03-05-2013, 10:16 PM
Akhi Steve,
Are you seriously suggesting that an Aramaic scribe took the liberty, when translating the alleged Greek from James, to chose "Shayna" for one instance of eyrene, and "Shlama" for the same exact Greek word, a few words later? And, in doing so, coincidentally created not only a pun on "seed" and "cultivated land", but also a Janus Parallelism .. neither of which exists in the alleged Greek source text he was translating?
Wow. I see how this works. You can hypothesize a wordplay that doesn't exist in any text of the NT, yet when one is actually found in the text itself that stares you in the face, you can explain it away as the liberty a "Syriac scribe" took while translating from the Greek. Throw around the term "Shibboleth" and basically continue in your cognitive dissonance. IC. <!-- s
--><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="" title="Smile" /><!-- s -->
+Shamasha
Are you seriously suggesting that an Aramaic scribe took the liberty, when translating the alleged Greek from James, to chose "Shayna" for one instance of eyrene, and "Shlama" for the same exact Greek word, a few words later? And, in doing so, coincidentally created not only a pun on "seed" and "cultivated land", but also a Janus Parallelism .. neither of which exists in the alleged Greek source text he was translating?
Wow. I see how this works. You can hypothesize a wordplay that doesn't exist in any text of the NT, yet when one is actually found in the text itself that stares you in the face, you can explain it away as the liberty a "Syriac scribe" took while translating from the Greek. Throw around the term "Shibboleth" and basically continue in your cognitive dissonance. IC. <!-- s
--><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="" title="Smile" /><!-- s -->+Shamasha