Steven Avery
Well-known member
What date do you assign for the Peshitta translation?
What date do you assign for the Old Latin?
Thanks!
What date do you assign for the Old Latin?
Thanks!
Syriac Peshitta, KJVO "pure" line, and the Comma
- Thread starter Unbound68
- Start date
TwoNoteableCorruptions
Well-known member
The Johannine Parenthetical text is an adulteration of the Bible in every language in which it occurs. It is a man made contamination.
Not one of the multiple 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th century Syriac New Testament manuscripts posted before contain the Comma in Syriac.
Not one of the multiple 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th century Syriac New Testament manuscripts posted before contain the Comma in Syriac.
Steven Avery
Well-known member
My question was simple.
Steven Avery
Well-known member
eee
No such "demand". If the 165 date is true, it helps decimate the textual theories behind the Critical Text. However, it is a fascinating discussion, between the 2nd, 3rd or 4th centuries.
The Thomas Strouse sentence needs a quote and reference. I really trust nothing from Bill Brown without proper referencing.
Apparently Bill Brown did not even read Edward Freer Hills, who he referenced earlier.
Bill Brown is always weak on logic. There could easily have been a mixed line at the time of the Peshitta translation.
Then he makes the same Arian blunder. It is a rather crass blunder since he already had referenced Hills.
No such "demand". If the 165 date is true, it helps decimate the textual theories behind the Critical Text. However, it is a fascinating discussion, between the 2nd, 3rd or 4th centuries.
The Thomas Strouse sentence needs a quote and reference. I really trust nothing from Bill Brown without proper referencing.
Apparently Bill Brown did not even read Edward Freer Hills, who he referenced earlier.
Bill Brown is always weak on logic. There could easily have been a mixed line at the time of the Peshitta translation.
Then he makes the same Arian blunder. It is a rather crass blunder since he already had referenced Hills.
TwoNoteableCorruptions
Well-known member
The answer is simple.
There is no Comma in the earliest Syriac manuscripts now, because ... (wait for it) there never was any Comma in the earliest Syriac manuscripts.
Steven Avery
Well-known member
Here was the question. You might try to answer the actual question.
TwoNoteableCorruptions
Well-known member
There's no Comma in this New Testament manuscript, because the Comma never was in the Syriac manuscript/manuscripts it was copied from prior to the 5th century.
St. Catherine's Monastery, Mount Sinai, Syriac Manuscripts 5 (circa. 5th century A.D./C.E.)
Contains the Catholic Epistles and the book of Acts.
[Comma Johanneum?].
https://www.loc.gov/item/00279386164-ms/
http://www.thetextofthegospels.com/2017/05/syriac-new-testament-mss-at-saint.html
There's no Comma in this New Testament manuscript, because the Comma never was in the Syriac manuscript/manuscripts it was copied from prior to the 5th century.
British Library, Add. 14470, (circa. 5th-6th century A.D./C.E.)
The oldest extant Syriac manuscript of the complete New Testament (all 22 books). Contains the Catholic Epistles. Folio 174a = beginning of 1st John,
Folio 176v = end of 1st John.
(Colophon = Folio 176b).
[Comma Johanneum?].
(Cf. William Wright, “Catalogue of the Syriac manuscripts in the British Museum,” Reprinted 2002, Page 40, and Cf. Institut für Neutestamentliche Textforschung, INTF “Das Neue Testament in syrischer Überlieferung,” Volume 2, Part 3, Page 29).
If there's no Comma in this New Testament manuscript (because it might not contain 1st John 5:7-8), then it's because the Comma never was in the Syriac manuscript/manuscripts it was copied from prior to the 5th century.
BNF, Syr. 341 (circa. 5th-7th century A.D./C.E.)
Peshitta Old and portions of the New Testament; See the catalog entry here.
[Comma Johanneum?].
http://syri.ac/digimss/sortable?page=12
http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10527102b/f3.item.r=Syriaque
There's no Comma in this New Testament manuscript, because the Comma never was in the Syriac manuscript/manuscripts it was copied from prior to the 6th century.
British Library, Add. 14473, (circa. 6th century A.D./C.E.)
Syriac manuscript of the complete New Testament. Contains the Catholic Epistles.
Folio 129r = beginning of 1st John,
Folio 139v = end of 1st John.
[Comma Johanneum?].
(Cf. William Wright, “Catalogue of the Syriac manuscripts in the British Museum,” Reprinted 2002, Pages 79-80, and Cf. Institut für Neutestamentliche Textforschung, INTF “Das Neue Testament in syrischer Überlieferung,” Volume 2, Part 3, Page 30).
