Assyrian Forums
 Home  |  Ads  |  Partners  |  Sponsors  |  Contact  |  FAQs  |  About  
 
   Holocaust  |  History  |  Library  |  People  |  TV-Radio  |  Forums  |  Community  |  Directory
  
   General  |  Activism  |  Arts  |  Education  |  Family  |  Financial  |  Government  |  Health  |  History  |  News  |  Religion  |  Science  |  Sports
   Greetings · Shläma · Bärev Dzez · Säludos · Grüße · Shälom · Χαιρετισμοί · Приветствия · 问候 · Bonjour · 挨拶 · تبریکات  · Selamlar · अभिवादन · Groete · التّحيّات

Thanks to Paul and the Assyrian People

Archived: Read only    Previous Topic Next Topic
Home Forums Peshitta Topic #824
Help Print Share
James_Trimm
 
Send email to James_TrimmSend private message to James_TrimmAdd James_Trimm to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

Thanks to Paul and the Assyrian People

Jan-23-2002 at 08:53 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)


I would like to take this oportunity to thank akhi Paul Younan for all of his hard work and effort. He has been a blessing to all of us.

As a Nazarene Jew actively involved in the latter day restoration of Nazarene Judaism I can say that we are deeply indebted to the Assyrian people for havuing preserved a great many important elements of Semitic NT understanding. Epecially for preserving the Peshitta and other important Aramaic texts.

I am also indebted to Paul for teaching me about the nuances of certain Aramaic words which are unique to the Syriac dialect. One that comes to mind is K'NUMA which never appears in the Aramaic of the Talmud or Zohar but which is key to understanding certain Peshitta texts and the exolution of Christendom from a Godhead of three K'NUMEH and one PARSOPA to one of three persons and one essence.

This dialect issue can be important. The Zohar for example contains this same concept but uses the Aramaic word GAUN (plural: GAUNIN) rather than K'NUMA (K'NUMEH)

(note the differant plural ending. The Syriac Dialect has -EH for the masc. Plural ending while the Babylonian Aramaic of the Talmud and Zohar use -IN similar to Hebrew -IM ending)

(So if you ever catch me adding -IN to and Aramaic noun instead of -EH you will now know why. The Syriac dialect's -EH has taken a lot of getting used to).

Trimm


Print Top

 
Forums Topics  Previous Topic Next Topic

Paul Younanmoderator

 
Send email to Paul YounanSend private message to Paul YounanView profile of Paul YounanAdd Paul Younan to your contact list
 
Member: Jun-1-2000
Posts: 1,306
Member Feedback

1. RE: Thanks to Paul and the Assyrian People

Jan-23-2002 at 09:56 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #0
 
....nuances of certain Aramaic words
which are unique to the
Syriac dialect. One that
comes to mind is K'NUMA
which never appears in the
Aramaic of the Talmud or
Zohar but which is key
to understanding certain Peshitta texts
and the exolution of Christendom
from a Godhead of three
K'NUMEH and one PARSOPA to
one of three persons and
one essence.

Please keep in mind that the Aramaic of the Peshitta (which James, along with the majority of western scholars, calls 'Syriac') and the Aramaic of the Talmud and Zohar are branches of the same language that had their origins in different places and different times by different people.

Christ did not speak Zohar or Babylonian Aramaic.

(note the differant plural ending.
The Syriac Dialect has -EH
for the masc. Plural ending
while the Babylonian Aramaic of
the Talmud and Zohar use
-IN similar to Hebrew -IM
ending)

Only partially true. To be accurate, you must also include the fact that the 'Syriac dialect' (as you, a westerner call it) also employs the -IN masculine plural ending, according to certain rules of grammar - in particular the Absolute State of the PEAL. (See word number 9001 in the Lexicon for an example of the -IN plural ending in the Aramaic of the Peshitta.)

In fact, the vast majority of examples where Aramaic dialects have differed over the centuries is over the exact rules in construction of the various states of the noun.

In Hebrew usage, for example - a preference is shown for the Absolute state (when looking through Aramaic glasses).

(So if you ever catch me
adding -IN to and Aramaic
noun instead of -EH you
will now know why.
The Syriac dialect's -EH has
taken a lot of getting
used to).

How come it's taken so much to get used to?

When was the last time the Scots (or, should I say - the lost Israelite tribe of Asher?) spoke Babylonian Aramaic?

