Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Greek primacists favoring certain anciet texts
#31
To Dan: I seem to recall a little church in the mid-ages who used the Peshitta to save countless souls in India and China. Have you heard of it?
Download my free book at <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.aramaicpeshitta.com">http://www.aramaicpeshitta.com</a><!-- m -->
Was the New Testament Really Written in Greek?
Reply
#32
Shlama Akhi Dave,

Dave Wrote:Man, I felt the shiver go up my spine there hehe. Paul is back in action and laid the gauntlet down!

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

Dave Wrote:Ok, how about this, if the peshitta is the text that is 100% correct, and has no translational errors, then why isn't GOD using it in HIS churches?

God has, is now, and will continue to use it in all sorts of churches....I can name you 6 different denominations that are using it today - and a whole lot of others in the past used it before Tamerlane nearly wiped out 99.9% of the largest church at the time.

Why do the Jehovah's Witnesses insist on using their own translation? Why do the Mormons insist on using the book of Mormon? Why does the Coptic Church insist on using Corinthians 3?

You're question is irrelevant - first you have to define what are God's churches, then next you have to tell me what control he has over people making their own translations. You have dozens of them in English alone. And they can't even make up their minds on which Greek to use.

I don't know why the Western churches don't use the Aramaic. They translated it a long time ago and feel they have no need for it anymore. Most English-speaking Christians don't even read the Greek anymore. They feel the English is sufficient.

And they are right - it is sufficient, just as a version in Mozambique or Eskimo is sufficient. Just like the Greek version was sufficient for the Greeks.

It doesn't mean that any of these are the original version, though. Just because you use it doesn't mean it is superior to one that is actually written in the language that Jesus delivered his message in.

Dave Wrote:This is 100% correct right? Why wouldn't GOD use this instead of dealing with the greek and it's problems, if it was 100% correct?

God is using this, and He has always used this version. That's why it's still around against all odds surviving as a tiny island in the midst of a vast ocean of Islam.

Dave Wrote:What was GOD doing with all this? I mean, there has been at least 3 versions brought out into english from the peshitta that I know of, and all 3 of them have failed. None are utilized in the Spirit-filled churches here in the states. In fact, the "standard" that is looked up to in all this within HIS churches is the King James version. The version that people love to hate here, has the pre-eminence over all other versions within HIS church!!!

The use of a version in English-speaking congregations in the United States is not the litmus test of whether a version is the original or not.

You have a very limited outlook, and your sense of history is severly limited. The United States is merely a drop in the bucket in the history of the Faith. Out of the 20 centuries of its existence, 13 of those centuries were dominated by Aramaic-based churches using Aramaic-based scripture - LONG before England, the mother land, was even evangelized.

You have a very Western-centric viewpoint which limits your reasoning to "why don't we use it here in the states?"

What it all boils down to for someone in Zimbabwe is: "Why don't they use the Aramaic version in Zimbabwe?"

What does that matter at all? Zimbabweans don't understand Aramaic and we wouldn't expect them to use an Aramaic version.

The more important question you are asking, however - is why did God allow Christians in Europe to discard the original Aramaic scriptures and prefer the Greek?

To that end I would suggest that the Greek is a faithful enough version. There is no doctrinal issues regarding salvation that are corrupted in the Greek. The Greek is a fantastic translation, and a fantastic medium by which Europe was drawn out of the heresy of paganism. It served its purpose very well. It is a tremendous witness (THEY are a tremendous witness.)

This doesn't, however, mean THEY (the various Greek versions) are the original. That's the point here.

You should be grateful that God has preserved a bunch of ancient churches and ancient people who suffered more than you can imagine to deliver this version to our hands today.

Dave Wrote:Now,.......if this peshitta is the original,.....and it is 100% correct,.......and is better than the greek,........and it is the original that the greek was copied from,........then why won't GOD promote it and use it to save souls!!!!

The Peshitta is not the only medium by which God saves souls. And neither is the Greek. The NT exists today in almost every language known to man. This is a fulfillment of prophecy.

It was first translated, like the OT, into Greek. And from there it has gone on into every language known, almost.

But that doesn't mean that the Greek is the original.

What did you expect - for God to have ensured that EVERY translation from Chinese to Swahili and from Japanese to Finnish be made from the Aramaic? (by the way, the Aramaic Peshitta was translated into Chinese about 5 centuries before the British isles were converted.)

