On the Title 'Sons of Thunder'

The gloss in the Greek “sons of thunder” is highly dubious, since neither regesh nor regez can have this meaning in either Hebrew or Aramaic. The Old Syriac (not the same as the Peshitta, but earlier!) leaves it out, probably because an Aramaic-speaker could not believe it. If the root is RESH-GIMEL-SHIN, then it means “perception”, either sense-perception or coming to know something in the mind by being informed or by working it out (close to English “realising”). If the root is RESH-GIMEL-ZAYIN, then it means “wrath” or in the right context “noisy commotion”. The Greek spelling is RGES, not RGEZ, so the first explanation fits better. But then, what is it that is perceived? And why “sons of perception”, an expression that sounds decidedly odd?

I should have realised this much earlier. When was there direct perception (regesh) of the meaning carried in thunder? At the giving of the Torah. All Israel directly perceive the first two of the Ten Utterances, i.e. “ I am the Lord thy God” and “ Thou shalt have no other gods before me”. This is not only the traditional understanding of the passage, it is actually stated by the corresponding passage in Deuteronomy if the terminology is understood. (I will explain such details another time). Moses directly perceived the meaning of the whole message. See Jastrow on the Hebrew noun regesh (RESH-GIMEL-SHIN). The midrash on Exodus XX: 18 “ they SAW the sounds (or peals of thunder)” cited by him is only preserved in a quotation in the Yalkut Shim’oni. It is very old, I would guess belonging to the time of composition of the extant Tannaitic midrashim. We see that James and John and no others had direct perception of the New Torah when others only heard the surface meaning of what Jesus said.

A sample of what appears in the Real Messiah order it here