Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Eleazar = Yeshua?
#1
Greetings.

In Younan's translation of the genealogy in Mattai Chapter one, Eleazar is named as "Yeshua" (presumably "the Savior", as opposed to the proper name). This directly contradicts the work of other translators (E.G. Murdock, whose work seems to be derived from entirely different primary texts), and I was wondering whose rendering reflects the earliest primary documents.

Thank You.
Reply
#2
All,

Having perused some distantly related threads, it seems there are at least two dominant traditions in Eastern Christianity: the Syriac (represented by Murdock's translation of The Peshitto; and the E. Aramaic (represented by Younan's rendering of The Peshitta).

Is that the case?
Reply
#3
Shlama Paul,

First, welcome to Peshitta.org Forums!

I think that you might find wiser answers from others here who are 'scholars', but let me give this a shot.

I feel that the world of Syriac is divided into two, in this way:

There is Assyrian Church of the East, which has kept the Eastern Syriac dialect alive, and then there are other Churches like the Monophysites, and the Syrian Orthodox Church, and others (the Maronites come to mind) who speak and use another kind of Western Syriac for their liturgical needs, and in their Bibles and use the Western PeshittO, instead of the Eastern PeshittA.

This is a very complex world. At first sight, it doesn't seem so, but when you get down wind of a lot of years of trying to study Eastern/Syriac Christianity, it becomes apparent, that it's 'just' a deep and rich culture that has been kept alive since Yeshua walked in Israel during Second Temple times.

Others here can probably give you a better answer than this.

Dave Bauscher says that there is "about a one percent difference" between the PeshittO and the PeshittA....."but it's a BIG one percent". <!-- s:biggrin: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/biggrin.gif" alt=":biggrin:" title="Big Grin" /><!-- s:biggrin: -->

I think that Akhan Dave is right on about this.

The texts of these two versions (Peshitta/Peshitto) are really quite similiar, but yet when they diverge from one another, it's for deep theological differences (in my opinion).

I favor the Eastern P'shitta, I think as do most people here at Peshitta.org.

Again, welcome.

Make yourself at home. Feel free to ask as many questions as you like.

The only stupid question, is one not asked!

Sometimes the board will slow way down like the last few days, and sometimes it's like a busy city!

Shlama (Peace [be] unto you), Albion



'taint Paul Wrote:All,

Having perused some distantly related threads, it seems there are at least two dominant traditions in Eastern Christianity: the Syriac (represented by Murdock's translation of The Peshitto; and the E. Aramaic (represented by Younan's rendering of The Peshitta).

Is that the case?
Reply
#4
Thank you, Albion.

Is it safe to assume that the differences (however small) between the Peshitta and the Peshitto are the result of keepers of the latter trying to stay in step with the ever-changing Roman Church?
Reply
#5
Wow, good question.

Tell ya what. Scroll down to 'The Church of the East' section and read "It was all about Plan G".

The Roman Catholic 'steam roller' has tried since around the 15th Century to swallow up The Assyrian Church of the East.

Really, even long before then (the 15th Century).

It's really the huge Imperial colonizing Church versus the tiny (but TRUE) Assyrian Church of the East.

It's not a pretty story.

I believe that there is at least one Maronite Christian here on the list, who might want to comment perhaps, on this dialogue.

Shlama, Albion




'taint Paul Wrote:Thank you, Albion.

Is it safe to assume that the differences (however small) between the Peshitta and the Peshitto are the result of keepers of the latter trying to stay in step with the ever-changing Roman Church?
Reply
#6
Shlama all,

Albion wrote:
Quote:Dave Bauscher says that there is "about a one percent difference" between the PeshittO and the PeshittA....."but it's a BIG one percent". <!-- s:biggrin: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/biggrin.gif" alt=":biggrin:" title="Big Grin" /><!-- s:biggrin: -->I think that Akhan Dave is right on about this.

Actually, I was talking about the difference between The Peshitta and the majority Greek text, which is
most probably an understatement in hindsight. It may be more like a 7% difference between the Peshitta & Greek, based on the difference in numbers of pronouns, conjunctions & prepositions I have compiled, as a comparative index (The Peshitta has more of each of these).

The Peshitta and Peshitto have far fewer differnces than 1% if we overlook the difference in canons (22 books versus 27). Comparing the text they both contain (this excludes pericope adultera in John 7:53 -8:11), the differences are insignificant apart from a handful of verses where they differ. If there are ten verses in which a significant one word difference exists, which may actually be the case, there is only a 0.01% significant difference between the two Peshittas! That is 99.99% agreement! Let's assume that we can find ten times that number of significant differences. That would still be only 0.1% difference, or 99.90% agreement!

