_New Chapters in New Testament Study_ by Edgar J. Goodspeed (1937), 223pp., on 157-159
https://archive.org/details/newchaptersinnew008790mbp
The weakness of the Aramaic method is shown by its treatment of the word pygme, "with the fist," in Mark 7:3.
How do you think Mark 7:3 originally read?:
"unless they ceremonially [literally: "with a fist"] wash [their] hands"?
"unless they carefully wash their hands"?
How do you think Lk 21:12-13 ought read?
How about: Jn 4:35-36? Jn 7:21-22? Lk 24:9-10?
Do you see any flaws in the Torrey below?
http://web.ovc.edu/terry/tc/lay04mrk.htm
Mark 7:3:
TEXT: "unless they ceremonially wash [their] hands"
EVIDENCE: A B D K L X Theta Pi f1 f13 28 33 565 700 892 1010 1241 Byz Lect most lat syr(h)margin
TRANSLATIONS: ASV RSVn NASV NIV NEBn TEV
RANK: A
NOTES: "unless they wash [their] hands"
EVIDENCE: Delta syr(s) cop(south)
TRANSLATIONS: RSV* NEB
NOTES: "unless they frequently wash [their] hands"
EVIDENCE: S W three lat vg syr(p,h) cop(north)
TRANSLATIONS: KJV NEBn
COMMENTS: The word translated "ceremonially" literally means "with a fist." Since the exact ceremony referred to is unknown, some copyists omitted the word while others replaced it with a word that makes more sense.
4435. pugmé
https://biblehub.com/greek/4435.htm
pugmé: the fist
Original Word: πυγμή, ῆς, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: pugmé
Phonetic Spelling: (poog-may')
Definition: the fist
Usage: the fist.
Mark 7:3, http://dukhrana.com
(Etheridge) For all the Jihudoyee and Pharishee, unless they carefully wash their hands, do not eat, because they hold the tradition of the elders;
(Murdock) For all the Jews and the Pharisees, unless they carefully wash their hands do not eat; because they hold fast the tradition of the Elders.
===============
_Our Translated Gospels: Some of the Evidence_ (1936), 172pp. by Charles Cutler Torrey. On 4-5
https://archive.org/details/ourtranslatedgos0000torr
The great freedom in the order of words of the Aram. sentence, and especially the manner of emphasizing a word by putting it at the beginning or end of a clause, occasionally produced ambiguity, as the translator rendered word by word. In this way arose the strange reading in Mk. 7:3, where the Jews are said to wash their hands "with the fist."
Hence also the "already," which in the Aram. of Jn. 4 stood at the end of vs. 35, was by the Grk. translator made to stand at the beginning of vs. 36. Argument for the date of the Gospel has been based on this translator's error-- for such it certainly is.
Another similar instance is the false position of the phrase "because of this"... which now forms the beginning of Jn. 7:22, whereas it was intended to end the preceding verse. Ordinarily, indeed, it stands at the head of its sentence or clause.
The frequently abrupt beginning of the Aram. sentence, without introductory conjunction or adverb, sometimes misleads the Grk. translator, where the context leaves room for doubt as to the connection intended. An example is Lk. 21:12 f., where the parallels in Mk. and Mt. [Mt 10:18, Mk 13:9] make it certain that the true reading is: "Before kings and governors, for my name's sake, you will be brought for testimony."
A more important instance is the passage Lk. 24:9 ff., in which the honor of being the first to bring to the disciples the news of the resurrection is by the Grk. translator taken away from Mary Magdalene and Joanna and Mary the mother of James, and given to "the other women."
CVB 2.3, Luke
21:12 But before all these things,
they will lay their hands on you and will persecute you,
delivering you up to synagogues and prisons,
bringing you before kings and governors for my name’s sake.
21:13 It will turn out as a testimony for you.
Lk 21:12-13 (based on Younan)
But before all these things,
they will lay hands upon you and persecute you,
and they will deliver you to the assemblies and to the prisons,
and they will bring you before malka [kings] and governors because of my name,
but it will be to you for a testimony.
Mark 7:3 (King James)
https://biblehub.com/mark/7-3.htm
For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders.
