Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Paul Younan Wrote:Which is OK, I suppose, but it's not accurate to call it the's based mostly on the Peshitta, but not the Peshitta.

Do you think it would be more correct to call it a 'critical' Peshitta just as the critical Greek is not pure one source?

The reason I ask, is that I have the opinion, that if you consider the few differences of teh Eastern and Western texts or even the Greek texts, which were translated from earlier texts than the current oldest peshitta (obviously), that the scribes were not infallable.
When it is very clear a verse should be there because it was (accidentely) deleted, I would insert it.
e.g. Acts 8:37.

Messages In This Thread
Re: ARAMAIC CLARIFICATION STATEMENTS IN NT - by distazo - 08-23-2011, 10:27 AM

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)