I think we are all in for a rude "awakening" in some way or another.
I don't really think it will be exactly like any of us believe.
Old Boudreaux was consigned to hell.
Upon arrival the devil took him to a hellish room full of screaming people with fire and brimstone peeling away at their flesh.
Boudreaux got a big ole grin on his face. The devil asked him, "what'chu smilin' about Boudreaux?" Boudreaux just grinned and said, "Say cher dis just like April in Louisiana - all warm and toasty."
The devil got angry and turned the thermostat all the way down. Soon Boudreaux's skin was blue and ice filled his hair and beard - everything was frozen in hell. He still sat there with a big grin. The devil asked him again, "What'chu smilin' about Boudreax?" Boudreaux grinned back and said, "The Saints just won the Superbowl!!!"
Just like Geisha said - The Saint's played - the Colts got a rude awakening - and most of us just couldn't believe it turned out that way.
Now dat's research!!!!! The translation of Geisha in the literal according to usage.
PS: OOPS! I forgot to mention just one little thing...
...Not everybody gets to stay !
The way I see it....if one TRULY believed that. . . ."OOPS" and a big laugh would hardly seem an appropriate response from someone commanded to love their neighbor as themselves.
Even scripture says God takes no pleasure. . . . . but, then again, if that is true . . . and He is the one who decides who is who. . . . well, like I said, "I don't really think it will be exactly like any of us believe."
______________________________
Hey RR. . . . GO PATS Errr . . . I means SAINTS. . . . congratulations to LA!!
Thanks for that LINK, Penworks! I read all the posts in it (from 2008). Many good points are made pertinent to this TOPIC you started, and it contains many "first hand accounts" by those who did "research" while at TWI.
SPEC
I re-read one of my comments from that post called Research and Premises and wanted to make a clarification about the Syriac text used in TWI research. It is a version of the N.T. and it is
spelled P-e-s-h-i-t-t-a. I put hyphens in it because if you don't do that on this site, it comes out spelled Pedangta, perhaps because this site's software "thinks" the word is saying something about s-h-i-t, which it is not, of course.
Anyway, the following in bold is what I wrote and then in italics I've put in the correction. I feel certain that Roberterasmus can explain more about this Syriac text than I can since he studied Syriac at the Univ. of Chicago, so correct me if I'm wrong, Bob, okay?
"Various Greek texts, as well as the Syriac version, which most scholars believe is a translation of the Greek (vpw referred to it as "Estrangelo Aramaic") were consulted. ..."
Correction: Some scholars find that portions of the P-e-s-h-i-t-t-a are translated from an earlier Greek text. Which Greek text that was I do not know. But not all scholars think so. But I do know that there are debates about the integrity of the P-e-s-h-i-t-t-a and its history, but it is the only stable N.T. in Syriac that is around and so was used in the TWI research effort.
Bob, would you like to add more info about this text and also perhaps any thing you can tell us about older Aramaic text fragments that were used in TWI research?
PS: OOPS! I forgot to mention just one little thing...
...Not everybody gets to stay !
"I don't really think it will be exactly like any of us believe."
Reminds me of the South Park episode where it turned out it was the Mormons who were right and everyone else was barred from heaven...
A good thing to remember is that not everyone here shares the same mythology/theology...snarky comments about "unbelievers" are likely to be insulting. (Same thing goes for snarky comments about Christians btw)
Reminds me of the South Park episode where it turned out it was the Mormons who were right and everyone else was barred from heaven...
A good thing to remember is that not everyone here shares the same mythology/theology...snarky comments about "unbelievers" are likely to be insulting. (Same thing goes for snarky comments about Christians btw)
Oak,
Sorry about the snarky "unbeliever" comments; and me being in the high and lofty position as chief cook and bottle washer... Ya'd think I'd know not to let my true colors show.
Hey, I'm figuring the Mormons will actually get "in" before me. All that geneaology stuff, ya know, they'll just have all that heritage to document and show off.