That's not necessary. The Greek was a sufficient base from which to translate into those tongues. It was good enough - it contains the same message as the Aramaic from which it was drawn.

But that doesn't mean it's the original. It contains numerous errors. You've seen them with your own eyes. You know if your heart of hearts that Acts 2:24 cannot possibly have been written in Greek. You know it.

Dave Wrote:Now, let's not try and dispose of this by saying that these are "faith" based questions, that's a cop out from anyone here.

I have done no such thing. I have appealed to your intelligence and to your heart. It's up to you to decide for yourself after examining the evidence.....God gave us all minds to discern these things in a scientific manner.

Dave Wrote:This is the current status of affairs within GOD's churches as anyone can deduct.

There is no such thing as "God's churches" - all churches, including Aramaic-based ones, are God's churches. Don't forget them.

Dave Wrote:Is GOD mocking the aramaic by sticking to the greek?

No, God is honoring the Aramaic right here and now, as he has honored it by preserving it through trials the European church has not gone through since Constantine delivered it from pagan persecution.

The persecution has never stopped for us - and you saw it in action even a couple of weeks ago while the people were inside singing their praised in HIS language, their blood was spilt as a witness to HIM.

No, God does not mock the Aramaic language - He honored it by choosing it as the language HE spoke in while here with us.

Take care Akhi.
+Shamasha Paul bar-Shimun de'Beth-Younan
[Image: sig.jpg]
Reply
#33
Dave Wrote:I did receive an answer in prayer today about one of the reasons why GOD won't bless the peshitta text, it is missing parts and whole books that are scriptural that GOD wants in there. Someone took them out, which was a no-no for GOD. There's one answer. Everyone says that they were not around at that time, maybe there is another side to this story.


God won't bless Peshitta? God has been using Peshitta to convert many souls for centuries long before KJV. God does not speak to English speaking people only. God speaks to others too. Don't forget that. Just because you don't like Peshitta it doesn't mean that God doesn't bless Peshitta. Missing parts? Probably you need to get the KJV 1611 edition.


Peace to all,

Dan Gan
One of the first owners of the facsimile of <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0802837867/ref=nosim/ultimyourulti-20"><b>Codex Leningrad</b></a>
Reply
#34
byrnesey Wrote:To Dan: I seem to recall a little church in the mid-ages who used the Peshitta to save countless souls in India and China. Have you heard of it?

Yes, I have heard about it. Church history is another favourite topic of mine, especially early Church history.

By the way, the next time you wanted to throw away KJV, please don't throw it away. Keep it for me. There are many out there who don't have a Bible.

<!-- sBig Grin --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/happy.gif" alt="Big Grin" title="Happy" /><!-- sBig Grin --> Just joking.


Peace to all,

Dan Gan
One of the first owners of the facsimile of <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0802837867/ref=nosim/ultimyourulti-20"><b>Codex Leningrad</b></a>
Reply
#35
The mental gymnastics continue! It's down to quote wars folks, the peshitta hater against the peshitta promoter (/sneer)!

Will they each be hard-headed?

Will either give in to the onslaught of quotes?

OMG! the drama and stress!!

Who shall prevail?


Hehe, I think Paul is the only one on here that catches the provocative, challenging aspect within in me, laughs at it, and then throws it back at me. The rest get upset and start squeeling and running like stuck pigs in a butchers parade down main street. I don't think they get it. Chris,... well, he's just trying to copy what he can to sell in a book /lol

Btw, I hope you've feeling great Paul, I'll been trying to keep you in prayer.

Alright, enough of the touchy, feely, kindler, gentler, forum ethics. Back to being a bull in a china shop.

Quote:You're question is irrelevant - first you have to define what are God's churches, then next you have to tell me what control he has over people making their own translations. You have dozens of them in English alone. And they can't even make up their minds on which Greek to use.

The question would probably be best served by identifying what I feel are GOD's churches. I define them as the ones who have all the aspects of the first century christians happening in it. I think that is about the best way to describe it and covers the most ground.

Quote:I don't know why the Western churches don't use the Aramaic. They translated it a long time ago and feel they have no need for it anymore. Most English-speaking Christians don't even read the Greek anymore. They feel the English is sufficient.

