Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Computer word searches of Greek and Aramaic
#1
The following are some computer word searches in which I compare parallel verses in Greek and Peshitto- Aramaic.
These demonstrate Peshitta-Peshitto primacy and the Greek NT to be a translation of that Aramaic NT.




I.This is a search of the Greek word "ermhneuw", which means, " I translate". Following are the 20 N.T. occurrences and the matching
verses in The Aramaic Peshitta and The Latin Vulgate. First , in Greek, is a transliteration of an Aramaic word, or words;
, then is the Greek word ???ermhneuw???, and finally there is a translation of an Aramaic or Hebrew phrase
into Greek; the Aramaic or Hebrew is contained in the Greek text as a transliteration almost letter by letter.
Six such cases are lacking in The Peshitta where they occur in Greek and Latin; These are marked with a red asterisk *.
I contend that Zorba is telling his readers that he is a translator in each of these verses and therefore, throughout the New Testament.
Every time he uses the word root, ermhneuw, he says, ???I translate- this is a translation??? .

This root is used 20 times in the following verses:



Matthew 1:23 idou h paryenov en gastri exei kai texetai uion kai kalesousin to onoma autou emmanouhl o estin meyermhneuomenon mey hmwn o yeov
[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]Nhl0 Nm9 Mgrttmd ly0wnm9 hm$ Nwrqnw 0rb dl0tw N+bt 0tlwtb 0hd [/font]Matthew 1:23
Matthew 1:23 ecce virgo in utero habebit et pariet filium et vocabunt nomen eius Emmanuhel quod est interpretatum Nobiscum Deus


Mark 5:41 kai krathsav thv ceirov tou paidiou legei auth taliya koumi o estin meyermhneuomenon to korasion soi legw egeirai
* [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]ymwq 0tyl+ hl rm0w 0tyl+d hdy0b dx0w [/font]Mark 5:41
Mark 5:41 et tenens manum puellae ait illi talitha cumi quod est interpretatum puella tibi dico surge

Mark 15:22 kai ferousin auton epi golgoya topon o estin meyermhneuomenon kraniou topov
[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0tpqrq 0qsptmd 0tkwd 0tlwggl yhwyty0w[/font] Mark 15:22
Mark 15:22 et perducunt illum in Golgotha locum quod est interpretatum Calvariae locus


Mark 15:34 kai th wra th enath ebohsen o ihsouv fwnh megalh legwn elwi elwi lima sabacyani o estin meyermhneuomenon o yeov mou o yeov mou eiv ti me egkatelipev
[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]yntqbs 0nml yhl0 yhl0 hyty0d yntqb$ 0nml ly0 ly0a rm0w 0mr 0lqb 9w$y 09q Ny9$
9$tbw [/font]Mark 15:34
Mark 15:34 et hora nona exclamavit Iesus voce magna dicens Heloi Heloi lama sabacthani quod est interpretatum Deus meus Deus meus ut quid dereliquisti me

John 1:38 strafeiv de o ihsouv kai yeasamenov autouv akolouyountav legei autoiv ti zhteite oi de eipon autw rabbi o legetai ermhneuomenon didaskale pou meneiv
* [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]tn0 0wh 0ky0 Nbr hl Nyrm0 Nwtn0 Ny9b 0nm Nwhl rm0w hrtb Nyt0d Nwn0 0zxw 9w$y ynpt0w [/font]John 1:38
John 1:38 conversus autem Iesus et videns eos sequentes dicit eis quid quaeritis qui dixerunt ei rabbi quod dicitur interpretatum magister ubi habitas

John 1:41 euriskei outov prwtov ton adelfon ton idion simwna kai legei autw eurhkamen ton mesian o estin meyermhneuomenon cristov
* [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0xysml yhynxks0 hl rm0w yhwx0 Nw9msl Mdqwl 0zx 0nh[/font] John 1:41
John 1:41 invenit hic primum fratrem suum Simonem et dicit ei invenimus Messiam quod est interpretatum Christus

John 1:42 kai hgagen auton prov ton ihsoun embleqav [de] autw o ihsouv eipen su ei simwn o uiov iwna su klhyhsh khfav o ermhneuetai petrov
* [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0p0k 0rqtt tn0 0nwyd-hrb Nw9m$ wh tn0 rm0w 9w$y hb rxw 9w$y twl hyty0w [/font]John 1:42
John 1:42 et adduxit eum ad Iesum intuitus autem eum Iesus dixit tu es Simon filius Iohanna tu vocaberis Cephas quod interpretatur Petrus

