Refutation to Aramaic primacists

[Thirdwoe]

What you gave as to his supposed source for Mark 16:9-20, if you knew better, you would know that neither the Codex Sinaiticus or Vaticanus has Mark 16:9-20 in its text.

Alexandrinus has it, but, do you say it has the same text as Ivan's text has there, where he split the words up?

Here at the link below is the Alexandrinus Codex for you to look at...so, if you can show me which page Ivan saw the text as he constructed it, that would be good.

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.csntm.org/manuscript/zoomify/GA_02?page=0#viewer">http://www.csntm.org/manuscript/zoomify ... e=0#viewer</a><!-- m -->


I don't think you have taken any actual time to verify Ivan's claims...only read other peoples opinions and believed them.

You said:

The text Mr Panin used to derive mark 16:9-20... Codex Alexandrinus: a 5th century manuscript containing the entire New Testament, brought to England about 1630.
Codex Siniaticus, discovered in St. Catherine's Monastery at (the traditional) Mt. Sinai, has been dated around 350 A.D:
Codex Vaticanus, dated about 325 A.D. had been in the Vatican Library since at least 1481, but was not made available to scholars until the middle of the 19th century. <!-- s:eh: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/eh.gif" alt=":eh:" title="Eh" /><!-- s:eh: -->

Ok...but two of those DO NOT have the passage, and so it must be in the other one, if that is where he got his text, with the split words in it....so which page at the online source there of Codex Alexandrinus shows this feature unique to Mr. Panin's text?

The recipients of Paul's epistles were 90% Greeks, and 10% Hellenists (only spoke Greek), and maybe some bilingual Jews. So, i say again, WHAT LANGUAGE WOULD YOU WRITE THE EPISTLES IN TO THESE RECIPIENTS? I think the answer is obvious.

I would write it in my own language, the one I used all the time, the one I was most knowledgeable in, and then have it translated by the help of other more knowledgeable people in that language.


.