‘Timothy A. Friedrichsen, in his 1992 dissertation at Katholieke Universiteit Leuven compiled a comprehensive list of all scholarly explanations of these and all other minor agreements”
Was that list ever turned into a book? I didn’t notice any books by him.
Is that list online?
“explain in more detail what you are saying here”
Peshitta Mt’s Lord’s Prayer has the most rhyming.
Peshitta Lk’s Lord’s Prayer has less rhyming.
An Arabic version I looked at has less rhyming;
ditto that for the Old Syriac Curetonian.
The Greek version has no rhyming, AFAICT.
Jesus spoke Aramaic.
The original version of the Lord’s Prayer was in Aramaic.
“None of these are convincing. Yes, a father is a man, but that is not a good reason to translate the word ‘man’ with the word ‘father’, not when there is a different word that very clearly means ‘father’ that is not used.
‘So a father and a husband can be referred to as ‘gabra’.’
“Yes, fathers and husbands are men, but that does not mean you should translate ‘man’ as ‘father’”
Do you think ‘g-b-r-h/ her g-b-r-a’ should be translated as ‘her husband’?
“The example referred to here is from 1999”
Yes, which is only 20 and not 2,000 years ago.
I saw ‘ab’/ father in Targum Job from Qumran, but no g-b-r-a.
“It demonstrates only that there can be a multiple words for ‘man’ and a translator may want to indicate this multiplicity in the target language. The real question is why the author of the Peshitta version of Mt 1 used two different words for Joseph”
‘Fathered’ worked for almost-all of the fatherings. However, one Joseph wasn’t a biological father of Mary, so a different word was used: g-b-r-h.
Putting ‘father’ into google translate and getting the Arabic yields ‘ab.’ Which is what Hebrew and Aramaic have for ‘father.’
Putting ‘stepfather’ into google translate and getting the Arabic yields “زوج الأم”/ zawj al’umi.
Putting those Arabic words on separate lines, and then getting the English, yields ‘husband the mom.’
“More than Delitzsch’s and the Modern Hebrew translations of the Greek?”
I’d wager ‘yes,’ but my copy of a ‘Hebrew Matthew’ hasn’t arrived yet, and I haven’t recently looked.
When I looked a few years ago at a Hebrew Matthew, I didn’t notice any rhyming.
“Learn to read Greek”
You know Greek. Is this a correct statement?:
The Greek Matthew Lord’s Prayer has rhyming.
“there is no real dispute that Jesus spoke Aramaic”
Is there any dispute about what language Jesus’ students:
spoke?
wrote?
“A more literal translation would be ‘her man’, which is a common way to indicate a husband”
The context is a geneology, with a slew of people fathering other people.
Overlooking the context often yields mistranslations, e.g. with the Greek Matthew 1:16’s mistranslation.
“‘her man’, which is a common way to indicate a husband”
2 instances where ‘her man’ in Aramaic “indicate a husband”?
How did ancient Hebrews indicate a stepfather?
“That is the more precise word for father”
Where in Aramaic Matthew 1 do you see ‘ab’?
edit:
I saw ‘ab’/ father in Qumran’s The Genesis Apocryphon, but no g-b-r-a.
I didn’t locate an ‘ab’ in Qumran’s fragmentary Targum Job.
“scholarly explanations of these”
“it’s more of a database than a book. You’ll need to travel to Leuven to use it, one of the greatest exegetical libraries in the world. That’s the cost of wanting to learn from the best scholars”
I’m unaware of any good grounds for accepting the ‘Marcan priority’ hypothesis.
“How much are you willing to wager?”
Not much.
“I don’t use the word ‘rhyming’”
I use it.
“in Matthew you certainly have the same sounding words in Greek: ἡμῶν four times and this same word in different cases four more times. Verbs ending in -έ/ήτω three times.
Lines ending in -α σου three times”
This sounds like rhyming to me: “Lines ending in -α σου three times”
“Extensive alliteration in the central line: τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον δὸς ἡμῖν σήμερον· True rhyming in the word endings of the next three lines: ἡμῶν, ἡμῶν, πειρασμόν”
That sounds like rhyming to me.
Is this a correct statement?:
In the Greek Matthew Lord’s Prayer, one set of 3 lines ends with the same sound, and another set of 3 lines ends with the same sound.
The Greek Revelation mistranslated the original Aramaic for Rev 2:22 to have an adulterer being threatened with getting ‘cast into a bed.’
