Roger Pearse

No, I agree. Let every theory stand or fall by its evidence. I've not seen this thread, but there are certainly people who know Syriac who believe in the idea that the Syriac texts are not translations from Greek.

I get somewhat confused when people discuss the various Syriac New Testament versions. Surely the Old Syriac gospel texts (Cureton's and the Sinai mss) precede whichever text is meant by "the Peshitta version" (which if I understand correctly means only "the vulgate")?

Syriac texts translated from Greek tend to contain embedded Greek words which makes them fairly distinctive. Indeed the Syriac word for 'gospel' is 'ewangelion (I have just tried and failed to transcribe this in vocalised Syriac letters, so please forgive me - I'm new to Syriac).

All the best,

Roger Pearse

judge

Hi Roger, Why surely?
What evidence can we base this on? This is the point I continually return to here. But no one can ever come up with the details although yuri did make an attempt to show Aprahat quoting the OS. But Yuri could only do this by truncating verses, i.e. leaving out the parts of the quotes that did not agree with the OS.

The earliest Syriac father we have survivng is Aphrahat, Aphrahat only quotes the peshitta. Why is this not evidence the peshitta is earlier

Yes and this works the other way too. The greek gospels contain many many Aramaic words embedded.

judge

Look Jeffrey if you find some of these arguments convincing then just what are they. Come tell us the details.

Can you do this ?

Thank you

judge

Spin ,if you know some of the scholarly details as to why the peshitta is not pimary then lets see them. You claim to have read some of the papers. What are the details of the scholarly arguments.

judge

And so , yet again we are back to the same place.
Every knows that scholars have examined the arguments for peshitta primacy...yer riiiight.

No one can name the details of what the scholars studied.

jgibson000

Why should I? The issue at hand isn't whether the arguments presented against the early date and originality of the Peshitta by the scholars I mentioned are convincing, but the validity of your claim that the question of the early date and originality of the Peshitta has not received any scholarly attention or been reviewed by experts in the Syriac versions of the Bible.

So I'll take your shifting of the goal postin this matter means both that you were (until I wrote) unaware of the scholars I mentioned and their work on the Peshitta, and that you haven't read anything they've produced.

So may we have that public recantation now, please?

yasaptz

JG

Chris Weimer

We've actually been throwing them at you for quite some time...

judge

Why then are you unable to tell us right now?
What are the details you personally know of that schlars have examined ?

judge

Yet another one!

This is hillarious. No one is able to discuss the details, yet they all know how terrribly terribly convincing they are.


You can have the recantation when you show the details WRT the particulars of my claim.

judge

Gawd this is so boring. If any here ever actually posts some of the so called evidence from scholars, can someone please email me?

it never seems to happen though so I wont hold my breath.

Thanks