11,310 reputation
33771
bio website frankluke.com
location Knoxville, IA
age 37
visits member for 2 years, 6 months
seen 1 hour ago

I am a web programmer by day (PHP) and work on sermons and teaching material in the evenings.

I attended Assemblies of God Theological Seminary in Springfield, Missouri, for a Master of Arts in Theological Studies and a Master of Divinity. I am an associate pastor at a small church in Iowa. While in seminary, my emphasis was on Old Testament studies, but Dr. Wave Nunnally introduced me to the rabbinics. Those have become a special interest as well.

I also enjoy apologetics and was a very active member of the apologetics.org forum before it went defunct.


Mar
15
revised What arguments exist that would refute the theory concerning Aramaic primacy of the New Testament?
Added link to more Josephus information
Mar
14
comment Who were the Hellenistic and Hebraic Jews of Acts 6:1?
1 Maccabees lists the sins of Judea that required internal reform. #1 on the list was Hellenization: removing the marks of their circumcision, attending the gymnasium (a place to discuss Greek philosophy as well as work out naked-serious problems), and leaving the covenant. vv. 11-15 (quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/r/rsv/rsv-idx?type=DIV1&byte=4219672). Things got worse from there (v. 54 tells of the final straw-a foreign offering upon the altar in the Temple).
Mar
13
comment What arguments exist that would refute the theory concerning Aramaic primacy of the New Testament?
@Sarah, it seems that the earliest reference for a Syriac translation (and not the Peshitta, even) is AD 160-180. However, that is not based on having a manuscript from that time, but a quote of Eusebius. In Church History IV xxii, he refers to the "Gospel according to the Hebrew and the Syriac Gospel." (Please note that he here distinguishes between Hebrew and Syriac.) In fact, it is known that there were versions of the Aramaic that existed before the Peshitta (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peshitta#Old_Syriac_texts). That rules out Apostolic authority on the Peshitta.
Mar
13
comment What arguments exist that would refute the theory concerning Aramaic primacy of the New Testament?
@Sarah, my most recent edit addresses some of this. Almost wherever Aramaic was spoken, so to was Greek. Going into that one language covered a lot of territory and hit many more people. Most people to the west of Judea didn't speak Aramaic. However, both directions spoke Greek. In theory, both of your items are possible. They could have been translated early into Aramaic, but we have no manuscript evidence of this. What we have is the tradition of a group who want their work to be first. Most books of the NT have an audience in mind. Those first audiences were in Greek cities.
Mar
13
comment What arguments exist that would refute the theory concerning Aramaic primacy of the New Testament?
@Sarah, I've seen their examples. Those problems can be answered just as easily by Jesus speaking Mishnaic Hebrew and the Apostles thinking in it. For example, sone' exists in Hebrew from the (OT) Biblical period throughout the Mishnaic (it may be in Modern Hebrew as well, but I have not studied that language). Likewise, "son of peace." The Hebrew would be "ben shalom." Shalom carries the same range of meaning as its Aramaic cousin.
Mar
13
revised What arguments exist that would refute the theory concerning Aramaic primacy of the New Testament?
Added bibliography
Mar
13
revised What arguments exist that would refute the theory concerning Aramaic primacy of the New Testament?
Added bibliography
Mar
13
revised What arguments exist that would refute the theory concerning Aramaic primacy of the New Testament?
Added paragraph about the early manuscripts.
Mar
13
comment What arguments exist that would refute the theory concerning Aramaic primacy of the New Testament?
The problem this raises for AP is that they argue that ALL of the NT comes from Aramaic. If even one book is shown to be in Greek, then their argument falls flat. Obviously, the Scriptures were translated for the regions they were being taken to. Those that were going east would be taken from Greek to Aramaic. But we have no evidence for Aramaic originals while there is plenty for Greek originals.
Mar
13
comment What arguments exist that would refute the theory concerning Aramaic primacy of the New Testament?
Another part of the problem with Aramaic primacy (and I should edit this in) is that there are NT fragments in Greek that are older than anything in Aramaic. Very early fragments. P52 (AD ~125) is older by centuries than any copy of the Peshitta that has survived, and even older than the work in the colophon that the Peshitta claims to come from. There is a fragment of Mark in Greek that has not been publicized yet that "almost certainly" comes from the first century. That's huge.
Mar
13
comment What arguments exist that would refute the theory concerning Aramaic primacy of the New Testament?
@Sarah, there are people who argue for parts of the NT to have been in Hebrew originally. Papias, the early church father argues such for Matthew (and that undermines the claims of the Aramaic primacists). Dr. Nunnally teaches that Luke had a Hebrew source for the books of Luke and Acts (up to chapter 16 when Luke joins the missionary party). It is also evident in much of the NT that the authors were used to thinking in Hebrew even though they wrote in Greek.
Mar
13
comment What arguments exist that would refute the theory concerning Aramaic primacy of the New Testament?
@Sarah, you are correct about the trade and coins. The Hebrew on the coins also indicates that Hebrew was known by the common people. You put words on currency that people can understand. If Hebrew were an academic language at the time, then the coins should have also had Aramaic. That they did not (with the exception of AJ's one series), tells us that Hebrew thrived in the Land among the common people.
Mar
12
revised What arguments exist that would refute the theory concerning Aramaic primacy of the New Testament?
added 107 characters in body
Mar
12
revised What arguments exist that would refute the theory concerning Aramaic primacy of the New Testament?
added 767 characters in body
Mar
12
revised What arguments exist that would refute the theory concerning Aramaic primacy of the New Testament?
added 36 characters in body
Mar
12
answered What arguments exist that would refute the theory concerning Aramaic primacy of the New Testament?
Mar
12
comment What is Paul's advice on anger?
I was going to check the LXX this morning. Good job on the verbs.
Mar
12
reviewed Approve suggested edit on What is Paul's advice on anger?
Mar
12
comment How Is the Date of Composition of the Gospels Estimated?
Are you looking for the general method as Jon describes or more specifics from internal clues of the books? For example, Luke shows an interest in this kind of events (he records them at X, Y, and Z). However, he does not record two similar events which would make his case well. We can thus infer that he wrote Acts before those events took place.
Mar
11
comment What is “apocalyptic” literature?
"Christian, though not necessarily orthodox, non-canonical, apocalyptic writings" may contain the most qualifiers I have ever used to modify a noun.