There's no Comma in this New Testament manuscript, because the Comma never was in the Syriac manuscript/manuscripts it was copied from prior to the 6th century.
British Library, Add. 17120, (circa. 6th century A.D./C.E.)
Syriac manuscript of the complete New Testament. Contains the Catholic Epistles.
Folio 47b = beginning of 1st John.
[Comma Johanneum?].
(Cf. William Wright, “Catalogue of the Syriac manuscripts in the British Museum,” Reprinted 2002, Page 80).
There's no Comma in this New Testament manuscript, because the Comma never was in the Syriac manuscript/manuscripts it was copied from prior to the 6th century.
British Library, Add. 17121, (circa. 6th century A.D./C.E.)
Syriac manuscript of the complete New Testament. Contains the Catholic Epistles.
Folio 98r = beginning of 1st John,
Folio 106r = end of 1st John.
[Comma Johanneum?].
(Cf. William Wright, “Catalogue of the Syriac manuscripts in the British Museum,” Reprinted 2002, Page 81 and Cf. “Das Neue Testament in syrischer Überlieferung,” Volume 2, Part 3, Page 27).
There's no Comma in this New Testament manuscript, because the Comma never was in the Syriac manuscript/manuscripts it was copied from prior to the 6th century.
British Library, Add. 14472, (circa. 6th-7th century A.D./C.E.)
Syriac NT manuscript. Contains the Catholic Epistles.
Folio 67a = beginning of 1st John.
[Comma Johanneum?].
Some marginalia, but from a later hand, and unrelated to the Comma Johanneum.
(Cf. William Wright, “Catalogue of the Syriac manuscripts in the British Museum,” Reprinted 2002, Pages 81-82).
There's no Comma in this New Testament manuscript, because the Comma never was in the Syriac manuscript/manuscripts it was copied from prior to the 6th century.
British Library, Add MS 14448 (circa. 6th-7th century A.D./C.E.)
Syriac NT manuscript. Contains the Catholic Epistles.
Folio 160v = beginning of 1st John,
Folio 164r = end of 1st John.
[Comma Johanneum?].
(Cf. William Wright, “Catalogue of the Syriac manuscripts in the British Museum,” Reprinted 2002, Pages 41-42 and Cf. Institut für Neutestamentliche Textforschung, INTF “Das Neue Testament in syrischer Überlieferung,” Volume 2, Part 3, Page 30).
If there's no Comma in this New Testament manuscript (because it might not contain 1st John 5:7-8), then it's because the Comma never was in the Syriac manuscript/manuscripts it was copied from prior to the 6th century.
British Library, Add. 18812, (circa. 6th-7th century A.D./C.E.)
Syriac NT manuscript. Contains the Catholic Epistles.
Folio 55a = ending with chapter 2:16
[Folio 55b = is missing possibly = may be an incomplete MS of 1st John]
[Comma Johanneum?].
(Cf. William Wright, “Catalogue of the Syriac manuscripts in the British Museum,” Reprinted 2002, Page 83).
There is definitely no Comma in this New Testament manuscript (I know, because I painstakingly examined the Syriac until I found 1st John 5:7-8, - of which I have digital snapshots of), because the Comma never was in the Syriac manuscript/manuscripts it was copied from prior to the 6th century.
Goodspeed Ms. 716, (circa. 6th-7th century A.D./C.E.)
Syriac Peshitta NT Fragments, (Formerly Goodspeed Ms. Syr. 26). University of Chicago Library, Goodspeed Manuscript Collection.
Contains the Catholic Epistles.
1st John 5:7-8 = Folio 32v, (Page/Image 64).
Confirmed, by personal examination, there is no Comma Johanneum in this MS.
http://goodspeed.lib.uchicago.edu/view/index.php?doc=0716&obj=064
There is definitely no Comma in this New Testament manuscript (I know, because I also painstakingly examined the Syriac until I found 1st John 5:7-8, - of which I have digital snapshots of), because the Comma never was in the Syriac manuscript/manuscripts it was copied from prior to the 6th century.
Vat. sir. 266 (circa. 6th-7th century A.D./C.E.)
Syriac NT manuscript. Contains the Catholic Epistles (Folio's 154r-157v).
Folio 157r = 1st John 5:7-8 (starts sixth line from bottom right column).
Confirmed, by personal examination, there is no Comma Johanneum in this MS.
