Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Acts 7:16
#1
Acts 7:16 shows Aramaic primacy, because not all fore fathers, were burried in Sichem.

QUESTION: Could it be translated as well like this?

"And he was removed FROM Shechem, and laid in the..." in stead of "And he was removed to Shechem, and laid in the..."

THanks
Reply
#2
distazo Wrote:Acts 7:16 shows Aramaic primacy, because not all fore fathers, were burried in Sichem.

QUESTION: Could it be translated as well like this?

"And he was removed FROM Shechem, and laid in the..." in stead of "And he was removed to Shechem, and laid in the..."

THanks

Shlama,

i don't think FROM is a viable translation. you would use the mim proclitic rather than the lamadh, as the text reads. but you do have a good point otherwise concerning the Peshitta's reading -- Joseph was indeed buried in Shechem.

however, another possible explanation is that even as far south as Jerusalem (Salem) the land was considered under the rule of Shechem (see Genesis 33:18), so perhaps at that time even Hebron (where Jacob was laid) fell under the rule of the prince of that country? something to think about, i don't suppose we can know for certain.


Chayim b'Moshiach,
Jeremy
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)