Re: aramaic New Testament

From: Jim West (jwest@Highland.Net)
Date: Tue Jan 05 1999 - 12:11:52 EST

Next message: jtownsle@iupui.edu: "aramaic New Testament"
Previous message: Jim West: "Re: aramaic New Testament"
Maybe in reply to: jtownsle@iupui.edu: "aramaic New Testament"
Next in thread: Kevin W. Woodruff: "Re: aramaic New Testament"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

At 03:43 PM 1/5/99 -0500, you wrote:
>Here is a follow-up to my last question.
>
>How well accepted is it that we have Greek Gospel fragments from pre-100
>CE (O'Callaghan's Mark fragment @60,

Nope.

> Thiede's Matthew frag at 60,

Nope.

< Luke frag at 90,

Nope.

> and John frag at 110)?

Yup.

>
>On the flip side, what are the earliest Aramaic fragments, and the
>strength of evidence for an early dating of those frags?

They aint none.

>
>Jeramy Townsley

Jim

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

Jim West, ThD
Quartz Hill School of Theology

jwest@highland.net

---
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

Next message: jtownsle@iupui.edu: "aramaic New Testament"
Previous message: Jim West: "Re: aramaic New Testament"
Maybe in reply to: jtownsle@iupui.edu: "aramaic New Testament"
Next in thread: Kevin W. Woodruff: "Re: aramaic New Testament"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:13 EDT