Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
An unexpected friend?
#1
Just wanted to bring to the attention of the forum the name of Gordon Fee, an evangelical theologian who seems to maintain that Greek New Testament is a translation of an Aramaic original.

Quote found around the web from his book:
"Jesus' primary tongue was Aramaic; his teachings come to us only in a Greek translation...to some this reality can be threatening..."

Does anybody know more about this?
Reply
#2
borota Wrote:Just wanted to bring to the attention of the forum the name of Gordon Fee, an evangelical theologian who seems to maintain that Greek New Testament is a translation of an Aramaic original.

Quote found around the web from his book:
"Jesus' primary tongue was Aramaic; his teachings come to us only in a Greek translation...to some this reality can be threatening..."

I think one day it will look quite ironic that evangelicals felt threatened by the peshitta.
A peshitta original provides the clearest evidence that the NT (the peshitta anyway) is preserved with interpolation, and with integrity.
Those who argue that the Nt is full of interpolations have huge problem to overcome by even the existence of the peshitta, not to mention a peshitta as the original.
How could all the alleged interplotaions have found themselves inot the peshitta.
Reply
#3
I was reading a posting in Romanian about the fact that the Eastern Orthodox church translation of the Bible does not have the issue of missing OT prophercy references because they use Septuagint for OT and not the masoretic text.

I wonder, is that the case with Peshitta too? Is there agreement between what NT authors refer to and the OT Peshitta?

This is something that really troubled me as I was growing up with my Romanian translation which used Greek Text for NT and Hebrew text for the OT. I see in the NT a reference to an OT prophecy, I follow it but when I land there I find that text says something quite different, or even worse the reference is not there at all. I never knew though that Septuagint actually did have that text in there.
Reply
#4
borota Wrote:I was reading a posting in Romanian about the fact that the Eastern Orthodox church translation of the Bible does not have the issue of missing OT prophercy references because they use Septuagint for OT and not the masoretic text.

I wonder, is that the case with Peshitta too? Is there agreement between what NT authors refer to and the OT Peshitta?

.

No theres seems aas far as i know, no real relationship between the peshitta OT and the peshitta NT.
The peshitta NT was not necessarily or likely written by people familiar with the peshitta OT.
Also the POT is quite close to the hebrew massoretic text, in many places, rather than any LXX we have.
I do, stand to be corrected on any of this though.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)