RT, this is stale thread, but it is so seldom I agree with you I have to
revive it.
Except it sounds a lot like insurances. An appropriate way would be
precocious-looking likenesses of Jesus.
RT
Perfect, and now you all understand the English language. When in doubt
re-cast the sentence. That
Dear Howard and Rainer,
The plural doesn't exist. Jesus was unique.
Tell that to John Cleese! (For those of you who remember Cleese as
Michaelangelo in one of my favorite Monty Python skits).
--
Ed Durbrow
Saitama, Japan
http://www9.plala.or.jp/edurbrow/
To get on or off this list see list
On Tue, 21 Sep 2004, Caroline Usher wrote:
At 11:47 PM 9/18/2004 -0500, you wrote:
Many old paintings (of skill and sensitivity) depict a young woman holding
a nude Christ, with the baby wearing an adult-like face and making a
religious hand symbol.
Could you cite an example or two so
Herbert Ward wrote
These do not look like baby faces to me. Especially around the eyes. I
guess it (the adult face) was a symbol of authority which the folks back
then needed to feel secure, like they needed kings and an infallible
omnipotent Church.
These are actually pretty mild examples
-Original Message-
From: Howard Posner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 04, 2004 5:02 PM
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Old religious paintings.
Herbert Ward wrote
These do not look like baby faces to me. Especially around
the eyes.
I guess
Spring, aus dem, Rainer [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
I think it's u-declination. Therefore the plural is Jesus with a long
u.
It isn't. In Hebrew / Aramaic, it is Yeshu, with both long and closed e
and u (like in French nee and in English zoo). It is not certain which
syllable was stressed
However, I'm wondering, Herbert, if you want to know all of this or if
you'd rather just like to express your opinions about all of those
strange old things.
He has to be careful, there are a few herbivores on the list...
RT
To get on or off this list see list information at
Dear Sirs:
I wish to complain in the strongest possible terms about the recent spate of
postings concerning English, German, Hebrew and Greek grammar. I would
never dream of bringing up such things myself, and I'm as pedantic as they
come.
Rear Admiral Howard Posner, M.P., OBE, KBE, JD UCLA
PPS: Mr. R? is informative as always, but I believe all references to
Jesus in Hebrew sources postdate the (Greek) Christian bible, which would
mean that Yeshu in the Hebrew sources is a transliteration of the Greek
IHCOYC (nom.) IHCOY (gen.) IHCOY (dat.) IHCOYN (acc.) IHCOY (voc.) and not
PS: It may be appropriate for Mr. Turovsky to say precocious-looking
'likenesses' of Jesus, but it would be the Jesice themselves, not the
likenesses that are precocious.
That's why I used the looking modifier.
RT
To get on or off this list see list information at
Rear Admiral Howard Posner, M.P.,
Last time we met (17 years...) you were admirably callipygian.
RT
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
There is, by the way, a very early version of the Bible in Aramaic in
existence, containing the New Testament as well (and, so, the testimony
to Yêshû meshîha) and probably predating the oldest surviving Hebrew
manuscripts, which is called the Peshitta.
Interesting. General adoption of Hebrew
Mathias Rösel wrote:
the very name Jesus
does occur in Hebrew sources which predate the New Testament, indeed.
Have a look into the books of Ezrah/Nehemya (26 times, especially Ezrah
2-3, Nehemya 7-9), if you will.
I will, but my point was that the person Christians know as Jesus of
Nazareth
mentioned in Greek sources, so it had to be be surmised from the Greek what
he called himself in Hebrew, or so I surmise.
You meant Aramaic.
RT
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
At 11:47 PM 9/18/2004 -0500, you wrote:
Many old paintings (of skill and sensitivity) depict a young woman holding
a nude Christ, with the baby wearing an adult-like face and making a
religious hand symbol.
Could you cite an example or two so I can see what you are talking about?
There are
On 19 Sep 2004, Mathias Rösel wrote:
First, there is the creed that Christ died for our sins (i. e. for us,
... baby but Christ who delivers entire man from the curse of sin.
Thank you.
But, no modern depiction of Jesus emphasizes Him as a nude man-baby. For
example, I doubt that modern
Herbert Ward [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
But, no modern depiction of Jesus emphasizes Him as a nude man-baby. For
example, I doubt that modern Baptists have a nude in any of their
churches.
..
address this difference in style and taste between 2004 and 1570, an
understanding of which might, I
Herbert Ward [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
Given that lutenists' musical literature was contemporary with these paintings,
perhaps one
may ask here how a modern person can understand the esthetics which produced these
paintings.
I shall make a cautious attempt. Please, note: not a sermon, but
18 matches
Mail list logo
