Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Romans 8:3- BAUSCHER
#1
In his translation of this verse, he states that Jesus came in the "form of sinful flesh". Most translations say "likeness" instead of "form" in order to avoid the notion that Jesus had part with sin. What is everyone's opinion of his translation of this verse?
Reply
#2
I'm not sure how "likeness" would be any better than "form". Either way, some will try to read more into a verse than what should be read into it. Without knowing the full context of Dave's translation, I'm in no position to comment on it one way or another. But I could offer an interpretation of the Peshitta source text, which would flow something like this:

"... the Allah dispatched his son in the form of the flesh of sinfulness, on account of the sinfulness; of by his flesh he to condemn to the sinfulness." - Rom. 8:3
Reply
#3
It's kind of hard to render this verse into English, but "Form" or "Likness" both work ok as translations...it could also mean "clothing", as something one puts on, which is not them personally, but something they put on themselves...a physical body of flesh and bones is made for our soul and spirit (the real us) to be expressed through, or a "physical house" which we dwell inside of, as is said in 2 Cor 5:1.

Alaha the Word came to dwell or "Tabernacle" with/in His creation, which had been cursed, in order to break the curse of the law of sin and death and to free us from it's bondage.

Hey, Jerry...how are you getting "the Allah" from the Aramaic text?

Shlama,
Chuck
Reply
#4
Thirdwoe, if I were asked what word most closely represents the Peshitta's name for God, I would opine that it is "more-or-less" the same Aramaic word used today to represent God; "the Allah", as it is coventionally spelled in English today.

For example, in the Peshitta NT it transliterates as "-a:lo:ho-", or as you and others write "alaha". But either way, it looks to me to be an emphatic singular noun, where the back qames-aleph signifies the front "the" in English; getting us to "the -a:loh", or "the Alah".

But admittedly, it might be a tough sell to an English audience; and admittedly also, I've never seen anyone else attempt to translate it as such; though Etheridge does transliterate it as "Aloha" in his translation.
Reply
#5
Jerry, I ask, because you dropped the "a" and added an extra "l" which is curious to me. Can you explain the reason?
Reply
#6
In the Peshitta NT, you will find this:

Alah used 3 times;
Alaha used 489 times;
Alahe used 9 times;
Alahta used 2 times.

Is not Alah "alah", or (god)?
Is not Alaha "the-alah", or (the-god)?
Is not Alahe "the-alahs", or (the-gods)?
Is not Alahta "the-alahtress", or (the-goddess)?

Regarding the extra "l", it was added only because "allah" seems to be the most recognizable spelling for "god" in the Aramaic world today. But I could be wrong on that.
Reply
#7
Thirdwoe Wrote:It's kind of hard to render this verse into English, but "Form" or "Likness" both work ok as translations...it could also mean "clothing", as something one puts on, which is not them personally, but something they put on themselves...a physical body of flesh and bones is made for our soul and spirit (the real us) to be expressed through, or a "physical house" which we dwell inside of, as is said in 2 Cor 5:1.

It's like in the movie Avatar <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->
Reply
#8
Jerry, I believe that "Alaha", is the most common form in Aramaic today and always, and "Allah" would be the way an Arab Muslim, or an Arab Christian would refer to God. It's not a personal name though, since the Arab Muslim (not the Arab Christian) accepts no personal name for God, they use this title instead, which seems to be all they have.

Shlama,
Chuck
Reply
#9
Bausher does appear to believe in the sinlessness of Christ, but I thought this was an unuasual translation lol. Thanks for the replies!
Reply
#10
I
Quote:n his translation of this verse, he states that Jesus came in the "form of sinful flesh". Most translations say "likeness" instead of "form" in order to avoid the notion that Jesus had part with sin. What is everyone's opinion of his translation of this verse?
Study Aramaic and you not need Bauschers, Roths etc.
Why to follow somebody's biases?
I do not understand people chasing different translations when it takes few months
to master NT Aramaic and read the original.
Reply
#11
IPOstapyuk Wrote:I do not understand people chasing different translations when it takes few months
to master NT Aramaic and read the original.

how did you do that?

Which steps did you follow? <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->
Reply
#12
First of all you have to love it.
I used parallel translation at dukhrana.com
(but their pronunciation is wrong at least it was a while ago).
Read Mingana 148 aloud with parallel translation help and
then reread aloud without translation. Record on audio only Aramaic text and listen
with attention and without attention. There other advanced techniques that long ago
I posted on the forum but it appeared that people are not interested in serious study of the foreign language and therefore dependent on translation biases and study and compare different versions.
As for me, I am free from this.
Khaboris manuscript also has vowels and use its parallel translation too.
Do not use dictionaries. Context is the dictionary. Good luck.
Reply
#13
IPO, if you have audio recorded any Eastern Peshitta books, I would love to hear them read aloud.

Shlama,
Chuck
Reply
#14
No. For a long time I have been waiting that our akhi Paul
may record but... .Hopefully one day he decides cause we have enough translations but
no recorded material.
Reply
#15
:

Yea...we need both an Aramaic and an English audio recording of The Eastern Peshitta Text. His Grace, Mar Awa, has recorded the full book of Psalms in the Peshitta Aramaic.

And...just to clear this up, the world has NO Eastern Peshitta only Text in an English translation, in any published translations available to the public. Plenty of Western Peshitto versions though, with some Eastern readings here and there added in.

Speaking of that...Shamasha Paul, is there any news concerning the Official Church of the East English translation?

Shlama,
Chuck
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)