The Transmission of the Bible to English
1. 500 BCE: Completion of All Original Hebrew Manuscripts which make up the 39 Books of the OT
2. 200 BCE: Completion of the Septuagint Greek Manuscripts which contain the 39 OT Books and 14 Apocrypha Books.
3. 1 CE: Completion of all original Greek Manuscripts which make up the 27 Books of the NT.
4. 390 CE: Jerome’s Latin Vulgate Manuscripts produced which contain all 80 books (39 OT + 14 Apocrypha + 27 NT).
5. 500 CE: Scriptures have been translated into over 500 languages.
6. 600 CE: Latin was the only language allowed for Scripture.
7. 995 CE: Anglo-Saxon (Early Roots of English language) translations of the NT produced.
8. 1384 CE: Wycliffe is the first person to produce a (Hand written) manuscript copy of the complete bible. All 80 books.
9. 1455 CE: Gutenberg invents the printing press; Books may now be mass produced instead of individually hand written. The first book ever printed is Gutenbergs Bible.
10. 1516 CE: Erasmus produces a Greek/Latin Parallel NT.
11. 1522CE: Martin Luthers German NT.
12. 1525 CE: William Tyndales NT; The first NT to be printed in the English language.
13. 1535 CE: Myles Coverdales Bible; The first complete Bible to be printed in English. (80 books: OT +NT+Apocypha)
14. 1537 CE: Mathews Bible; The second complete Bible to be printed in English. Done by John “Thomas Matthew” Rogers (80 books)
15. 1539 CE: The “Great Bible” printed; The first English language bible to add Numbered Verses to each chapter (80 books total).
16. 1568 CE: The Bishops Bible printed; The bible of which the KJV was a revision (80 books).
17. 1609 CE: The Douay OT is added to the Rheimes NT (of 1582) making the first complete English Catholic bible. Translated from the Latin Vulgate (80 books).
18. 1611 CE: The KJV bible printed; Originally with all 80 books. The Apocrypha was officially removed in 1885, leaving only 66 books.
19. 1782 CE: Robert Aitkens bible; The first English language bible ( a KJV without the Apocrypha) to be printed in America.
20. 1791 CE: Isaac Collins and Isaiah Thomas respectively produce the first family bible and first illustrated bible printed in America. Both were KJV with all (80 books).
21. 1808 CE: Jane Aitkens bible (Daughter of Robert Aitken); The first bible to be printed by a woman.
22. 1833 CE: Noah Websters bible; After producing his famous dictionary, Webster printed his own revision of the KJV.
23. 1841 CE: English Hexapla NT; and early textual comparison showing the Greek and 6 famous English translations in parallel columns.
24. 1846 CE: The illuminated bible; The most lavishly illustrated bible printed in America. A KJV with all (80 books).
25. 1885 CE: The Revised Version bible; The first major English revision of the KJB.
26. 1901 CE: The American Standard Version; The second major American revision of the KJV.
27. 1971 CE: The New American Standard Bible (NASB) is published as a modern and “accurate” word for word English translation of the bible.
28. 1973 CE: The New International Version (NIV) is published as a modern and “accurate” phrase for phrase English Translation of the bible.
29. 1983 CE: The New King James Version (NKJV) is published as a modern English version maintaining the original style of the KJV.
30. 1993-2002 CE: The Message: The Bible in Contemporary Language was created by Eugene H. Peterson. It is a paraphrase of the original languages of the Bible.
Sunday, February 7, 2010
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Holy Bible and Syriac Orthodox Church (Part II)
Holy Bible and Syriac Orthodox Church (Part II)
We have seen numerous differences in the translation of Bible in the first part.Now let us see how some of these changes affected the true faith. Please refer to the previous table shown in chapter ‘Holy Bible and Syriac Orthodox Church Part-1’ and see how each of these changes were used to twist the original church teachings. (You may please use a Bible to refer the verses where ever necessary)
Refer to Numbers From the Tables in Part I
CHANGES TO THE ORIGINAL BIBLE AND HOW THEY ARE USED TO CHANGE THE INTERPRETATION OF THE BIBLE
(How changes mentioned in previous table in the previous chapter are used to change the teachings of the original Church)
1 They had to prove that Mary had other children too, and so to prove
that she is not a virgin. Hence they use “brothers”
2 To prove that there is no position of Bishop or episcopacy
3, 42 To prove that Ordination (of Priests) is not necessary
4 To prove that there were only teachings from Apostles and no Doctrines
5 To prove there is nothing like church, only groups
6, 16 To prove that there was no breaking of bread, but just fellowship meals
9, 22 To prove that for salvation, no Church is necessary or that one need not be a member of the church.
10 To satisfy the section of people who believes that Jesus is not Son of God and there for not equal to God
12 To prove that there was no Deacon positions in the early church
13 To prove that there was no ordination, but just appointment
14 To prove no one confessed to the apostles and they have no right to absolve your sins
15 To prove that there is no importance to Sunday
16 To prove that those elders who were given position were not guided by the Holy Spirit
19 To give the impression that baptism does not absolve one's sins.
20, 21 To prove that Christ has no ministers or priests
25 To prove that fasting (and lent) is not required - they left the word fasting
26,28 Apostles has no right to command, but only to teach
27 The cup of blessing is not the communion of the blood of Christ
29 To satisfy the section who believes that Christ is not God
30, 32,33 Faulty translations
31, 41 To prove that the Apostles or their successors are not the representatives of Christ
34,39 To give impression that there were no deacons or Bishops in the early church
35 Proves that there is no need of external ceremonies
38 – 40 In early church there were no Doctrines or traditions
43 Church means just a fellowship
45 Added a word to prove that anyone can confess to anyone
46 Added a word to support another view
47 To prove that to receive Holy Spirit, no unction is necessary
Yes, it is shocking for any independent scholar to see all these changes in the different translations. All these changes were made for ones own selfish gains.
“Soul Winner’s New Testament Bible" has substituted the word ‘baptize’ with ‘immerse’. This book also uses the word ‘immerse in Holy Spirit’. In the Good News Bible, they use ‘Holy Spirit poured on you’. Again in Mark 11:3, it is written ‘The Lord has need of it [Colt]…," In Good News Bible it is written ‘He will return it soon’ ie. Christ will return the colt!
Ruthor Ford established the Jehovah Witness, in 1870. He was 29 years old at that time. They have their own New Testament with their own translations. In 1954, F.W. France, president of the Jehovah Witness group, revealed how they received their interpretation of the Bible. “They are passed by Holy Spirit who invincibly communicates with Jehovah’s witness” (see it is not the real original Bible!). This
section does not consider the Son and the Holy Spirit as God. Again, The Church of Christ of Latter-Day Saints, the fastest growing religion in the U.S., is based on a revelation to Joseph Smith in 1820 (Again not the real and original Bible!). They have their own Bible and their own interpretations. Orson Prat a famous scholar in that church asks, whether there is a single sentence in the Bible now,which is original? (The cults page 88). These 'churches' have their own New Testaments and their own interpretations.
Since most translations are distorted, which version is the original? As you will see in the table of next chapter, the different books of the New Testament were written during the period AD 60-100. It is widely accepted that some of the books were written in Aramaic and some in Greek (but used lots of Aramaic words), which was also the prominent language in Palestine at that time. [Some scholars are of the opinion that nothing was written in Greek, as no one knew Greek there. Jesus Christ taught in Aramaic, as common man understood no other language. So it is unlikely that anything would have been written in Greek. What is the use of writing in a language not understood by the people?] Josephus wrote (AD 42): “I have taken a great deal of pain to obtain the learning of the Greeks and understand the elements of the Greek language; although I have accustomed myself to speak our own tongue, that I cannot pronounce Greek with sufficient exactness. ……there have been many who have done their endeavors, with great patience, to obtain this Greek learning, there have yet been hardly two or three that have succeeded herein. (Antiquities XX, X1 2)” (George Lamsa’s Translation)
Many scholars believe that it is very unlikely that the Epistles targeted for common man, were written in a language understood only by a few. “Aramaic was the language of the common people during the time of Jesus Christ. It is certainly the language of the Semetic culture, the language of the Hebrew Patriarchs and in the older days, the lingua franca of the Fertile Cresecent. The term Hebrew was derived from the Aramaic word Abor or Habor, which means ‘to cross over’. This name was given to Hebrew’s because Abraham and the people who were with him crossed the river Euphrates and went to Palestine. Therefore they were known by those who lived east of the river Euphrates as Hebrews that is ‘the people across the river’ (Lamsa’s Peshitta Translation). Another view is “Aramaic was the mother-tongue of the region comprising of present Eastern Syria and Northern Iraq. This region was called ‘Aram’, after Aram, Sem’s fifth son. Aramaic is the oldest of the semantic languages. Aram, the father of Armenians, was the grandson of Noe, while Heber the Father of the Hebrews was the great great grandson of Noe.”
The earliest manuscripts of the Bible are in Aramaic, and different versions are available which dates back to 2nd, 5th and 7th centuries. “Astonishingly enough, all of the Peshitta Texts in Aramaic agree”. There is one thing the eastern churches can boast about. They copied their holy books diligently, faithfully and meticulously. Sir Frederic Kenon, the curator of the British Museum, in his book Textual Criticism of the New Testament speaks highly of the accuracy of the copying and of the antiquity of Peshitta MSS. “The versions translated from sematic languages into Greek and Latin was subject to constant revisions. Learned men who copied them introduced changes trying to simplify the obscurities and ambiguities, which were due to the work of first translators.
The present translators and Bible revisers does the same, when translating the Bible.” The Scriptures in the Church of the East, from the inception of Christianity to the present day, are in Aramaic and have never been tampered with or revised as attested by the present Patriarch of the Church of the East. The Biblical manuscripts were carefully and zealously handed down from one generation to another and were
kept in the massive stonewalls of the ancient churches and caves. They were written on parchments and many of them survive to the present day. When expert scribes copied these texts, they (the copies) were carefully examined for accuracy before they were dedicated and permitted to be read in churches. Even one missing letter would render the text void. Easterners still adhere to God’s commandment not to add or omit to a word from the Scripture. The Holy Script condemns any addition, subtraction or modification to the Word of God.
• “You shall not add to the commandments which I command you, neither shall you take form it, but you must keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you” (Deut. 4:2)
• "Everything that I command to you, that you must be careful to do; you shall not add nor take from it.” (Deut. 4:2)
• "Do not add to his words; lest he reprove you, and you be found a liar.” (Prov.30:6)
• “And if any man shall take away form the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his portion from the tree of life and from the holy city and from the things which are written in this book.” (Rev 22:19)
The term Peshitta means straight, simple, sincere and true, that which is the original. The name was given to this ancient and authoritative text to distinguish it from the other Bible revisions and translations which were introduced into some of the Churches of the East after the division at Ephesus and Chalcedon in 431 and 451 AD respectively. This Peshitta is still the only authoritative text of the Old and New Testament of all the Eastern Christians in the Near East and India, the Roman Catholic Church in the East, the Monophysites and Indian Christians. This was because this text was in use for 400 years before the Christian Church was divided to several sects.