Well, Paul, think about this, who enlightens you into scripture as you read it? You and I understand that The Holy Spirit quickens the word to bring a depth and understanding that is not capable of happening otherwise. Sections within the prophets of old could be talking about HIS church for the future HE had planned but one would never get the understanding of that without The Spirit of Truth. The apostle Paul related such things at times in his writings, but most were not ready for such meat.

To be honest with you, the Spirit-filled Christians want it all. They feel the greek provided that to them. Now the "peshitto" has most of the books, but then again, it still misses sections that are strong doctrinal issues that mainstream Christianity will not step aside from and loose their blessing from GOD over. Anyone can buy whatever bible they want, but if GOD tells you to buy this or that particular one for HIM to reveal things through, well you pay attention to that.

Anyways, back to my point, Smith Wiggleworth never read anything but his new testament. I mean all the time he read only that, no newspaper, nothing, and never knew a thing about the background of any word that was translated into english in his bible. But,....big but,...he and others like himself, walked this planet and performed miracles that boggle the mind. Their understanding of the scriptures? Beyond words. Oswald Chambers had an understanding that rivals anything that you and I could imagine at the moment, a real depth to what GOD understood and meant. Did any of these folks spend time in the background of the language? No. Should they have? I don't know. Really, I think it would hinder what GOD wanted to put into action. We can become educated idiots and not do a thing for GOD the whole time we are here as one of HIS chosen ones. There are plenty of those that GOD is unable to work with. They base their Christianity on scientific approaches to the word when if they understood what GOD wanted, they would have been in action doing the things that Jesus did and greater. But there you go, it's a choice I guess, or a misleading by our friend mister critter, however you view it.

Quote:The use of a version in English-speaking congregations in the United States is not the litmus test of whether a version is the original or not.

Maybe not,....maybe it is! What is currently going on in mainstream Christianity? Just how involved is GOD here in the good old USA? Are the things happening that Jesus talked about and did, happening here? It can be viewed as a litmus test, or better yet, a standard to reach. Now to judge if the KJV is original, that was not said by me. I and many others know the aramaic scriptures correct whole sections within the KJV. I stated it was what GOD was currently using against what others on here wished HE would use. Again, if GOD wants to accept the eastern version of the aramaic scriptures, or even that the scriptures came from some semetic (I left that mispelled on purpose just for Chris, heh) source over the greek, I guess we will have to see. Currently, HE is not. I don't view it as a bias in the church because GOD can do whatever HE wants. HE could change their views in a heartbeat. They are HIS children led by The Holy Spirit so their insight into this is directed by The Almighty. Again, show me people on the street corners beating people over the head with lamsa bibles to bring them into the fold away from hell, then I'll retract what I currently say about it.

Enough for now, time for lunch here
Reply
#36
Dave Wrote:The mental gymnastics continue! It's down to quote wars folks, the peshitta hater against the peshitta promoter (/sneer)!

Will they each be hard-headed?

Will either give in to the onslaught of quotes?

OMG! the drama and stress!!

Who shall prevail?


Hehe, I think Paul is the only one on here that catches the provocative, challenging aspect within in me, laughs at it, and then throws it back at me. The rest get upset and start squeeling and running like stuck pigs in a butchers parade down main street. I don't think they get it. Chris,... well, he's just trying to copy what he can to sell in a book /lol


To be honest with you, the Spirit-filled Christians want it all. They feel the greek provided that to them. Now the "peshitto" has most of the books, but then again, it still misses sections that are strong doctrinal issues that mainstream Christianity will not step aside from and loose their blessing from GOD over. Anyone can buy whatever bible they want, but if GOD tells you to buy this or that particular one for HIM to reveal things through, well you pay attention to that.

....

Maybe not,....maybe it is! What is currently going on in mainstream Christianity? Just how involved is GOD here in the good old USA? Are the things happening that Jesus talked about and did, happening here? It can be viewed as a litmus test, or better yet, a standard to reach. Now to judge if the KJV is original, that was not said by me. I and many others know the aramaic scriptures correct whole sections within the KJV. I stated it was what GOD was currently using against what others on here wished HE would use. Again, if GOD wants to accept the eastern version of the aramaic scriptures, or even that the scriptures came from some semetic (I left that mispelled on purpose just for Chris, heh) source over the greek, I guess we will have to see. Currently, HE is not. I don't view it as a bias in the church because GOD can do whatever HE wants. HE could change their views in a heartbeat. They are HIS children led by The Holy Spirit so their insight into this is directed by The Almighty. Again, show me people on the street corners beating people over the head with lamsa bibles to bring them into the fold away from hell, then I'll retract what I currently say about it.

