Aramaic Peshitta
Buy Lamsa Bible:
Aramaic Peshitta Bible Repository
page XLII - XLV
XLII
FAUST NAIRON, a Maronite, is often referred to by J. S. Asseman as a writer of eminence. He was one of the two editors of the edition of the Peshito Syriac Version, printed by the side of an Arabic Version of the New Testament, in 1703, by command of the Roman Congregation DE PROPAGANDA FIDE, for the use of the Maronites. He also wrote the preface. In this he said, (pg. 2) "The Syriac text EXCELS IN ANTIQUITY ALL OTHER TEXTS. By it very many places which in these are obscure, may be made plain." He proceeds to endeavour to prove that the Syriac text is more ancient than the Greek text of the Gospels. He mentions the common opinion that the Syriac Gospels were translated from the Greek, and says that there are better reasons for concluding that the Greek Gospels were translated from the Syriac. The weak part of his argument is, that he considers it certain that the sacred writers could not have given details of words and events so numerous and so varied as to time and place, unless they had made a WRITTEN RECORD of them, when they heard, saw, or were first informed of them. He says, that if they did make such a record, it must have been in their own language, Syriac. To this it may be replied, that we have very little evidence that any of them did make such records in the Saviour's life-time; and that they had no need of them, because the Holy Spirit brought all things to their remembrance. (John xiv. 26.) But the events which occurred were so extraordinary, and Christ so often called attention to his teaching, by saying, "He that has ears to hear, let him hear," that those who could write, would of necessity think it worth while to keep a written record of what they heard and saw, as Josephus did of the events of the Jewish war. Evidence that this was done by some persons appears from what Luke says of the many who had "set forth in order" the events of the gospel history. (Luke i. 1.); and when he says of himself, that he had "closely followed up with exactness FROM THE FIRST what had been DELIVERED by those who, from the beginning, were eye-witnesses;" he seems clearly to intimate that what he wrote was from written records made by himself FROM THE FIRST of what these eye-witnesses had told him; so that Faust Nairon has, in these words of Luke, some support for his remark, that the sacred writers in order to construct with accuracy, as witnesses, what they knew of the "parables, miracles, and sayings of Christ," may have done so, unless the Holy Spirit's aid dispensed with ordinary means, from records made in the life-time of Christ; and that as they then knew no language but their own native Syriac tongue, these records must have been made in Syriac. (Introduction, pp. 2, 3, 4.)
Of MATTHEW, Faust Nairon says, and correctly, that "all the ancients bear witness that he wrote his Gospel in Syriac." (pp. 3, 4.) He states also that Theophilact says the apostle John translated it into Greek. He notices the singular fact that Matthew does not record the ascension of Christ to heaven, and he draws from this the conclusion that the gospel was completed before that event took place. (pg. 6.)
Of JOHN'S GOSPEL, Faust Nairon says that Alexander, (who was bishop of Rome about A. D. 109 to119), stated that John opposed and confuted the error of Cerinthus, who in Jerusalem, Caesarea, and Antioch, denied the Deity of Christ. Faust Nairon says, that for this purpose John's Gospel must have been first written in Syriac. He says that Cerinthus afterwards went into Asia Minor. Irenaeus, who died about A. D. 200, says that John "published a Gospel while he dwelt at Ephesus, in Asia." (Lardner's Credibility, bk. i. ch. xvii.) Faust Nairon suggests that this may mean that John, to meet the error of Cerinthus there, re-issued his Gospel, and in Greek. He says that John, like Matthew, does not mention the ascension, and that this implies that his Gospel was written before it took place. He says also, that the Syriac modes of speech in John's Greek Gospel, imply that it was first written in Syriac. (pg. 4.)
******* XLIII ****** XLIII ******** XLIII ******* XLIII ***** XLIII ******* XLIII *******
Of MARK, Faust Nairon says that he preached the gospel in many regions, and that some writers say that he wrote his Gospel in THREE LANGUAGES; Greek, Latin,and Syriac. (pg. 5.)
Of THE GOSPEL OF LUKE, Faust Nairon says, that from the writings of Origen, Ambrose, Theophilact, and Epiphanius, it appears that Luke was a Syrian from Antioch, and sent his Gospel first to his own countrymen in Antioch, to oppose some false teachers there; that for this purpose it needed to be written in Syriac, as well as in Greek; because, though Greek had been introduced by the Greek rulers of Antioch, it was not the common language of the citizens. He says also, that Greek was not the native language of Luke himself, but acquired by him afterwards; that this appears from the statement of Jerome, that he was "a physician of Antioch, and not ignorant of Greek." Faust Nairon says, that the many Syriac idioms in Luke's Gospel shows that he was a Syrian.
OF THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES, Faust Nairon says that Jerome states the book was written in Greek, but that Metaphrastes says, Luke also wrote it in the language of his own country, which was Syriac.
OF 1 JOHN, he says, that it was sent to Hebrew Christians who lived beyond the Euphrates under the rule of the Parthians, that it was anciently called, The Epistle to the Parthians, and must have been written in Syriac, the native tongue of the Hebrews there. (pg. 8.)
OF HEBREWS, JAMES, and 1 PETER, Faust Nairon makes no special mention; but his remark, that all the epistles must "of necessity have been written in the language of those to whom they were sent, or they could not have been understood by them," applies specially to these epistles; for their contents prove that they were written to Hebrew Christians, and their native language, as Faust Nairon says, was Syriac. (pg. 9.)