I read all about it, including the cockamaimy theory that the U.S.A. is the lost tribe of Mannaseh right here on your website - https://www.nazarene.net/brit-am/index.htm?


Fk^rwbw 0ml4

Peshitta.org

Print Top
James_Trimm
 
Send email to James_TrimmSend private message to James_TrimmAdd James_Trimm to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

2. RE: Thanks to Paul and the Assyrian People

Jan-23-2002 at 10:36 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #1
 

>
>Christ did not speak Zohar or
>Babylonian Aramaic.
>

No. Messiah spoke Hebrew, Middle Aramaic and Gallilean Aramaic.

>(note the differant plural ending.
>The Syriac Dialect has -EH
>for the masc. Plural ending
>while the Babylonian Aramaic of
>the Talmud and Zohar use
>-IN similar to Hebrew -IM
>ending)

>
>Only partially true. To be
>accurate, you must also include
>the fact that the 'Syriac
>dialect' (as you, a westerner

"Westerner?" well I was born in the U.S. (as you were) but Jews are no more Western that Assyrians.

>call it) also employs the
>-IN masculine plural ending, according
>to certain rules of grammar
>- in particular the Absolute
>State of the PEAL. (See
>word number 9001 in the
>Lexicon for an example of
>the -IN plural ending in
>the Aramaic of the Peshitta.)
>
>
>In fact, the vast majority of
>examples where Aramaic dialects have
>differed over the centuries is
>over the exact rules in
>construction of the various states
>of the noun.
>
>In Hebrew usage, for example -
>a preference is shown for
>the Absolute state (when looking
>through Aramaic glasses).
>
>(So if you ever catch me
>
>adding -IN to and Aramaic
>noun instead of -EH you
>will now know why.
>The Syriac dialect's -EH has
>taken a lot of getting
>used to).

>
>How come it's taken so much
>to get used to?
>
>When was the last time the
>Scots (or, should I say
>- the lost Israelite tribe
>of Asher?) spoke Babylonian Aramaic?
>

Because I first learned Aramaic under Rabbi Moyal in relation to my Talmud studies. Although I do have some Scottish, Irish and even American Indian ancestory my primary heritage is from my Jewish ancestory. I have never participated in any of those other cultures and have attended Synagogue and practiced Judaism since I was a child.

>
>I read all about it, including
>the cockamaimy theory that the
>U.S.A. is the lost tribe
>of Mannaseh right here on
>your website - https://www.nazarene.net/brit-am/index.htm?

Thats not my website. We do give Brit-Am the space. They are an Orthodox Jewish organization in Israel run by Yair Davidy and with the aprobation of Israeli Rabbi Avraham Feld.

Davidy has written three books on the topic, all published in Jerusalem:

The Tribes; Ephraim and Lost Israelite Identity.

I have all three books and they are very well documented.

Also you may want to see the website of United Isreal https://www.unitedisrael.org

another such organization.

Trimm

>
>
>Fk^rwbw 0ml4
>
> Peshitta.org


Print Top

Paul Younanmoderator

 
Send email to Paul YounanSend private message to Paul YounanView profile of Paul YounanAdd Paul Younan to your contact list
 
Member: Jun-1-2000
Posts: 1,306
Member Feedback

3. RE: Thanks to Paul and the Assyrian People

Jan-23-2002 at 11:01 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #2
 
"Westerner?" well I was born in
the U.S. (as you were)
but Jews are no more
Western that Assyrians.

Assyrians are genetic Semites from the same stock that Abraham was called from to go to the Holy Land.

While there is nothing wrong with being a "Westerner" (my wife is and my child is half) - you shouldn't portray yourself as a Jew when you converted to that religion as a young man. You were born a Goyim - as Goy as I am, because no Jewish family names their son 'James' - a New Testament name. You told me yourself that you converted to Judaism at around the age of 19 because of the influence of certain friends - and that your parents were not Jews.

My point in bringing all of this up is that you are, in fact, of European ancestry and did not grow up in a household speaking either Hebrew or Aramaic. You learned it either studying on your own or in school, wherever they supposedly gave you a PhD in "Semitic Studies."

Your knowledge of even basic Aramaic is woeful and makes me question everything you say about your background and your education. You make mistakes that a 10-year old native speaker would not make - and that's no compliment for someone who supposedly holds a PhD in "Semitic Studies."

