Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Hebrews 2:9 Revisited
#1
Shlama Khulkon:
The pivotal verse between the eastern and western versions of the New Testament Peshitta is Hebrews 2:9. Both Etheridge and Murdock translate from the Western Peshitta. The UBS (United Bible Society) 1905 retains the western reading by following the reading of the Greek New Testament.

KJV
"for he by the grace of God".

Western Peshitta text
"hu gir b'taybutha Alaha"

John Wesley Etheridge
But him who was humbled to be less than the angels, we see to be JESHU himself, for the sake of the passion of his death; and glory and honour set upon his head; for He Aloha [Hu ger Aloho] , in his grace, for every man hath tasted death!

Dr. James Murdock
But we see him, who was depressed somewhat lower than the angels, to be this Jesus, because of the passion of his death; and glory and honor are placed on his head; for God himself, in his grace, tasted death for all men.

However, Lamsa translates from the Eastern Peshitta text and I think quite remarkably, he clarifies the eastern reading.

Dr. George Lamsa's Eastern Peshitta reading
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.aramaicpeshitta.com/AramaicNTtools/Lamsa/19_Hebrews/Hebrews2.htm">http://www.aramaicpeshitta.com/AramaicN ... brews2.htm</a><!-- m -->
"We see that he is Jesus, who humbled himself to become a little lower than the angels through his suffering and his death, but now he is crowned with glory and honour, for he tasted death for the sake of everyone but God."

The eastern reading of "hu gir s'tar min Alaha" is accurately translated "for he apart from God" and Lamsa seems to capture this meaning in his translation.

Having presented this, I also want to revisit the controversy, as it was debated in the second through the fifth centuries. Below is a quote from wikipedea.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestorianism">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestorianism</a><!-- m -->

"Nestorianism originated in the Church in the 5th century out of an attempt to rationally explain and understand the incarnation of the divine Logos, the Second Person of the Holy Trinity as Jesus Christ. Nestorianism taught that the human and divine essences of Christ are separate and that there are two natures, the man Jesus and the divine Logos, united in Christ. In consequence, Nestorians rejected such terminology as "God suffered" or "God was crucified", because the humanity of Christ which suffered is separate from his divinity. Likewise, they rejected the term Theotokos (Giver of birth to God/Mother of God) as a title of the Virgin Mary, suggesting instead the title Christotokos (Giver of birth to Christ/Mother of Christ), because in their view he took only his human nature from his mother, while the divine Logos was pre-existent and external, so calling Mary "Mother of God" was misleading and potentially wrong.

The Assyrian Church of the East refused to drop support for Nestorius or to denounce him as a heretic. That church has continued to be called "Nestorian" in the West, to distinguish it from other ancient Eastern churches. However, the Church of the East does not regard its doctrine as truly Nestorian: it teaches the view of Babai the Great - Christ has two qnome (manifest or individuated substance, similar to hypostasis) that are unmingled and eternally united in one parsopa (person). According to some interpretations,[by whom?] the origin of this belief is mostly historical and linguistic: for example, the Greeks had two words for 'person', which translated poorly into Syriac, and the meanings of these terms were not even quite settled during Nestorius's lifetime."

Further reading about Babai the Great

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://books.google.ca/books?id=Ey_FW7acTycC&pg=PA12&lpg=PA12&dq=Babai+the+Great&source=bl&ots=N9NAvjqFXW&sig=Gr0Ir5BKzECMICk4XZdoetOAIHg&hl=en&ei=Yr-YSpypFo2ssgPlqZCkAg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7#v=onepage&q=Babai%20the%20Great&f=false">http://books.google.ca/books?id=Ey_FW7a ... at&f=false</a><!-- m -->

This isn't meant to spark a theological debate. It's informative in showing one possible reason for the variation between the eastern Peshitta and the western version which follows the Greek text.

Shlama,
Stephen Silver
Dukhrana Biblical Research Group
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- m -->
Reply
#2
Shlama Stephen,

You stated:
Quote:It's informative in showing one possible reason for the variation between the eastern Peshitta and the western version which follows the Greek text.

Two questions: 1.Why do you assume the Western follows the Greek?
2. What does the Greek follow?

Dave Bauscher
Get my NT translations, books & articles at :
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://aramaicnt.com">http://aramaicnt.com</a><!-- m --> and Lulu.com
I also have articles at BibleCodeDigest.com
Reply
#3
gbausc Wrote:Shlama Stephen,

You stated:
Quote:It's informative in showing one possible reason for the variation between the eastern Peshitta and the western version which follows the Greek text.

Two questions: 1.Why do you assume the Western follows the Greek?
2. What does the Greek follow?

Dave Bauscher


Shlama Akhi David:
It is factual that the Khabouris Codex retains what is traditionally called the eastern reading of Hebrews 2:9 as does the 1892 "little red book" (Aramaic New Testament), which I purchased from Chicago. The "little red book" also contains the Western Five and the Book of Psalms. All Greek manuscripts that I have seen show "otos kariti Theo", "so that by the grace of God". This is translated into Aramaic as "b'taybutha Alaha". This is what has been traditionally called "the western reading" of Hebrews 2:9. The phrase in the eastern Peshitta text is "hu gir s'tar min Alaha" which is translated as "for he apart from God".

