LANGUAGE OF GOSPELS

Evening Star, Issue 21747, 15 June 1934, Page 1

LANGUAGE OF GOSPELS

ANCIENT ARAMAIC VERSION The ecclesiastical correspondent of the London ‘ Daily Telegraph ’ writes: New evidence that the Gospels were originally written in Aramaic and afterwards translated into Greek is adduced in a translation into English of the Eastern version of the four Gospels. It has been made by Mr George M. Lamsa, who is a graduate, of the Archbishop of Canterbury’s Mission College in Persia, and of the Virginia Theological Seminary in Alexandria. Ho has made a life study of the Scriptures in their original language, and his translation is made from the ancient Peshiita text which was used by the native church of Persia and was quoted by Eastern writers of the second and third centuries. At one time the Persian Empire had seven archiepiscopal provinces and eighty bishoprics. When the country was subdued by the Moslems the Christian schools of learning were closed, monasteries dispersed, and churches turned into mosques. Only the Gospels survived of all the Christian books, for they were accepted by •Mohammed as the veritable word of God. From these Aramaic Gospels Mr Lamsa has for the first time made a translation into English. In the introduction to his book, which is published in Philadelphia by the A. J. Holman Company, he points out that a number of passages, which are obscure in what in the West is regarded as the original Greek, are perfectly clear in the Peshitita text. For instance, the Aramaic word gamla means both “ camel ” and “ a large rope.” Matthew xix., 24, thus reads: “ It is easier for a rope to go through the eyo of a needle. ...” “ COINS ”, AND “ CITIES.” The. Aramaic word for a certain large piece of money called kakra, “ talent ” is barely distinguishable from the word meaning “ province.” The confusion is seen in the parable of the nobleman, who rewarded his servants not with coins, but with cities (Luke xix., 13, 17, 24), which Mr Lamsa considers improbable. He bolds that the error could not have occurred iu the Greek version if it had been the original, because the Greek has two entirely different words for “ city ” and “ coin.” Another difficult passage which the Aramaic version puts in a clearer light is that from St. John’s Gospel, which reads:— He hath blinded their eyes and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them. These words hi our Lord’s discourse have troubled many' devout souls. According to Mr Lamsa it turns on the use of the Aramaic Word avaro, which means “have become blind.” As translated from the Pcshitta the verse runs: Their eyes have become blind and their heart darkened, so that they cannot see with their eyes nor understand with their heart, let them return and I will heal them. Other difficulties are traced to Aramaic colloquialisms, such as the phrase “Ho breathed on them ” (John xx., 22), which is well known among Aramaic-speaking people to have the sense of stimulating courage.

Thus, “ And when He had said these thing* He gave them courage.” , One of the most striking of the hundred* of differences between Mr Lamsa’s translation and that ; of the Authorised Version occurs in the Lord’s Prayer. Instead of “Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil,” the Aramaic reads: “ Do not let us enter into temptation, but deliver u» from error.” Mr Lamsa’s purpose has been to present the thought and | accuracy of the Kastern version, which is endorsed by the traditions and history of a people who, through many martyrdoms, trace their origin to Apostolic times. Though poor and constantly reduced in numbers by persecutions and privations, they once constituted what was regarded a* the Mother Church. To-day they are the only pure Semitie people in the Christian fold. They still speak Aramaic, the language of our Lord, with a few inevitable changes, and have retained their ancient version of the Scriptures without the changes of revision.