Posts: 34
Threads: 11
Joined: May 2013
Reputation:
0
shlama Shamasha Paul,
I'd like to ask about Mark 7:34. If this "Ephphata" originally in Aramaic why would the Bible write the explanation of it? didn't they aramaic-speaking people?
Tawdee.
Rudolf
Posts: 2,812
Threads: 271
Joined: Sep 2003
Reputation:
2
Have you read the Aramaic of Mark 7:34 ?
+Shamasha
Posts: 2,812
Threads: 271
Joined: Sep 2003
Reputation:
2
I can't answer why Lamsas version reads that way. Who knows?
Take care
+Shamasha
Posts: 682
Threads: 95
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation:
0
George Lamsa liked to use some of the KJV's readings. I find it interesting that the Greek transliterates the Aramaic text in spots, as the Septuagint does this with the Hebrew Tanakh, also. Sometimes the Greek has different transliterations for one Aramaic phrase, hinting at an Aramaic original. For example, some manuscripts transliterate "Talitha qum" in Mark 5:41 as "Talitha qumi", this is because unless there is no other vowel in the word, the final yodh (transliterated here as "i") is silent. "Talitha qumi" is the written form, while "Talitha qum" is the phonetic spelling.