Enough for now, time for lunch here

Dear Dave,

You are speaking as though that God only speak through you and not to others. You are speaking as though that only you have the Holy Spirit and others don't. There is no need to liken others with pigs when they are not in agreement with your personal opinions.

Everyone has personal opinions and differences that is due to his or her level of knowledge and personal experiences in life. You should be able to differentiate between personal opinions and what comes from the Holy Spirit. Just because someone disagree with you it doesn't mean that others are wrong and you are right. You have to realize that.

Since you have admitted that you are a Peshitta hater, it is very clear now according to your own admission above that the answer you get from asking "why GOD won't bless the peshitta text" earlier is due to your own hatred for Peshitta text. You are making too much assumption that God is working through English speaking people only. Your view of Christianity is only within English speaking people as though God only bless English.

God is not mocking at Peshitta or Greek text or any other translations like KJV. It is people who is mocking and hating God's word whether Peshitta, Greek, or KJV. Some people in this forum are making unnecessary imaginary war between Greek and Aramaic NT as though God sided with Greek or Aramaic or KJV when the truth is that God uses them to seek and save the lost.

Even if I don't believe that Peshitta is the original, I will not mock it or hate it. How much more if I have not examined its content. I will just consider it an early version that is important to attest to the faithfulness of the Greek NT just like Latin Vulgate. Some Protestant hates Vulgate out of the hatred to the Catholic church. And these are the people who don't even take the trouble to read it. They just criticize without taking the trouble to examine it and attribute their ignorants to the Holy Spirit.

The original KJV 1611 edition has the works called "apocryphal." So being non Catholic, I guess you might hate KJV too. Or perhaps even hate the Greek NT since the apostles quoted from the Septuagint and the Septuagint has the "apocryphal" books.

Actually apocryphal books have nothing to do with Catholic-Protestant feuds. Protestant churches continue reading the Bible with apocrypha until the Protestant Bible societies decided to stop printing it to cut cost so that the Bible can be distributed freely or at cheaper price. Read about the history of Bible societies.

There is a lot of pride in you Dave that you need to let God's Holy Spirit to work on, because God gives grace to the humble but hates the proud. If you spelled "Semitic" wrongly, you should just accept the fact that you made a mistake eventhough when the correction comes from someone like Chris (a person that you dislike). You should not persist with your error by continue to spell it wrongly as Semitic is the accepted spelling when referring to Semites or their languages. <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www3.oup.co.uk/semitj/">http://www3.oup.co.uk/semitj/</a><!-- m -->

When one is in error and someone pointed our error, we should be humble enough to admit our mistake instead of continuing with our error. Which one is more important? Our pride or truth?

The same can be said about doctrines in denominational churches. Which one is more important? Truth from the Bible or denominational doctrines?

Many peoples treat being a member of a Church is like being a member of a political party. When they heard that another member is from another denomination, they will be hostile towards the other member just like a Democrat being hostile to a Republican forgetting that Jesus is Lord and all of us are His servants. There is no denomination in the Church. Stop treating the Church like a political party.

There are certain things that you know better than others & certain things that you don't ....so why argue all the time? Why don't we try to understand each other's opinions instead of just taking the opportunity to refute others all the time?


Think about it Dave.


Peace be upon you,

Dan Gan
Reply
#37
Heh Dan,

This may seem like a stupid question here to you, but do you understand the meaning of sarcasm?

My personality contains a lot of sarcasm and quick witted humour. It is a different sort of humour because unless you are paying attention you will be caught off guard by me. I intentionally do blank stare humour to catch people off guard and surprise them and make them laugh. So,....look up this definition and then re-read what I wrote and look for all the sarcastic humour that is in there. All the stuff directed at Chris, the peshitta hater comments, etc,......that was humour, ok? I want you to catch up here.