Pulpit Commentary
https://biblehub.com/mark/7-3.htm
Verse 3. - Except they wash their hands oft. The Greek word here rendered "oft" is πυγμῇ: literally, with the fist, i.e. with the closed hand, rubbing one against the other. This word has caused a vast amount of criticism; and the difficulty of explaining it seems to have led to the adoption of a conjectural reading (πυκνῷς or πυκνῇ) rendered "oft;" crebro in the Vulgate. But the Syriac Peshito Version renders the Greek word by a word which means "diligently," and it is interesting and helpful, as a matter of exegesis, to know that it also renders the Greek word (ἐπιμελῶς) in Luke 15:8 by the same Syriac synonym, "diligently."
4435. pugmé
https://biblehub.com/greek/4435.htm
pugmé: the fist
Original Word: πυγμή, ῆς, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: pugmé
Phonetic Spelling: (poog-may')
Definition: the fist
Usage: the fist.
NAS Exhaustive Concordance
Word Origin
from pux (the fist)
Definition
the fist
John 4:35-36 (NABRE)
35 Do you not say, ‘In four months the harvest will be here’? I tell you, look up and see the fields ripe for the harvest. 36 The reaper is already[b] receiving his payment and gathering crops for eternal life, so that the sower and reaper can rejoice together.
b: Already: this word may go with the preceding verse rather than with Jn 4:36.
John 7 (Berean Literal Bible)
https://biblehub.com/blb/john/7.htm
21 Jesus answered and said to them, “I did one work, and you all marvel.
22 Because of the fact that Moses has given you circumcision (not that it is of Moses, but of the fathers) also on the Sabbath you circumcise a man.
CVB, Lk 24
24:8 They remembered his words, 24:9 returned from the tomb, and told all these things to the eleven, and to all the rest. 24:10 Now they were Mary Magdalene, Joanna, and Mary the mother of James. The other women with them told these things to the apostles.
Luke 24 (based on Younan)
8. And they remembered his words. 9. And they returned from the grave and told all these things to the eleven and to the rest. 10. Now they were Maryam of Magdala and Yokan and Maryam the mother of Yaqub and others who were with them, those who had told the Shelikha [Apostles].
=====================================================
Do you agree with this Goodspeed?:
_New Chapters in New Testament Study_ by Edgar J. Goodspeed (1937), 223pp., on 165
https://archive.org/details/newchaptersinnew008790mbp
The advocates of the Aramaic school.... give us no list of Aramaic works created in Palestine in the first half of the first century. There is no record of any written composition in Aramaic at that time.
_Dictionary of Qumran Aramaic_ (2015), 265pp.
https://www.amazon.com/Dictionary-Qumran...575063417/
_Classifying the Aramaic Texts From Qumran: A Statistical Analysis of Linguistic Features_, Library of Second Temple Studies 89 (2017), 350pp.
https://www.amazon.com/Classifying-Arama...567667820/
_Vision, Narrative, and Wisdom in the Aramaic Texts from Qumran_ (2019)
https://www.amazon.com/Vision-Narrative-...004413707/
_A Handbook of the Aramaic Scrolls from the Qumran Caves: Manuscripts, Language, and Scribal Practices_, Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 140 (2023)
https://www.amazon.com/Handbook-Aramaic-...004513787/
This book provides the first comprehensive treatment of the Aramaic Dead Sea Scrolls from the caves of Qumran. These nearly one hundred scrolls open a window onto a vibrant period of Jewish history for which we previously had few historical sources. Scholars and advanced students will find a general introduction to the corpus, detailed, richly-illustrated profiles of individual scrolls, and up-to-date studies of their Aramaic language and scribal practices. The goal of the book is to foster and support further study of these scrolls against the historical backdrop of early Judaism and ancient Mediterranean scribal cultures.
==========================================
"constantly posting quotes from scholars... that do not actually agree with your position"
And I have no problem doing that.
Do you agree with Goodspeed that "the Peshitto Syriac version of the gospels" is "dated about A.D. 411"?
Are you aware of any instances of "interpolation and accretion" present in the Peshitta? (and if 'yes,' what are some of those instances?)
_New Chapters in New Testament Study_ by Edgar J. Goodspeed (1937), 223pp., on 161
https://archive.org/stream/newchaptersin...p_djvu.txt
....the Peshitto Syriac version of the gospels, which modern learning under the leadership of Burkitt has dated about A.D. 411. They had previously been translated by J. W. Etheridge, London, 1846 (the rest of the New Testament following in 1849), and by J. Murdock, New York, 1851. Its text is far from primitive, being strongly characterized by conflation, that is, the combination of variant readings drawn from different earlier types of text. It is also rich in interpolation and accretion ; so that it is difficult to see how anyone can suppose it original.
