Biblia Peshitta (Spanish Edition) [Holman Bible] on *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. The Peshitta (Classical Syriac: ܦܫܝܛܬܐ pšîṭtâ) is the standard version of the Bible for .. In Spanish exists Biblia Peshitta en Español (Spanish Peshitta Bible) by Holman Bible Publishers, Nashville, TN. U. S. A., published Shop our inventory for Biblia Peshitta: traduccion de los antiguos manuscritos arameos by Broadman & Holman Publishers with fast free shipping on every used.
|Published (Last):||11 February 2006|
|PDF File Size:||6.44 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||5.88 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The Peshitta Arames Syriac: The consensus within biblical scholarship, though not universal, is that the Old Testament of the Peshitta was translated into Syriac from Hebrewprobably in the 2nd century AD, and that the New Testament of the Peshitta was translated from the Greek. Syriac is a dialect, or group of dialects, of Eastern Aramaicoriginating around Edessa. It is written in the Syriac alphabetand is transliterated into the Latin script in a number of ways, generating different spellings of the name: All of these are acceptable, but ‘Peshitta’ is the most conventional spelling in English.
There is no full and clear knowledge of the circumstances under which the Peshitta was produced and came into circulation. Whereas the authorship of the Peshits Vulgate has never been in dispute, almost every assertion regarding the authorship of the Peshitta and its time and place of its origin, is subject to question. The chief ground of analogy between the Vulgate and the Peshitta is that both came into existence as the result of a revision.
This, indeed, has been strenuously denied, but since Hort maintained this view in his Introduction to New Testament in the Original Greekfollowing Griesbach and Hug at the beginning of the 19th century, it has gained many adherents. As far as the New Testament writings are concerned, there is evidence, aided and increased by recent discoveries, for the view that the Peshitta represents a revision, and fresh investigation in the field of Syriac scholarship has raised it to a high degree of probability.
The very designation, “Peshito,” has given rise to dispute. The word itself is a feminine form, meaning “simple”, as in “easy to be understood”. It seems to have been used to distinguish the version from others which are encumbered with marks and signs in the nature of a critical apparatus.
However, the term as a designation of the version has not been found in any Syriac author earlier than the 9th or 10th century.
As regards the Old Testamentthe antiquity of the aramsa is admitted on all hands. The tradition, however, that part of it was translated from Hebrew into Syriac for the benefit of Hiram in the days of Solomon is surely a myth. That a translation was made by a priest named Assa, or Ezra, whom the king of Assyria sent to Samariato peshta the Assyrian colonists mentioned in 2 Kings That the translation of the Old Testament and New Testament was made in connection with the visit of Thaddaeus to Abgar at Edessa belongs also to unreliable tradition.
Mark has even been credited in ancient Syriac tradition with translating his own gospel written peshlta Latin, according to this account and the other books of the New Testament into Syriac.
What Theodore of Mopsuestia says of the Old Testament is true of both: Crawford Burkitt concluded that the translation pwshita the Old Testament was probably the work of Jews, of whom there was a colony in Edessa about the pesita of the Christian era. It contained the same number of books, but it arranged them in a different order.
Most of the Deuterocanonical books of the Old Testament are found in the Syriac, and the Wisdom of Sirach is held to have been translated from the Hebrew and not from the Septuagint.
Of the Qramea Testament, attempts at translation must have been made very early, and among the ancient versions of New Testament scripture, the Syriac in all likelihood is the earliest. It was at Antiochthe capital of Syriathat the disciples of Christ were first called Christiansand it seemed natural that the first translation of the Christian Scriptures should have been made there.
The tendency of recent research, however, goes to show that Edessathe literary capital, was more likely the place. If we could accept the somewhat obscure aarmea of Eusebius  that Hegesippus “made some quotations from the Gospel according to the Hebrews and from the Syriac Gospel,” we should have a reference to a Syriac New Testament as early as — AD, the time of that Hebrew Christian writer.
