Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
_The Peshitta Holy Bible_ translated by David Bauscher
#56
"NIV... is based on false manuscripts"
How "false"-- details?

"The KJV is based on the Textus Receptus, a majority text with an unbroken pedigree"
Do you agree with me that majority opinion is often incorrect?
What do you make of mistranslations in the KJV (and moreover, in all translations from the Greek, which was in turn translated from the original Aramaic)?

====================================================.
semiticism: redundant pronoun at Rev 12:4 and Rev 5:8
Hoskier on word order of Rev 12:3

When Rev 12:4 was originally composed, do you think it had the semiticism of a superfluous pronoun?
The Aramaic Crawford has such, as do at-least 11 Greek mss.

Revelation 12:4b (based on Glaser)
And the dragon/second stands/rises being before the woman
who was prepared of/she giving birth,
that when she has birthed,
n-a-k-L-i-u-h-i will consume (plural) him
L'b-r-h to her son.

Revelation 12:4b
https://biblehub.com/text/revelation/12-4.htm
And the
δράκων/ drakōn/ dragon
stands before the
γυναικὸς/ gynaikos/ woman
being about to bring forth,
so that when she should bring forth, the
τέκνον/ teknon/ child
αὐτῆς/ autēs/ of her
καταφάγῃ/ kataphagē/ he might devour

Hoskier - Concerning the Text of the Apokalypse (1929), vol. 2 pg 314 speaking of Rev 12:4's having at its very end an additional concluding word in some mss.
https://archive.org/details/Hoskier-Conc...1/mode/2up
https://archive.org/stream/Hoskier-Conce...n_djvu.txt
_fin_. +αυτο 23 [_non_ 55] 34-35-87-124-132-156, 164/5 [_non_ 166], 181-188 _copt_, +αυτω 200.
+ eum _Vict_. (_apud Apr._), +eum, ille draco _arm α_. 1. 2.

846. autos
https://biblehub.com/greek/846.htm
autos: (1) self (emphatic) (2) he, she, it (used for the third pers. pron.) (3) the same
Original Word: αὐτός, αὐτή, αὐτό
Part of Speech: Personal Pronoun
Transliteration: autos
Phonetic Spelling: (ow-tos')
Definition: (1) self (emphatic) (2) he, she, it (used for the third person pronoun) (3) the same
Usage: he, she, it, they, them, same.

https://biblescan.com/searchgreek.php?q=...F%84%CF%89
https://biblehub.com/greek/1473.htm
Strong's Greek: 848. αὑτοῦ (hautou) -- her own, his own, their own, themselves, they.
.... Forms and Transliterations ... αυτω ....
https://biblehub.com/greek/848.htm
Strong's Greek: 846. αὐτός (autos) -- (1) self (emphatic) (2) he, she, it (used for the third pers. pron.) (3) the same
... αυτο .... αυτω....

Hat tip:
H.C. Hoskier, "Manuscripts of the Apocalypse - Recent Investigations: V" (1924), 412-443, 438-440
jstor.org/stable/10.2307/community.28211048
CONCLUSION.
Can history express the very early polyglot interaction more clearly? It would not seem possible, but it requires infinite patience to convince oneself, and I can only indicate the path leading to true Knowledge. It has its penances and its disappointments, but it is the only one (as the Indians say) which leads to Emancipation! As regards the Seer's own Syro-Greek style, observe the following redundant relative constructions (hitherto barely touched upon by other critics), a real Semitic-- (whether Hebraic or Aramaic)-- mode of expression, to be paralleled as far back as in Genesis, _viz.:_
Apoc. ii. 7 and 17. ....
iii. 8. ....
vi. 4. ....
vii. 2. ....
9. ....
xii. 4. .... (some MSS) ....
xiii. 12. ....
xvii. 9. ....
xx. 8. .... (some MSS. omit) ....