(George Lama’s translation) “The originality of the Peshitta Text is strongly supported by the early evidence. Aphraates quoted it. St. Ephraim wrote a commentary on it and the doctrine of Addi placed it at apostolic times”
“The names Aram, Aramaeans and Aramaic were changed, during the course of time into Syria, Syrians and Syraic. The Greeks were responsible for this change. And Aramaic Christians gradually became reconciled with this change of name” (Syro-Chaldaic grammar by Fr.Gabriel)
Peshitta version of the Bibles existed in the 2nd Century. “The Peshitta version of the Bible was made about the first or second century.” (Helps to the study of the Bible – Oxford page 7) These isolated manuscripts were collected, examined, and approved by the early church fathers only in AD 389; and thus the New Testament became part of the Holy Bible. Soon after the New Testament was translated into Latin, this New Testament was in use till the 14th century. From the 15th century (see the list below) onward, different
protestant groups began to make their own Bibles through distorted translations to suit their arguments.
Syriac Bible
The Syriac Orthodox Church believes that the Holy Bible, which comprises of the Old Testament and the New Testament, is the divine word of God. The words of Christ were first transmitted in his native language, the Palestinian dialect of Aramaic, either orally or in a written form. It is from this Aramaic tradition that the Greek Gospels were derived. The Syriac New Testament as we know it today is an earlytranslation of the Greek, Latin and Aramaic (Refer to Part III) text back into Syriac, the Aramaic dialect of Edessa (Modern Urfa in Southeast Turkey). The Syriac Old Testament is a translation from the original Hebrew and Aramaic (a different Aramaic dialect from Syriac which is known by the name 'Biblical Aramaic'). Syriac Orthodox
Church insists on using only the Peshitta Bible. The close similarities between the Palestinian dialect of Aramaic spoken by Christ and Syriac offer us a unique understanding of some of the Biblical readings. For
example, in the English King James version of the Bible we read in Matthew 5:18 "Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." What could jot mean? The Syriac Bible uses the word yod for jot in this verse. This word is the name of the tenth letter (out of the total 22 alphabets) of the Aramaic alphabet, shown below in the Syriac Estrangelo script (read from right-to-left;
yod is shown in red color. Syriac and Aramaic are read from right to left):
Note that yod is the smallest letter in size. The above verse means that not even the smallest of the letters shall pass from the law. This is rendered in the English New Revised Version as "not one letter. Another interesting reading appears in the Lord's Prayer. The King James reads "and forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors" (Matthew 6:12). The Syriac versions read “and forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors." This implies that we must first forgive our debtors before asking forgiveness from God. The English New Revised Version agrees with the Syriac in this verse!
In many instances the Syriac language offers interesting interpretations of Biblical verses. An understanding of Syriac homonyms, for example, help us clarify the reading in Matthew 19:25 (also Mark 10:25 and Luke 128:25), when Jesus tells us how much easier it is for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God. The Syriac word corresponding to camel is gamlo whichmeans 'camel.' However, gamlo has other a meaning as well, one of which is given by the Syriac lexicographer Bar Bahlul (10th century) in his Syriac dictionary: "gamlo is a thick rope which is used to bind ships." Considering that Jesus was speaking to fishermen, this meaning of gamlo seems more appropriate.
The Syriac Fathers studied the Bible in a critical and scientific manner, though regarding it at the same time as a divine text. Witness to this are the numerous translations and revisions of translations and the massive body of commentaries that they have produced. Some of these translations were lost until they were discovered by
Western scholars in the past 150 years.
Many old Syriac manuscripts of the Biblical texts survive and can be found in the major museums and libraries of the world and of course in the ancient Syriac libraries of the Middle East as well. The Syriac Orthodox Church in India had many Peshitta Syriac Bibles and one of them, in 16th century, was transferred to the Oxford University library in fear of Roman Catholic Persecution, since the Portugal Roman Catholics were in search of all Syriac documents for destruction. The most famous manuscript is that of the Gospels which is written by a certain Rabbula, hence known as the Rabbula Gospels. It is famous for its decorative calligraphy and miniatures which are excellent representations of Syriac art.
The first printed edition of the Bible was an edition of the New Testament which was printed in 1555, soon after the advent of printing. It was published by Johann Widmanstetter, with the assistance of a Syriac Orthodox priest, Moses of Mardin. Moses was sent by the Patriarch of Antioch to meet with the Pope of Rome and served as a teacher of Syriac in Europe.
The Syriac Bible is available today from the United Bible Societies. The Peshitta Institute at Leiden is preparing a new annotated English translation of the Peshitta Old Testament (NEATSB, or The New English Annotated Translation of the Syriac Bible).
Questions to test your knowledge
1. What could be the reason (what is the impact) why there is a translational
difference in Good News Bible version from King James Version in Acts 1:14?
2. What could be the reason (what is the impact) why there is a translational
difference in Good News Bible version from King James Version in Acts 1:22?
3. What could be the reason (what is the impact) why there is a translational
difference in Good News Bible version from King James Version in Acts 2:42?
4. What could be the reason (what is the impact) why there is a translational
difference in Good News Bible version from King James Version in Acts 14:23?
5. What could be the reason (what is the impact) why there is a translational
difference in Good News Bible version from King James Version in Acts 2:47?
6. What could be the reason (what is the impact) why there is a translational
difference in Good News Bible version from King James Version in Phili 3:3?
7. What could be the reason (what is the impact) why there is a translational
difference in Good News Bible version from King James Version in 2 Tess
2:15?
8. What could be the reason (what is the impact) why there is a translational
difference in Good News Bible version from King James Version in Acts 19:18?
9. What could be the reason (what is the impact) why there is a translational
difference in Good News Bible version from King James Version in 1 Cori 7:5?
10. What could be the reason (what is the impact) why there is a translational
difference in Good News Bible version from King James Version in Phili 1:1?
11. When was Jehovah Witness established?
12. What was the language of the common men at the time of Jesus Christ?
13. Where (material) was the Biblical Manuscripts written in olden days?
14. What does the tern Peshitta means?
15. Which Bible is the original Bible?
16. Give an example to show how important it is to learn Syriac to interpret Bible?
17. How many letters are there in Syriac or Aramaic language?
18. Which is the smallest letter in the Syriac/Aramaic?
19. Where can we get Syriac Bible today?
20. According to the Syriac lexicographer Bar Bahlul, which is more appropriate
meaning of ‘Gamlo’ to interpret the Biblical verse in in Matthew 19:25?
We have seen numerous differences in the translation of Bible in the first part.Now let us see how some of these changes affected the true faith. Please refer to the previous table shown in chapter ‘Holy Bible and Syriac Orthodox Church Part-1’ and see how each of these changes were used to twist the original church teachings. (You may please use a Bible to refer the verses where ever necessary)
Refer to Numbers From the Tables in Part I
CHANGES TO THE ORIGINAL BIBLE AND HOW THEY ARE USED TO CHANGE THE INTERPRETATION OF THE BIBLE
(How changes mentioned in previous table in the previous chapter are used to change the teachings of the original Church)
1 They had to prove that Mary had other children too, and so to prove
that she is not a virgin. Hence they use “brothers”
2 To prove that there is no position of Bishop or episcopacy
3, 42 To prove that Ordination (of Priests) is not necessary
4 To prove that there were only teachings from Apostles and no Doctrines
5 To prove there is nothing like church, only groups
6, 16 To prove that there was no breaking of bread, but just fellowship meals
9, 22 To prove that for salvation, no Church is necessary or that one need not be a member of the church.
10 To satisfy the section of people who believes that Jesus is not Son of God and there for not equal to God
12 To prove that there was no Deacon positions in the early church
13 To prove that there was no ordination, but just appointment
14 To prove no one confessed to the apostles and they have no right to absolve your sins
15 To prove that there is no importance to Sunday
16 To prove that those elders who were given position were not guided by the Holy Spirit
19 To give the impression that baptism does not absolve one's sins.
20, 21 To prove that Christ has no ministers or priests
25 To prove that fasting (and lent) is not required - they left the word fasting
26,28 Apostles has no right to command, but only to teach
27 The cup of blessing is not the communion of the blood of Christ
29 To satisfy the section who believes that Christ is not God
30, 32,33 Faulty translations
31, 41 To prove that the Apostles or their successors are not the representatives of Christ
34,39 To give impression that there were no deacons or Bishops in the early church
35 Proves that there is no need of external ceremonies
38 – 40 In early church there were no Doctrines or traditions
43 Church means just a fellowship
45 Added a word to prove that anyone can confess to anyone
46 Added a word to support another view
47 To prove that to receive Holy Spirit, no unction is necessary
Yes, it is shocking for any independent scholar to see all these changes in the different translations. All these changes were made for ones own selfish gains.
“Soul Winner’s New Testament Bible" has substituted the word ‘baptize’ with ‘immerse’. This book also uses the word ‘immerse in Holy Spirit’. In the Good News Bible, they use ‘Holy Spirit poured on you’. Again in Mark 11:3, it is written ‘The Lord has need of it [Colt]…," In Good News Bible it is written ‘He will return it soon’ ie. Christ will return the colt!
Ruthor Ford established the Jehovah Witness, in 1870. He was 29 years old at that time. They have their own New Testament with their own translations. In 1954, F.W. France, president of the Jehovah Witness group, revealed how they received their interpretation of the Bible. “They are passed by Holy Spirit who invincibly communicates with Jehovah’s witness” (see it is not the real original Bible!). This
section does not consider the Son and the Holy Spirit as God. Again, The Church of Christ of Latter-Day Saints, the fastest growing religion in the U.S., is based on a revelation to Joseph Smith in 1820 (Again not the real and original Bible!). They have their own Bible and their own interpretations. Orson Prat a famous scholar in that church asks, whether there is a single sentence in the Bible now,which is original? (The cults page 88). These 'churches' have their own New Testaments and their own interpretations.
Since most translations are distorted, which version is the original? As you will see in the table of next chapter, the different books of the New Testament were written during the period AD 60-100. It is widely accepted that some of the books were written in Aramaic and some in Greek (but used lots of Aramaic words), which was also the prominent language in Palestine at that time. [Some scholars are of the opinion that nothing was written in Greek, as no one knew Greek there. Jesus Christ taught in Aramaic, as common man understood no other language. So it is unlikely that anything would have been written in Greek. What is the use of writing in a language not understood by the people?] Josephus wrote (AD 42): “I have taken a great deal of pain to obtain the learning of the Greeks and understand the elements of the Greek language; although I have accustomed myself to speak our own tongue, that I cannot pronounce Greek with sufficient exactness. ……there have been many who have done their endeavors, with great patience, to obtain this Greek learning, there have yet been hardly two or three that have succeeded herein. (Antiquities XX, X1 2)” (George Lamsa’s Translation)
Many scholars believe that it is very unlikely that the Epistles targeted for common man, were written in a language understood only by a few. “Aramaic was the language of the common people during the time of Jesus Christ. It is certainly the language of the Semetic culture, the language of the Hebrew Patriarchs and in the older days, the lingua franca of the Fertile Cresecent. The term Hebrew was derived from the Aramaic word Abor or Habor, which means ‘to cross over’. This name was given to Hebrew’s because Abraham and the people who were with him crossed the river Euphrates and went to Palestine. Therefore they were known by those who lived east of the river Euphrates as Hebrews that is ‘the people across the river’ (Lamsa’s Peshitta Translation). Another view is “Aramaic was the mother-tongue of the region comprising of present Eastern Syria and Northern Iraq. This region was called ‘Aram’, after Aram, Sem’s fifth son. Aramaic is the oldest of the semantic languages. Aram, the father of Armenians, was the grandson of Noe, while Heber the Father of the Hebrews was the great great grandson of Noe.”
