09-07-2004, 02:50 AM
Quote:Hi Dave, perhaps you are unfamiliar with Matthew 1: 5, which lists two women in it.
Ok,.....how about something that is not of the topic? Was there a listing with women in it from another source that would be used to validate this? Like Mister Roth said, they are rare, that means that they did happen at some point, but they are few and far between. What about something other than Matthew for this as a comparison?
Quote:It shows that that Joseph the baali was about to send her away. If he wasn't considered to have the same status as "husband" there would be no need to send her away.
Let Scripture interpret Scripture.
You overlooked the point I was making. We understand that he was her betrothed/husband because it was inferred in line 18,...what's the use of stating it again? It's gotta be an addition. The leige and one of the OS doesn't have it.
Quote:You should be able to tell from his quote that he is not directly quoting from the OS at Matt 1: 16. It looks like he left out a couple of words and added others.
I didn't say he was quoting the OS, I just posted the quote as a comparison to this "gowra" thing since his quotes have been utilized on here at times. Burkitt didn't list the particular book it was in, he just listed the books associated with the author, so one could look it up for themselves it they wished.
Let's look at the quote again here:
Quote:"and Jacob begat Joseph, and Joseph was called father to Jesus The Messiah."
No matter what, the point is this,..........there is a problem with accepting that word "gowra" as original. If we do accept it then where did Joseph the husband go because he has just been effectively removed from the picture? If we don't then the peshitta has the mistake that the rest of the greek manuscripts do that copied from it, and shows just how "unoriginal" this particular book of the peshitta is. Now what do you "aramaic only" folks do here?
Do we just say that Joseph the husband wasn't important enough so he doesn't deserve to be listed in matthew's genealogy? Matthew was just kidding when he said 14, it was an idiom? Matthew was speaking in targums at this point?