========================================
"can’t name any critical scholars that agree with your position"
AFAIK, none of them has as of yet been persuaded by what I've presented.
"despise the work of scholars?"
Not that I know of.
You've studied Mark. What are the 2 strongest lines of evidence “that the gospel itself [i.e. Mark] was composed in Greek”?
_The New Westminster Dictionary of the Bible_ by Henry Snyder Gehman (1888-1981) (1970), on 341-342 after using the search option for "aramaic"
https://archive.org/details/newwestminsterdi0000gehm/
Various scholars (e.g., C.F. Burney and J.A. Montgomery) have suggested an Aramaic origin of the Gospels, but the most complete presentation of this theory has been worked out by C.C. Torrey (_The Four Gospels, A New Translation_, 1933), who maintains that the Aramaisms in the Gospels and the first half of The Acts are not due to bilingual authors who thought in Aramaic and wrote barbarous Greek, but that they are due to translations from Aramaic documents no longer extant. He believes that accounts of the life, words, and works of Christ were put into writing almost immediately after the crucifixion (cf. Luke 1:1-2).
....
With the exception of Luke, chs. 1; 2, and John, ch. 21, the Aramaic idiom is everywhere present in the Gospels; various difficulties can be clarified by turning the Greek into Aramaic, and in many cases the interpretation of a word or passage is simplified by considering the meaning of the supposed Aramaic original. Jesus and his disciples spoke Aramaic, and the Gospels reflect the atmosphere of Palestine.
To the literary critics this theory of the Aramaic origins was revolutionary. Yet it is a refreshing contribution to N.T. studies, because it is based on sound philology and does not lead into the involved study of interior sources or documents. While it definitely throws light upon difficult passages, it has a special merit in projecting the written sources to a period very close to the time of our Lord and thus supporting the impression of authenticity and, by inference, the trustworthiness of the records. Whatever may be thought of this theory, at any rate it can be employed to support a plausible hypothesis that the Greek sources behind the Gospels in Greek are based upon Aramaic documents and not merely on oral traditions in Aramaic.
https://archive.org/details/newchaptersinnew008790mbp
The weakness of the Aramaic method is shown by its treatment of the word pygme, "with the fist," in Mark 7:3.
How do you think Mark 7:3 originally read?:
"unless they ceremonially [literally: "with a fist"] wash [their] hands"?
"unless they carefully wash their hands"?
How do you think Lk 21:12-13 ought read?
How about: Jn 4:35-36? Jn 7:21-22? Lk 24:9-10?
Do you see any flaws in the Torrey below?
http://web.ovc.edu/terry/tc/lay04mrk.htm
Mark 7:3:
TEXT: "unless they ceremonially wash [their] hands"
EVIDENCE: A B D K L X Theta Pi f1 f13 28 33 565 700 892 1010 1241 Byz Lect most lat syr(h)margin
TRANSLATIONS: ASV RSVn NASV NIV NEBn TEV
RANK: A
NOTES: "unless they wash [their] hands"
EVIDENCE: Delta syr(s) cop(south)
TRANSLATIONS: RSV* NEB
NOTES: "unless they frequently wash [their] hands"
EVIDENCE: S W three lat vg syr(p,h) cop(north)
TRANSLATIONS: KJV NEBn
COMMENTS: The word translated "ceremonially" literally means "with a fist." Since the exact ceremony referred to is unknown, some copyists omitted the word while others replaced it with a word that makes more sense.
4435. pugmé
https://biblehub.com/greek/4435.htm
pugmé: the fist
Original Word: πυγμή, ῆς, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: pugmé
Phonetic Spelling: (poog-may')
Definition: the fist
Usage: the fist.
Mark 7:3, http://dukhrana.com
(Etheridge) For all the Jihudoyee and Pharishee, unless they carefully wash their hands, do not eat, because they hold the tradition of the elders;
(Murdock) For all the Jews and the Pharisees, unless they carefully wash their hands do not eat; because they hold fast the tradition of the Elders.