I know your trying to understand me, so I'll explain myself a little to you. I am not only myself. I contain this being within me called GOD because I accepted what HIS Son did on the cross one morning. HE does things at times and I do things at times. Sometimes it's funny, sometimes it's mean. Sometimes it's with vision, sometimes it's shortsided. When I do something that HE doesn't care for, HE let's me know about it, and believe me, it aint funny. So far, all my input here, from the outlandish to the mean-spirited has been GOD. Believe me, I spent some time on my knees here the last few days to make sure I wasn't doing this on my own initiative and HE didn't chastise me once, not once.

I would spend some time with HIM asking why HE is being provacative to Chris on here through me. You could probably get some answers if you just did a search on the name drmlanc. You will find out just how much the freemasons care for him. Eventually you would find his "other" site that he maintains also, the site where he puts down christians on his personal forum. Once you understand such things, then you will probably understand more about what GOD thinks about this particular person and his motives for picking on and putting down HIS children all the time. But don't believe me, find the sites.

To be honest, I can be an ass at times. I guess that has come about through my time in the military. With over 18 years in, you tend to see some interesting things and go through some different environments that the person on the outside doesn't experience. Maybe that is a help for you.
Reply
#38
Dear Dave,

Yes, I know the meaning of the word sarcasm and also its origin.

I am glad that you have clarified to me about your personality and your background. Thanks. Sometimes we judged the intention of other people's heart due to the miscommunication that we had in the forum. Many times people quarelled needlessly due to miscommunication or poor communication skills. We tend to think that whatever we say is always clear and obvious and easily understood by others. But the truth is that others don't always see things as we do, and therefore we need to be careful with what we said and also be forgiving to what others said about us.

If we accept the fact that our communication is always plagued by difficulties in the way we express ourselves, as well as how we perceive others, and how we are perceived by others, we should be able to see how important it is to learn to understand properly to what others are trying to say.

The first step to improve our communication is saying honestly and clearly what is on our mind. We should speak the truth even if it is not what others wish to hear. Keeping quiet or merely agreeing with others, especially when you know differently, will not help anyone.

However, being totally honest does not give us the license to be mean or sarcastic towards others. This is not about winning a debate but communicating to be understood and to understand others' point of view. We should also realize that others have their own version of what they think and believe is true just like we have ours.

We can only state our point of view as we perceive them from the amount of knowledge that we have gained in the past. We should avoid using language or a tone of voice that implies blame on others as though that we know better than them. We shouldn't try to score points or to make the other person look bad.

As you came from military background, I can understand the kind of language that you used that sometimes sound harsh, or seems mean, or sarcastic to others who are not familiar with military life. All of us have different experiences in life and upbringing. Some of us are eloquent in speech and some are not. That is why we need to try to understand each other instead of resorting to ridicule others.

Too many times we can see that some people in this forum are making imaginary war between Aramaic NT and Greek NT as though that one of them is evil or a fraud or Satanic, etc. when the truth is the errors are the result of unintentional mistakes of the copyists or the translators just like you mispelled the word "semitic" in another thread. Sorry. Don't get me wrong. I am not trying to pick up on you or ridicule you for your mistake. I just want to make a point that all of us made mistakes and keep on making mistakes. When we made mistakes, we should be honest enough to examine the cause of our errors.

How do copyists or the translators of the Bible feel when you accuse them of Satanic when the truth is they have done their best to copy or translate the Bible?

Therefore, when you said that the Holy Spirit told you so and so regarding certain matters, you should be wise enough to differentiate between your personal opinions and the Holy Spirit. For example, "semetic" is not from the Holy Spirit but from your typo error or your personal knowledge about how the word "Semitic" is spelled. Those who know how "Semitic" is spelled will disagree with your spelling.

We as a human being are unique as all of us have opinions. On certain matters we share same opinions. On other matters, we disagree. What the Holy Spirit can show us depends on the level of knowledge that we have. If we have not read a certain translation of the Bible or have not read the original language from where that English translation of the Bible is translated from, then it is not wise for us to make unnecessary comments about that English translation and attribute our unwise and unnecessary comments to the Holy Spirit.

Regarding Chris or drmlanc, I know who he is before everyone else (except Paul Younan and God, and the angels). There are many things that I disagree with him and I agree with you. And there are also certain things that I agree with him. I don't feel the need to attack him for not sharing my opinions. I don't know his age but I think he is still young and has the zeal of a youth. That is why in another thread I told him that I am willing to host his site as long as he edit the offensive part as I don't want to be a partner in crime with him in attacking the OT in Hebrew or the church. I appreciate his heart and zeal for God's word. And he agrees to edit it.

