Peshitta Forum

Full Version: 1 Corinthians Aramaic primacy doubted...
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Shlama,

Quote:For the Jihudoyee demand signs, and the Aramoyee require wisdom; but we preach the Meshiha crucified, a scandal to the Jihudoyee, and to the Aramoyee foolishness; but to them who are called, Jihudoyee and Aramoyee, the Meshiha is the power of Aloha, and the wisdom of Aloha.

Why does it read Aramoyee? ....Arameans?? I thought the Greeks were the ones whose culture who was into philosophy / wisdom? Or does Aramoyee refer to the Greeks?

Quote: Give no offence to Jihudoyee, or to Aramoyee, or to the church of Aloha.

If [and only if] "Aramoyee" are Arameans, then why would Corinthian greek christians have to worry about offending them -- for Corinth seems a city mostly of ethnic Greeks and /or Hellenistic people?


I am new to the theories about Aramaic. I am not a Greek primacist, and also not an Aramaic primacist, rather uncertain and doubting in regards to primacy. But in regards to this, aramaic primacy theory in regards to the Corinthians letter is under scrutiny already...

Any theories to explain this...?
Hi!

Good questions and I am not certain about some things too, however, I find several reasons why it could be having an aramaic source and that the ethnic group 'Aramoyee' really existed in the diaspora and in Syria of course.

1. Paul was a Jew and his nativity in an Aramaic speaking region in Turkey and writing (even speaking) Greek, was not common for Jews according to historian Flavius.
2. The quality and clearness of the Aramaic peshitta, is better than the Greek source e.g. 1 Cor 7:5,6; 11:20; 14:12,19,20; 15:2 (critical greek); 15:33; 16:33 (Maran atha);
3. Historically, Jews had a big population in Ancient Corinth <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Corinth#Biblical_Corinth">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Co ... al_Corinth</a><!-- m -->
4. Paul often 'said' he went for the nations (non-jews) but he clearly states he went after the 12 tribes (Acts 26:7). And this also can be translated as 'nations' (not Greeks!)
So, he first visited the Jews, and after that, the ethic Greeks followed. (Acts 17:1)

There is a discussion about rendering Aramoyee. Stricly taken, the Peshitta has just on ONE place, the 'Syrian' language, which is in Revelation 9:11 (Aramayit) and this is not a recognized book in the CoE.
But on the other places, it has Armoyee, _not_ Aramoyee and according to the lexicon, Armoyee means 'gentiles'.

The issue is that it may be possible, that originally when it was written, there were not vowels (except aleph of course) in the writings, so syrians (Aramoyee) were an ethnic group which just like the Jews had a big population and they also lived as the Jews did, along the Mediteranian.
Later, when Christianity was a fact, 'Syrians' became internally divided as 'Syrians' and pagans. And the Pagans were called 'Armoye' (syrians) and the Christians, were called Kristiyane.

The meaning 'gentiles' also was used for the same devision among the ethnic Greeks. The Christians were called 'Christians' and the non-Christians were called 'Greek' (gentiles).

Personally, I believe, because when we compare the Greek HSS and the Peshitta, it originally really was the ethnic group, called Aramoyee (Syrians) (especially Mark 7:26 is my main argument). I wrote something about it in Dutch.

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=nl&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=nl&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.2001translation.nl%2FAramese_Grondtekst.aspx%3Fnom%3D1&act=url">http://translate.google.com/translate?s ... D1&act=url</a><!-- m -->
Shlama Akhay.

It is important to note a couple of historical facts.

The Aramaic-speaking world during this time was split between Jews and Arameans (Gentiles). Geographically speaking, the nearest Gentiles to the Jews were Arameans. In fact, the Jews originated with (were originally) the Arameans.

Over time, the word "Aramaye" became synonymous with "gentile" in order to differentiate the two Aramaic-speaking populations. This was such a problem to the early Christian church, that we changed our own self-destination to the Greek form "Syriac" so as to shake off the negative connotation that "Aramaye" had taken on.

Like the Jews, the Arameans spread all over Mesopotamia, Arabia, Africa and Anatolia, and were commonly found amongst each other due to their cultural and linguistic affinity. This spreading helped to make Aramaic the Lingua Franca of a large area, and multiple empires, for over a thousand years.

