Freethought & Rationalism Archive

judge · 05-25-2004, 05:13 PM

If it is true that hebrews awas written in greek then the question then is asked.."which greek text preserves the original reading".
The greek texts themselves vary one to another, so at some point at least some versions were altered. This kind of question, of course, is the subject of critical analysis.

I submit that some of the variations in the greek texts can be explained because an aramaic word of phrase could be translated in more than one way.

Thus in the greek texts we have variations from tect to text but in the eastern peshitta we have no variations just the original reading.

One example is hebrews 8:11 which in the peshitta conatins the idiom son of the city.
Some greek texts render this fellow citizen and others (TR) render this idiom neighbour.
Either o these is an acceptible translation.
If the peshitta is a translation from greek we would expect to find examples going the other way, but we do not even find one!

rlogan · 05-25-2004, 10:49 PM

The Peshitta energizer bunny.

We know that in the dead sea scrolls we have variations within the Hebrew that predate the LXX. So we see examples of this.

Were I to attack the language of authorship question then I would be looking for idiosyncratic features of culture/language that make for a dead givaway. Hey! There's an example right there. Dead Giveaway. Two bit whore. One brick shy of a load. Etc.

ichabod crane · 05-26-2004, 01:29 AM

rlogin: The Peshitta energizer bunny.

Ichabod: You ain't kiddin'!

The only textual variant in Hebrews 8:11 is politen (citizen) versus plesion (near, close to, in plural can mean friends, here the KJV renders neighbour). It doesn't seem that plesion is a very good translation of "son of the city", it has no connotations of citizenship or relation to society at all. The words politen and plesion are similar enough in Greek that its not an unsuprising scribal error. And all the early Greek manuscripts read politen. The Septuagint also reads politen (the author is quoting from Jer. 31:34). So the evidence is strong that plesion is a later corruption.

judge: If the peshitta is a translation from greek we would expect to find examples going the other way, but we do not even find one!

Ichabod: But there are only 6 manuscripts of the peshitta, whereas there are hundreds of the Greek! As for your claim that we do not find even one, have you been all the way through Hebrews, checking every textual variant in the peshitta against the Greek?

judge · 05-26-2004, 04:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ichabod crane

judge: If the peshitta is a translation from greek we would expect to find examples going the other way, but we do not even find one!

Ichabod: But there are only 6 manuscripts of the peshitta, whereas there are hundreds of the Greek! As for your claim that we do not find even one, have you been all the way through Hebrews, checking every textual variant in the peshitta against the Greek?

There are 350 ancient (first millenium) copies of the eastern peshitta. If it is another translation then according to the above logic there would be variants between them.
There aren't any it seems. Unless you can provide us with one.

Judge aka the energiser bunny

ichabod crane · 05-26-2004, 05:32 AM

Judge: There are 350 ancient (first millenium) copies of the eastern peshitta. If it is another translation then according to the above logic there would be variants between them. There aren't any it seems. Unless you can provide us with one.

Ichabod: Yes but there are only 6 early manuscripts. As for there being no variants, as a student of both Hebrew and Greek I find that unbelievable. Even in the case of the Masoretic Text of the Old Testament, in which unbelievably stringent procedures were put in place and even the slightest deviant copy was destroyed, we still have textual variants. I do not believe that 350 hand copied manuscripts could be identical. But I don't have access to a text of the peshitta with manuscript information, so I can't prove it. I'm just saying I find it impossible to believe.

Yuri Kuchinsky · 05-26-2004, 01:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ichabod crane

Judge: There are 350 ancient (first millenium) copies of the eastern peshitta. If it is another translation then according to the above logic there would be variants between them. There aren't any it seems. Unless you can provide us with one.

Ichabod: Yes but there are only 6 early manuscripts. As for there being no variants, as a student of both Hebrew and Greek I find that unbelievable. Even in the case of the Masoretic Text of the Old Testament, in which unbelievably stringent procedures were put in place and even the slightest deviant copy was destroyed, we still have textual variants. I do not believe that 350 hand copied manuscripts could be identical. But I don't have access to a text of the peshitta with manuscript information, so I can't prove it. I'm just saying I find it impossible to believe.

It's not true.

While the Peshitta MSS tradition is pretty consistent, there are still hundreds of (mostly minor) variants both in the Peshitta and the Peshitto.

We've been through this many times...

Best,

Yuri.

judge · 05-26-2004, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yuri Kuchinsky

It's not true.

While the Peshitta MSS tradition is pretty consistent, there are still hundreds of (mostly minor) variants both in the Peshitta and the Peshitto.

We've been through this many times...

Best,

Yuri.

Lets have a look at what you call a variant, between eastern peshitta texts.

If only most of them are "minor" lets examine one that is not minor. And remenber this is between eastern peshitta texts.

If you know this to be true, then you must know what this "non minor" variant is. Lets have a look at the details.
Earlier you claimed Aphrahat dies not quote the peshitta "word for word" .
I demonstrated he in fact did in Romans.

