Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The "O" argument
#32
judge Wrote:An argument that the peshitta is the result of a unification process (if this is what you are arguing), without any evidence would seem to be an argument from silence.
I am merely showing you why the fact that there are no significant extant variants does not mean that there have never been any. You take the fact that there are no variants and so assume a unified tradition. I take it and simply assume that there are no variants. Unification is another possible explanation for this fact.


Quote:This may be a strawman though. As I understand it the argument is we have no textual variants, there fore we have no evidence for textual variants.
We can't know there were none, but we just dont have any evidence of any.
The way it was explained to me is that this is evidence that there were never any, and thus we know that we have a modern version that is consistent with the original.

Quote:
Quote: All I've done here is to point out that that proves nothing. There is another simple, logical explanation.
.

But isn't this still an argument from silence?
The peshitta is the text used by the COE. All our earliest COE sources use the peshitta, including Aphrahat and the COE liturgy. We dont have any evidence of that tradition using anything else.
By saying that these other versions existed, but not providing any evidence they did, one cannot argue from evidence but must argue from silence.
Look at the statement of mine that I have left. I do not intend to suggest that this is what actually happened. I mean to suggest that there is no proof that it didn't.

Yes, it would have to have been adopted as standard at a very early date in order for all variants to have fallen out of use and completely disappeared. For this theory to work we would be talking about standardization beginning in probably the fourth century at the very latest. And the Peshitta as we know it would have to have been the common text from the very beginning of the existence of a Syriac text.
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)