As to the "wisdom" question, and I don't mean this to sound harsh but will say it anyway...long before the Greeks even learned how to read and write (indeed before they settled down in what we recognize as a civilized condition), the Mesopotamians (including the Arameans) were inventing almost every aspect of culture and science and education. While the Greeks were counting on their fingers, Mesopotamians were writing down calculus and geometry on clay tablets.

So again, I'm not sure that "wisdom", as relates to scientific thought, applies to the Greeks solely as they inherited this wisdom (and pretty much everything else) from the civilizations of the Semitic world, not the other way around.

+Shamasha
distazo Wrote:But on the other places, it has Armoyee, _not_ Aramoyee and according to the lexicon, Armoyee means 'gentiles'.

The issue is that it may be possible, that originally when it was written, there were not vowels (except aleph of course) in the writings, so syrians (Aramoyee) were an ethnic group which just like the Jews had a big population and they also lived as the Jews did, along the Mediteranian.
Later, when Christianity was a fact, 'Syrians' became internally divided as 'Syrians' and pagans. And the Pagans were called 'Armoye' (syrians) and the Christians, were called Kristiyane.

The meaning 'gentiles' also was used for the same devision among the ethnic Greeks. The Christians were called 'Christians' and the non-Christians were called 'Greek' (gentiles).

Paul Younan Wrote:Shlama Akhay.

It is important to note a couple of historical facts.

The Aramaic-speaking world during this time was split between Jews and Arameans (Gentiles). Geographically speaking, the nearest Gentiles to the Jews were Arameans. In fact, the Jews originated with (were originally) the Arameans.

Over time, the word "Aramaye" became synonymous with "gentile" in order to differentiate the two Aramaic-speaking populations. This was such a problem to the early Christian church, that we changed our own self-destination to the Greek form "Syriac" so as to shake off the negative connotation that "Aramaye" had taken on.

Like the Jews, the Arameans spread all over Mesopotamia, Arabia, Africa and Anatolia, and were commonly found amongst each other due to their cultural and linguistic affinity. This spreading helped to make Aramaic the Lingua Franca of a large area, and multiple empires, for over a thousand years.

As to the "wisdom" question, and I don't mean this to sound harsh but will say it anyway...long before the Greeks even learned how to read and write (indeed before they settled down in what we recognize as a civilized condition), the Mesopotamians (including the Arameans) were inventing almost every aspect of culture and science and education. While the Greeks were counting on their fingers, Mesopotamians were writing down calculus and geometry on clay tablets.

So again, I'm not sure that "wisdom", as relates to scientific thought, applies to the Greeks solely as they inherited this wisdom (and pretty much everything else) from the civilizations of the Semitic world, not the other way around.

+Shamasha

Hold on. I am confused. May you please clarify -- why then doesn't the text read Armoyee instead of Aramoyee in those verses I quoted? Why did the writer or scribe have to use a different word in 1 Cor. 1:22-24, 10:32?

If both Gentiles (Armoyee) and Arameans (Aramoyee) sought wisdom, and if Aramoyee and Armoyee both then meant 'gentiles', why the different reading here if the aramaic usually uses Armoyee? <!-- sHuh --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/huh.gif" alt="Huh" title="Huh" /><!-- sHuh --> <!-- s:dontgetit: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/dontgetit.gif" alt=":dontgetit:" title="Dont Get It" /><!-- s:dontgetit: -->

And side note, distazo (or Paul), why were the Aramean Christians called Kristyane? That has Christos as a root instead of something like Meshikha. Why a Greek title in an Aramean area?
Yeah. bump. any answer for my other latest posts?

This is pretty interesting...
Draw Closer,

did you RCV my msg to you. I am unable to send you a Private Msg because under your information box there is no "send private msg" option. I can not get ahole of you and so I wish yuou to reply to me by "Private Msg."

Also the use of "Christian" in the Acts reference you cited the Aramaic word is of Greek origin and a used term among Christians in that region (Antioch) and of that time because the region was also Greek speaking. From what I gather the Jews in that area spoke Greek. Now as to what lenght they did speak Greek I can not be positive. I think it is safe to say that some of the Jewish believers in that area know how to speak the Koine Greek better than others. You would have some that could just get by and others that spoke the Greek very well. Key in on Acts 11:20 where it states that the believers (who were Jewish) were scattered abroad outside of Jerusalem and preached the gospel TO THE GRECIANS. Take care. But please "message" me and hope you also noticed that I sent you a friend request.

