Hmmm. I don't think this is really a Protestant vs. Catholic issue. Roman Catholic scholars are not leaning toward Aramaic Primacy, as far as I know -- at least not toward the radical position which is so hotly debated nowadays.
The most passionate defenders of Aramaic Primacy seem to be people of Middle Eastern descent who are motivated by pride in their Aramaic heritage, and, in some cases, by their belief in the special sanctity of the Aramaic Bible, as taught by the Assyrian Church of the East.
Most of these folks are fiercely anti-Catholic. They accuse the Roman Catholic Church of suppressing Aramaic and of mistranslating the Bible.
>Catholic scholars are not leaning toward Aramaic Primacy, as far as I know — at least not toward the radical position which is so hotly debated nowadays.
As I stated, if the Aramaic was not the basis for ALL of the Gospels, then brothers and sisters of Jesus would mean just that, and the Roman Catholic dogma that Mary had no further children is left without basis.
Since this is one of the great rifts between the Prots and Catholics, I would see this as a stumbling block for any Catholic who is stuck trying to get Tradition and Scripture to say the same thing in defending Marian Doctrine.
>Most of these folks are fiercely anti-Catholic. They accuse the Roman Catholic Church of suppressing Aramaic and of mistranslating the Bible.
Interesting. Will have to look them up. I assume they claim to have a copy of the original that was mistranslated? I wonder how far they have wandered from the reservation...