Now notice the same proportionate number of similar expressions in the book of Genesis: (Hebrew order of words) :

Gen. iv. 5. Hath appointed to me God seed another instead of Abel whom slew him Cain.
v. 29. Because of the ground which hath cursed it Jehovah.
xix. 29. When he overthrew the cities in which dwelt in them Lot.
xxiv. 3 and 37. Not thou shalt take a wife unto my son of the daughters of the Canaanites, whom I dwell in the midst of them.
xxiv. 14. And let it come to pass that the damsel whom I shall say to her. . . .
xxx. 26. Give me my wives and my children whom I have served thee for them.
xxxi. 13. I am the God of Bethel where thou annointedst there the pillar, and where thou vowest unto me there a vow.
xxxiv. 8. Shechem my son longeth the soul of him for your daughter.
xxxvii. 13. And Israel loved Joseph more than all his children because the son of his old age he was his.
xliii. 38. If befall him mischief by the way the which ye go in it.
xliv. 16 and 17. Behold we are the servants of my Lord, both we and also he whom is found the cup in the hand of him.
xlv. 4. And he said I am Joseph your brother whom ye sold me into Egypt.
xlviii. 15. The God whom did walk my fathers before him.

Thus a link (of most undesigned coincidence), is formed between the first and the last books of the Canon, and marks the Alpha and Omega of our scriptures, and a continuity, which the ultra-modernist-- (God forgive his conceit and complacency)-- with all the ingenuity at his command, is not able to break nor to weaken.

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
When Rev 5:8 was originally composed, do you think it had the semiticism of a superfluous pronoun?
The Aramaic Crawford has such, as do at-least 5 Greek mss.

Revelation 5:8 (based on Glaser)
a-k-d And when
sh-q-L-h taking/lifting it
L-k-th-b-a to the book/writing,
four living beings and twenty and four elders fall down before him-- that lamb--....

Revelation 5:8a
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/revelation/5-8.htm
Καὶ/ And
hote/ ὅτε/ when
elaben/ ἔλαβεν/ He had taken
to/ τὸ/ the
biblion/ βιβλίον/ scroll
ta/ τὰ/ the
tessara/ τέσσαρα/ four ....

Hoskier - Concerning the Text of the Apokalypse (1929), vol. 2 pg 152 speaking of Rev 5:8's having near its beginning an additional pronoun in some mss.
https://archive.org/details/Hoskier-Conc...1/mode/2up
https://archive.org/stream/Hoskier-Conce...n_djvu.txt
τουτο _pro_ το βιβλιον 119-123-144-148-158 _sah_, τουτο το βιβλιον _aeth_.

5124. touto
https://biblehub.com/greek/5124.htm
touto: this; he, she, it
Original Word: τοῦτο
Transliteration: touto
Phonetic Spelling: (too'-to)
Definition: this; he, she, it
NAS Exhaustive Concordance
Word Origin
neut. sing. nom. or acc. of houtos,, q.v.

Hat tip:
H.C. Hoskier, "Manuscripts of the Apocalypse - Recent Investigations: V" (1924), 412-443, 422
jstor.org/stable/10.2307/community.28211048

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Do you think Rev 6:12 originally had:
sackcloth?
wineskin? (Crawford contains that)

Do you think Rev 12:3's original word order was:
"another sign"?
"sign another"? (Crawford contains that)

Glaser's PDF http://dukhrana.com/crawford/files/Revel...l-Data.pdf
SP [Standard Peshitto] has 0qs [s-q-a] ("sackcloth"), whereas Crawford has 0qz [z-q-a] ("wineskin"). Both words convey the idea of a black sun like an animal's outer layer, but they are also quite distinct in meaning. The reference to a black wineskin is made in Psalm 119:83, and curiously that Hebrew word is d0n [n-a-d] which is like the rootword SP used earlier in the verse to describe an earthquake (0dwn) [n-u-d-a].

