+- Peshitta Forum (http://peshitta.org/for)
+-- Forum: New Testament (http://peshitta.org/for/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: General (http://peshitta.org/for/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: 2Corinthians 6:15 - Satana to Belial (/showthread.php?tid=2277)
2Corinthians 6:15 - Satana to Belial - Aaron S - 03-08-2010
Shlama Achai,
Here's a variant which is quite complicated:
2Corinthians 6:15 Wrote:[font="Estrangelo (V1.1)"].Nmyhm fd M9 Nmyhmdl ty0 Fnm 0dy0 w0 0n=s M9 0xy4ml ty0 Fwml4 0dy0 w0[/font]
or what concord hath the Messiah with Satan? or what part hath a believer with an unbeliever?
?????? ????? ???????????????????? ????????????? ????????? ???????????? ??? ?????? ??????????? ??????????? ????????? ???????????????
And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?
Any ideas why Satan/Satana become Belial/Beliar here?
The issue is that Belial is not a Greek word, but a loan-word from Hebrew (?????????????????????? B'liya'al).
I wouldn't expect Zorba to be this astute in the Hebrew of the TaNaKh to make such a crafty swap-of-terms.
Re: 2Corinthians 6:15 - Satana to Belial - Donald J - 03-09-2010
Shlama Aaron,
I took a look at this scripture verse and then did a little research on words used to describe the adversary what I found is that Greek ??????????????? (Satanas) is used 36 times in the Greek New Testament. See Matthew 4:10, 12:26, 16:23, Romans 16:20 just to name a few. It is interesting to see the translator use Belial here since this character is viewed as one of seven princes of hell. So what we have here is the Greek taking liberties with a Hebrew term and an Aramaic term as well. <!-- s
--><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="" title="Smile" /><!-- s --> . The book Jegar Sahadutha (Heap of Witness) points out that "Ha Satan in the Hebrew Tanakh is translated with the word Diabolos in the LXX every time except in 1 Kings 11:14 where it transliterates Satan as "Satan" and not Satana, twice." So maybe Zorba is just trying to dress up his Greek a little.Shlama w'Burkate,
Donald
Re: 2Corinthians 6:15 - Satana to Belial - Aaron S - 03-09-2010
Shlama Donald and thanks for the reply
Here's my next question: Could it be that Belial is a remnant of the original Aramaic manuscripts and that the Peshitta differs from said original in this spot?
Re: 2Corinthians 6:15 - Satana to Belial - Burning one - 03-12-2010
Shlama,
i don't have any idea why there is a difference between Satana and Beliar, but here's a few variant spellings from different Greek texts that might be of interest to throw into the midst:
BELIAR
BELIAL
BELIAN
BELIAB
if you know Estrangela, you can see how BELIAB, BELIAL, and perhaps even BELIAN (if the nun was not in sophit form) could each be misconstrued with the last letter. Beliar - not so much... i don't know that it helps, since we don't have any Peshitta texts that actually contain such a variant term, but the lamadh, bet, and nun could indeed be mistaken for one another - especially the lamadh and nun, depending on height -- and i've seen an instance or so of misreading between a lamadh and a bet accounting for a disparate reading between the Greek and Aramaic, so that is possible, as well.
Chayim b'Moshiach,
Jeremy
Re: 2Corinthians 6:15 - Satana to Belial - ShabbatSealed - 04-23-2010
Quote:Here's my next question: Could it be that Belial is a remnant of the original Aramaic manuscripts and that the Peshitta differs from said original in this spot?
I agree. I was just looking at the interlinear on this site and in John 16 the Holy Spirit isn't mn'chema but looks like a transliteration of the Greek word comforter. I wonder what else potentially could have gotten in there from the Greek or whatever the case may be.
