Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Variations in the Peshitta??
#1
[b]Greetings and hello to everyone. My name is Mike and I live in Georgia. I consider myself a pretty serious Bible student. I have been studying the New Testament, with the Greek, for about a year or more now. I mean, w/o knowing all the nuances of the Greek I have been "getting into it." Peshitta Primacy is something new to me and I sense I am heading in that direction. I want to let you know that some of my experiences in studying the Greek has not been good. Oh, for a year or so now I have been using the New King James Bible. It has footnotes at the bottom of just about every single page in the New Testament. One aspect that has been a sore spot for me are the notes which say something to this nature: "The NU-Text does not contain this phrase;" or "The NU-Text omits this verse while the M-Text includes it;" or "The NU-Text omits this word," or "the NU-Text omits the rest of this sentance." Sure enough, when I would get on a computor and go online to some of these NT Greek sites this would confirm what the NKJV notes would say. This would leave me wondering if this sentance or this phrase or this word is included in the Bible at all!! Well, this as been a source of frustration for me at times. I am sick of it and hoping, but we'll see, if the Peshitta's holds true to its' claims. So, having said this I would like to ask you all if there any passages or places in the NT Peshitta that has this same dilemna as the Greek New Testament manuscripts do?? I mean are there certain places (anywhere) where some Aramaic manuscripts have word or phrase additions in certain passages while in other manuscripts where they're not included?? I mean, just one or two?? May I put forth ONE example just to start?? How about the account of the woman caught in adultery (John &;50 to John 8:1)?? We all know in the Greek texts we get that same old song and dance where certian family of texts contain this story while in another family of texts (in the Greek tradition) this story is included. Do we have the same debate in the Peshitta??

I would appreciate your input as I, being new to this field, would like to know what I should expect. I have come across some statements that the manuscripts of the Aramaic Peshitta is approximately 99.8% accurate and the only instances of variences in the Peshitta are not missing words but occasional mispellings here and there. Please tell me if where there might be some missing words or phrases in the manuscripts of the Peshitta. I believe they are minimal from what I read but I really am just throwing an arrow in the wind. Is there such a thing as 2 or 3 family of texts within the Aramaic Peshitta framework?? Thank you folks for your hard work and dilegence in reference to the Peshitta. Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,

Mike G. Karoules
Reply
#2
Hi, it is well known that the king james version is better, than the new king james. Although I do not find it easier to read. At the moment I have a lamsa bible, and meanwhile I am waiting for more accurate versions of the aramaic (in english)to come out, one of which will come out soon, for the new covenant anyway. Lamsa's translation of revelation does not seem to be as good as the king james, so I am trying to find a good translation of that at the moment.
Reply
#3
Mike Kar Wrote:[b]Greetings and hello to everyone. My name is Mike and I live in Georgia. I consider myself a pretty serious Bible student. I have been studying the New Testament, with the Greek, for about a year or more now. I mean, w/o knowing all the nuances of the Greek I have been "getting into it." Peshitta Primacy is something new to me and I sense I am heading in that direction. I want to let you know that some of my experiences in studying the Greek has not been good. Oh, for a year or so now I have been using the New King James Bible. It has footnotes at the bottom of just about every single page in the New Testament. One aspect that has been a sore spot for me are the notes which say something to this nature: "The NU-Text does not contain this phrase;" or "The NU-Text omits this verse while the M-Text includes it;" or "The NU-Text omits this word," or "the NU-Text omits the rest of this sentance." Sure enough, when I would get on a computor and go online to some of these NT Greek sites this would confirm what the NKJV notes would say. This would leave me wondering if this sentance or this phrase or this word is included in the Bible at all!! Well, this as been a source of frustration for me at times. I am sick of it and hoping, but we'll see, if the Peshitta's holds true to its' claims. So, having said this I would like to ask you all if there any passages or places in the NT Peshitta that has this same dilemna as the Greek New Testament manuscripts do?? I mean are there certain places (anywhere) where some Aramaic manuscripts have word or phrase additions in certain passages while in other manuscripts where they're not included?? I mean, just one or two?? May I put forth ONE example just to start?? How about the account of the woman caught in adultery (John &;50 to John 8:1)?? We all know in the Greek texts we get that same old song and dance where certian family of texts contain this story while in another family of texts (in the Greek tradition) this story is included. Do we have the same debate in the Peshitta??

I would appreciate your input as I, being new to this field, would like to know what I should expect. I have come across some statements that the manuscripts of the Aramaic Peshitta is approximately 99.8% accurate and the only instances of variences in the Peshitta are not missing words but occasional mispellings here and there. Please tell me if where there might be some missing words or phrases in the manuscripts of the Peshitta. I believe they are minimal from what I read but I really am just throwing an arrow in the wind. Is there such a thing as 2 or 3 family of texts within the Aramaic Peshitta framework?? Thank you folks for your hard work and dilegence in reference to the Peshitta. Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,

Mike G. Karoules

Hi Mike:
You will find a high degree of agreement between any two Peshitta manuscripts. English translations will vary as is expected but the "autograph" in Aramaic is quite consistent vis-a-vis the Greek New Testament. If you stick around you are sure to learn many things. Check out some of the posted threads. Feel free to ask questions or offer comments.