John 9:7 kai eipen autw upage niqai eiv thn kolumbhyran tou silwam o ermhneuetai apestalmenov aphlyen oun kai eniqato kai hlyen blepwn
* [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0zx dk 0t0w gy$0 lz0w 0xwly$d 0tydwm9mb gy$0 lz hl rm0w[/font] John 9:7
John 9:7 et dixit ei vade lava in natatoria Siloae quod interpretatur Missus abiit ergo et lavit et venit videns

Acts 4:36 iwshv de o epiklhyeiv barnabav apo twn apostolwn o estin meyermhneuomenon uiov paraklhsewv leuithv kupriov tw genei
[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]srpwqd 0rt0 Nm 0ywl 00ywbd 0rb Mgrttmd 0xyl$ Nm 0bnrb ynkt0d wh Nyd Pswy [/font]Acts 4:36
Acts 4:36 Ioseph autem qui cognominatus est Barnabas ab apostolis quod est interpretatum Filius consolationis Levites Cyprius genere

Acts 9:36 en iopph de tiv hn mayhtria onomati tabhya h diermhneuomenh legetai dorkav auth hn plhrhv agaywn ergwn kai elehmosunwn wn epoiei
* [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]twh 0db9d 0tqdzbw 0b+ 0db9b twh 0ryt9 0dh 0tyb+ 0wh hm$d 0tnydm 0pwyb 0dx 0tdymlt Nyd 0wh ty0 [/font]Acts 9:36
Acts 9:36 in Ioppe autem fuit quaedam discipula nomine Tabitas quae interpretata dicitur Dorcas haec erat plena operibus bonis et elemosynis quas faciebat


Acts 13:8 anyistato de autoiv elumav o magov outwv gar meyermhneuetai to onoma autou zhtwn diastreqai ton anyupaton apo thv pistewv
[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0twnmyh Nm sw+pwtn0l yhwymq9nd 9wh 9bud ljm smwl0 hm$ Mgrttmd 0mw$rb 0$rx 0nh wh Nwhlbqwl Nyd 0wh m0q [/font]Acts 13:8
Acts 13:8 resistebat autem illis Elymas magus sic enim interpretatur nomen eius quaerens avertere proconsulem a fide


1 Corinthians 12:10 allw de energhmata dunamewn allw de profhteia allw de diakriseiv pneumatwn eterw de genh glwsswn allw de ermhneia glwsswn
[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0n$ld 0q$wp Nyd 0nrx0l 0n$ld 00ynz Nyd 0nrx0l 0xwrd 0tw$wrp Nyd 0nrx0l 0twybn Nyd 0nrx0l 0lyx Nyd 0nrx0l [/font]1 Corinthians 12:10
1 Corinthians 12:10 alii operatio virtutum alii prophetatio alii discretio spirituum alii genera linguarum alii interpretatio sermonum

1 Corinthians 12:30 mh pantev carismata ecousin iamatwn mh pantev glwssaiv lalousin mh pantev diermhneuousin
[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]Nyqspm Nwhlk 0mld w0 Nyllmm 0nslb Nwhlk 0ml 0twy$0d 0tbhwm Nwhl ty0 Nwhlkl 0ml[/font] 1 Corinthians 12:30
1 Corinthians 12:30 numquid omnes virtutes numquid omnes gratiam habent curationum numquid omnes linguis loquuntur numquid omnes interpretantur

1 Corinthians 14:5 yelw de pantav umav lalein glwssaiv mallon de ina profhteuhte meizwn gar o profhteuwn h o lalwn glwssaiv ektov ei mh diermhneuei ina h ekklhsia oikodomhn labh
[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0nb 0td9 q$pm Nyd N0 q$pm 0l N0 0n$lb llmmd wh Nm 0bntmd 0ny0 ryg wh br Nwbnttd Nyd ty0ryty 0n$lb Nwllmt Nwklkd Nyd 0n0 0bu[/font] 1 Corinthians 14:5
1 Corinthians 14:5 volo autem omnes vos loqui linguis magis autem prophetare nam maior est qui prophetat quam qui loquitur linguis nisi si forte ut interpretetur ut ecclesia aedificationem accipiat

1 Corinthians 14:13 dioper o lalwn glwssh proseucesyw ina diermhneuh
[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]q$pnd 0lun 0n$slb llmmd whw [/font]1 Corinthians 14:13
1 Corinthians 14:13 et ideo qui loquitur lingua oret ut interpretetur