The earliest manuscripts of the Bible are in Aramaic, and different versions are available which dates back to 2nd, 5th and 7th centuries. “Astonishingly enough, all of the Peshitta Texts in Aramaic agree”. There is one thing the eastern churches can boast about. They copied their holy books diligently, faithfully and meticulously. Sir Frederic Kenon, the curator of the British Museum, in his book Textual Criticism of the New Testament speaks highly of the accuracy of the copying and of the antiquity of Peshitta MSS. “The versions translated from sematic languages into Greek and Latin was subject to constant revisions. Learned men who copied them introduced changes trying to simplify the obscurities and ambiguities, which were due to the work of first translators.
The present translators and Bible revisers does the same, when translating the Bible.” The Scriptures in the Church of the East, from the inception of Christianity to the present day, are in Aramaic and have never been tampered with or revised as attested by the present Patriarch of the Church of the East. The Biblical manuscripts were carefully and zealously handed down from one generation to another and were
kept in the massive stonewalls of the ancient churches and caves. They were written on parchments and many of them survive to the present day. When expert scribes copied these texts, they (the copies) were carefully examined for accuracy before they were dedicated and permitted to be read in churches. Even one missing letter would render the text void. Easterners still adhere to God’s commandment not to add or omit to a word from the Scripture. The Holy Script condemns any addition, subtraction or modification to the Word of God.
• “You shall not add to the commandments which I command you, neither shall you take form it, but you must keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you” (Deut. 4:2)
• "Everything that I command to you, that you must be careful to do; you shall not add nor take from it.” (Deut. 4:2)
• "Do not add to his words; lest he reprove you, and you be found a liar.” (Prov.30:6)
• “And if any man shall take away form the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his portion from the tree of life and from the holy city and from the things which are written in this book.” (Rev 22:19)
The term Peshitta means straight, simple, sincere and true, that which is the original. The name was given to this ancient and authoritative text to distinguish it from the other Bible revisions and translations which were introduced into some of the Churches of the East after the division at Ephesus and Chalcedon in 431 and 451 AD respectively. This Peshitta is still the only authoritative text of the Old and New Testament of all the Eastern Christians in the Near East and India, the Roman Catholic Church in the East, the Monophysites and Indian Christians. This was because this text was in use for 400 years before the Christian Church was divided to several sects.
(George Lama’s translation) “The originality of the Peshitta Text is strongly supported by the early evidence. Aphraates quoted it. St. Ephraim wrote a commentary on it and the doctrine of Addi placed it at apostolic times”
“The names Aram, Aramaeans and Aramaic were changed, during the course of time into Syria, Syrians and Syraic. The Greeks were responsible for this change. And Aramaic Christians gradually became reconciled with this change of name” (Syro-Chaldaic grammar by Fr.Gabriel)
Peshitta version of the Bibles existed in the 2nd Century. “The Peshitta version of the Bible was made about the first or second century.” (Helps to the study of the Bible – Oxford page 7) These isolated manuscripts were collected, examined, and approved by the early church fathers only in AD 389; and thus the New Testament became part of the Holy Bible. Soon after the New Testament was translated into Latin, this New Testament was in use till the 14th century. From the 15th century (see the list below) onward, different
protestant groups began to make their own Bibles through distorted translations to suit their arguments.
Syriac Bible
The Syriac Orthodox Church believes that the Holy Bible, which comprises of the Old Testament and the New Testament, is the divine word of God. The words of Christ were first transmitted in his native language, the Palestinian dialect of Aramaic, either orally or in a written form. It is from this Aramaic tradition that the Greek Gospels were derived. The Syriac New Testament as we know it today is an earlytranslation of the Greek, Latin and Aramaic (Refer to Part III) text back into Syriac, the Aramaic dialect of Edessa (Modern Urfa in Southeast Turkey). The Syriac Old Testament is a translation from the original Hebrew and Aramaic (a different Aramaic dialect from Syriac which is known by the name 'Biblical Aramaic'). Syriac Orthodox
Church insists on using only the Peshitta Bible. The close similarities between the Palestinian dialect of Aramaic spoken by Christ and Syriac offer us a unique understanding of some of the Biblical readings. For
example, in the English King James version of the Bible we read in Matthew 5:18 "Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." What could jot mean? The Syriac Bible uses the word yod for jot in this verse. This word is the name of the tenth letter (out of the total 22 alphabets) of the Aramaic alphabet, shown below in the Syriac Estrangelo script (read from right-to-left;
yod is shown in red color. Syriac and Aramaic are read from right to left):
Note that yod is the smallest letter in size. The above verse means that not even the smallest of the letters shall pass from the law. This is rendered in the English New Revised Version as "not one letter. Another interesting reading appears in the Lord's Prayer. The King James reads "and forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors" (Matthew 6:12). The Syriac versions read “and forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors." This implies that we must first forgive our debtors before asking forgiveness from God. The English New Revised Version agrees with the Syriac in this verse!
In many instances the Syriac language offers interesting interpretations of Biblical verses. An understanding of Syriac homonyms, for example, help us clarify the reading in Matthew 19:25 (also Mark 10:25 and Luke 128:25), when Jesus tells us how much easier it is for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God. The Syriac word corresponding to camel is gamlo whichmeans 'camel.' However, gamlo has other a meaning as well, one of which is given by the Syriac lexicographer Bar Bahlul (10th century) in his Syriac dictionary: "gamlo is a thick rope which is used to bind ships." Considering that Jesus was speaking to fishermen, this meaning of gamlo seems more appropriate.
The Syriac Fathers studied the Bible in a critical and scientific manner, though regarding it at the same time as a divine text. Witness to this are the numerous translations and revisions of translations and the massive body of commentaries that they have produced. Some of these translations were lost until they were discovered by
Western scholars in the past 150 years.
Many old Syriac manuscripts of the Biblical texts survive and can be found in the major museums and libraries of the world and of course in the ancient Syriac libraries of the Middle East as well. The Syriac Orthodox Church in India had many Peshitta Syriac Bibles and one of them, in 16th century, was transferred to the Oxford University library in fear of Roman Catholic Persecution, since the Portugal Roman Catholics were in search of all Syriac documents for destruction. The most famous manuscript is that of the Gospels which is written by a certain Rabbula, hence known as the Rabbula Gospels. It is famous for its decorative calligraphy and miniatures which are excellent representations of Syriac art.
The first printed edition of the Bible was an edition of the New Testament which was printed in 1555, soon after the advent of printing. It was published by Johann Widmanstetter, with the assistance of a Syriac Orthodox priest, Moses of Mardin. Moses was sent by the Patriarch of Antioch to meet with the Pope of Rome and served as a teacher of Syriac in Europe.
The Syriac Bible is available today from the United Bible Societies. The Peshitta Institute at Leiden is preparing a new annotated English translation of the Peshitta Old Testament (NEATSB, or The New English Annotated Translation of the Syriac Bible).
Questions to test your knowledge
1. What could be the reason (what is the impact) why there is a translational
difference in Good News Bible version from King James Version in Acts 1:14?
2. What could be the reason (what is the impact) why there is a translational
difference in Good News Bible version from King James Version in Acts 1:22?
3. What could be the reason (what is the impact) why there is a translational
difference in Good News Bible version from King James Version in Acts 2:42?
4. What could be the reason (what is the impact) why there is a translational
difference in Good News Bible version from King James Version in Acts 14:23?
5. What could be the reason (what is the impact) why there is a translational
difference in Good News Bible version from King James Version in Acts 2:47?
6. What could be the reason (what is the impact) why there is a translational
difference in Good News Bible version from King James Version in Phili 3:3?
7. What could be the reason (what is the impact) why there is a translational
difference in Good News Bible version from King James Version in 2 Tess
2:15?
8. What could be the reason (what is the impact) why there is a translational
difference in Good News Bible version from King James Version in Acts 19:18?
9. What could be the reason (what is the impact) why there is a translational
difference in Good News Bible version from King James Version in 1 Cori 7:5?
10. What could be the reason (what is the impact) why there is a translational
difference in Good News Bible version from King James Version in Phili 1:1?
11. When was Jehovah Witness established?
12. What was the language of the common men at the time of Jesus Christ?
13. Where (material) was the Biblical Manuscripts written in olden days?
14. What does the tern Peshitta means?
15. Which Bible is the original Bible?
16. Give an example to show how important it is to learn Syriac to interpret Bible?
17. How many letters are there in Syriac or Aramaic language?
18. Which is the smallest letter in the Syriac/Aramaic?
19. Where can we get Syriac Bible today?
20. According to the Syriac lexicographer Bar Bahlul, which is more appropriate
meaning of ‘Gamlo’ to interpret the Biblical verse in in Matthew 19:25?
Monday, January 25, 2010
Holy Bible and Syriac Orthodox Church (Part I)
Holy Bible and Syriac Orthodox Church (Part I)
Syriac Orthodox Church, one of the most ancient churches, considers Bible as the most authoritative source of doctrines. Our church has the utmost respect for the Bible.
While the Syriac Orthodox Church and other ancient churches treat the Holy Bible with great reverence, using it in all their prayers, ministry and sacraments, they also hold the apostolic traditions equally important. The Church has no doctrine that could not be proven by the Bible. The Bible is not to be degraded by independent interpretation by anyone according to their will and pleasure.
[In the Syriac Orthodox and Coptic Orthodox Churches every ministry is done, as taught and done by the apostles. The church was not created out of a vacuum. Each generation learned from the previous generation, from the time of the apostles to the present. The Syriac Orthodox Church still uses Aramaic (Syriac) as its official language, the language used by Jesus Christ and the apostles]. Syriac Orthodox Church Fathers labored in translating the Holy Scriptures into Syriac since the very dawn of Christianity. These Syriac translations of the Bible are the oldest and most ancient in any language. Further, the Syriac New Testament is quite unique for it presents the teachings of our Lord in an Aramaic dialect (Syriac) which is akin and would have been mutually comprehensible with the Palestinian dialect of Aramaic in which Christ taught (see an example given in Holy Bible and Syriac Orthodox Church Part II later). Since the translation of the Bible into Syriac started as early as the first century (even though the New Testament was not codified at that time into a Book), the Syriac version preserves the very ancient renditions of the original texts. In fact,
the Syriac Church Fathers produced a number of translations of the Bible and revisions of these translations from the original languages of the Bible.
Translations of Bible and Differences
Below is a list of some of the variations in different translations. The list is from some popular versions. This encouraged many new interpretations and caused heresy. See below how two translations differ. Of all the Protestant English translations, King James Version has the least errors.
CHAPTER AND GOOD NEWS BIBLE KING JAMES
VERSE (1927) VERSION
1 Acts 1:14 Brothers brethren
2 Acts 1:20 place of service bishopric
3 Acts 1:22 must join us must be ordained
4 Acts 2:42 learning from Apostles Apostle’s Doctrine
5 Acts 2:47 to their group to the church
6 Acts 2:47 fellowship meals breaking of bread
7 Acts 2:27 Servant Holy one
8 Acts 2:38 God’s Gift Gift of Holy Spirit
9 Acts 2:48 who were being saved such as should be saved
10 Acts 3:13 Servant Son
11 Acts 4:30 Servant Holy Child
12 Acts 6:6 Helpers Deacons
13 Acts 14:23 appointed Ordained
14 Acts 19:18 publicly admitted confessed
15 Acts 20:7 Saturday evening 1 St. day of the week ( Sunday)
16 Acts 20:7 Fellowship meal breaking bread
17 Acts 20:28 flock which the Holy Spirit has placed in your care. Be shepherds of church of God which he made his own through the death of his son Flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers to feed the church of God which he hath purchased with his own blood
18 Acts 22:14 Servant The just one
19 Acts 22:16 Get up and be baptized and have your sins washed away by praying to him Arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins calling on the name of the Lord
20 Rom 15:16 Like a priest- Minister Of Jesus Christ
21 Rom 16:21 My fellow Jews My Kinsmen - relatives
22 1 Cori 1:18 Who are being saved Who are saved
23 1 Cori 4:1 Servant Ministers
24 1 Cori 5:13 As the scripture says these words are not found
25 1 Cori 7:5 For Prayer For fasting and prayer
26 Acts 7:17 I teach I command
27 Acts 10:16 The cup we use in the The cup of blessing Lord’s and which we give thanks to God when we
drink from it we are sharing in the blood of Christ which we bless is it not the communion of the blood of the Christ?
