09-03-2008, 08:21 AM
Hi, Mike.
You seem to be stuck on the fact that we ???Aramaic??? folk are not in total agreement on ???everything.??? We are not clones. Raphael???s opinions go beyond Peshitta Primacy. I haven???t read the latest edition of his book, but I???ve read earlier editions, and he???s been up-front with his views regarding the Peshitta and the Peshitto. Comparing ???Aramaic Primacy??? with ???Peshitta Primacy??? is kinda like comparing rectangles with squares; there will be many similarities, but there will NOT necessarily be total agreement. Raphael???s ???rectangles??? are not necessarily Paul???s or Andrew???s ???squares??????and that does NOT represent contradiction! When Raphael refers to examples from Revelation or others of the ???Western Five,??? he is NOT doing so from a ???Peshitta Primacy??? position.
The point has been made that even if someone feels that there may be Aramaic roots to the ???Western Five,??? those roots cannot be demonstrated conclusively. However, this DOES NOT IN ANY WAY weaken the argument for Peshitta Primacy (and, therefore, Aramaic Primacy of the 22 books contained in the Peshitta). I know you???re concerned about those who hold to a 27-book canon, but do you think any logical person would throw away 22 ???sure things??? because another five cannot be supported quite as well?
I believe most of the regulars here DO AGREE that the 22 books of the Peshitta represent the Aramaic originals of those books. Do you agree with them?
Respectfully,
-Whitey
You seem to be stuck on the fact that we ???Aramaic??? folk are not in total agreement on ???everything.??? We are not clones. Raphael???s opinions go beyond Peshitta Primacy. I haven???t read the latest edition of his book, but I???ve read earlier editions, and he???s been up-front with his views regarding the Peshitta and the Peshitto. Comparing ???Aramaic Primacy??? with ???Peshitta Primacy??? is kinda like comparing rectangles with squares; there will be many similarities, but there will NOT necessarily be total agreement. Raphael???s ???rectangles??? are not necessarily Paul???s or Andrew???s ???squares??????and that does NOT represent contradiction! When Raphael refers to examples from Revelation or others of the ???Western Five,??? he is NOT doing so from a ???Peshitta Primacy??? position.
The point has been made that even if someone feels that there may be Aramaic roots to the ???Western Five,??? those roots cannot be demonstrated conclusively. However, this DOES NOT IN ANY WAY weaken the argument for Peshitta Primacy (and, therefore, Aramaic Primacy of the 22 books contained in the Peshitta). I know you???re concerned about those who hold to a 27-book canon, but do you think any logical person would throw away 22 ???sure things??? because another five cannot be supported quite as well?
I believe most of the regulars here DO AGREE that the 22 books of the Peshitta represent the Aramaic originals of those books. Do you agree with them?
Respectfully,
-Whitey