From: Jim West (jwest@Highland.Net)
Date: Tue Jan 05 1999 - 10:36:50 EST
At 02:59 PM 1/5/99 -0500, you wrote:
>Hey all:
>
>I know we recently discussed this, but it just came up on another listserv
>of mine. There are two clergy on this list that talk as if they are
>"assuming" that the NT was first written in Aramaic not Greek, and they
>cite a couple of sources. Does anybody have some info on the absurdity of
>this hypothesis.
Point them to Moulton's Prolegomena (Vol 1- "Grammar of the Greek New
Testament"), "Hebraism" in the index and the citation of pages there. Also
point thm to the index listing "over use" ! There simply is no way that the
Greek text is a translation of some underlying Aramaic text. No way!
> Or am I just being an academic snob going along with the
>"tradition" of a Greek as the original langauge of our texts. It is what
>currently has the most evidence right--that the NT was originally written
>in Greek?
On a purely empirical level- ask them to produce any Aramaic text of any
portion of the NT which predates the oldest papyri. On a purely textual
basis there simply is no evidence that the NT was composed in Aramaic.
< I include his most recent response below. Is there any
>"respected" scholar who actualy believes that Aramaic was the original
>written text?
Nope.
>Jeramy Townsley
>Indiana University
Best,
Jim
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
Jim West, ThD
Quartz Hill School of Theology
--- B-Greek home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-329W@franklin.oit.unc.edu To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:13 EDT