[B-Greek] Matthwe 18:2 called a little child unto him, Semitic idiom ?

Jason Hare jason at jhronline.com
Sat Jun 7 14:40:35 EDT 2003


I'm really confused by your question for several
reasons:

>Codex D has:   kai proskalesamenoj o ihs paidion
en...

As Carl has noted to another poster, it would make it
a great deal to understand your reference if your
would use the transliteration scheme as it is on the
B-Greek homepage: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek/

Secondly, this reading that you mention does not
appear in any of the references that I have consulted:
/A Commentary on the Greek New Testament/ (Metzger),
UBS4, NA27 or the Interlinear TR.

However, the TR (which you prefer, I know) moves the
hEN from verse 18.5 to a different location. This
verse reads thus in the TR:

KAI hOS EAN DEXHTAI PAIDION TOIOUTON hEN EPI TWi
ONOMATI MOU...
And whoever receives one such child in my name...

USB4 has:
KAI hOS EAN DEXHTAI hEN PAIDION TOIOUTO EPI TWi
ONOMATI MOU...

The word hEN (one) is not removed, but simply
transferred: hEN PAIDION TOIOUTO >> PAIDION TOIOUTON
hEN.

Check your references and let us know if you still
have a question about 18.2 (which, so far as I can
tell, has no hEN in it in any version).

Regards,
Jason

--- Schmuel <schmuel at escape.com> wrote:
> Hello b-Greek,
> 
> Matthew 18:2
> And Jesus called **a little child** unto him, and
> set him in the midst of them, 
> 
> There is some variation  in the verse between the
> Byzantine Text, and the Alexandrian,
> but they agree on "a little child", the point at
> issue.
> 
> Putting aside for a moment the question as to
> whether there can be 
> said to be a "western" text-type, and the big
> differences between the 
> Codex Bezae Greek and any other manuscripts....
> 
> It seems "Western" (ie in Greek, Codex D) has its
> own reading as follows...
> 
> >Codex D has:   kai proskalesamenoj o ihs paidion
> en...
> >“And Iesus called the one boy…”
> 
> It is claimed that this maintains a "Semitic idiom"
> as is also used in the Old Syriac
> (Peshitto) text, which "has no place in the Greek
> language".
> 
> The Byzantine and Alexandrian readings are
> >kai proskalesamenoj paidion...
> >“And he called a boy…”
> 
> Ergo, it is claimed that the Codex D (Bezae) reading
> is a "clear semitism" supporting the
> idea that this reading was "part of the original
> Aramaic".
> 
> Essentially the following reasons are conjectured..
> 
> 1) Bezae represents a Semitic to Greek translation
> ..  AND/OR
> 2) Bezae has the "harder Greek reading" that was
> smoothed later in the
>    great majority of Greek manuscripts. (by the
> much-debated "harder reading" principle)
> 
> =====
> 
> Would anyone like to comment on this idea that Codex
> D has readings like this
> that should be attributed to being from older, more
> semitic manuscripts ?
> 
> Perhaps (if in fact it is "no place" Greek) other,
> simpler Ocaam Razor reasons are
> offered for such readings (eg weak Greek, Old Latin
> influence, Semitic background of the scribe)
> 
> So, using this as a fairly straightforward
> "test-case" I would like to hear what
> our Greek experts feel about the Codex Bezae
> "semitic reading" here.
> 
> Thanks :-)  (If more appropriate on textcrit, I will
> jump over, but it is largely Greek-based :-)
> 
> Shalom,
> Steven Avery
> Queens, NY
> www.messiahresearch.com
> 
> 
> schmuel at escape.com
> Messianic_Apologetic-subscribe at yahoogroups.com
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic/ 
> 
> 
> ---
> B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
> B-Greek mailing list
> B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek




More information about the B-Greek mailing list