Here is something simple to consider regarding translations.
If you are in Britain and discussing "public schools", you are really talking about what we in America call "private schools". The same language, same point in time and, yet, completely different implications. How will translators sort that one out two thousand years from now?
I re-read one of my comments from that post called Research and Premises and wanted to make a clarification about the Syriac text used in TWI research. It is a version of the N.T. and it is
spelled P-e-s-h-i-t-t-a. I put hyphens in it because if you don't do that on this site, it comes out spelled Pedangta, perhaps because this site's software "thinks" the word is saying something about s-h-i-t, which it is not, of course.
Anyway, the following in bold is what I wrote and then in italics I've put in the correction. I feel certain that Roberterasmus can explain more about this Syriac text than I can since he studied Syriac at the Univ. of Chicago, so correct me if I'm wrong, Bob, okay?
"Various Greek texts, as well as the Syriac version, which most scholars believe is a translation of the Greek (vpw referred to it as "Estrangelo Aramaic") were consulted. ..."
Correction: Some scholars find that portions of the P-e-s-h-i-t-t-a are translated from an earlier Greek text. Which Greek text that was I do not know. But not all scholars think so. But I do know that there are debates about the integrity of the P-e-s-h-i-t-t-a and its history, but it is the only stable N.T. in Syriac that is around and so was used in the TWI research effort.
Bob, would you like to add more info about this text and also perhaps any thing you can tell us about older Aramaic text fragments that were used in TWI research?
Thanks,
Pen
Charlene,
I used to call it the Bull s-h-i-t-t-a text myself at one point while I was at TWI. Us eggheads actually studying the stuff never quite had enough influence on the “big boys” to get it through their heads that Syriac was not the Aramaic of the originals (if that even existed at some time in the late first century Palestine). The influence of Lamsa and his ilk, the so-called Pe-s-h-i-t-t-a Primacy boys (Errico, Younan, Roth, Lataster, etc.) was devastating. Those who may have heard that Jesus spoke Aramaic or even that Aramaic was the “original” language of the apostles were influenced highly. Even today they will find that the Syriac sources on the internet are around more readily than the more scholarly works on the Aramaic language and poof, Syriac/Pedangta gets the nod.
Syriac, by most scholarly accounts (stick me in here), is/was not the “original” language of the Christian Scriptures. It is a translation from the Greek (Everybody here can look up Wikipedia for verification. They do a pretty good job). As for the “stablity” of the Pe-s-h-i-t-t-a tradition of texts, I will only say that it is not the oldest Syriac text type, but it was the most used in the eastern churches in early Christian times (from Rabbula onward (mid 5th Century). Research into it’s influence on the Church is a field that is very interesting and important. What is considered the Pedangta OT is from the second or third Century onwards, but this does not speak to the Christian Scriptures.
Don’t get me wrong, I appreciate the Syriac, but only as an “early version” (like Latin, Ethiopic, Boharic, Coptic, Gothic, etc.). I studied under a pretty respected teacher in Syriac in the mid-70’s and others followed me there. We all realized that the history of the eastern churches may have had some great surprises and opportunities to reveal insight into that early version text that were not hereforto available. But this was never to say that this form of language was the original. TWI never really opened up the “books” to the layman on this subject. And while I was highly in favor of supporting the work on the Syriac Concordance and even the Interlinear (folks there were no works like this in the world at the time…) I did not support the Syriac Pedangta Primacy viewpoint. That viewpoint is how TWI leaned.
