Peshitta Forum

Full Version: Romans 1:17 query
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Salaam???

This is my first time to post, and I would just like to say, those who created this forum and facilities have done a great job, since I really like it.
I have never heard of the Aramaic Bible ever, until I came across this site some time ago and the information that is here is a real eye opener. i have learnt quite a lot here.
.........

I was in a chat room and a certain Muslim guy pointed out that Romans 1:17 is quoting Habakkuk 2:4, [using either KJV or ASV] but the quote in Romans has a slight difference in meaning compared to what was written in Habakkuk.
I was wondering if the Aramaic Peshitta has any solution to this?

Keep up the good work??????
And p.s. the sample of the audio Aramaic Bible sounds cool. cant wait to hear more of The Bible in Aramaic.
[Actually, does the Aramaic have a particular name for the Book, instead of a greek word "Bible"? it will be intresting if it has!!!!!]

well, anyways, Salaam be with you all. <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->
Shlama,

What is the difference? There is no difference in meaning between Habakkuk 2:4 quoted by Apostle Paul in Romans 1:17.

Behold, his soul is puffed up, it is not upright in him; but the righteous shall live by his faith. (Habakkuk 2:4 ASV)

Behold, his soul which is lifted up is not upright in him: but the just shall live by his faith. (Habakkuk 2:4 KJV)

For therein is revealed a righteousness of God from faith unto faith: as it is written, But the righteous shall live by faith. (Romans 1:17 ASV)

For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. (Romans 1:17 KJV)

The part of Habakkuk in the original Hebrew text says:

וצדיק באמונתו יחיה


(ie. but the righteous/just shall live by his faith)

Romans 1:17 in KJV & ASV were translated from the Greek NT:

dikaiosunh gar qeou en autw apokaluptetai ek pistewV eiV pistin kaqwV gegraptai o de dikaioV ek pistewV zhsetai


The Greek dikaioV in Hebrew is צדיק. It means righteous or just. Is this the difference that your Muslim chatter was talking about? <!-- sHuh --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/huh.gif" alt="Huh" title="Huh" /><!-- sHuh --> <!-- sSad --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/sad.gif" alt="Sad" title="Sad" /><!-- sSad -->

Apostle Paul wrote in Aramaic :

daktiv : dkena min haymanutha nikhe

(for it is written the righteous/just shall live by faith. )

The Hebrew וצדיק (tzadiq i.e. righteous or just) corresponds to Aramaic dkena; and the Hebrew באמונתו יחיה corresponds to Aramaic haymanutha nikhe (ie. shall live by faith) in Apostle Paul's epistle.

The Aramaic translation above is based on my English translation of the Hebrew translation of the Aramaic of Paul as I am not an expert in Aramaic. Now let us look at what Aramaic experts said about Habakkuk 2:4 quoted by Apostle Paul.

Romans 1:17 For in it is revealed the righteousness of God, from faith to faith; as it is written, The righteous by faith, shall live. (James Murdock's translation of the Aramaic of St. Paul)


Romans 1:17 for the righteousness of Aloha in it is revealed from faith to faith, as it is written, The righteous by faith shall live. (John Wesley Etheridge's translation of the Aramaic of St. Paul)

So I cannot see what kind of problem that Muslim guy was trying to raise except that Muslims have to resort to attacking Apostle Paul as they could not deny the reliability of Jesus Christ of the New Testament.


Peace.
Shlama kalhown,

[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0qydz[/font] "Zdyqa" means "Righteous",
"What is fitting","What is right";
[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0n0k[/font] means "Just","What is just".

[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0n0k[/font] is used in Romans 1:17 in The Peshitta, whereas The Hebrew of Habakkuk uses "Tsadyk", very similar to the Aramaic [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0qydz[/font] "Zadyqa" .

It is interesting that the Peshitta OT uses [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0qydz[/font] "Zdyqa" in Hab. 2:4 whereas the Peshitta NT in Rom. 1:17 uses "Kana".

It would seem the latter emphasizes a legal righteousness , which is the point of Romans; being declared just according to God's law.
Hebrews 10:38 quotes Hab. 2:4 with "Kana", but Galatians 3:11 quotes the same verse with "Zadyqa".

The Hebrew word "Tsadyk" has both meanings "just", "righteous", therefore it is appropriate to translate it with either Aramaic word, depending on the emphasis
of the quotation.

Burktha w'Shlama

Dave
Salaam,

Thanks for your responce,

emm, the muslim guy was alluding to the diffrence between the meaning of :-

Hab. 2:4> "by HIS faith"

Rom.1:17> "by faith"

I looked at the Aramaic script, [although i am a new born baby on the Aramaic language] i was wondering if the letter "B", before the "hymnwta" has something to do with it? or perhaps when the verses are translated, it can mean both?

Anyway, the guy was aluding to the difference in the meaning when you say: the rightous will by "HIS faith" rather than "faith".

Salaam.
Shlama Bar Nohra (Son of Light),


At last the light dawns on the problem !

Hab. 2:4 says "his faith" in the Hebrew text; Rom. 1:17 says "faith"; Hebrews 10:38 in The Peshitta, quoting Hab. 2:4, says "My faith"; Habakkuk 2:4 in The LXX (Septuagint Greek) says "My faith".
It is possible that "וצדיק באמונתו יחיה" ("The just shall live by his faith"), was
read for וצדיק באמונתי יחיה ("The just shall live by My faith"), seeing that the waw and yodh are easily confused one for the other. Apparently the LXX translator had a Hebrew text with "My faith"; the writer of Hebrews - Peshitta also had the same Hebrew text before him, reading "My faith".
I personally believe the Hebrews and LXX text is the correct and most powerful statement of all. Other scripture makes plain the fact that it is God's faith and the faith of Christ that is given to a man and transforms him from death in sin to life in God's righteousness; it is a miracle and an act of new creation from the Spirit of Holiness in whom God chooses to reveal Himself.
The Westcott and Hort Greek text of Hebrews 10:38 also bears witness to this reading in a corrupted form :
"o de dikaiov mou ek pistewv zhsetai" ("My righteous one shall live by faith") The "My" is misplaced ; if placed 5th instead of 4th in the sentence, it would mean "The righteous one shall live by My faith."

"His faith" is not an incorrect statement, for the righteousness of the righteous is not his own; it is the gift of God, yet he is called a righteous man; so it is with faith; wherever true faith exists, "it is the gift of God, not of works, lest any man should boast". - Ephesians 2:8,9
When God gives a man faith, it becomes his own because it is fully given to him; he cannot truly boast, however, for it is not of
himself.

Burkhtha w'Shlama
Quote:When God gives a man faith, it becomes his own because it is fully given to him; he cannot truly boast, however, for it is not of
himself.

I would say that is incorrect Dave, nothing is of our own, that is why we cannot boast in the first place. It never does fully become our own. All good things procede from Him and I'm in full recognition of this once I receive the new birth and continue in the footsteps and the path His Son laid out for us to follow. But I cannot claim anything. Even the faith I had to reach up and ask for Jesus to come into my life and heart was not my own, He did that and enabled me to be able to look up and ask. The "few chosen" statement rings true here.

The same ideal is contained in the following:

Mark 1:14

And after that John was delivered up, Jesus came to Galilee, and He was preaching the gospel of GOD, saying:

"The time is accomplished and the kingdom of GOD hath arrived; repent ye, and believe in HIS gospel."


This is from the Old Syriac and shows Jesus following the same principles, He being our perfect example. You won't find this in the standardized versions, such as the syriac (peshitta) and the greek. The ideal is the same though, hence the reasons I look for superior readings other than the standardized texts.
Shlama Dave,

I think we do agree on the "faith is a gift" statement. The question is not whether it is the gift from God, but rather , does God still call the gift He gives ,His own , or does it become yours by reason of it being given to you ?
If I gave you a new car, is it my car, or yours ? And what kind of giver would I be if I insisted on calling it mine and driving it whenever I wanted to ?
God is not an "Indian giver", (excuse the ethnic reference, I have nothing against Native Americans, it is simply a familiar term that illustrates my point.) He will not claim for Himself what He freely gives to another; He is a gentleman, in my book, not a cad.
He truly gives what He gives. That does not mean I should or can take credit for the gift or anything I accomplish with it; far from it ! I want to glorify God for all of it, for He alone deserves the glory and honor.

2Co 5:18 And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;
Ro 11:36 For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen.

As to the second point in Mark:


Mark 1:14 ?? (ASV) Now after John was delivered up, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of God,

The American Standard Version is a "standardized" text . How can you agree with it ?

Burktha w'shlama,


Dave
Quote:The question is not whether it is the gift from God, but rather , does God still call the gift He gives ,His own , or does it become yours by reason of it being given to you ?

The question was really this:

"Hab. 2:4 says "his faith" in the Hebrew text."

The standardized texts do not follow this hebrew text. I do not know if any of the greek or syriac texts ever got it right since they follow the LXX.

So it seems we have one big mistake that all of the texts got wrong, including the peshitta here (not to rag on you, but it is evident). Such things do affect doctrinal issues within His church.

