In reply to message #1
Shlama Akhi Paul, thank you for the answers! After reading your words, I tried examine more deeper the questions: >>I wrote more manuscripts at Qumran >>is aramaic, for example the >>Habakuk-commentary. The reader states that >>the Habakuk is hebrew and >>not aramaic. > >I'm not sure about Habakuk, but >many Aramaic manuscripts were found >at Qumran. The complete bibliography of Dead Sea Scrolls: https://www.flash.net/~hoselton/deadsea/bibliog.htm The text uses "hebrew AND aramaic" instead of earlier simple hebrew. Altough it is not too important in topic of aramaic primacy of NT. He criticised also why I did write the Isiah known before 1948 was aramaic. The masoretic Isaiah had "aramaic spelling: https://www.ao.net/~fmoeller/qum-intr.htm#aramaic >>The declaration about aramaic origin of >>the patriarch of COE is >>not an evidence, it is >>very biased. >> > >And his/her opinion is also biased. > Well said  >It's what the text says and >how it proves that the >Greek is only a translation. > Show him Acts 2:24 >(only one example of many) >in both Aramaic and Greek >and ask him which came >from which. I included this smoking gun in my book, I hope he will find it. >>What is the source that the >>350 Pesitta manuscripts are uniform >>against the greek manuscripts? - >>asked the reader. > >Reading them and seeing for yourself >that they are all the >same.
How can he access it? Altough I don't believe he will inmediatly order all aramaic manuscripts but I think he need a reference. >>The reader states that Jerome, Origenes, >>Eusebius only adopt earlier opinions >>about hebrew primacy. He told >>me that the earlier witnesses, >>Ireneus and Papias said only >>"hebrew mind" not "hebrew tongue". >>Source: Old christian writers, 3/29 > >The reader badly interprets what was >said in the Greek of >Eusebius. The word "Dialect" >was used - not "mind" >or "tongue." There was >a Hebrew "dialect" of Aramaic. > He used the hungarian translation of this text. He states that this fact is "uncertain". I worked with english: Matthew, also called Levi, apostle and aforetimes publican, composed a gospel of Christ at first published in Judea in Hebrewfor the sake of those of the circumcision who believed, but this was afterwards translated into Greek though by what AUTHOR is uncertain. So, the author is uncertain, not the whole fact. The word dialekt is also a smoking gun. > >>He does not accept that Cepha >>is stone, he stated that >>Christ is the stone (Ef >>2.20) so Peter can be >>only Petros, little stone. > >He obviously doesn't understand Aramaic. >Meshikha and Keepa were not >speaking in Greek and Meshikha >did not say "petros." > Yes, I see. But, long years of the theory of greek primacy, not everyone realise this fact - and I can say, a lot of people think Jesus spoke greek. P.S. When would like your wife begin the "interlinear" music project? cheers, Gabor
|