Announcement

Collapse

Biblical Languages 301 Guidelines

This is where we come to delve into the biblical text. Theology is not our foremost thought, but we realize it is something that will be dealt with in nearly every conversation. Feel free to use the original languages to make your point (meaning Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic). This is an exegetical discussion area, so please limit topics to purely biblical ones.

This is not the section for debates between theists and atheists. While a theistic viewpoint is not required for discussion in this area, discussion does presuppose a respect for the integrity of the Biblical text (or the willingness to accept such a presupposition for discussion purposes) and a respect for the integrity of the faith of others and a lack of an agenda to undermine the faith of others.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Our Translated Gospels

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Chapter XI Lost Portions of the Original Text

    Chapter XI "Lost Portions of the Original Text" in Our Translated Gospels: Some of the Evidence, by Charles Cutler Torrey:
    The cases thus far observed of such accidental loss have already received mention in the introductory portions of Chapter VIII. The attempt to restore in these passages the text originally written by the evangelists was reserved for this chapter.

    To be continued...

    Comment


    • Continued from the last post above ↑

      Chapter XI "Lost Portions of the Original Text" in Our Translated Gospels: Some of the Evidence, by Charles Cutler Torrey:
      The loss of a single (but highly important) Aramaic word was shown in Exhibit XXI, C. In this case the omission was not due to accident, but to the mistake of a scribe, who believed himself to be correcting the carelessness of his predecessor.

      To be continued...

      Comment


      • Continued from the last post above ↑

        Chapter XI "Lost Portions of the Original Text" in Our Translated Gospels: Some of the Evidence, by Charles Cutler Torrey:
        In Matthew 5:32 two words were accidentally dropped from the original text in the process of transmission, see Exhibit III, B. The passage read : "Any one who divorces his wife on any other ground than that of fornication, [and marries another] ( [זְנוּתָא [וְנָסַב אֻחְ רָנְתָּא ), commits adultery with her." That which brought about the omission was the resemblance of one group of overlined [rather, colored -JR] letters to the other.

        To be continued...

        Comment


        • Continued from the last post above ↑

          Chapter XI "Lost Portions of the Original Text" in Our Translated Gospels: Some of the Evidence, by Charles Cutler Torrey:
          Oversights of this nature are of course likely to occur, sometimes leaving very extensive gaps, in the manuscript transmissions in any language, but they are especially frequent in unpointed Semitic, as would be expected. Examples in the O.T. are very many, and the demonstration is usually made easy by the Greek translation, or a parallel passage, or both. A typical case, which may help to illustrate the similar examples in the N.T., is the lacuna in the Massoretic text of Esther 3:7b, which reads as follows

          הפיל פור הוא הגורל לפני המן מיום ליום ומחדשׁ לחדשׁ [לאבד
          ביום אחד עם מדדכי ויפל הגורל בשׁלושׁה עשׁר לחדשׁ] שׁנים
          עשׁר הוא חדשׁ אדר׃.

          "They cast pūr, that is, the lot, before Haman, for one day after another and for month after month, [to destroy in one day the people of Mordecai; and the lot fell on day 13 of month] 12, which is the month of Adar."

          To be continued...

          Comment


          • Post repeated to correct misspelling.

            Spelling correction:

            Torrey's text does not distinguish between שׂ and שׁ; instead, it only has the bottom part of the letter, without the dot on top of either the left or right side. I have not found a way to represent only the bottom part of the respective letters (i.e., without either of the dots ― as is the case in Torrey's text) in any of the resources in Accordance; so, consequently, I inadvertantly misspelled the number ten = עָשָׂר, which has the letter שׂ rather than the letter שׁ.
            Chapter XI "Lost Portions of the Original Text" in Our Translated Gospels: Some of the Evidence, by Charles Cutler Torrey:
            Oversights of this nature are of course likely to occur, sometimes leaving very extensive gaps, in the manuscript transmissions in any language, but they are especially frequent in unpointed Semitic, as would be expected. Examples in the O.T. are very many, and the demonstration is usually made easy by the Greek translation, or a parallel passage, or both. A typical case, which may help to illustrate the similar examples in the N.T., is the lacuna in the Massoretic text of Esther 3:7b, which reads as follows

            הפיל פור הוא הגורל לפני המן מיום ליום ומחדשׁ לחדשׁ [לאבד
            ביום אחד עם מדדכי ויפל הגורל בשׁלושׁה עשׂר לחדשׁ] שׁנים
            עשׂר הוא חדשׁ אדר׃.

