THE LORD’S PRAYER IN A WIDER SETTING: A NEW HEBREW RECONSTRUCTION (original) (raw)
Related papers
In: Prayer in the Sayings Gospel Q [Das Gebet in der Logienquelle Q.], ed. by Daniel A. Smith & Christoph Heil, WUNT, Tübingen, Mohr-Siebeck, 2019
Excerpt of the Introductory remarks by Daniel A. Smith and Christoph Heil: Ursula Schattner-Rieser (Martin-Buber-Institut für Judaistik, Universität zu Köln/University of Cologne) investigates the Aramaic foundations of the Lord’s Prayer (Q 11:2b–4; Matt 6:9–13; Luke 11:2b–4) in her contribution, “The Lord’s Prayer in the Context of Jewish-Aramaic Prayer Traditions in the Time of Jesus.” Schattner-Rieser begins by assessing the relevance of the Aramaic Qumran materials for our understanding of prayer in early Judaism, and of the linguistic situation in Palestine at the time of Jesus. The Qumran materials provide evidence that prayer in Aramaic was acceptable, and also that there was a developing trend towards fixed formulae in prayers. Next, Schattner-Rieser presents an Aramaic retroversion of the Lord’s Prayer in its Matthean and Lukan forms, and gives a detailed petition-by-petition commentary on ancient Aramaic parallels. Even though our only certain texts are in Greek, translation (back) into Aramaic is made possible by the numerous formulaic and morphological correspondences to ancient Aramaic materials. Such a (re-)translation does not afford access to “the original Lord’s Prayer,” but to a possible primitive Aramaic Urform, illustrating how consistent the Prayer was to its Palestinian Jewish milieu. “For every [Greek] petition there is a clear underlying Jewish-Semitic background, one that could display both cross-linguistic influences (with Hebrew or Aramaic in the background), as well as cross-cultural influences in relation to the Jewish milieu, the biblical history, and the expectations of that time” (p. 46). This Semitic background is reflected in Septuagintal parallels as well. Schattner-Rieser finds the strongest correspondences to the individual petitions of the Lord’s Prayer in Aramaic materials that tell, re-tell, or evoke aspects of the Exodus story (especially Exod 16:4–5).
THE HEBREW TRANSLATION OF THE CAROLINGIAN LORD'S PRAYER: A CASE STUDY IN USING LINGUISTICS
AJSR, 2020
Through a linguistic analysis of the Hebrew Lord's Prayer, this article endeavors to reach a new understanding of the function of this text in the lives of its users, concluding that the ninth-century Carolingian writer/translator meant for this text to be sung aloud. This article goes back to the basics of textual research-philology and language study-in order to determine the correct historical framework through which to understand this much-debated text, thus adding to our understanding of the religious life and practice of the nuns of Essen at the polyglottic crossroads of Latin and German, Hebrew and Greek. This paper is also an invitation for future studies to continue its effort to rewrite the history of Hebrew in the church, for historians to broaden their toolbox, and for linguists and philologists to contribute their insights to other fields.
ABBAUN The Authentic Aramaic Meaning of the Lord’s Prayer
Recently various authors have published what they claim to be the original Aramaic version of the Lord’s Prayer. However, this is not the authentic prayer that Yeshua, the Jesus of history, transmitted to his disciples. It is merely a second-century Syriac translation adapted from the Greek versions in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. It is used in the modern Syrian churches. Although Syriac was a development of Aramaic, the Abbun d’bishmayo or “Our Father Who art in Heaven” is taken from the Diatessaron or harmony of the New Testament gospels translated from the Greek into Syriac by Tatian about A.D. 160–175. In other words, the so-called Aramaic version of the Lord’s Prayer is merely a translation into second-century Syriac of the flawed Greek version in Matthew and Luke (c. A.D. 85-90). Like all the sayings and parables of Yeshua in the New Testament gospels, the Lord’s Prayer was poorly translated from Aramaic and altered to make sense in terms of the Pauline theology of the gentile churches. However, through biblical scholarship it is possible to recover the original Aramaic prayer of Yeshua, understand its meaning, and render it into a form that modern people can use with understanding. That is the purpose of this little booklet.