The better way to do research into the autograph (and I do believe in an Aramaic autograph), IMHO, is the way Charles Cutler Torrey, Matthew Black, Frank Zimmerman and others did it. They looked at the Aramaic that was actually used in Palestine in the first Century (equivalent to that found in the Dead Sea Scrolls Genesis Apocryphon and other similar Palestinian works.) and engaged in the difficult task of “back-translating” the Greek into what would have been the Aramaic of the time (on a verse-by-verse basis where it was warranted, BTW (and all this in academic journals)). Then they would retranslate the Aramaic into better Greek (if, for instance the Greek could have gone in a different directions (like our word “bank”…can mean a lot of things…same in Aramaic and any other language)). While this may sound highly speculative, it has helped me in many contexts where the Greek that we have was just butchered. Revelation 19:16, when handled in this way has nothing written on the “thigh” of the returning Messiah, but rather on his “banner”.
Whoa, did I just get caught up in an acid flashback. I didn’t even do acid…
Sorry I went a little ballistic there. I promise to not do it again.
The way I see it....if one TRULY believed that. . . ."OOPS" and a big laugh would hardly seem an appropriate response from someone commanded to love their neighbor as themselves.
Gee, Geisha, I certainly meant no harm. I am sorry if I ruffled your feathers a bit. I really didn't mean to. I meant it as humorous - and most here know me well enough to have seen I wasn't being completely serious.
Certainly it is God who will decide (NOT ME!) who deserves the "second death" he mentions. He alone will decide who makes it to the "bema", and the resurrections of the "just" and "unjust". He alone will not only weigh (on His balances) the actions of everyone who ever lived, but also their heart and intent as well.
It is written, "Charity thinketh no evil." Personally, I believe EVERYONE will be subject to this one - including myself!
So please lighten up - I judged nobody in particular - but you indeed "singled me out" as having made a grave error. To be perfectly honest however, I do admit that the "big laugh" may have been inappropriate.
So, in answer to that: In the words of Steve Martin, "Well...exc-uuuuuuuse ME!"
Sorry about the snarky "unbeliever" comments; and me being in the high and lofty position as chief cook and bottle washer... Ya'd think I'd know not to let my true colors show.
Hey, I'm figuring the Mormons will actually get "in" before me. All that geneaology stuff, ya know, they'll just have all that heritage to document and show off.
RE
It's all good bro' - and Spectrum too...
Sometimes it's easy to forget that there are non-Christians in this "Christian Nation"...I don't offend easily, but I like to remind folks that there's "unbelievers" in the room!
Reminds me of when I was in college and had quite a few Jewish friends, whose parents just assumed that I was Jewish too. I was kind of shocked at the remarks about the goyim, but enjoyed being "undercover".
Sometimes it's easy to forget that there are non-Christians in this "Christian Nation"...I don't offend easily, but I like to remind folks that there's "unbelievers" in the room!
Whoa, did I just get caught up in an acid flashback. I didn’t even do acid…
Sorry I went a little ballistic there. I promise to not do it again.
Bob
Thanks for the background info, Bob. I knew you had it in you! And I imagine this is instructive for those here who are curious about why TWI focused on Syriac and just what the heck all the Aramaic talk was about...
Gee, Geisha, I certainly meant no harm. I am sorry if I ruffled your feathers a bit. I really didn't mean to. I meant it as humorous - and most here know me well enough to have seen I wasn't being completely serious.
Certainly it is God who will decide (NOT ME!) who deserves the "second death" he mentions. He alone will decide who makes it to the "bema", and the resurrections of the "just" and "unjust". He alone will not only weigh (on His balances) the actions of everyone who ever lived, but also their heart and intent as well.
It is written, "Charity thinketh no evil." Personally, I believe EVERYONE will be subject to this one - including myself!
So please lighten up - I judged nobody in particular - but you indeed "singled me out" as having made a grave error. To be perfectly honest however, I do admit that the "big laugh" may have been inappropriate.
So, in answer to that: In the words of Steve Martin, "Well...exc-uuuuuuuse ME!"
SPEC
:)
I have been known to do snarky at times. . . . . . . . and you are exc-uuuuuused. :)
Good call Oak! I agree wholeheartedly ... after all, who is perfect among us?
Oak,
Sorry about the snarky "unbeliever" comments...
Geeze, if it wasn't for snarky comments, I'd have nothing to say at all...