If someone claims to have a Doctorate in Mathematics and tells me that the Pythagoran Theorum is A2 - B2 = C2 then I know something's up.

It's even more frustrating when someone who purports to have that level of education in this topic, yet doesn't know jack squat - comes and dictates that garbage to a native speaker. It's very insulting. My parents did a fine job teaching me this language - thank you.

Because I first learned Aramaic under
Rabbi Moyal in relation to
my Talmud studies. Although
I do have some Scottish,
Irish and even American Indian
ancestory my primary heritage is
from my Jewish ancestory.
I have never participated in
any of those other cultures
and have attended Synagogue and
practiced Judaism since I was
a child.

You told me over a telephone conversation that it was since the age of 19. Which is it - I'm confused? Or do you consider 19 years old as still being a child?

Did you have a Bar Mitzvah? Were your parents Jewish? Did they speak any word of Hebrew and Aramaic?

My point in bringing this up, again, is because I believe, frankly (and I have no problem with being frank), that you intentionally misrepresent not only who you are (your background) but also your level of education and your knowledge of Aramaic (which I, along with the scores of Assyrians who have emailed me laughing, can see right past.)

....I have all three books and
they are very well documented.

Also you may want to see
the website of United Isreal
https://www.unitedisrael.org
another such organization.

No thanks. I've read that garbage (British-Israelitism) before - when Herbert Armstrong proposed it and made it popular back in the 80's.

The fact that you host that website made me suspect that you thought your predominantly European Anglo-Saxon ancestry qualifies you to be an Israelite - and your comments about and support of Davidy only reinforces my concerns.

My primary concern, again being frank, is not with what you claim or who you are (I could care less) - as long as I don't feel that you are coming on this forum to intentionally deceive, spread half-truths and further your blatantly biased agenda.


Fk^rwbw 0ml4

Peshitta.org

Print Top
James_Trimm
 
Send email to James_TrimmSend private message to James_TrimmAdd James_Trimm to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

4. RE: Thanks to Paul and the Assyrian People

Jan-23-2002 at 11:37 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #3
 
>"Westerner?" well I was born in
>
>the U.S. (as you were)
>but Jews are no more
>Western that Assyrians.

>
>Assyrians are genetic Semites from the
>same stock that Abraham was
>called from to go to
>the Holy Land.
>

As are Jews

>While there is nothing wrong with
>being a "Westerner" (my wife
>is and my child is
>half) - you shouldn't portray
>yourself as a Jew when
>you converted to that religion
>as a young man.
>You were born a Goyim
>- as Goy as I
>am, because no Jewish family
>names their son 'James' -
>a New Testament name.
>You told me yourself that
>you converted to Judaism at
>around the age of 19
>because of the influence of
>certain friends - and that
>your parents were not Jews.

You definitely recall the conversation wrong.

I was born with Jewish ancestory, to a non-religious family. I began attending synagoge regularly when I was but a child of 14 years old.

You may be thinking of my acceptance of Yeshua as Messiah of Judaism when I was 18. This was not to my mind a conversion, since my religion was already the same as his had been: Judaism.

>
>
>My point in bringing all of
>this up is that you
>are, in fact, of European
>ancestry and did not grow
>up in a household speaking
>either Hebrew or Aramaic.
>You learned it either studying
>on your own or in
>school, wherever they supposedly gave
>you a PhD in "Semitic
>Studies."

No I never claimed that my household speke Hebrew or Aramaic. Like most Jews I picked up a lot of Hebrew growing up and in Synagogue classes.

I learned Aramaic in connection with my Talmud studies.

BTW it is an S.T.D. not a Ph.D.

I am shocked that in my absence you have changed your opinion of me so drasticly.

In the past you had credited my theories and evidence for Aramaic NT origins as cutting edge.

I am sorry if you no longer believe that it is of value.

Trimm

Print Top

Paul Younanmoderator

 
Send email to Paul YounanSend private message to Paul YounanView profile of Paul YounanAdd Paul Younan to your contact list
 
Member: Jun-1-2000
Posts: 1,306
Member Feedback

6. RE: Thanks to Paul and the Assyrian People

Jan-23-2002 at 12:14 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #4
 
You definitely recall the conversation wrong.

