05-27-2005, 08:36 PM
Quote:Leave the rest of us to discover what Shimun Keepa really meant in Acts 2:24......while the Greek Primacists can keep scratching their heads trying to come up with a good explanation out how their texts came to read "pains" instead of "cords", if they weren't translated from a written Aramaic source that means both.....which had the same reading as the Peshitta does........coincidentally, of course, just coincidentally.....like all the other examples we've posted here.
Now Paul, you keep hitting on this particular section of Acts as if this is your particular jewel against all other languages. Ok, let's help Paul sort this out just like we did with the LXX here.
Your question as to why the syriac in this section is better (as if the particular language made more difference than the truth itself), than the greek, here is the answer:
They had a better greek or old latin copy to translate from or they made a correction when they translated it into the syriac.
I know I know, this goes against the grain of everything posted here by you and others on the originality that you theorize, but there is no other way to surmize it. Let's look at an example:
Go to the end of chapter 2 and let's look at Paul's translation and the greek translation. Here's Paul's as best as I can get it:
47 And they were praising GOD whilst finding favor before all the people, and our Lord would add everyday, amongst the congregation, those who lived. Or as Murdock put it, "became alive."
I think that is as best as I can get to do justice to Paul's interlinear. Ok here is a standard form of the greek in that same chapter:
(ASV) praising God, and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added {1} to them day by day those that {2} were saved.
{1) Gr together 2) Or were being saved}
Let's have an interlinear form to compare:
(IGNT) ainountev ton {PRAISING} yeon {GOD,} kai {AND} econtev {HAVING} carin {FAVOUR} prov {WITH} olon {WHOLE} ton {THE} laon {PEOPLE;} o {AND} de {THE} kuriov {LORD} prosetiyei {ADDED} touv {THOSE WHO} swzomenouv kay {WERE BEING SAVED} hmeran {DAILY} th {TO THE} ekklhsia {ASSEMBLY.}
Here's another literal translation of the text:
(YLT) praising God, and having favour with all the people, and the Lord was adding those being saved every day to the assembly.
Ok, here is the old testament prophecy that this proceeds from (I'm using mutiple translations to try and ensure the understanding is given correctly here):
32 (AV) And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD shall be delivered: for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the LORD hath said, and in the remnant whom the LORD shall call.
32 (ASV) And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of Jehovah shall be delivered; for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem there shall be those that escape, as Jehovah hath said, and {1} among the remnant those whom Jehovah doth call. {1) Or in the remnant whom etc}
32 (Darby) And it shall be that whosoever shall call upon the name of Jehovah shall be saved: for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as Jehovah hath said, and for the residue whom Jehovah shall call.
32 (Douay) And it shall come to pass, that every one that shall call upon the name of the Lord, shall be saved: for in Mount Sion, and in Jerusalem shall be salvation, as the Lord hath said, and in the residue whom the Lord shall call.
32 (IGNT)
32 (JPS) (3-5) And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD shall be delivered; for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem there shall be those that escape, as the LORD hath said, and among the remnant those whom the LORD shall call.
32 (Lamsa) And it shall come to pass that whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD shall be delivered; for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the LORD has said to the remnant whom the LORD has called.
32 (Murdoch)
32 (NKJV) And it shall come to pass That whoever calls on the name of the LORD Shall be saved. For in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there shall be deliverance, As the LORD has said, Among the remnant whom the LORD calls.
32 (Rotherham) And it shall come to pass, whosoever, shall call on the name of Yahweh, shall be delivered, ???For in Mount Zion, and in Jerusalem, shall be a delivered remnant, just as Yahweh hath said, and among the survivors, whom Yahweh doth call.
32 (RSV) And it shall come to pass that all who call upon the name of the LORD shall be delivered; for in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there shall be those who escape, as the LORD has said, and among the survivors shall be those whom the LORD calls.
32 (RWebster) And it shall come to pass, that whoever shall call on the name of the LORD shall be delivered: for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the LORD hath said, and in the remnant whom the LORD shall call.
32 (YLT) And it hath come to pass, Every one who calleth in the name of Jehovah is delivered, For in mount Zion and in Jerusalem there is an escape, As Jehovah hath said, And among the remnants whom Jehovah is calling!
What's being conveyed in the new testament is the action of something happening, the deliverance, or those persons being saved from something, not just the after effect but the ongoing fulfillment. The prophecy keeps being actively fulfilled. The syriac changes the whole meaning here into something else whereas the greek witnesses to the old testament prophecy, as we just seen, and rightly divides the Word for you.
See, it is very easy to find more of these between the two languages as one goes comparing between both covenants.
So what just happened here? I did the same thing that Paul did in comparison, but I supplied an answer to this that contained a more sensible approach to the reasonings why, rather than hastily assume that one particular language was more original than the other. If anything, the particular manuscript that was used in the translation of this into syriac was cleaner, but as we see, neither of the languages are without their faults. The Word will witness to itself though, if you let it.
How about one where both of them got it wrong?
Same book, chapter 1 verse 2. Here is Paul's translation:
Up until that day in which He wast taken up, after He had commanded the Apostles, those whom He chose by The Spirit of Holiness.
Ok here is a greek translation of that verse:
(ASV) until the day in which he was received up, after that he had given commandment through the Holy Spirit unto the apostles whom he had chosen:
All of the greek translations, and the syriac, give this sense that Jesus picked His Apostles "by The Holy Spirit" or through, when it fact none of the texts witness to this particular action of His that it says.
If you go further in the text, it witnesses to a day, that day, when "He was taken up by The Holy Spirit," in the form of a cloud, but it does not show a particular place where He pointed out ones and chose them by The Spirit (whatever that is suppose to mean). Again, the Word will witness to itself if you let it.
The greek is flexible here, but in reality, both languages really have the understanding of this particular section skewered, whilst they both point to a particular "day" that something happened in this section.
Both camps argue over originality when it fact it should be approached with a desire to have the truth correctly handed out to HIS people, but no, that is not really the desire by these groups that handle GOD's word.
There are more in these first few chapters of Acts, I just pointed out some quick stuff here.
So Paul, there is your answer to this text you keep quoting as your jewel of the Nile. I really wish you would not claim originality here in this particular section of the new testament, it is not a good choice.