1 Corinthians Aramaic primacy doubted...

[Paul Younan]

Shlama Akhi Distazo and DrawCloser,

That's an excellent point you made about the Alexandrian variant, DrawCloser - and we should list that in the forum as it's own proof of Aramaic primacy (where the two Greek texts are both drawn from the same Aramaic source).

If Paul wanted to use the word "Greek" specifically, there already is an Aramaic word specifically for that ethnic group ("Yonaye", from "Ionian") See Colossians 3:11 "There is neither Jew (Yehudaya) nor Gentile (Aramaya), Circumcision nor Uncircumcision, Greek (Yonaya) nor Barbarian (Barbaraya)....etc"

If Paul meant to say "Greek", specifically, he would say "Yonaya" like he did in Colossians 3:11, and not use the generic term for Gentile.

+Shamasha

Akhi Paul,

Good point, but I was not speaking about the superior Col 3:11 in the Peshitta, but about the mentioning of ethnic groups, _not_ of religious kind.
My question is: WHy do the Arameans, both CoE as Christian Syrians render themselves as 'Gentiles' in the NT while all kind of ethnic groups and cities _are_ mentioned!
Isnt it more than logic to render Syrians instead of 'gentiles' because where are the syrians??? They were a major population, not?

Shlama Akhi.

The short answer is they translated it as gentile at first, which in many cases is defensible. Then they went to Greek after that.

Apparently Syrians or Arameans went extinct during the new testament period. <!-- s --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/wink1.gif" alt="" title="Wink" /><!-- s -->. Everyone was Greek!