Peshitta Forum
What's your opinion on this? - Printable Version

+- 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: What's your opinion on this? (/showthread.php?tid=2979)

Pages: 1 2 3


What's your opinion on this? - DrawCloser - 01-06-2013

Hi, after reading about the WEB bible (<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://ebible.org">http://ebible.org</a><!-- m -->) -- It got me thinking, and I want to start a poll. But, first need to explain things...

The WEB bible is free, and is in the public domain. It can be used freely without royalties and fear of infringement. Evangelistic groups can distribute the text freely to others (without royalties); people can share the text online, use it in their bible software & apps, add it to their books, use it freely in churches, and other creative uses, and lastly, personal use.

So, how about a (sincere and literal) version of the [Eastern] Peshitta that is also free, in the public domain, and not under copyright?

(I know we have Etheridge, Norton, and Murdock texts freely available, but those are old and have Western readings.)

And to be honest, I would like to learn Aramaic / Syriac myself, to accomplish this task. I would like for there to be a generous and free source of the Bible, which allows people to freely use the text. But no promise that I would do this task...

So, what's your opinion on this?

Please add input to this poll, and please say honest opinions via posts (even brutally honest opinions). If you have feedback, or comments, please say them.

Thanks,
~DC


Re: What's your opinion on this? - DrawCloser - 01-06-2013

Hi everyone, please re-vote, I edited post and I edited the poll, and results accidentally got erased.
The poll is up with a new option. Please and thanks.

& Results of old poll:

From scratch: 1 vote
Update and complete Paul Younan Interlinear: 1 vote
CoE translation: 1 vote

Sorry for accidentally screwing up the old poll....

~DC


Re: What's your opinion on this? - SteveCaruso - 01-07-2013

<!-- s:crazy: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/crazy.gif" alt=":crazy:" title="Crazy" /><!-- s:crazy: --> There needs to be new translation of the Peshitta as much as there needs to be another few newly fractured denominations within the Christian tradition.

My suggestion: Work with Murdock (which, for all intents and purposes, is pretty good to begin with) and focus your study of the Peshitta text, itself, to where you have difficulty or take issue with his choice of words.

Another "new" translation will only add more noise to an already noisy topic. <!-- sCool --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/cool1.gif" alt="Cool" title="Cool" /><!-- sCool -->


Re: What's your opinion on this? - ScorpioSniper2 - 01-07-2013

Since we have two complete Peshitto New Testament translations (David Bauscher's Aramaic-English Interlinear New Testament and Herb Jahn's Aramaic New Covenant), it would be nice to have a complete Peshitta New Testament. Andrew Roth needs to correct the Western reading he has in the AENT to make it a real Peshitta translation. The closest we have so far are Younan's Interlinear, Roth's AENT, and Etheridge's New Testament (which only has 3 Western readings). All three are outstanding.


Re: What's your opinion on this? - The Texas RAT - 01-07-2013

SteveCaruso Wrote::crazy: There needs to be new translation of the Peshitta as much as there needs to be another few newly fractured denominations within the Christian tradition.

My suggestion: Work with Murdock (which, for all intents and purposes, is pretty good to begin with) and focus your study of the Peshitta text, itself, to where you have difficulty or take issue with his choice of words.

Another "new" translation will only add more noise to an already noisy topic. <!-- sCool --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/cool1.gif" alt="Cool" title="Cool" /><!-- sCool -->
I differ with you Steve. As I see that if a truthful translation of the eastern PeshittA Text would help to clear up the muddied water, so to speak, as when Moshay [Moses] interjected a hyssop branch into the polluted water. I see the untruthful translations falling to the way side once a real translation comes forth.

As for just revising Murdock's translation it would be like try to revise the KIV (a.k.a. - KJV). It is far easier to build from scratch than it is to try and clean up another's mess and make order out of it. Any body that has ever had to redo someone else's mess knows exactly what I am talking about. Yes with some cosmetics on could quickly make a mess look good but the truth is if one is to make it good through and through there can be no quick fix. Why bother with having to tear something apart and try and save parts when it is much easier and far better to just do it right to start with. This is why no revisions will do to clear up the muddy water, it will literally take a pure translation from scratch in a pool all it's own to brake free of the muddy water.