Hoskier - Concerning the Text of the Apokalypse (1929), vol. 2 pg 9
https://archive.org/details/Hoskier-Conc...1/mode/2up
https://archive.org/stream/Hoskier-Conce...n_djvu.txt
As to _syr_S [i.e. the Crawford Revelation].
Gwynn's edition of the elder Syriac or _syr_S. For some reason later writers persist in calling this philoxenian, and Horner designates it as _syr ph_. But the appellations of _syr_S and Σ for earlier and later Syriac were so simple in a critical apparatus. Why change? For my part I refuse to do so, and that simply for the sake of perpetuating sound traditions, as against unnecessary change, and in the interests of simplification for future students.

The trouble with Gwynn's otherwise most excellent study is that whenever he found a various reading in his Syriac, which by a slight adjustment of a letter or a point could be brought into harmony with the then known Greek, he did so. It is unfortunate, because my labours have since produced Greek witness for most of his doubtful Syriac readings.

Notably at vi. 12 ασκος for σακκος is now attested by all my five mss. of _fam_ 119, a true Graeco-Syriac family. Again, in a very small place at XII. 3 I found _fam_ 119, varied the order of
kαὶ ὤφθη αλλο σημειον
to
k. ωφθη σημειον αλλο [αλλο: "another"; σημεῖον: "sign"]
for which none of the other Greeks or Versions seemed to vouch ; nor did Gwynn or Horner report this for _syr_S, yet there it stands, σημειον preceding αλλο. In Syriac the word for signum is ala, hence easy confusion of order.
_Syr_S is entitled to respect, but when absolutely alone it can be neglected, as it seems to be a very independent recension.

Revelation 12:3
Kai/ Καὶ/ And
ōphthē/ ὤφθη/ was seen
allo/ ἄλλο/ another
sēmeion/ σημεῖον/ sign
en/ ἐν/ in
tō/ τῷ/ the
ouranō/ οὐρανῷ/ heaven ....

Revelation 6:12
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/revelation/6-12.htm
.... kai/ καὶ/ and
ho/ ὁ/ the
hēlios/ ἥλιος/ sun
egeneto/ ἐγένετο/ became
melas/ μέλας/ black
hōs/ ὡς/ as
sakkos/ σάκκος/ sackcloth
trichinos/ τρίχινος/ of hair ....

ασκός
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%CE%B1%CF...F%8C%CF%82
Alternative forms
ασκί n (askí) (literary)
Etymology
From Ancient Greek ἀσκός (askós).
Noun
ασκός • (askós) m (plural ασκοί)
animal skin, goatskin, wineskin
bag .... Aeolus bound all the winds in a bag and gave it to Odysseus.
(anatomy) sac (bag shaped organ)
container shaped like a wineskin

=========================================================.
"There are no mistranslations in the KJV"

Aramaic original New Testament theory
wikipedia.org/wiki/Aramaic_original_New_Testament_theory
....accurate translations of the original Aramaic remove several mistranslations present in Greek manuscripts:

mistranslation at Mt 1:16
Greek manuscripts of Matthew's genealogy list 14, 14, and 13 generations. In Aramaic mss. of Matthew's genealogy, with Mt 1:16's "gbra" correctly translated as father/guardian, Matthew's genealogy lists 14, 14, and 14 generations. Mary had a father/guardian named Joseph (plus a husband also called Joseph). Native Aramaic speaker Paul Younan detected this mistranslation.

mistranslation at Mt 26:6 and Mk 14:3
Greek mss. have Jesus and his disciples visiting the house of a leper. The Greek translation from Aramaic has leper at Mt 26:6 and Mk 14:3, while the Aramaic allows for potter. Lepers were unclean and weren't allowed to have guests over. It's actually Simon the potter. To continue to call someone a leper even after he'd been healed of leprosy would have constituted slander.

mistranslations at Mt 7:6
For Mt 7:6, it's actually 'hang earrings on dogs,' not 'give a holy thing to dogs.' Native Aramaic speaker Paul Younan noticed the two mistranslations in this verse.

