11-04-2010, 08:06 PM
Greetings and salutations to all.
I would like a some to give me a clearer perspective on the Aramaic Old Testament as it relates or is compared to my KJV Old Testament (translated from Hebrew). My present understanding is that for most of the the Aramaic Primacy view also believe (from what I have read on this site) that the most ancient manuscripts/copies of our current Old Testament are not in Hebrew but in Aramaic and thus, you all believe that most reliable translations of the Old Testament are from Aramaic sources. Hence, I premise that you believe that our/my KJV Old Testament is corrupt (to some degree).
(1) Please tell me to what measure that the Hebrew behind the KjV Old Testament is a poor selection. I mean, when I read and study my KJV Old Testament am I reading a "watered down" version or deficient translation based upon not so good sources??
(2) I would like to know what how you all view the Lamsa Old Testament translation, ( there are several on line sites where one can go and read his(Lamsa's) translation which is FROM THE ARAMAIC.) His OT translation is from Aramaic, right?? Is his translation reliable enough to give a good reflection of the Old Testament Aramaic??
(3) To my limited knowledge there is very little difference between the Hebrew and the Aramaic when it comes to the Old Testament Books. Would the effort really be worth it to go out of my way and find english translations of the OT FROM THE ARAMAIC??
Thanks for any input or backround knowledge you can give me. I just desire a more accurate perspective of the KJV Old Testament books from an Aramaicist point of view and if there is much difference in the significance of the Hebrew OlD Testament verses the Aramaic Old Testament. Backround of how each view developed their canon would be helpful also.
Tks alot.
Mike Karoules[/i][/i]
I would like a some to give me a clearer perspective on the Aramaic Old Testament as it relates or is compared to my KJV Old Testament (translated from Hebrew). My present understanding is that for most of the the Aramaic Primacy view also believe (from what I have read on this site) that the most ancient manuscripts/copies of our current Old Testament are not in Hebrew but in Aramaic and thus, you all believe that most reliable translations of the Old Testament are from Aramaic sources. Hence, I premise that you believe that our/my KJV Old Testament is corrupt (to some degree).
(1) Please tell me to what measure that the Hebrew behind the KjV Old Testament is a poor selection. I mean, when I read and study my KJV Old Testament am I reading a "watered down" version or deficient translation based upon not so good sources??
(2) I would like to know what how you all view the Lamsa Old Testament translation, ( there are several on line sites where one can go and read his(Lamsa's) translation which is FROM THE ARAMAIC.) His OT translation is from Aramaic, right?? Is his translation reliable enough to give a good reflection of the Old Testament Aramaic??
(3) To my limited knowledge there is very little difference between the Hebrew and the Aramaic when it comes to the Old Testament Books. Would the effort really be worth it to go out of my way and find english translations of the OT FROM THE ARAMAIC??
Thanks for any input or backround knowledge you can give me. I just desire a more accurate perspective of the KJV Old Testament books from an Aramaicist point of view and if there is much difference in the significance of the Hebrew OlD Testament verses the Aramaic Old Testament. Backround of how each view developed their canon would be helpful also.
Tks alot.
Mike Karoules[/i][/i]