1 Corinthians 14:26 ti oun estin adelfoi otan sunerchsye ekastov umwn qalmon ecei didachn ecei glwssan ecei apokaluqin ecei ermhneian ecei panta prov oikodomhn ginesyw
[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]Nywhn 0nynbl Nyhlk 0qswp hl ty0d 0ny0w 0n$l hl ty0d 0ny0w 0nylg hl ty0d 0ny0w 0nplwy hl ty0d 0ny0w rm0n 0rwmzm hl ty0d Nwknm 0ny0l Nwtn0 Ny$nktmd ytm0d yx0 lykh 0n0 rm0 [/font]1 Corinthians 14:26
1 Corinthians 14:26 quid ergo est fratres cum convenitis unusquisque vestrum psalmum habet doctrinam habet apocalypsin habet linguam habet interpretationem habet omnia ad aedificationem fiant


1 Corinthians 14:27 eite glwssh tiv lalei kata duo h to pleiston treiv kai ana merov kai eiv diermhneuetw
[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]q$pn dxw Nwllmn dx dxw 0tlt ygs dkw Nwllmn Nyrt llmn $n0 0n$lb N0w [/font]1 Corinthians 14:27
1 Corinthians 14:27 sive lingua quis loquitur secundum duos aut ut multum tres et per partes et unus interpretetur

1 Corinthians 14:28 ean de mh h diermhneuthv sigatw en ekklhsia eautw de laleitw kai tw yew
[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]llmn 0hl0lw h$pnl yhwnybw 0n$lb llmmd wh 0td9b hl qwt$n qspmd tyl N0w[/font] 1 Corinthians 14:28
1 Corinthians 14:28 si autem non fuerit interpres taceat in ecclesia sibi autem loquatur et Deo

Hebrews 5:11 peri ou poluv hmin o logov kai dusermhneutov legein epei nwyroi gegonate taiv akoaiv
[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]Nwkt9m$mb 0hyrk Nwkl Nwtywhd l+m htwq$pml 0qs9w hrm0ml 0tlm Nl yh 00ygs qdzyklm 0nh l9 Nyd yhwl9[/font] Hebrews 5:11
Hebrews 5:11 de quo grandis nobis sermo et ininterpretabilis ad dicendum quoniam inbecilles facti estis ad audiendum

Hebrews 7:2 w kai dekathn apo pantwn emerisen abraam prwton men ermhneuomenov basileuv dikaiosunhv epeita de kai basileuv salhm o estin basileuv eirhnhv
[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0ml$d 0klm yhwty0d Myl$ Klm bwtw 0twn0kd 0klm hm$ Nyd q$ptm hme 0wh ty0d Mdmlk Nm 0rs9m Mhrb0 $rp hlw [/font]Hebrews 7:2
Hebrews 7:2 cui decimas omnium divisit Abraham primum quidem qui interpretatur rex iustitiae deinde autem et rex Salem quod est rex pacis


Though The Peshitta has only 14 of the 20 ???translations", The Latin Vulgate contains all 20 with the transliterated Aramaic.

The Greek betrays itself as a translation in these six places by transliterating the original and then declaring the Greek to be a translation of that original by use of the word , ??? ermhneuw???.Luke was from Antioch, Syria , according to Eusebius. He would have written to his people in Syria his Gospel and Acts ,and naturally in their Syrian dialect of Aramaic.
The written dialects would have far fewer differences than the spoken dialects, just as British English would be more similar to Tenneseean English in written form than in spoken form.
If it be argued that the Peshitta translates Hebrew and other Aramaic dialects in a few places, I answer that this is a rare occurrence since there are few direct
Hebrew quotes of The OT (Is. 7:14 in Mat. 1:23) and there are few differences between Aramaic dialects.

Mark and Luke seem to use another dialect of Aramaic, since they write to the Gentiles, probably in Syria and other Middle Eastern nations whose lingua franca was Aramaic.
What is difficult to account for is that there are any translations of Aramaic into Greek accompanying a transliterated Aramaic word or phrase,
assuming the Greek to be the original. There are many more transliterations which are simply left alone; no translation follows them. Here they are:
???Raca???, ???Mammon???, ???Corban???, ???Maranatha???, ???Gehenna
???,etc.