****** XLIV ****** XLIV ******** XLIV ****** XLIV ***** XLIV ****** XLIV *****
OF THE EPISTLES OF PAUL, he says, that to them, as well as to all the epistles, the rule must be applied, that they must have been written in the language of those to whom they were sent. We have Paul's letters in Greek, and we have them also in Syriac, with abundant evidence that they were written in Syriac in the time of the apostles. From what Peter says of Paul's Epistles, it seems probable that they were circulated among Hebrew Christians in Syriac, very soon after they were written. Syriac was the only language, as we have found, which was GENERALLY, and well understood by all the Hebrews. Yet Peter, writing to the dispersed Hebrew Christians of Asia Minor, speaks of "ALL" Paul's Epistles, as if well known among them, and not only those which Paul had written "to them." (2nd Peter iii. 15, 16.) This reference to "ALL his Epistles," seems to imply that those which he had written in Greek were well known to Hebrews who knew little of any language but Syriac; and tends, by its agreement with the Syrian testimony, to show that ALL THE LETTERS OF PAUL IN THE PESHITO, were written in Syriac in the time of the Apostles.
Faust Nairon says in proof that THE PESHITO, AS A WHOLE, IS NOT A MERE TRANSLATION OF THE GREEK COPIES, that the NUMBER of books in it is different from that of the Greek text, which has 2nd Peter, 2nd and 3rd John, Jude and Revelation. That the ORDER of books is also different from their order in most Greek copies; for James, 1st Peter, and 1st John, follow the Acts; and that the Greek text has passages which the Peshito has not.
He says that Luke xxii. 17, 18, is not in most copies of the Peshito. "And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves; for I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come." Bishop Walton says, "These verses are not found in the Vienna manuscript, nor in the one which we have mostly used." They are placed in brackets by Dr. Lee, 1816, and in the Ooroomiah edition, to show, apparently, that they were not in the copies followed.
The account of the adulteress, John viii. 1-11, which is in many Greek copies, is absent from most of those of the Peshito. Bishop Walton printed it in Syriac from a copy in the library of Archbishop Usher, but said that it was absent from all preceding printed editions. In Dr. Lee's edition, and that of Ooroomiah, lines are placed across the page at the beginning and end of the passage, with evident intention to show its absence from the copies followed.
Acts xxviii. 29: "And when he had said these words, the Jews departed, and had great reasoning among themselves," is not in the Peshito.
Nor is 1st John v. 7: "There are three who bear witness in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one." Faust Nairon remarks that this verse is quoted by Cyprian, (bishop of Carthage, 247-258), when writing on the unity of the Church, and that this was before Arius was born. (See the edition of Cyprian's work by Le Preuse, 1593, pg. 297.) Cyprian says, "Respecting the Father, and Son, and Holy Spirit, it is written, 'And these three are one.'" Faust Nairon suggests that this verse was probably added to the epistle when published in Greek, with view to meet more fully the denial of the Deity of Christ by Cerinthus; and that its appearance in the Greek text, though absent from the Syriac, tends to show that the epistle "was first written by John in Syriac." (Nairon, pg. 8.)
********* XLV ******* XLV ****** XLV ******** XLV ******* XLV ******** XLV *******
FAUST NAIRON'S belief that A RECORD WAS MADE IN SYRIAC by Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John, of events in the Saviour's history, DURING HIS LIFE-TIME, receives some support from the contents of the first three Gospels. It has been observed, that there are passages in some of the Greek copies of these three Gospels, which are in EXACTLY THE SAME WORDS as passages in others. Bishop Herbert Marsh, in his translation of the Introduction of J. D. Michaelis, vol. iii. pp. 160-409, prints an elaborate treatise on the origin of the first three Gospels, and gives in Greek many instances of these identical Greek passages. He says that it is "wholly impossible" that these three historians, if they had no connexion with each other, should have written IN GREEK, passages so identical, (pg. 168); and that "we are reduced to this dilemma, 'Either the succeeding Evangelists copied from the preceding, or that all the three drew from a common source." (pg. 170.) After examining various attempts made by others to account for this identity of Greek words, he comes to the conclusion that internal proofs show that these three writers did not copy words one from another. (pp. 320-330.) At pg. 361, he says that the verbal agreements and disagreements of these three Gospels, can be solved in a manner which is perfectly consistent with the inspiration of the Greek Gospels, by admitting that "all three writers used copies of A COMMON HEBREW," that is, A SYRIAC "DOCUMENT."
STEPHEN EVOD ASSEMAN, Archbishop of Apamea, a third Syrian of the name of Asseman, in answer to an inquiry made by Dr. Glocester Ridley, who published a work on the Peshito in 1761, said, -- "The first [Syriac] version of the New Testament is called the Peshito; the Syrians believe that its translation of the Gospels was made either by the Apostles themselves, or at least by the Apostle Thaddaeus; that the Acts and Epistles were made by Apostolic men, and that Ephraem, and other fathers, who flourished in the third and fourth centuries, used that version." (Wichelhaus, pg. 68.) Dr. N. Lardner defines the meaning of "apostolical men," to be "disciples of the Apostles, intimately acquainted with them," (Credibility, book i., chap. xxii., pg. 536); men like "Mark and Luke, companions of the Apostles." (chap. xxvii. pg. 576.) Such men could obtain from the apostles their correction of and authority for what they wrote.