28 Acts 11:2 Teachings ordinances I delivered
29 Acts 11:3 God is superior over Christ note: In Living N.T. - they use “ Christ is responsible to God” The Head of Christ is God
30 2 Cori 2:17 We are not like many others who handle God’s message as if it were cheap merchandise but because God has sent us, we speak as servants of Christ We are not…… which corrupt the word of God….. we speak in Christ
31 2 Cori 5:20 We are speaking for Christ… we pleaded on Christ’s behalf let God change you from enemies to his friends We are the ambassadors for Christ as though God did beseech you by us we pray in Christ’s stead you e reconciled to God
32 Gala 4:19 Until Christ’s nature is formed in you. I wish that people who are upsetting you ..let them go and castrate themselves Until Christ is formed in you .. I wish they were even cut off which trouble you (St. Paul did not say to castrate)
33 Eph 1:7 by the death of Christ we are set free that is our sins are forgiven In whom we have redemption through his blood for the forgiveness of sins
34 Phili 1:1 Church leaders and helpers Bishops and Deacons
35 Phili 3:3 We do not put any trust in external ceremonies We have no confidence in the flesh
36 Colo 1:2 By his son’s death on the cross the blood of his cross
37 Colo 1:25 Servant of the Church Ministers of the Church
38 2 Tess 2:15 those truths The traditions which have been taught
39 1 Tim 3:1 A Church leader Bishop
40 1 Tim 4; 6 Good teaching Good Doctrine
41 1 Tim 4:11 Give them these instructions Command them
42 Tim 1:5 to appoint to ordain
43 Heb 2:12 meeting Church
44 Hew 13:7 former leaders The rule over you
45 James 5:16 Confess your sins Confess your faults
46 1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins to God If we confess our sins
47 I John 2:20 But you had the Holy Spirit poured out on you by Christ You have an unction from Holy One
Note: Unction - an anointing ointment that which is used for anointing. more details later
48 1 John 5:7 Three witness the Spirit, the water and blood There are there that bear record in Heaven - the
Father , the Word, and the Holy Spirit
This proves the point that translators have made their own changes from the original version!
To answer why there was such a difference in translations, we have to analyze two points. 1) Who codified the Bible and when was it codified? 2) Who made the changes, when, and why?
Ever since the Bible was codified, the ancient church (At that time there was only one church with three Patriarchs in full communion to each other) owned it;because the ancient church codified it in the Council of Carthage in AD 397. And thus the ancient Church was its custodian. This is why St. Augustine said, “Since the Church owns the Bible, I believe it. Its interpretation also belonged to the church.”
During those days the Church stood as a mighty pillar of the true faith, the body of Christ and as one against which the gates of Hell could not prevail. Later reformist groups began to make changes to the Holy Bible. Thus people like Luther, Calvin, Single, Matthew etc. brought different versions and different interpretations of the Bible into the English and other languages.
Even Luther who started the reformation, became uneasy about this trend [painfully heartbroken to see God’s words modified, twisted and changed] and wrote “Now there are so many sections as there are heads. Some do not need Baptism, some reject Sacraments, some others teach that there is a third world life for a person between this world and the end of the world. Some says Christ is not God. One person says it in one way and another person another way. It has come to this situation that if one sees a dream or one feels so, he decides that it was a revelation to him by the Holy Spirit and declares himself as a prophet.” (Rebuilding the Lost Faith - Pg. 386 Griser, Luther IV).
The Bibles by Wycliffe (AD1382), Tyndale (1535) came out and many copies of the early editions were burned by order of Cuthbert Tunstall, the Bishop of London who was offended by Tyndale’s translations of various ecclesiastical terms, such as Congregations for Church and Senior for priest or Elder.
Then came the Coverdale Bible, (1535) and Matthew’s Bible (1537) versions.
This was the first Bible that was printed with the Royal permission.
Some of the other translations are:
• Travaners Bible (1539)
• The Great Bible (1539)
• Wittim Graham (1557) - This bible was the first one, which formatted the Bible into separate sentences.
• Ganeva Bible (1569) - became popular among the Puritan Party.
• Bishops Bible (1568)
• Raim’s New Testament (1582)
• Authorized Version (1611)
• Revised Version (1881, 1885). This had the most significant changes, compared to the prior ones. “Mistranslation again have been corrected where ever necessary ”[Helps to study of the Bible]
It is obvious that from the 16th century, many translations came and each translator made considerable changes during the process. Those responsible for the Authorized Version Translation submitted a request to
King James which was “We shall be maligned by self conceited Brethren, who run their own ways and give liking unto nothing, but what is framed by themselves and hammered on their anvil.” This proves that so many translators did their works as they pleased.
Even the early Protestant scholars were of the opinion that the early translations were full of mistakes. Dixon says, unless one is a fanatic Protestant, one will agree to the fact that early translations were full of serious errors. Ward in his book
“Errata” proves that these errors were not accidental, but purposely introduced. Bishop Eikot in his book says that the translated versions have many additions which were not found in the original Bible. Blunt, another Biblical scholar, in his book says that “The personality of the translators were such that, it was easy for them to get the respect of the public.” (Keys to the knowledge and use of the Bible)
Robert Gell, who was a member of the revising committee and who was a chaplain to Arch Bishop Abbot tells - as many times the truth has taken a back seat to the interest of many sections and voted out (truth), as required by different sections of people. So, there are differences between translations and most of the
translations did not do justice to the original. This lesson is to be continued as Holy Bible and Syriac Orthodox Church Part II.
To learn more about why there was differences in translation and what impact did it had on the faith of the church and why is it so important to learn the translational mistakes, please read the Holy Bible and Syriac Orthodox Church Part II.
Questions to test your knowledge
1. How Syriac Orthodox Church does consider Bible?
2. What does the Syriac Orthodox Church considers as important as Bible?
3. How does the ministry in Syriac Orthodox and Coptic Orthodox Church done?
4. What is the official language of the Syriac Orthodox Church?
5. When and where the Bible codified?
6. Who codified the Bible and who was the custodian of the Bible?
7. Among the all translations of Bibles available which translation is the oldest and
most ancient?
8. Why Syriac Translation is unique?
9. Why the Bibles by Tyndale (1535) were burned by Bishop of London?
10. Name at least 10 different translations of Bible?
11. Give one proof that different Bible was translated and framed by the translators
in their please or in their own interpretation?
12. What is the difference in translation in King James Version and Good News
Bible version in Acts 20:7?
13. What is the difference in translation in King James Version and Good News
Bible version in Acts 1:14?
14. What is the difference in translation in King James Version and Good News
Bible version in Acts 1:22?
15. What is the difference in translation in King James Version and Good News
Bible version in Phili 1:1?
16. What is the difference in translation in King James Version and Good News
Bible version in Tim 1:5?
17. What is the difference in translation in King James Version and Good News
Bible version in 1 Cori 1:18?
18. What are the differences in translation (give two) in King James Version and
Good News Bible version in Acts 2:47?
19. What is the difference in translation in King James Version and Good News
Bible version in Acts 19:18?
20. What is the difference in translation in King James Version and Good News
Bible version in 1 Cori 7:5?
21. What is the difference in translation in King James Version and Good News
Bible version in Acts 7:17?
22. What is the difference in translation in King James Version and Good News
Bible version in Acts 11:2?
Please copy and paste the questions to word or e mail text box and answer under each
question. Please limit the answer to each question to a maximum of 50 words.
Syriac Orthodox Church, one of the most ancient churches, considers Bible as the most authoritative source of doctrines. Our church has the utmost respect for the Bible.
While the Syriac Orthodox Church and other ancient churches treat the Holy Bible with great reverence, using it in all their prayers, ministry and sacraments, they also hold the apostolic traditions equally important. The Church has no doctrine that could not be proven by the Bible. The Bible is not to be degraded by independent interpretation by anyone according to their will and pleasure.
[In the Syriac Orthodox and Coptic Orthodox Churches every ministry is done, as taught and done by the apostles. The church was not created out of a vacuum. Each generation learned from the previous generation, from the time of the apostles to the present. The Syriac Orthodox Church still uses Aramaic (Syriac) as its official language, the language used by Jesus Christ and the apostles]. Syriac Orthodox Church Fathers labored in translating the Holy Scriptures into Syriac since the very dawn of Christianity. These Syriac translations of the Bible are the oldest and most ancient in any language. Further, the Syriac New Testament is quite unique for it presents the teachings of our Lord in an Aramaic dialect (Syriac) which is akin and would have been mutually comprehensible with the Palestinian dialect of Aramaic in which Christ taught (see an example given in Holy Bible and Syriac Orthodox Church Part II later). Since the translation of the Bible into Syriac started as early as the first century (even though the New Testament was not codified at that time into a Book), the Syriac version preserves the very ancient renditions of the original texts. In fact,
the Syriac Church Fathers produced a number of translations of the Bible and revisions of these translations from the original languages of the Bible.
Translations of Bible and Differences
Below is a list of some of the variations in different translations. The list is from some popular versions. This encouraged many new interpretations and caused heresy. See below how two translations differ. Of all the Protestant English translations, King James Version has the least errors.
CHAPTER AND GOOD NEWS BIBLE KING JAMES
VERSE (1927) VERSION
1 Acts 1:14 Brothers brethren
2 Acts 1:20 place of service bishopric
3 Acts 1:22 must join us must be ordained
4 Acts 2:42 learning from Apostles Apostle’s Doctrine
5 Acts 2:47 to their group to the church
6 Acts 2:47 fellowship meals breaking of bread
7 Acts 2:27 Servant Holy one
8 Acts 2:38 God’s Gift Gift of Holy Spirit
9 Acts 2:48 who were being saved such as should be saved
10 Acts 3:13 Servant Son
11 Acts 4:30 Servant Holy Child
12 Acts 6:6 Helpers Deacons
13 Acts 14:23 appointed Ordained
14 Acts 19:18 publicly admitted confessed
15 Acts 20:7 Saturday evening 1 St. day of the week ( Sunday)
16 Acts 20:7 Fellowship meal breaking bread
17 Acts 20:28 flock which the Holy Spirit has placed in your care. Be shepherds of church of God which he made his own through the death of his son Flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers to feed the church of God which he hath purchased with his own blood
18 Acts 22:14 Servant The just one
19 Acts 22:16 Get up and be baptized and have your sins washed away by praying to him Arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins calling on the name of the Lord
20 Rom 15:16 Like a priest- Minister Of Jesus Christ
21 Rom 16:21 My fellow Jews My Kinsmen - relatives
22 1 Cori 1:18 Who are being saved Who are saved
23 1 Cori 4:1 Servant Ministers
24 1 Cori 5:13 As the scripture says these words are not found
25 1 Cori 7:5 For Prayer For fasting and prayer
26 Acts 7:17 I teach I command
27 Acts 10:16 The cup we use in the The cup of blessing Lord’s and which we give thanks to God when we
drink from it we are sharing in the blood of Christ which we bless is it not the communion of the blood of the Christ?
