Thank you for your reply. To address this issue succinctly,
the first problem with your answer is that we are asked to 'imagine
if' one language, namely Greek, could be æthe same as Arabic.Æ
Greek language is not the SAME as the family of Semitic languages.
When Greek was written, as Early as Homer (c.800BCE) it used
vowels and will always need vowels to be understood. This is true
for most, if not all, of the Indo-European languages, which Greek is
a part of. Thus, we CAN NOT be asked to æimagineÆ English as the
æsame as Arabic.Æ
This word is taken into Arabic style, so the word PRCLTS can be
anything and the nearest is Periclytos that have same meaning with
Even if the word was ætaken into ArabicÆ, and became PRCLTS,
we can not translate the Arabic PRCLTS into something the Greek (not
to mention the author of John) never intended. The word the author
used was PARACLETE and thatÆs what the text says. Finally, I
checked the Greek textual apparatus, and there is not even the
slightest idea of manuscript corruption or textual uncertainty.
PARACLETE is PARACLETE and that is how the text stands.
I'll give you the exact source for my argument in my next letter,
because I forget in which book this argument came from.
Thanks Martin, I will be awaiting your response.
Sincerely Yours, Tim Dickens