Primacy Proofs Refuted (Six and counting)

[Thomas]

One would think that with so many examples of potential proofs for Aramaic primacy, it will be more interesting to solidify and research the existing ones, than to find new ones

Thank you Sestir. A wonderful suggestion, and exactly my point here. While I haven't been able to post the other five examples, I would love to discuss them. Mainly, I am disturbed by the lack of veracity in some of these arguments, and I would be highly interested in more demonstrable primacy proofs--ones that have been tested.

I recognize that takes a lot of work, but considering that some people make monumental claims of scholarly and theological importance regarding the Peshitta Aramaic text, I would like to see some primacy proofs that have been more than just passed around the campfire, so to speak.

If I can find through my simple tools that a Greek word has dual meanings just like an Aramaic word has dual meanings, then there is no way to claim that the Aramaic is superior to the Greek; but rather that the English translator didn't know what they were doing.

Part of my demonstration here with Mark 9:49 was to show that the initial claim of Aramaic primacy sounds good but was built on virtually a fabrication. Granted, we did find one concordance to support the secondary meaning of mlkh in Mark 9:49, but it wasn't easy, to say the least.

Now, if anyone reading this understands the issue here, please feel free to point me in the direction of more certain internal evidence--that which a Greek primacists couldn't look in his dictionary and easily refute. Thanks again all who posted.

Thomas