08-30-2013, 08:37 AM
:
Both English translations which are available of the Diatessaron 160 A.D., that I have seen, have the same reading: "...the only begotten, God, which is in the bosom of the Father...;" The comas are not original to the text, and it's a guess how they should be, or if they should be applied here. This is how it is printed in the two English versions I have seen.
The Eastern Peshitta text has the same reading as the western revision of the text, "...the only begotten, God, which is in the bosom of the Father...;" but where the comas must go, if at all, is something to be discussed further. Paul Younan chose to translated it this way, "...the only begotten of God, which is in the bosom of the Father..."; yet, there is no "of" present in the Aramaic Peshitta text, but may be implied and may be correct, though again, it's something to be discussed further.
The Curetonian, in a litteral rendering of the text, says: "For, Alaha, from always, no Man has seen. The only Son, the one from the bosom of The Father, he shows unto us." And we know that this Aramaic text, was revised to conform in places with the Greek text used at the time and in that region.
The Majority of Greek MS has "the only Son", as does Jeromes Latin Vulgate from the 390s, while the Greek Siniaticus text about the 350s, has "No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has made him known." Even though W&H went with "the only begotten God." Which may be because "..the only begotten God..." reading, is found in the oldest Papyri, from 175-225 A.D.
St. Ireneaus (130-200 A.D.), if his books have not been corrupted, quotes it both ways, twice "God", and once "Son" in his "Against Heresies" Books. Clement of Alexandria (153-217 A.D.) has "And John the apostle says: ?No man hath seen God at any time. The only-begotten God, who is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him,?
The Sinaitic Palimpsest (old scratch) lacks this verse, so we can't check it's reading.
All things considered, I say that how the Aramaic Peshitta text reads, is the correct form. But if it should be "the only begotten of God" or just "the only begotten God" is up for debate.
.
Both English translations which are available of the Diatessaron 160 A.D., that I have seen, have the same reading: "...the only begotten, God, which is in the bosom of the Father...;" The comas are not original to the text, and it's a guess how they should be, or if they should be applied here. This is how it is printed in the two English versions I have seen.
The Eastern Peshitta text has the same reading as the western revision of the text, "...the only begotten, God, which is in the bosom of the Father...;" but where the comas must go, if at all, is something to be discussed further. Paul Younan chose to translated it this way, "...the only begotten of God, which is in the bosom of the Father..."; yet, there is no "of" present in the Aramaic Peshitta text, but may be implied and may be correct, though again, it's something to be discussed further.
The Curetonian, in a litteral rendering of the text, says: "For, Alaha, from always, no Man has seen. The only Son, the one from the bosom of The Father, he shows unto us." And we know that this Aramaic text, was revised to conform in places with the Greek text used at the time and in that region.
The Majority of Greek MS has "the only Son", as does Jeromes Latin Vulgate from the 390s, while the Greek Siniaticus text about the 350s, has "No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has made him known." Even though W&H went with "the only begotten God." Which may be because "..the only begotten God..." reading, is found in the oldest Papyri, from 175-225 A.D.
St. Ireneaus (130-200 A.D.), if his books have not been corrupted, quotes it both ways, twice "God", and once "Son" in his "Against Heresies" Books. Clement of Alexandria (153-217 A.D.) has "And John the apostle says: ?No man hath seen God at any time. The only-begotten God, who is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him,?
The Sinaitic Palimpsest (old scratch) lacks this verse, so we can't check it's reading.
All things considered, I say that how the Aramaic Peshitta text reads, is the correct form. But if it should be "the only begotten of God" or just "the only begotten God" is up for debate.
.