08-25-2008, 10:41 PM
Stephen
Here I am again. Well, far more convincing to me is the "split-word" examples like in Luke 17:35 where you have some Greek manuscripts tranlsated as "children" and other Greek manuscripts translated as "works."
Steve, BTW, maybe just off the top of your head; how many of these splite word examples are there in Luke-Acts??
I am sure you are aware of Acts 2:24. Well, I have thought about this some more over this past weekend and it is not so convincing in favor of Aramaic Primacy as I first thought. The "translator" isn't violating any grammer or syntax rules that I see. Is he?? And taking into consideration the word "sorrows" or "pains," the picture that the Apostle Peter is painting in his sermon to his audience is not doing any injustice to the point he is trying to make. The only thing in this verse (Acts 2:24) that would seem to "fit" better would be "cords." Sure, this word may do a better job but this does not prove "Aramaic Primacy" as being a crystal clear example or proof. Maybe consider these 2 options in english:
"Last night when I received the bad news of his death - I could not go to sleep. I was drowning in my own 'sorrows' ." Or:
"Last night when I received the bad news of his death - I could not go to sleep. I was drowning in my own 'tears.' "
Notice the second phrase may fit the picture more effectively as you link "drowning" with "tears," as opposed to "drowning" with "sorrows." But both phrases bring across the point.
Are you with me??
Mike
Here I am again. Well, far more convincing to me is the "split-word" examples like in Luke 17:35 where you have some Greek manuscripts tranlsated as "children" and other Greek manuscripts translated as "works."
Steve, BTW, maybe just off the top of your head; how many of these splite word examples are there in Luke-Acts??
I am sure you are aware of Acts 2:24. Well, I have thought about this some more over this past weekend and it is not so convincing in favor of Aramaic Primacy as I first thought. The "translator" isn't violating any grammer or syntax rules that I see. Is he?? And taking into consideration the word "sorrows" or "pains," the picture that the Apostle Peter is painting in his sermon to his audience is not doing any injustice to the point he is trying to make. The only thing in this verse (Acts 2:24) that would seem to "fit" better would be "cords." Sure, this word may do a better job but this does not prove "Aramaic Primacy" as being a crystal clear example or proof. Maybe consider these 2 options in english:
"Last night when I received the bad news of his death - I could not go to sleep. I was drowning in my own 'sorrows' ." Or:
"Last night when I received the bad news of his death - I could not go to sleep. I was drowning in my own 'tears.' "
Notice the second phrase may fit the picture more effectively as you link "drowning" with "tears," as opposed to "drowning" with "sorrows." But both phrases bring across the point.
Are you with me??
Mike