Mike Karoules
DrawCloser Wrote:Hold on. I am confused. May you please clarify -- why then doesn't the text read Armoyee instead of Aramoyee in those verses I quoted? Why did the writer or scribe have to use a different word in 1 Cor. 1:22-24, 10:32?

If both Gentiles (Armoyee) and Arameans (Aramoyee) sought wisdom, and if Aramoyee and Armoyee both then meant 'gentiles', why the different reading here if the aramaic usually uses Armoyee? <!-- sHuh --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/huh.gif" alt="Huh" title="Huh" /><!-- sHuh --> <!-- s:dontgetit: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/dontgetit.gif" alt=":dontgetit:" title="Dont Get It" /><!-- s:dontgetit: -->

And side note, distazo (or Paul), why were the Aramean Christians called Kristyane? That has Christos as a root instead of something like Meshikha. Why a Greek title in an Aramean area?

Hi DrawCloser,

Aramaye (eastern pronunciation) and Armoyee (western pronunciation) is the same word. The words "Aramean" and "Gentile" are synonyms. I think distazo is incorrect here, as there is no lexical difference between "Aramean" and "Gentile". Just two different pronunciations, one eastern one western.

The Arameans Christians, to this day, call themselves "Meshikhaye" (Messianics). In Acts, we are told that Antioch adopted the name "Kristyane" first, since there was a large Greek-speaking population there. The Greeks called themselves that, not the Arameans. Although the two words later became synonymous and interchangeable.

+Shamasha
Hi Paul,

The word, written with different consonants could either mean 'syrian' or 'Greek'.
So, that could be Armaye, or Aramaye. (The 'a' vs the 'o' is known to me and is just the eastern vs the western prononciation)
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com/lexicon/Jennings/page.php?p=30">http://www.dukhrana.com/lexicon/Jennings/page.php?p=30</a><!-- m -->

so; Armaye would mean 'gentiles' or 'Greek'
and Aramaye would mean Arameans.
I don't have this knowledge from myself b.t.w.!

I share the opinion with some, that it all means Syrian. The father of Timothy (for instance) was a Syrian, not a Greek.


Correct me if I'm wrong.
This makes me think...

1 Cor. 15:55:

"O death, where is thy victory? O death, where is thy sting?" (ASV, Alexandrian text-type)

"Where is thy sting, Death ? and where is thy victory Shiul ?" (Etheridge Peshitto)

"Death, where is your sting? Grave, where is your victory?" (Byzantine text-type)

Could the Aramaic word d$ywl been mistranslated by the Zorbans?

Why the textual variation for this verse? <!-- sWink --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/wink1.gif" alt="Wink" title="Wink" /><!-- sWink -->

<!-- s:onfire: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/onfire.gif" alt=":onfire:" title="On Fire" /><!-- s:onfire: -->
Paul Younan Wrote:Aramaye (eastern pronunciation) and Armoyee (western pronunciation) is the same word. The words "Aramean" and "Gentile" are synonyms. I think distazo is incorrect here, as there is no lexical difference between "Aramean" and "Gentile". Just two different pronunciations, one eastern one western.

+Shamasha

distazo Wrote:Hi Paul,

The word, written with different consonants could either mean 'syrian' or 'Greek'.
So, that could be Armaye, or Aramaye. (The 'a' vs the 'o' is known to me and is just the eastern vs the western prononciation)
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com/lexicon/Jennings/page.php?p=30">http://www.dukhrana.com/lexicon/Jennings/page.php?p=30</a><!-- m -->

so; Armaye would mean 'gentiles' or 'Greek'
and Aramaye would mean Arameans.
I don't have this knowledge from myself b.t.w.!

I share the opinion with some, that it all means Syrian. The father of Timothy (for instance) was a Syrian, not a Greek.


Correct me if I'm wrong.

So... Aramaye and Armaye differences are irrelevant? Would the presence of 'a' be irrevelant in the apostle's time?

So the correct translation of those verses should rather be 'gentile'?