One thing is certain, the earliest New Testament of the Syriac church lacked not only the Antilegomena — 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude, and the Apocalypse — but the whole of the Catholic Epistles.
Biblia Peshitta by B&H Español Editorial Staff on Apple Books
From the 5th century, however, the Peshitta containing both Old Testament and New Testament has been used in its present form as the national version of the Syriac Scriptures only. The translation of the New Testament is careful, faithful and literal, and the simplicity, directness and transparency of the style are admired by all Syriac scholars and have earned it the title of “Queen of the versions. It is in the gospels, however, that the analogy between the Latin Vulgate and the Syriac Vulgate can be established by evidence.
If the Peshitta is the result of a revision as the Vulgate was, then we may expect to find Old Syriac texts answering to the Old Latin. Such texts have actually been found: These are, to take them in the order of their recovery, 1 the Curetonian Syriac, 2 the Syriac of Tatian’s Diatessaronand 3 the Sinaitic Syriac.
The Curetonian consists of fragments of the gospels brought in from the Nitrian Desert in Egypt and now in the British Museum. The fragments were examined and edited by Canon Cureton of Westminster in The manuscript from which the fragments have come appears to belong to the 5th century, but scholars believe the text itself may be as old as the ‘s CE.
In this recension, the gospel according to Matthew has the title “Evangelion da-Mepharreshe”, which will be explained in the next section.
The Diatessaron is the work which Eusebius ascribes to Tatianan early Christian author considered by some to have been a heretic. Eusebius called it that “combination and collection of the Gospels, I know not how, to which he gave the title Diatessaron. Its existence is amply attested in the churches of Mesopotamia and Syria, but it had disappeared for centuries, and not a single copy of the Syriac work survives.
A commentary upon it by Ephraem the Syriansurviving in an Armenian translation, was issued by the Mechitarist Fathers at Venice inand afterward translated into Latin. Sincean Arabic translation of the Diatessaron itself has peshkta discovered, and it has been ascertained that the Codex Fuldensis of the Vulgate represents the arakea and contents of the Diatessaron. A translation from the Arabic can now be read in English in Pesihta.
Although no copy of the Diatessaron peshota survived, the general features of Tatian’s Syriac work can be gathered from these materials. It is still a matter of dispute whether Tatian composed his “Harmony” out of a Syriac version already made, or composed it first in Greek and then translated it into Syriac.
But the existence and widespread use of a harmony, i. Theodoret, bishop of Cyrrhus in the 5th century CE, tells how he found more than copies of the Diatessaron held in honor in his diocese and how he collected them, and put them out of the way, associated as they were with the name of a heretic, and substituted for them the Gospels of the four evangelists in their separate forms. In the discovery of the third text comprising the four Gospels nearly entire, known as the Sinaitic Syriacbased on the place where it was found, heightened the interest in the subject and increased the available material.
It is a palimpsestand was afamea in the Monastery of Catherine on Mt. Raamea by Agnes S. Lewis and her sister Margaret D. Bibliaa text has been carefully examined and many scholars regard sramea as representing the earliest translation into Syriac, and reaching back into the 2nd century. Like the Curetonian, it is an example of the “Evangelion da-Mepharreshe” as distinguished from the Harmony of Tatian.
The discovery of these texts has raised many questions which may require further discovery and investigation to answer satisfactorily. It is natural to ask what the relation of these three texts is to the Peshitta. There are still scholars who maintain the priority of the Peshitta and insist upon its claim to be the earliest monument of Syrian Christianity, foremost of whom is G.
Gwilliam, the learned editor of the Oxford Peshito. From an exhaustive study of the quotations in the earliest Syriac Fathers and the works of Ephraem Syrus, in particular, Burkitt concludes that the Peshitta did not exist in the 4th century. He finds that Ephraem used the Diatessaron in the main as the source of his quotation, although “his voluminous writings contain some clear indications that he was aware of the existence of the separate Gospels, and he seems occasionally to have quoted from them.
