7
7thMoon
Guest
Yes it does according to the Midrash about it.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
7
7thMoon
Guest
Ezr 4:7You make such huge and sweeping claims 7th. This is another one that would require a lifes work, probably the lifes work of several people,, to even begin to justify, and you just casually drop it into the convo.
What basis do you have for the belief that Greek originated in Babylon?
In the days of Artaxerxes also, Bishlam, Mithredath, Tabel, and the rest of their companions wrote to Artaxerxes king of Persia; and the letter was written in Aramaic script, and translated into the Aramaic language. (NKJV)
And in the days of Artaxerxes wrote Bishlam, Mithredath, Tabeel, and the rest of his companions, unto Artaxerxes king of Persia; and the writing of the letter was written in the Syrian character, and set forth in the Syrian tongue. (ASV)
In the days of Artachshasta wrote Bishlam, Mitredat, Tav'el, and the rest of his companions, to Artachshasta king of Paras; and the writing of the letter was written in the Arammian character, and set forth in the Arammian language.(HNV)
and in the days of Artaxerxes have Bishlam, Mithredath, Tabeel, and the rest of his companions written unto Artaxerxes king of Persia, and the writing of the letter is written in Aramaean, and interpreted in Aramaean. (YLT)
καὶ ἐν ἡμέραις Αρθασασθα ἔγραψεν ἐν εἰρήνῃ Μιθραδάτῃ Ταβεηλ σὺν καὶ τοῗς λοιποῗς συνδούλοις αὐτοῦ πρὸς Αρθασασθα βασιλέα Περσῶν ἔγραψεν ὁ φορολόγος γραφὴν Συριστὶ καὶ ἡρμηνευμένην(LXX)
Which could only mean a different language, since the script is different. Checking the LXX of the passage, γλωσσα is not used, nor is the word used about the confusion of the tower of babel. Since all languages are artificial after the Aramaic dialect of Hebrew, it seems the Babylonians were the first bilinguals.
They had one language for commerce and one for secrecy. One must also conclude logically that everyone used the Aramaic dialect of Hebrew at one time.
T
TrevorL
Guest
Greetings 7thMoon,
Kind regards
Trevor
I accept the Hebrew text and reject the LXX here. The One God, Yahweh, God the Father is inviting the Angels to participate in the creation of man in the image and after the likeness of God and the Angels Psalm 8:5.“I shall make man in My image and My likeness” (ibid., v. 26);18Instead of Let us make man in our image. etc. (MIDRASH Midrash Tanchuma Shemot, Siman 22)
This is what the LXX originally worded in Genesis 1:26. T
Not sure what you are claiming here. The Apostles would hear the Hebrew read in the Synagogues at least, and I believe that they would have understood Hebrew even if they did not normally speak in Hebrew.This important, because he apostles never heard of the word Elohim.
Kind regards
Trevor
T
The_drake_
Guest
So who is he talking to? It isn't Adam.Yes it does according to the Midrash about it.
T
The_drake_
Guest
Ezr 4:7
In the days of Artaxerxes also, Bishlam, Mithredath, Tabel, and the rest of their companions wrote to Artaxerxes king of Persia; and the letter was written in Aramaic script, and translated into the Aramaic language. (NKJV)
And in the days of Artaxerxes wrote Bishlam, Mithredath, Tabeel, and the rest of his companions, unto Artaxerxes king of Persia; and the writing of the letter was written in the Syrian character, and set forth in the Syrian tongue. (ASV)
In the days of Artachshasta wrote Bishlam, Mitredat, Tav'el, and the rest of his companions, to Artachshasta king of Paras; and the writing of the letter was written in the Arammian character, and set forth in the Arammian language.(HNV)
and in the days of Artaxerxes have Bishlam, Mithredath, Tabeel, and the rest of his companions written unto Artaxerxes king of Persia, and the writing of the letter is written in Aramaean, and interpreted in Aramaean. (YLT)
καὶ ἐν ἡμέραις Αρθασασθα ἔγραψεν ἐν εἰρήνῃ Μιθραδάτῃ Ταβεηλ σὺν καὶ τοῗς λοιποῗς συνδούλοις αὐτοῦ πρὸς Αρθασασθα βασιλέα Περσῶν ἔγραψεν ὁ φορολόγος γραφὴν Συριστὶ καὶ ἡρμηνευμένην(LXX)
Which could only mean a different language, since the script is different. Checking the LXX of the passage, γλωσσα is not used, nor is the word used about the confusion of the tower of babel. Since all languages are artificial after the Aramaic dialect of Hebrew, it seems the Babylonians were the first bilinguals.
They had one language for commerce and one for secrecy. One must also conclude logically that everyone used the Aramaic dialect of Hebrew at one time.
So not only do you call but you raise! Now you're claiming all languages come from Aramaic! Wild stuff 7th.
7
7thMoon
Guest
Greek is an artificial language it. It wasn't created by God.So not only do you call but you raise! Now you're claiming all languages come from Aramaic! Wild stuff 7th.
7
7thMoon
Guest
"I shall make man" means he was telling HIS angels to back off.So who is he talking to? It isn't Adam.
7
7thMoon
Guest
χεῖλος
This is what was confused at Babel, rather the γλῶσσα.
- a lip, of the speaking mouth
- metaph. the sea shore
This is what was confused at Babel, rather the γλῶσσα.
T
Ted T
Guest
Luke 20:36 Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.where is it written that GOD formed angels in the likeness of GOD?
Can anyone NOT in the image of GOD be equal to (or even like) one who IS the image of GOD?
7
7thMoon
Guest
The model of God was even in Jesus the messiah. It is like a design built by an engineer.Luke 20:36 Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.
Can anyone NOT in the image of GOD be equal to (or even like) one who IS the image of GOD?
T
The_drake_
Guest
You have no evidence for that, just like the rest of it. More totally far out claims. Why don't you start by defending the least of these, instead of continuing to re raise with more and more extravagant ones.Greek is an artificial language it. It wasn't created by God.
7
7thMoon
Guest
You have no evidence that the others happened at Babel or that they evolved into existence. But there is nothing extravagant about Aramaic being the original dialect of Hebrew. The new testament calls it Hebrew, but the dialect is Aramaic.You have no evidence for that, just like the rest of it. More totally far out claims. Why don't you start by defending the least of these, instead of continuing to re raise with more and more extravagant ones.