Debunking another Trimmism

[The Thadman]

Shlama Akhi Steve-o,

That's great news. We should compile these examples and create an article to be hosted on both sites! I don't think anyone else has made this observation before. (kinda like the whole "Evangelion de Mepharreshe" pointing back to Rabbula)

I think if we demonstrate conclusively that the basis for Old Scratch was the Peshitta, except in cases of disagreement with the Western Greek textual family - then this would put to an end once and for all the headache that Old Scratch is.

Well, the prime example was the research I did on Trimm's "khadh" idiom. Each Mefarishe MSS agreed more with the Peshitta seperately than amongst themselves. It's still here somewhere on the board, and is definitely still on James' email list.

From Heb-Aram-NT

Message: 7
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2003 00:38:07 -0400
From: Steve Caruso <thadman@mindspring.com>
Subject: Kkadh/Chad in the Old Syriac: Interesting Development (Please read)

Akki James and all involved with the Kkadh/Chad study,

There is something I noticed, going over the numbers concerning the
preservation of the "Kkadh idiom." Going over the verses Akki James
provided I found out how the Old Syriac looks against itself along with
the Peshitta:

Sinaitic Unique (~4): 2:23; 15:22; 18:2; 21:2;
Cureton Unique (~3): 9:9; (26:7)? (27:57)?
Peshitta Unique (~1): 12:11

Peshitta & Sinaitic Agreement (~4): 8:2; 8:5; 18:24; 21:19;
Peshitta & Cureton Agreement (~4): 9:18; 13:46; 21:24; (26:69)?
Sinaitic & Cureton Agreement (~1): 17:14;

Complete Agreement (~6): 8:19; 12:10; 12:22; 19:16; 21:28; 21:33

Total Instances: ~23

Peshitta & Sinaitic Agreement: ~43%
Peshitta & Cureton Agreement: ~43%
Sinaitic & Cureton Agreement: ~30%
Peshitta, Sinaitic, & Cureton Agreement: ~26%


Taking a close look at the evidence, there are many places where syr(s)
and syr© disagree with eachother. With this in mind, we find one
place where the Peshitta disagrees with both Old Syriac manuscripts
(Mt. 12:11), and one place that we can verify that both Old Syriac
manuscripts disagree with the Peshitta (17:14). Even Steven :-) We also
see that the Peshitta Agrees more closely to each individual Old Syriac
Manuscript than the Old Syriac Manuscripts do to eachother (43% vs 30%).

With this in mind, I believe that this is ample evidence to conclude
that the inclusion or exclusion of "kkadh"/"chad" as "certain" is
arbitrary & not a valid means of determining which biblical text is
"more authentic" than another; the statistics simply do not warrant it.
Additionally, I wholeheartedly reject the further study of it's
frequency in this context as any form of evidence for the Gospel of
Matthew.

Shlomo!

Shlomo,
-Steve-o