The New Testament Peshitta and the Nomina Sacra

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Charles Wilson
Posts: 1789
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Re: The New Testament Peshitta

Post by Charles Wilson »

Hello everyone.

I started a Thread that immediately disappeared into das Noumena concerning Aramaic Primacy vs. The Greekies. I thought I had enough material to begin but was inundated with a flood of examples that showed to me that the subject was much deeper.

The easier Path to refute the Aramaic Primacy Argument is through John and the Composite Author Theory of, for example, Teeple. If Teeple is correct, 4 or 5 Greekies wrote John with the E-ditor writing the recognizable John and the R-edactor finishing the Task. If there were 4 or 5 writers authoring a Book with recognizable Greek constructions ("Arthrous" vs. "Anarthrous" names, for example) AND the Aramaic followed this construction, even if not entirely word-for-word, then it would be easier to presume that the Greek came first.

Steve Caruso attempts to show that the language of the NT is Galilean in nature and the Syriac came later.
This makes a hash of certain Primacy arguments since it then becomes plausible to assert a Primitive Galilean John that was supplanted by a later Syriac Version "that everyone recognized", following from the Greek.

The Aramaic Side is found in Mark, oddly enough, since the obvious rewrite telescopes two stories into one, with John "correcting" Mark as to which crucifixion was the "Real One". Raskin, again, attempts to show that there was a Source Document that BOTH Mark and John used. If True, in what Language was this Original written?

The first thought would be that if this Document was seized in the rubble of the Temple, it would have been most likely an Aramaic document. if a Nicholas of Damascus authored it, however, it might have been in Greek. Unless Zakkai helped. 'N so on. It gets complicated.
Steven Avery wrote: Wed Jul 14, 2021 9:20 amThe Peshitta is far closer to the Greek Byzantine text than to the Vaticanus/Alexandrian reader's digest abbreviated text. However, there are many important spots where it does not match the Greek.
You bring up a good point. What is your view on the word "Gabbatha"? It is given as "Hebrew" (as is "Golgotha") though Teeple states that it is Aramaic and was inserted by the Redactor, showing that the Redactor really doesn't know Hebrew. Bauscher states that it is a "One-Way" Transliteration, that it would never get Transliterated from Greek back into Aramaic, thus illustrating Aramaic Primary, certainly not Greek.

As an aside, if the Empty Tomb Section was written by Pliny the Younger and Tacitus, the Roman Thesis would also bring the Primacy Arguments to ruin but that might be for another day.

Thanx all,

CW
Steven Avery
Posts: 646
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2014 9:27 am

Re: The New Testament Peshitta

Post by Steven Avery »

Charles Wilson wrote: Thu Jul 15, 2021 2:46 pm What is your view on the word "Gabbatha"? It is given as "Hebrew" (as is "Golgotha") though Teeple states that it is Aramaic ... CW
Aramaic names and loan-words would easily come into Hebrew.

============================

Discovering the Language of Jesus: Hebrew Or Aramaic? (2007)
Douglas Hamp
https://books.google.com/books?id=12KTD95EhQcC&pg=PA45
https://www.academia.edu/45622119/Disco ... or_Aramaic
2011 final
http://www.douglashamp.com/wp-content/u ... -Jesus.pdf

... There is little doubt that this word is Hebrew and need not necessarily be interpreted as Aramaic. ....

============================

The Narrative Role of Semitic Languages in the Book of Acts (2003)
John C. Poirier
http://biblicalstudy.ru/NT/01.pdf
https://www.bsw.org/filologia-neotestam ... -acts/402/

============================

Jesus' Mother Tongue Part 2: The Supposed Dominance of Aramaic in First Century Galilee
David Miller
Associate Professor of New Testament and Early Judaism, Briercrest College & Seminary
https://gervatoshav.blogspot.com/2010/0 ... posed.html

Third, John's three place names called Hebraisti, namely Bethzatha, Gabbatha, and Golgotha should not be given much weight in the light [of] the resistance of proper names to translation. Thus all the apparently Aramaic words cited could easily have been used in Hebrew speech.

David Miller
https://www.briercrestcollege.ca/facult ... avidMiller

============================

The Language Environment of First Century Judaea - Jerusalem Studies in the Synoptic Gospels - Volume Two (2014)
Hebraisti in Ancient Texts: Does ἑβραϊστί Ever Mean "Aramaic"?
Randall Buth and Chad Pierce
http://mis.kp.ac.rw/admin/admin_panel/k ... (2014).pdf

Tessa Rajak (Josephus: The Historian and His Society [London: Duckworth, 2002], 232) noted this correctly and explicitly: “In the Gospel of John certain names are said to he ‘in Hebrew’: Bethesda (5:2), Gabbatha (19.13), Golgotha (19.17) and the appellation ‘Rabbouni’ (20.16). While the place-name forms look Aramaic, they could have served at the time in Hebrew too, if there was constant interaction between the two languages."
David Rivin (“Hebraisms in the Now Testament," in Encyclopedia of Hebrew language and Linguistics [Leiden: Brill, forthcoming]) takes the same approach: “The author of John gives the Greek transliterations of three place names: Bethzatha, Gabbatha, Golgotha, and despite their Aramaic etymology, he accepts these proper nouns as part of the Hebrew language” - p. 97-98

Rajak’s summary is short and to the point: "In the Gospel of John certain names are said to be ‘in Hebrew’: Bethesda (5:2), Gabbatha (19.13), Golgotha (19.17) and the appellation ‘Rabbouni’ (20.16). While the place-name forms look Aramaic, they could have served at the time in Hebrew too, if there was constant interaction between the two languages" (Rajak Josephus, 232). p. 108

Randall Buth
https://www.uhl.ac/buth/

============================

Ken Penner really moved the needle on this question at the 2004 SBL

Ancient Names for Hebrew and Aramaic: A Case for Lexical Revision (2019, built upon a much earlier SBL presentation)
Ken Penner
https://www.academia.edu/39012105/Ancie ... l_Revision
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals ... 632C92DCC6

What language did Paul speak in Acts 21-22? Ancient names for Hebrew and Aramaic (2011)
Ken Penner
https://www.academia.edu/1669906/What_l ... nd_Aramaic

Ken Penner
https://people.stfx.ca/kpenner/

============================

Pure Bible Forum
Hebraisti - Douglas Hamp, Ken Penner, Targumim and 2021 discussion on academia.edu
https://purebibleforum.com/index.php?th ... -edu.1778/

Paul speaking Hebrew (Hebraisti) in the New Testament - "Aramaic" another modern version blunder
https://www.purebibleforum.com/index.ph ... under.434/

============================

Steven Avery
Dutchess County, NY USA
Post Reply