It is disputed what he said, different accounts of the event claim different things. I see no reason why he would have said "God, why have you forsaken me?" Either it is a later construction or the Greek composition does misrepresent the original Aramaic utterance, for Jesus spoke Aramaic and not Greek.
The Biblical Gospels are poorly translated which is something I have observed while investigating the matter. I have compared typical Semitic words and how they are often misinterpreted. Despite that, they are more accurate linguistically compared to Quran.
It is difficult for me to say because I do not have the Aramaic script for what letters are used in Eli, Eli, Lemana Shabakthani. First three words are easy though, it is الى الى لمن if we were to use Arabic letters.
I would not call Aramaic an obscure language like the author of that website does. It is the skill of people interpreting it which is lackluster. Both Aramaic and Arabic are quite easy languages if you know them. It may be that some people, the people who translated it into Greek, lived far later than by traditional accounts and were weak at being able to understand. However, it appears people listening to Jesus when he made that utterance could not make out what he was saying, either. It may be plausible Aliy/Eli might be confused with Elias name as the translation suggests.
But we must be able to make out what Shabakthani means in order to understand further. Either it is one word or two and the transliteration is erroneous. In Arabic, the Shiin used in Aramaic, and probably Hebrew, is often Siin instead, and roots in Arabic are the same as in Aramaic no matter what people say and they mean the same meaning someone skilled at Arabic can decipher Aramaic even if it is grammatically different.
I browsed for a better transliteration and found this: Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani. Here is says "CH". This may be a letter that does not directly exist in Arabic, but is usually substituted with a Qaaf. There is a root for Siin-Ba-Qaf in Arabic:
Siin-Ba-Qaf: to be in advanced, go/pass before, surpass, get the better of, get in advanced, precede, overtake, come first ot the goal, outstrip, overcome, go forth previously, escape, go speedily, go first, race/strive/excel, prevent the act of advancing. One who precedes or outstrips in race, foremost masbuq - one who is surpassed or beaten or is out run in a race. I eventually found one set of Aramaic letters from a source (https://www.quora.com/Is-Eli-Eli-lema-lama-sabachthani-Hebrew-or-Aramaic): שבקתני
And ק is a Qaf indeed as far as I could tell by searching for a script table (https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/f9/10/eb/f910ebdd46360b171e4aab43cbe23faf.jpg).
The letters are: Siin - Be - Qaf - Heh - Nun - Ye or س ب ق ه ن ى and the best transliteration I can produce is: Sebeq-heniy and the root is Se-Be-Qa.
So the phrase is in Arabic letters: الى الى لمن سبقهنى and that is obviously Aramaic so it would look different if it was Arabic.
So what does Jesus say by אלי, אלי למה שבקתני?
Aliy, this is a common word also used in Arabic, it is more of a pronoun indicating "substance" and as far as I can tell Jesus starts saying: "This is, this is". Then his reference next is depending on the meaning of the root in question "[of] (my) escape" or "[of] (my) passing". Jesus is probably telling people around him that he is hereby dying and giving up the spirit of his flesh. Opposite to common translators, there is absolutely NO "you" in the phrase above, it does not exist in the language here, so you can rule out the common translation entirely. If we put this analysis into the context of the Bible's Gospels, it is very plausible that Jesus is thus saying: "This, this is... me passing away" or "This, this is my passing on". Just as in Arabic, you use Kaf to say "you singular" and Kaum to say "you plural".
See how much one can understand simply by studying things objectively and understanding that both Arabic and Aramaic are family languages and each word in them does basically mean the same thing.
And no, Jesus does not say God has forsaken him. He is just sensing that it is the time of his departure and proclaims it.
I have one comment on your explanation. You said the sentence has no "You" in it but since I know Egyptian Arabic. We can say for example "Lematha Sebteny" or "Leh Sebteny" which means "why did you leave me". It's very different from English.
Perhaps, but this is Aramaic and the Semitic language I am into. He says Aliy Aliy Lamena Sebeqheni! "This is, this is my passing on". That fits perfectly with the Aramaic letters provided. سبقهنى if we write it in Arabic letters instead. It would be possible to break the word down like سبق هن ى. The prior word is لمن which is simply ل +من, a common preposition. He speaks of himself.
Aramaic and Arabic are in essence very similar languages. The entire root is the same.
