Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Translations Compared: Eastern or Western?
(08-29-2015, 05:36 AM)distazo Wrote: Hi Bro,
So, is the text added -everywhere- or is it accidentely not copied in the eastern variant?

All the Eastern MSS, and Church of the East's printed texts do not have "in the boat" there, as does the Greek and the UBS edited version, which is known to be influenced by the Greek text.

It's interesting to see that with The Way International's "The Aramaic New Testament" it also lacks "in the boat", while its interlinear text of The Aramaic New Testament has "in the boat" present. Added into it during editing.

So, where did they get the reading from?

They say they used the same text they used for their NT, MSS 14453 (5th century), but didn't follow it here. Was it taken from the UBS version? If so, where did the UBS editors find the clause "in the boat" in any Aramaic NT manuscripts?

In the introduction to their Interlinear version, The Way International states that the Aramaic text "is not the original, but the text is similar to the Peshitta Version in use during the 5th century in the Eastern Church..."

So, they altered the text, and as you read further it seems they felt the Greek text was more accurate with the clause "in the boat", so added it into the Aramaic NT.

This may be what the UBS editors did as well. Not sure.

The Greek scribes are famous for interpolating the text, and since "in the boat" is found in Matthew's Gospel, in the parallel account, it could have been interpolated into Mark's Gospel, where it didn't originally appear.

If anyone knows of a real Aramaic Manuscript (not the UBS edited version), that has "in the boat" in Mark 1:20, please show it here.


Messages In This Thread
RE: Translations Compared: Eastern or Western? - by Thirdwoe - 09-02-2015, 04:55 AM

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)