I don't think so.

I was born with Jewish ancestory, to a non-religious family.

Who was ethnically Jewish in your lineage and how far back was that?

By non-religious, do you mean the family was secular Jewish, as many are in Israel today, or do you mean one grandparent was Jewish and everyone else was a non-practicing Baptist?

How exactly does the Scottish, American Indian and other elements fit in with a "Jewish Ancestry?"

>I began attending synagoge regularly
>when I was but a
>child of 14 years old.

After your Bar Mitzvah?

And your family, which had a "Jewish Ancestry", named you 'James?' - a New Testament name?

How many Pauls, Stephens, and Marks attended that Synagogue?

No I never claimed that my
household speke Hebrew or Aramaic.

You certainly, then, should not speak authoritatively on the issue. Especially to one whose household has (and does.)

I learned Aramaic in connection with
my Talmud studies.

It must have not been a very comprehensive curriculum.

>BTW it is an S.T.D. not
>a Ph.D.

May I ask which theological seminary granted this S.T.D. ? How much of the curriculum was based on Aramaic study? When was your dissertation given and who reviewed it?

The reason why I ask, again, is because I don't believe, with your lack of knowledge in basic Semitic linguistics, that you would have qualified for such a degree.

I will apologize, and in public on this forum, if I can independently verify that you were indeed granted a Doctorate by a respectable, established university or theological seminary. I'd like names, dates and addresses.

Then - my only qualm will be with whomever instructed you in Aramaic.

>
>I am shocked that in my
>absence you have changed your
>opinion of me so drasticly.
>

Well, yes I have. It's only gotten worse after the "shukhlapas" and the "khudathas" and the other, either blatant or ignorant, errors have revealed themselves.


Fk^rwbw 0ml4

Peshitta.org

Print Top
James_Trimm
 
Send email to James_TrimmSend private message to James_TrimmAdd James_Trimm to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

8. RE: Thanks to Paul and the Assyrian People

Jan-23-2002 at 01:38 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #6
 

>
>And your family, which had a
>"Jewish Ancestry", named you 'James?'
>- a New Testament name?
>
>
>How many Pauls, Stephens, and Marks
>attended that Synagogue?
>

Two of my best friends at that Synagogue when I was a boy were "Christopher" and "Steve". Jews today have no aversion to taking gentile names, we also each have a Hebrew name. Likewise one of Yeshua's Talmidim was a Jew named ANDREW.

>>BTW it is an S.T.D. not
>>a Ph.D.
>
>May I ask which theological seminary
>granted this S.T.D. ?

St. John Chrysostom Theological Seminary

>How much of the curriculum
>was based on Aramaic study?

8 credit hours vs. 16 credit hours in Hebrew

> When was your dissertation
>given and who reviewed it?
>

My disertation did not involve Aramaic but if you still want to know I can tell you.

>

>>I am shocked that in my
>>absence you have changed your
>>opinion of me so drasticly.
>>
>
>Well, yes I have. It's
>only gotten worse after the
>"shukhlapas" and the "khudathas" and
>the other, either blatant or
>ignorant, errors have revealed themselves.
>
>

revealed themselves? after I left ? While I was here there was none of this.

We have an honest disgreement over SHUKHLAPA which is a rare Aramaic word in the Peshitta. It never appears in the Tanak (OT) portion and has only five appearances in the NT portion.

I think I have made a reasonable argument that the word can mean "change" or "renewal" and certainly you agree that the verbal root can mean to change or renew and that in Heb. 12:27 "renewal" looks very likely.

Now I know you do not agree with me, but the understanding I have derived for this rare word is not born of idiocy. It is simply that you think I have fallen short of proving my case.

Trimm

Print Top
Dean
 
Send email to DeanSend private message to DeanAdd Dean to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

19. RE: Thanks to Paul and the Assyrian People

Jan-25-2002 at 12:24 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #8
 

>>And your family, which had a
>>"Jewish Ancestry", named you 'James?'
>>- a New Testament name?
>>
>>
>>How many Pauls, Stephens, and Marks
>>attended that Synagogue?
>>


>Two of my best friends at
>that Synagogue when I was
>a boy were "Christopher" and
>"Steve". Jews today have
>no aversion to taking gentile
>names, we also each have
>a Hebrew name. Likewise
>one of Yeshua's Talmidim was
>a Jew named ANDREW.
>
>Trimm

According to my exposure to Orthodox, Rabinical Judaism, I have never come across a "James", "Stephen", "Luke", or "Christopher" named by religious Jewish parents

While its true that Jews do take on western names, naming specific NT names is generally not practiced. I knew one "Chris " but he was adopted from non-jewish parents.

