Simon Magus's Epithet 'Standing One' = 'Bishop' or 'Overseer' in Aramaic

[Ben C. Smith]

If you knew Aramaic or Hebrew, you would understand what 𐤏𐤋𐤉𐤑𐤐𐤄 means....

What would happen if you knew Aramaic or Hebrew?

[Ethan]

Aramaic and Hebrew are dialects of Phoenicians, theologians are trying too erase Phoenicians from our history books, so nobody knows about them.

http://blog.press.princeton.edu/2017/12 ... oenicians/

There is the evidence.

How can Hebrew and Aramaic be understood without its parent language and parent culture.

[Ben C. Smith]

How can Hebrew and Aramaic be understood without its parent language and parent culture.

How can Hebrew and Aramaic be understood without any working knowledge of their grammar and syntax?

[Ethan]

Hebrew and Aramaic are not theological languages, for people believe they were created by Moses in the middle of the desert just to write the Torah but the authentic language is that of the Phoenicians, who existed, David, Solomon and Moses did not.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carthage
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyre,_Lebanon

[Ben C. Smith]

Hebrew and Aramaic are not theological languages, for people believe they were created by Moses in the middle of the desert just to write the Torah but the authentic language is that of the Phoenicians, who existed, David, Solomon and Moses did not.

None of this, even if true, means that you know Aramaic or Hebrew in any way whatsoever.

[Secret Alias]

Getting back to the OP it is interesting to see how the Samaritan use of qayoma has the sense of 'overseer'

I, I am He who stood over (קעומה) the Creation and at Mount Sinai.
I, I am He and there is no other beside me

I think qayoma here literally means 'stood over' but with the sense that we say in English 'over look' albeit with an explicit sense of 'standing there' looking.

[Secret Alias]

I did some more digging and there is also a variant qayma which also means 'statue'

qymh, qymtˀ (qāmā/qāymā, qāyemtā) n.f. standing object: statue; grain; overseer
f.act.ptcp.

1 an upright stone object (a) statue PTA, Sam, Syr. TN Gen35:20 : קיימת קבורתא ‏ . (b) column Syr. Kays 261:7 : ܩܝ̈ܡܬܐ ܗܿܠܝܢ ܕܐܩܝܼܡ ܗܪܩܠܝܣ‏ those pillars that Hercules erected. P Gn19:26 : ܩܝܡܬܐ ܕܡܠܚܐ‏ . (b.1) stela Sam, Syr. SamTgJ Gen28:22 : ואבנה הדה דשבית קעמה יהי בית אלהים ‏ . P Gn31:45 : ܘܐܪܝܡܗܿ ܩܝܡܬܐ‏ he raised it up as a maṣṣebah. (c) mile-stone Syr.

2 mature grain PTA, Syr. P Ex22:5 : ܬܐܟܘܠ ܓܕܝ̈ܫܐ ܐܘ ܩܝ̈ܡܬܐ‏ . P Ju15:5 . P Ho8:7 : ܡܛܠ ܕܪܘܚܐ ܙܪܥܘ ܘܥܠܥܠܐ ܚܨܕܘ܂ ܘܩܝܡܬܐ ܠܝܬ ܠܗܘܢ‏ because they have sown the wind and harvested the storm, and have no mature grain. (a) food (see also s.v. qymtˀ #1) Syr. IshDan 103(2) : ܩܝܡܬܐ ܕܝܘܡܐ܂ ܗܢܘ܂ ܬܘܪܣܝܐ‏ daily portion, i.e. nourishment.

3 female guard or overseer Syr.

4 trunk Syr. (a) extension piece (into a handle) Syr. P 1S13:21 : ܘܠܣܟܬܐ ܘܠܐܒܘܬܐ ܘܠܟܘܠܒܐ ܘܠܩܝܡܬܐ ܕܡܣܣܐ‏ for the plowshare, the goad, the axe, and for affixing the goad base [=MT וּלְהַצִּיב הַדָּרְבָן].

Isn't there something in the Simon Magus story about a 'statue'? The term appears over and over in the Samaritan targum:

Early the next morning Jacob took the stone he had placed under his head and set it up as a pillar (קעמה) and poured oil on top of it. Genesis 28:18
So Jacob took a stone and set it up as a pillar (קעמה) Genesis 31:45
Jacob set up a pillar (קעמה) at the place where God had talked with him, and he poured out a drink offering on it; he also poured oil on it. Genesis 35:14

So already I think we found a strong sign that the allusion to 'those who were thought to be pillars' has something to do with being a 'standing one' and an overseer (= bishop) in the Church.

The normative spelling in Jewish Aramaic is קמא http://cal.huc.edu/showjastrow.php?page=1383 That the word also has connotation of 'resurrection' is demonstrated by the Arabic 'Day of Resurrection' awm al-Qiyāmah (Arabic: يوم القيامة‎,)

qymh, qymtˀ (qyāmā, qyāmtā (qayyāmtā) ) n.f. resurrection
Mand: qaiamta


1 resurrection CPA, Syr, Man. P Mt22:28 : ܒܿܲܩܝܵܡܬܿܵܐ‏ at the Resurrection. (a) ܩܝܡܬܐ ܡܩܿܕܡܬܐ‏ : early resurrection, i.e. a mystical experience Syr. (b) rising up CPA.

2 the resurrected Syr. AphDem22.432:2 : ܩܝܡܬ ܙܕܝܩ̈ܐ‏ the resurrection of the righteous.

3 constancy, steadfastness Syr. P Lv26:37 : ܘܠܐ ܬܗܘܐ ܠܗܘܢ ܩܝܡܬܐ ܩܕܡ ܒܥܠܕܒܒܝ̈ܗܘܢ‏ you shall be unable to withstand your enemies. (a) a steady wind Syr. P Is37:27 : ܐܝܟ ܒܘܚܫܝܢܐ ܩܕܡ ܩܝܡܬܐ‏ like green herbs before a steady wind.

