Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
About Luke 16:19-31 II century interpolation
#42
Jerry Wrote:Why would all the single original text need to be Greek? Intuitively, it seems probable that the original text was a composite of two or three languages. Those likely being Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, maybe some Latin, etc. Maybe "Q" was Aramaic, Matthew and a few others Hebrew or Aramaic, Paul's letters Greek. Which is which would depend some upon who the author was and who the target audience was. Who knows for sure, I am just speculating.

Could it be that the Greeks were the first to assemble all 27 into one language, that of Greek. And a few centuries later the same occurred with the Peshitta, for the 22, in Syriac. Maybe some of the original texts lost through time to the Greeks were still available to the writers of the Peshitta in the 5th century. Not that they were the original, but a very direct first or second generation copy of them.

Again, all this is pure speculation on my part, but it seems intuitively probable to me.


Shlama,

i also believe that the NT books were translated into other tongues at a very early date, and by multiple sources, which only explains the majority of the variant readings to be found.

i don't know how much study you've done in Paul's letters, but i've done quite a bit of study there in the past year, and in the Peshitta, they are replete with wordplays that are nonexistent in the Greek. they also contain their own respective variant resolutions, idioms, etc., all which strongly point to the Peshitta text as being source-text for the Greek readings.

out of all the NT books, Paul's letters are the ones that are usually assumed to have been originally in Greek, and yet the evidence from the text seems to actually show otherwise...


Chayim b'Moshiach,
Jeremy
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: About Luke 16:19-31 II century interpolation - by Burning one - 05-19-2010, 06:08 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)