Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
So what difference does Aramaic primacy really make?
frjdalton Wrote:Hi all,

Hi yourself. <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->

frjdalton Wrote:I've been following this site for several years and am 99% convinced (enough to start learning Aramaic and change my view of my Nestle Greek NT). But having read all the evidences, its left me wondering a little- "so what?" I'm sure that working with the Aramaic unlocks the real meaning of passages so that a small % of the NT now makes sense which it doesn't in Greek. Great. But does it actually make a large enough difference to *really* matter? ie for most purposes isn't the Greek ok? Why or why not? (No I'm not Greek- I'm Aussie-Irish-German). I'm not trying to be funny here, but trying to understand the implications. Does it matter that much that we need to teach Aramaic at theology schools instead of Greek? In what way? What other impacts should it all have??


I think where it will really make a momentus difference is in New Testament criticism and it's related fields. Using the various greek mss modern scholars and authors have created a framework in which the NT as we have it, was written in greek many years after it records Jesus as living and had been edited and undergone many revisions.
In other words it is unreliable, to some degree and maybe to a large degree.

The acceptance of the peshitta as the original will leave virtually everything in tatters.

1. Many contradictions will vanish, including some which might make the NT appear to have been written by men far removed from the incidents it descibes.

2. An original Aramaic must mean that it is earlier than now thought.

3. An original Aramaic increases the "likelihood" that these documents (or at least some) are in fact written by Jewish men who actually walked with Jesus.

4.The astounding lack of variation will show that the text appears to have come to us unchanged.

The western Institutional churches (mainly "protestant" ones) lame brained insistence on greek originals has created many problems for it as it has tried to insist upon the integrity of the texts. many today doubt the integrity of the texts and with fair reason.

Personally I think it will be a good thing if the credibility of the institutional church is brought further into question by this issue but at the same time the integrity of the documents is strengthened.
Hopefully the crisis in textual criticism that must ensue will be concurrent witha time when the man in the street is open to having a fresh look at the texts and asking "what do these really say?".

<judge hope off his soapbox> <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->

Messages In This Thread
Re: So what difference does Aramaic primacy really make? - by judge - 09-09-2008, 07:35 AM
Kudos to Christina - by Stephen Silver - 09-09-2008, 09:32 PM

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)