mistranslation at Mark 9:49 ....
mistranslation at Lk 14:26 ....
mistranslation at John 13:13
Jesus spoke in Aramaic what became John 13:13a. Greek mss. have Jesus say, "ὑμεῖς φωνεῖτέ με Ὁ διδάσκαλος καί Ὁ κύριος" (W&H, NA28 variants). "φωνεῖτέ" ('to call out') was an incorrect word choice for the Greek rendition of his remark: "Ὑμεῖς φωνεῖτέ με Ὁ διδάσκαλος καί Ὁ κύριος [you call me, Teacher and Lord] is bad Greek, just about as astonishing as if one should say in English: "you cry me teacher and lord." The right word, which John knew quite well, would have been καλεῖτε. Why did he ever write φωνεῖν?"[28]

mistranslation for Acts 2:24....
mistranslation for Acts 5:13....
mistranslation for Acts 8:23....
mistranslation for Acts 8:27....
mistranslation at Rev 1:13....
mistranslation at Rev 2:22....
mistranslation at Rev 10:1....
mistranslations at Mt 5:13 and Lk 14:34 (but not at Mk 9:50)
Matthew 5:13 and Luke 14:34 in Greek mss. have an erroneous translation of the original Aramaic th-p-k-h by rendering it as μωρανθῇ/ foolish. In contrast, Mark 9:50 in Greek mss. correctly render Jesus' remarks about salt that becomes ἄναλον/ unsalty.

"There is no Aramaic New Testament"

_Aramaic Peshitta New Testament Translation_ (2011) by Janet Magiera
amazon.com/Aramaic-Peshitta-New-Testament-Translation/dp/0982008554/

===========================================.
"Greek was the scholarly language at the time it was written"
I agree Paul was scholarly, and could speak Greek. Do you think Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, James, and Peter:
were scholarly? could speak Greek?

Acts 4:13 (NIV), biblehub.com/acts/4-13.htm
When they saw the courage of Peter and John and realized that they were unschooled, ordinary men, they were astonished and they took note that these men had been with Jesus.

"the Septuagint which preceded the books of the New Testament, even though it was an erroneous translation from Hebrew to Greek, was a translation into Greek and not Aramaic"
The book of Daniel "preceded the books of the New Testament," and was originally partially if not wholly in Aramaic. Copies of Daniel today are partially Aramaic.
The book of Ezra "preceded the books of the New Testament" and is partially in Aramaic.
The Targums of the OT (exception: Daniel, which lacks a Targum) were completed by A.D. 200, and are in Aramaic.
The Peshitta OT (including the Apochrypha) was completed by A.D. 200, and is in Aramaic.

Do you agree with R.H. Charles that "the chief Hebraisms in the Apocalypse... are sufficient to prove that it is more Hebraic than the LXX itself"?

_The Original Language of the Apocalypse_ by Robert Balgarnie Young Scott (1928), 25pp.
https://docplayer.net/52870343-The-apoca...erend.html
Charles' own explanation is that the author writes in Greek but thinks in Hebrew. This may be questioned from the following stand-points. An author who is so imperfectly acquainted with Greek would be unlikely to choose it as a medium of literary expression. Again, if he were thinking in one language and writing in another, his thoughts would be expressed in the language of everyday speech, which at this period was not Hebrew but Aramaic.^1 [1: cf. G.F. Moore: Judaism, vol. i, p. 302] Moreover, Charles himself finds this hypothesis insufficient and is forced to postulate translation from Semitic sources, as, for example, in cap. 12. But the idioms of cap. 12 are found elsewhere in places where the use of sources is not suggested. Finally, the transliterations and mistranslations later to be noted are inexplicable on the theory that the Apocalypse was composed in Greek.
Charles unconsciously gives away his case when he says: "the chief Hebraisms in the Apocalypse... are sufficient to prove that it is more Hebraic than the LXX itself". There is only one thing that is more Hebraic than a translation from Hebrew, and that is a translation that is more literal and not so well done.
We come to the conclusion, therefore, that the Apocalypse as a whole is a translation from Hebrew or Aramaic, while leaving room for the possibility of minor editorial alterations after it was in a Greek form.

