Posts: 783
Threads: 130
Joined: Dec 2007
Reputation:
0
I know that 2 Peter does not belong to the official canon of the Eastern Church, though, the mistranslation in Greek, is (I think) quite funny.
As we might know, there is an Aramaic idiom, Men-shila means litterally 'out of the silence' and it should be translated as 'suddenly'.
However, 2 Peter 3:10 contains a greek word, which nowhere else occurs in the NT, it is 'roizedon'. Strongs G4500. "With a booming noise". (With a loud bang?)
The translator (seemingly) thought 'the opposite of silence' must be a loud bang.
Posts: 14
Threads: 4
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
0
And there was silence in heaven for the space of one half hour.
Posts: 47
Threads: 10
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation:
0
I'm surprised this hasn't gotten more attention. It seems to me that the difference between the greek and aramaic texts in this case could only have come about if the former were translated from the latter -- as opposed to the other way around which is the predominant theory even among peshitta primacists. A good translator wouldn't substitute a euphemism with an unrelated meaning for a word that is clear in the "original" greek. Even a particularly bad translator wouldn't have substituted "out of the silence" for "loudly." A different meaning whether interpreted figuratively or literally.
2 Peter being a western book and yet having such a strong hint that it too was originally penned in aramaic should lead us to further examination of Jude and John's works as well.
Posts: 1,660
Threads: 88
Joined: Feb 2008
Reputation:
5
Can this be explained any other way, besides it being a mistranslation of an Aramaic word? And if not, is there any proof this strong showing it must have 1st been written in Greek?
Shlama,
Chuck
Posts: 47
Threads: 10
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation:
0
I wish I could answer that question. I'd be stretching to even call myself an amateur at linguistics, I have a very limited working knowledge of greek and can barely sound out aramaic words (but I'm getting better at that). Hoping akhi Paul can offer his insight.
Shlama.
Posts: 47
Threads: 10
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation:
0
I agree, but the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, Akhi Paul. Seems to be worth further investigation at the very least. It would be bittersweet though, if we were to conclude that there was an aramaic original but that it no longer exists in its original form.