Shlama,
Stephen,
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- m -->
Reply
#4
August 7, 2008

Dear Mike,

There is a world of difference between the thousands of important variant reading in the Greek New Testament documents versus the relatively few minor differences in the Aramaic New Testament documents.

According to the Greek scholars Kurt Aland and Barbara Aland (The Text of the New Testament, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids, MI, 1989), there are significant differences (two or more important word differences) in 40% of the verses among the Greek New Testament documents. There are literally thousands of variants among the Greek New Testament documents, and these differences are magnified by the fact that the modern English versions are translated primarily from a Catholic Greek text rather than from the Protestant Textus Rcceptus used for the KJV and NKJV versions.

The 22 books of the revered Eastern Text of the Peshitta are essentially variant free. These are the books that are properly the canon of the Peshitta. There is one book in the Peshitta for each letter of the Aramaic alphabet in the Eastern Text.

The Western Five books (2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude, and Revelation) along with the passage of the woman caught in adultery in John's Gospel were added by the western church to form the Western Peshitto, The western version has a few other small changes from the eastern Peshitta text. There are two primary Aramaic versions of Revelation which have some variants.

Since variants are really not a major problem with the Aramaic New Testament, you will find most of the discussion in this forum is primarily directed to proper translation into English.

Otto
Reply
#5
Otto, I know this is come days after your reply. Thank-you. Your comment that the East's 22 book New Testament Canon is virtually error free, for now, is very much an encouragement to me. Would you or anyone else like to give me an estimate of degree of being varient free?? I mean, 99%; 99.5%, 99.8%?? I also want to let everyone know that my first post to this thread comes across that I am angry and that "the Peshitta better be right" type attitude. Although I have had struggles with the Greek text I wish to say to everyone that my first post was a little bit too caustic or stinging. I don't want to come across as an angry cynic. And since we have brought up the 22 book Eastern Canon and the 27 book Canon of the Peshitto are these same Aramaic autographs(manuscript copies) used by both the East and West; at least the 22 books that both East and West accept??? Thanks so much.

Sincerely,
Mike Karoules
Reply
#6
Hi Mike,

A quick note here: it all depends on what you consider a "variant."

In the Greek/Latin manuscript traditions, the "variants" that are found include everything from minor spelling errors to different readings altogether. And everything in between.

In the eastern canon of the Peshitta, most of the "variants" (if you can call them that) are minor spelling errors, missing letters or an occasional contraction. For instance, in English we can say "He is risen" or "He's risen". That type of contraction is common with some Aramaic phrases like "Bar Nasha" (son of man) becomes "barnash", etc.

Most of the "variants" in the eastern canon are like that, minor spelling or contraction that really depended on the preference of the scribe and have no impact at all on the meaning.

+Shamasha Paul
Reply
#7
Paul,

Hi!! Yes, thanks for your reply, Paul. Yes, by "varient" I mean spelling error, word change or word reconstruction and everything in between. But I should have "zeroed" in on "word change" as that is my biggest concern. So, let us forget, for now, varients in contractions, mispellings or an occasional letter that is left out. My main focus would be a different word from one Aramaic manuscript copy to another when looking at a particular verse. Also another major varient issue I would have in mind would be missing word or 2 or 3 at the end of a particular passage. Let's focus on these, can we. Just taking into consideration these two types of varients when looking at the Aramaic manuscript copies to what degree are Aramaic manuscripts varient free or close to 98%, or 99% or 96%?? Also, Paul, since you may be getting this reply soon please tell me your opinion of <!-- w --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- w --> for study purposes. Thanks and again thank-you.

Mike Karoules
Reply
#8
Mike,

Personally, I am unaware of any of those types of variants within the eastern manuscript tradition. If you are excluding the typical spelling, contraction and other types of "scribal" variants, I think from what I've observed you have pretty much a 100% agreement between any two eastern manuscripts. Again, I'm not aware of any variant **reading** within the eastern texts.

EDIT: dukhrana.com is a phenomenal resource!
Reply
#9
Paul, Okay, thank-you. I think it is common knowledge that there will always be scribal errors and varients when it comes to manuscript and manuscript copies and copies of copies and so on. Like, what I have in mind are occasional mispellings, error in contractions. These are small things that don't change the text. These kinds of varients are only human nature. Your answer is pretty good news to me but almost too good to be true considering my experience in studying various New Testament Greek manuscripts when placing some of them side by side on a particulare verse. So, yes, my focus is on what would be a different word in Aramaic when looking at a particular passage from two different manuscripts. Thanks for your help, Paul.

Mike Karoules
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)