But to use the biblical "Andrew" is an example is ludicrous since the Christian/Jewish struggles and rivalries did not exist when biblical "Andrew" was named!?!?

regards,
Dean Dana

Print Top
James_Trimm
 
Send email to James_TrimmSend private message to James_TrimmAdd James_Trimm to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

5. RE: Thanks to Paul and the Assyrian People

Jan-23-2002 at 12:14 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #3
 

Let me address this further as there may have been some misunderstanding.

I have never claimed to be a fluent Aramaic speaker.

My STD is in "Semitic Studies" which is a broad area of overall knowledge of Semitic langusge, culture and litearture. It does not meanI am a DR. of Aramaic, however Hebrew and ARamaic studies were part of my Doctoral Field, but so were Talmud Studies, Studies in the Midrashim, Dead Sea Scrolls, Second Temple Era Judaism and many other elements. I do feel that I have contributed greatly to the field of Aramaic NT Primacy regardless of the fact that I am not fluent and that my initial Aramaic studies were of the Babylonian Dialect rather than the "Syriac Aramaic Dialect."

James Trimm

Print Top

Paul Younanmoderator

 
Send email to Paul YounanSend private message to Paul YounanView profile of Paul YounanAdd Paul Younan to your contact list
 
Member: Jun-1-2000
Posts: 1,306
Member Feedback

7. ???

Jan-23-2002 at 12:35 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #5
 
...James, let me get this straight just so that there are no further misunderstandings on my part:

Number 1 - you come from a mixed background -a small portion of which was Jewish, but nevertheless the Jewish background didn't matter much to your qualifications in Aramaic linguistics - as you stated that neither your immediate household nor you spoke any Semitic tongue as a first language. In fact, English is your primary tongue.

Number 2 - your educational background was very broad and did not specialize in either Hebrew or Aramaic linguistics, although they may have comprised a small portion of the curriculum.

Number 3 - your primary educational exposure to Aramaic was through the Babylonian dialect of the Talmud. In other words, you learned some basic things about a very specific and distinct dialect of Aramaic in a classroom, or private self-initiated, setting.

Number 4 - you admit that you cannot converse in, nor readily understand, any ancient or modern dialect of Aramaic.

If I have understood these things properly, then I don't feel you are, by any stretch of the imagination, qualified to be telling native speakers where they are wrong about the language they speak on a daily basis. Neither do I feel you have any qualifications to translate primary texts in this Aramaic language that you readily admit little proficiency in.

Please disregard my earlier request to verify your educational background. With what I now know - I do understand why you are making these simple mistakes.

Fk^rwbw 0ml4

Peshitta.org

Print Top
James_Trimm
 
Send email to James_TrimmSend private message to James_TrimmAdd James_Trimm to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

9. RE: ???

Jan-23-2002 at 01:38 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #7
 
Paul,

I nour past conversations we had always been real clear about these things. What you bring to the table is that you are a native speaker. What I bring to the table is the Jewish cultural perspective, a knowledge of Aramaic as Jews used it which is influenced by Hebrew and Judaism.

For example idiomatic uses in Judaism and technical terms in Judaism.

A good example is the material I posted under PARAKLITA which examines the term as a technical term used in Judaism and seeking insight from that to help understand the peshitta. That is my strong point, not any ability to converse fluently.

I have also uncovered dozens of internal evdences for the Aramaic primacy of the NT. Places where the Greek translator mistranslated ambiguous Greek words, or misreads them as look alike Aramaic words and places where synoptic variances have been due to this. Also I have uncovered many Aramaic wordplays. I believe you are wrong to dismiss my contribution.

Print Top

Paul Younanmoderator

 
Send email to Paul YounanSend private message to Paul YounanView profile of Paul YounanAdd Paul Younan to your contact list
 
Member: Jun-1-2000
Posts: 1,306
Member Feedback

10. RE: ???

Jan-23-2002 at 02:27 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #9
 
James,

I would never dismiss any contribution by anyone to this field - nor do I pretend to be infallible in this topic.