A better translation is ‘cast upon a bier.’
Revelation 2:22
(Literal Standard Version) behold, I will cast her into a bed,
and those committing adultery with her into great tribulation–
if they may not convert from her works,
(King James) Behold, I will cast her into a bed,
and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation,
except they repent of their deeds.
Aramaic–> Dutch; via google translate–> English
Revelation 2:22
** you do not have permission to see this link **
Behold, I cast her upon a bier,
and those who commit adultery with her I bring into great tribulation,
unless they repent of their deeds.
on a bier – this is the bed on which a dead person lies. The Aramaic word can certainly also mean “bed” or “sickbed”, but in Lk. 7:14 the same word is used in Aramaic Peshitta for the bier on which the dead young man from Nain lies. In the reading of the Greek NA28, MHT and TR it says “bed”, sometimes interpreted as “sick bed”. But the question is whether it might be more correct to see a bier in this, because we read in the next verse of her children that they are being put to death. Would God judge the children more severely than their mother, who is apparently the cause of evil?
their deeds – this is the reading of the Aramaic Peshitta and of the Greek TR, but the reading of the Greek NA28 and MHT reads: “her deeds”. Despite this, many translations opt for “their deeds”.
“If the author wanted to specify ‘father’, he would use ܐܒܐ, which the Peshitta uses for the same statement in Lk 11,11”
Do you believe that in the passages below, if Jesus had wanted to specify ‘husband,’ he would have used g-b-r-a?
John 4:16 (modified Etheridge)
** you do not have permission to see this link **
Jeshu saith to her,
Go, call l’b-ai-l-k-i [to your baal/lord/master],
and come hither.
John 4:18
for five b-ai-l-i-n hast thou had,
and this whom thou now hast is not b-ai-l-k-i;
this hast thou said truly.
“I don’t use the word ‘rhyming’”
“I use it.”
“Despite the fact that I’ve given you good reasons not to.”
“This sounds like rhyming to me:
‘Lines enn -α σου three times'”
“Usually we use ‘rhyming’ for two different words that nonetheless end the same. This, on the other hand, is repetition of the same word, similar to Hebrew’s repetition of the same suffix. The same word always sounds exactly the same as itself. No great poetic feat in that.”
“Extensive alliteration in the central line:
τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον δὸς ἡμῖν σήμερον·
True rhyming in the word endings of the next three lines:
ἡμῶν, ἡμῶν, πειρασμόν”
“That sounds like rhyming to me.”
“Alliteration is not ‘rhyming’ but it can be stylistic. Note I already said here that second example is true rhyming.”
“Is this a correct statement?:
In the Greek Matthew Lord’s Prayer, one set of 3 lines ends with the same sound, and another set of 3 lines ends with the same sound.”
“It’s minimally correct but insufficient if you want to understand how these and other aspects of the Greek results in what you call ‘rhyming’ in Hebrew, Aramaic, or Syriac.”
If ‘rhyming’ involves “two different words that nonetheless end the same,” while “repetition of the same word” doesn’t qualify as contributing to ‘rhyming,’ then it appears to me that the Greek Lord’s Prayer has 2 instances of rhyming:
1. σήμερον
ἡμῶν
2. ἡμῶν
πειρασμόν.
That’s less rhyming than the Aramaic Luke,
which in turn has less rhyming than the Aramaic Matthew.
** you do not have permission to see this link **
** you do not have permission to see this link **
Westcott and Hort / {NA28 variants}
Πάτερ ἡμῶν ==
ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς· ==
Ἁγιασθήτω τὸ ὄνομά σου, ==
\ἐλθάτω / ἐλθέτω ἡ βασιλεία σου, ==
γενηθήτω τὸ θέλημά σου, ==
ὡς ἐν οὐρανῷ ==
καὶ ἐπὶ γῆς· ==
Τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον δὸς ἡμῖν σήμερον· ==
καὶ ἄφες ἡμῖν τὰ ὀφειλήματα ἡμῶν, ==
ὡς καὶ ἡμεῖς ἀφήκαμεν τοῖς ὀφειλέταις ἡμῶν· ==
καὶ μὴ εἰσενέγκῃς ἡμᾶς εἰς πειρασμόν, ==
ἀλλὰ ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ. ==
Westcott and Hort / {NA28 variants}
Páter imón ==
o en toís ouranoís: ==
Agiasthíto tó ónomá sou, ==
\eltháto / elthéto i vasileía sou, ==
genithíto tó thélimá sou, ==
os en ouranó ==
kaí epí gís: ==
Tón árton imón tón epioúsion dós imín símeron: ==
kaí áfes imín tá ofeilímata imón, ==
os kaí imeís afíkamen toís ofeilétais imón: ==
kaí mí eisenénkis imás eis peirasmón, ==
allá rýsai imás apó toú poniroú. ==
Westcott and Hort / {NA28 variants}
Our Father ==
the one in the heavens; ==
Hallowed be thy name, ==
Your kingdom is coming, ==
let your will be done, ==
as in heaven ==
and on earth; ==
Give us this day our daily bread; ==
and forgive us our debts, ==
as we too are left to our debtors; ==
and lead us not into temptation, ==
but deliver us from evil. ==
“‘Rabouli’ is not attested in any contemporary dialects of Jesus”
What does “epiousios” mean?
