Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Split-contents !?!?!?
Shlama Akhay,

I've just come up with a new subcategory for split-words. It's called split-contents. Let me explain. If I found a Greek text that had half of the contents of that same verse in the Peshitta Text and I found another Greek text that furnished the other half that would still be a primacy proof, right? Well, it so happens that Mark 15:4 is an excellent case in point for this. To understand this in a nutshell, take a look at this entry on <!-- w --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- w --> ..............
Mark 15:4. Read "accuse thee of" instead of "witness against thee". L T Tr A WH N NA

The Peshitta Text has 'both halves of the Oreo cookie' and all that sweet white stuff in between. <!-- s:biggrin: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/biggrin.gif" alt=":biggrin:" title="Big Grin" /><!-- s:biggrin: -->
Here's Akhan Paul's Interlinear translation)--

and <he> Peelatos again asked him and said to him "Not will answer you the accusation? . See how many are testifying against you?"

Greek Mark?.......NOT!!!!! <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->

Shlama w'Burkate, Larry Kelsey
Hi bro,

I think this may have been what actually happened. But amazingly, Zorbans easily use this as evidence AGAINST Peshitta primacy. They claim that this is "confounding", where the Peshitta shamelessly ripped off both Greek traditions by copying them both...

But I think it is an excellent explanation of why some Greek say A and others say B, because the Peshitta said AB. Confounding is a joke...
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->
I think I meant "conflation"... <!-- sBlush --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/blush.gif" alt="Blush" title="Blush" /><!-- sBlush -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m -->

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)