From: Ben Crick (ben.crick@argonet.co.uk)
Date: Tue Dec 23 1997 - 01:34:41 EST
On Mon 22 Dec 97 (14:02:23), dixonps@juno.com wrote:
> Ben, could you either:
> 1) expand/clarify your argument regarding this axiom, or
> 2) refer me to some reading on it? My first reaction is that this is
> not so axiomatic, at least I had never considered it so. What exactly
> is the argument for the position that the Gospels were originally
> written in the Hebrew language?
Well, Paul, I referred to Papias' well-known dictum, quoted by Eusebius
in E.H. III.39:
"Now concerning Matthew it is stated: 'So then Matthew recorded the oracles
[LOGIA] in the Hebrew tongue, and each interpreted them to the best of his
ability'." (H Bettenson, /Documents/, 2nd Ed., 1963, p 39). No doubt you
can find it in Greek somewhere on the Web.
As for Luke, you only have to compare the style of chapter 1 verses 1-4
in immaculate Greek, with verses 5 and following in its Hebraistic style,
with almost every clause beginning with KAI: the Waw Consecutiva.
> I'm leaving shortly for skiing with my future son-in-law. A beautiful day
> for it here in Oregon. Christmas week is here, families are gathering.
> Peace among men EUDOKIAS.
Et cum spiritu tuo! (that's a Latinised Hebraism too)
-- Revd Ben Crick, BA Bristol, 1963 (hons in Theology) <ben.crick@argonet.co.uk> 232 Canterbury Road, Birchington, Kent, CT7 9TD (UK)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:40 EDT