Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Greek NT single source
#2
Shlama Akhi Ivan,

No matter which side you are on (Aramaic Primacy, or Greek Primacy), the most logical conclusion is that the other one was translated very early on. It would have had to have been. Both Aramaic and Greek were the international languages of the time - the languages of two great empires that bordered each other near the Holy Land. Even Latin would have been translated very early on.

I have no issue with the Greek having been translated by either the Apostles themselves in some cases, or their immediate disciples (perhaps with their guidance.) I can see Paul or Luke being involved, I cannot see a fisherman like Peter being of much help.

So yes, I've always approached this with the mindset that there was a single, very early, Greek translation (of the epistles, individually at the local congregation), and there were at most 2-3 different Greek recensions (some maybe compared against the original Aramaic and revised.) The Byzantine, the Egyptian and an independent "Western" text. The rest are copyist errors or variations.

+Shamasha
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Greek NT single source - by IPOstapyuk - 04-23-2013, 02:48 AM
Re: Greek NT single source - by Paul Younan - 04-23-2013, 05:27 AM
Re: Greek NT single source - by IPOstapyuk - 04-23-2013, 06:46 AM
Re: Greek NT single source - by Thirdwoe - 04-23-2013, 03:40 PM
Re: Greek NT single source - by IPOstapyuk - 04-23-2013, 04:06 PM
Re: Greek NT single source - by Thirdwoe - 04-23-2013, 06:09 PM
Re: Greek NT single source - by IPOstapyuk - 04-23-2013, 11:05 PM
Re: Greek NT single source - by carlosmendoza - 04-26-2013, 10:06 PM
Re: Greek NT single source - by Thirdwoe - 04-27-2013, 04:44 AM
Re: Greek NT single source - by IPOstapyuk - 04-28-2013, 05:04 AM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)