What does the Peshitta Tanakh say about Psalm 8:5?

[rungold315]

Shlama to all,

I know the Hebrew says "a little lower than Elohim", Elohim being able to be God, judges, or angels. But is the Aramaic more specific? Ive always wondered about things that dont quite match up from OT to NT, such as this issue, the "clothing of the body" as opposed to "opening up my ears" issue, and "why have you spared me" in the NT as opposed to "why have you forsaken me" in the Tanakh. Can anybody address these issues?

[yaaqubyl]

Shlama to all,

I know the Hebrew says "a little lower than Elohim", Elohim being able to be God, judges, or angels. But is the Aramaic more specific? Ive always wondered about things that dont quite match up from OT to NT, such as this issue, the "clothing of the body" as opposed to "opening up my ears" issue, and "why have you spared me" in the NT as opposed to "why have you forsaken me" in the Tanakh. Can anybody address these issues?

Shlama,

I would translate Psalm 8:5 from the Pshitta Tanakh as follows.

You made him a little lower than the angels, and covered/clothed him with glory and honor.

Other members here may translate different.

Shlama,
Ya'aqub Younan-Levine

[Stephen Silver]

Shlama to all,

I know the Hebrew says "a little lower than Elohim", Elohim being able to be God, judges, or angels. But is the Aramaic more specific? Ive always wondered about things that dont quite match up from OT to NT, such as this issue, the "clothing of the body" as opposed to "opening up my ears" issue, and "why have you spared me" in the NT as opposed to "why have you forsaken me" in the Tanakh. Can anybody address these issues?

Shlama:
What is the "clothing of the body" as opposed to "opening up my ears" issue, and what are the scriptural references?

Shlama,
Stephen
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- m -->

[rungold315]

Sorry about not only my lack of specifics, but even error. This is a New Testament compariosn to the Tanakh.

Hebrews 10:5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me: In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure. {7} Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.

Psalm 40: 5-7 Sacrifice and meal offering You have not desired; My ears You have opened; Burnt offering and sin offering You have not required. Then I said, "Behold, I come; In the scroll of the book it is written of me.

Its a bit of a contradiction. I think the LXX reads the same as the NT. Which makes me distrust particular readings in the Masoretic more and more, although it is the most superior base text.

[rungold315]

Now that I think about it, why isnt the lXX superior to the Masoretic AND peshitta tanakh? Its the oldest Tanakh we have, matches up with the New Testament a lot better in a lot of fulfilled prophecies, fixes a lot of errors that the MT has in relation to the NT, and is least likely to have rabbinic, anti-yeshua bias. The fact that its simply in Greek as opposed to a corrupted Hebrew MT text? causes it to be pushed aside? I know I keep bringing the Tanakh up but its just frustrating not knowing what should say what.

[yaaqubyl]

Sorry about not only my lack of specifics, but even error. This is a New Testament compariosn to the Tanakh.

Hebrews 10:5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me: In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure. {7} Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.

Psalm 40: 5-7 Sacrifice and meal offering You have not desired; My ears You have opened; Burnt offering and sin offering You have not required. Then I said, "Behold, I come; In the scroll of the book it is written of me.

Its a bit of a contradiction. I think the LXX reads the same as the NT. Which makes me distrust particular readings in the Masoretic more and more, although it is the most superior base text.

Shlama,

For some detailed information concerning LXX, Aramaic Peshitta and quotes made by Mshikha, I would suggest this link, <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.peshitta.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1122">http://www.peshitta.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1122</a><!-- m -->

[Stephen Silver]

Now that I think about it, why isnt the lXX superior to the Masoretic AND peshitta tanakh? Its the oldest Tanakh we have, matches up with the New Testament a lot better in a lot of fulfilled prophecies, fixes a lot of errors that the MT has in relation to the NT, and is least likely to have rabbinic, anti-yeshua bias. The fact that its simply in Greek as opposed to a corrupted Hebrew MT text? causes it to be pushed aside? I know I keep bringing the Tanakh up but its just frustrating not knowing what should say what.

Shlama Akhi:
The LXX is a paraphrase, when it's not a literal translation. The Greek translators of the New Testament used the LXX to standardize the Old Testament quotes, while the Jewish/Assyrian scribes used the available AN"K (Peshitta Old Testament) for Peshitta New Testament quotes. There will always be slight variations but the Peshitta is quite accurate in verbatim quotes from the Peshitta AN"K.
I think the Jewish/Hebrew/Aramaic scribes can be trusted more than the Greek scribes or Hellenized Jewish scribes that translated the TN"K into the LXX. Again, the LXX is a paraphrase in some parts, while in others it's a literal translation. The Massoretic text varies little from the Dead Sea Scrolls, for the "lion's share". It's silly to throw out the baby with the bath-water over selective differences, when these variations are minor. Yes, one can surely find variations. That's the nature of translation, especially between two vastly different language traditions such as Hebrew/Aramaic vis-a-vis Greek/Latin/English.
If one looks for 100% verbatim agreement between the Hebrew TN"K and the Peshitta New Testament it's not going to happen. For one thing a translation from Hebrew to Aramaic will require some synonyms, and interpretive phrasing. It's important to keep this in mind when reading any quote from the TN"K in the New Testament Peshitta. Having said this there is still a much better affinity between Hebrew and Aramaic than between either Hebrew and Greek or Aramaic and Greek.

Psalm 40: 5-7 Sacrifice and meal offering You have not desired; My ears You have opened; Burnt offering and sin offering You have not required. Then I said, "Behold, I come; In the scroll of the book it is written of me.

Its a bit of a contradiction. I think the LXX reads the same as the NT. Which makes me distrust particular readings in the Masoretic more and more, although it is the most superior base text.

The phrase My ears You have opened has actually been paraphrased in the New Testament. I'll explain in a moment.

First, let me digress with another example here. The acrostic Psalm 145 has always missed the Nun verse. During the time of the mystical writings of the Zohar and the Bahir, the Khassidim gave various Kabbalah-based theories as to why this Nun verse went missing. Then it showed up in a Dead Sea Scrolls manuscript.

Psalm 145:between verse 13 and 14.

"Elohim is faithful in his words,
and gracious in all his works."

That to say this. In the case of Psalm 40:7, "az'nayim karit li", "my ears have been cut for me" is resolved in the Peshitta New Testament. This verse is actually in the original Hebrew and the Peshitta AN"K (Ambrosiano) reads "my ears you have bored/pierced for me". This follows the literal Hebrew of the Massoretic text. It's not really a huge problem that this is paraphrased in the Peshitta New Testament reading of Hebrews 10:5, is it? Does it change the context of Hebrews 10:5-7 at all? The equivalent is between "my ears you have cut" or "my ears you have pierced" and "but you have clothed me with a body". It's a paraphrase and it really is saying the same thing. Christ came to "hear his people (my ears you have opened) and to be pierced for our sins, "but you have clothed me with a body". God hears the cry of His people because of our sins and makes a way of atonement by the incarnation of our LORD Yeshua Meshikha. The allusion of "hearing with pierced ears" is fulfilled. Remember the expression, "I'm all ears". Isn't this the very same expression?

While doing any comparisons between the TN"K/AN"K and the Peshitta New Testament try and clothe your mind with a Semitic mind-set rather than a Greek mind-set. If one get's too literal and reads the scriptures rigidly the result will be confusion rather than resolve.

Shlama,
Stephen
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- m -->