Of course, we could wrangle over the 5 books in the Western canon, but as Paul has pointed out, the COE has no official position about those books one way or the other. The value in the 2 Peshittas is that they agree so closely and are yet separate Bibles of separate divisions of the ancient Aramaean church going back to an original text almost 2000 years ago. The Greek tradition does not fare nearly as well. The Alexandrian and Byzantine Greek editions differ by 2% in their letter numbers. That is 7 times the letter number differences between The Khabouris Eastern Peshitta ms. and The Peshitto 1905 edition. Most of the letter number differences in the 2 Peshittas has to do with many pronoun enclitics attached to nouns in the Western text being separate pronouns in the Eastern text, which adds a letter or two each time, but does not change the meaning at all. This is a style difference between the 2 texts. Most of the letter differences in the two are not meaningful.

Blessings in our Lord,

Dave
Reply
#7
Shlama Dave,

I didn't mean to mis-quote you <!-- sBlush --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/blush.gif" alt="Blush" title="Blush" /><!-- sBlush --> .

Sorry about THAT!

Peace, Albion
Reply
#8
Albion and Dave,

The information is very much appreciated.

Getting back to the thrust of the original post, specifically regarding the genealogy of Yeshua in Matt. 1, I think it's noteworthy that Murdock's rendering of the Peshitto falls right in line with the NASB (or vice versa?), while Younan's translation of the Peshitta indicates a clear departure.

Matthew Ch.1: 15-16, NASB:

Quote:15 Eliud was the father of Eleazar, Eleazar the father of Matthan, and Matthan the father of Jacob.
16 Jacob was the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, by whom Jesus was born, (I)who is called the Messiah.

Matthew Ch. 1: 15-16, Peshitto, J. Murdock Trnsl.

Quote:15 Eliud fathered Eleazar. Eleazar fathered Mattan. Mattan fathered Ya???aqub. 16 Ya???aqub fathered Yoseph, the relative of Miriam, from whom was born Yeshua*, who is called the Anointed.



Mattai Ch. 1: 15-16, Peshitta, P. Younan Trnsl.

Quote:15 Eleud fathered Akhen Akhen fathered Zadoq Yaqub 16 Yaqub fathered Matan Matan fathered Eleazar Eleazar who is called Yeshua was born from whom of Maryam the kinsman Yosip fathered until Awraham from the generations therefore all [???]

Some observations and questions:

O: In Younan's work, there's an apparent void between Zadoq and Yaqub.

Q: Do both names refer to one individual?

O: In Younan's work, the child/parent relationships between Yaqub and Matan, and Matan and Eleazar, are exactly opposite of those in both the NASB and Murdock's Peshitto.

Q: Is this, perhaps, indicative of an error in translation, whether on Younan's part??? or by extension, on the parts of Murdock and the NASB translators, by virtue of unwittingly perpetuating mistakes made by earlier translators?

ManyThanks.
Reply
#9
February 4, 2008

According to Barbara Alland in her book on the New Testament, forty percent of the verses in the he various Greek New Testament documents (don't call them manuscripts) are signifcanctly different in that there are at least two significant words that are different. These differences are those that contrast the Majority and Minority texts. Clearly, the Minority Greek text is seriously inferior to the Majority (Byzantine) text. Except for the NKJV, all other modern English versions are based on the inferior Minority text. This is the result of the "Greek scholar" influence of Nestle and Alland. How bad is this????

Otto
Reply
#10
shlomo Taint Paul,

'taint Paul Wrote:Greetings.

In Younan's translation of the genealogy in Mattai Chapter one, Eleazar is named as "Yeshua" (presumably "the Savior", as opposed to the proper name). This directly contradicts the work of other translators (E.G. Murdock, whose work seems to be derived from entirely different primary texts), and I was wondering whose rendering reflects the earliest primary documents.

Thank You.

Here is the translations of the above mentioned verse:
Official Peshitta/Peshitto => Eliud fathered Eli'azar. Eli'azar fathered Mathan. Mathan fathered Ya'quv. Ya'quv fathered Yawseph ...

As for the Younan NT Codex, I don't have a copy of it, so I can't translate the Syriac and confirm if it was properly translated or not. The above mentioned Text (i.e. Peshitta/o) is the only official Text for any of the Syraic Churches, as such if the Yonan NT Codex differs from it, then it is either a scribal mistake or someones attempt at modifiying or making a new translation of the Syriac NT. But without access to the Codex I can't say which one it is.

push bashlomo,
keefa-morun
Reply
#11
Shlama,

The New Interlinear Aramaic/English text of Pul Younan says:

Quote:15 Eleud fathered Eleazar; Eleazar fathered Matan; Matan fathered Yaqub; 16Yaqub fathered Yosip the kinsman of Maryam from whom was born Yeshua who his called the Meshikha.

