Wicked or Righteous?
In the Greek of the Book of Romans, there is the following passage:
Romans 5:7
For one would hardly die for a righteous δικαιος (dikaios; righteous, upright, lawful, or just) man; though perhaps for the good αγαθος (agathos) man someone would dare even to die.
Arguably this progression is not logical. If someone is not willing to die for a “righteous man,” why would they be willing to die for a “good” man instead? Interestingly enough, within the Syriac Peshitta, we see that where the Greek reads δικαιος (righteous, upright, lawful, or just), the Aramaic reads רשעיא (rashe`yâ) which in the Syriac dialect means “wicked.” This in turn makes the text of the Peshitta read:
Nor one would hardly die for a wicked רשעיא man; though perhaps for a good טבא (tâbâ’; good) man someone would dare even to die.
This progression makes a greater deal of logical sense, however such a diversion from a well established textual tradition is rather bold. Why would the compilers of the Peshitta do this? The answer may be within the letter /ע/ (`ayin). In the Estrangelo, Madnyaha, and Serto Alphabets, the letter /ע/ looks almost identical to the letter /נ/ (nûn) except for a difference of a mere 20 to 30° on their respective stems.
If we deliberately confuse /ע/ for /נ/, we get the word רשניא (reshnâyâ’) which does not mean “wicked” but “righteous, justice, lawmaker, ruler, or leader.” This could have been easily translated as δικαιος (righteous, upright, lawful, or just), as it would have been the least absurd of the possible renderings.
ܪܫܥܝܐ
(rashe`yâ; “wicked”)
ܪܫܢܝܐ
(reshnâyâ’; “righteous”)
(If you have Syriac Uncode fonts installed with proper Open Type support, you should be able to see the above text.)
Within the context of this passage, however, רשעיא (wicked) is arguably a more authentic reading, as we can see in the verses that surround this part of the pericope, they author is building a logical progression:
Romans 5
6 For while we were yet weak, at the right time the Christ died for the ungodly. 7 For one will hardly die for a wicked man. Yet perhaps for a good man someone would even dare to die. 8 But God commends his own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
If δικαιος (righteous) were the original reading, then it would seem to miss the context of the author’s words. The connundrum of salvation, according to him, rests within the fact that the Christ came and died for those who were unrighteous, sinners, and ungodly, not those who were upright in the eyes of God. רשעיא (wicked), therefore, is fits this argument, completing the three lines of parallelism and building upon the author’s theological concept laid down in verse 6.
The weight of this particular quirk is certainly notable. We have the possibility of evidence that (1) the letter to the Romans came from an Aramaic source, but (2) even more importantly, this source may have been written in a particular family of Aramaic scripts. Given how young Estrangela would be at the authoring of this particular letter, more research is certainly in order.