Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Thirdwoe Wrote:Also, I notice that when Lonnie feels that a Greek NT reading should be in his version, he puts it in there, and says in his notes, that "The Aramaic is missing" this or that verse or part of the he picks and chooses which verse should say what.
It seems Lonnie is one whom believes that the Eastern Aramaic PeshittA is nothing more than a revision of the Western PeshittO and that even it was a translation of the Greek texts.

Thirdwoe Wrote:Also, he decides how often to insert YHVH into the text, where The Aramaic Text has Marya, or Alaha...which he believes were substitutes for the Tetragramaton both in the 1st Aramaic Manuscripts, and in the 1st Greek Manuscripts. So, he chooses which places this should be reversed.
Again if the Greek texts where superior to the Aramaic then this could be a justified Hebraic Roots restoration of the text. But all evidence is to the contrary.

Thirdwoe Wrote:I can't recommend this revision of Etheridge's and Murdoch's translation. Too much Lonnie at work here and not enough of The Aramaic Scriptures speaking what they really say.

Anther so-called Aramaic version muddying the waters. Oh for the day unto a pure English translation of the Eastern Aramaic Peshitta.

Thirdwoe Wrote:if you desire a GreekaHebraShitta...this is it, looks like.

Messages In This Thread
bibles - by sean - 01-07-2013, 08:03 PM
Re: bibles - by ScorpioSniper2 - 01-08-2013, 01:08 AM
Re: bibles - by The Texas RAT - 01-08-2013, 04:29 PM
Re: bibles - by Luc Lefebvre - 01-08-2013, 06:16 PM
Re: bibles - by The Texas RAT - 01-08-2013, 07:10 PM
Re: bibles - by sean - 01-08-2013, 09:06 PM
Re: bibles - by sean - 01-08-2013, 09:10 PM
Re: bibles - by The Texas RAT - 01-09-2013, 12:06 AM
Re: bibles - by Thirdwoe - 01-09-2013, 08:14 AM
Re: bibles - by The Texas RAT - 01-09-2013, 08:44 AM

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)