Plus it would be nice to have a complete Interlinear that is "tit for tat" spot-on accurate to the eastern Aramaic Text. Not to belittle Brother Paul but I have noticed where "unto MarYah" is in the Aramaic Paul at times did not put the unto in the English portions. I assume he did this to try and make the English flow better, but that is what translations are for and an Interlinear is to just simply convey what the Mother Text has. So even if one was to translate "MarYah" as "The Lord" the "unto" part should still be translated as well each and every time it appears in the Aramaic. As such details need to be strictly adhered to in my opinion.


Re: What's your opinion on this? - Luc Lefebvre - 01-07-2013

The Texas RAT Wrote:As for just revising Murdock's translation it would be like try to revise the KIV (a.k.a. - KJV). It is far easier to build from scratch than it is to try and clean up another's mess and make order out of it. Any body that has ever had to redo someone else's mess knows exactly what I am talking about. Yes with some cosmetics on could quickly make a mess look good but the truth is if one is to make it good through and through there can be no quick fix. Why bother with having to tear something apart and try and save parts when it is much easier and far better to just do it right to start with. This is why no revisions will do to clear up the muddy water, it will literally take a pure translation from scratch in a pool all it's own to brake free of the muddy water.
You've obviously never done translation work before. You do realize that the majority of the translations out there all used some sort of base text, right? Including some of the most scholarly translations like the NASB.

Besides, no matter how "pure" of a translation you get, there will always be mud in the water. Sometimes problems you find in the English translations don't go away when you learn the original...


Re: What's your opinion on this? - ScorpioSniper2 - 01-07-2013

You can't translate Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek perfectly into English either. There are always certain idioms and words that can't be captured adequately in the English language. I still think the Church of the East should release an official Eastern Peshitta Bible translation with the Western Five from Peshitto, along with an official Interlinear.


Re: What's your opinion on this? - Luc Lefebvre - 01-07-2013

ScorpioSniper2 Wrote:You can't translate Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek perfectly into English either. There are always certain idioms and words that can't be captured adequately in the English language. I still think the Church of the East should release an official Eastern Peshitta Bible translation with the Western Five from Peshitto, along with an official Interlinear.
Yeah, something comparable to the Orthodox Study bible like Paul mentioned would be a good asset to the community. The Peshitta is their Bible, so they should translate it and publish it IMO.


Re: What's your opinion on this? - ScorpioSniper2 - 01-07-2013

We've had two Church of the East members translate the Syriac text individually, but they let their biases slip in when it could have been easily avoided. A translation done by a committee would be fantastic! It'd be nice to see one that transliterates Aramaic proper names for events, people, and places. Eshoo Meshikha (as opposed to Yeshu or Yeshua Meshikha), Alaha, Marya, and such would be very nice to see. More translations of the Bible are always welcome! As time goes on, the English language continues to evolve. New translations suiting the needs of contemporary English speakers will always be necessary in order for people to easily be able to understand the Word of God. The KJV's English is obsolete, and at some point (if the Lord Jesus doesn't return beforehand) the English of the NIV and the NASB will be considered obsolete too.


Re: What's your opinion on this? - The Texas RAT - 01-08-2013

Luc Lefebvre Wrote:You've obviously never done translation work before. You do realize that the majority of the translations out there all used some sort of base text, right? Including some of the most scholarly translations like the NASB.
What am I going to translate, English into Hillbilly? Even that would be a joke as I do not understand English, muchless Hillbilly, all to well. I barely graduated the 12th grade! In English I made Fs Ds and Cs for the most part with a possible B once a year. But I have studied many English translations and have found that much trash from the base text carries over to the revisions, and this includes your precious NASB!


Luc Lefebvre Wrote:Besides, no matter how "pure" of a translation you get, there will always be mud in the water. Sometimes problems you find in the English translations don't go away when you learn the original...
Yes, and one can pick apart a million dollar house as well, but at least it is worth something! And yes one can try and spend a million dollars on a shack and they will have something that is unstable and/or routine at the heart of it. It is ALWAYS best to build a million dollar house from scratch.


ScorpioSniper2 Wrote:You can't translate Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek perfectly into English either. There are always certain idioms and words that can't be captured adequately in the English language.
Even a idiot such as myself understands this point, but I am hoping that one day that will be all that hinders a pure translation of the Eastern PeshittA. I hope one day that a translation will leave out there bias and just translates as accurately the best they can and then put the rest into footnotes or commentary books. So despite the obstacles I still believe a fresh translation can be done leaving out (all) the trash of the past (and present crude also).

So instead of people with scholarly understanding wasting their time trying to enlighten me on all their excuses as to why they have not made an accurate translation yet, I would suggest that the only thing in the way of having one is where their focus lies. HINT HINT.