28 Acts 11:2 Teachings ordinances I delivered
29 Acts 11:3 God is superior over Christ note: In Living N.T. - they use “ Christ is responsible to God” The Head of Christ is God
30 2 Cori 2:17 We are not like many others who handle God’s message as if it were cheap merchandise but because God has sent us, we speak as servants of Christ We are not…… which corrupt the word of God….. we speak in Christ
31 2 Cori 5:20 We are speaking for Christ… we pleaded on Christ’s behalf let God change you from enemies to his friends We are the ambassadors for Christ as though God did beseech you by us we pray in Christ’s stead you e reconciled to God
32 Gala 4:19 Until Christ’s nature is formed in you. I wish that people who are upsetting you ..let them go and castrate themselves Until Christ is formed in you .. I wish they were even cut off which trouble you (St. Paul did not say to castrate)
33 Eph 1:7 by the death of Christ we are set free that is our sins are forgiven In whom we have redemption through his blood for the forgiveness of sins
34 Phili 1:1 Church leaders and helpers Bishops and Deacons
35 Phili 3:3 We do not put any trust in external ceremonies We have no confidence in the flesh
36 Colo 1:2 By his son’s death on the cross the blood of his cross
37 Colo 1:25 Servant of the Church Ministers of the Church
38 2 Tess 2:15 those truths The traditions which have been taught
39 1 Tim 3:1 A Church leader Bishop
40 1 Tim 4; 6 Good teaching Good Doctrine
41 1 Tim 4:11 Give them these instructions Command them
42 Tim 1:5 to appoint to ordain
43 Heb 2:12 meeting Church
44 Hew 13:7 former leaders The rule over you
45 James 5:16 Confess your sins Confess your faults
46 1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins to God If we confess our sins
47 I John 2:20 But you had the Holy Spirit poured out on you by Christ You have an unction from Holy One
Note: Unction - an anointing ointment that which is used for anointing. more details later
48 1 John 5:7 Three witness the Spirit, the water and blood There are there that bear record in Heaven - the
Father , the Word, and the Holy Spirit
This proves the point that translators have made their own changes from the original version!
To answer why there was such a difference in translations, we have to analyze two points. 1) Who codified the Bible and when was it codified? 2) Who made the changes, when, and why?
Ever since the Bible was codified, the ancient church (At that time there was only one church with three Patriarchs in full communion to each other) owned it;because the ancient church codified it in the Council of Carthage in AD 397. And thus the ancient Church was its custodian. This is why St. Augustine said, “Since the Church owns the Bible, I believe it. Its interpretation also belonged to the church.”
During those days the Church stood as a mighty pillar of the true faith, the body of Christ and as one against which the gates of Hell could not prevail. Later reformist groups began to make changes to the Holy Bible. Thus people like Luther, Calvin, Single, Matthew etc. brought different versions and different interpretations of the Bible into the English and other languages.
Even Luther who started the reformation, became uneasy about this trend [painfully heartbroken to see God’s words modified, twisted and changed] and wrote “Now there are so many sections as there are heads. Some do not need Baptism, some reject Sacraments, some others teach that there is a third world life for a person between this world and the end of the world. Some says Christ is not God. One person says it in one way and another person another way. It has come to this situation that if one sees a dream or one feels so, he decides that it was a revelation to him by the Holy Spirit and declares himself as a prophet.” (Rebuilding the Lost Faith - Pg. 386 Griser, Luther IV).
The Bibles by Wycliffe (AD1382), Tyndale (1535) came out and many copies of the early editions were burned by order of Cuthbert Tunstall, the Bishop of London who was offended by Tyndale’s translations of various ecclesiastical terms, such as Congregations for Church and Senior for priest or Elder.
Then came the Coverdale Bible, (1535) and Matthew’s Bible (1537) versions.
This was the first Bible that was printed with the Royal permission.
Some of the other translations are:
• Travaners Bible (1539)
• The Great Bible (1539)
• Wittim Graham (1557) - This bible was the first one, which formatted the Bible into separate sentences.
• Ganeva Bible (1569) - became popular among the Puritan Party.
• Bishops Bible (1568)
• Raim’s New Testament (1582)
• Authorized Version (1611)
• Revised Version (1881, 1885). This had the most significant changes, compared to the prior ones. “Mistranslation again have been corrected where ever necessary ”[Helps to study of the Bible]
It is obvious that from the 16th century, many translations came and each translator made considerable changes during the process. Those responsible for the Authorized Version Translation submitted a request to
King James which was “We shall be maligned by self conceited Brethren, who run their own ways and give liking unto nothing, but what is framed by themselves and hammered on their anvil.” This proves that so many translators did their works as they pleased.
Even the early Protestant scholars were of the opinion that the early translations were full of mistakes. Dixon says, unless one is a fanatic Protestant, one will agree to the fact that early translations were full of serious errors. Ward in his book
“Errata” proves that these errors were not accidental, but purposely introduced. Bishop Eikot in his book says that the translated versions have many additions which were not found in the original Bible. Blunt, another Biblical scholar, in his book says that “The personality of the translators were such that, it was easy for them to get the respect of the public.” (Keys to the knowledge and use of the Bible)
Robert Gell, who was a member of the revising committee and who was a chaplain to Arch Bishop Abbot tells - as many times the truth has taken a back seat to the interest of many sections and voted out (truth), as required by different sections of people. So, there are differences between translations and most of the
translations did not do justice to the original. This lesson is to be continued as Holy Bible and Syriac Orthodox Church Part II.
To learn more about why there was differences in translation and what impact did it had on the faith of the church and why is it so important to learn the translational mistakes, please read the Holy Bible and Syriac Orthodox Church Part II.
Questions to test your knowledge
1. How Syriac Orthodox Church does consider Bible?
2. What does the Syriac Orthodox Church considers as important as Bible?
3. How does the ministry in Syriac Orthodox and Coptic Orthodox Church done?
4. What is the official language of the Syriac Orthodox Church?
5. When and where the Bible codified?
6. Who codified the Bible and who was the custodian of the Bible?
7. Among the all translations of Bibles available which translation is the oldest and
most ancient?
8. Why Syriac Translation is unique?
9. Why the Bibles by Tyndale (1535) were burned by Bishop of London?
10. Name at least 10 different translations of Bible?
11. Give one proof that different Bible was translated and framed by the translators
in their please or in their own interpretation?
12. What is the difference in translation in King James Version and Good News
Bible version in Acts 20:7?
13. What is the difference in translation in King James Version and Good News
Bible version in Acts 1:14?
14. What is the difference in translation in King James Version and Good News
Bible version in Acts 1:22?
15. What is the difference in translation in King James Version and Good News
Bible version in Phili 1:1?
16. What is the difference in translation in King James Version and Good News
Bible version in Tim 1:5?
17. What is the difference in translation in King James Version and Good News
Bible version in 1 Cori 1:18?
18. What are the differences in translation (give two) in King James Version and
Good News Bible version in Acts 2:47?
19. What is the difference in translation in King James Version and Good News
Bible version in Acts 19:18?
20. What is the difference in translation in King James Version and Good News
Bible version in 1 Cori 7:5?
21. What is the difference in translation in King James Version and Good News
Bible version in Acts 7:17?
22. What is the difference in translation in King James Version and Good News
Bible version in Acts 11:2?
Please copy and paste the questions to word or e mail text box and answer under each
question. Please limit the answer to each question to a maximum of 50 words.
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Apostolic Tradition and Apostolic Succession: Lesson 2
Apostolic Tradition and Apostolic Succession
We have found that the religious doctrines are based on the Bible and apostolic traditions. But how do we interpret Matthew 15:3 “Why do you also transgress the command of your God, because of your tradition?” Since Christ said this, it is obvious that He was not referring to something after His crucifixion and
resurrection. He was referring to the Jewish traditions prevalent at that time. During this time there were many Jewish rules, which were created and enforced by the Pharisees. After Babel, the Jews created an administrative body called The Great Synagogue, whose responsibility was to maintain the faith and to interpret. This body existed for almost 150 years and became extinct in BC 291. They made a total of 613
rules. Christ referred to these as burdens or elder’s traditions. St. Paul also criticizes tradition (Colo. 2:8) Yes, this is true. What he says is “Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit according to the tradition of men according to the basic principles of the world and not according to Christ.” It is obvious that he is referring to philosophy and not the apostolic tradition. “You are not redeemed from
your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers;” Then why hold on to tradition? (1 Pet. 1:18) Here also he does not refer to apostolic traditions, but discusses the traditions mentioned in the previous question.
Can we justify tradition from the New Testament? Yes. The reasons are
discussed below:
• We have seen earlier what apostolic traditions are and how important they are.
• In Luke 1:1-4, Luke says that his writings are based on apostolic teachings (traditions) and not based on any written documents. He tells us that he accepted traditions, and compared and wrote them. Paul converted Luke, a physician and an artist, to Christianity. He later drew a picture of St. Mary and
this picture is still kept in the house of Mark (which is a monastery). (Ref Biblical Encyclopedia pages 624, and 684)
• In 2 Thess. 2:14-15, “To which He called you by our gospel, for the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.” (Yes, our gospels are not written). "Therefore brethren stand fast and hold the traditions, which you were, taught weather by word or our epistle." (All gospels were not written!).
• In 2 Tim 1:13 “Hold fast the pattern of sound words which you have heard from me, in faith and love which are in Christ Jesus” and in 2 Timothy 2:2 “And things that you have heard from me among many witness commit these to faithful men who will be able to teach others too.” (These ‘sound words’ of St.
Paul are not written).
• In Matthew 28:20, “…teaching them (the baptized people), to observe all I have commanded you”
• “Whoever listens to you (the apostles), listens to me. Whoever rejects you rejects me. And whoever rejects me rejects the one who sent me”. (Luke 10:16).
• In Luke 10:16, “He who hears you hears me, he who rejects you rejects me and he who rejects me rejects Him who sent me”. Therefore if one does not consider what the apostles taught by saying that "it is not written or not in the Bible”, then their position is as in the above sentence.
• In Acts 20:20 Paul says, “… but proclaimed to you (i.e. people of Ephesus) and taught you publicly and from house to house “(He taught orally!)
• In 1 Thess. 5:12, “We beseech you, my brethren to respect those who labor among you and admonish you in our Lord and teach you”
• 1 Tim 5:17, “Let elders who rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in the word and doctrine.”
• “They devoted themselves to the teaching of the apostles (doctrines) and to the communal life, to the breaking of the bread and to prayers” (Acts 2:42) These words that the believers listened to and heard from the apostles are called traditions.
Is tradition acceptable?
Certainly, it should be accepted because it came from the apostles. It is a poor argument to say that one should not believe in anything not written in the Bible. We believe in world history not because it is written in the Bible, but because the historians have recorded it. Jesus predicted that the Jerusalem temple would not be remaining (Later Titus destroyed it). The Jewish historian Josephus recorded this.
[Josephus has recorded that even the foundation stones were ploughed, thinking that there would be hidden gold under the foundation!] If we can believe him, we should also believe the works of prominent disciples of the 1st and 2nd century. St. Ignatius, and Polycarp, who learned from St. John, had written epistles. Shouldn’t we respect them? Shouldn’t we obey them?
Isn’t it fair that we refer to their teachings to understand what the church did during, and immediately after the apostolic times? Isn’t it childish to argue that those teachings (and practices) were irrelevant and to argue that teachings and interpretations by the people of the18th or 19th centuries are acceptable? (Remember that modern Christian communities do just that; for they reject traditions, and do not accept early teachings, but follow modern era teachings and interpretations!)
