The following makes use of the SPTIBERIAN and SPIONIC Hebrew and Greek fonts which can be obtained freely from:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Heb-Aram-NT/files/

THE GREEK WESTERN TYPE TEXT OF CODEX D:
THE MISSING LINK BETWEEN
THE ORIGINAL ARAMAIC NEW TESTAMENT
AND THE RECEIVED GREEK TEXT

INTRODUCTION

This paper has intentionally been written so that it is easily understandable by the lay-person despite the fact that it deals with technical issues related to distinctions between Aramaic grammar and Greek grammar. I have written the paper in such an easy to understand manner because I feel it is so important for people to know and accept the conclusion of this paper, which is profound in its implications for New Testament origins.

To begin with the reader should know that no two Greek manuscripts of New Testament books agree exactly. Scholars classify Greek New Testament manuscripts based upon their agreements and disagreements with each other in these variant readings. Using this method scholars have broken NT manuscripts into three categories known as ”text types”: Western; Alexandrian and Byzantine. (Some scholars add a “Cesarean” text type but others see these as “half breed” Alexandrian-Western texts).

It is important to know that the most ancient Greek manuscripts are Alexandrian and Western and the most recent ones, and the vast majority, are of the Byzantine type. It is also important to know that Codex D (referenced in this paper) is our most complete Greek manuscript of the Four Gospels and Acts in the Western type.

The reader should also know that the quotations of the Greek New Testament by the earliest Greek “Church Fathers” like Ireaneus and Justin Martyr, tend to agree with the Western type against the other types.

Finally the reader should also know that the various early translations of the NT are classed according to their text type as well. The earliest translation, the Old Latin agrees with the Western type text. The Old Syriac is believed by most scholars to be the earliest Aramaic version and it is also of the Western text type. The Peshitta Aramaic version, by contrast, tends to agree with the later Byzantine text type.

Now with this background the reader is ready to embark upon the following analysis-made-easy which demonstrates the VERY important place that the Greek Western text of Codex D plays as a missing link between the original Aramaic New Testament and the received Greek text.

THE DUAL PREPOSITION

Now in Hebrew and Aramaic when a preposition applies to more than one noun in a series the preposition is usually repeated. In the example below we have a case where the normal Aramaic grammar appears in the Old Syriac as well as the Greek Western text of codex D both of which repeat the preposition. However the Alexandrian and Byzantine Greek text types eliminate the second occurrence of the preposition creating a more natural Greek reading. In some cases the Peshitta agrees with the Old Syriac but in some instances the Peshitta has been revised to agree with the Byzantine Greek.

Matthew 14:9

Old Syriac:
)kyms l+mw )tmwm l+mw
”And because of the oath and because of the guests”

Greek Western text of Codex D:
dia touj orkouj kai dia touj sunanakeimenouj
”And because of the oath and because of the guests”

Byzantine and Alexandrian Greek:
dia touj orkouj kai touj sunanakeimenouj
”and because of the oath and the guests”

Peshitta:
)kymsw )tmwm Nyd l+m
”but because of the oath and the guests”

Mark 6:36

Peshitta:
)yrwqlw Nyrdxd )srwg)l
"to the surrounding fields and to the villages"
(The Peshitta here probably preserves the original reading of the Old Syriac. The only surviving copy of the Old Syriac for this verse has only one object and so it could not have two prepositions.)

Codex D has:
eij touj eggista agrous kai eij taj kwmaj
"to the surrounding fields and to the villages"

Alexandrian and Byzantine Greek has:
eij touj kuklw agrous kai kwmaj
"to the surrounding fields and villages"

Mark 8:31

Old Syriac & Peshitta:
)rps Nmw )nhk ybr Nmw )#y#q Nm
"by the elders and by the chief priests and by the scribes"

Codex D:
upo twn presbuterwn kai apo twn arxierewn kai twn grammatewn
"by the elders and by the chief priests and the scribes"

Alexandrian and Byzantine Greek:
upo twn presbuterwn kai twn arxierewn kai twn grammatewn
"by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes"

Luke 2:34

Old Syriac & Peshitta:
)myqlw )tlwpml
"for fall and for rising"

Codex D:
eij ptwsin kai eij anastasin
"for fall and for rising"

Alexandrian and Byzantine Greek:
eij ptwsin kai anastasin
"for fall and rising"

Luke 2:52

Old Syriac:
)#n) ynb twlw )hl) twl
“with God and with the sons of man”

Codex D (Greek Western Type Text):
para qew kai para anqrwpoij
“with God and with men”

Alexandrian and Byzantine Greek Text Types:
para qew kai anqrwpoij
"with God and men"

Peshitta:
)#nynbw )hl) twl
“with God and men”

The following makes use of the SPTIBERIAN and SPIONIC Hebrew and Greek fonts which can be obtained freely from:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Heb-Aram-NT/files/

THE PARTICIPLE PHRASE

The second evidence for the Aramaic origin of the Greek Western type text of Codex D is its tendency to use two verbs where the later Greek text types use a participle construction. This is important because this type of use of a participle construction is common in Greek (and in English) but impossible in Aramaic.

The following is an example:

And having approached, the Tempter
said to him….
(Mt. 4:3 from Greek Alexandrian and Byzantine)

But this grammatical construction is impossible in Aramaic so when we look at the Aramaic we see the participle construction replaced by a normal verb and an “and” placed before the second verb as follows:

And he approached (to him) the Tempter
and said to him…
(Mt. 4:3 from Aramaic; portion in parenthesis is in OS only)

Wherever the Alexandrian and Byzantine Greek use the participle construction as shown above, the Aramaic has a normal verbal construction followed by “and” prefixed to the second verb as shown above.

