Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Aramaic Q ?

Expand Messages
  • Ron Price
    ... Jack, I presume you are referring to Matt 6:12 = Luke 11:4 and saying that the Lukan version correctly translates the supposed Aramaic as sins whereas
    Message 1 of 3 , Apr 6 4:11 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      I wrote:

      >> What evidence points to
      >> translation by a previous unknown person rather than translation by the
      >> author of Matthew?

      Jack Kilmon replied:
      > ....... I dont believe the Matthean
      >scribe was Aramaic competent at all. There are cases where
      >the Lukan scribe properly transmits the Aramaic idiom that
      >Matthew's Greek did not. OFEILETAIS/hAMARTIAS, for example,
      >the Aramaic xowbyn.

      Jack,
      I presume you are referring to Matt 6:12 = Luke 11:4 and saying that
      the Lukan version correctly translates the supposed Aramaic as "sins"
      whereas the Matthean version incorrectly translates it as "debts".
      This may well be so, but I don't see how it answers my question.
      Let me rephrase it. On the basis of what you have just written, a
      translation error lies behind the Matthean text here. You had previously
      asserted that Matthew used a Greek Q. How do you know that the
      translation error was made by an anonymous translator of Q rather than
      by the author of Matthew himself attempting to translate an Aramaic Q?

      Ron Price

      Weston-on-Trent, Derby, UK

      e-mail: ron.price@...

      Web site: http://homepage.virgin.net/ron.price/index.htm
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.