Mattai 7:6

[Paul Younan]

Shlama Alakh Khabiba Sami,

I'd like to explain it in a different way.

Think of the Aramaic word "Qudsha" in its function as an adjective in English. Specifically, an attributive adjective. In English, an attributive adjective normally precedes the noun it modifies. For example:

"a small house"

In Aramaic, it's the reverse. The attributive adjective follows the noun that it modifies. For example:

"beytha zawra" (a house small)

Examine Mattai 4:5:

"Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city (medinath Qudsha), and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple"

1 Cor. 9:13

"Don't you know that those who work in the temple (beth Qudsha) get their food from the temple (beth Qudsha)" (see also, Hebrews 8:2, 9:1-3)

Of course the most common phrase we find in the NT is "Holy Spirit" - "Rukha d'Qudsha", again with the attributive adjective following the noun which it modifies.

The reason, Akhi, that the word in question cannot mean "(that which is) Holy" in Mattai 7:6 is because it is not preceded (or, followed) by a noun. It is not an adjective at all, it is itself a noun which is preceded by the verb "hang."

Masoretically speaking, the word in Mattai 7:6 is not "Qud-sha" as in the examples above, it is "Qud-a-sha", a noun in Jewish Galilean Aramaic which means a sort of ear or nose ring. Remember we had no vowel points back then - the consonants are the exact same, which led to the confusion on the Greek translators part.

It's only in the original Aramaic, that the parallelism (dog-pig, ring-pearl) is preserved.

This is not apparent to Assyrians, as it is not part of our dialect. In fact all the Assyrians here will think that's crazy. Had I not referenced the C.A.L., I would have not known this either. We never use that word for a ring, we say "aziqtha" (ref. James/Yaqub 2:2).

Mattai 7:6 was Yeshua speaking to the Hebrews in their "dialect".