I do not, however, consider your opinions on Aramaic topics as authoritative. I, personally, don't think you have the qualifications to be doing what you're doing.

Unfortunately, many people may very well consider you an authority on Aramaic - and that would be misinformation - unless you make it very clear that you studied it on your own as a hobby (apart from any credit hours received in a classroom setting) - that it's not your field of expertise - that you're not a native speaker and with that lack of speech comes many potential pitfalls.

That way, when disagreements do arise between you and a native speaker - people will be able to objectively weigh the evidence and credentials of each party and make a judgement for themselves.

As it stands - and especially since the release of the HRV, the number one source of misinformation (in my opinion) regarding Aramaic just happens to originate from your research.

Fk^rwbw 0ml4

Peshitta.org

Print Top
Andrew Gabriel Roth
 
Send email to Andrew Gabriel RothSend private message to Andrew Gabriel RothView profile of Andrew Gabriel RothAdd Andrew Gabriel Roth to your contact list
 
Member: Sep-6-2000
Posts: 384
Member Feedback

11. 1 Corinthians 13:1-13

Jan-23-2002 at 07:51 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #10
 
Gentlemen:

This grieves me, I am sorry to say. I love you both and respect you both immensely. For the record, in case anyone wants to know:

1) I have no degree. My qualifications are a love of Hebrew and Aramaic, and a deep abiding pride in my Jewish culture.

2) I am a Nazarene Jew, and both my parents are Jewish, but I believe in GERI'IM D'TZADAKIM.

3) While Hebrew feels very natural to me having heard it all my life and my love of Aramaic is rock solid, I am not a native speaker.

Akhi Paul: Your work and studies are invaluable to me. We stand together united on the significance of Peshitta, if not always in interpreting Torah practice. I count you among my closest friends and am proud to work with you.

Akhi James: Your studies have also been critical from moving me out of "Greeks in Jewish clothing" messianism. Your Nazarene moviement-- although I have called myself as such for many years prior to your restoration--has consistently been the most accurate, satisfying and wonderful kind of Messianism I have ever found. Your halakha is flawless, and while we have disagreements on methodology and translation, I have never faulted your intentions. And I never will.

I beg you both, as my pillars of inspiration, to express your differences in another manner. Because of my feelings for both of you, I may feel this more acutely than either of you does individually.

Peace, my brothers, peace.

Yours in Messiah

Andrew Gabriel Roth

Print Top
Biga
 
Send email to BigaSend private message to BigaView profile of BigaAdd Biga to your contact list
 
Member:
Posts: 193
Member Feedback

12. RE: 1 Corinthians 13:1-13

Jan-23-2002 at 10:08 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #11
 
well said, akhi Andrew.


I have no PhDs and seminaries, only a lot of nights with reading, reading... YOU, BOTH akhi Paul and akhi James. Don't make sad your readers, please....

Print Top
Iakov
 
Send email to IakovSend private message to IakovAdd Iakov to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

13. RE: 1 Corinthians 13:1-13

Jan-24-2002 at 09:37 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #12
 
Shlama Kulkon,

I agree that the manner of the discussion is missing the 'agape' potion. (1 Cor 13 in GNT).


Never the less brothers I do want to understand the rule. Does the modifier alter the gender or does it depend on the gender of the object or person to which the appellation is directed?

I undertsand the passion for this in you both but let's be civil and considerate.

Shlama Iakov

Print Top

Paul Younanmoderator

 
Send email to Paul YounanSend private message to Paul YounanView profile of Paul YounanAdd Paul Younan to your contact list
 
Member: Jun-1-2000
Posts: 1,306
Member Feedback

14. RE: 1 Corinthians 13:1-13

Jan-24-2002 at 09:52 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #13
 
Shlama Akhi Iakov,

We have to distinguish here between two different topics that I believe are being confused in this discussion.

First topic is the gender of the Holy Spirit. We know that the Holy Spirit is neither male nor female, but "spirit." So let's move past this to the real point.

In Aramaic, like in Hebrew, there is no neuter. Everything is either male or female - LINGUISTICALLY SPEAKING ONLY. That's very critical to understand what's going on here.

When you find 'Rukha' alone - with nothing else, then you refer to that 'Rukha' in the feminine - because the term is linguistically feminine.