I have been known to do snarky at times. . . . . . . . and you [sPECTRUM] are exc-uuuuuused. :)
hey ! that's where i come in !!!!!
(She was referencing that Jesus had said he came to call "sinners" - how humbling!)
It's a great thread and so are you people :)
Yes, folks! There ARE a lot of great people here, despite the fact that we cannot help being "snarks" at times. At least we are having fun!
A lot of what is going on during this thread is sort of a "side-bar" to the real work being done here concerning the "topic" - and most recently by Penworks and roberterasmus. I am learning a lot about "true research" from this - and having a little fun too!
Another thought occurred to me last night. Think of the P-e-s-h-i-t-t-a as the English speaking world’s King James Version. The 5th Century Syriac speaking church of the east (in and around Edessa (northern Mesopotamia, today’s southeastern Turkey) utilized it as the western world did the Vulgate (the 5th Century Latin version translated from Greek by Jerome (da guy from Brooklyn…just makin’ sure yer watchin’)).
Anyway, if it was good enough for the apostle Paul…you know the rest.
Another thought occurred to me last night. Think of the P-e-s-h-i-t-t-a as the English speaking world's King James Version. The 5th Century Syriac speaking church of the east (in and around Edessa (northern Mesopotamia, today's southeastern Turkey) utilized it as the western world did the Vulgate (the 5th Century Latin version translated from Greek by Jerome (da guy from Brooklyn…just makin' sure yer watchin')).
Anyway, if it was good enough for the apostle Paul…you know the rest.
RE
So from this we see a text gaining a reputation, and due to that reputation, gaining authority, and from that authority, having value but that value has become murky over the centuries to people like us who live far away and in a different time.
This version was, as Bob points out, a popular one valued by users so it survived. It is not the Aramaic original that VP often talked about. When VP said the "original" it did not refer to any text necessarily. The Way had its own "original" text - it was in VP's mind.
So from this we see a text gaining a reputation, and due to that reputation, gaining authority, and from that authority, having value but that value has become murky over the centuries to people like us who live far away and in a different time.
This version was, as Bob points out, a popular one valued by users so it survived. It is not the Aramaic original that VP often talked about. When VP said the "original" it did not refer to any text necessarily. The Way had its own "original" text - it was in VP's mind.
VP was not smart enough to have the "original text" in his own mind, but he did point out some things (in his theological meanderings) that I still hold to today. Yes, he (and Walter, et al) did not work around the "magic" that was/is the P-e-s-h-i-t-t-a Primacy movement, but there was value in that version. They reactivated much of the oriental culture that the Greek versions buried behind wooden translations (sorry, got technical again...). The holy grail of any text critic is the autograph and I still hold the ideal in my flea-bitten mind today. I still find gross errors in the Received Text and fight with those who would pull the wool over the eyes of the unsuspecting.
Recognizing the errors in TWI is great (been to the tee-shirt factory and got a new one...says "Long live the nonchristotheocentric hermeneutic" on the front and "huh?" on the back), but the so-called "original text" is a means to an end. Justifying abberant behavior in the practical realm of living is much more gross in my opinion.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
43
39
63
36
Popular Days
Feb 8
30
Nov 3
21
Nov 4
20
Feb 12
18
Top Posters In This Topic
geisha779 43 posts
waysider 39 posts
penworks 63 posts
spectrum49 36 posts
Popular Days
Feb 8 2010
30 posts
Nov 3 2009
21 posts
Nov 4 2009
20 posts
Feb 12 2010
18 posts
Popular Posts
penworks
Hold everything. Some people can believe that they are not sure they believe in God. That is another topic that belongs in a different thread, IMO. I appreciate these lessons in mathmatics and lo
Sunesis
With all due respect Spectrum, who cares when this thread will end? Most people here have enjoyed reading the posts and having their say. Sure, threads meander here, there, everywhere. Its the Body
penworks
I've been thinking about these sorts of things a long time, myself. One thing I found is that there are other ways to value the Bible besides thinkig it is has to be either "God's Word" (thereby it h
geisha779
You don't want to play? :o
I think we are all in for a rude "awakening" in some way or another.