1) 1.Why do you assume the Western follows the Greek?
It's not so much an assumption as much as it's an observation of the evidence available and presented. All Greek New Testament manuscripts show some variation of "otos kariti Theo".

2. What does the Greek follow?
The Greek "otos kariti Theo" is a reflection of the teachings established by the Roman Catholic Church in the Fifth Century. These same teachings declare "theotokos", "mother of God" as opposed to the Assyrian Christian response to this with that of "Christotokos", "mother of Christ".

Akhi David, I don't want this to become a theological debate. I'm just showing a difference between the two readings and the "possible cause". I can't be definitive as to the full causes behind the Christological controversies but this difference between the two readings looks like a "smoking gun" to me.

Shlama,
Stephen
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- m -->
Reply
#4
Shlama Akhay,

Stephen Silver Wrote:1.Why do you assume the Western follows the Greek?
It's not so much an assumption as much as it's an observation of the evidence available and presented. All Greek New Testament manuscripts show some variation of "otos kariti Theo".

Apparently there are three known Greek NT manuscripts that do have a reading similar to the Eastern Peshitta.

From the page: <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.ovc.edu/terry/tc/lay24heb.htm">http://www.ovc.edu/terry/tc/lay24heb.htm</a><!-- m -->

Quote:Hebrews 2:9:
TEXT: "so that by the grace of God he might taste death"
EVIDENCE: p46 S A B C D K P Psi 33 81 104 614 630 1241 1881 2495 Byz Lect lat most vg most syr(p) syr(h,pal) cop
TRANSLATIONS: KJV ASV RSV NASV NIV NEB TEV
RANK: B

NOTES: "so that without God he might taste death"
EVIDENCE: 0121b 424c 1739* one vg some syr(p)
TRANSLATIONS: NEBn

COMMENTS: There are only three letters' difference between the two readings. Perhaps the reading "without God" arose when copyists misread the text reading.

Some info about said manuscripts:
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncial_0121b">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncial_0121b</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minuscule_424">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minuscule_424</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minuscule_1739">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minuscule_1739</a><!-- m -->

It would be nice to be able to read the exact Greek wording of "so that without God he might taste death" and compare it with the more general reading, in order to see how similar they actually are.

//Lars

Credits:
Bruce Terry
Prof. of Bible and Humanities
School of Biblical Studies
Ohio Valley University
Reply
#5
Quote:Hebrews 2:9:
TEXT: "so that by the grace of God he might taste death"
EVIDENCE: p46 S A B C D K P Psi 33 81 104 614 630 1241 1881 2495 Byz Lect lat most vg most syr(p) syr(h,pal) cop
TRANSLATIONS: KJV ASV RSV NASV NIV NEB TEV
RANK: B

NOTES: "so that without God he might taste death"
EVIDENCE: 0121b 424c 1739* one vg some syr(p)
TRANSLATIONS: NEBn

COMMENTS: There are only three letters' difference between the two readings. Perhaps the reading "without God" arose when copyists misread the text reading.

Majority reading:
KARITI ThEOU

Greek equivalent of the Eastern Peshitta reading:
0243, 1739*, and perhaps 424
KWRIS ThEOU


Quote:Several striking examples of agreements between 0243 and 1739 may be cited. Perhaps the most noteworthy is Hebrews 2:9, where 0243, 1739*, and perhaps 424**, alone among Greek manuscripts, read CWRIS ThEOU instead of the majority reading CARITI ThEOU.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.skypoint.com/members/waltzmn/ManuscriptsUncials.html#u0121_0243">http://www.skypoint.com/members/waltzmn ... u0121_0243</a><!-- m -->

Shlama Khulkon:
By looking further into some of the leads that Lars Lindgren has made known, We can now appreciate the exhaustive scholarship of Dr. Bruce Terry. For these direct quotes credit and is given to Dr. Bruce Terry whose invaluable studies have clarified the different readings in the Greek texts which distinguish between the traditional western reading of "for he by the grace of God" and the eastern Peshitta reading of "for he apart from God".

That to say this. We have now documented three known Greek manuscripts with the same reading as the eastern Peshitta. These, it would appear, reflect an earlier tradition which predates the Christological controversies between the Roman Catholic Church vis-a-vis the Assyrian Church of the East in it's primitive tradition. This must be proven by dating these Greek texts and showing that these are not just scribal errors, but that a later deliberate redaction was made to conform the text to the western tradition.

In retrospect how did a tenth century Greek manuscript survive with an equivalent reading to the eastern Peshitta?

From wikipedea:
Uncial 0121a (in the Gregory-Aland numbering), it was named as Fragmentum Uffenbachianum, or Codex Ruber. It is a Greek uncial manuscript of the New Testament, dated palaeographically to the 10th century.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncial_0121b">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncial_0121b</a><!-- m -->

Credits:
Bruce Terry
Prof. of Bible and Humanities
School of Biblical Studies
Ohio Valley University

Shlama,
Stephen Silver
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- m -->
Dukhrana Biblical Research
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)