Luke 2:22 casts DARK SHADOWS on Aramaic Primacy

[positron]

I hope I've made my point - now please, let's stop wasting our time on this utter nonsense.

Thank you Paul for your patient. I can sense your frustration to repeat the answer. I concur with you that it is ceremonially unclean for a child who is uncircumcised. But this discussion is not "utter nonsense" as the plain word "holy" must be interpreted to get along with ceremonial uncleanness. At first thought, holy means Set apart for God. Afterall, baby Jesus came from the Holy Spirit and not from a paternal father.

I would suggest that baby Jesus is Holy which means He is without sin while ceremonial uncleanness is in submission to this ceremonial law.

Oh I see. Aramaic Peshitta to English is better in translation than Greek version in this manner. So you have defended it well.

Cheers!