I don't really think it will be exactly like any of us believe.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Link to comment
Share on other sites
spectrum49
Not to worry folks! -- The way I see it...
EVERYBODY GETS TO GO TO HEAVEN !
Now, ain't that just wonderful ?
SPEC
:)
PS: OOPS! I forgot to mention just one little thing...
...Not everybody gets to stay !
Edited by spectrum49Link to comment
Share on other sites
RumRunner
Old Boudreaux was consigned to hell.
Upon arrival the devil took him to a hellish room full of screaming people with fire and brimstone peeling away at their flesh.
Boudreaux got a big ole grin on his face. The devil asked him, "what'chu smilin' about Boudreaux?" Boudreaux just grinned and said, "Say cher dis just like April in Louisiana - all warm and toasty."
The devil got angry and turned the thermostat all the way down. Soon Boudreaux's skin was blue and ice filled his hair and beard - everything was frozen in hell. He still sat there with a big grin. The devil asked him again, "What'chu smilin' about Boudreax?" Boudreaux grinned back and said, "The Saints just won the Superbowl!!!"
Just like Geisha said - The Saint's played - the Colts got a rude awakening - and most of us just couldn't believe it turned out that way.
Now dat's research!!!!! The translation of Geisha in the literal according to usage.
Edited by RumRunnerLink to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
The way I see it....if one TRULY believed that. . . ."OOPS" and a big laugh
would hardly seem an appropriate response from someone commanded to love their neighbor as themselves.
Even scripture says God takes no pleasure. . . . . but, then again, if that is true . . . and He is the one who decides who is who. . . . well, like I said, "I don't really think it will be exactly like any of us believe."
______________________________
Hey RR. . . . GO PATS Errr . . . I means SAINTS. . . . congratulations to LA!!
Edited by geisha779Link to comment
Share on other sites
penworks
I re-read one of my comments from that post called Research and Premises and wanted to make a clarification about the Syriac text used in TWI research. It is a version of the N.T. and it is
spelled P-e-s-h-i-t-t-a. I put hyphens in it because if you don't do that on this site, it comes out spelled Pedangta, perhaps because this site's software "thinks" the word is saying something about s-h-i-t, which it is not, of course.
Anyway, the following in bold is what I wrote and then in italics I've put in the correction. I feel certain that Roberterasmus can explain more about this Syriac text than I can since he studied Syriac at the Univ. of Chicago, so correct me if I'm wrong, Bob, okay?
"Various Greek texts, as well as the Syriac version, which most scholars believe is a translation of the Greek (vpw referred to it as "Estrangelo Aramaic") were consulted. ..."
Correction: Some scholars find that portions of the P-e-s-h-i-t-t-a are translated from an earlier Greek text. Which Greek text that was I do not know. But not all scholars think so. But I do know that there are debates about the integrity of the P-e-s-h-i-t-t-a and its history, but it is the only stable N.T. in Syriac that is around and so was used in the TWI research effort.
Bob, would you like to add more info about this text and also perhaps any thing you can tell us about older Aramaic text fragments that were used in TWI research?
Thanks,
Pen
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
A good thing to remember is that not everyone here shares the same mythology/theology...snarky comments about "unbelievers" are likely to be insulting. (Same thing goes for snarky comments about Christians btw)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Hey! We've got sneaux! (That's la neige in fancy come-to-meeting French. White stuff from the sky to the rest of you.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
roberterasmus
Oak,
Sorry about the snarky "unbeliever" comments; and me being in the high and lofty position as chief cook and bottle washer... Ya'd think I'd know not to let my true colors show.
Hey, I'm figuring the Mormons will actually get "in" before me. All that geneaology stuff, ya know, they'll just have all that heritage to document and show off.
