Individual claiming entire NT written in Aramaic

[Lazerlike42]

Here is the site:

v-a.com/bible/

For quick examples of what I am talking about, read v-a.com/bible/current_bible_translator_notes.html and v-a.com/bible/hebrews.html .

From this idea, he seems to draw many different ideas, like those on the Lord’s Prayer here: v-a.com/bible/prayer.html .

Anybody have anything to say?

 

[Ahimsa]

Very interesting, especially the Lord’s Prayer.

 

[Lazerlike42]

Well the fellow seems to speak Aramaic very well.

 

[thistle]

We need Daniel Marsh in this thread.

 

[hurst]

I read a bit of it and find it interesting to compare his translation with approved ones, especially noting the places where his translation is the same and where it differs. The portions that differ reveal areas that are hard to express in our language and are worth thinking about. However, some of his terms sound ridiculous. “In the beginning was the Manifestation…” instead of “In the beginning was the Word…”; “Educator” instead of “Rabbi” or “Teacher”; and other such changes. There are also inconsistencies where he renders a passage in the OT one way, and the NT reference to that OT passage a different way (as found in Hebrews).

He also has a personal theory about aborigines and humanoids which is clearly reflected in his version of Genesis.

In the end, I wouldn’t get it because it is too tainted with his own views, in spite of his Aramaic skills. For what good is his skill in that, if his English is poor or his views not in line with Church teaching? The scriptures come from the Church and not vice-versa, but these are not approved.

hurst

 

[vern_humphrey]

To the extent that the New Testament quotes Jesus frequently and Jesus spoke Aramaic, it is quite fair to say much of the Gospels were originally in Aramaic. And many of the information collected by the Gospel writers was probably originally said in Aramaic.

But look at the opening of the Gospel of John:

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

There can be no question that passage was originally written in Greek. The Greeks considered speaking and reasoning as the same thing. John presents God as a reason or intelligence. In no other language does 'word" (Logos in Greek) have such meaning.

 

[Fredricks]

Matthew originally, yes. That is actually the historical view.
Luke, no way. Gentile writing for gentiles.
John, no
Mark, no.

 

[thistle]

I think it highly unlikely that Paul wrote to the Romans and Greeks in Aramaic!