The teachings written by these early church fathers are called traditions.
The church has its own history. The book of Acts contains the initial history of the church, but history is not limited to the book of Acts. Many church leaders and advocates immediately after the apostles had recorded facts about the church. We should also accept this as history of the church.
“The Bible is only a part of the Holy Traditions of the church (2 Tess. 2:15). We must not fall a prey to those who want proof i.e. texts for all of the teachings of the church. Again remember, theology is based on the Bible, but not limited by the Bible. The Bible and Traditions together are the primary sources of Theology (Gala 1:8, Colo. 4:16, Heb 2:1). “The Bible is to teach, and the church is to interpret". “Tradition
is the continuing stream of the mind of the Church.”
“On many fundamental questions of faith, the Bible used by itself without the knowledge of the Traditions of the Church can lead to heresy. All of the early heretics used the Bible in one form or the other. The tradition of the Christian truth can be found in its fullness only in the church. How important were the church, the
priesthood, and the sacraments for the disciples of the Apostles. The denial of these realities and the dependence on the Bible alone can be a great error. The truth is experienced and known only by membership in the church, which has a responsible and proper apostolic ministry and a high tradition of the Christian Mysteries". (Faith of Our Fathers --16)
St. Irenaeus: “As I said before, the Church, having received this preaching and this faith, although she is disseminated throughout the world, yet guards it. As if she is occupied in one house. She likewise believes these things just as if she had but one soul and one and the same heart; and harmoniously proclaims them and
teaches them and hands down, as if she possessed but one mouth. Even though the languages of the world are diverse and nevertheless the authority of the tradition is one and the same." (192).
“Every church throughout this whole world received this tradition from the
apostles” (page 198)
“It is possible, then, for everyone in every church, who may wish to know the truth, to contemplate the tradition of the apostles which has been made known throughout the whole world…. For surely they (apostles) wished all those and their successors to be perfect and without reproach, to whom they handed on their authority” (209)
“All Churches agree that… it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the apostolic tradition.”(211) “The true gnosis is the doctrine of apostles, and the ancient organization of the
Church throughout the whole world, and the manifestation of the body of Christ according to the succession of the bishops.” (243)
Tertullian: “...all doctrine which agrees with apostolic Churches…. be regarded as truth.”(293) “Whenever it shall be clear that the truth of the Christian discipline and faith are present, there also will be found of the Scriptures and of their explanation and of all the Christian traditions.” (291)
Tertullian: “...all doctrine which agrees with apostolic Churches…. be regarded as truth.”(293) “Whenever it shall be clear that the truth of the Christian discipline and faith are present, there also will be found of the Scriptures and of their explanation and of all the Christian traditions.” (291)
So what are these traditions? Tertullian describes some of them below:
• Before baptism “in the church and under the Bishop we solemnly profess that we renounce the devil and his pomp’s and his angels.”
• Then we are baptized and from that day on for a whole week we abstain from the daily bath. (367)
• "The god-father takes the candidate into his protection for the purification of the soul"
• "After coming from baptism, we are thoroughly anointed with blessed unction, from the ancient discipline by which in the priesthood they were accustomed to be anointed with a horn of oil". (304)
• "We offer sacrifices for the dead on their birthday anniversaries. We regard it as unlawful to fast or to worship on our knees on the Lord’s Day. We rejoice in the same privilege from the Paschal day to Pentecost. At every forward step and movement, when coming in and going out, when putting on our clothes, when putting on our shoes, when bathing, when at table, when lighting lamps,
when reclining, when sitting, in all ordinary occupations of our lives, we furrow the forehead with sign of the cross.” (367)
St. Polycrates (AD196) “So also do I, Polycrates, the least of all among you, in accord with the tradition of my kindred, some of whom I have followed closely.” (190a) St. Hilary: The church, instituted by the Lord and confirmed by the apostles, is one for all men; but the frantic folly of diverse impious sects has cut them off from her. It cannot be denied that this tearing asunder of the faith has arisen from the defect of
poor intelligence, which twists what is read to conform the opinion, instead of adjusting the opinion to the meaning of what is read.” (865)
St. Augustine: “Each heretic says that the gospels are the basis and that he adheres to it. But they follow their own faults. They do not deny the gospels but do not understand the meaning.”
Now let us think if it is necessary to look at Christian History and if it’s enough to live according to what is said in the Bible alone. We have seen that the faith of the Church is based on apostolic doctrines and the Bible. The Church for its own use codified the Bible. We have also seen that the Bible supports the teachings of the Church. Some argue the other way because of the fact that they cannot show lineage from the apostles and Jesus Christ. It is like sneaking a copy of a family’s deed by a non-family member and after a long time the descendents of the duplicate deed holder abuses, insults, and teases the real deed holder’s descendants! Every country, society, or even organizations of people, have history. History is used to know how a community started and what they did and believed in. Jesus is a historical figure and what we see in the gospels is a narration of His life and teachings. The book of Acts is the history of the Church and we have seen in it how the apostles delegated authority to successors (in the epistles to Timothy and Titus). Every society has history. So why is history being denied for the Church? Some people deny it because they have no relation to the Church. By denying early Church history, they hope to blur the practices of the early church.
Apostolic Succession
We have already seen that Christ founded the church and that the Church is His. Ee commanded the apostles to go all over the world, preach, and baptize those who believed and to receive them to the Church. He gave power to the apostles to govern the Church, and commanded many important things the members of the Church should obey and observe. He taught them things pertaining to the kingdom of God. He opened their minds to understand the scriptures (Luke 24:45). He established the Eucharist after the Last Supper. He blessed the bread and wine and said, ‘this bread is My body and this wine is My blood, being shed for the remission of sins and for eternal life to all who eat and drink’. One should believe that:
(a) Jesus Christ is the Son of God and is God.
(b) He came to this world to offer salvation to humanity.
(c) He suffered on the cross, died, and ascended to heaven.
(d) He will come again for the final judgment, and therefore on should:
1) Be baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit, and
2) Participate in Eucharist after confession of sins and eat with firm belief that it
is the ‘body and blood of Jesus Christ’.
After the Last Supper, He gave His body and blood to the apostle and commanded them to perform this till the end of the world (for coming generations). The apostles also received from Christ the power to bind and loose (power to forgive or not to forgive sins). Some new church groups argue that those who believe in Christ, become disciples and that there is no distinction between the believers and apostles. This is wrong. If this was true every one is capable of forgiving sins (Jesus told the apostles that they could forgive sins). If this was the case, whose sins should they forgive, their own sins? (In that case, any one who sins can declare themselves as forgiven!) Is this what Christ meant? If each one can perform the Eucharist (breaking of the bread) to whom should he give it to?
Jesus Christ blessed the bread and wine and gave to the apostles and commanded them to do as he did and gave them the right to do. The apostles (or who ever appointed by them) themselves have to perform this and give it to the believers till the end of the world. So the above argument doesn’t make any sense. More over, after the resurrection, He gave them all power to do everything (John 20: 20-23). He also sent the Holy Spirit to the apostles after ascending to heaven. The apostles knew their special status. This is why St. Paul said, “We are the ambassadors for Christ, as though God were pleading through us” (2 Cori. 5:20). “We are God’s fellow workers” (1 Cori. 3: 9). The following powers were given to the apostles alone:
(1) To preach and baptize
(2) To forgive sins (Mat 16:19)
(3) To Offer Eucharist
So the apostles are the representatives or ambassadors of the Church (2 Cori. 5-20)
• They are fathers (1 Cori. 4;17)
• Stewards of God’s Mysteries (1 Cori 4;1)
• They have the power to punish ( 1 Cori 4;21)
• Command in the name of Lord (1 Cori 7:10, 14:37) “I give this instruction
(not I, but the Lord)”
• Make laws (Acts 15:1, 1 Cori 7;17)
• They are authorities (2 Cori 10:8)
• Christ speaks through them (2 Cori 13:3)
• Chosen and anointed (2 Cori 1:21-22)
• The mystery of God was revealed to them (1 Tess 2:7)
• Make rules for the church (1 Cori 11:34)
• Make rules for prayers (1 Cori 11:6)
• They are given the authority by the Lord (1 Tim 1:20, 2:8, 6:13, Titus 2:15, 2
Peter 1:3, 1 John 2;7)
• Key to kingdom of heaven is given to the apostles. (Mat 16;19)
• They are chosen and anointed (2 Cori 1:21-22)
The apostles were blessed at the time of ascension and received the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost. All powers are vested in them and are to be exercised till the end of the world. But the apostles cannot live till that time; it is only logical that they appoint their successors to perform their duties. This is seen in the epistles to Timothy and Titus (1:5). This transfer of power from the apostles to their successors is called
Questions to test your knowledge
apostolic succession.
During the apostolic time itself we can see that pastors or presbyters of the church were appointed. The apostles were the authority of the church and elders received their authority and power from the apostles (Acts 5:13, 8:16). St. Clement (AD 96) has documented that the apostles appointed successors before their death. St. Ignatius has written that “there is no church without three grades of priesthood, i.e. bishop, priest and deacon’
Therefore the true church of Christ should have a continuous chain of succession from the apostles. It should have the apostolic faith and observances, which is in the book of Acts, Epistles, and in the writings of the immediate successors of the Apostles like St. Clement, St. Ignatius, and others (Refer to the Faith of early church fathers). Tertullian has written that believers should know if they are going to a true church - each church should have a bishop who should show a continuous chain from the apostles and should believe everything as taught by the apostles.
Merely making a building and calling it a 'church', fellowship, or an assembly and attending there will not make it a church that the Lord Jesus Christ had established!
Questions to test your knowledge
1. What was the tradition mentioned by Jesus in Matthew 15:3?
2. What was Luke before accepting Christianity?
3. Who converted Luke to Christianity?
4. Give two examples for the existence of apostolic tradition from New
Testament?
5. What type of Bible interpretations can probably lead to heresy?
6. Who is authorized to forgive sins after Jesus Christ?
7. Who was authorized to perform Eucharist?
8. Whom did the mystery of God revealed to by Jesus?
9. Who were the chosen and anointed people of Jesus?
10. Who had the power to preach and baptize?
11. Who had the power to forgive sins?
12. When did the Apostles receive Holy Spirit?
13. What is Apostolic Succession?
14. How should a true Church of Christ be?
15. Who has the power to command in the name of Lord?
Saturday, January 16, 2010
HISTORY OF THE SYRIAC ORTHODOX CHURCH Lesson 1
History
Few Christian denominations can claim the antiquity of the Syriac Orthodox Church of
Antioch, whose foundations can be traced back to the very dawn of Christianity. The
Church justifiably prides itself as being one of the earliest established apostolic
churches. It was in Antioch, after all, that the followers of Jesus were called Christians
as we are told in the New Testament, “The disciples were first called Christians in
Antioch.” (Acts 11:26).
According to ecclesiastical tradition, the Church of Antioch is the second established
church in Christendom after Jerusalem, and the prominence of its Apostolic See is well
documented. Church believes that Jesus Christ founded his church on earth. In his
Chronicon (I, 2), the church historian Eusebius of Caesarea tells us that St. Peter the
Apostle established a bishopric in Antioch and became its first bishop. He also tells us
that St. Peter was succeeded by Evodius. In another historical work, Historia
Ecclesiastica, Eusebius tells us that Ignatius the Illuminator, “a name of note to most
men, [was] the second after Peter to the bishopric of Antioch” (III, 36). The present
Patriarch, .H.H. Ignatius Zakha Iwas I is the 122nd Patriarch to the throne of Antioch
and is celebrating the silver jubilee of his enthronement on September 14th, 2005.
