Re: Greek New Testament is translatiion from Aramaic?

On Dec 1, 5:59 am, "Egbert"
<Egb...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Ruud Harmsen" <realemailons...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:h1vgk3ptt967ac3pinfngv93gdj4dmgut3@xxxxxxxxxx

http://www.aramaicpeshitta.com/Online_Version/WNTRWG_poetry_and_word_...
--
Ruud Harmsen,http://rudhar.com
(Note changed e-mail address)

Sure it is.

There is a dutch translation of the peshitta.
It's soundness and more clearness and the rhyme (in aramaic anyway) proof
that ARamaic is the origin, not Greek, which is in most cases Greek that can
be compared to the english that asian tranlators write for there devices
(hardware) so, in short, it is bad koine. While the Aramaic shows high level
language, high level rhyme.

You're basing your opinion of the original language on the NT on a
Dutch translation of an Aramaic translation that was made centuries
later than and hundreds of miles away from (and in a very different
dialect of Aramaic from that spoken by Jesus and the apostles) when
and where the original traditions were formed? How does that work,
linguistically?

As I pointed out years ago, that's like saying we know the Aeneid is
older than the Iliad because Dryden's translation of the Aeneid is
manifestly older than Pope's translation of the Iliad.

I've seen no 'the NT is Greek' follower, who could explain to me, why the
prayer in Matthew 6:9 sounds good in aramaic, but not in greek.

It sounds good in English, too. Does that mean it was first written
down in English?
.

Quantcast