Many times over the last few years, I have heard the assertion that the Apostle Paul (Shaliach Sha'ul) was not a tent-maker, as most Bibles render it. Rather, he was a tallit-maker. This assertion is even popularized in some newer Bible versions and Messianic-flavored commentaries. Indeed, so common is the acceptance of this belief, that few even question it. But I would ask the question…why? Why does one need Paul to be a tallit-maker? Does it render him somehow more Jewish? Does it, in some way, make him any more of an Apostle? What do we gain by claiming this understanding? I'll let those questions hang there for a moment, while addressing the issue Scripturally.
Within the Torah-Observant community, it is not at all uncommon to hear someone say, "Well the New Testament was originally written in Aramaic, so that's why there looks like there is a contradiction…but the Aramaic clears it all up." This is not the only rationale behind the premise of "Aramaic Primacy." In this article, we'll give a fair examination of the Aramaic Primacist position.