            "They cast pūr, that is, the lot, before Haman, for one day after another and for month after month, [to destroy in one day the people of Mordecai; and the lot fell on day 13 of month] 12, which is the month of Adar."

            To be continued...
            Last edited by John Reece; 02-11-2015, 03:36 PM.

            Comment


            • Post repeated to add link.

              Link to Esther added:

              Torrey's text does not distinguish between שׂ and שׁ; instead, it only has the bottom part of the letter, without the dot on top of either the left or right side. I have not found a way to represent only the bottom part of the respective letters (i.e., without either of the dots ― as is the case in Torrey's text) in any of the resources in Accordance; so, consequently, I inadvertantly misspelled the number ten = עָשָׂר, which has the letter שׂ rather than the letter שׁ.
              Chapter XI "Lost Portions of the Original Text" in Our Translated Gospels: Some of the Evidence, by Charles Cutler Torrey:
              Oversights of this nature are of course likely to occur, sometimes leaving very extensive gaps, in the manuscript transmissions in any language, but they are especially frequent in unpointed Semitic, as would be expected. Examples in the O.T. are very many, and the demonstration is usually made easy by the Greek translation, or a parallel passage, or both. A typical case, which may help to illustrate the similar examples in the N.T., is the lacuna in the Massoretic text of Esther 3:7b, which reads as follows

              הפיל פור הוא הגורל לפני המן מיום ליום ומחדשׁ לחדשׁ [לאבד
              ביום אחד עם מדדכי ויפל הגורל בשׁלושׁה עשׂר לחדשׁ] שׁנים
              עשׂר הוא חדשׁ אדר׃.

              "They cast pūr, that is, the lot, before Haman, for one day after another and for month after month, [to destroy in one day the people of Mordecai; and the lot fell on day 13 of month] 12, which is the month of Adar."

              To be continued...

              Comment


              • Continued from the last post above ↑

                Here, our Hebrew has lost ten words necessary to the sense; preserved in the Greek translation, and in part in verse 13. The copyist's eye caught the wrong group of letters; the more easily because of the tall lamed at the beginning.

                To be continued...

                Comment


                • Continued from the last post above ↑

                  In Theodotion's Hebrew of Neh. 8:7, eleven words dropped out because of the similarity between ימין and מבימין; in 1 Chron. 28:20, thirteen words, because "house of the Lord" occurred twice; in some manuscripts of Josh. 21:36 f., twenty words, for a similar reason; in Judg. 16:13 f., (preserved only in the Greek versions), because of the repetition of a single word of four letters. There are other equally striking instances.

                  To be continued...

                  Comment


                  • Our Translated Gospels

                    The only example of considerable loss of the original Aramaic text in the Gospels is the passage Matthew 14:12 f. which is curiously like, and yet unlike, the parallels in Mark and Luke, and has caused much discussion without receiving any acceptable solution. The considerably longer text of Mark is in its wording so closely parallel to Matthew that it may reasonably be expected to give some help. When it is turned word by word into Aramaic, the reason for the peculiar text of Matthew appears, it seems to me, with certainty. It is a case exactly like those which have just been mentioned. The two parallel texts, in the Aramaic, were the following:

                    To be continued...

