Acts 8:27 - a "Treasure" for Aramaic Primacy

[judge]

Shlama Akhi Judge,

All of these are distracting from the main point of the argument:

The confusion of the gender due to the unpointed text of the original Aramaic.

+Shamasha

Yes, I would have to agree, from my unlearned perpective anyway <!-- s --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="" title="Smile" /><!-- s -->

Why does this variant occur right in the precise place that the unpointed Aramaic had two meanings? What are the chances of that?
On top of this what are the odds that it happens again and again throughout the NT? Astronomical.
Anyway they certainly put up a struggle <!-- s --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="" title="Smile" /><!-- s -->

It is understandable though I think. If I had spent my academic career arguing from a perpspective of greek primacy I would certainly be hoping I had bet on the right horse all those years.
The other fellow has for several years been trying to put his first peer reviewed paper together which is heavily dependent on greek primacy.

I think it most likely that when younger students of the scriptures, who have no emotional committment either way, begin to study the peshitta it will snowball.

We are probably on the verge of a renaissance* of interest in the Aramaic language.

*'Scuse the french. <!-- s:biggrin: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/biggrin.gif" alt=":biggrin:" title="Big Grin" /><!-- s:biggrin: -->