Antioch, the third most important city after Rome and Alexandria, in the Roman
Empire, was made one of the church's first three Patriarchates, along with Rome and
Alexandria at the Council of Nicea, regarded as the first ecumenical council, in AD
325. Other than the importance of the cities in the order of Rome being the first,
Alexandria being the second and Antioch being the third in the Roman Empire, there
was no supremacy given to any of these Patriarchates. They were all regarded as equal
and remained in full communion with each other. The Patriarch of Antioch ruled over
the entire East including Asia and part of the modern Middle East. Where as Rome
ruled over the entire West and Alexandria ruled over the entire Africa.
The Syriac Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch used to be known by his own name;
however, since 1293 the patriarchs of Antioch adopted the name Ignatius, after the
Illuminator. The See of Antioch continues to flourish till our day, with His Holiness
Patriarch Ignatius Zakka I, being the 122nd in the line of legitimate patriarchs.
The patriarchate was forced to move from Antioch in A.D. 518, after a period of
turbulent history, to various locations in the Near East until it settled in the monastery
Dayro d-Mor Hananya (also known as Kurkmo Dayro, Deir az-Za'faran--Syriac and
Arabic respectively for Saffron Monastery) in Mardin, Turkey, during the 13th
century. After another period of heinous violence during and after World War I, which
took the lives of a quarter million Syriac Orthodox faithful, the patriarchate was
transferred to Homs, Syria, in 1933, and later to Damascus, Syria in 1957 and it
continues there till to date.
The Syriac Orthodox Church is quite unique for many reasons. Firstly, it presents a
form of Christianity, which is Semitic in nature, with a culture not far from the one
Christ himself experienced. Secondly, it employs in its liturgy the Syriac language, an
Aramaic dialect akin to the Aramaic spoken by Christ and the Apostles. Thirdly, its
liturgy is one of the most ancient, and has been handed from one generation to another.
Fourthly, and most importantly, it demonstrates the unity of the body of Christ by the
multiethnic nature of its faithful: A visit to your local Syriac Orthodox Church in
Europe or the Americas would demonstrate, for example, the blend of Near Eastern
and Indian cultures in the motifs and vestments of clergy. The Syriac Orthodox faithful
today live primarily in Middle Eastern countries and the Indian State of Kerala, with
many communities in the diaspora.
The Syriac Orthodox Church has been a member of the World Council of Churches
since 1960, and is one of the founding members of the Middle East Council of
Churches. The Church takes part in ecumenical and theological dialogues with other
churches. As a result of these dialogues, the Church has issued two joint declarations
with the Roman Catholic Church and another with the Eastern Orthodox churches.
In Syriac, the proper name of the Church is `idto suryoyto treeysath shubho. In the
past, the name of the Church had been translated to English as “Syrian Orthodox
Church”. The Holy Synod of the Church approved the translation “Syriac Orthodox
Church” in its session of March 28-April 3, 2000.
Throughout Syria and Mesopotamia, Aramaic, in its many dialectical forms, was the
language of the land, and Syriac, originally the Aramaic dialect of Edessa in Northern
Mesopotamia, must have been the most influential literary form of Aramaic. When we
speak of Syriac Christianity, we refer to Christians whose native tongue was Syriac
and those who employed Syriac as their liturgical language.
Syriac Christianity was not centered just in Antioch, the Roman capital of Syria. In
fact, Syriac Christianity can be traced further East in Mesopotamia. As local tradition
tells us, Christianity was received in Edessa during the time of the Apostles. This is
reported in a number of documents including Eusebius's Ecclesiastical History.
Historical literary sources tell us that by the second half of the second century there
was an established church in Edessa, though probably most of the inhabitants remained
pagan. The Chronicle of Edessa tells us that in the year 201, a disastrous flood
destroyed the church of the Christians in the city. However, it took only about a
century until most of the city was under the umbrella of Christianity. Edessa, home of
the Syriac form of Aramaic, indeed prides itself as the first kingdom that officially
accepted the new faith.
Syriac Christianity has had a long history in India. According to tradition, Christianity
in India was established by St. Thomas who arrived in Malankara (Kerala) from
Edessa in A.D. 52. The close ties between the Church in Malankara and the Near East
go back to at least the fourth century when a certain Joseph of Edessa traveled to India
and met Christians there. The church in Malankara today is an integral part of the
Syriac Orthodox Church with the Patriarch of Antioch as its supreme spiritual head.
The local head of the church in Malankara is the Catholicos of the East, consecrated by
and accountable to the Patriarch of Antioch.
Syriac Christianity spread rapidly in the East. The Bible was translated into Syriac to
serve as the main source of teaching as early as the second century. Till our day, the
antiquity of the Syriac biblical versions is upheld with high esteem by modern
scholars. In the words of Dr. Arthur Vööbus, “In our search for the oldest translation of
the Greek original [of the New Testament] we must go back to the Syriac idiom”
(Studies in the History of the Gospel Text in Syriac, p. 1). The Syriac Church Fathers
made no less than six translations and revisions of the New Testament and at least two
of the Old Testament. Their scholarship in this domain has no equal in Church history.
The Church of Antioch was thriving under the Byzantine Empire until the fifth century
when Christological controversies split the Church. After the Council of Chalcedon in
A.D. 451, two camps of the one Church emerged: The Greek Church of Byzantium
and the Latin Church of Rome accepted Chalcedon, but the Syriac and Coptic (later
Armenian as well) Churches rejected the council. The former group professed that
Christ is in two natures, human and divine, whilst the latter adopted the doctrine that
Christ has one incarnate nature from two natures. It is worth noting that the drafts of
the Council were according to the position of the Syriac and Coptic Churches. The
final resolution, however, was according to the doctrine of the Western Churches and
was rejected by the Syriac Church. This schism had sad consequences on the Syriac
Church during the next few centuries.
As the Emperor supported the Chalcedonian camp, the Syriac Church came under
much persecution. Many bishops were sent to exile, most notably Patriarch Mor
Severius, who was later given the epithet togho d-suryoye, ‘Crown of the Syriacs’. Mor
Severius died in exile in 538. By the year 544, the Syriac Church was in an abysmal
situation with only three bishops remaining. It was at this time that Mor Yacqub
Burd`ono (Jacob Baradeus) emerged to rejuvenate the Church. Mor Yacqub traveled to
Constantinople for an audience with Empress Theodora, the daughter of a Syriac
Orthodox priest from Mabbug according to Syriac Orthodox sources, and wife of
Emperor Justinian. Theodora used her influence to get Jacob ordained as bishop in
544. Later, Mor Yacqub would travel across the entire land reviving the Church. He
managed to consecrate 27 bishops and hundreds of priests and deacons. For this, the
Syriac Orthodox Church honors this saint on July 30 of every year, the day of his death
in 578. A few centuries later, adversaries labeled the Syriac Orthodox Church
‘Jacobite’ after St. Jacob. The Syriac Orthodox Church rejects this belittling label
which wrongly suggests that the Church was founded by Mor Yacqub. However, the
Syriac Orthodox Church in India is still known as Jacobite Church and the name was
whole heartedly accepted by the church, even though the name was given originally by
the Chalcedonians with sarcasm in the early 6th century.
Aside from their ecclesiastical role, Syriac Churchmen have contributed to world
civilization. As early as the fourth century, academies and schools were set up in
monasteries throughout Syria and Mesopotamia. Monks and scholars where busy
studying the sciences of the Greeks, commenting on and adding to them. It is no
surprise that when the Arabs, who conquered the Near East at the end of the seventh
century, wanted to acquire Greek knowledge, they turned to Syriac scholars and
churchmen. Arab caliphs commissioned Syriac scholars to translate the sciences of the
Greeks into Arabic. In his film Forgotten Christians, Christopher Wenner describes
the impact of Syriac scholars and Churchmen when he describes the school at Deir az-
Za'faran monastery, “It was through the monks here that the Arabs received Greek
learning, and it was the Arabs of course who passed it back to Europe. Had it not been
for the Syriac monks, we in Europe might never have had a renaissance.”
The Syriac Orthodox Church survived under the dominion of many empires in the
centuries that followed. Under the Arabs, Mongols, Crusades, Mamluks and Ottomans,
the Syriac Orthodox Church continued its survival. Neither intimidation nor oppression
could suppress the faithful, but the Church diminished in size to a fraction of what it
was.
By the beginning of the 20th century, Syriac Orthodox Christianity was confined
mostly to mountainous rural areas, such as Tur Abdin, and various towns in the
Ottoman Empire. The worst of the persecutions was yet to come. During World War I
massacres and ethnic cleansing befell the Syriac Orthodox Christians at the hands of
the Ottoman Turks and the neighboring Kurds. The year 1915 is known in Syriac by
sayfo, or ‘[the year of the] sword’. It is estimated that a quarter of a million perished;
villages were emptied; monasteries and Churches were destroyed. This resulted in
what the Syriacs call (in Turkish) sefer berlik ‘the collective exodus’, a migration to
the newly established countries of Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Palestine. Some left the
Middle East all-together, forming new communities in the Americas.
As a result of further immigration that ensued, the Syriac Orthodox Church today has
faithful not only in the Middle East and India, but in Europe, the Americas and
Australia as well.
Quiz to test your knowledge
1. According to the ecclesiastical tradition, which Church was the first established
church in whole Christendom?
2. According to the ecclesiastical tradition, which Church was the second established
church in whole Christendom?
3. Which is the city were disciples were first called ‘Christians’?
4. Who founded Syriac Orthodox Church?
5. Who was the first bishop (Patriarch) of the Syriac Orthodox Church?
6. Who was the second bishop (Patriarch) of Antioch?
7. When was the bishop of Antioch named as Patriarch?
8. Which were the three Patriarchates established in A.D. 325?
9. Which Patriarchate was in charge of ruling the entire East?
10. Which Patriarchate was superior to other Patriarchates?
11. What is the name of the Patriarch of Antioch adopted in the 13th century?
12. Who is the canonical Patriarch of Antioch at present?
13. Where is the head office of the Patriarchate of the Syriac Orthodox Church at
present?
14. Provide at least four unique characters of SOC in your opinion?
15. What is meant by Syriac Christians?
16. What language was Jesus spoke?
17. Which city had the Syriac dialect of Aramaic?
18. Which city was rich in Syriac Christians in 2nd century AD?
19. Who preached Christianity in India for the first time?
20. According to History when was the Christians in India came into contact with
Antioch?
21. When the SOC was closed ties with the Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox
Church?
22. What was the reason for the persecution experienced from the Byzantine Empire in
the fifth century?
23. Who rejuvenated the SOC and Coptic Church during the Byzantine persecution?
24. Why are SOC and Coptic Church some times called Jacobites?
25. Name at least a four different regimes/dominion under which SOC was persecuted
further?
26. Name an ancient school of Syriac and monastery under SOC?
27. What forced massive immigration of the SOC members to other countries?
Few Christian denominations can claim the antiquity of the Syriac Orthodox Church of
Antioch, whose foundations can be traced back to the very dawn of Christianity. The
Church justifiably prides itself as being one of the earliest established apostolic
churches. It was in Antioch, after all, that the followers of Jesus were called Christians
as we are told in the New Testament, “The disciples were first called Christians in
Antioch.” (Acts 11:26).