(Cf. Institut für Neutestamentliche Textforschung, INTF“Das Neue Testament in syrischer Überlieferung,” Volume 2, Part 3, Pages 28-29).
http://digi.vatlib.it/view/MSS_Vat.sir.266
https://roger-pearse.com/wiki/index.php?title=Vatican_Syriac_manuscripts
There's no Comma in this New Testament manuscript, because the Comma never was in the Syriac manuscript/manuscripts it was copied from prior to the 8th century.
BNF, Syr. 361 (circa. 8th-9th century A.D./C.E.)
Syriac Peshitta NT manuscript. Contains Acts, and the Catholic Epistles (Folio's 118-169).
[Comma Johanneum?].
http://syri.ac/digimss/sortable?page=13
There's no Comma in this New Testament manuscript, because the Comma never was in the Syriac manuscript/manuscripts it was copied from prior to the 8th century.
BNF, Syr. 342 (circa. 8th-9th century A.D./C.E.)
Syriac Peshitta NT manuscript. Contains the Catholic Epistles.
Folio 169v = 1st John 5:7.
[Comma Johanneum?].
http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10528606c/f344.item.r=Syriaque.zoom
http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10528606c/f1.item.r=Syriaque.zoom
The simple answer why there is no Comma in these Syriac New Testament manuscripts is simply because the Comma was never in the Syriac New Testament manuscripts at all.
NOTE: None of the British Library manuscripts listed above have been digitized (to my knowledge). The other manuscripts which are online, I will get images of the 1st John 5:7-8 texts in the near future.
St. Catherine's Monastery, Mount Sinai, Syriac Manuscripts 5 (circa. 5th century A.D./C.E.)
Contains the Catholic Epistles and the book of Acts.
[Comma Johanneum?].
https://www.loc.gov/item/00279386164-ms/
http://www.thetextofthegospels.com/2017/05/syriac-new-testament-mss-at-saint.html
There's no Comma in this New Testament manuscript, because the Comma never was in the Syriac manuscript/manuscripts it was copied from prior to the 5th century.
British Library, Add. 14470, (circa. 5th-6th century A.D./C.E.)
The oldest extant Syriac manuscript of the complete New Testament (all 22 books). Contains the Catholic Epistles. Folio 174a = beginning of 1st John,
Folio 176v = end of 1st John.
(Colophon = Folio 176b).
[Comma Johanneum?].
(Cf. William Wright, “Catalogue of the Syriac manuscripts in the British Museum,” Reprinted 2002, Page 40, and Cf. Institut für Neutestamentliche Textforschung, INTF “Das Neue Testament in syrischer Überlieferung,” Volume 2, Part 3, Page 29).
If there's no Comma in this New Testament manuscript (because it might not contain 1st John 5:7-8), then it's because the Comma never was in the Syriac manuscript/manuscripts it was copied from prior to the 5th century.
BNF, Syr. 341 (circa. 5th-7th century A.D./C.E.)
Peshitta Old and portions of the New Testament; See the catalog entry here.
[Comma Johanneum?].
http://syri.ac/digimss/sortable?page=12
http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10527102b/f3.item.r=Syriaque
There's no Comma in this New Testament manuscript, because the Comma never was in the Syriac manuscript/manuscripts it was copied from prior to the 6th century.
British Library, Add. 14473, (circa. 6th century A.D./C.E.)
Syriac manuscript of the complete New Testament. Contains the Catholic Epistles.
Folio 129r = beginning of 1st John,
Folio 139v = end of 1st John.
[Comma Johanneum?].
(Cf. William Wright, “Catalogue of the Syriac manuscripts in the British Museum,” Reprinted 2002, Pages 79-80, and Cf. Institut für Neutestamentliche Textforschung, INTF “Das Neue Testament in syrischer Überlieferung,” Volume 2, Part 3, Page 30).
There's no Comma in this New Testament manuscript, because the Comma never was in the Syriac manuscript/manuscripts it was copied from prior to the 6th century.
British Library, Add. 17120, (circa. 6th century A.D./C.E.)
Syriac manuscript of the complete New Testament. Contains the Catholic Epistles.
Folio 47b = beginning of 1st John.
[Comma Johanneum?].
(Cf. William Wright, “Catalogue of the Syriac manuscripts in the British Museum,” Reprinted 2002, Page 80).
There's no Comma in this New Testament manuscript, because the Comma never was in the Syriac manuscript/manuscripts it was copied from prior to the 6th century.
British Library, Add. 17121, (circa. 6th century A.D./C.E.)
Syriac manuscript of the complete New Testament. Contains the Catholic Epistles.
