v. 88 ?????, ??. ????? ????????… ???±??????????·?‚ ?†?»???????‚, _cf._ Dan. iii. 21, 29; vii. 11
(?™?§?“, Chald. in first and third of these cases, and also in Gaster's
Aramaic of this piece).
v. 89 ?????, ??. ??????µ???»?µ?„?? does not seem a very suitable word, as they had
not yet been into ??…???·?‚. It may be a translation of ?™?©?¦ as in Jer. xlii.
11, if from a Hebrew original. ?©?™?–?‘? ?? is given by Gaster as the original
of both ??????µ???»?±?„?? (??) and ????????????±?„??.
v. 90 ?????, ??. ????± ???µ???????µ??????, used of proselytes of the gate in Acts xvii.
17, may have this meaning here also, as coming last, and in connection
with ?„????? ???µ????? ?„??¶?? ???µ??¶??, a possible reference to the "gods of the
nations." Gaster's Aramaic has nothing answering to ?????????µ??????. Grotius
suggests "?™?????™ ?????”?™?? ut Job i. I, 8, ii. 3," where ???µ?????µ???®?‚ is the word.
The writer deems the evidence of language to point on the whole to a
Semitic rather than to a Greek base. The difficulty of balancing the
indications however of the original language is shewn by the names of
important authorities which may be ranged on either side, Ball,
Rothstein, and Swete regarding the Semitic as probable; Westcott,
Sch??rer, and Fritzsche holding a similar opinion as to the Greek.
Pages:
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73