That's almost identical to Murdock.

Are you reading the interlinear pdf files from right to left or the other way around?
Reply
#12
Shlama,

Here is the logical English order of the entire chapter 1 of Mattai based on the interlinear here at peshitta.org. I have the entire Interlinear Gospels if anyone wants them in this format:

Chapter 1

1The book of the genealogy of Yeshua Meshikha, the son of Dawed, the son of Awraham. 2Awraham fathered Aeskhaq, Aeskhaq fathered Yaqub, Yaqub fathered Yehuda and his brothers. Yehuda fatherd Pares and Zarakh by Thamar; Pares fathered Khisron. 3Khisron fathered Aram; Aram fathered Amenadab; Amendadab fathered Nikhshon; Nikhshon fathered Salmon. 4Salmon fathered Baz by Rakhab; Baz fathered Awbed by Rath; 5Awbed fathered Aeshe; 6Aeshe fathered Dawed the King; Dawed fathered Shlemon by the wife of Awrea. 7Shlemon fathered Rkhebam; Rkhebam fathered Abea; Abea fathered Asa. 8Asa fatherd Yahoshapat; Yahoshapat fathered Yoram; Yoram fathered Awazea; 9Awazea fathered Yotham; Yotham fathered Akhaz; Akhaz fathered Khizaqea. 10Khizaqea fathered Mnashe; Mnashe fathered Amon; Amon fathered Yoshea. 11Yoseha fathered Yokhanea and his brothers in the captivity of Babel.

12And after the captivity of Babel, Yokhanea fathered Shilathiel; Shilathiel fathered Zerubabel; 13Zerubabel fathered Awiud; Awiud fathered Eleakem; Eleakem fathered Azor; 14Azor fathered Zadoq; Zadoq fathered Akhen; Akhen fathered Eleus. 15Eleud fathered Eleazar; Eleazar fathered Matan; Matan fathered Yaqub; 16Yaqub fathered Yosip the kinsman of Maryam from whom was born Yeshua who his called the Meshikha.

17Therefore, all the generations from Awraham until Dawed were fourteen generations, and from Dawed until the captivity of Babel, the generations were fourteen, and from the captivity of Babel until Meshikha there were fourteen generations.

18Now the birth of Yeshua Meshikha was like this: While Maryam his mother was betrothed to Yosip, without them being united, she was found pregnant by the Rukha d'Kudsha. 19But Yosip her husband was just and did not desire to expose her, yet he was thinking in secret that he would dismiss her.

20Now while he was thinking on these things, an angel of MarYah appeared to him in a dream and said, Yosip bar Dawed, do not have fear to take Maryam as your wife, for he that is begotten in her is from Rukha d'Kudsha. 21And she will bear a son and she will call his name Yeshua; for, he will save his people from their sins.

22And all this happened that it might be fulfilled what was said from MarYah by the prophet: 23Behold, a virgin will conceive and give birth to a sons, and they will call his name Ammanuel, which is interpreted Our God is With Us.

24Now when Yosip rose from his sleep he did as the angel of MarYah commanded him and he took his wife. 25And he did not know her until she had given birth to her first-born son; and she called his name Yeshua.
Reply
#13
shlomo yaaqub,

yaaqub Wrote:Shlama,

The New Interlinear Aramaic/English text of Pul Younan says:

Quote:15 Eleud fathered Eleazar; Eleazar fathered Matan; Matan fathered Yaqub; 16Yaqub fathered Yosip the kinsman of Maryam from whom was born Yeshua who his called the Meshikha.

That's almost identical to Murdock.

Are you reading the interlinear pdf files from right to left or the other way around?

I think you're right, he's reading it left to right. I thought we was speaking about the Yonan NT Codex, but I think you nailed it on the head.

push bashlomo,
keefa-morun
Reply
#14
Thread,

Click here, then click on "Interlinear NT", "Mattai", and "Ch. 1" (in that order).
Reply
#15
All,

Note that, while reading from right to left explains the child/parent relationship issue, the co-identification of "Eleazar" and "Yeshua" remains intact.

Quote:15 Eleud fathered Akhen Akhen fathered Zadoq Yaqub 16 Yaqub fathered Matan Matan fathered Eleazar Eleazar who is called Yeshua was born from whom of Maryam the kinsman Yosip fathered until Awraham from the generations therefore all [???]

Instead of "Eleazar who is called Yeshua", the correct reading would be "Yeshua who is called Eleazar".

Either way, I'm hoping that Paul Younan will see fit to chime in at some point.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)