04-20-2013, 06:38 AM
Hi,
I think this makes way for a very early (1st century) translation of an original which was written using Hebrew Square script to a Greek source. The mistake is ancient and later on, never corrected.
When the Peshitta was penned, at some time it was copied from a hebrew script to a Aramaic-Syrian script, this mistake was not made.
G.D. Bauscher gives a very viable possibility it could have looked like this in the 1st century:
![[Image: rom5v7.png]](http://www.peshitta.nl/images/rom5v7.png)
Another thing I would like to comment on is the phrasing 'altered'. I seriously doubt there is any exegetical discussion or schism in the early church about Romans 5:7. There have been counsils, of Calchedon for instance, to which we can relate to certain verses in the NT but Romans 5:7? Do you know any?
The right word should be 'mistakes'. Scribal errors are likely to occur, but alterations are rare.
I think this makes way for a very early (1st century) translation of an original which was written using Hebrew Square script to a Greek source. The mistake is ancient and later on, never corrected.
When the Peshitta was penned, at some time it was copied from a hebrew script to a Aramaic-Syrian script, this mistake was not made.
G.D. Bauscher gives a very viable possibility it could have looked like this in the 1st century:
Another thing I would like to comment on is the phrasing 'altered'. I seriously doubt there is any exegetical discussion or schism in the early church about Romans 5:7. There have been counsils, of Calchedon for instance, to which we can relate to certain verses in the NT but Romans 5:7? Do you know any?
The right word should be 'mistakes'. Scribal errors are likely to occur, but alterations are rare.