02-05-2008, 05:21 PM
Shlama,
As most of us in Aramaic primacy know, the Peshitta differentiates between the two words "kumra" and "kohein", especially in the Epistle to the Hebrews. Most Hebrew editions of the New Covenant are made from the Greek and I only know of one that is from the actual Eastern Peshitta text, which is the the bi-lingual Hebrew/Aramaic Peshitta available from AramaicBooks.com.
Unfortunately, this particular modern Hebrew translation of the Peshitta (which I love to use) does not differentiate between "kumra" and "kohein", and uses the Hebrew word "kohein" instead, whereas the Peshitta text uses "kumra" (which is a different type of priest than the Levitical order). It probably would have been best for the translator of the Hebrew edition to simply have transliterated the Aramaic "kumra" instead of trying to make it say something different than the Aramaic. In my personal opinion, this is most unfortunate, especially for those who may use this Hebrew edition in their apologetics because, if they don't have access to the original Aramaic or are unable to read it, they will run into a spot when others say that Yeshua was not a part of the Levitical order, or line of Aharon. I noticed this in Hebrews 5:6 and have not gone through the entire text as of yet to see if it is consistent.
Anyway, thought I'd share this note.
Blessings,
Ya'aqub
As most of us in Aramaic primacy know, the Peshitta differentiates between the two words "kumra" and "kohein", especially in the Epistle to the Hebrews. Most Hebrew editions of the New Covenant are made from the Greek and I only know of one that is from the actual Eastern Peshitta text, which is the the bi-lingual Hebrew/Aramaic Peshitta available from AramaicBooks.com.
Unfortunately, this particular modern Hebrew translation of the Peshitta (which I love to use) does not differentiate between "kumra" and "kohein", and uses the Hebrew word "kohein" instead, whereas the Peshitta text uses "kumra" (which is a different type of priest than the Levitical order). It probably would have been best for the translator of the Hebrew edition to simply have transliterated the Aramaic "kumra" instead of trying to make it say something different than the Aramaic. In my personal opinion, this is most unfortunate, especially for those who may use this Hebrew edition in their apologetics because, if they don't have access to the original Aramaic or are unable to read it, they will run into a spot when others say that Yeshua was not a part of the Levitical order, or line of Aharon. I noticed this in Hebrews 5:6 and have not gone through the entire text as of yet to see if it is consistent.
Anyway, thought I'd share this note.
Blessings,
Ya'aqub