You also claimed that Aphrahat "mostly seesm to quote the OS or the diatessaron" (I have paraphrased you here).
However you are unable to demonstrate even one time where Aphrahat quotes the Old Syriac.
You can only try to do so by only giving part of Aphrahat quote. IOW you cut out parts of an actual sentence where Aphrahat does not quote the OS and leave in the parts of the same sentence where he does.

So lets have a look at the your claim this time. Lets be specific.

Yuri Kuchinsky · 05-27-2004, 09:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by judge

So lets have a look at the your claim this time. Lets be specific.

OK, Judge, I'll be specific.

Peshitta and Peshitto variants have been discussed in detail at Peshitta.org forum, and you know where these discussions are. Juckel's study is a case in point,

JUCKEL: A Re-examination of Codex Phillipps 1388
http://syrcom.cua.edu/Hugoye/Vol6No1/HV6N1Juckel.html

but this only covers a fraction of all the variants. Lots more can be seen in the Pusey/Gwilliam edition of the Peshitta. There are variants listed on _every page_ of this edition.

In the gospels, Aphrahat mostly seems to quote from the Old Syriac via the Diatessaron. This is the view of every published textual scholar.

I'm not concerned about how Aphrahat quotes from the NT epistles, because there are no (or very few) OS epistles to compare them to the Peshitta. Therefore, this particular issue is a red herring.

What I said about Aphrahat's citations was only relevant to the gospels.

Regards,

Yuri

judge · 05-27-2004, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yuri Kuchinsky

OK, Judge, I'll be specific.

Yuri, lets have alook at a "non minor" variation between eastern peshitta manuscripts. Not between Old Syriac and peshitta manuscripts.

Can you present even ONE. If so then lets have alook at it.
All I am asking for is that you present ONE of the variants you have claimed exist from between eastern peshitta manuscripts. Just ONE.

No links to discussions of the peshitta versus the old syriac. They are totally different writings as you know.
Just show the acyual variation , give the verse number nd tell us which eastern peshitta manuscripts they come from.

thanks

05-25-2004, 05:13 PM	#51
judge Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Bli Bli Posts: 3,135	Which greek version is the original? If it is true that hebrews awas written in greek then the question then is asked.."which greek text preserves the original reading". The greek texts themselves vary one to another, so at some point at least some versions were altered. This kind of question, of course, is the subject of critical analysis. I submit that some of the variations in the greek texts can be explained because an aramaic word of phrase could be translated in more than one way. Thus in the greek texts we have variations from tect to text but in the eastern peshitta we have no variations just the original reading. One example is hebrews 8:11 which in the peshitta conatins the idiom son of the city. Some greek texts render this fellow citizen and others (TR) render this idiom neighbour. Either o these is an acceptible translation. If the peshitta is a translation from greek we would expect to find examples going the other way, but we do not even find one!

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-25-2004, 10:49 PM	#52
rlogan Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Alaska Posts: 9,159	The Peshitta energizer bunny. We know that in the dead sea scrolls we have variations within the Hebrew that predate the LXX. So we see examples of this. Were I to attack the language of authorship question then I would be looking for idiosyncratic features of culture/language that make for a dead givaway. Hey! There's an example right there. Dead Giveaway. Two bit whore. One brick shy of a load. Etc.

05-26-2004, 01:29 AM	#53
ichabod crane Regular Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: Australia Posts: 262	rlogin: The Peshitta energizer bunny. Ichabod: You ain't kiddin'! The only textual variant in Hebrews 8:11 is politen (citizen) versus plesion (near, close to, in plural can mean friends, here the KJV renders neighbour). It doesn't seem that plesion is a very good translation of "son of the city", it has no connotations of citizenship or relation to society at all. The words politen and plesion are similar enough in Greek that its not an unsuprising scribal error. And all the early Greek manuscripts read politen. The Septuagint also reads politen (the author is quoting from Jer. 31:34). So the evidence is strong that plesion is a later corruption. judge: If the peshitta is a translation from greek we would expect to find examples going the other way, but we do not even find one! Ichabod: But there are only 6 manuscripts of the peshitta, whereas there are hundreds of the Greek! As for your claim that we do not find even one, have you been all the way through Hebrews, checking every textual variant in the peshitta against the Greek?

05-26-2004, 05:32 AM	#55
ichabod crane Regular Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: Australia Posts: 262	Judge: There are 350 ancient (first millenium) copies of the eastern peshitta. If it is another translation then according to the above logic there would be variants between them. There aren't any it seems. Unless you can provide us with one. Ichabod: Yes but there are only 6 early manuscripts. As for there being no variants, as a student of both Hebrew and Greek I find that unbelievable. Even in the case of the Masoretic Text of the Old Testament, in which unbelievably stringent procedures were put in place and even the slightest deviant copy was destroyed, we still have textual variants. I do not believe that 350 hand copied manuscripts could be identical. But I don't have access to a text of the peshitta with manuscript information, so I can't prove it. I'm just saying I find it impossible to believe.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.