|
The Aramaic New Testament exists in two forms: (1) the classical Aramaic, or Syriac, New Testament, part of the Peshitta Bible, or "Peshitta;" (2) the "Assyrian Modern" New Testament and Psalms, published by the Bible Society in Lebanon (1997) and newly translated from Greek. The official Assyrian Church of the East (known by some as the Nestorian Church) does not recognise the new "Assyrian Modern" edition, and traditionally considers the New Testament of the Peshitta to be the original New Testament, and Aramaic to be its original language. This view was popularised in the West by the Assyrian Church of the East scholar George Lamsa, but is not supported by the majority of scholars, either of the Peshitta or the Greek New Testament. The traditional New Testament of the Peshitta has 22 books, lacking 2 John, 3 John, 2 Peter, Jude and Revelation, which are books of the Antilegomena. The text of Gospels also lacks the Pericope Adulterae (John 7:53–8:11) and (Luke 22:17–18 ).〔''The text of the New Testament: an introduction to the critical ... '' Page 194 Kurt Aland, Barbara Aland – 1995 "It contains twenty-two New Testament books, lacking the shorter Catholic letters (2–3 John, 2 Peter, Jude) and Revelation (as well as the Pericope Adulterae [John 7:53–8:11[ and Luke 22:17–18)."〕 These missing books were reconstructed by the Syriacist John Gwynn in 1893 and 1897 from alternative manuscripts, and included them in the United Bible Societies edition of 1905. The 1997 modern Aramaic New Testament has all 27 books. ==Aramaic original New Testament hypothesis== The hypothesis of an Aramaic original for the New Testament holds that the original text of the New Testament was not written in Greek, as held by the majority of scholars, but in the Aramaic language, which was the primary language of Jesus and his Twelve Apostles. The position of the Assyrian Church of the East is that the Syriac Peshitta (a Bible version which is written in a vernacular form of Aramaic), used in that church, is the original of the New Testament.〔For instance the patriarch Mar Eshai Shimun XXIII declared in 1957: "With reference to... the originality of the Peshitta text, as the Patriarch and Head of the Holy Apostolic and Catholic Church of the East, we wish to state, that the Church of the East received the scriptures from the hands of the blessed Apostles themselves in the Aramaic original, the language spoken by our Lord Jesus Christ Himself, and that the Peshitta is the text of the Church of the East which has come down from the Biblical times without any change or revision." (April 5, 1957) The current Patriarch of the Church of the East, Mar Dinkha IV (1976–present), has not publicly pronounced that the Peshitta is the original New Testament.〕 Variants of this view are held by some individuals who may argue for a lost Aramaic text preceding the Peshitta as the basis for the New Testament. This view is to be distinguished from the view held by most historical critics, that the Greek New Testament (particularly the gospels of Matthew and Mark) may have had Aramaic source texts which are no longer extant.〔e.g. the Hebrew Gospel hypothesis of Lessing and others.〕 The most noteworthy advocate of the "Peshitta-original" hypothesis in the West was George Lamsa of the Aramaic Bible Center. A tiny minority of more recent scholars are backers of the Peshitta-original theory today,〔Notably website owners Andrew Gabriel Roth (compiler of the "Aramaic-English New Testament") and Paul Younan. See Michael L. Brown, ''60 Questions Christians Ask About Jewish Beliefs and Practices'' (Bloomington, MN: Chosen Books, 2011), p.179.〕 whereas the overwhelming majority of scholars consider the Peshitta New Testament to be a translation from a Greek original. For instance the noted Assyriologist Sebastian Brock wrote:
Some advocates of the "Peshitta-original" theory also use the term "Aramaic primacy", though this is not used in academic sources, and appears to be a recent neologism, as is the phrase "Greek primacy", used to characterize the consensus view. 〔The expression "Aramaic primacy" was used by L. I. Levine (‘’Judaism and Hellenism in antiquity: conflict or confluence’’, 1998, p.82) - but only as a general expression used to denote the primacy of Aramaic over Hebrew and Greek in Jerusalem during the Second Temple period (i.e. roughly 200 BC - 70 AD). The present article was originally titled "Aramaic primacy" when it appeared on Wikipedia in August 2004,() with the first line "Aramaic Primacists believe that the Christian New Testament was originally written in Aramaic, not Greek as generally claimed by Churches of the West". The earliest appearance of the phrase in print appears to be in David Bauscher, ''The Original Aramaic Gospels in Plain English'' (2007), p.59.〕 These terms are not used by textual critics, since the evidence is overwhelming that the New Testament was written originally in Greek.〔Metzger B. The Text of the New Testament. Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration. Fourth Edition. Bruce M. Metzger and Bart D. Ehrman〕〔Aland, K. and Aland, B. ''The text of the New Testament'' (9780802840981)〕 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Aramaic New Testament」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|