“THE IMPORTANCE OF ARAMAIC FOR MARKAN CHRISTOLOGY”
A test case of the importance of Aramaic for New Testament studies. This paper focuses on how a knowledge of Aramaic can help one to better understand Jesus' usage of the title "Son of Man" by way of a detailed study of the Aramaic of Daniel 7 and the term בר אנשׁ used in that text.
The Search For The Language Of The New Testament
2024
Explore the linguistic roots of early Christianity with Al Garza's new book, "The Search for the Language of the New Testament." Based on over ten years of detailed research, this insightful work examines the roles of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek during the times of Jesus and the apostles, shedding new light on the original texts of the New Testament. "The Search for the Language of the New Testament" delves into the linguistic foundation of the New Testament texts, highlighting the pivotal role played by Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Recent scholarship and historical analysis suggest that Hebrew was likely the mother tongue of Jesus and the apostles, complementing the previously recognized use of Aramaic and Greek. This linguistic diversity is reflected in the early Christian texts and translations examined throughout the discussions, such as those by Jerome and Augustine, who worked with these languages to articulate the doctrines and narratives central to Christianity. The exploration reveals how the Hebrew language, alongside Greek and Aramaic, significantly influenced the formulation and dissemination of the New Testament, leading to a multilingual body of scripture that encompassed the theological and cultural nuances of early Christian communities. This complex linguistic backdrop underscores the depth and breadth of early Christian texts and shapes our understanding of their development and transmission.
Reviews in Religion & Theology, 2018
Biblical Aramaic: A Reader and Handbook (hereafter Aramaic Reader) is an expanded version of the authors' previous Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia: A Reader's Edition (hereafter, Reader's BHS) with the same publisher. After a brief introduction, the book consists of two main parts: the Aramaic portions of all of the Biblical Aramaic text with detailed annotation, and vocabulary and morphology lists for consultation, learning and review. Like the Reader's BHS, it comes in an attractive, hardcover binding, with thick, white paper preventing the otherwise inevitable bleed-through in other Bibles. The introduction covers a few key matters to orient students to the Aramaic language. First,
Published in Kleine Untersuchungen zur Sprache des Alten Testaments und seiner Umwelt 22 (2017), 101–123, 2017
Many of the works now contained in the Hebrew Bible—or their putative sources—were originally written in the Old Hebrew script. When exactly and why did scribes shift to copying scriptural works in the Square script? It is often asserted that this change did not take place until the third century BCE, i.e., well within the Hellenistic period. Yet the presence of scriptural scrolls from Qumran written in Paleo-Hebrew script (and the evidence that the Hebrew language was still used as a vernacular in Palestine, alongside Aramaic, during the Greco-Roman period), only re-inforce the question: What was the original motivation for shifting the script, which apocryphal and rabbinic sources describe as a radical (or even traumatic) break in the textual transmission of biblical literature in general and the Pentateuch in particular? The present discussion argues that the unique historical and cultural circumstances of the Aramaic language and script during the Persian period supply a compelling context for the shift to the Aramaic script when recording sacred, inherited literature that was eventually canonized as part of the Hebrew Bible. This proposal builds upon a theoretical perspective drawn from the linguistics of writing systems, which developed a highly nuanced understanding of the intricate relationship between languages, writing systems and scripts, one that offers analytical distinctions that are helpful in untying some of the conceptual complexities of these issues.
THE ARAMAIC, SYRIAC, AND LATIN TRANSLATIONS OF HEBREW SCRIPTURE VIS-À-VIS THE MASORETIC TEXT
Traditionally, text-critical analysis of Hebrew Scripture started with MT, and since 1947 it also covers the Judean Desert texts. The picture must be completed by also consulting the ancient translations, even though the Hebrew texts behind those translations must be reconstructed first, and this procedure often involves an almost impossible enterprise. It is an accepted view that the Hebrew parent text of the LXX needs to be taken into consideration in the textual praxis, but we hear little about the other versions, T S V, 1 because V and T almost always agree with MT. They are less significant for the textual analysis, but remain important for understanding the biblical exegesis in antiquity. Specialists find more variants in S, but they often state that S, also, differs very little from MT.