Yakub 5:3 - Fire or Treasure?

[Stephen Silver]

Just a random thought, it may also be possible that in the text that Zorba had someone had substituted gza for nwra.

Shlama Akhi Dawid:
Somehow I think it unlikely that there was an extant, transcribed Peshitta manuscript using "gza" (treasure) instead of "nwra" (fire) for (James 5:3). There would be no need for the use of an ambiguous synonym like "gzl" by an Aramaic scribe that had been solemnly entrusted to transcribe the text. As has been seen on numerous occasions, it is Zorba that had to choose the appropriate and contextual synonyms, in the task of translating the Peshitta text into Greek. For the most part the Greek is an excellent translation of the Aramaic "autograph". It is purely speculative on my part to assume any scenario. I'm just making what I think to be a logical observation (logical to me). <!-- s --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="" title="Smile" /><!-- s --> I just find it curious that "gzl" (fire) and "gza" (treasure) look very similar in the Estrangelo text type. On the other hand LAMED looks nothing like an ALEF in First Century K'tav Ashuri/Dead Sea Scrolls/Herodian. Developing this thought, this is second century stuff when the "autograph" was transcribed into Estrangelo, not first century with the "autograph" in K'tav Ashuri.

Shlama,
Stephen
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- m -->