Folio 98r = beginning of 1st John,
Folio 106r = end of 1st John.
[Comma Johanneum?].
(Cf. William Wright, “Catalogue of the Syriac manuscripts in the British Museum,” Reprinted 2002, Page 81 and Cf. “Das Neue Testament in syrischer Überlieferung,” Volume 2, Part 3, Page 27).
There's no Comma in this New Testament manuscript, because the Comma never was in the Syriac manuscript/manuscripts it was copied from prior to the 6th century.
British Library, Add. 14472, (circa. 6th-7th century A.D./C.E.)
Syriac NT manuscript. Contains the Catholic Epistles.
Folio 67a = beginning of 1st John.
[Comma Johanneum?].
Some marginalia, but from a later hand, and unrelated to the Comma Johanneum.
(Cf. William Wright, “Catalogue of the Syriac manuscripts in the British Museum,” Reprinted 2002, Pages 81-82).
There's no Comma in this New Testament manuscript, because the Comma never was in the Syriac manuscript/manuscripts it was copied from prior to the 6th century.
British Library, Add MS 14448 (circa. 6th-7th century A.D./C.E.)
Syriac NT manuscript. Contains the Catholic Epistles.
Folio 160v = beginning of 1st John,
Folio 164r = end of 1st John.
[Comma Johanneum?].
(Cf. William Wright, “Catalogue of the Syriac manuscripts in the British Museum,” Reprinted 2002, Pages 41-42 and Cf. Institut für Neutestamentliche Textforschung, INTF “Das Neue Testament in syrischer Überlieferung,” Volume 2, Part 3, Page 30).
If there's no Comma in this New Testament manuscript (because it might not contain 1st John 5:7-8), then it's because the Comma never was in the Syriac manuscript/manuscripts it was copied from prior to the 6th century.
British Library, Add. 18812, (circa. 6th-7th century A.D./C.E.)
Syriac NT manuscript. Contains the Catholic Epistles.
Folio 55a = ending with chapter 2:16
[Folio 55b = is missing possibly = may be an incomplete MS of 1st John]
[Comma Johanneum?].
(Cf. William Wright, “Catalogue of the Syriac manuscripts in the British Museum,” Reprinted 2002, Page 83).
There is definitely no Comma in this New Testament manuscript (I know, because I painstakingly examined the Syriac until I found 1st John 5:7-8, - of which I have digital snapshots of), because the Comma never was in the Syriac manuscript/manuscripts it was copied from prior to the 6th century.
Goodspeed Ms. 716, (circa. 6th-7th century A.D./C.E.)
Syriac Peshitta NT Fragments, (Formerly Goodspeed Ms. Syr. 26). University of Chicago Library, Goodspeed Manuscript Collection.
Contains the Catholic Epistles.
1st John 5:7-8 = Folio 32v, (Page/Image 64).
Confirmed, by personal examination, there is no Comma Johanneum in this MS.
http://goodspeed.lib.uchicago.edu/view/index.php?doc=0716&obj=064
There is definitely no Comma in this New Testament manuscript (I know, because I also painstakingly examined the Syriac until I found 1st John 5:7-8, - of which I have digital snapshots of), because the Comma never was in the Syriac manuscript/manuscripts it was copied from prior to the 6th century.
Vat. sir. 266 (circa. 6th-7th century A.D./C.E.)
Syriac NT manuscript. Contains the Catholic Epistles (Folio's 154r-157v).
Folio 157r = 1st John 5:7-8 (starts sixth line from bottom right column).
Confirmed, by personal examination, there is no Comma Johanneum in this MS.
(Cf. Institut für Neutestamentliche Textforschung, INTF“Das Neue Testament in syrischer Überlieferung,” Volume 2, Part 3, Pages 28-29).
http://digi.vatlib.it/view/MSS_Vat.sir.266
https://roger-pearse.com/wiki/index.php?title=Vatican_Syriac_manuscripts
There's no Comma in this New Testament manuscript, because the Comma never was in the Syriac manuscript/manuscripts it was copied from prior to the 8th century.
BNF, Syr. 361 (circa. 8th-9th century A.D./C.E.)
Syriac Peshitta NT manuscript. Contains Acts, and the Catholic Epistles (Folio's 118-169).
[Comma Johanneum?].
http://syri.ac/digimss/sortable?page=13
There's no Comma in this New Testament manuscript, because the Comma never was in the Syriac manuscript/manuscripts it was copied from prior to the 8th century.
BNF, Syr. 342 (circa. 8th-9th century A.D./C.E.)