Matthew 6:11
** you do not have permission to see this link **
The bread of us the epiousion/ἐπιούσιον grant us today
Matthew PDF at
** you do not have permission to see this link **
TVU 54
Minority reading:
NA28 Matthew 6:11….
“continual, perpetual” Sy-C (Sy-S has a lacuna)
“needed, necessary” Sy-P, Sy-H
….
M. Nijman AND K. A. Worp “EPIOUSIOS in a documentary papyrus?”
NovT 41 (1999) 231-234, Marjan Nijman wrote (Bgreek, June 2005):
“In 1998 I finished my studies in the department of Theology and Religious Studies of the faculty of Humanities at the University of Amsterdam with an Extended Essay in the area of New Testament. The topic was the daily bread in the Lords Prayer. My supervisor Prof. Dr. J. W. van Henten sent me on 6 May 1998 to ”our neighbour ” at the department of Papyrology of the archeological and historical institute Dr. K. A. Worp to check the facts on the ”missing papyrus” because the literature I found was very old. We couldn’t find any new facts and concluded it was still missing.
Dr. Worp however suggested to contact Dr. W. E. H. Cockle of the department of Greek and Latin of University College London. I wrote a letter to ask whether SB1,5224 = Flinders Petrie Hawara p. 34 was still missing. At 13 May 1998 he wrote me a letter on the Hawara papyri but the letter said this papyrus was never in London. He continues ”However in fact you are in luck! In 1985 Dr. Susan S. Stephens published Yale papyri in the Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library II, (American Studies in Papyrology, Volume 24) Scholars Press, Chico, California. I have noted that on pages XV-XXXII is printed a Bbibliography of published Yale Papyri by Inventory Number. On p.XVI Yale Papyrus Inventory number 19 is said to be P. Hawara 245…From my own experience of the other Hawara Papyri I can confirm that the Rev. Professor A.H. Sayce, who published the editio princeps of this text, was not a very accurate transcriber, so it would indeed be desireable to check whether epiousion can in fact be read. I have my doubts.”
I had to finish my studies before september and thought it would take too much time (and money) to order a photo of the papyrus. But I was in luck a second time! For Dr. Worp told me he had received an e-mail from Yale that morning. Professor B. Porten an Arameicus from Israel was in Yale. Dr. Worp asked him by e-mail whether it was possible for him to go to the Beinecke Library to take a look. He was so kind to do it. and provided us with a xerox of papyrus P.C.+YBR inv 19. On 15 June 1998 he wrote an e-mail to tell that he and Professor A. Crislip had made a xerox and posted it. _They couldn’t find the word epiousi.. in the papyrus. They read the complete word elaiou (oil)_. When we received the xerox Dr. Worp told me that _the word in the papyrus was indeed elaiou_. He also said the papyrus was definitely from the first or second century CE and not from the fifth century CE. Sayce was indeed very inaccurate.
I didn’t find the correct meaning of the word epiousios, but within a month I found a papyrus that was reported missing for almost a century. I finished my studies and we wrote an article on the missing papyrus to be published in Novum Testamentum.
In december 1998 I wrote a letter to Bruce M. Metzger at Princeton Theological Seminary, who had been searching for the papyrus for years. He was very surprised and answered at 17 december 1998 that he had taken the liberty to send a copy of the material we found on to his friend Frederick Danker who was up-dating the Bauer-Arndt-Gingrich-Danker Greek-English Lexicon!
Now you know why Danker writes ”Origen is very likely correct in saying the word is coined by the evangelists and does not occur outside Christian literature.”
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)