RE
Link to comment
Share on other sites
George Aar
Geeze, if it wasn't for snarky comments, I'd have nothing to say at all...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Here is something simple to consider regarding translations.
If you are in Britain and discussing "public schools", you are really talking about what we in America call "private schools". The same language, same point in time and, yet, completely different implications. How will translators sort that one out two thousand years from now?
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
roberterasmus
Charlene,
I used to call it the Bull s-h-i-t-t-a text myself at one point while I was at TWI. Us eggheads actually studying the stuff never quite had enough influence on the “big boys” to get it through their heads that Syriac was not the Aramaic of the originals (if that even existed at some time in the late first century Palestine). The influence of Lamsa and his ilk, the so-called Pe-s-h-i-t-t-a Primacy boys (Errico, Younan, Roth, Lataster, etc.) was devastating. Those who may have heard that Jesus spoke Aramaic or even that Aramaic was the “original” language of the apostles were influenced highly. Even today they will find that the Syriac sources on the internet are around more readily than the more scholarly works on the Aramaic language and poof, Syriac/Pedangta gets the nod.
Syriac, by most scholarly accounts (stick me in here), is/was not the “original” language of the Christian Scriptures. It is a translation from the Greek (Everybody here can look up Wikipedia for verification. They do a pretty good job). As for the “stablity” of the Pe-s-h-i-t-t-a tradition of texts, I will only say that it is not the oldest Syriac text type, but it was the most used in the eastern churches in early Christian times (from Rabbula onward (mid 5th Century). Research into it’s influence on the Church is a field that is very interesting and important. What is considered the Pedangta OT is from the second or third Century onwards, but this does not speak to the Christian Scriptures.
Don’t get me wrong, I appreciate the Syriac, but only as an “early version” (like Latin, Ethiopic, Boharic, Coptic, Gothic, etc.). I studied under a pretty respected teacher in Syriac in the mid-70’s and others followed me there. We all realized that the history of the eastern churches may have had some great surprises and opportunities to reveal insight into that early version text that were not hereforto available. But this was never to say that this form of language was the original. TWI never really opened up the “books” to the layman on this subject. And while I was highly in favor of supporting the work on the Syriac Concordance and even the Interlinear (folks there were no works like this in the world at the time…) I did not support the Syriac Pedangta Primacy viewpoint. That viewpoint is how TWI leaned.
The better way to do research into the autograph (and I do believe in an Aramaic autograph), IMHO, is the way Charles Cutler Torrey, Matthew Black, Frank Zimmerman and others did it. They looked at the Aramaic that was actually used in Palestine in the first Century (equivalent to that found in the Dead Sea Scrolls Genesis Apocryphon and other similar Palestinian works.) and engaged in the difficult task of “back-translating” the Greek into what would have been the Aramaic of the time (on a verse-by-verse basis where it was warranted, BTW (and all this in academic journals)). Then they would retranslate the Aramaic into better Greek (if, for instance the Greek could have gone in a different directions (like our word “bank”…can mean a lot of things…same in Aramaic and any other language)). While this may sound highly speculative, it has helped me in many contexts where the Greek that we have was just butchered. Revelation 19:16, when handled in this way has nothing written on the “thigh” of the returning Messiah, but rather on his “banner”.
Whoa, did I just get caught up in an acid flashback. I didn’t even do acid…
Sorry I went a little ballistic there. I promise to not do it again.
Bob
Edited by roberterasmusLink to comment
Share on other sites
spectrum49
Gee, Geisha, I certainly meant no harm. I am sorry if I ruffled your feathers a bit. I really didn't mean to. I meant it as humorous - and most here know me well enough to have seen I wasn't being completely serious.
Certainly it is God who will decide (NOT ME!) who deserves the "second death" he mentions. He alone will decide who makes it to the "bema", and the resurrections of the "just" and "unjust". He alone will not only weigh (on His balances) the actions of everyone who ever lived, but also their heart and intent as well.