===============
_Our Translated Gospels: Some of the Evidence_ (1936), 172pp. by Charles Cutler Torrey. On 4-5
https://archive.org/details/ourtranslatedgos0000torr
The great freedom in the order of words of the Aram. sentence, and especially the manner of emphasizing a word by putting it at the beginning or end of a clause, occasionally produced ambiguity, as the translator rendered word by word. In this way arose the strange reading in Mk. 7:3, where the Jews are said to wash their hands "with the fist."
Hence also the "already," which in the Aram. of Jn. 4 stood at the end of vs. 35, was by the Grk. translator made to stand at the beginning of vs. 36. Argument for the date of the Gospel has been based on this translator's error-- for such it certainly is.
Another similar instance is the false position of the phrase "because of this"... which now forms the beginning of Jn. 7:22, whereas it was intended to end the preceding verse. Ordinarily, indeed, it stands at the head of its sentence or clause.
The frequently abrupt beginning of the Aram. sentence, without introductory conjunction or adverb, sometimes misleads the Grk. translator, where the context leaves room for doubt as to the connection intended. An example is Lk. 21:12 f., where the parallels in Mk. and Mt. [Mt 10:18, Mk 13:9] make it certain that the true reading is: "Before kings and governors, for my name's sake, you will be brought for testimony."
A more important instance is the passage Lk. 24:9 ff., in which the honor of being the first to bring to the disciples the news of the resurrection is by the Grk. translator taken away from Mary Magdalene and Joanna and Mary the mother of James, and given to "the other women."
CVB 2.3, Luke
21:12 But before all these things,
they will lay their hands on you and will persecute you,
delivering you up to synagogues and prisons,
bringing you before kings and governors for my name’s sake.
21:13 It will turn out as a testimony for you.
Lk 21:12-13 (based on Younan)
But before all these things,
they will lay hands upon you and persecute you,
and they will deliver you to the assemblies and to the prisons,
and they will bring you before malka [kings] and governors because of my name,
but it will be to you for a testimony.
Mark 7:3 (King James)
https://biblehub.com/mark/7-3.htm
For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders.
Pulpit Commentary
https://biblehub.com/mark/7-3.htm
Verse 3. - Except they wash their hands oft. The Greek word here rendered "oft" is πυγμῇ: literally, with the fist, i.e. with the closed hand, rubbing one against the other. This word has caused a vast amount of criticism; and the difficulty of explaining it seems to have led to the adoption of a conjectural reading (πυκνῷς or πυκνῇ) rendered "oft;" crebro in the Vulgate. But the Syriac Peshito Version renders the Greek word by a word which means "diligently," and it is interesting and helpful, as a matter of exegesis, to know that it also renders the Greek word (ἐπιμελῶς) in Luke 15:8 by the same Syriac synonym, "diligently."
4435. pugmé
https://biblehub.com/greek/4435.htm
pugmé: the fist
Original Word: πυγμή, ῆς, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: pugmé
Phonetic Spelling: (poog-may')
Definition: the fist
Usage: the fist.
NAS Exhaustive Concordance
Word Origin
from pux (the fist)
Definition
the fist
John 4:35-36 (NABRE)
35 Do you not say, ‘In four months the harvest will be here’? I tell you, look up and see the fields ripe for the harvest. 36 The reaper is already[b] receiving his payment and gathering crops for eternal life, so that the sower and reaper can rejoice together.
b: Already: this word may go with the preceding verse rather than with Jn 4:36.
John 7 (Berean Literal Bible)
https://biblehub.com/blb/john/7.htm
21 Jesus answered and said to them, “I did one work, and you all marvel.
22 Because of the fact that Moses has given you circumcision (not that it is of Moses, but of the fathers) also on the Sabbath you circumcise a man.
CVB, Lk 24
24:8 They remembered his words, 24:9 returned from the tomb, and told all these things to the eleven, and to all the rest. 24:10 Now they were Mary Magdalene, Joanna, and Mary the mother of James. The other women with them told these things to the apostles.
Luke 24 (based on Younan)
8. And they remembered his words. 9. And they returned from the grave and told all these things to the eleven and to the rest. 10. Now they were Maryam of Magdala and Yokan and Maryam the mother of Yaqub and others who were with them, those who had told the Shelikha [Apostles].
=====================================================
Do you agree with this Goodspeed?:
_New Chapters in New Testament Study_ by Edgar J. Goodspeed (1937), 223pp., on 165
https://archive.org/details/newchaptersinnew008790mbp
The advocates of the Aramaic school.... give us no list of Aramaic works created in Palestine in the first half of the first century. There is no record of any written composition in Aramaic at that time.
