Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | Mark 15:34 At the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, "ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI?" which is translated, "MY GOD, MY GOD, WHY HAVE YOU FORSAKEN ME?" |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | Mark 15:34 And at the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, "ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI?"--which is translated, "MY GOD, MY GOD, WHY HAVE YOU FORSAKEN ME?" [Ps 22:1] |
Subject: "Eloi" or "Eli"? |
Bible Note: Greetings Tim! I agree, Matthew would be the earliest, and I'm not just saying that because Matthew happens to be my favorite.. :) My friend also states, "Various Versions There are three common versions of the Hebrew Matthew a.. Shem Tov (about 9 manuscripts in this family of texts) b.. DuTillet (like "Do tell it") c.. Munster The Munster is partly original Hebrew and partly a translation from the Greek. One could cite textual evidence such as I cited above comparing the Munster with the Greek and show where it only makes sense for that Hebrew word/phrase to have been written that way if it had been translated from the Greek. This is because Munster only had a partial text, and filled in the rest of it with a translation. But he didn't keep track of which section were from the original and which were translated "fill-ins". The Shem Tov and DuTillet do not have this problem. I think the duTillet is more likely the more authoritative version, though there's little discrepency between them, and not much more discrepency than the way the various Greek manuscripts vary from each other. In any case, where these agree and agree with the Peshitta, it should be taken as an authoritative reading. The gospel of Matthew was translated into Aramaic very early and Aramaic copies exist from the 2nd century even today. These manuscripts probably lose very little in translation since Aramaic is very close to Hebrew, sharing most of the same grammar and root vocabulary system, but differing in some points and in pronunciation. There is a plethoria of Greek texts that don't always agree with each other's readings, but the Textus Receptus is the one used in most translations. Other Notes The Hebrew version of Matthew 27:46 does not translate the phrase "Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?" Since Jesus was likely speaking to Israelis in their common tongue (Hebrew and/or Aramaic), some "loss of thought" will be unavoidable in reading the Greek manuscripts, whether they were originally written in Greek or not. Historic evidence favors the idea of Luke being drafted in Greek, but that's not the language the events he recorded originally happened in. Even the Hebrew Matthew has that problem, since it's likely that "The Lord's Prayer" was spoken in Aramaic. In Aramaic, this prayer follows an intricate rhyme scheme." I'm not sure if I quite agree with all of this, but it is rather interesting in light of our conversation.. :) Your Brother in Christ, Nolan |