"There is no Greek manuscript that has a traceable lineage from an Aramaic source text"
All Greek mss. exhibit mistranslations from Aramaic, and semiticisms-- some more so than others, esp. the 4 Gospels, the 1st half of Acts, and Revelation.
Are you aware of _any_ Greek manuscript that has a "traceable lineage" back to say: A.D. 100? A.D. 250?

"shouldn't you be providing evidence that there is an Aramaic source text for the New Testament?"
The Peshitta NT is the Aramaic source text for the New Testament (exception: the 'Western Five' of 2 Peter, 2 Jn, 3 Jn, Jude, and Revelation).
The Crawford ms. of Revelation is the Aramaic source text for the book of Revelation.

"God's promise that he guarantees their preservation"
Who or what is "their"?

"Don't you believe the bible?"
About what, specifically? (that the earth is flat? that the sun goes around the earth?)

"Psalms 12:7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever."
Do you think "them" is: the Bible? particular written statements?

"1 Corinthians 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."
What do you conclude from that verse?

================================================.
"every verse of the King James Bible is scripture; God's inspired word in English.
2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
Why do you quote the NIV which contains obvious errors?"

I make use of several versions. When I quote the NIV, I give you the opportunity to tell me where it went wrong.
By "scripture," do you think 2 Timothy 3:16 means 'the KJV version'?
Do you think Revelation 22:19 originally had:
"tree of life"?
"book of life"?

Revelation 22:19
https://biblehub.com/revelation/22-19.htm
Berean Literal Bible
And if anyone should take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life, and out of the holy city, of those having been written in this book.
Aramaic Bible in Plain English
“And whoever subtracts from the words of the Scripture of this prophecy, God shall subtract his part from The Tree of Life and from The Holy City, those things which are written in this book.”

King James Bible
And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
Douay-Rheims Bible
And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from these things that are written in this book.

"Erasmus and the Text of Revelation 22:19: A Critique of Thomas Holland’s Crowned With Glory" by Jan Krans
PDF: http://www.reltech.org/TC/v16/Krans2011.pdf
The story of Erasmus’ retranslation of the final verses of Revelation from the Vulgate into Greek is well-known and discussed in every textbook on New Testament textual criticism. The basic elements or facts are the following. The first edition of the New Testament with a Greek text was prepared by Erasmus and published in 1516. For Revelation, he based his Greek text on a single manuscript, minuscule 1^r (now numbered 2814 according to the new Gregory-Aland number). This manuscript, however, lacks the final verses of the book, and in order to have a complete text, Erasmus retranslated these verses into Greek from the Latin. Elements of his retranslation survive in every edition of the so-called Textus Receptus, the standard text of the printed Greek New Testament until the nineteenth century. Obviously, for those who try to defend the Textus Receptus as the original text of the Greek New Testament, this story poses something of a problem. Here is one text in which the presumably uninterrupted line of transmission is demonstrably broken. Only a miracle could have made Erasmus produce exactly the same text as the original Greek, and such a miracle did not happen.

"strawman"
How could I improve what I posted to make it better present your view?
Do you see anything erroneous here?:

_Scribal Habits and Theological Influences in the Apocalypse: The Singular Readings of Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, and Ephraemi_ by Juan Hernandez (2006), 241pp., on 13
https://www.amazon.com/Scribal-Habits-Th...161491122/
look inside:
amazon.co.uk/Scribal-Habits-Theological-Influences-Apocalypse-ebook/dp/B083W1HGW5/
However, only one very defective MS was available for the Apocalypse, Codex Reuchlin-- a twelfth-century MS that lacked the final leaf, which contained Rev. 22:16-21.^11 As is widely known, for this section Erasmus went back to the Latin Vulgate and retranslated it into Greek, resulting in a number of readings unattested anywhere else in the entire Greek MS tradition (in one case, even the Greek language!).^12 What is less publicized, however, is the fact that Erasmus also did this for other parts of the Apocalypse, where his Greek MS differed from the Latin Vulgate.^13
Reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: _The Peshitta Holy Bible_ translated by David Bauscher - by DavidFord - 06-19-2021, 02:59 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)