05-30-2014, 10:47 AM
Seriously, godparticle, i mostly come here to read stuff, and in all the years i've done so, no one managed to write such consistently useless garbage. i enjoy all view points, and entertain any possibility, but what you do here is not presenting facts or even good reason or logic. You are just blabbering. It is annoying. i suppose it is a problem for you to see your world view challenged, as the arguments that Aramaic Primacy provides are far superior to the intellectual hogwash that is Greek Primacy.
You are askeing for proof. Proof comes by evidence. Anyone that seeks Truth allows best evidence to constitute proof. Tell me then, what evidence do you provide for your position? See, it is unfit for a person to ask for proof, if a person understands neither the nature of evidence, nor the nature of history. We could provide all kind of evidence, and you would still not accept it (as you do).
If you could conclusively show what happened on 9/11, when the WTC fell, and had 10.000 pages of "evidence", plus video records here and there, you would still convince no one. Everybody imagines they would have evidence. For example, you seem to imagne that numerology can serve as evidence, whereas it is just fantasy. You can make up number theories based on anything. Just lokk at the Bible code people, it is essentially the same thing. They look for "codes" in many different translations and manuscripts. And "of course" even versions like the KJV "contain code", aka statistically speaking sufficient data to make up anything. Numbers don't work the way most people think. Too often, numerology is the opposite of evidence. It is in fact the evidence of how ridiculous people's ideas of the nature of numbers and statistics are.
Look, this actually constitutes evidence:
Concerning the language of Paul's letters:
He (Paul) being a Hebrew wrote in Hebrew, that is, his own tongue and most fluently while things which were eloquently written in Hebrew were more eloquently turned into Greek.? ? Jerome (4th Cent.); Lives of Illustrious Men, Book V
Concerning the language of "Hebrews":
The epistle to the Hebrews he asserts was written by Paul, to the Hebrews, in the Hebrew tongue; but that it was carefully translated by Luke, and published among the Greeks. (Clement of Alexandria, Hypotyposes, referred to by Eusebius in Eccl. Hist.6:14:2)
Concerning the language of Matthew:
Matthew composed the words in the Hebrew dialect, and each translated as he was able. (Papias, 150-170 CE, quoted by Eusebius, Eccl. Hist. 3:39)
Matthew also issued a written gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect. (Ireneus, 170 CE, Against Heresies 3:1)
The first is written according to Matthew, the same that was once a tax collector, but afterwards an emissary of Yeshua the Messiah, who having published it for the Jewish believers, wrote it in Hebrew. (Origen circa 210 CE, quoted by Eusebius, Eccl. Hist. 6:25)
Now all you have to do is find evidence that is more explicit than this to support Greek primacy, and we would have a reason to talk about these issues. However, all the best evidence is in support of Aramaic Primacy. That constitutes proof to those that seek Truth.
Can you prove Greek primacy? Can you show your actual, irrefutable proof? Your 1st century manuscripts, signed by the apostles own hands?
You are askeing for proof. Proof comes by evidence. Anyone that seeks Truth allows best evidence to constitute proof. Tell me then, what evidence do you provide for your position? See, it is unfit for a person to ask for proof, if a person understands neither the nature of evidence, nor the nature of history. We could provide all kind of evidence, and you would still not accept it (as you do).
If you could conclusively show what happened on 9/11, when the WTC fell, and had 10.000 pages of "evidence", plus video records here and there, you would still convince no one. Everybody imagines they would have evidence. For example, you seem to imagne that numerology can serve as evidence, whereas it is just fantasy. You can make up number theories based on anything. Just lokk at the Bible code people, it is essentially the same thing. They look for "codes" in many different translations and manuscripts. And "of course" even versions like the KJV "contain code", aka statistically speaking sufficient data to make up anything. Numbers don't work the way most people think. Too often, numerology is the opposite of evidence. It is in fact the evidence of how ridiculous people's ideas of the nature of numbers and statistics are.
Look, this actually constitutes evidence:
Concerning the language of Paul's letters:
He (Paul) being a Hebrew wrote in Hebrew, that is, his own tongue and most fluently while things which were eloquently written in Hebrew were more eloquently turned into Greek.? ? Jerome (4th Cent.); Lives of Illustrious Men, Book V
Concerning the language of "Hebrews":
The epistle to the Hebrews he asserts was written by Paul, to the Hebrews, in the Hebrew tongue; but that it was carefully translated by Luke, and published among the Greeks. (Clement of Alexandria, Hypotyposes, referred to by Eusebius in Eccl. Hist.6:14:2)
Concerning the language of Matthew:
Matthew composed the words in the Hebrew dialect, and each translated as he was able. (Papias, 150-170 CE, quoted by Eusebius, Eccl. Hist. 3:39)
Matthew also issued a written gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect. (Ireneus, 170 CE, Against Heresies 3:1)
The first is written according to Matthew, the same that was once a tax collector, but afterwards an emissary of Yeshua the Messiah, who having published it for the Jewish believers, wrote it in Hebrew. (Origen circa 210 CE, quoted by Eusebius, Eccl. Hist. 6:25)
Now all you have to do is find evidence that is more explicit than this to support Greek primacy, and we would have a reason to talk about these issues. However, all the best evidence is in support of Aramaic Primacy. That constitutes proof to those that seek Truth.
Can you prove Greek primacy? Can you show your actual, irrefutable proof? Your 1st century manuscripts, signed by the apostles own hands?