Re: HEBREW IS GREEK

[Martin Edwards]

Matt Giwer wrote:
>     The problem as everyone knows is there is no evidence Hebrew was 
> ever at any time other than a liturgical language. So where it came from 
> is a legitimate issue. There are no reports of anyone ever speaking the 
> language nor is there any evidence of it evolving from an earlier 
> language. And this is discounting the Phoenician the believers call 
> proto-hebrew solely because the bible says "israelites" ruled the PLACE 
> where it is found. Proper identification requires the use intrinsic 
> evidence.
Your stunning capacity for missing the point is once again in play.  Yes 
 it is a legitimate issue.  Whether it was a naturally spoken language 
is not the point.  Sanskrit was not a naturally spoken language.  It 
*was* spoken, but its speakers had to learn it.  On intrinsic 
*linguistic* grounds Hebrew is clearly descended from Phoenician 
*whether or not* this was "proto-Hebrew" in the areas where the term has 
been conjecturally applied by concensus scholars.  Your hypothesis that 
it was only a liturgical language is not way out but, as yet, it is only 
a hypothesis.  The contention that it was Greek is balls.  Sorry about 
the Anti-American by the way.  Linguistic incompetence is endemic 
in the Anglophone world.  I spend much of my spare time correcting this 
kind of twaddle.

--
You can't fool me: there ain't no Sanity Clause - Chico Marx

www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/1955