Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Translations Compared: Eastern or Western?
(09-03-2015, 11:38 PM)distazo Wrote: What about this?
Mark 10:6

In the Greek it says: "From the beginning of the creation", while the Peshitta has 'from the beginning'.

Obviously, the Greek has an inserted 'footnote', but the Peshitto (UBS), does not have that. So, if scribes harmonized the Peshitta using the Greek, they did a lousy job and I dont believe that the Peshitto (UBS) is a lousy job. Not anything of the Peshitta/o b.t.w.

Accidently omission, that is something I believe what could happen. So, if some source, misses a phrase, it could be an accident. There is not any 100 perfect text Smile But overall, the DNA of holy script has been kept and maintained.

Again, I would want to know where the UBS editors found their reading in Mark 1:20. The SP? If not, then where...what Peshitta manuscript reads that way? Maybe they have a note there? I don't have the original publication, but I will look for a copy soon.

I don't say that the UBS version was harmonized with the Greek NT in all places, but, that it contains the Peshitta text as its base, with some variant spellings of certain words (because of East/West dialect), and that they edited the Peshitta text, where in some cases they add in certain parts from the Greek NT.

If you just go with an online UBS text, and translate from that, as with what Dukhrana has there, where there are no notes from the original publication, then you would be mislead to think that all that is given there in that edited version comes only from the Peshitta NT.

It certainly does not, and without the notes saying as much, where the Greek text is added to the Peshitta's NT text, you would be mislead to think it belongs in the Peshitta NT. But, not so.

It must be understood, that the UBS text is not an Aramaic New Testament manuscript, but rather, it is a Hybrid, Greek/Aramaic NT text. It isn't a straight and true Aramaic NT document, it is an edited version only, with some Greek NT parts translated in to have the edited text conform more to the Greek form of the NT. 

If you want The straight and true Aramaic NT Scriptures, then the UBS is not what you want.

I think this is a very important distinction to be made and told, because some will be very confused when they see these variants in the Aramaic text, and think that the Aramaic New Testament (The Peshitta) has these variants in it. 

The example of Mark 10:6, shows that the Aramaic text agrees with itself, against the Greek NT text, and the UBS retains the original Peshitta reading. Note that among the Greek versions, they don't even agree with themselves as to what the original reading should be.

In this case it could easily be a case of the Greek scribes putting in helper words, to make it more clear what "the beginning" refers to there. Sort of like a paraphrase does...

I don't know if there is a 100% perfect copy of the Aramaic NT (The Peshitta), but any copies you might read, will be much more accurate and faithful to the original autograph as penned by the Apostles, than any Greek version/translation.

While it could me an omission in the Peshitta at Mark 1:20, we can't say it is for sure. I would like to know more, so I will keep digging to see what I can find.

Thanks for the conversation. Smile



Messages In This Thread
RE: Translations Compared: Eastern or Western? - by Thirdwoe - 09-04-2015, 01:35 AM

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)