Syriac Peshitta NT manuscript. Contains the Catholic Epistles.
Folio 169v = 1st John 5:7.
[Comma Johanneum?].
http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10528606c/f344.item.r=Syriaque.zoom
http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10528606c/f1.item.r=Syriaque.zoom
The simple answer why there is no Comma in these Syriac New Testament manuscripts is simply because the Comma was never in the Syriac New Testament manuscripts at all.
NOTE: None of the British Library manuscripts listed above have been digitized (to my knowledge). The other manuscripts which are online, I will get images of the 1st John 5:7-8 texts in the near future.
TwoNoteableCorruptions
Well-known member
Anecdotal theories are worthless Steven compared to manuscripts that you can actually hold in your own hand and read with your own eyes - without having to MAKE UP DESPERATE CONVOLUTED STORIES about why something you wish was written in them - ISN'T written in them.
Your trying to INVENT A STORY about something that doesn't exist in reality - an early Syriac New Testament manuscript with the Comma in it.
Last edited:
Perhaps this is the opportune thread wherein to ask this oft repeated question that equally as often garners different answers.
What then in the contemporary age (within the era of the printing press) the Bible version most closely relating the authentic recording of Jesus' Ministerial teachings?
Or should the Christian necessarily be vested in knowledge of Hebrew, Koine(common) Greek and relative grammar, Latin, in order to fully understand what is written in scripture?
The Holy Spirit leads us, informs us, to understanding. Does that mean if we're not vested in the aforementioned disciplines, that we're not indwelt by Holy Spirit? Or, are failing to receive Holy Spirit's leading into understanding?
If so, what opportunity of success does the missionary have when prosthletyzing to primitive tribes? When first being introduced to the Gospel alone.
What then in the contemporary age (within the era of the printing press) the Bible version most closely relating the authentic recording of Jesus' Ministerial teachings?
Or should the Christian necessarily be vested in knowledge of Hebrew, Koine(common) Greek and relative grammar, Latin, in order to fully understand what is written in scripture?
The Holy Spirit leads us, informs us, to understanding. Does that mean if we're not vested in the aforementioned disciplines, that we're not indwelt by Holy Spirit? Or, are failing to receive Holy Spirit's leading into understanding?
If so, what opportunity of success does the missionary have when prosthletyzing to primitive tribes? When first being introduced to the Gospel alone.
Steven Avery
Well-known member
TwoNoteableCorruptions
Well-known member
Steven Avery
Well-known member
It is easy enough to check the Syriac Peshitta on about 200 variants, simply by checking the published English editions like Etheridge and Murdock. That is how I learned that the Peshitta is about 70-30 in a 3-way comparison between the Byzantine and Alexandrian texts. This I wrote up on a textual forum, and there was no objection.
Steven Avery
Well-known member
Your entire✌️Pure✌️ Bible Forum qualifies as that claim.
You are continuing the fabrication.
You can quote anything from that forum, and you will not find your claim.
TwoNoteableCorruptions
Well-known member
Steven Avery
Well-known member
The Magic Marker site shows you the English differences of about 200 variants, many omission, Byzantine and Alexandrian.
It is easy enough to compare the English Syriac Peshitta, being aware that the Lamsa edition has some quirks, so better to use the two I mentioned above. Of the 200, almost all were easily put on one side or the other.
Simple truth, the method works. You can get an accurate number in about an hour or two.
Last edited:
TwoNoteableCorruptions
Well-known member
The reason why the Comma Johanneum is not in any of the early Syriac New Testament manuscripts is because it was NEVER there in the first place. That is not only the simple explanation, but the simplest explanation.
THOSE ARE THE FACTS AS THEY STAND.
So what can you say Steven? Where are you going to go to contradict that? What options do you have? Are you going to say you've actually got a Syriac New Testament with the Johannine Comma written in Syriac, in the Scripture text, do you? Not likely.
So, what simpler explanation do you have for why the Comma is not in any of the early Syriac New Testament manuscripts?
TwoNoteableCorruptions
Well-known member
Just be honest. English is the only language you can read.
TwoNoteableCorruptions
Well-known member
Sorry, that was lost in translation
.Just what are you saying about the Syriac and the Comma?
TwoNoteableCorruptions
Well-known member
So, what simpler explanation do you have for why the Comma is not in any of the early Syriac New Testament manuscripts, other than it was not there in the first place?
TwoNoteableCorruptions
Well-known member
Tell us more about the Arian deletion story out of fear of Sabellian misuse part again Steven?
I think you are leaving that out of your ✌️simpler✌️ explanation.