Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Translations Compared: Eastern or Western?
(09-04-2015, 09:44 AM)sestir Wrote: When we talk about harmonizations between the gospel accounts we may as well suspect influence from the Diatessaron.

Quote:We can't consider the SP to be a true Peshitta manuscript as it isn't a copy of its text, but another sort of production...

Usually when I see this discussed, people split the Aramaic witnesses into SyS (Sinaitic Palimpsest), SyC (Curetonian Gospels), SyP (Peshitta) and SyH (Harklean version). It has more value as an independent witness, like you illustrate with the Eastern Peshitta textual family which was protected from Roman and Alexandrine influence by its geographic location in Persia, outside the reach of the Roman empire. So too have Greek textual families (not "the Greek" but some Greek), individual manuscripts and families in other languages (Latin, Gothic, Armenian..) escaped recension in certain passages by being used or transmitted in remote areas.

It is just how it is, when you have so many copies and scribes around, handling the text, and translating the text into different languages, like Greek for instance, there is bound to be many mistakes and mistranslations.

In this case less is more... as in better. Less handling of the text. After many years trying to figure out what is going on in the Greek versions, it is very refreshing to have a NT text which is so right on and so free of problems. Boring for the textual critics out there, but rewarding for those who truly love God's Word.


Messages In This Thread
RE: Translations Compared: Eastern or Western? - by Thirdwoe - 09-04-2015, 05:17 PM

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)