![]() #VERSIONS OF THE BIBLE FREE#The Sahidic version is especially of importance for the study of the Septuagint, as it was made, it seems, from Greek manuscripts free from Hexapla influence. 398).Īll agree as to the great value of the Coptic versions. 150, then we must come down to the date of Demetrius as the earliest possible date of the version but if, as is more likely, the Christian religion had spread by means of the Nile immediately after it began to be preached in Alexandria and had already become infected by heretical anci semipagan superstitions in the second century, we may provisionally conclude from the character of the Sahidic version that it was made at that time” (“The Coptic Version of the New Testament in the Southern Dialect”, III, Oxford, 1911, p. If Christianity did not exist at all in Upper Egypt before A.D. Where history fails us, the internal character of the Sahidic supplies confirmation of a date earlier than the third century the traces of early mixture shown by the definite tinge of Western influence can hardly be explained except by reference to a date as early as possible. More emphatic still is Horner: “If, with Harnack, relying on Leipoldt we may conjecture, though we cannot prove, that the Sahidic version partly goes back to the third century, there seems some reason for supposing that need of a vernacular version arose as early as the time of Demetrius. 200, we shall be consistent with all extant evidence, and probably shall not be very far wrong” (“Textual Criticism of the New Testament“, 154, quoted by Budge in “Coptic Biblical Texts”, p. Kenyon goes one step further: “If, therefore, we put the origin of the Coptic versions about A.D. der christlichen Literaturen”, VII, 2, Leipzig, 1907, p. Leipoldt agrees that the Sahidic version was completed about A.D. However, in proportion as older manuscripts are discovered, and Coptic versions are submitted to a closer study, the pendulum of opinion is swinging back to the former view. of the Bible“, IV, 570) does not think that there is sufficient ground for believing that a Coptic version existed before the fourth century (see also Burkitt in Cheyne, “Encycl. On the other side Forbes Robinson (Hastings, “Dict. 67) concluded that some Coptic end of the second century. The present writer in his “Etude sur les versions coptes de la Bible” (Revue biblique, 1897, p. There is much discussion between specialists as to the age of the Coptic versions, especially as to which of them was made first. It is now considered certain that they were made independently and that their differences are to be traced to a difference between the Greek recensions from which they were translated. All of them are now incomplete, but there is hardly any reason to doubt that they once existed in their entirety. Versions.-There are versions of the Bible in all four dialects. Later (eleventh century?) when the Patriarch of Alexandria moved his residence from that city to Cairo, Bohairic began to drive out Sahidic and soon became the liturgical language of the Copts throughout Egypt. In the ninth century Bohairic was flourishing, in Northern Egypt, particularly in the Province of Bohairah (hence its name) southwest of Alexandria and in the monasteries of the Desert of Nitria, while Sahidic was spread throughout Upper Egypt or Sahid (hence the name of Sahidic) inclusive of Cairo, having already superseded Fayfimic in the Province of Fay-Om (ancient Crocodilopolis) and Akhmimic in the region of Akhmim (ancient Panopolis). But the fact is that no Bohairic manuscript and probably no Fayflmic manuscript is older than the ninth century, while some Sahidic and Akhmimic codices are apparently as old as the fifth and even the fourth century. The relative antiquity of these as literary idioms is much debated. The Coptic language is now recognized in four principal dialects, Bohairic (formerly Memphitic), Fayflmic, Sahidic (formerly Theban), and Akhmimic. This content was produced by Ask The UMC, a ministry of United Methodist Communications.Versions of the Bible, Coptic. The American Bible Society provides a brief description of popular Bible translations to help in choosing a Bible. However, writers are also free consult other versions or quote from them when doing so strengthens the teaching resource. When it comes to United Methodist teaching resources published by The United Methodist Publishing House in English, the Common English Bible (CEB ) and the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) are the preferred texts for curriculum, largely because these are the preferred versions of many of our pastors and teachers in the US. In practice, United Methodists affirm the usefulness of a number of translations and versions as being helpful for study, teaching, memorization and other purposes, since each sheds a slightly different light in translating or paraphrasing the original languages and manuscripts. Ask your questions and check out more FAQS. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |