Peshitta Forum

Full Version: CF Burney explains it all!
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Shlama all--

I have been getting into the works of other 19th-20th century Peshitta scholars through Google Books and Internet Archive. William Norton of course has long been a hero of mine. CC Torrey's work has been limited in its availablity but I have found his collaboration on a really interesting work "The Shorter BIble" of great use. There are separate volumes for each Testament, and what they have done is kind of harmonized different accounts and limited duplication. There is a heavy Hebrew and Aramaic emphasis in both volumes and the English is very clear with good footnotes.

But, the real focus of this post is on CF Burney. Burney writes in a way that is every bit as methodical as John Gwynn but in much less space. I am reading his "Aramaic Origins of the Fourth Gospel" which is really an argument for the Aramaic Origin of the whole NT. Brilliant stuff.

I can't post the excerpt I want, part of chapter 7 on mistranslations, so please follow this link and get this short but very powerful book. As far as I can tell, the only area where Burney seems to be slightly off is in supporting the contention of his friend FC Burkitt on the whole Rabulla-Peshitta thing. Fact is, this merits a very brief mention in the beginning, but the rest of the treatise to my mind is going specifically AGAINST OS primacy in its details as the Aramaic proofs he uses are Peshitta in nature. Regardless as to how that may be to some of us purists, the proofs are stunning. Burney even gets into why the NT is not quoting the LXX on the Aramaic side and how the Semitic NT patterns are deeper than oral transmission theories, although he seems to stop short of proclaiming Peshitta as original. For me the interesting fact is we who do proclaim Peshitta orginality would use the exact same evidence and argumentation as Burney did. I have seldom seen such a compact yet effective presentation.

See for yourself. I have had a tons of CD Roms leftover from when I did e-books of my rough drafts and they are now being put to good use building an electronic library every bit as impressive as what I have on my bookshelves--and that is saying something. It is all free for the taking if you know where to look, so go here please and enjoy:

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.archive.org/details/aramaicoriginoff00burnrich">http://www.archive.org/details/aramaico ... 00burnrich</a><!-- m -->

PS--I recommend downloading the pdf version and going into: View, then Page Display and selecting Two-Up.
Shlama akhi,

Thanks for the link. This is a good resource.
Shlama:
This is great. It's a detailed examination of the syntaxical "casus pendens".

<!-- l --><a class="postlink-local" href="http://www.peshitta.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=652">viewtopic.php?f=25&t=652</a><!-- l -->

exerpt by Paul Younan on Mon Mar 29, 2004:
Quote:You can search Classical Greek high and low, and you will never find a construction like these examples in any book originally written in Greek. This syntactical construct is quite foreign to all Indo-European languages. However, you can turn to any book and chapter in the LXX or GNT and find at examples like this.

And what do we know about the LXX? Well, first and foremost of course it is translational Greek. If we find similiar syntactical constructs in the GNT, and we do indeed, then it would logically follow that the GNT is translational Greek, as well.

It is this very imitation of Semitic syntactical structure that is a dead-giveaway that the GNT is a translation from a Semitic source....namely, the Aramaic NT.


Shlama,
Stephen
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- m -->
Stephen Silver Wrote:Shlama:
This is great. It's a detailed examination of the syntaxical "casus pendens".

Wow Akhi Stephen, beginning on p. 63 he has a great section on casus pendens in the 4th Gospel, very interesting.
Paul Younan Wrote:
Stephen Silver Wrote:Shlama:
This is great. It's a detailed examination of the syntaxical "casus pendens".

Wow Akhi Stephen, beginning on p. 63 he has a great section on casus pendens in the 4th Gospel, very interesting.

Shlama Akhi Paul:
I'm a novice. This is a great study in and of itself. Perhaps, I'll get a handle on casus pendens after all. You know this is really at the heart of the proofing of Aramaic Primacy.

Shlama,
Stephen
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- m -->
Mr. Roth appears to link us with a great resource. Holy man!! I did not know such things like this existed . CF Burney even tries to demonstrate the Aramaic originality of the Gospel of John which, has been a problem for me because split word proofs in this gospel are just a handfull - at best.

Now, just a quick couple of technical questions if you, Stephen and Andrew, don't mind. Do you know the full name of CF Burney?? Also, when going to the link and clicking "full text," from a few lines down all through the rest of the book the writing is crossed out. Why is this?? Does this mean we can't read the link of this book online??

thanks,

Kindly,

Mike Karoules
Charles Fox Burney. oooops!! Right there in front of me. sorry

My first question; answered

Mike
Shlama Akhi Mike,

It is best to download the pdf, and if you can't, get the free Adobe Reader from <!-- w --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.adobe.com">www.adobe.com</a><!-- w --> and then download it. The Full Text format loses info--it's like a long plain text email. Foreign language fonts don't translate well. Hope this helps!