I have no time to read his works as I know that most of the materials are taken from this forum or the materials that I myself am familiar with. I have visited his web sites in the past and I am fully aware of his unorthodox opinions. And I also do appreciate your input on his writings.


Peace,


Dan Gan
One of the first owners of the facsimile of <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0802837867/ref=nosim/ultimyourulti-20"><b>Codex Leningrad</b></a>
Reply
#39
Dan, I must say that was a very professional post. That exibited your intellegence and wisdom. I tend to pay become more serious and pay attention more when I sense how serious a person is being. When Paul is speaking I tend to try and pay attention more as he has a wisdom that I appreciate and try to learn from.

But I have my moments when I'm just uncontrolled and completely free. I'm not as serious as some most of the time but you know when I am.

Dan, I think my personality falls back to another time. There are just people of GOD who are not as liked or as social as most within the Christian community. But,...they get the job done for GOD. They each have their abilities. Some are able to get through situations because of just how tough they are inside. GOD can instill a Holy strength or boldness within a person that can be quite striking at times and unpredictable. Our moments with GOD should always be spiritual to some degree though.

Anyways, enough for now.
Reply
#40
Quote:What does the statement mean that "GOD has still not moved from the greek scriptures?" I don't understand - is the Holy Spirit confined to white~european churches?
This is a general theological issue with God preserving his word among the masses throughout the ages. (Romans 9:14-21)

Quote:The vast majority of the church?
The Calvinistic belief in God preserving his word coincides with the belief that he will intervene on large scales in order to do so. The issue then is not whether or not the Peshitta had a time of prominance, but rather that in the end the Western traditions dominated. This goes into both linguistic and theolgical issues, but I don't think that God would preserve his word through a medium that would lose it's influence in any age. If the bible was written in Aramaic, it would have been preserved in Aramaic, and translated from Aramaic; in every generation.

Quote:Of course there is nothing before the 4th century. Everyone who has studied history knows what happened in the 4th century in the Roman empire, and how it affected the Christians in the Eastern (Persian) empire. His name was Constantine - and ever since he established Christianity as the state religion - the Eastern Christians have been persecuted.
Both the Jesus Seminar and the fans of the Da Vinci code would agree with you on this. <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->

Quote:We have also proven that the earliest Arabic copy of the Diatesseron demonstrates that the Diatesseron of Tatian, composed during the 2nd century in Assyria (Tatian called himself an Assyrian) contains 100% the same readings as the Peshitta, against the Western Greek texts.
This is a rather dynamically linked proof. The point is that the Diatesseron isn't the original and is a harmonized version of the Peshitta. The Peshitta then, must provide evidence of antiquity which beats the Greek tradition, which it does not. The Peshitta certainly is old, but its not old enough. I have already provided evidence that the Gospels were written after the Pauline Epistles; which are mostly directed towards Hellenized Churches. Why circulate Aramaic documents to churches which originally received apostolic instruction in Greek?

Quote:Geography has nothing to do with the language in which an epistle is written. Epistles sent out by the Patriarch of the Church of the East today, to the church in India who are ethnically Indians and who do not understand Aramaic, are written in Aramaic.
The Church of the East uses it as a liturgical language and has dogmatic claims behind the Peshitta's authenticy; I don't believe either of these things existed in the 1st Century church.

Quote:Secondly, all those churches in Asia Minor were started in the synagogues and the Jews were the elders of those churches. Surely you don't mean to imply that Jews didn't understand Aramaic simply because they lived in Ephesus?
Living in Gentile culture one would imagine that they spoke the local language, but likewise no early congregation was comprised of completely jews, otherwise Paul would not have been concerned with the Galatian church practicing Jewish customs while not being concerned with the Jerusalem church. Why else was he called the apostle to the Gentiles?

Quote:And what single Greek tradition is that?
An old one, I will give you guys that.

Quote:Would you agree that all translators make mistakes and that all translations have some mistakes in them?
Yes, but they can be easily smoothed out in later translations.

