Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: SeekAndFind

I do not understand what the difficulty is in stating that the vernacular used by Jesus was Aramaic rather than Hebrew. This was the vernacular of the Jews at the time and does not make him any less Jewish. Just as if the Gospel had been situated in eastern Europe in the modern era and stating that he spoke Yiddish. It is still the language of the Jews.


18 posted on 06/01/2014 7:07:39 PM PDT by Petrosius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Petrosius
Because it is a convenient myth, invented to erase Jewishness. Scholars now acknowledge that Aramaic was the language of the upper crust. Common folk, am ha-eretz spoke Hebrew. It is sort of like how Mel Gibson had him speaking Latin - it is about owning "Jesus." The Pope could not let some silly Jew own "Jesus" - so he made a jerk of himself.
20 posted on 06/01/2014 7:14:45 PM PDT by Tzfat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

To: Petrosius

Interesting that the Mishnah, compiled a century or two after Jesus, is in Hebrew, not Aramaic.

The Gemara, commentary on the Mishnah compiled a century or two after the Mishnah, is indeed in Aramaic.


22 posted on 06/01/2014 7:22:58 PM PDT by jjotto ("Ya could look it up!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson