06. Internal Evidence that the Peshito-Syriac was made in Century I; and that it is not a mere tr...

06. Internal Evidence that the Peshito-Syriac was made in Century I; and that it is not a mere translation of the Greek.

JESUDAD said that the New Covenant Peshito is "a translation made by the care and solicitude of Thaddaeus and other Apostles." Books written, as the Gospel of Matthew was, in the Syriac of Palestine, needed very little change when translated into the Syriac of Edessa. Paul’s letter to the Hebrews, the letter of James, the first of Peter, and the first of John, were all addressed to Hebrews, and probably, therefore, were first written in Syriac, the language of the Hebrews; and needed but few changes when translated into the dialect of Edessa. These few changes were probably what Jesudad called a "translation," so far as the word had reference to these books. The Apostles, when taking the care and oversight of the translation of all the books in the Peshito, were not bound as an uninspired translator would have been, to follow always the exact words of what was translated. They had divine authority to use whatever difference of expression the Holy Spirit might guide them to adopt, as better fitted for use in the translation.

If, therefore, in comparing the Syriac with the Greek text, we find that they both express nearly the same MEANING, but that in places a supposed Greek original so differs IN WORDS from the Syriac, that if the Syriac had been made by an uninspired translator, he would be justly condemned for licentious departure from his Greek copy, the reason may be, that the inspired translator has been divinely guided to make that difference; and if, in some of these cases of different wording, the Syriac meaning be more clear, or exact, or better adapted for Syrian readers than the Greek wording is, those very differences become evidence of the correctness of the Syrian belief that the Peshito was made "by the care and solicitude of Apostles." For it is evident that an uninspired translator could not, as a rule, bring light out of darkness, clearness out of obscurity, exactness and correctness out of ambiguity and uncertainty. Persons familiar with the Peshito admit the truth of Faust Nairon’s remark, that the Peshito does really sometimes "make clear, things difficult or doubtful in the Greek." (Introduction, pg. 9.)

Bishop Walton quotes with approval the remark of De Dieu, that "the true meaning of phrases which often occur in the New Testament, can scarcely be sought from any other source than the Syriac. (Polyglot, Prolegomena, xiii. 19.)

J.D. Michaelis says, "the Syriac Version leads us sometimes to just and beautiful explanations, where other help is insufficient." (Marsh’s Michaelis, vol. ii. pg. 44.)

WICHELHAUS REJECTS THE SYRIAN TESTIMONY that the Peshito was made by "the care of Apostles," and gives this reason for doing so, - that it "does not in all things express and religiously follow the Greek text;" (pg. 259.) But these differences, according to Syrian testimony, are differences made BY SOME OF THE APOSTLES THEMSELVES, in writing or revising the same things in two different languages. If, in some places, the expressions in the Syriac are more exact, and make the meaning more clear, than the Greek does, the fact that they differ from the Greek more than a faithful translator from the Greek would have dared to differ, favours the Syrian belief that they are due to that apostolic authority which had a right to vary the mode of verbal expression, where this was thought to be desirable, in a different language. The following are specimens of those differences which Wichelhaus mentions, and which, as he contends, COMPEL the conclusion that the Syrian belief which has existed from the first ages till now, is a complete delusion. The reader will probably think that, instead of proving this, there is nothing in them which is inconsistent with that belief. The passages which ARE NOT IN THE SYRIAC, are not on that account to be deemed of doubtful authority; for if they are well sustained by Greek copies, that is evidence that they were afterwards added by Apostolic authority. Dr. Scrivener says that some various readings are probably due to additions made by the sacred writers themselves to some copies of their writings after these were first issued. He says," It may be reasonably thought that a portion of the variations [in ancient copies], and those among the most considerable, had their origin in a cause which must have operated at least as much in ancient as in modern times, the changes gradually introduced after publication, BY THE AUTHORS THEMSELVES, into the various copies yet within their reach. Such revised copies would circulate independently of those issued previously, and now beyond the writer’s control, and thus, becoming the parents of a new family of copies, would originate and keep up diversities from the first edition, without any fault on the part of transcribers." (Intro., pg. 18.) In MATTHEW, six differences named by Wichelhaus as proof of bad translation, are certainly not so. They are cases in which the common Greek text is admitted to be corrupt, and the Revisers of the English Version have followed the Peshito readings. They are Matthew 5:27; Matthew 9:13; Matthew 22:44; Matthew 26:9; Matthew 26:60; Matthew 28:9. In 14:24 also, some Greek copies have, as the Peshito has, "many furlongs distant from the land," instead of, "now in the midst of the sea;" so that it is doubtful whether the true Greek text differs from the Syriac there. In 7:14, the Syriac has, "how narrow"; the Greek has, "for narrow." In 10:10, Syr., ’staff’; Grk., some copies, ’staves’; some ’staff.’ 13:18, Syr., ’seed’; Grk., ’sower.’ 14:13, Syr., ’on dry land’; Grk., ’on foot.’ 16:27, Syr., ’holy angels’; Grk., ’angels.’ 21:34, Syr., ’that they should send’; Grk., ’to receive.’ 22:23, Syr., ’the Saducees were saying’; Grk., ’the Saducees who say.’ 22:37, Syr., ’and with all thy might’; Grk. has it not. 27:9, Syr., ’by means of the prophet’; Grk., ’by means of the prophet Jeremiah.’ AN ERROR, for the words are in Zechariah 11:12-13. In Matthew 17:60, Syr., ’was hewn’; ’they rolled, placed, departed’; Grk., ’he had hewn’; ’he rolled, and departed.’ 28:18, Syr., ’And as my Father sent me, so I send you’; Grk. has it not. IN Luke 9:34, Syr., ’And they feared when they saw that Moses and Elijah entered the cloud’; Grk., ’and they feared when those, (some copies have, ’when they’) entered the cloud.’ In John 7:39, the Syriac has, ’The Spirit was not yet given’; the Greek, ’The Spirit was not yet.’ In 8:1-11, the Syriac has not the account of the adulteress. In the Greek some copies are without it; but others have it. It probably is due to an addition made by John himself after his Greek Gospel was first issued. (See the remark of Dr. Scrivener, quoted pg. xlviii, from his Introduction, pg. 18.) It has in itself strong evidence of Apostolic origin. In Acts 3:21, Syr., ’until the completion of the times of all those things of which God has spoken’; Grk., ’until the times of the restoration of all things, of which God has spoken.’ 5:37, Syr., ’in the days in which men were enrolled for the head-tax’; Grk., ’in the days of the enrollment.’ 10:22, Syr., ’in a vision by a holy angel’; Grk., ’by a holy angel.’ 12:1, Syr., ’Herod the king, who is surnamed Agrippa’; Grk., ’Herod the king.’ 12:10, Syr., ’the iron gate’; Grk., ’the iron gate which leads into the city.’ 13:13, Syr., ’Paul and Barnabas’; Grk., ’those around Paul.’ 17:19, Syr., ’to the house of judgment which is called Areopagus’; Grk., ’to the Areopagus.’ 18:5, Syr., ’was restricted in speech’; some Grk. copies have, ’was pressed in spirit’; others, ’was hindered in word’; rendered in Revised English Version, ’was constrained by the word.’ 18:7, Syr., ’Titus’; Grk., ’Justus.’ 20:4, Syr., ’Timothy, who was of Lystra’; Grk., ’Timothy.’ 28:13, Syr., ’Peteoli, a city of Italy’; Grk., ’Peteoli.’ 28:29, Syr., nothing; Grk., some copies, ’And when he had said these words, the Jews departed, and had great reasoning among themselves.’ Other Grk. copies, and Revised English Version, have nothing. In Romans 1:1, Syr., ’Paul, called, and a Chief Messenger.’ The Grk. has not the word ’and.’ The Greek meaning is uncertain. The Common and Revised Eng. Vers. have, ’called [to be] an Apostle’; but the Grk. may be rendered, ’One called, an Apostle.’ 5:9, Syr., ’how much more shall we now be declared just’; Grk., ’how much more, having now been declared just.’ 15:6, Syr., ’God the Father’; Grk., ’the God and Father.’ So also in 2 Corinthians 1:3; Ephesians 1:3; 1 Peter 1:3. In 1 Corinthians 7:35, Syr., ’but that ye may be faithful to your Lord in a comely manner, not setting thought on the world’; Grk., ’but for what is comely and serviceable to the Lord, without interruption.’ 10:2, Syr., ’were immersed by means of Moses’; Grk., ’were immersed into Moses.’ In Php 2:13, Syr., ’to will and to do that which ye wish’; Grk., ’to will and to do on behalf of [his] good pleasure.’ 2:15, Syr., ’pure sons of God, who dwell among...’; Grk., ’children of God without blemish, in the midst of...’ 2 Thessalonians 1:7, Syr., ’with the power of his angels’; Grk., ’with the angels of his power.’ 1 Timothy 2:15, Syr., ’but she is to have life [-bliss] by means of her children, if they, [the women]’, etc. Grk., ’but she will be saved by means of the bearing of children, if they, [the women],’ etc. In Hebrews 2:6, Syr., ’the Scripture’; Grk., ’one somewhere.’ 6:2, Syr., ’the teaching of immersion’; Grk., ’the teaching of immersions.’ 6:4, Syr., ’have gone down into immersion’; Grk., ’have been once enlightened.’ 7:3, Syr., ’neither his father, nor his mother, was written in family records, nor the beginning of his days, nor the end of his life’; Grk., ’without father, without mother, without family record, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life.’ 10:32, Syr., ’in which ye received immersion’; Grk., ’in which, having been enlightened.’ IN THE WORDS USED TO DESCRIBE CHURCH ELDERS, there is evidence that the Peshito is not a mere word-for-word translation, as some imagine, of the Greek Text. The Syrians sometimes used the Greek word EPISCOPOS, in the form of EPISCOPE. It is used in Acts 20:28, "The church - the assembly, over which the Holy Spirit has made you OVERSEERS;" for ’overseer’ is the meaning of EPISCOPOS, anglicised in the word ’bishop.’ But in 1 Timothy 3:1, where the Greek has "the office of overseer," the Peshito has, "the office of elder." In verse 2, the Greek has overseer; the Peshito, elder. In Php 1:1, the Greek has, overseers, the Peshito, elders. In Titus 1:7, the Greek has overseer, the Peshito, elder. In 1 Peter 2:25, the Greek has overseer, the Peshito, care-taker. So that the difference of the words used for the same office in all these cases but one, shows that the Greek was not a mere translation of the Syriac.

[[ This was misstated by William Norton - he meant to say "...shows that the Syriac was not a mere translation of the Greek" which coincides with the title of the section, namely, VI.-INTERNAL EVIDENCE THAT THE PESHITO WAS MADE IN CENT. 1, AND IS NOT A MERE TRANSLATION OF THE GREEK. ]] IN THE NAMES OF PLACES, the Peshito shows the same independence of the Greek. In Matthew 4:13, the Grk. has Capernaum; the Syr. has, The village of Nahum. In John 3:23, the Grk. has, Aenon; the Syr. has, The Fountain of the Dove. In John 19:38, the Grk. has Arimathea; the Syr. has, Romtho; in Acts 21:7, the Grk. has Ptolemais; the Syriac has, Acu.

Mr. Jeremiah Jones, in his work on the Canon, 1798, contends that the use of the name ACU, for Ptolemais, is a decisive proof that the Peshito must have been made not far in time from A.D. 70, when Jerusalem was destroyed. (vol. i. pg. 103.) He says that the most ancient name of this place among the Israelites was Aco, or Acco, Judges 1:31; that this name was afterwards changed to Ptolemais; that some say it had its new name from Ptolemy Philadelphus, about 250 B. C. He says it is certain that the old name Aco, was antiquated and out of use in the time of the Romans, and that the use of the old name Acu, in the Peshito, can be accounted for in no other way, but by supposing that the persons for whom the version was made were more acquainted with it, than with the new name Ptolemais; that upon any other supposition it would have been absurd for him to have used Acu. He says, that until the destruction of Jerusalem, one may suppose that the Jews may have retained the old name Aco still, out of fondness for its antiquity; but, he says, "how they, or any other part of Syria, could, after the Roman conquest, call it by a name different from the Romans, seems to me impossible to conceive..... To suppose, therefore, that this translation, in which we meet with this old name, instead of the new one, was made at any great distance of time after the destruction of Jerusalem, is to suppose the translator to have substituted an antiquated name known to but few, for a name well known to all." (pp. 104, 105.)

Mr. Jeremiah Jones says that a similar proof that the Peshito cannot have been made much after A.D. 70, is found in the fact that the Peshito often calls the Gentiles, as the Jews were accustomed to do, PROFANE PERSONS, where the Greek calls them THE NATIONS, that is, the Gentiles. The Peshito calls them profane, in Matthew 6:7; Matthew 10:5; Matthew 18:17; Mark 7:26; John 7:35; Acts 18:4; Acts 18:17; 1 Corinthians 5:1; 1 Corinthians 10:20; 1 Corinthians 10:27; 1 Corinthians 12:2; 1 Peter 4:3. The expression is used, therefore, throughout the Peshito. Mr. Jones says, that it shows that the writer was a Jew, for no other person would have called all the world profane; and that after the destruction of the temple, all Hebrew Christians must have seen that other nations were not to be reckoned unclean and profane in the Jewish sense, and that therefore this version must have been made either before, or soon after, A.D. 70. (On Canon, Vol. i., pp. 106-110.)

It must be admitted, I think, that the above differences are not inconsistent with the proof given by Syrian testimony that "the Peshito was written by Apostolic authority." (Wichelhaus, pg. 153.) Those differences seem to indicate that the Apostles, who had authority to deviate from their own words in one language, when writing or revising copies in another, did so deviate with respect to the Peshito text, and the Greek text. And it is evident that Wichelhaus and others, not only reject the evidence on which we must rely in order to know the true origin of the Peshito, but also create for themselves a difficulty which they do not solve; namely, that an uninspired translator, whom they praise for his great general exactness, has to be accused by them of practising, in some places, a "licentious" freedom of which no mere translator, if faithful, can be supposed to have been guilty.