But when a masculine adjective like 'Qudsha' or 'Shrara' is used (check the lexicon), then you must refer to that construct as masculine. You cannot refer to the "Rukha d'Qudsha" in the feminine - not because the Holy Spirit is male - but because the plain feminine word 'Rukha' is further qualified with a masculine attribute (Truth, Wisdom are masculine in Aramaic.)

Now, having said that - if you find the phrase "Rukha d'Khekmatha" (Spirit of Wisdom, or 'Wise Spirit') then the phrase must be treated as feminine - since the adjective "Khekmatha" is feminine.

Finally, the answers to your questions are both 'YES'. Gender can be altered with an adjective or modifier (like the examples above.) Gender can also be altered depending on the gender of the object - for instance, when Mshikha calls Shimon "Keepa", which is a feminine word - he does not subsequently use feminine pronouns or enclitics to describe that 'Keepa' - since Shimon would be quite insulted.

The hypothesis that states that 'since the word is feminine, then automatically it must be treated as such' simply is erroneous and there are thousands of examples that prove otherwise (just like John 1:1 and Matthew 16.)

Fk^rwbw 0ml4

Peshitta.org

Print Top
Iakov
 
Send email to IakovSend private message to IakovAdd Iakov to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

15. RE: 1 Corinthians 13:1-13

Jan-24-2002 at 11:23 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #14
 

Akhi Paul,

Thank you that helps.

So if I were to refer to a woman having a spirit of holiness it would be clear that the apellation modifies the gender.

That is, although the adjective modifier 'qdsha' is masculine it is clear we are referring to a specific woman.

Then we would use feminine pronouns referring to the woman's spirit of holiness? Conversely if we simply refer to a spirit that is holy a masculine pronoun is used because of the adjective modifier?
If we refer to the holy 'Spirit of God' we must use a masculine pronoun? But, in the latter which rule is more overriding; the adjective modifier or the reference to a specific person?

Sorry if this sounds confusing.

Shlama Iakov

Print Top

Paul Younanmoderator

 
Send email to Paul YounanSend private message to Paul YounanView profile of Paul YounanAdd Paul Younan to your contact list
 
Member: Jun-1-2000
Posts: 1,306
Member Feedback

16. RE: 1 Corinthians 13:1-13

Jan-24-2002 at 12:00 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #15
 
Shlama Akhi Iakov,

>Thank you that helps.

No prob.

>
>So if I were to refer
>to a woman having a
>spirit of holiness it would
>be clear that the apellation
>modifies the gender.
>
>That is, although the adjective modifier
>'qdsha' is masculine it is
>clear we are referring to
>a specific woman.
>

If you're speaking of the woman herself then indeed, any pronouns or enclitic suffixes you use to reference the woman would have to be feminine.

>Then we would use feminine pronouns
>referring to the woman's spirit
>of holiness?

Not in that case. Her 'spirit of holiness' is still masculine - she remains feminine.

>Conversely if we
>simply refer to a spirit
>that is holy a masculine
>pronoun is used because of
>the adjective modifier?

Absolutely.

>If we refer to the holy
>'Spirit of God' we must
>use a masculine pronoun?

No, in this case the spirit is still referred to in the feminine ('of God' is not an adjective - "Holy" is and "True" is, but not "of God.") Even 'the spirit of Iakov' or 'the spirit of Paul' is linguistically feminine because we are still talking about a bland 'spirit.'

But a 'Holy' or 'True' Spirit is linguistically masculine, likewise a 'Wise' Spirit is linguistically feminine. These are adjectives. That's what makes the difference.

>But, in the latter which rule
>is more overriding; the adjective
>modifier or the reference to
>a specific person?

"The Holy Spirit of God" is good English but it isn't good Aramaic and wouldn't be used as such (I've never seen a construct like that.)

We would say something more like "The Holy Spirit, who is of God" (Rukha d'Qudsha, haw d'min Alaha) - in which case the "who" ('haw') is masculine (as opposed to 'hay', which is feminine.)

>
>Sorry if this sounds confusing.
>

No prob - I understood ya.

