03-10-2011, 11:32 AM
Aaron S Wrote:In his translation of the Septuagint (Codex Vaticanus), Thomson writes at the very end of the translation:
NOTE.
Zacharias IX. I. A Burden.] This, and the five following Chapters, though added to what Zacharias wrote, appear evidently, from the style and subjects, to be the work of another. The Evangelist Matthew, in his quotation, (Chap. II.) ascribes them to Jeremias. And it must be allowed that the contents of these chapters agree well with the time of Jeremias, but by no means with that of Zacharias. And the same may be said with respect to the style, which corresponds with that of Jeremias, but not in the least with that of Zacharias. From the words of the Evangelist it would appear that in his time, they were considered as being written by Jeremias:--and it is to be observed that in some ancient manuscripts, there is a large vacant space between the end of Chap. VIII. and IX. to distinguish what precedes, from that which follows.
Source: <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://books.google.com/books?id=b88UAAAAYAAJ&pg=PR154">http://books.google.com/books?id=b88UAAAAYAAJ&pg=PR154</a><!-- m -->
I am not certain whether or not this argument undermines Peshitta primacy, because one could then argue that, by the 5th century, it was understood that Zechariah wrote it, and thus, when the Peshitta was translated, the name was removed because it was deemed incorrect. I'd like to hear a proper rebut of this argument though.
I understand your viewpoint. But some quote from Mar Aphrahat and Mar Ephraim. Their biblical reference shows a precursor/older version of Peshitta did exist in the 4th century.
By the way, my friend, what is your attitude towards Peshitta? Do you believe this is the bible closest to original manuscript?