Quote:Can you point me to one instance, just one, where the Peshitta contains any error which you can convincingly demonstrate came from a translators' misreading of a Greek word, a misspelling of a Greek word, etc?
Besides it's own Greek loan words, (outside of Roman culture, there should be none) the quality of the Peshitta has no merit as an original if it can't first answer the historical questions, which to myself, are nothing but speculation.
Reply
#41
Quote:It's down to quote wars folks, the peshitta hater against the peshitta promoter
I'm not a peshitta hater and I never will be. My NIV rightfully indexes some Peshitta variants, for example.

Quote:To be honest with you, the Spirit-filled Christians want it all.
To take your quote out of context, I agree with this. Nothing will satisfy some christians, and this leads to gnosticism. As much as I tried to avoid it while being a pro-peshitta person, I couldn't help but succumb to it. Being a westerner, it was like pioneering the rediscovering of biblical criticism back in the age of the reformation, when biblical languages were just being rediscovered. After asking some Greek professors about it, I started pondering whether or not God would let something like this take place, the need for a complete rediscovery of the New Testament.

It isn't my intention to make anyone upset, but I can imagine it might.
Reply
#42
Rob, the peshitta-hater saying was not directed at you. I was making fun of myself and the name that Chris had made up for those who were not pro-peshitta.

I was just having fun at that point. I wasn't trying to direct that at anyone else. <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->
Reply
#43
Quote:The vast majority of the church?
The Calvinistic belief in God preserving his word coincides with the belief that he will intervene on large scales in order to do so. The issue then is not whether or not the Peshitta had a time of prominance, but rather that in the end the Western traditions dominated. This goes into both linguistic and theolgical issues, but I don't think that God would preserve his word through a medium that would lose it's influence in any age. If the bible was written in Aramaic, it would have been preserved in Aramaic, and translated from Aramaic; in every generation.


Well I actually see that as circular reasoning.
Reply
#44
Dear Rob,

It is useless to discuss theories and idealogies of what God should have done, or what Calvinists and the Jesus Seminar says.

Let's discuss examples.

Why don't you address, for starters, Acts 2:24 and explain how that could NOT have come from an Aramiac written source ...

And after you addressed Acts 2:24 - why don't you bring up a similiar example in reverse? A Greek word that has two meanings, which the Peshitta translator obviously screwed up. It happens all the time in versions we know came from the Greek. Articles have been written about the errors in the Vulgate, Coptic versions, etc.

Why do we not hear about any errors in the Peshitta?

Again - let's not talk theory as that is useless. I'd like specific examples - like I give you.
+Shamasha Paul bar-Shimun de'Beth-Younan
[Image: sig.jpg]
Reply
#45
Shlama Akhi Rob

Rob Wrote:Both the Jesus Seminar and the fans of the Da Vinci code would agree with you on this.

I don't think I explained myself clearly on this, or perhaps you aren't familiar with the world outside of the Roman empire at the time and the interaction between Rome and Parthia. So allow me to explain.

There was a border to the Roman empire. It did not rule the word, as some people may think. To the east of it was the Parthian empire - who kicked Roman rear end every time they tried to cross the Euphrates. I've included the map below for your reference.

The two side were constantly at war. They hated each other. In Parthia (Persia), there were many many Christians who were Semites just like the Jews across the border on the extreme eastern fringe of the Roman empire. Reference the map. In addition to these Semites who were Christians, there was the largest concrentation of Jews (and Jewish believers) in Babylon and Adiabene (read Josephus about the Jewish kingdom of Adiabene, also on the map) - the vast majority of whom never left and who produced such works as the Babylonian Talmud in their famous schools.

Anyway, back to the topic. Up until the time of Constantine, as you are aware, Christians were bitterly persecuted in the Roman empire. They were tolerated in Persia.

But that changed when Constantine became a Christian. You can imagine how the Shah (king) of Persia felt about having the Roman emperor's co-religionists within his own kingdom. Persia never became Christian. Suddenly, the tolerance Christians in Persia once enjoyed became a slaughter on the scale never seen before or since. It made the coloseums of Rome look humane. It lasted for 70 long years. Read up about it - it's really fascinating and you might discover one reason why there is a dearth of written Christian material (not the least of which biblical manuscripts) from pre-Constantine Parthia.

[Image: parthia.gif]
+Shamasha Paul bar-Shimun de'Beth-Younan
[Image: sig.jpg]
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)