04-26-2004, 12:30 PM
shlomo,
Origianlly the Peshitto and Peshitta were the same document, without the extra books or passages, but later after several failed attempts at creating a Greek translation into Syriac, they decided to just add the few passages and books to the Peshitto, but leave the original Peshitto text the same.
"why did Rabulla create a "new" set of Aramaic Gospels instead of using the PeshittO Gospels already used by the SOC?"
Because many revisionist considered that some of the Peshitto reading looked Nestorian.
poosh bashlomo,
keefa-moroon
byrnesey Wrote:I do not find it clear at all. That would explain why SOC and so forth used Peshitto rather than Peshitta. So the real question then becomes, why did Rabulla create a "new" set of Aramaic Gospels instead of using the PeshittO Gospels already used by the SOC? As I explained earlier, it is irrelivant as there is enough evidence for Peshitta originality over the Greek and the OS, but it still would be nice to know.
Origianlly the Peshitto and Peshitta were the same document, without the extra books or passages, but later after several failed attempts at creating a Greek translation into Syriac, they decided to just add the few passages and books to the Peshitto, but leave the original Peshitto text the same.
"why did Rabulla create a "new" set of Aramaic Gospels instead of using the PeshittO Gospels already used by the SOC?"
Because many revisionist considered that some of the Peshitto reading looked Nestorian.
poosh bashlomo,
keefa-moroon