Quote:I am not going to argue about Acts 8:37 here. I can say that I have honestly translated it because it is included in the 1905 Peshitta edition. It is also included in every online edition of the Peshitta NT I have seen, being found in Hutter's Peshitta edition of 1599-1600. Who knows where he got it? You and I do not know. I would love to obtain a copy of his Peshitta; perhaps it has a note somewhere, citing the source; until such time, I will regard him as an honest copyist and transcriber of the Peshitta he possessed at the time, even though extant Peshitta mss. do not have the verse today.
1st: None of this is "arguing"...this is called honest discussion. Be positive.
2nd: You say there "Who knows where he got it? You and I do not know. I would love to obtain a copy of his Peshitta; perhaps it has a note somewhere, citing the source; until such time, I will regard him as an honest copyist and transcriber of the Peshitta he possessed at the time, even though extant Peshitta mss. do not have the verse today."
Dave...you are willing to trust this man as being faithful to what you say he could have seen in a text, but that is not now extant, but are you also willing to trust the man who scribed the Khabouris reading for Acts 20:28 as being faithful in the Text he copied, or the Manuscript's father Text, scribed by the person before him...which may even be a copy of the Autograph itself?
The Khabouris is most likley only a 3rd Generation Text of the Original Aramaic Autograph.
If not, you must believe that the Eastern Peshitta Text, is a corruption then...Right?
You said:
Quote:You accept the Western Five books as the word of God. The Eastern Peshitta omits them from its canon because Eastern mss. do not have them. The Western Syrian churches include them. If you were consistent, you should reject them as not canonical and therefore not inspired, because you believe the Eastern Peshitta is the sole authority by which to decide the text of the NT.
However, if the Eastern canon Peshitta lacks five inspired books of the NT, then it is surely severely defective by reason of that omission, and cannot be counted as a witness against the inclusion of those books in the NT. And if all Eastern Peshitta mss. are defective to such an extent as to omit five books, surely they may be defective to a much lesser degree in other places, and require the testimony of the Western Mss. and to a certain extent, the witness of the Greek mss. and ancient versions, and perhaps even the church Fathers.
Dave, how much of what The Church of the East believes about certain things do you truly know? So far you have mis-represented the teaching's of Bishop Nestorius on what he taught about the two natures of Christ, and what The Chuch of the East believes about that subject today, and about how they (The COE) view the "Western Five" books.
I won't inform you here too much...its not the place. But you need some right information, before you judge things. I recomend you learn it by yourself, by reading Bishop Nestorius' own writtings on the subject. You can start by reading his detailed replies to Cryil of Alexandria's 12 Anathemas against him, where Bishop Nestorius responds line by line to each of the 12 curses, and explains his teaching on the matter and proves his Orthodoxy...and then, for further understanding of his belief, you can read his book "THE BAZAAR OF HERACLEIDES" which goes into minute detail of his teaching on the subject. Please do this, BEFORE you speak against what you think he taught. You would want others to do the same with what you are teaching, regarding the whole Trinity dying and the Atonement taking place before Christ died on the Cross. And this I will begin to do, before I make a final judgment on what you teach, though so far it looks to be in grave error.
As to what the Church of the East believes about the other books of the NT...They do not say that the "Western Five" books are not inspired by God...but that they (The Church of the East) did not recieve those 5 Books from the hands of the Apostles as they did the 22 Books of the Eastern Peshitta Canon.
They do not say that they are not to be read, studied, or to be discarded...but hold them in great esteem. They are not "Apocrypha" type books Dave. They consider them Scriptures as well...just not ones that they got Originaly from the Apostles, this is why the differance in the two families of Peshitta (Eastern) and Peshitto (Western), the extra readings/verses found in the Western Peshitto, come from the Greek versions.
Dave...the Eastern Peshitta is SO OLD...that it was given to The Church of the East, in the 22 Books they still maintain, without change, since they recieved it from the hands of the Apostles of Christ, who gave them those Books. This, I believe was about the year 78 A.D....and the others were either not written yet, or they were simply not part of the Books that they received from the Apostles.
If Revelation was written before 70 A.D....which seems likely to me, as it does you. Then it was still in Asia Minor at the time, being that it was adressed to the 7 Churches which were in that part of the world. We see that these other 5 books, were also not as accepted by the Church as a whole, for a number of centuries in the west...as the others were....and the Church of the East...didn't even know about them for many more centuries looks like.
The Eastern Peshitta...is OLDER as a Text, than the Western Peshitto is Dave. Ask Paul about the Western Peshitto transmission...he knows much more than I do about it. I believe that these Greek readings and verses not found in the Eastern Peshitta...are not Original to the Aramaic Text, as given by the hands of the Apostles in the 1st century. That is why they are not there...it was not in the Manuscript given them in the 1st Century.
It looks to me that the Western readings are from other sources, Greek, Latin etc, etc...and represent an edited edition of the Aramaic Scriptures by the Western Syriac groups, who were more inclined to the Greek and Latin doctrines.
I know that is not what you could ever consider, because you have come to believe that GOD Himself has given you a revelation as to which text is the real Original, based on what happened when you found the bible codes in the code finder program, by using the 1905 text.
But I find that strange, because you admit that when you 1st ran it...you got those long codes...but later found some mistakes in the 1905 text you used that had them...and when you fixed those mistakes...and ran it again...the long codes were no longer there...but you still say that GOD, made it so, that the mistakes created the long codes, so you could find them...and be convinced that the 1905 text was GOD's ONLY Perfect Scriptures on Earth!
Is this the reason why you can't even concive of another reading, such as in Acts 20:28 in the Eastern Peshitta, and that Acts 8:7, even though it is not found in any known Aramaic Manuscript...it must be Original, because its part of GOD's Text, the 1905 Edition.
This is what I have gathered from your own statements Dave. Maybe I have read them wrong though...so correct me if I am not understanding your beliefs right. I can only go on what you write...and this is what I have seen you write, as best I remember it.
Blessings,
Chuck