The only thing that you showed was that one Greek writer used the word "Palestine" once upon a time -- that's all -- until the Romans renamed the territory in order to try to erase the Jewish memory of it, but it didn't work.
Why would Greeks have a separate name for Aramaic?
Because they did and you know it to be true -- just like they distinguished Syria linguistically from Judea. Western Aramaic was also called "Syriac" or the Syrian tongue and Eastern Aramaic was Chaldean.
I already showed you that parts of the "Hebrew" bible are written in Aramaic, not in foreign words added to Hebrew.
Yeh --- a very small part of Daniel, that's all, so what??? Should we then conclude that the OT was written in Aramaic because of that small part. Get real --
Jesus taught in Aramaic because that's what He spoke.
So then He was the Syrian Messiah not the Jewish Messiah???
What He read in the synagogues was Aramaic, because the Tanakh (Old Testament) used for public prayer and homilies was Targum, which was written in Aramaic, not Hebrew. To untrained eyes and ears it may very well appear and even "sound" as Hebrew, but it ain't Hebrew!
So then the Jews of that time with all their learned scholars didn't know the difference between the Hebrew Tanakh and the Aramaic Targums. You get more ridiculous with every stroke of the keys.
He even died crying out in Aramaic, not in Hebrew.
And yet they kept those Aramaic words that he spoke in that one instance untranslated in the Greek. Why??? Because they were the exception to the rule, rather than the rule itself. The rule was that He spoke Hebrew among the Jews, the exception was when He didn't.
Do you always make up (even confabulate) things like this? The very people who "hung around" the temple and synagogues were usually the people who rejected Him.
Do you always reject those Greek scriptures, like this:
"For had you believed Moses, you would have believed me, for he wrote of me. But if you believe not his writings, how shall you believe my words" [John 5:46-47]
Moses' writings were in Hebrew, the same language of the words of Jesus. But I'm sure that's all Greek to you --
Just showed you that Romans didn't invent the name as you claimed. Do you have any documents to prove your assertion that it was renamed in order to "erase the Jewish memory of it?" If they did, they did a loousy job, because--contrary to popular mythis--the Jews were not leaving the area on their own; they had to be forcibly removed, and many communities remained.
The Romans renamed it because Israel ceased to rexist as a state and the area needed a new (old) name.
They called Chaldee Hebraisti (Hebrew tongue). Now, even a first a grade biblical scholar knows that Chaldee was Aramaic. It is referenced four times in the Gospel of John as such, inlcuidng the inscription on the Cross, which was not in (Biblical) hebrew, but in Chaldee (Aramaic).
Western Aramaic was also called "Syriac" or the Syrian tongue and Eastern Aramaic was Chaldean
Chaldee was the language spoken by the Jews, which the Aramaic, not Biblical Hebrew.
I referenced Ezekiel as well. The fact is that some portions of the OT are written in Aramaic.
So then He was the Syrian Messiah not the Jewish Messiah? [because he spoke Aramaic]
LOL!!! That was good. You ought to try Saturday night Live! :)
So then the Jews of that time with all their learned scholars didn't know the difference between the Hebrew Tanakh and the Aramaic Targums
I never said that. You are making things up again.
Moses' writings were in Hebrew, the same language of the words of Jesus
In your dreams. jesus did not speak in Biblical Hebrew.