Amaleq13

Isn't that what we would expect from someone considering multiple greek variants and trying to produce a single aramaic translation? Wouldn't such a translator try to choose a word that covers all greek versions if such a word existed?

Doctor X

Amaleq:

Exactly. Spin actually gives a very good defense of the Gk that judge has hitherto ignored. That is, basically, that it is more likely for a later translator or scribe to correct a metaphor--since metaphors are hard to understand in non-native languages--and explain it--than for a scribe to delete the explanatory material or mistranslate the word to begin with.

Aland, et al. remind that "internal" evidence--"my reading makes sense by context" has to be subordinate to the external evidence of the witnesses. A summary of the Syriac witness was given above. This has not been rebutted or even acknowledged. Furthermore, Aland, et al. note that context does have a place provided that the external evidence does not contradict it.

In the particular case cited, the context of metaphor supports it. Indeed, it is a good example of why the "more difficult" and "the shorter" reading is generally prefered.

--J.D.

CX

Well firstly, the recognition that the canon of the New Testament was a living and changing tradition for many years is only a problem for certain flavors of Xianity. The truth is Xians who embrace the doctrine of inerrancy are a tiny minority in Christendom. It's just that in the U.S. that minority is very vocal.

That being said most Xians are not terribly concerned with text critical issues and other academic disciplines related to Xianity. My father attended seminary for 3 years. I think mostly he concentrated on faith related stuff and glossed over or largely ignored whatever academic material was included in the curriculum.

Doctor X

Indeed, as CX notes, most theology or seminary programs deal with "interpreting" texts rather than discussing the scholarship.

In a way it is understandable. How many priest/preachers know Greek, Latin, and Hebrew well enough to work through the texts?

--J.D.

Soul Invictus

Not familiar with this particular argument. Care to go into it for me?

Soul Invictus

Is there any particular reason you've found that they failed to study the Aramaic texts intensively or first?

Doctor X

Soul Invictus:

Mt and Lk link their narratives to historical events. Unfortunately, they link them to two different historical events. Mt links it to Herod who is dead by 4 BCE. Lk links it to Quirinius which forces it to after 6 CE.

Both have their thematic reasons for writing the stories the way they did. They just never expected to be in the same book together!

--J.D.

judge

I don't think so.
Think about it , we have two different greek versions , two different variations,
And quite coincidentally again and again and again we have one aramaic word that has more than one meaning. What are the chances of just happening to find a word in aramaic that covers the greek variants evry time?
Sure maybe now and again it would happen just by chance, but why would it happen again and again?

judge

OK you have claimed that the phrase "everything will be salted (?!?!) with fire is some kind of idiom.
Can you show me anywhere at any time in all of recorded history where this idiom is ever used by any one at all?

Just one instance that is all I am asking for.

judge

The tremendous irony is that even "infidels" blindly follow fundamentalist christians. Think about it , it is qute funny

When protestants rejected the authority of the Roman Church that had to have a perfevt authority to follow. So they decided that they had the perfect in testament in greek. lol

From then till now no-one (not even infidels) has dared to examine intensively whether this is supported by the data.

Fundamentalists beleive the NT was written in greek as a matter of FAITH. It is hillarious.Even infidels blindly follw them, particularly ones who have spent time and money studying the "experts".
Bruce Metzger is even worshipped by infidels.:notworthy