Internal and external evidence alike point to the later and revised character of the Peshitta. The Peshitta had from the 5th century onward a wide circulation in the East, and was accepted and honored by the whole diversity of sects of Syriac Christianity. It had a great missionary influence: The famous Nestorian tablet of Chang’an witnesses to the presence of the Syriac scriptures in the heart of China in the 8th century.
The Peshitta was first brought to the West by Moses of Mindina noted Syrian ecclesiastic who unsuccessfully sought a patron for the work of printing it in Rome and Venice.
He undertook the printing of the New Testament, and the emperor bore the cost of the special types which had to be cast for its issue in Syriac.
Immanuel Tremelliusthe converted Jew whose scholarship was so valuable to the English reformers and divines, made use of it, and in issued a Syriac New Testament in Hebrew letters. The critical edition of the gospels recently issued by G. Gwilliam at the Clarendon Press is based upon some 50 manuscripts. Considering the revival of Syriac scholarship, and the large company of workers engaged in this field, we may expect further contributions of a similar character to a new and complete critical edition of the Peshitta.
The Peshitta version of the Old Testament is an independent translation based largely on a Hebrew text similar to the Proto-Masoretic Text. It shows a number of linguistic and exegetical similarities to the Targumim but is no longer thought to derive from them. The influence of the Septuagint is particularly strong in Isaiah and the Psalmsprobably due to their use in the liturgy. Most of the Deuterocanonicals are translated from the Septuagint, and the translation of Sirach was based on a Hebrew text.
The choice of books included in the Old Testament Peshitta changes from one manuscript to another, though most of the Deuterocanonicals are usually present. Biblical apocryphasas 1 Esdras3 Maccabees4 MaccabeesPsalm can be also found in some manuscripts. More than manuscripts of the Old Testament Peshitta are known, and the main and older ones are:. The Peshitta version of the New Testament is thought to show a continuation of the tradition of the Diatessaron and Old Syriac versions, displaying some lively ‘Western’ renderings particularly clear in the Acts of the Apostles.
It combines this with some of the more complex ‘Byzantine’ readings of the 5th century CE. It contains the unusual feature of the absence of 2 Peter2 John3 JohnJudeand Revelationhowever, modern Syriac Bibles add 6th- or 7th-century translations of these five books to a revised Peshitta text. With this understood, almost all Syriac scholars agree that the Peshitta gospels are translations of the Greek originals. However, there is a minority viewpoint in scholarship that the Aramaic New Testament of the Peshitta represents the original New Testament and the Greek is a translation of it.
The type of text represented by Peshitta is the Byzantine. In a detailed examination of Matthew 1—14, Gwilliam found that the Peshitta agrees with the Textus Receptus only times and with Codex Vaticanus 65 times.
Meanwhile, in instances it differs from both, usually with the support of the Old Syriac and the Old Latin, and in 31 instances it stands alone. In the first century CE, Josephusthe Jewish priest, testified that Aramaic was widely spoken and understood accurately by ParthiansBabyloniansthe remotest Arabians, and those of his nation beyond Euphrates with Adiabeni.
Joseph, the son of Matthias, by birth a Hebrew, a priest also, and one who at first fought against the Romans myself, and was forced to be present at what was done afterwards, [am the author of this work],”. Yigael Yadin, an archeologist working on the Qumran find, also agrees with Josephus’ testimony, pointing out that Aramaic was the lingua franca of this time period.
The following list does not necessarily reflect the historical canonicity or typical order of New Testament books in the Peshitta translation. This critical Peshitta text is based on a collation of more than seventy Peshitta and a few other Aramaic manuscripts. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Peshitta – Wikipedia
For the suffix “-psitta” as used in taxonomy, see List of commonly used taxonomic affixes. Autonomous afamea grouped by tradition: CiliciaConstantinopleJerusalem Syriac: Abuna Catholicos Coptic cross Cross of St.
Thomas Ethiopian titles Maphrian Tewahedo biblical canon. This section includes a list of referencesbut its sources remain unclear because it has insufficient inline citations. Please help to improve this section by introducing more precise citations. May Learn how and when to remove this template message.