10-23-2014, 10:31 AM
I write a third post because there is still a question unresolved: Why The texts coming from Alexandria have Elo? in Matthew ? There isn't any text which have only Eloi in Matthew and Eli in Mark... I also suppose that it is not an accident. Jews (and Christians) of Alexandria don't understand Hebrew and I doubt they understand Aramaic neither, so it is very unlikely that someone harmonized Matthew with Mark. There's no philological reason to prefer Eloi to Eli and the scribe who reads Eli didn't replaced it because Elo? sounded better. Eli was not used by Gnostics (it would have been a good reason to prefer Eloi). The only explanation I have (it's the better I have found) is that Elo? is linked with Mark's Greek Gospel, and the Egyptians keep the word of their first Bishop.
The Coptic manuscripts read Eloi in Matthew. I'd really want to read the Codex Schoyen 2625 (one of the earliest Codex with Matthew amongst all manuscripts), but I can't find any facsimile.
The Ethiopian manuscripts too. Except one ! Two manuscripts found in the Abba Garima Monastery and thought to be medieval copies, were in fact (thank to Radiocarbon dating) 5-6th century Gospels. And the earliest of the two (Garima 2 aka Garima III) read Eli Eli lama sabaqatani. Isn't that great ? <!-- s:inlove: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/inlove.gif" alt=":inlove:" title="In Love" /><!-- s:inlove: --> But these two manuscripts seem to derive from a unique one, maybe written by Frumentius (died ca. 383, Ethiopia) who is credited with bringing Christianity to the Aksumite Kingdom. Frumentius became a slave there but he was freed, and the Queen wanted him to assist her in the education of the heir. Then, he leaves Ethiopia and go to Tyre (where he was born) before he goes to Alexandria before Athanasius. He requested to send a bishop and some priests as missionaries to Ethiopia and Athanasius chose him. (Source: Wikipedia)
So I'd say that the Gospel he made (I don't know if he did the translation from Greek to Geez himself) should have Eli in Matthew. After Athanasius sent him, the Ethiopians became friends with the Copts. I think it's a latter influence that explains the reading Eloi and it would mean during ca. 150 years the Eli reading was preferred.
Of course it's only supposition, it's why I write this third post.
The Coptic manuscripts read Eloi in Matthew. I'd really want to read the Codex Schoyen 2625 (one of the earliest Codex with Matthew amongst all manuscripts), but I can't find any facsimile.
The Ethiopian manuscripts too. Except one ! Two manuscripts found in the Abba Garima Monastery and thought to be medieval copies, were in fact (thank to Radiocarbon dating) 5-6th century Gospels. And the earliest of the two (Garima 2 aka Garima III) read Eli Eli lama sabaqatani. Isn't that great ? <!-- s:inlove: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/inlove.gif" alt=":inlove:" title="In Love" /><!-- s:inlove: --> But these two manuscripts seem to derive from a unique one, maybe written by Frumentius (died ca. 383, Ethiopia) who is credited with bringing Christianity to the Aksumite Kingdom. Frumentius became a slave there but he was freed, and the Queen wanted him to assist her in the education of the heir. Then, he leaves Ethiopia and go to Tyre (where he was born) before he goes to Alexandria before Athanasius. He requested to send a bishop and some priests as missionaries to Ethiopia and Athanasius chose him. (Source: Wikipedia)
So I'd say that the Gospel he made (I don't know if he did the translation from Greek to Geez himself) should have Eli in Matthew. After Athanasius sent him, the Ethiopians became friends with the Copts. I think it's a latter influence that explains the reading Eloi and it would mean during ca. 150 years the Eli reading was preferred.
Of course it's only supposition, it's why I write this third post.