04-23-2004, 07:23 PM
Shlama, Akhay,
The Biography of Rabbula says that he translated something from the Greek.
Rabbula uses the expression "Evangelion de Mepharreshe".
SyS also uses the expression "Evangelion de Mepharreshe".
Sorry, but I cannot conclude from the above that Rabbula was the author of SyS. Rabbula might have translated something, but there's no sufficient evidence that this was SyS. (Perhaps he might have created some intermediate version between the Peshitta and SyS, that is now lost?)
Besides, Rabbula only became bishop in 411. The date of SyS is mid- to late 4th c.
Also, Akhi Andrew said some other things that I couldn't quite understand. When I said "extreme" it was only meant to characterise the position that all establishment scholars are always wrong about everything. This obviously cannot be so, because here we see people quoting Voobus all the time, or Metzger, so they must be right about something, isn't this so?
I'm not here to try to change people's minds about the earliest texts, or to slam any old MSS. In general, I prefer to be positive and constructive. People can believe anything that they want to believe.
All I'm saying is, Let's spend more time criticising the Greek zombies (99% of biblical professionals today), rather than our fellow Semitic prioritists. Rather than criticising some other Aramaic/Hebrew MSS that we don't like, let's focus on all the good things that _all_ Aramaic/Hebrew MSS share with each other, as opposed to the mainstream Greek MSS.
I think this is a better way to go forward, and to make progress in advocating Semitic priority.
And as to the mainstream biblical scholars, I would like to see some constructive dialogue between the Aramaic prioritists and the Greek mainstreamers. There must be a way... Just saying that they are all deluded isn't going to be helpful.
Yes, they are deluded to a significant extent. But still there should be some way to challenge them on some common grounds, and in the language that they would understand. Saying, for example, that all palimpsests are worthless will only get a laugh from them, but will not score us any points. Such a strategy will be counterproductive.
Shlama,
Yuri.
The Biography of Rabbula says that he translated something from the Greek.
Rabbula uses the expression "Evangelion de Mepharreshe".
SyS also uses the expression "Evangelion de Mepharreshe".
Sorry, but I cannot conclude from the above that Rabbula was the author of SyS. Rabbula might have translated something, but there's no sufficient evidence that this was SyS. (Perhaps he might have created some intermediate version between the Peshitta and SyS, that is now lost?)
Besides, Rabbula only became bishop in 411. The date of SyS is mid- to late 4th c.
Also, Akhi Andrew said some other things that I couldn't quite understand. When I said "extreme" it was only meant to characterise the position that all establishment scholars are always wrong about everything. This obviously cannot be so, because here we see people quoting Voobus all the time, or Metzger, so they must be right about something, isn't this so?
I'm not here to try to change people's minds about the earliest texts, or to slam any old MSS. In general, I prefer to be positive and constructive. People can believe anything that they want to believe.
All I'm saying is, Let's spend more time criticising the Greek zombies (99% of biblical professionals today), rather than our fellow Semitic prioritists. Rather than criticising some other Aramaic/Hebrew MSS that we don't like, let's focus on all the good things that _all_ Aramaic/Hebrew MSS share with each other, as opposed to the mainstream Greek MSS.
I think this is a better way to go forward, and to make progress in advocating Semitic priority.
And as to the mainstream biblical scholars, I would like to see some constructive dialogue between the Aramaic prioritists and the Greek mainstreamers. There must be a way... Just saying that they are all deluded isn't going to be helpful.
Yes, they are deluded to a significant extent. But still there should be some way to challenge them on some common grounds, and in the language that they would understand. Saying, for example, that all palimpsests are worthless will only get a laugh from them, but will not score us any points. Such a strategy will be counterproductive.
Shlama,
Yuri.
Yuri Kuchinsky | Toronto | <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.trends.ca/~yuku/bbl/bbl.htm">http://www.trends.ca/~yuku/bbl/bbl.htm</a><!-- m -->