Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Revelation Good case for Aramaic Primacy?? Come on now
#4
Andrew,

Yes, it clarifies things; some. But to my "utter" (well, almost) dissapointment. I am just about floored. It does not bid very well at all for Aramaic Primacists to say that the Gospel of John and 1 John were written in originally in Aramaic and then to concede the point to Greek Primacists that 2 and 3 John (again, same author) was written in Greek. Soon as some Greek Primacists who are eagerly hunting for a more "varient free/error free" or more perfect manuscript support of the Word of G-d - discover this, you will lose them right there.

Andrew (with respect and softly), you can not stand up and declare that we have An Aramaic Apostle John and and say that John's Gospel and his 1st Epistle has a very clear Aramaic underlining, foundation, composition (or what ever word I am searching for) and then say that this same author's epistles of 2 John, 3 John and Revelation (plus those other 2) is clearly Greek in composition and in nature. Is this what you meant?? I need to know this, please. The idea that John and 1 John have Aramaic originals behind them while 2 John, 3 John and the Apocolypse have Greek originals behind them will not wash.

Another point, Mr Lancaster himself has a web-site that employs Revelation (the split word evidence: 3 or 4 examples). He is a Peshitta Primacist, and you said that no one who is within the Peshitta Primacy movement argues that fact that Revelation , 2 John and 3 John were translations from the Greek. What on earth is he doing employing Revelation. Both you and Paul's fingerprints are all over his book - "Was the new Testament Really Written in Greek?" Oh yes, and one of those letters within this epistle was written to Ephesus. This will immediately draw many to conclude that Paul's Ephesian letter was written in Greek. How could they come to any other conclusion?? And while we are at it, since anyone who has read Ephesians and Colossians more then twice will see that they are like "twin epistles." I have heard this several times and I think you know it is true. So now, Ephesians has a Greek original behind it and let us grab Colossians as well. They are epistles so much alike. They are either both in Greek or Aramaic.

You mentioned something about the surviving manuscripts of the Western 5 and their dates. Andrew, almost all of the Greek manuscript copies that make up the 27 book New Testament canon are older than any (that's any) of the Aramaic manuscripts copies. This fact is pretty well known and well established.

Though I basically understand your post to me it "clogs" things up in my mind. I did not know that you or Paul or , for that matter, anyone else pushing in the Aramaic Primacy movement thought that theese 5 books had Greek base or underlining to it. I was under the impression that all 27 NT books had an Aramaic tone or composition but that, for some reason the Western 5 were not accepted into the NT Canon(according to COE) because of some theological reason. If this is so, at least with the Apostle John one can not have a "mixed bag."

Now, let me just say that I am not mad. You can't see me nor pick up my nonverbal cues. So I just want to be clear that I do not speak out of being upset, angry nor do I have any malice. But I am passionate about this and in a gentle way. I believe this is vital , very vital to apologetics. That is why I write the way I do and that is why I desire some clear answers. I know you are doing your best. I am too. Hopefully we can take it from here. The time you have taken with me is so much appreciated and I don't just shrug this off. Anyway, I will close here. Please take care and go with G-d. May peace be yours as Y'shua gives it.

Mike
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: Revelation Good case for Aramaic Primacy?? Come on now - by Mike Kar - 08-28-2008, 06:06 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)