09-20-2011, 08:48 PM
Thanks for the detailed response Dave. I have a much better grasp on your approach to translating.
So if its in the 1905 text, then it is, in your judgment part of the Original Aramaic NT Scriptures, even if a verse or word is not now found in any extant Aramaic Manuscript?
Where did the editor's of the 1905 Text, get the disputed verses and words from then...If not from an Aramaic Manuscript source? The Greek, Latin, or Church Father's qoute? But how do we know that these sources are Word's from GOD?
If this is The Aramaic NT Scriptures in English...then it should be The Aramaic Scriptures that is being translated right?
Can the 1905 Text be the true form of The Aramaic Peshitta Text, with some of its readings not found in any Aramaic Text? You said: "Acts 8:37 is not found in any Peshitta ms" And yet its in the 1905 Edition?
..
So if its in the 1905 text, then it is, in your judgment part of the Original Aramaic NT Scriptures, even if a verse or word is not now found in any extant Aramaic Manuscript?
Where did the editor's of the 1905 Text, get the disputed verses and words from then...If not from an Aramaic Manuscript source? The Greek, Latin, or Church Father's qoute? But how do we know that these sources are Word's from GOD?
If this is The Aramaic NT Scriptures in English...then it should be The Aramaic Scriptures that is being translated right?
Can the 1905 Text be the true form of The Aramaic Peshitta Text, with some of its readings not found in any Aramaic Text? You said: "Acts 8:37 is not found in any Peshitta ms" And yet its in the 1905 Edition?
..