According to ecclesiastical tradition, the Church of Antioch is the second established
church in Christendom after Jerusalem, and the prominence of its Apostolic See is well
documented. Church believes that Jesus Christ founded his church on earth. In his
Chronicon (I, 2), the church historian Eusebius of Caesarea tells us that St. Peter the
Apostle established a bishopric in Antioch and became its first bishop. He also tells us
that St. Peter was succeeded by Evodius. In another historical work, Historia
Ecclesiastica, Eusebius tells us that Ignatius the Illuminator, “a name of note to most
men, [was] the second after Peter to the bishopric of Antioch” (III, 36). The present
Patriarch, .H.H. Ignatius Zakha Iwas I is the 122nd Patriarch to the throne of Antioch
and is celebrating the silver jubilee of his enthronement on September 14th, 2005.
Antioch, the third most important city after Rome and Alexandria, in the Roman
Empire, was made one of the church's first three Patriarchates, along with Rome and
Alexandria at the Council of Nicea, regarded as the first ecumenical council, in AD
325. Other than the importance of the cities in the order of Rome being the first,
Alexandria being the second and Antioch being the third in the Roman Empire, there
was no supremacy given to any of these Patriarchates. They were all regarded as equal
and remained in full communion with each other. The Patriarch of Antioch ruled over
the entire East including Asia and part of the modern Middle East. Where as Rome
ruled over the entire West and Alexandria ruled over the entire Africa.
The Syriac Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch used to be known by his own name;
however, since 1293 the patriarchs of Antioch adopted the name Ignatius, after the
Illuminator. The See of Antioch continues to flourish till our day, with His Holiness
Patriarch Ignatius Zakka I, being the 122nd in the line of legitimate patriarchs.
The patriarchate was forced to move from Antioch in A.D. 518, after a period of
turbulent history, to various locations in the Near East until it settled in the monastery
Dayro d-Mor Hananya (also known as Kurkmo Dayro, Deir az-Za'faran--Syriac and
Arabic respectively for Saffron Monastery) in Mardin, Turkey, during the 13th
century. After another period of heinous violence during and after World War I, which
took the lives of a quarter million Syriac Orthodox faithful, the patriarchate was
transferred to Homs, Syria, in 1933, and later to Damascus, Syria in 1957 and it
continues there till to date.
The Syriac Orthodox Church is quite unique for many reasons. Firstly, it presents a
form of Christianity, which is Semitic in nature, with a culture not far from the one
Christ himself experienced. Secondly, it employs in its liturgy the Syriac language, an
Aramaic dialect akin to the Aramaic spoken by Christ and the Apostles. Thirdly, its
liturgy is one of the most ancient, and has been handed from one generation to another.
Fourthly, and most importantly, it demonstrates the unity of the body of Christ by the
multiethnic nature of its faithful: A visit to your local Syriac Orthodox Church in
Europe or the Americas would demonstrate, for example, the blend of Near Eastern
and Indian cultures in the motifs and vestments of clergy. The Syriac Orthodox faithful
today live primarily in Middle Eastern countries and the Indian State of Kerala, with
many communities in the diaspora.
The Syriac Orthodox Church has been a member of the World Council of Churches
since 1960, and is one of the founding members of the Middle East Council of
Churches. The Church takes part in ecumenical and theological dialogues with other
churches. As a result of these dialogues, the Church has issued two joint declarations
with the Roman Catholic Church and another with the Eastern Orthodox churches.
In Syriac, the proper name of the Church is `idto suryoyto treeysath shubho. In the
past, the name of the Church had been translated to English as “Syrian Orthodox
Church”. The Holy Synod of the Church approved the translation “Syriac Orthodox
Church” in its session of March 28-April 3, 2000.
Throughout Syria and Mesopotamia, Aramaic, in its many dialectical forms, was the
language of the land, and Syriac, originally the Aramaic dialect of Edessa in Northern
Mesopotamia, must have been the most influential literary form of Aramaic. When we
speak of Syriac Christianity, we refer to Christians whose native tongue was Syriac
and those who employed Syriac as their liturgical language.
Syriac Christianity was not centered just in Antioch, the Roman capital of Syria. In
fact, Syriac Christianity can be traced further East in Mesopotamia. As local tradition
tells us, Christianity was received in Edessa during the time of the Apostles. This is
reported in a number of documents including Eusebius's Ecclesiastical History.
Historical literary sources tell us that by the second half of the second century there
was an established church in Edessa, though probably most of the inhabitants remained
pagan. The Chronicle of Edessa tells us that in the year 201, a disastrous flood
destroyed the church of the Christians in the city. However, it took only about a
century until most of the city was under the umbrella of Christianity. Edessa, home of
the Syriac form of Aramaic, indeed prides itself as the first kingdom that officially
accepted the new faith.
Syriac Christianity has had a long history in India. According to tradition, Christianity
in India was established by St. Thomas who arrived in Malankara (Kerala) from
Edessa in A.D. 52. The close ties between the Church in Malankara and the Near East
go back to at least the fourth century when a certain Joseph of Edessa traveled to India
and met Christians there. The church in Malankara today is an integral part of the
Syriac Orthodox Church with the Patriarch of Antioch as its supreme spiritual head.
The local head of the church in Malankara is the Catholicos of the East, consecrated by
and accountable to the Patriarch of Antioch.
Syriac Christianity spread rapidly in the East. The Bible was translated into Syriac to
serve as the main source of teaching as early as the second century. Till our day, the
antiquity of the Syriac biblical versions is upheld with high esteem by modern
scholars. In the words of Dr. Arthur Vööbus, “In our search for the oldest translation of
the Greek original [of the New Testament] we must go back to the Syriac idiom”
(Studies in the History of the Gospel Text in Syriac, p. 1). The Syriac Church Fathers
made no less than six translations and revisions of the New Testament and at least two
of the Old Testament. Their scholarship in this domain has no equal in Church history.
The Church of Antioch was thriving under the Byzantine Empire until the fifth century
when Christological controversies split the Church. After the Council of Chalcedon in
A.D. 451, two camps of the one Church emerged: The Greek Church of Byzantium
and the Latin Church of Rome accepted Chalcedon, but the Syriac and Coptic (later
Armenian as well) Churches rejected the council. The former group professed that
Christ is in two natures, human and divine, whilst the latter adopted the doctrine that
Christ has one incarnate nature from two natures. It is worth noting that the drafts of
the Council were according to the position of the Syriac and Coptic Churches. The
final resolution, however, was according to the doctrine of the Western Churches and
was rejected by the Syriac Church. This schism had sad consequences on the Syriac
Church during the next few centuries.
As the Emperor supported the Chalcedonian camp, the Syriac Church came under
much persecution. Many bishops were sent to exile, most notably Patriarch Mor
Severius, who was later given the epithet togho d-suryoye, ‘Crown of the Syriacs’. Mor
Severius died in exile in 538. By the year 544, the Syriac Church was in an abysmal
situation with only three bishops remaining. It was at this time that Mor Yacqub
Burd`ono (Jacob Baradeus) emerged to rejuvenate the Church. Mor Yacqub traveled to
Constantinople for an audience with Empress Theodora, the daughter of a Syriac
Orthodox priest from Mabbug according to Syriac Orthodox sources, and wife of
Emperor Justinian. Theodora used her influence to get Jacob ordained as bishop in
544. Later, Mor Yacqub would travel across the entire land reviving the Church. He
managed to consecrate 27 bishops and hundreds of priests and deacons. For this, the
Syriac Orthodox Church honors this saint on July 30 of every year, the day of his death
in 578. A few centuries later, adversaries labeled the Syriac Orthodox Church
‘Jacobite’ after St. Jacob. The Syriac Orthodox Church rejects this belittling label
which wrongly suggests that the Church was founded by Mor Yacqub. However, the
Syriac Orthodox Church in India is still known as Jacobite Church and the name was
whole heartedly accepted by the church, even though the name was given originally by
the Chalcedonians with sarcasm in the early 6th century.
Aside from their ecclesiastical role, Syriac Churchmen have contributed to world
civilization. As early as the fourth century, academies and schools were set up in
monasteries throughout Syria and Mesopotamia. Monks and scholars where busy
studying the sciences of the Greeks, commenting on and adding to them. It is no
surprise that when the Arabs, who conquered the Near East at the end of the seventh
century, wanted to acquire Greek knowledge, they turned to Syriac scholars and
churchmen. Arab caliphs commissioned Syriac scholars to translate the sciences of the
Greeks into Arabic. In his film Forgotten Christians, Christopher Wenner describes
the impact of Syriac scholars and Churchmen when he describes the school at Deir az-
Za'faran monastery, “It was through the monks here that the Arabs received Greek
learning, and it was the Arabs of course who passed it back to Europe. Had it not been
for the Syriac monks, we in Europe might never have had a renaissance.”
The Syriac Orthodox Church survived under the dominion of many empires in the
centuries that followed. Under the Arabs, Mongols, Crusades, Mamluks and Ottomans,
the Syriac Orthodox Church continued its survival. Neither intimidation nor oppression
could suppress the faithful, but the Church diminished in size to a fraction of what it
was.
By the beginning of the 20th century, Syriac Orthodox Christianity was confined
mostly to mountainous rural areas, such as Tur Abdin, and various towns in the
Ottoman Empire. The worst of the persecutions was yet to come. During World War I
massacres and ethnic cleansing befell the Syriac Orthodox Christians at the hands of
the Ottoman Turks and the neighboring Kurds. The year 1915 is known in Syriac by
sayfo, or ‘[the year of the] sword’. It is estimated that a quarter of a million perished;
villages were emptied; monasteries and Churches were destroyed. This resulted in
what the Syriacs call (in Turkish) sefer berlik ‘the collective exodus’, a migration to
the newly established countries of Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Palestine. Some left the
Middle East all-together, forming new communities in the Americas.
As a result of further immigration that ensued, the Syriac Orthodox Church today has
faithful not only in the Middle East and India, but in Europe, the Americas and
Australia as well.
Quiz to test your knowledge
1. According to the ecclesiastical tradition, which Church was the first established
church in whole Christendom?
2. According to the ecclesiastical tradition, which Church was the second established
church in whole Christendom?
3. Which is the city were disciples were first called ‘Christians’?
4. Who founded Syriac Orthodox Church?
5. Who was the first bishop (Patriarch) of the Syriac Orthodox Church?
6. Who was the second bishop (Patriarch) of Antioch?
7. When was the bishop of Antioch named as Patriarch?
8. Which were the three Patriarchates established in A.D. 325?
9. Which Patriarchate was in charge of ruling the entire East?
10. Which Patriarchate was superior to other Patriarchates?
11. What is the name of the Patriarch of Antioch adopted in the 13th century?
12. Who is the canonical Patriarch of Antioch at present?
13. Where is the head office of the Patriarchate of the Syriac Orthodox Church at
present?
14. Provide at least four unique characters of SOC in your opinion?
15. What is meant by Syriac Christians?
16. What language was Jesus spoke?
17. Which city had the Syriac dialect of Aramaic?
18. Which city was rich in Syriac Christians in 2nd century AD?
19. Who preached Christianity in India for the first time?
20. According to History when was the Christians in India came into contact with
Antioch?
21. When the SOC was closed ties with the Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox
Church?
22. What was the reason for the persecution experienced from the Byzantine Empire in
the fifth century?
23. Who rejuvenated the SOC and Coptic Church during the Byzantine persecution?
24. Why are SOC and Coptic Church some times called Jacobites?
25. Name at least a four different regimes/dominion under which SOC was persecuted
further?
26. Name an ancient school of Syriac and monastery under SOC?
27. What forced massive immigration of the SOC members to other countries?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)