Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Matthew 27:3-9 - Jeremiah or Zachariah?
#1
First, thanks to Paul for this forum. This is one of the biggest topics in the whole Greek vs. Aramaic affair. Contradictions in the Greek, but not in the Peshitta
---

Matthew 27:3-9 saying Jeremiah, when it was Zachariah 11:13 and Peshitta says "the prophet" but does not name him.

So the Peshitta does not have this contradiction, while the Greek has.
Reply
#2
Zorba names the wrong prophet in Matthew 27:9.
This post wouldn't fit under 'Mistranslations' very well because of the fact that the name of the prophet is not mentioned in the Peshitta.
Also notice that Zorba missed an interesting phrase, "the precious one."

Larry_Kelsey "Matthew 27:9"
Jun-19-2002 at 03:11 AM (GMT3)

Quote:
Shlama Akhay,

To see the first mistake that the Greek translators made in Matt. 27:9, let's take a look at Young's Literal Translation of the Greek text.

"Then was fulfilled that spoken through Jeremiah the prophet, saying,'And I took the thirty silverlings, the price of him who hath been priced, whom they of the sons of Israel did price,...'"

In the first place, they're quoting the wrong prophet. The O.T. passage referred to in this verse is Zechariah 11:12,13. To prove it, here is Jay P. Green's Literal Translation of these two verses in Zechariah:

"And I said to them, If it is good in your eyes, give My pay, and if not, let it go. And they weighed My price, thirty pieces of silver.
And Jehovah said to Me, Throw it to the potter, the magnificent price at which I was valued by them. And I took the thirty pieces of silver and threw it to the potter in the house of Jehovah."

The supposed portion of Jeremiah that some insist is being quoted (32:6-9) involves the purchase of a field, but seventeen pieces of silver are mentioned instead of thirty and no mention of the potter exists. Actually, the Peshitta reads "...which was spoken by the prophet..." so the Greek translators took it upon themselves to declare which prophet was being referred to, but they chose the wrong one.
Also, I noticed a phrase in Akhan Paul's Interlinear that is missing in the Greek text. "...the precious one..."
Thirdly, Young's Literal from the Greek has "...the price of him who hath been priced , whom they of the sons of Israel did price..." In Paul's Aramaic-English Interlinear the word 'price' exists only once. "... the price of the precious one which agreed upon {those} from the sons of Israel..." is the way Paul's work reads.

Shlama w'Burkate, Larry Kelsey
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)