judge

Since Spin is back I thought I might post a thread looking again at an issue we looked at a while ago. BTW welcome back, I hope all is well with you..

In this thread the argument was made that certain greek words transliterated in the peshitta are evidence that the peshitta must have been translated from the greek. After all, if the peshitta precedes the greek then why did the peshitta authors not just use the Aramaic words.
The major problem with this is that it works the other way. The greek versions of the NT contain many Aramaic words, also transliterated. The same argument could be used in reverse.

Acts 8:27 is one such example, which contains the Aramaic word for treasure which is gaza. Even though there is aperfectly good word for treasure in greek, θησαυρός, "thesauros."

See here for a picture of the text in an interlinear greek/english version.

Here is Strongs entry.



Looking to the peshitta we find something very interesting. The Aramaic worg gaza when unpointed could be either masculine or feminine.

See here for a picture of the text

Paul Younan comments.

Vowel markings were not added until around the 5th or 6th century. Anyone translating from Aramaic to greek prior to this would have to decide whether it was masculine of feminine by looking to the context.

Most translators from Aramaic to greek went with the feminine but some made the mistake of using the masculine form. After all we have the eunuch (male) and Candace(female) in the same sentence. An easy slip to make.

The Bezan text translator went with the masculine form in the greek.

See here for a picture of the text.

This seems pretty plain evidence that Acts was first written in Aramaic and later translated into greek and not the other way around.

*Thanks and credit to Paul Younan for this work.

spin

Liddell & Scott: Gaza (Can be slow: wait for it. Note the last two words.)


:deadhorse:


:wide:

(Is there a blind-leading-the-blind-into-the-ditch smilie in circulation?)


spin

judge

What's your point? That you imagine gaza is Persian and not Aramaic?

I can only conclude this as the last two words in your link are as the last two words are Persian word. Younan comments on this.

But as you and I both know this is all irrelevant. Even if the word were originally Persian (which it is obviously not) it makes no difference.

We need an explanation for how the greek texts came to be split between his treasure and her treasure.

The answer is simple. The unpointed Aramaic could be translated either way!

spin

This is ever so hopeful. What would make your source conjecture that a translator misread the Aramaic and declined the noun wrongly? It is a wonderful flight of fancy to suppose that the fellow translated unpointed Aramaic, made a mistake in the gender despite the proximity of the noun to the feminine owner and thus came up with a masculine declination.




spin

judge

Very flowery stuff

1.We have some greek texts with his treasure and some with her treasure.

2. We have an explanation for how this happened.

3. You have no alternate explanation.

What this means is, you dont deal with the evidence. You mock, you ridicule, but what you have not done is deal with the evidence.

spin

Actually, we seem to have a Greek text. Please cite what that text actually says -- and while we're there what does the Latin version contained in that manuscript say?

Now could we have a rational one? One that takes into consideration the weight of all the other manuscripts rather than depending on a conjecture about one alone?

I haven't provided you with one.

Have you seen the Greek word gazofulakion?

You've perennially caught with your pants down, blindly accepting this stuff. I suppose all you can do is avoid the subject you initiate.

:deadhorse:


spin

judge

So...you have one but are keeping it a secret?

Yes I have seen it. Here is the greek english interlinear of Luke 21:1, where it occurs.

Here is the Aramaic.



The Aramaic contains the Aramaic word beth gaza. The greek contains a compound word for this Aramaic word, containing the original Aramaic word gaza. That greek word is gazophulakion.

Jeffrey Gibson

The word γάζα, ης, ἡ is from the Persian ganuÅ treasure and is found as a loanword in Greek since Theophrastus, Pl. 8, 11, 5; and in Polybius.; Diodorus Siculius.; Plutarch ; Appian, Mithrid. 23 §93; Dit., Or. (Orientis Graeci Inscriptiones Selectae, ed. WDittenberger, 2 vols. 1903-5) 54, 21f;


γαζοφυλακει̂ον, ου, τό (v.l. γαζοφυλάκιον, preferred by Bl-D. §13) lit. treasure room, treasury, is found in Diod. S. 9, 12, 2; Strabo 7, 6, 1; Dit., Or. 225 (Didyma, iii b.c.), among other places in secular Greek writings.

Did these Greek authors these words from Aramaic?

Jeffrey

spin

judge,

you didn't respond to this:

Actually, we seem to have a Greek text. Please cite what that text actually says -- and while we're there what does the Latin version contained in that manuscript say?

I put the word "a" in italics to show the reality behind your little deception:

We have some greek texts with his treasure and some with her treasure.

I also asked you for the actual words of the one text, Codex Bezae, on which your source based his conjecture on. I also asked for the Latin (the codex has both Greek and Latin) to see how it is rendered there. The masculine declension is what needs to be seen.

There was a reason why I provided you with this:
You'll note of course two things:

1. the form of the first morpheme gazo-; and
2. the significance of the second, ie "n. hold, cage, prison", significance not derivable from BYT GZH, house of treasure, while the more generic contrary to Aramaic is true.

spin

judge

Spin, all you can do is nitpick. You are dodging the issue.

Do you have an alternate explanation or not?

If so what is it?

You refuse to commit yourself to say anything much. Once you do we can examine your explantion. Until you do; you have no explanation for the Bezan reading.

The Bezan reading is explainable by an Aramaic original where the Aramaic word could be feminine or masculine. You need to provide another explanation, or admit you have none. You have done neither.