Re: What's your opinion on this? - ScorpioSniper2 - 01-08-2013

We only have four complete translations of the Aramaic New Testament that I know of that are virtually free of personal theological bias. These translations are the Etheridge, Murdock, Magiera, and Jahn translations. The only thing is that they aren't completely Peshitta, but a mix between Peshitta and Peshitto (Etheridge, Murdock, Magiera) readings or completely Peshitto (Jahn). I find it interesting that the Etheridge New Testament follows Peshitta readings the vast majority of the time, despite being translated from the Peshitto. The sad thing about the Etheridge, Murdock, and Jahn translations is that they don't translate Marya correctly.

Jahn translates Marya as "Yah Veh" but never translates it as such when it is used in reference to "Yah Shua" (Jesus), even though he clearly believes in the deity of the Christ. Etheridge made note that Marya (or "Morio") was held as equal to the Tetragrammaton, but only mentioned it in on the footnote to the debate recorded in Matthew 22:41-46.


Re: What's your opinion on this? - The Texas RAT - 01-08-2013

ScorpioSniper2 Wrote:We only have four complete translations of the Aramaic New Testament that I know of that are virtually free of personal theological bias.
Are you aware of "The Testimony of Yeshua" version? If so what is your opinion of it?

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.everlastingkingdom.info/article/194/">http://www.everlastingkingdom.info/article/194/</a><!-- m -->


Re: What's your opinion on this? - Luc Lefebvre - 01-08-2013

The Texas RAT Wrote:So instead of people with scholarly understanding wasting their time trying to enlighten me on all their excuses as to why they have not made an accurate translation yet, I would suggest that the only thing in the way of having one is where their focus lies. HINT HINT.
My focus is on surrendering to the Almighty, not wasting my time in the books while the world falls apart when He has made His Word and His will perfectly clear for us without having to idolize a translation of the Scripture that fits our useless theological OCD.

I won't waste my time commenting further. If you can't see what you are to do from the translations available, then may G-d have mercy on your soul. Other cultures do just fine with ONE translation, let alone the many to be distracted by. And so did we with all the great revivals and holiness movements using nothing but a KJV. And if we aren't walking in holiness ourselves, then we need to stop, take a deep moral inventory, and clean the house before we decide to venture out with criticisms and ideas. The Hebrew Roots movement utterly fails in this. But Mashiach Himself says, first we must take the plank out of our own eyes, and then we may address the specks...


Re: What's your opinion on this? - The Texas RAT - 01-08-2013

Luc Lefebvre Wrote:My focus is on surrendering to the Almighty, not wasting my time ...

Really, could of fooled me (that is to say not wasting your time focused other than where you say).


Luc Lefebvre Wrote:I won't waste my time commenting further.

According to your statement above I am surprised you had time to give this comment!


Luc Lefebvre Wrote:If you can't see what you are to do from the translations available, then may G-d have mercy on your soul.

Luc Lefebvre Wrote:And if we aren't walking in holiness ourselves, then we need to stop, take a deep moral inventory, and clean the house before we decide to venture out with criticisms and ideas.
Such as your comments dirrectly above and below this one?
Then yes, I would have to agree with you on this.

Luc Lefebvre Wrote:The Hebrew Roots movement utterly fails in this.



Luc Lefebvre Wrote:But Mashiach Himself says, first we must take the plank out of our own eyes, and then we may address the specks...
Have you heard of the old saying - "It's time you took your own medicine"? And yes the Anointed spoke on the subject of being judgmental as well as hypocritical (just saying).

Luc, if you really fell it is a waste of time doing something then (as I have conveyed to you more than once in the past) please, PLEASE, let your actions speak louder than words. At least when it comes in such a form as this one. But if and when you do not feel a need to be so snippety please feel free to share and comment, as I do value opinions - void attitudes. Oh and do not expect me to necessarily agree all the time though.


Re: What's your opinion on this? - The Texas RAT - 01-08-2013

Luc Lefebvre Wrote:
The Texas RAT Wrote:So instead of people with scholarly understanding wasting their time trying to enlighten me on all their excuses as to why they have not made an accurate translation yet, I would suggest that the only thing in the way of having one is where their focus lies. HINT HINT.
Brother Luc, if my comment came across as being snippety then I worded it wrongly as I meant for it to be but just a quip. Sadly the spell checker does not help me in such a manner.

I apologize for any offence taken over my bad English skills.