And the Arabic of today is a fabricated language tragically enough which does not reflect writings found from 1500-2000 years ago and the tongues which have an origin several thousand years ago. It grew forth according to a clergy in medieval times. L
You can express yourself without pronouns in Arabic, so you indirectly mean "you", but that must come forth depending on the context. However, there are no other letters to symbolize you except ك and كم, anything beyond that is a falsehood.
Aviel: Immanuel, Thank You very much for the work you do. Thank you for your insight, IM SINCERELY THANKFUL! There are people to whom your work is very important, and I can and will raise my hand for being one of them.
Jul 31, 2017 10:29:55 GMT
Immanuel: You are welcome, hansolo. It is for your sake that I am doing it primarily, but I am also a bit curious myself regarding the underlying lore. Persistent research and critical thinking has led to a great breakthrough.
Aug 13, 2017 19:08:46 GMT
nullandvoid: Wondering what a future with only non-dualistic people would be like?
Jan 28, 2018 14:53:12 GMT
Immanuel: Symbiotic existence, like a permanent telepathic coexistence. This is why humans are placed to learn to coexist on Earth on a very basic level and even with marriages, in order to be ready for a greater union by developing from there.
Feb 2, 2018 21:32:19 GMT
Immanuel: Our challenge here is Homo sapiens' self-preservation and other instinctive drives/motivations, which makes people think in "dualistic" ways.
Feb 2, 2018 21:34:12 GMT
hftwo: Immanuel do you believe that You will be able to do "Godly" things during this Immanuel-life-time? Because I do think if Jesus said that you will. e able to do these things and even greater! But logically thinking to get Godlike powers...
Oct 4, 2018 10:48:45 GMT
hftwo: ... one needs to become perfect /totally complete as a being. I do not count on my self, because it seems like the sex commandment is something that I usually break.
Oct 4, 2018 10:49:35 GMT
hftwo: How can I count myself as a perfect being if I cannot control the reproduction urges of the body?
Oct 4, 2018 10:50:10 GMT
hftwo: But at the same time, I do not want to be a human any longer, I do not want to be weak any longer.
Oct 4, 2018 10:50:49 GMT
cerulean: learning to live each day as the last i.e giving our best at each moment, not allowing for sloppiness in thinking and doing, not even for a second. Not allowing the postponing of what should be done
Oct 10, 2018 18:51:29 GMT
cerulean: We should learn to do that, and then all other things will be easier. By adopting a way of being instead of just focusing on abolishing those apparent wrong acts such as masturbation.
Oct 10, 2018 18:55:42 GMT
Immanuel: I might seem to prescribe impossible goals, but I also say that we do reside in a creature which is an animal and you will not be rid of its functionality without killing it and the creature as an animal has needs which are inevitable.
Nov 4, 2018 21:01:04 GMT
Immanuel: What the "Ten Commandments" counteract is the enslaving effects of the body. Furthermore, I am still not convinced about what the seventh command says as it probably says "unnecessary sex". Jesus gave a recommendation of not even looking upon a woman.
Nov 4, 2018 21:05:37 GMT
Immanuel: Jesus' word of not even looking upon a woman (or man) suits that of no unnecessary sex. It is about that sexual trigger in the mind which is spoke of. Pay attention to that translators usually add "other" within parentheses, meaning it is about ANY woman.
Nov 4, 2018 21:11:06 GMT
Immanuel: "but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. Matthew 5:28 NASB
Nov 4, 2018 21:17:55 GMT
cerulean: Right, so one should probably adopt an entire way of living, instead of focusing on one thing, because many other things can lead to that one thing you are trying to keep away from.
Nov 5, 2018 12:44:38 GMT
Immanuel: Yes, this is about a way of living rather than a dumb set of rules. People have incorrectly referred to the so-called 'Ten Commandments' as laws to uphold for the sake of worship, but this is wrong. They are guidelines in order to maintain a conscious lif
Nov 5, 2018 18:38:31 GMT
Immanuel: Unfortunately the first lines of the Commandments were distorted so badly it looks like they sanction religious worship. While they seem to promote relinquishing the mind, the truth is they that say the straight opposite.
Nov 5, 2018 18:43:25 GMT
hftwo: Just "Be" is that simple
Jan 11, 2019 12:54:40 GMT
hftwo: You have everything You need, You have Yourself, or is it?
Jan 11, 2019 12:55:25 GMT