4 existing portion, substance CPA, Syr. P Gn47:22 : ܕܩܿܝܡܬܐ ܩܝܡܐ ܗܘܬ ܠܟܘܡܪ̈ܐ‏ . P Lv10:13 . P StDan(1)1:5 : ܩܝܡܬܐ ܕܝܘܡܐ‏ .

5 precept Syr.

6 pact Syr. AphDem11.205:20 : ܕܢܛܪܘ ܩܝܡ̈ܬܗܘܢ ܒܙܒ̈ܢܝܗܘ‏ .

7 a prayer of dedication Man.

'Mshiha qam' means 'Christ is risen'

[Ben C. Smith]

Isn't there something in the Simon Magus story about a 'statue'?

There is this:

Justin Martyr, 1 Apology 26.2-3: 2 There was a Samaritan, Simon, a native of the village called Gitto, who in the reign of Claudius Caesar, and in your royal city of Rome, did mighty acts of magic, by virtue of the art of the devils operating in him. He was considered a god, and as a god was honoured by you with a statue, which statue was erected on the river Tiber, between the two bridges, and bore this inscription, in the language of Rome:-- "Simoni Deo Sancto," "To Simon the holy God." 3 And almost all the Samaritans, and a few even of other nations, worship him, and acknowledge him as the first god; and a woman, Helena, who went about with him at that time, and had formerly been a prostitute, they say is the first idea generated by him.

[Secret Alias]

Yes that must be it. Thanks

[Secret Alias]

Jastrow has an interesting entry for qamah which leads us back to the Talmud Baba Kamma 60a and a long discussion of the meaning of the word in Exodus 22:6. First the passage in Exodus:

If a fire breaks out and spreads into thorn bushes so that it burns shocks of grain or standing grain (קמה) or the whole field, the one who started the fire must make restitution.

The Mishnah:

IF HE ALLOWED FIRE TO ESCAPE AND IT BURNT WOOD, STONES OR [EVEN] EARTH, HE WOULD BE LIABLE, AS IT SAYS: IF FIRE BREAK OUT AND CATCH IN THORNS SO THAT THE STACKS OF CORN, OR THE STANDING CORN, OR THE FIELD BE CONSUMED THEREWITH: HE THAT KINDLED THE FIRE SHALL SURELY MAKE RESTITUTION.

Gemara:

Raba said: Why was it necessary for the Divine Law to mention [both] 'thorns', 'stacks', 'standing corn' (קמה) and 'field'? They are all necessary. For if the Divine Law had mentioned [only] 'thorns', I might have said that it was only in the case of thorns that the Divine Law imposed liability because fire is found often among them and carelessness in regard to them is frequent, whereas in the case of 'stacks', which are not often on fire and in respect of which negligence is not usual, I might have held that there is no liability. If [again] the Divine Law had mentioned [only] 'stacks', I might have said that it was only in the case of 'stacks' that the Divine Law imposed liability as the loss involved there was considerable, whereas in the case of 'thorns' where the loss involved was slight I might have thought there was no liability. But why was קמה necessary [to be mentioned]? [To teach that] just as קמה is in an open place, so is everything [which is] in an open space [subject to the same law].14 But according to R. Judah who imposes liability also for concealed articles damaged by fire, why had קמא [to be mentioned]? — To include anything possessing stature. Whence then did the [other] Rabbis include anything possessing stature? — They derived this from [the word] 'or' [placed before] קמה. And R. Judah? — He needed [the word] 'or' as a disjunctive. Whence then did the [other] Rabbis derive the disjunction? — They derived it from [the word] 'or' [placed before] 'the field'. And R. Judah? — He held that because the Divine Law inserted 'or' [before] קמה 'it also inserted 'or' [before] 'the field'. But why was 'field' needed [to be inserted]? — To include [the case of] Fire lapping his neighbour's ploughed field, and grazing his stones.18 But why did the Divine Law not say only 'field',19 in which case the others would not have been necessary? They were still necessary. For if the Divine Law had said 'field' only, I might have said that anything in the field would come under the same law, but not any other thing.20 It was therefore indicated to us [that this is not so].

Rashi explains the line - what is קמא to intimate? It is to include all things of erect stature (as trees, living beings). The point here clearly is that the 'standing one' is an overseer and a pillar but we are in my mind approaching the idea that the קמה could include the crucifixion device itself. In other words, if we understand Simon and Paul to have some underlying relationship (which is clear from the Clementine Literature) his being a 'standing one' and 'overseer' also could have an underlying connotation of 'Cross' insofar as it is an erect standing thing.

It has always puzzled me - what was the Hebrew or Aramaic word for Cross? The Cross was a central concept in early Christianity. Samuelsson notes how difficult it is to track down the exact concept in Greek antiquity. It is even harder in Semitic languages. Is it possible that Christ was understood to simply have been nailed to a Stand (קמה) or some such word - i.e. an erect pillar-like object? This would explain a lot. First of all, the bishop is clearly understood as a living embodiment of God, which explains why he is called 'father.' I wonder whether baptism was some throwback to the Creation narrative when God's reflection was on the water which in turn made the world 'anthropomorphic' in shape (so Philo and many others). Plato thinks the world was saltire in shape. Was fastening the individual martyr to the Cross understood as a symbol of some sort of mystical union between man and God? Between individual and standing thing/one? Note Paul's reference to his own stigmata and the superstition of making the sign of the Cross on one's body as some sort of blessing.

Another thing this discussion does is explain why it was that the Cross was so swiftly developed into an 'idol' or statue. The underlying terminology might have lent itself to be taken that way.