If I were to categorize the priorities in linguistic gender classification, it would be as follows:


  1. A word without adjectives inherits it's native gender state (e.g., 'Rukha' alone), unless
  2. ....it is used as an adjective or nickname to an object of opposite gender (e.g., 'Keepa')
  3. A word used with an adjective of same gender inherits it's native gender state (e.g., 'Rukha d'Khekmatha' remains Feminine)
  4. A word used with an adjective of opposite gender is then referenced with the gender of that adjective (e.g., 'Rukha d'Qudsha' changes to Masculine)


Fk^rwbw 0ml4

Peshitta.org

Print Top
Iakov
 
Send email to IakovSend private message to IakovAdd Iakov to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

17. RE: 1 Corinthians 13:1-13

Jan-24-2002 at 02:29 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #16
 
Shlama Akhi Paul,

"Her
>'spirit of holiness' is still
>masculine - she remains feminine.
>
Even 'the spirit of Iakov' or
>'the spirit of Paul' is
>linguistically feminine because we are
>still talking about a bland
>'spirit.'
>
>But a 'Holy' or 'True' Spirit
>is linguistically masculine, likewise a
>'Wise' Spirit is linguistically feminine.
> These are adjectives.
>That's what makes the difference.

So the adjective modifier would always take precedence over any other factor? The particular woman's spirit of holiness is masculine (can't wait to tell my wife)?



Fk^rwbw 0ml4
bwq9y

Print Top

Paul Younanmoderator

 
Send email to Paul YounanSend private message to Paul YounanView profile of Paul YounanAdd Paul Younan to your contact list
 
Member: Jun-1-2000
Posts: 1,306
Member Feedback

18. RE: 1 Corinthians 13:1-13

Jan-24-2002 at 02:49 PM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #17
 
Shlama Akhi Iakov,

Yes, the adjective modifier would always take precedence over any other factor because we aren't referring to the gender of the woman but the gender of the 'spirit of holiness' - which would be masculine.

Consequently, we would refer to a man's 'spirit of wisdom' in the feminine.

Fk^rwbw 0ml4

Peshitta.org

Print Top

Forums Topics  Previous Topic Next Topic


Assyria \ã-'sir-é-ä\ n (1998)   1:  an ancient empire of Ashur   2:  a democratic state in Bet-Nahren, Assyria (northern Iraq, northwestern Iran, southeastern Turkey and eastern Syria.)   3:  a democratic state that fosters the social and political rights to all of its inhabitants irrespective of their religion, race, or gender   4:  a democratic state that believes in the freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture in faithfulness to the principles of the United Nations Charter — Atour synonym

Ethnicity, Religion, Language
» Israeli, Jewish, Hebrew
» Assyrian, Christian, Aramaic
» Saudi Arabian, Muslim, Arabic
Assyrian \ã-'sir-é-an\ adj or n (1998)   1:  descendants of the ancient empire of Ashur   2:  the Assyrians, although representing but one single nation as the direct heirs of the ancient Assyrian Empire, are now doctrinally divided, inter sese, into five principle ecclesiastically designated religious sects with their corresponding hierarchies and distinct church governments, namely, Church of the East, Chaldean, Maronite, Syriac Orthodox and Syriac Catholic.  These formal divisions had their origin in the 5th century of the Christian Era.  No one can coherently understand the Assyrians as a whole until he can distinguish that which is religion or church from that which is nation -- a matter which is particularly difficult for the people from the western world to understand; for in the East, by force of circumstances beyond their control, religion has been made, from time immemorial, virtually into a criterion of nationality.   3:  the Assyrians have been referred to as Aramaean, Aramaye, Ashuraya, Ashureen, Ashuri, Ashuroyo, Assyrio-Chaldean, Aturaya, Chaldean, Chaldo, ChaldoAssyrian, ChaldoAssyrio, Jacobite, Kaldany, Kaldu, Kasdu, Malabar, Maronite, Maronaya, Nestorian, Nestornaye, Oromoye, Suraya, Syriac, Syrian, Syriani, Suryoye, Suryoyo and Telkeffee. — Assyrianism verb

Aramaic \ar-é-'máik\ n (1998)   1:  a Semitic language which became the lingua franca of the Middle East during the ancient Assyrian empire.   2:  has been referred to as Neo-Aramaic, Neo-Syriac, Classical Syriac, Syriac, Suryoyo, Swadaya and Turoyo.

Please consider the environment when disposing of this material — read, reuse, recycle. ♻
AIM | Atour: The State of Assyria | Terms of Service