The inclusion of those contained in The Greek beg the question : Where is the original Aramaic? The many other tell-tale Aramaic words- over two hundred total occurrences in the Greek NT, suggest Aramaic
sources which occasionally posed a challenge to a translator, hence the puzzling transliterations : ???Beelzebub??? , ???Belial??? , ???Raca???, ???Maranatha???, ???Mammon???, ???Corban???, ???Gehenna??? all
of which are unexplained. They are not Greek words. They are all Aramaic ??????Belial??? is Hebrew. So also for the Hellenism ???satanas??? , from the Aramaic, [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0n+s[/font], ???satana???. The LXX
always translates The Hebrew ???Ha Satan??? with ???diabolos???. The Greek NT translates the Aramaic ???diabolos??? about half the time, and the other half
uses the Aramaic word ???satanas??? in Greek letters.
Not that The Greek NT is a bad translation; it is excellent, except for the Apocalypse, which has quite a few grammatical blunders. The point is that it is a very
reliable translation, but a translation. No translation is perfect. Only the original can be perfect. It is exactly what the writers intended;more importantly, it is exactly what God intended and said.

A very interesting fact is that for the Greek root ermhneuw , there are three different Aramaic roots in the parallel Peshitta verses ,[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]hyty0d[/font] ???which is??? , [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]q$p[/font] ???explain??? and [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]mgrt[/font] ???Targum??? or ???translate???.
It is also very noteworthy that Peshitta Matthew , in the parallel places for the Greek root ermhneuw ,has [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]Mgrt[/font] -???Targum??? , Mark has [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]hyty0d[/font] ???which is??? and [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]q$p[/font] ???explain???, Luke???s writings have [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]mgrt[/font]-???Targum??? twice , Paul???s epistles (including Hebrews) have [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]q$p[/font] ???explain??? , 9 times, while John has nothing for the 4 parallel places where the Greek has ermhneuw. That is quite a variety of translation , (or non- translation in the four cases of John , one of Mark and one of Luke) for one Greek root !

It is much simpler to suppose that the Aramaic is the original and the Greek translates these three Aramaic roots with the one Greek root and supplies it to interpret Aramaic words 6 times where
The Peshitta is quoted by transliteration. The reverse phenomenon of transliteration and translation of Greek into Aramaic is never found in The Peshitta New Testament !
The only transliteration and translation in The Peshitta is of Hebrew or a one dialect of Aramaic into another, but never of Greek.

Add to this that the Greek contains hundreds of transliterated Aramaic words throughout The N.T. , with or without translation (mostly without) ??? Messias, Kephas, Corban, Raca, Satanas, Simon Bar Iwna, Boanerges, Golgotha, Rabboni, Rabbi, Abba, Maranatha, eunglion (Hebrew and Aramaic compound meaning ???powerful scroll???,eun + glion), gehenna, Pharisha, and many more- and there
is little doubt that it is the Greek that is the translation and the Aramaic that is the original behind it.


II.Thayer's Greek Lexicon lists the word , ebrais , as " Chaldee, the language of the Hebrews and not the language of The O.T."
Chaldee is Aramaic and was the language of Israel and the Middle East for many centuries from 7th cent. B.C. to 7th cent A.D.
[b]These scriptures affirm, even in Greek , that the New Testament language recorded Aramaic words and that the language spoken was almost universally Aramaic in Bible lands.This should give weighty evidence in favor of an Aramaic original New Testament.

[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]ty0rb9[/font] - ebrais-???Aramaic???
[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0ydwhyd 0klm wnh ty0rb9w ty0mwhrw ty0nwy hnm l9l bytkd 0btk p0 Nyd 0wh ty0 [/font]Luke 23:38
Byzantine Greek Luke 23:38 hn de kai epigrafh gegrammenh ep autw grammasin ellhnikoiv kai rwmaikoiv kai ebraikoiv outov estin o basileuv twn ioudaiwn
Westcott & Hort's Greek Luke 23:38 hn de kai epigrafh ep autw o basileuv twn ioudaiwn outov
[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]Nyw+s0 0$mx hb 0wh ty0w 0dsx-tyb ty0rb9 0yrqtmd 0tydwm9md 0dx 0tkwd Ml$rw0b Nmt Nyd 0wh ty0 [/font]John 5:2
John 5:2 estin de en toiv ierosolumoiv epi th probatikh kolumbhyra h epilegomenh ebraisti bhyesda pente stoav ecousa
John 5:2 estin de en toiv ierosolumoiv epi th probatikh kolumbhyra h epilegomenh ebraisti bhyzaya pente stoav ecousa
(bhyesda is an Aramaic name transliterated into Greek.)