                    Comment


                    • The only example of considerable loss of the original Aramaic text in the Gospels is the passage Matthew 14:12 f. which is curiously like, and yet unlike, the parallels in Mark and Luke, and has caused much discussion without receiving any acceptable solution. The considerably longer text of Mark is in its wording so closely parallel to Matthew that it may reasonably be expected to give some help. When it is turned word by word into Aramaic, the reason for the peculiar text of Matthew appears, it seems to me, with certainty. It is a case exactly like those which have just been mentioned. The two parallel texts, in the Aramaic, were the following:

                      [Note: the text of Mark 6:29-32 is black with a couple of letters in maroon; the text of Matthew 14:12 f. is green. Torrey's text has the two biblical texts in parallel columns; however, as I do not have the knowledge or expertise to do parallel columns, I am mixing the texts in a single column using green color to distinguish between the Marcan text and that of Matthew. Please ignore the dot on the right top of all the שׁ's, as that would be the accurate replication of Torrey's text. I cannot replicate the letter without the dot, and not all the letters should have the dot on the right top rather than the left top.]
                      ושׁמעו תלמידוהי ואתו
                      ואתו תלמידוהי

                      ושׁקלו גשׁמה ושׁמוי בקבד
                      ושׁקלו גשׁמה וקברוהי

                      ואתכנשׁו תלמידיא לישׁוע
                      ואתו תלמידיא

                      ואמרו להכל
                      והודעו לה כל

                      די עבדו ודי הודעו

                      ואמר להון אתו לכון

                      בלחודכון למדבר ונוחו זעיר

                      ארי שׁגאין די אתין ואזלין

                      הוו ולא הוא להון

                      זמן אף לא להכל

                      ואזלו בספינא
                      ואזלו בספינא

                      למדבר בלחודדהון
                      למדבר בלחהון

                      Comment


                      • Our Translated Gospels

                        The only example of considerable loss of the original Aramaic text in the Gospels is the passage Matthew 14:12 f. which is curiously like, and yet unlike, the parallels in Mark and Luke, and has caused much discussion without receiving any acceptable solution. The considerably longer text of Mark is in its wording so closely parallel to Matthew that it may reasonably be expected to give some help. When it is turned word by word into Aramaic, the reason for the peculiar text of Matthew appears, it seems to me, with certainty. It is a case exactly like those which have just been mentioned. The two parallel texts, in the Aramaic, were the following:

                        [Note: the text of Mark 6:29-32 is black with a couple of letters in maroon; the text of Matthew 14:12 f. is green. Torrey's text has the two biblical texts in parallel columns; however, as I do not have the knowledge or expertise to do parallel columns, I am mixing the texts in a single column using green color to distinguish between the Marcan text and that of Matthew. Please ignore the dot on the right top of all the שׁ's, as that would be the accurate replication of Torrey's text. I cannot replicate the letter without the dot, and not all the letters should have the dot on the right top rather than the left top.]
                        ושׁמעו תלמידוהי ואתו
                        ואתו תלמידוהי

                        ושׁקלו גשׁמה ושׁמוי בקבד
                        ושׁקלו גשׁמה וקברוהי

                        ואתכנשׁו תלמידיא לישׁוע
                        ואתו תלמידיא

                        ואמרו להכל
                        והודעו לה כל

                        די עבדו ודי הודעו

                        ואמר להון אתו לכון

                        בלחודכון למדבר ונוחו זעיר

                        ארי שׁגאין די אתין ואזלין

                        הוו ולא הוא להון

                        זמן אף לא להכל

                        ואזלו בספינא
                        ואזלו בספינא

                        למדבר בלחודדהון
                        למדבר בלחהון

                        The ease with which the accidental omission could take place is very evident, for the two groups of letters [colored maroon] are not only practically identical, but are also conspicuous on the page, with the tall lamedh at either end of the group. This shows exactly what fell out from the text of Matthew, and why. Moreover, every word of Matthew's Greek is now accounted for. The translator had his difficulty here, for a merely literal rendering of the mutilated Aramaic text could not possibly serve; there must be some editing, as the following shows.

