Theos-Talk Archives (September 1996 Message tl00204)

In message <B2B9C475E5@serv.peb.ufrj.br>, ABRANTES@serv.peb.ufrj.br
writes
>Acts21:40 Paul was
>imprisioned at Jerusalem, and speaks in greek with romans and in HEBRAIC
>(not aramaic) with jews. So hebraic could be also understood by people in
>judae. I think that the opposite understanding could also be possible: the
>jews in Rome could understand aramaic.

The text says that he spoke to them "in the Hebrew language" - meaning
the language *spoken* by the Hebrews, which at that date was almost
certainly Aramaic in one form or another, so *JEWS* in Rome would have
understood him, but *NOT GENTILES*.  Ironically, they would probably not
have understood anyone who actually *did* speak Hebrew.  Even in Judea,
the Hebrew Scriptures had to be interpreted to the hearers when they
were read aloud, which gave rise to the many Targums, or paraphrases
that developed, some of which were written down and almost became "holy
writ" themselves ... it is clear that in the Holy Land at that period,
the Jews themselves no longer understood Hebrew, except for some among
the priestly caste.

Alan
---------
Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/
THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age
TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk
http://WWW1.Minn.Net/~vlg/TI.html (Figure "one" after WWW)