Back to the faith issue, my knowledge of what I can speak into existence relies completely on His revelation to me. I am unable to act on faith without some sort of knowledge and complete assurance from Him in these endeavors. Faith is action, but there are times when you need to build up in faith, and it comes directly from Him through fasting and prayer. So yes, it is not my own, it procedes from Him always, and without a day and night communion with Him, we wilt like dead flowers due to our environments.

On the thing about Mark, does the ASV say this:

and believe in HIS gospel.

No it doesn't, nor does any text and translation that I have seen yet outside of the greek behind the OS. Here again, we have the western text correcting the standardized versions. It's up to people to see the truth in it and ask The Almighty to witness it to them.

To answer your question about the ASV, did I ever say that I agreed with it?
Shlama Dave,

You said you agreed with the reading "The Gospel of God"
in verse 14. The ASV has that reading as well, hence, you said you agreed with it in v. 14.

Who is the speaker in Habakkuk 2:4 ?


Dave
Quote:Shlama Dave,

You said you agreed with the reading "The Gospel of God"
in verse 14. The ASV has that reading as well, hence, you said you agreed with it in v. 14.

You left out the part about "believe in HIS gospel." Does the ASV have that?

Why would you miss that Dave, that is not like you to put words and intentions in other peoples mouths?!


Anyways,

You may be onto something. Here is one of the best translations of that particular verse:

4 (RSV) Behold, he whose soul is not upright within himself shall fail, but the righteous shall live by his faith.

I made the corrections. The speaker is The Almighty and at this point, He is not speaking through the prophet concerning a foretelling of the messiah. The context is directed at someone else. I'll look at it more here this week.

Actually, I'm defending the use of the word "My" as I'm thinking about it now. Here I am defending that the faith is not my own, and that the gifts are not completely my own, which would justify the use of the phrase "My faith" in repect to God. I am unable to work miracles unless He does it through me.

So, in retrospect, I would have to agree that the use of the word "My" in this passage is right Dave.
January 31, 2005

It seems to me that if LXX and POT agree but differ from the Hebrew Masoretic text, it is the Masoretic text that is possibly wrong. After all, the Hebrew Masoretic text was compiled hundreds of years after LXX and POT.

Otto
Shlama akhi Otto,

The Masoretic probably is wrong in this place., however it is incorrect to say the Peshitta OT is correct in its reading, as it disagrees with The LXX Text
here as well as with the Massoretic. It is also incorrect to assume that the Massoretic did not exist when The LXX was written. The Great Isaiah Scroll, dated 100 BC, agrees with the Massoretic text throughout the entire book of Isaiah. The other Isaiah scroll, not quite complete and of the same age, also agrees with the Massoretic text.
I don't know where people get the idea that the Massoretic text was invented . The Great Isaiah scroll is the oldest complete scroll of Hebrew Isaiah ever found. I have the entire scroll photocopied on CD Rom with scholar's notes and commentary. It is quite legible and should be studied by those interested in discovering truth. You can go to the web site and view it :
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.ao.net/~fmoeller/qumdir.htm">http://www.ao.net/~fmoeller/qumdir.htm</a><!-- m -->

This site is highly educational for Hebrew scholars and laymen alike.


The OT Peshitta was also translated from the Massoretic text. All who have studied its text in detail will tell you that. The two texts agree very closely as compared to the LXX.

No particular text of the OT is always correct. All of them have errors here and there. There are ways to determine the correct readings, in my view, and that of Orthodox Hebrew scholars. More important than the text of the Massoretes are the principles of the Massoretes by which to determine the correct readings. These principles have been employed for at least 2000 years , and are still used today to compare and collate mss..to determine the original text. Jewish Scribes have used them to arrive at a text of the Torah, using relatively recent mss. , that differs from the oldest Hebrew ms. of the Torah by only 6 letters !

Shlama w'burkhtha,


Dave B
While we are on the subject of mistakes in the OT, is this a correct translation of Romans 8:16 in the peshitta?

And She The Spirit gives testimony,....
Dave Wrote:While we are on the subject of mistakes in the OT, is this a correct translation of Romans 8:16 in the peshitta?

And She The Spirit gives testimony,....

Shlama Akhi Dave,

"Spirit", the word etimylogically speaking, is feminine in both Hebrew and Aramaic....and Arabic, for that matter.
Quote:Shlama Akhi Dave,

"Spirit", the word etimylogically speaking, is feminine in both Hebrew and Aramaic....and Arabic, for that matter.

Ok,.....that would explain the Genesis 1:2 reference "And The Spirit of God(She) was moving/hovering over the face of the waters."

But I must ask again, does the peshitta say "And She The Spirit gives testimony,..."?
Pages: 1 2 3 4