                        Rendering of the mutilated text: καὶ προσελθόντες οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ ἦραν τὸ πτῶμα καὶ ἔθαψαν αὐτόν. καὶ ἐλθόντες οἰ μαθηταὶ ἀπήγγειλαν αὐτᾠ πάντα [.....] καὶ ἀνεχώρησαν ἐκεῖθεν ἐν πλοίᾠ εἰς ἔρημον τόπον κατ' ἰδίαν.

                        The reason for each step in the slight editing of this text in order to produce the Greek of our Matthew is evident. The translator of Mark departed from a strictly literal rendering at only one point. The second occurrence of "the disciples"―now those of Jesus, not John―might cause confusion; he accordingly wrote "apostles."

                        Comment


                        • Last Post of Torrey's Text

                          This is the ending of Torrey's Our Translated Gospels:
                          The remaining case of omission of this nature is the small but important gap in Mark 9:13, which fortunately can be filled from the parallel in Matthew. The readings, Greek and Aramaic, are the following:

                          [Note: the text of Matthew 17:12 is black with a duplicated set of half a dozen letters in maroon; the text of Mark 9:13. is green. Torrey's text has the two biblical texts in parallel columns; however, as I do not have the knowledge or expertise to do parallel columns, I am mixing the texts in a single column using green color to distinguish between the text of Matthew and that of Mark].
                          λέγω δὲ ὑμῖν
                          ἀλλὰ λέγω ὑμῖν

                          ὅτι Ἠλείας ἤδη ἦλθεν
                          ὅτι καὶ Ἠλείας ἐλήλυθεν

                          καὶ οὐκ ἐπέγνωσαν αὐτὸν

                          ἀλλὰ ἐποίησαν ἐν αὐτῷ
                          καὶ ἐποίησαν αὐτῷ

                          ὅσα ἠθέλησαν
                          ὅσα ἤθελον

                          οὕτως καὶ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ

                          ἀνθρώπου μέλλει πάσχειν

                          ὑπ᾿ αὐτῶν

                          καθὼς γέγραπται ἐπ᾿ αὐτόν


                          אמר אנא לכון
                          אמר אנא לכון

                          די אליא כדו אתא
                          די אליא אתא

                          די אליא כדו אתא
                          די אליא אתא

                          ולא ידעוהי אלא

                          עבדו בה כל די
                          ועבדו לה כל די

                          צבין הוו
                          צבין הוו

                          וכן אף בר אנשׁא

                          עתיד למחשׁ ביןהוו

                          [כדי כתיב עלוהי]
                          כדי כתיב עלוהי

                          In this case, the two groups of letters which are here [colored maroon] resembled each other in the ordinary script, with no space between words, more closely than appears in any modern printed text. The words "as is written concerning him" must have stood in the original text at the end of the passage.

                          finis

                          Comment


                          • A Reminiscence by Metzger

                            From Chapter 3, Expanding Horizons, page 33 of Reminiscences of an Octogenarian, by Bruce Manning Metzger:
                            My acquaintance with a wider spectrum of biblical scholars began in 1937 when, during my second year at seminary, I decided to become a member of the Society of Biblical Literature. This decision came about largely because of a suggestion made by Dr. Gehman, who had taken an interest in me as a fellow Pennsylvanian. In those days the annual meetings of the Society were held during the Christmas vacation period at Union Theological Seminary in New York, and thus it was convenient for Princeton residents to attend the sessions. It goes without saying that I found it both stimulating and enlightening to hear scholars such as William H. P. Hatch, Kirsopp Lake, and Ernest Colwell discuss textual problems.

                            On one occasion an altercation that generated more heat than light followed the reading of a paper by Donald Riddle of the University of Chicago in which he criticized sharply the view held by C. C. Torrey of Yale, namely that the Greek Gospels are translations of Aramaic originals. During the discussion period, Torrey, a patrician figure, refused to be drawn into the debate and haughtily declared that he did not see anyone present who knew enough Aramaic to make such a debate profitable!

                            Comment

                            widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                            Working...
                            X