It is written, "Charity thinketh no evil." Personally, I believe EVERYONE will be subject to this one - including myself!
So please lighten up - I judged nobody in particular - but you indeed "singled me out" as having made a grave error. To be perfectly honest however, I do admit that the "big laugh" may have been inappropriate.
So, in answer to that: In the words of Steve Martin, "Well...exc-uuuuuuuse ME!"
SPEC
:)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Sometimes it's easy to forget that there are non-Christians in this "Christian Nation"...I don't offend easily, but I like to remind folks that there's "unbelievers" in the room!
Reminds me of when I was in college and had quite a few Jewish friends, whose parents just assumed that I was Jewish too. I was kind of shocked at the remarks about the goyim, but enjoyed being "undercover".
Link to comment
Share on other sites
spectrum49
Thanks Oak! I feel much better now!
SPEC
:)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
penworks
Thanks for the background info, Bob. I knew you had it in you! And I imagine this is instructive for those here who are curious about why TWI focused on Syriac and just what the heck all the Aramaic talk was about...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
I have been known to do snarky at times. . . . . . . . and you are exc-uuuuuused. :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
hey ! that's where i come in !!!!!
also, i keep wanting to comment but i keep reading and reading
it's a great thread and so are you people :)
my biggest hope for the jot and tittle stuff is that jesus christ saves to the uttermost
mwah
ps. i detest wierwille to the uttermost, but if it is, so be it
what can i say?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvA9nxlFQjM&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param'>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvA9nxlFQjM&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvA9nxlFQjM&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Link to comment
Share on other sites
spectrum49
Good call Oak! I agree wholeheartedly ... after all, who is perfect among us?
Yes, folks! There ARE a lot of great people here, despite the fact that we cannot help being "snarks" at times. At least we are having fun!
A lot of what is going on during this thread is sort of a "side-bar" to the real work being done here concerning the "topic" - and most recently by Penworks and roberterasmus. I am learning a lot about "true research" from this - and having a little fun too!
SPEC
:)
Edited by spectrum49Link to comment
Share on other sites
roberterasmus
Another thought occurred to me last night. Think of the P-e-s-h-i-t-t-a as the English speaking world’s King James Version. The 5th Century Syriac speaking church of the east (in and around Edessa (northern Mesopotamia, today’s southeastern Turkey) utilized it as the western world did the Vulgate (the 5th Century Latin version translated from Greek by Jerome (da guy from Brooklyn…just makin’ sure yer watchin’)).
Anyway, if it was good enough for the apostle Paul…you know the rest.
RE
Link to comment
Share on other sites
penworks
So from this we see a text gaining a reputation, and due to that reputation, gaining authority, and from that authority, having value but that value has become murky over the centuries to people like us who live far away and in a different time.
This version was, as Bob points out, a popular one valued by users so it survived. It is not the Aramaic original that VP often talked about. When VP said the "original" it did not refer to any text necessarily. The Way had its own "original" text - it was in VP's mind.
Edited by penworksLink to comment
Share on other sites
roberterasmus
VP was not smart enough to have the "original text" in his own mind, but he did point out some things (in his theological meanderings) that I still hold to today. Yes, he (and Walter, et al) did not work around the "magic" that was/is the P-e-s-h-i-t-t-a Primacy movement, but there was value in that version. They reactivated much of the oriental culture that the Greek versions buried behind wooden translations (sorry, got technical again...). The holy grail of any text critic is the autograph and I still hold the ideal in my flea-bitten mind today. I still find gross errors in the Received Text and fight with those who would pull the wool over the eyes of the unsuspecting.
Recognizing the errors in TWI is great (been to the tee-shirt factory and got a new one...says "Long live the nonchristotheocentric hermeneutic" on the front and "huh?" on the back), but the so-called "original text" is a means to an end. Justifying abberant behavior in the practical realm of living is much more gross in my opinion.
RE
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.