[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0tpypg 0rm0tm Nyd ty0rb9 0p0kd 0tpyur 0yrqtmd 0tkwdb Myb l9 btyw rbl 9w$yl hqp0 0tlm 0dh sw+lyp Nyd 9m$ dk [/font]John 19:13
John 19:13 o oun pilatov akousav touton ton logon hgagen exw ton ihsoun kai ekayisen epi tou bhmatov eiv topon legomenon liyostrwton ebraisti de gabbatha
John 19:13 o oun pilatov akousav twn logwn toutwn hgagen exw ton ihsoun kai ekayisen epi bhmatov eiv topon legomenon liyostrwton ebraisti de gabbatha
(gabbatha is an Aramaic word.It is transliterated into Greek and it is a bad transliteration; the word should read, ??? gafiftha??? in Greek- ???Gafiftha??? in English).

[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0tlwgg 0rm0tm Nyd ty0rb9 0tpqrq 0yrqtmd 0tkwdl hpyqz lyq$ dk[/font] John 19:17
John 19:17 kai bastazwn ton stauron autou exhlyen eiv topon legomenon kraniou topon ov legetai ebraisti golgotha
John 19:17 kai bastazwn eautw ton stauron exhlyen eiv ton legomenon kraniou topon o legetai ebraisti golgotha
(golgoya is an Aramaic name. It is transliterated into Greek and it is a bad transliteration; the word should read ???gagoltha??? in Greek letters ??? ???Gagoltha??? in English.)

[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]ty0mwhrw ty0nwyw ty0rb9 0wh 0bytkw 9w$y hb Pqdz0d 0tkwd 0tnydml twh 0byrqd l+m yhw0rq 0ydwhy Nm 00ygs 0pd 0nhlw[/font] John 19:20
John 19:20 touton oun ton titlon polloi anegnwsan twn ioudaiwn oti egguv hn o topov thv polewv opou estaurwyh o ihsouv kai hn gegrammenon ebraisti ellhnisti rwmaisti
John 19:20 touton oun ton titlon polloi anegnwsan twn ioudaiwn oti egguv hn o topov thv polewv opou estaurwyh o ihsouv kai hn gegrammenon ebraisti rwmaisti ellhnisti

[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0nplm rm0tmd ylwbr ty0rb9 hl 0rm0w tynpt0w myrm 9w$y hl rm0[/font] John 20:16
John 20:16 legei auth o ihsouv maria strafeisa ekeinh legei autw rabbouni o legetai didaskale
John 20:16 legei auth ihsouv mariam strafeisa ekeinh legei autw ebraisti rabbouni o legetai didaskale
What are the chances a poor first century Jewish woman would have learned Hebrew , especially with Mary Magdalene's background ?
[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]Nwhl rm0w ty0rb9 Nwhm9 llm wlhb dkw hdy0 Nwhl 0wh 9yz0w 0grd l9 swlwp Mq hl $p0 dkw[/font] Acts 21:40
Acts 21:40 epitreqantov de autou o paulov estwv epi twn anabaymwn kateseisen th ceiri tw law pollhv de sighv genomenhv prosefwnei th ebraidi dialektw legwn
Acts 21:40 epitreqantov de autou o paulov estwv epi twn anabaymwn kateseisen th ceiri tw law pollhv de sighv genomenhv prosefwnhsen th ebraidi dialektw legwn

[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]Nwhl rm0w wlhb ty0ryty Nwhm9 0wh llmm ty0rb9d w9m$ dkw [/font]Acts 22:2
Acts 22:2 akousantev de oti th ebraidi dialektw prosefwnei autoiv mallon parescon hsucian kai fhsin
Acts 22:2 akousantev de oti th ebraidi dialektw prosefwnei autoiv mallon parescon hsucian kai fhsin
The Apostle Paul spoke to the Jews in their language, which was Aramaic.They did not speak Hebrew.

[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0sqw9l wj9bml Kl wh 0$q yl tn0 Pdr 0nm lw0$ lw0$ ty0rb9 yl rm0 dk 0lq t9m$w 09r0 l9 Nlk Nlpnw[/font] Acts 26:14
Acts 26:14 pantwn de katapesontwn hmwn eiv thn ghn hkousa fwnhn lalousan prov me kai legousan th ebraidi dialektw saoul saoul ti me diwkeiv sklhron soi prov kentra laktizein
Acts 26:14 pantwn te katapesontwn hmwn eiv thn ghn hkousa fwnhn legousan prov me th ebraidi dialektw saoul saoul ti me diwkeiv sklhron soi prov kentra laktizein

