02-22-2020, 09:40 PM
"top 3 reasons Aramaic is not viewed as the original among scholars?" Beats me. I do know that Daniel Wallace booted me from posting pro-Aramaic arguments on his blog-- see below.
I bet many scholars work to ensure that people having views similar to their own are their successors. I'm reminded that my application to attend BIOLA was rejected because I was an annihilationist at the time, and didn't tow the never-ending-torture position.
What are the top 3 reasons:
Ultimate Restoration isn't adopted by most "scholars"?
Intelligent Design isn't embraced by most scientists?
In an 1887 book, John Hancock Pettingell reports doing an investigation wherein he discovered that, "The common impression that the entire New Testament was first written in Greek, and that all the copies we now have, in whatever tongue, are copies, or translations of the original manuscripts, when seriously examined, is found to have no certain foundation. And yet this has been taken almost universally for granted. It is probable, that this is true with respect to some, possibly a majority of these books. But it is more than probable, if not quite certain, that some portions of the New Testament, such as the Gospel of Matthew, the Epistles to the Hebrews, and others, which will hereafter be mentioned, were first written in the vernacular Syriac of the Jews, and were afterward translated into Greek; and that other portions, perhaps most of the books, were duplicated, at the time they were written, by their authors, or under their direction,-- one copy being furnished to those who were familiar with the Greek, and another to those who knew only the Syriac."
Daniel B. Wallace ....@....com
To d....
Dec 21, 2014 at 4:00 PM
I have allowed you to post several lengthy comments about an Aramaic original NT at danielbwallace.com, but it is my policy not to let this blogsite be a place for an individual to advance an ideology or use the site for propaganda. So, you have posted your last comment on this blog.
dbw
I bet many scholars work to ensure that people having views similar to their own are their successors. I'm reminded that my application to attend BIOLA was rejected because I was an annihilationist at the time, and didn't tow the never-ending-torture position.
What are the top 3 reasons:
Ultimate Restoration isn't adopted by most "scholars"?
Intelligent Design isn't embraced by most scientists?
In an 1887 book, John Hancock Pettingell reports doing an investigation wherein he discovered that, "The common impression that the entire New Testament was first written in Greek, and that all the copies we now have, in whatever tongue, are copies, or translations of the original manuscripts, when seriously examined, is found to have no certain foundation. And yet this has been taken almost universally for granted. It is probable, that this is true with respect to some, possibly a majority of these books. But it is more than probable, if not quite certain, that some portions of the New Testament, such as the Gospel of Matthew, the Epistles to the Hebrews, and others, which will hereafter be mentioned, were first written in the vernacular Syriac of the Jews, and were afterward translated into Greek; and that other portions, perhaps most of the books, were duplicated, at the time they were written, by their authors, or under their direction,-- one copy being furnished to those who were familiar with the Greek, and another to those who knew only the Syriac."
Daniel B. Wallace ....@....com
To d....
Dec 21, 2014 at 4:00 PM
I have allowed you to post several lengthy comments about an Aramaic original NT at danielbwallace.com, but it is my policy not to let this blogsite be a place for an individual to advance an ideology or use the site for propaganda. So, you have posted your last comment on this blog.
dbw