YESHUA but PURKANA.
>
> In Aramaic "Yeshua" is just a name but not a wordwith meaning.
> The name "Yeshua" is pronounced in Aramaic "Yeshu" or
> in later dialcts "Ishu"."
> -------
>
> Solomon Zeitlin states:
>
> "YSUA (Yeshua) is not Hebrew. In Hebrew the name is written YHUSUA
> (Yahushua)."
> (Jewish Quarterly Review, 60, p. 194)

I do not know the complete context of your quote but if
that is in context then your source is just plain wrong.
The Hebrew word for "salvation" is YESHUA.

For example "YHWH my ELOHIM is my strength and my song
he also has become my SALVATION [my YESHUA)

>
> Also according to "The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 8 vols., 1965",
>
> the form YSUA (Yeshua), is Aramaic and was from Aramaic transliterated into the
> Greek
> as Iesous (Yesus; Jesus).

Again I do not know the context of this short quote bit if it is not being taken out of context it is wrong. The word YESHUA does not appear in Aramaic. In Aramaic the word is PURKANA.

The NAME Yeshua does appear in Aramaic only as a name and NOT as a word. The NAME "Yeshua" is pronounced differently in Aramaic however as YESHU or ISHU.

At any rate Yeshua is the common Hebrew word for "salvation" and appears all through the Tanak for "salvation".

> -------
>
> On the one hand Trimm states:
>
> "Both the names Yahushua and Yeshua are Hebrew."
>
> Then on the other hand he states:
>
> "In Aramaic "Yeshua" is just a name but not a wordwith meaning."
> -------

No contradioction here. The first statement refers to the MEANING of the words. The second statement refers to the pronounciation of the names.

Unlike many debates that take place on this forum this is not a debatable point of opinion. These are simple facts to anyone
who is truely familiar with Hebrew and Aramaic.

>
> Is the name Yeshua both Aramaic and Hebrew?

The "name" Yeshua can appear in ANY language.

> Is the name Yeshua the Aramaic form
> of the Hebrew name Yahushua or not? What gives?

No. YESHUA is the Hebrew word for "salvation" throughout the Hebrew Tanak (which you obviously are unfamiliar with or you would know that). The word YESHUA does not exist in Aramaic as a word (The Aramaic word for Salvation is PURKANA) but only as a name which is pronounced "Yeshu" or "Ishu".

I will add this. There are many dialects of Aramaic spanning 4,000 years at least. Of the dialects I work with the name "Yeshua" is pronounced "Yeshu" or "Ishu" but there may be some dialect that pronounces it "Yeshua". Nonetheless I know of no Aramaic dialect that contains the word "Yeshua" for salvation. In Aramaic the name "Yeshua"/"Yeshu"/Ishu" is a meaningless name and not a word in the language.

If you wish to seek this out further you may want to join the Biblical Aramaic e-mail discusion group at:
http://www.nazarene.net/aramaic

posted 12-12-1999 11:21 PM            

http://www.tlig.org/aram.html

posted 12-13-1999 10:02 PM            

I do not profess to be a Hebrew or Aramaic scholar but at the same time
this does not prevent me from consulting scholarly sources.

I will try to provide the context for the quote by Solomon Zeitlin so
there is no misunderstanding.

In the article in the Jewish Quarterly Review I referred to, an
identical opinion as yours in regard to the name Yeshua being Hebrew was
taken by Dr. David Flusser in his book titled "Jesus," (Herder and
Herder, New York, 1969). On page 12 he gave an illustration where he
wrote the name in Hebrew letters yod shin waw ayin (Yeshua). Then
underneath the illustration Flusser wrote:

"This is how Jesus wrote his name in Hebrew."

Solomon Zeitlin soundly criticizes Flusser for the error writing:

"The innocent reader would assume this is the autograph of Jesus. Yod
shin waw ayin (Yeshua) is not Hebrew. In Hebrew the name is written yod
he waw shin ayin (Yahushua).

Solomon Zeitlin is well recognized as an authority in the ancient Hebrew
language. It will take more than your statement "I do not know the
complete context of your quote but if that is in context then your
source is just plain wrong."

With all due respect, I will need more evidence demonstrating the
inaccuracy of Zeitlin's statement other than your saying it is wrong.

Also there is no dispute considered by myself as to whether the name
Yeshua means anything in the Aramaic language. More to the point,
whether the name Yeshua means anything in Aramaic is irrelevant. The
truth of the matter is that Yahushua, according to scholars, is in fact
Hebrew and was brought into Aramaic as the form Yeshua.

To help get to the heart of the matter some questions to ask might be:
Why would the Hebrew name Yahushua be altered into its Aramaic form
Yeshua? Is there not historical evidence that the Aramaic language was
considered to be, so to speak, a contaminated language? What do Jewish
scholars say about the Aramaic language compared to the Hebrew language,
Hebrew being considered to be the pure language?

The facts concerning how Aramaic found its way into the Hebrew language
can be found in the pages of history and when put into context, explains
how the form Yeshua came about. Knowing some of the history will go a
long way toward understanding this issue. I am not saying that you are
not aware of the history. It is that maybe you are reading something of
your own desires into the situation that is not warranted.

I have provided two scholarly sources that attest to the fact that the
name Yeshua is not Hebrew. In Hebrew the name of the messiah is written
Yahushua. I would be interested to know what sources can be provided to
show that the name Yeshua is in fact Hebrew and not Aramaic.

Again, whether the name Yeshua in Aramic means anything is not relevant
to the discussion. What would go a long way to clear up the matter is to
provide evidence that is recognized by Hebrew and Aramaic scholars to
support your view.

posted 12-14-1999 01:34 AM            

I will make this simple and cut to the obvious.

To claim that "Yeshua" is not Hebrew is just plain silly.

If YESHUA is not the Hebrew word for "salvation" please
fill us all in... what is the REAL Hebrew word for "Salvation"?

Don't say Yahushua, that means "Yah Saves".

Now go get your Strong's concordance and look up the word "salvation" and use the word numbers to see that the word YESHUA appears throughout the Hebrew text of the Tanak in most
if not all of the places where the KJV has "salvation".

To claim that somehow YESHUA is Aramaic and not Hebrew is just plain silly. YESHUA is ONLY Hebrew and not Aramaic at all.
Trust me... I know both languages.

posted 12-14-1999 04:35 AM         

Is there a way in Hebrew or Aramaic to say "your Law"?

Wouldn't it have to be "our Law" or "His Law"?

Think about the answer and then look at John 10:34.

Thanks,

Vincent