And any Aramaic primacy evidence of 1 Cor. 15:55? That appears like the Alexandrian Zorba blew it there...
** BUMP**

Ok, I doubt Aramaic primacy for 1 Cor. but...now I doubt even my doubt <!-- sWink --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/wink1.gif" alt="Wink" title="Wink" /><!-- sWink -->

1 Corinthians 1:23 Wrote:[Nestle-Aland and Westcott-Hort ("Alexandrian")]: but we preach Christ crucified; a stumbling block to Jews, and foolishness to Gentiles (ethnesin)

[Byzantine texts]: but we preach Christ crucified; a stumbling block to Jews, and foolishness to Greeks (hellesin)

What?!?

Notice how the Byzantine tradition has 'Greeks' (hellesin) for 1 Cor. 1:22-24 and 10:32 BUT 'Alexandrian' text has the odd 'Gentiles' (ethnesin) discrepancy for verse 23.

Is this significant?

...and distazo:

The Aramaic for 'Aramean' and 'Gentile' is the same except the little symbols above the letters -- and are those 'Syame markings'?? -- And if they are Syame markings, that means they were not present in the earliest Peshitta texts, right?
Shlama Akhi Distazo and DrawCloser,

That's an excellent point you made about the Alexandrian variant, DrawCloser - and we should list that in the forum as it's own proof of Aramaic primacy (where the two Greek texts are both drawn from the same Aramaic source).

If Paul wanted to use the word "Greek" specifically, there already is an Aramaic word specifically for that ethnic group ("Yonaye", from "Ionian") See Colossians 3:11 "There is neither Jew (Yehudaya) nor Gentile (Aramaya), Circumcision nor Uncircumcision, Greek (Yonaya) nor Barbarian (Barbaraya)....etc"

If Paul meant to say "Greek", specifically, he would say "Yonaya" like he did in Colossians 3:11, and not use the generic term for Gentile.

+Shamasha
Hi Paul,

Good remark, for Greek, there is a specific word
Yawnaya (Greek, Hellenois) (Acts 16:1)
Gentile (Hanpa, Etnikoi ) (Matthew 6:7)

(Eg: John 7:35 mentions both 'ame' which is 'people' 'hanpe' which is 'gentiles')

But if Yawnaya -also- means 'Gentile', we have a strange verse in Acts 19:17.
It became known to Jews and Gentiles who lived in Efesos.

Well, wasn't Efesos _anyway_ a city of Gentiles or of Greeks? This sounds like a tautology to me! (Like mentioning that the sun, is round)

But if Aramaya means 'Syrians', it makes a lot more sense to me. Just like the current online Lamsa translation has this notion: The news became known to as well Syrians as to Jews who lived in Efesos. (and of course, this city originally was of Greek origin so it was full of Greeks, not just 'the jews and the Greek')

Then we also have 'nations' (where the Greek NT has etnos)
Galatians 2:14
"why do you compel the Gentile converts to live as do the Jews?"

To sum it up:
Aramaya, Ama: Gentiles, People
Greek: Jawnaya
Jews: Ebrayit

My question is: if the Jews and the Greeks are mentioned as a ethnic group, even the Scyths?, where are the Syrians?

Isn't Aramaya exactly meaning 'Syrian' and not just 'gentile' for which already exist the word Ama, in the Peshitta?
Akhay,

Compare Colossians 3:11 in the Peshitta vs. the Greek. Which one makes more sense?

The verse is meant to be a parallelism, a listing of opposite pairs.

Peshitta reading: Jews/Gentiles, Circumcision/Uncircumcision, Greeks/Barbarians, Slaves/Freemen.

Greek reading: Jews/Greeks, Circumcision/Uncircumcision, Scythians/Barbarians, Slaves/Freemen.

Weren't the Scythians barbarians? How does that make any sense? The parallelism of opposites is broken, but not in the Peshitta. The parallelism that Paul so frequently employed, is preserved only in the Peshitta.

Besides all this, the word Scythian is found nowhere else in the scriptures. It was unheard of.

+Shamasha
Hey Shamasha Paul,

Should'nt Colosians 3:11 be rendered "Jew and Aramean" rather than "Jew and Gentile" ? Both Lamsa and Roth show this reading, and Roth has a note which says the proper word for "Gentiles" is "aimmeh" not "armaya" as present in Col 3:11... Just checking to make sure.

Shlama,
Chuck
Pages: 1 2 3 4