Peshitta Forum › New Testament › General v
The "O" argument

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Thread Modes
The "O" argument
Dawid Offline
Senior Member
****
Posts: 376
Threads: 21
Joined: Nov 2007
Reputation: 0
#3
08-27-2009, 12:44 AM
enarxe Wrote:Indeed GNT reads as you wrote. There appears (strangely) one character for the w-mega in Revelation 1:8, after "alfa" the name of the first letter of the alphabet (see <!-- l --><a class="postlink-local" href="http://www.peshitta.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=2122">viewtopic.php?f=17&t=2122</a><!-- l -->). However, I honestly do not understand the rest of the argument. If O-mega (large o) as the name of the letter appeared at a later date it is reasonable that the text (presumably, older and original) contains just one character, not that name. So lack of the name would be an argument for the older date of GNT, not against. By the way, both letters (o-mikron, and o-mega) were in use BC. Would be interested to know more.
That's exactly what I'm saying. This would simply prove that the GNT is older than the Byzantine period (which we already knew) not that it is a translation of the Peshitta.
Find
Reply


Messages In This Thread
The "O" argument - by Dawid - 08-25-2009, 01:58 AM
Re: The "O" argument - by enarxe - 08-26-2009, 06:59 PM
Re: The "O" argument - by Dawid - 08-27-2009, 12:44 AM
Re: The "O" argument - by Nimrod Warda - 08-27-2009, 03:42 PM
Re: The "O" argument - by enarxe - 08-27-2009, 07:27 PM
Re: The "O" argument - by Dawid - 08-28-2009, 12:49 AM
Re: The "O" argument - by Christina - 08-29-2009, 02:26 PM
Re: The "O" argument - by Dawid - 08-29-2009, 03:19 PM
Re: The "O" argument - by gbausc - 09-11-2009, 12:24 PM
Re: The "O" argument - by Dawid - 09-11-2009, 09:41 PM
Re: The "O" argument - by gbausc - 09-12-2009, 04:09 PM
Re: The "O" argument - by Dawid - 09-13-2009, 02:26 AM
Re: The "O" argument - by Dawid - 09-13-2009, 02:28 AM
Re: The "O" argument - by gbausc - 09-13-2009, 08:55 PM
Re: The "O" argument - by Dawid - 09-14-2009, 05:53 PM
Re: The "O" argument - by gbausc - 09-14-2009, 07:44 PM
Re: The "O" argument - by Dawid - 09-14-2009, 11:10 PM
Re: The "O" argument - by Thirdwoe - 09-15-2009, 12:48 AM
Re: The "O" argument - by Dawid - 09-17-2009, 02:42 PM
Re: The "O" argument - by Dawid - 09-17-2009, 02:51 PM
Re: The "O" argument - by Thirdwoe - 09-17-2009, 06:32 PM
Re: The "O" argument - by judge - 09-19-2009, 07:09 AM
Re: The "O" argument - by judge - 09-19-2009, 07:12 AM
Re: The "O" argument - by judge - 09-19-2009, 07:26 AM
Re: The "O" argument - by Dawid - 09-20-2009, 01:41 PM
Re: The "O" argument - by Dawid - 09-20-2009, 01:42 PM
Re: The "O" argument - by Dawid - 09-20-2009, 01:48 PM
Re: The "O" argument - by judge - 09-21-2009, 04:49 AM
Re: The "O" argument - by judge - 09-21-2009, 05:02 AM
Re: The "O" argument - by Christina - 09-21-2009, 08:54 AM
Re: The "O" argument - by Dawid - 09-21-2009, 10:24 PM
Re: The "O" argument - by Dawid - 09-21-2009, 10:31 PM
Re: The "O" argument - by Dawid - 09-21-2009, 10:36 PM
Re: The "O" argument - by judge - 09-22-2009, 09:32 AM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)