08-29-2009, 02:23 AM
Shlama Khulkon:
The pivotal verse between the eastern and western versions of the New Testament Peshitta is Hebrews 2:9. Both Etheridge and Murdock translate from the Western Peshitta. The UBS (United Bible Society) 1905 retains the western reading by following the reading of the Greek New Testament.
KJV
"for he by the grace of God".
Western Peshitta text
"hu gir b'taybutha Alaha"
John Wesley Etheridge
But him who was humbled to be less than the angels, we see to be JESHU himself, for the sake of the passion of his death; and glory and honour set upon his head; for He Aloha [Hu ger Aloho] , in his grace, for every man hath tasted death!
Dr. James Murdock
But we see him, who was depressed somewhat lower than the angels, to be this Jesus, because of the passion of his death; and glory and honor are placed on his head; for God himself, in his grace, tasted death for all men.
However, Lamsa translates from the Eastern Peshitta text and I think quite remarkably, he clarifies the eastern reading.
Dr. George Lamsa's Eastern Peshitta reading
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.aramaicpeshitta.com/AramaicNTtools/Lamsa/19_Hebrews/Hebrews2.htm">http://www.aramaicpeshitta.com/AramaicN ... brews2.htm</a><!-- m -->
"We see that he is Jesus, who humbled himself to become a little lower than the angels through his suffering and his death, but now he is crowned with glory and honour, for he tasted death for the sake of everyone but God."
The eastern reading of "hu gir s'tar min Alaha" is accurately translated "for he apart from God" and Lamsa seems to capture this meaning in his translation.
Having presented this, I also want to revisit the controversy, as it was debated in the second through the fifth centuries. Below is a quote from wikipedea.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestorianism">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestorianism</a><!-- m -->
"Nestorianism originated in the Church in the 5th century out of an attempt to rationally explain and understand the incarnation of the divine Logos, the Second Person of the Holy Trinity as Jesus Christ. Nestorianism taught that the human and divine essences of Christ are separate and that there are two natures, the man Jesus and the divine Logos, united in Christ. In consequence, Nestorians rejected such terminology as "God suffered" or "God was crucified", because the humanity of Christ which suffered is separate from his divinity. Likewise, they rejected the term Theotokos (Giver of birth to God/Mother of God) as a title of the Virgin Mary, suggesting instead the title Christotokos (Giver of birth to Christ/Mother of Christ), because in their view he took only his human nature from his mother, while the divine Logos was pre-existent and external, so calling Mary "Mother of God" was misleading and potentially wrong.
The Assyrian Church of the East refused to drop support for Nestorius or to denounce him as a heretic. That church has continued to be called "Nestorian" in the West, to distinguish it from other ancient Eastern churches. However, the Church of the East does not regard its doctrine as truly Nestorian: it teaches the view of Babai the Great - Christ has two qnome (manifest or individuated substance, similar to hypostasis) that are unmingled and eternally united in one parsopa (person). According to some interpretations,[by whom?] the origin of this belief is mostly historical and linguistic: for example, the Greeks had two words for 'person', which translated poorly into Syriac, and the meanings of these terms were not even quite settled during Nestorius's lifetime."
Further reading about Babai the Great
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://books.google.ca/books?id=Ey_FW7acTycC&pg=PA12&lpg=PA12&dq=Babai+the+Great&source=bl&ots=N9NAvjqFXW&sig=Gr0Ir5BKzECMICk4XZdoetOAIHg&hl=en&ei=Yr-YSpypFo2ssgPlqZCkAg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7#v=onepage&q=Babai%20the%20Great&f=false">http://books.google.ca/books?id=Ey_FW7a ... at&f=false</a><!-- m -->
This isn't meant to spark a theological debate. It's informative in showing one possible reason for the variation between the eastern Peshitta and the western version which follows the Greek text.
Shlama,
Stephen Silver
Dukhrana Biblical Research Group
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- m -->
The pivotal verse between the eastern and western versions of the New Testament Peshitta is Hebrews 2:9. Both Etheridge and Murdock translate from the Western Peshitta. The UBS (United Bible Society) 1905 retains the western reading by following the reading of the Greek New Testament.
KJV
"for he by the grace of God".
Western Peshitta text
"hu gir b'taybutha Alaha"
John Wesley Etheridge
But him who was humbled to be less than the angels, we see to be JESHU himself, for the sake of the passion of his death; and glory and honour set upon his head; for He Aloha [Hu ger Aloho] , in his grace, for every man hath tasted death!
Dr. James Murdock
But we see him, who was depressed somewhat lower than the angels, to be this Jesus, because of the passion of his death; and glory and honor are placed on his head; for God himself, in his grace, tasted death for all men.
However, Lamsa translates from the Eastern Peshitta text and I think quite remarkably, he clarifies the eastern reading.
Dr. George Lamsa's Eastern Peshitta reading
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.aramaicpeshitta.com/AramaicNTtools/Lamsa/19_Hebrews/Hebrews2.htm">http://www.aramaicpeshitta.com/AramaicN ... brews2.htm</a><!-- m -->
"We see that he is Jesus, who humbled himself to become a little lower than the angels through his suffering and his death, but now he is crowned with glory and honour, for he tasted death for the sake of everyone but God."
The eastern reading of "hu gir s'tar min Alaha" is accurately translated "for he apart from God" and Lamsa seems to capture this meaning in his translation.
Having presented this, I also want to revisit the controversy, as it was debated in the second through the fifth centuries. Below is a quote from wikipedea.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestorianism">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestorianism</a><!-- m -->
"Nestorianism originated in the Church in the 5th century out of an attempt to rationally explain and understand the incarnation of the divine Logos, the Second Person of the Holy Trinity as Jesus Christ. Nestorianism taught that the human and divine essences of Christ are separate and that there are two natures, the man Jesus and the divine Logos, united in Christ. In consequence, Nestorians rejected such terminology as "God suffered" or "God was crucified", because the humanity of Christ which suffered is separate from his divinity. Likewise, they rejected the term Theotokos (Giver of birth to God/Mother of God) as a title of the Virgin Mary, suggesting instead the title Christotokos (Giver of birth to Christ/Mother of Christ), because in their view he took only his human nature from his mother, while the divine Logos was pre-existent and external, so calling Mary "Mother of God" was misleading and potentially wrong.
The Assyrian Church of the East refused to drop support for Nestorius or to denounce him as a heretic. That church has continued to be called "Nestorian" in the West, to distinguish it from other ancient Eastern churches. However, the Church of the East does not regard its doctrine as truly Nestorian: it teaches the view of Babai the Great - Christ has two qnome (manifest or individuated substance, similar to hypostasis) that are unmingled and eternally united in one parsopa (person). According to some interpretations,[by whom?] the origin of this belief is mostly historical and linguistic: for example, the Greeks had two words for 'person', which translated poorly into Syriac, and the meanings of these terms were not even quite settled during Nestorius's lifetime."
Further reading about Babai the Great
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://books.google.ca/books?id=Ey_FW7acTycC&pg=PA12&lpg=PA12&dq=Babai+the+Great&source=bl&ots=N9NAvjqFXW&sig=Gr0Ir5BKzECMICk4XZdoetOAIHg&hl=en&ei=Yr-YSpypFo2ssgPlqZCkAg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7#v=onepage&q=Babai%20the%20Great&f=false">http://books.google.ca/books?id=Ey_FW7a ... at&f=false</a><!-- m -->
This isn't meant to spark a theological debate. It's informative in showing one possible reason for the variation between the eastern Peshitta and the western version which follows the Greek text.
Shlama,
Stephen Silver
Dukhrana Biblical Research Group
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- m -->