Now one might wrongly take this as evidence that the NT had been written in Greek and that the Aramaic was translated from the Greek. On the surface it might appear that Mt. 4:3 is written in idiomatic Greek that an Aramaic translator had to adjust for the Aramaic language. (since the Aramaic could have been a natural translation of the Greek but the Greek could not have been translated literally from the Aramaic without being either a paraphrase or a more idiomatically Greek revision of an earlier Greek version).

But the key missing link is the very Semitic style of the Greek Western text type of Codex D.

The Aramaic reads:

Aramaic:
)snmd wh [htwl] brqw
…. hl rm)w

And approached (to him) he the Tempter
and said to him…
(Mt. 4:3 from Aramaic; portion in parenthesis is in OS only)

The primitive Western Greek text of Codex D translates the Aramaic literally with:

kai prochlqen o peirazwn
kai eipen autw

And approached (to him) he the Tempter
and said to him
(Mt. 4:3 from Western Greek of Codex D)

And the later Greek scribes revised this into more idiomatic Greek with:

kai proselqwn o peirazwn
eipen autw

And having approached, the Tempter
said to him
(Mt. 4:3 from Byzantine and Alexandrian Greek)

Now one example does not make a pattern. But we have more than one example. One can also cite LOTS of examples of this same pattern throughout the text of Codex D where the Alexandrian and Byzantine Greek use a participle construction and the Western Greek uses a normal verbal construction and adds an “and” before the second verb:

Mt. 4:3; 5:13; 9:28; 13:1, 4, 48; 17:7; 20:6, 30; 21:6; 25; 26:51; 27:58; 28:19
Mark 2:16; 4:36; 5:23; 8:10; 10:22; 12:20; 14:22
Luke. 5:14, 24; 8:27; 15:23; 19:5, 35
Jn. 6:11; 9:35; 11:17; 12:36

In addition, in some of the passages where the Greek Western text of Codex D does use the participle construction, the Western Greek STILL adds the “and” to the second verb, as if an earlier version had the normal verbal construction and had been revised to a less choppy participle construction but the reviser had neglected to remove the “and” from the second verb.

Examples may be found in:
Mt. 27:33
Mk. 2:1; Mk. 5:27; 6:48; 7:25; 8:10; 10:22; 11:2; 14:63; 15:46; 16:11, 15
Lk. 8:8; 9:6
Jn 12:3

This pattern of literal translation from the Aramaic in the Western type text and revision toward less choppy, more flowing Greek in the Alexandrian and Byzantine text types should forever satisfy those Aramaic Primacists who have expressed doubt that the Greek Western text of Codex D is the most primitive type of Greek text and, in fact, a “missing link” between the original Aramaic and the Alexandrian and Byzantine Greek text types.

The following makes use of the SPTIBERIAN and SPIONIC Hebrew and Greek fonts which can be obtained freely from:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Heb-Aram-NT/files/

THE RELATIVE PRONOUN

Another evidence for the Aramaic origin of the Greek Western type text of Codex D is that of the use of relative pronouns (some English relative pronouns are: this, that, those, these). Aramaic has no definite article (in English the definite article is “the”). As a result Aramaic makes more use of relative pronouns in order to compensate for its lack of a definite article. However Greek does have definite articles, making many of the relative pronouns in the Aramaic unnecessary in the Greek versions. Now as we examine the Greek Western text type of Codex D we find that yet another pattern develops. In many places where the Aramaic Old Syriac text uses a relative pronoun, Codex D retains the relative pronoun (often also adding a definite article) and then the Greek Alexandrian and Byzantine text types drop the relative pronoun which is not really needed in the Greek, and leave only a definite article. The following is a list of examples:

Mt. 15:24

Old Syriac:
Nylh )n(
"[the] flock, those"

Codex D:
ta probata tauta
"the sheep, those"

Alexandrian & Byzantine Greek:
ta probata
"the sheep"

Peshitta:
)br(
"[the] sheep"

Mt. 15:32

Old Syriac & Peshitta:
)nh )#nk
"This crowd"

Codex D:
ton oxlon touton
"the crowd, this"

Alexandrian and Byzantine Greek:
ton oxlon
"the crowd"

Mk. 8:2

Old Syriac and Peshitta:
)nh )#nk
"this crowd"

Codex D:
ton oxlou touton
“the crowd, this”

Alexandrian and Byzantine Greek:
ton oxlou
“the crowd”

Mk. 10:22

Old Syriac:
)tlm )dh
“this word”

Peshitta:
)dh )tlmb
“at this word”

Codex D:
toutw tw logw
“This the word”

Alexandrian and Byzantine Greek:
tw logw
“the word”

Luke 17:17

Old Syriac:
)rs( Nylh
“these ten”

Codex D:
outoi deka
“these ten”

Alexandrian and Byzantine Greek:
oi deka
“the ten”

CONCLUSION

The Western Greek text type of Codex D presents us with an important missing link in New Testament origins. The Greek Western text preserved in Codex D preserves much of the original Aramaic grammar of the original Aramaic New Testament which was later revised into grammar better suited to Greek in the other Greek text types and in the received Greek text. The importance of the Greek text of Codex D as a more direct witness to the original Aramaic text of the New Testament should not be ignored.

Textual Criticism of the
Semitic New Testament

by James Scott Trimm

A free e-book in PDF files at:

http://www.nazarene.net/hantri/FreeBook/AramaicTextualCriticism.htm

and the Hebraic Roots Version Website at: