Bart Ehrman.

[distazo]

Has anyone had a chance to verify his claims, or bold enough to dismiss him as merely a frustrated former-evangelical agnostic looking to make fast bucks?

Barts claims are pretty much in line with what scholars conclude about the NT, when they don't consider the evidence for peshitta primacy.

When peshitta primacy is considered another story emerges though, which seems to have better explanatory power.

Mm,
late reaction though <!-- s --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="" title="Smile" /><!-- s --> but are we talking about peshitta primacy? Not about Aramaic primacy? I hardly can believe the original documents straightly were Syrian Aramaic. Why would the apostles do that instead of Judean Aramaic? (I can imagine that Paul & Luke could have used Syrian Aramaic)