View Single Post
Old 10-31-2008, 03:08 AM   #35
Esther
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 46
Default Re: The Bible, Our Conclusion. by Norval and Gale

Quote:
Originally Posted by Norval View Post
Esther,


I, for one, am very grateful to those that have taken their time to teach me. As a retired master shipwright in boat building and repair, or as a researcher of the bible, those that taught me have earned my respect and gratitude. Yet in the end, yes, it is your own "heart" that will judge you.
You were ready, otherwise the teaching would not have occurred. I am grateful as well, but I was ready.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Norval View Post
Whitecrow,


Oh gawd, I remember those days of researching books on tables. There were two 1.2 m x 2.2 m (4 foot by 8 foot) tables at the bible study center and many times they were two books deep doing cross comparisons. I am so grateful for computers now. You do realize that the Pe****ta was translated from the original Kione Greek new testament writings into Aramaic, so the part you mentioned won't work in the original Greek
writings. But it is interesting, thank you. The "Needles Eye" was actually a small narrow single person entrance along side the main gates.
"These are claims that are highly contested in Western Christianity. The common misconception that the New Testament was originally penned in Greek still persists today in a vast majority of Christian denominations. Most scholars and theologians acknowledge that Eshoo Mshikha, the Apostles, and the Jews in general spoke Aramaic indeed many instances of Aramaic survive in the Greek New testament manuscripts. However, they still maintain that the New Testament was penned in Greek by the Apostles and disciples of Mshikha.

Aramaic Lectionary - about
A.D. 550. Pierpont Morgan Library
New York, N.Y.

The Church of the East has always rejected this claim. We believe that the Books of the New Testament were originally penned in Aramaic, and later translated into Greek by first-century Gentile Christians in the West, but never in the East, where the Aramaic was the Lingua Franca of the Persian Empire. We also hold and maintain that after the books were translated into Greek, the Aramaic originals were discarded, for by now the Church in the West was almost completely Gentile and Greek-speaking. This was not the case in the East, which had a Jewish majority (especially in Babylon and Adiabene) for a much longer period. Even when the Church of the East became mostly Gentile, the Aramaic was preserved and used rather than translated into the various vernacular languages of the regions to the East of the Euphrates river."

http://www.pe****ta.org/initial/pe****ta.html

These regions have been isolated for hundreds of years and their language and history has been preserved, regardless of the West's misconception and erroneous concept that only Western theories are valid.
Esther is offline   Reply With Quote