_Dictionary of Qumran Aramaic_ (2015), 265pp.
https://www.amazon.com/Dictionary-Qumran...575063417/
_Classifying the Aramaic Texts From Qumran: A Statistical Analysis of Linguistic Features_, Library of Second Temple Studies 89 (2017), 350pp.
https://www.amazon.com/Classifying-Arama...567667820/
_Vision, Narrative, and Wisdom in the Aramaic Texts from Qumran_ (2019)
https://www.amazon.com/Vision-Narrative-...004413707/
_A Handbook of the Aramaic Scrolls from the Qumran Caves: Manuscripts, Language, and Scribal Practices_, Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 140 (2023)
https://www.amazon.com/Handbook-Aramaic-...004513787/
This book provides the first comprehensive treatment of the Aramaic Dead Sea Scrolls from the caves of Qumran. These nearly one hundred scrolls open a window onto a vibrant period of Jewish history for which we previously had few historical sources. Scholars and advanced students will find a general introduction to the corpus, detailed, richly-illustrated profiles of individual scrolls, and up-to-date studies of their Aramaic language and scribal practices. The goal of the book is to foster and support further study of these scrolls against the historical backdrop of early Judaism and ancient Mediterranean scribal cultures.
==========================================
"constantly posting quotes from scholars... that do not actually agree with your position"
And I have no problem doing that.
Do you agree with Goodspeed that "the Peshitto Syriac version of the gospels" is "dated about A.D. 411"?
Are you aware of any instances of "interpolation and accretion" present in the Peshitta? (and if 'yes,' what are some of those instances?)
_New Chapters in New Testament Study_ by Edgar J. Goodspeed (1937), 223pp., on 161
https://archive.org/stream/newchaptersin...p_djvu.txt
....the Peshitto Syriac version of the gospels, which modern learning under the leadership of Burkitt has dated about A.D. 411. They had previously been translated by J. W. Etheridge, London, 1846 (the rest of the New Testament following in 1849), and by J. Murdock, New York, 1851. Its text is far from primitive, being strongly characterized by conflation, that is, the combination of variant readings drawn from different earlier types of text. It is also rich in interpolation and accretion ; so that it is difficult to see how anyone can suppose it original.
========================================
"can’t name any critical scholars that agree with your position"
AFAIK, none of them has as of yet been persuaded by what I've presented.
"despise the work of scholars?"
Not that I know of.
You've studied Mark. What are the 2 strongest lines of evidence “that the gospel itself [i.e. Mark] was composed in Greek”?
_The New Westminster Dictionary of the Bible_ by Henry Snyder Gehman (1888-1981) (1970), on 341-342 after using the search option for "aramaic"
https://archive.org/details/newwestminsterdi0000gehm/
Various scholars (e.g., C.F. Burney and J.A. Montgomery) have suggested an Aramaic origin of the Gospels, but the most complete presentation of this theory has been worked out by C.C. Torrey (_The Four Gospels, A New Translation_, 1933), who maintains that the Aramaisms in the Gospels and the first half of The Acts are not due to bilingual authors who thought in Aramaic and wrote barbarous Greek, but that they are due to translations from Aramaic documents no longer extant. He believes that accounts of the life, words, and works of Christ were put into writing almost immediately after the crucifixion (cf. Luke 1:1-2).
....
With the exception of Luke, chs. 1; 2, and John, ch. 21, the Aramaic idiom is everywhere present in the Gospels; various difficulties can be clarified by turning the Greek into Aramaic, and in many cases the interpretation of a word or passage is simplified by considering the meaning of the supposed Aramaic original. Jesus and his disciples spoke Aramaic, and the Gospels reflect the atmosphere of Palestine.
To the literary critics this theory of the Aramaic origins was revolutionary. Yet it is a refreshing contribution to N.T. studies, because it is based on sound philology and does not lead into the involved study of interior sources or documents. While it definitely throws light upon difficult passages, it has a special merit in projecting the written sources to a period very close to the time of our Lord and thus supporting the impression of authenticity and, by inference, the trustworthiness of the records. Whatever may be thought of this theory, at any rate it can be employed to support a plausible hypothesis that the Greek sources behind the Gospels in Greek are based upon Aramaic documents and not merely on oral traditions in Aramaic.