Re: 2Corinthians 6:15 - Satana to Belial - Aaron S - 04-23-2010
Burning one Wrote:Shlama,
i don't have any idea why there is a difference between Satana and Beliar, but here's a few variant spellings from different Greek texts that might be of interest to throw into the midst:
BELIAR
BELIAL
BELIAN
BELIAB
if you know Estrangela, you can see how BELIAB, BELIAL, and perhaps even BELIAN (if the nun was not in sophit form) could each be misconstrued with the last letter. Beliar - not so much... i don't know that it helps, since we don't have any Peshitta texts that actually contain such a variant term, but the lamadh, bet, and nun could indeed be mistaken for one another - especially the lamadh and nun, depending on height -- and i've seen an instance or so of misreading between a lamadh and a bet accounting for a disparate reading between the Greek and Aramaic, so that is possible, as well.
Chayim b'Moshiach,
Jeremy
What about misreading a final lamed for a nun? That's a strange phenomenon since the nun would have to be in a final form (see Manaen)
Re: 2Corinthians 6:15 - Satana to Belial - Burning one - 04-23-2010
Aaron S Wrote:Burning one Wrote:Shlama,
i don't have any idea why there is a difference between Satana and Beliar, but here's a few variant spellings from different Greek texts that might be of interest to throw into the midst:
BELIAR
BELIAL
BELIAN
BELIAB
if you know Estrangela, you can see how BELIAB, BELIAL, and perhaps even BELIAN (if the nun was not in sophit form) could each be misconstrued with the last letter. Beliar - not so much... i don't know that it helps, since we don't have any Peshitta texts that actually contain such a variant term, but the lamadh, bet, and nun could indeed be mistaken for one another - especially the lamadh and nun, depending on height -- and i've seen an instance or so of misreading between a lamadh and a bet accounting for a disparate reading between the Greek and Aramaic, so that is possible, as well.
Chayim b'Moshiach,
Jeremy
What about misreading a final lamed for a nun? That's a strange phenomenon since the nun would have to be in a final form (see Manaen)
Shlama akhi,
yes, it would be a less likely case, unless the translator saw the Lamadh and was thinking "nun" even though the final form would have been wrong. we've seen other instances where Zorba in all his glory made similar mistakes, so it is at least possible, the admittedly the least likely of the proposed solutions.
the more likely scenario would fit with BELIAB and BELIAL, between the Bet and Lamadh being confused, which i've seen elsewhere as explanation for Greek variants. perhaps the other reading, BELIAR, could have arisen from a misreading of a smudged or faded or poorly-finished Bet, since the two letters share the same structural form to a good degree in Estrangela....
it is all up in the air, but the similarity of three of the Greek variant's last letters in Estrangela makes me tend to think the original would have been something in Aramaic, not Hebrew.
just my half-shekel worth! <!-- s
--><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="" title="Smile" /><!-- s --> Chayim b'Moshiach v'Shabbat shalom,
Jeremy
Re: 2Corinthians 6:15 - Satana to Belial - Aaron S - 04-24-2010
ShabbatSealed Wrote:Quote:Here's my next question: Could it be that Belial is a remnant of the original Aramaic manuscripts and that the Peshitta differs from said original in this spot?
I agree. I was just looking at the interlinear on this site and in John 16 the Holy Spirit isn't mn'chema but looks like a transliteration of the Greek word comforter. I wonder what else potentially could have gotten in there from the Greek or whatever the case may be.
Roth says [font="Estrangelo (V1.1)"]0=lqrp[/font] (Paraqlita) is an Aramaic construct derived from [font="Estrangelo (V1.1)"]Qrp[/font] (Paraq) which means to end, to finish, to save (Strong's H6561, H6562) and [font="Estrangelo (V1.1)"]0=l[/font] (Lita) which means the curse (See Matthew 5:44). Thus [font="Estrangelo (V1.1)"]0=lqrp[/font] can mean redeemer. It's quite possible that, when confronted with this construct, a translator thought he was looking at a transliterated Greek word and just put in parakleitas instead of a translation along the lines of redeemer.