[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]0r$ ty0 hl 0m$ ty0mr0w wdb9 ty0rb9 hm$d 0mwhtd hk0lm 0klm Nwhyl9 ty0w[/font] Revelation 9:11
Revelation 9:11 ecousai basilea ep autwn aggelon thv abussou onoma autw ebraisti abbadwn en de th ellhnikh onoma ecei apolluwn
Revelation 9:11 ecousin ep autwn basilea ton aggelon thv abussou onoma autw ebraisti abaddwn kai en th ellhnikh onoma ecei apolluwn
This is the only place where [font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]ty0mr0[/font] occurs , apparently referring to the Syrian tongue as opposed to the Palestinian Jewish dialect.
Notice the Aramaic version makes no reference to Greek and the Greek makes no reference to Aramaic.


[font=Estrangelo (V1.1)]wdgm ty0rb9 0rqtmd 0rt0l Nwn0 $nknw [/font]Revelation 16:16
Revelation 16:16 kai sunhgagen autouv eiv ton topon ton kaloumenon ebraisti armagedwn
Revelation 16:16 kai sunhgagen autouv eiv ton topon ton kaloumenon ebraisti armagedwn
???Armageddon??? is not a familiar Hebrew name ; ???Megiddo is???. The O.T. mentions ???Megiddo??? 11 times and ???Har-Mageddon??? not at all.


The Peshitta N.T. is the original by all accounts of the evidence, and there is so much more !
Reply
#2
Now that is cool <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->
Reply
#3
Shlama Akhi gbausc, <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->

Wow! Here's Zorba openly admitting that "I translate"!
I just checked out Thayer's on my e-Sword and here's what he has for this Greek word:

μεθερμηνεύω methermēneuō meth-er-mane-yoo'-o

Thayer Definition:
1) to translate into the language of one with whom I wish to communicate, to interpret

Aramaic 'Gephiphtha' in John 19:13 is a lot different than Greek 'Gabbatha'. I'm not sure why Zorba chose two betas when the Greek alphabet has the letter phi to match the aspirated Aramaic peh.
The Peshitta text compares 'retsiphtha' and 'gephiphtha'. Here's a great footnote of akhan Paul's I'm sure you'll appreciate.

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.peshitta.org/pdf/Yukhnch19.pdf">http://www.peshitta.org/pdf/Yukhnch19.pdf</a><!-- m -->

Quote:Yukhanan here points out a difference in the northern (Galilean) and southern (Judean, which he calls 'Hebrew') dialects of Aramaic. Both RTSIPTHA and GPIPTHA are Aramaic words which mean 'Pavement.'

I'm glad you included Revelation because it has been stated that this book has 285 O. T. references and words like 'menorah'...'ephod'...'Sheol' etc., that the Syriac Peshitto contains draw us into a Semitic framework. Personally, I think Revelation would be an awesome book in any language, though! <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->

Good observations, akhi!

Shlama w'Burkate, Larry Kelsey
Reply
#4
December 4, 2003

THE GREEK PRIMACIST WILL SAY THAT THE ARAMAIC TRANSLATOR OF THE GREEK ORIGINAL CONSIDERED THE TRANSLATION PHRASE TO BE REDUNDANT FOR ARAMAIC READERS IN EACH CASE.

Otto
Reply
#5
Hello Otto,

If Greek were the original, we should expect some transliterations and translations accompanying them in the Aramaic text , like the Greek has of Aramaic.

The fact that the Greek is translating Aramaic terms is obvious; Zorba says so by using ,"ermhnouw", after which he follows with transliterated Aramaic and then a translation into Greek. Show me one place where Aramaic does the same with Greek.

Then there are the hundreds of Aramaic words transliterated into Greek throughout the Greek New Testament. Show me a like number of transliterations of Greek words in the Peshitta throughout the New Testament.

If the Greek references Aramaic as the language of Israel, and it does, we should expect the writers of Israel to write first to Israel in the language of Israel.
Read Josephus' Antiquities XVIII- (I believe). He (a Pharisee , born AD 37)wrote his works in Aramaic and said he was not fluent in Greek and knew of two or three in Israel who were ,as Greek learning was discouraged among his countrymen.

Josephus' works were translated into Greek for the Romans. If such an educated man as he was incapable of writing in Greek, how likely is it that the common people of Israel would have been able to read a Greek gospel ?
How much less like likely is it that a fisherman like John or a tax collector like Matthew would be capable of composing a Greek gospel? And who would have been able to read it if they had?



Dave B
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)