The (arguably) original Aramaic commands of Christ

infoseeker26754
reply to post by yuppa

 

5th of Nov? What happened?

It's not wrong Yuppa; just twisted for Power! Care so shed some Light in this Dark?

I need to hear all so I can understand nothing. My path is bound by this my Friend.

I really need to edit it. It was a refrence to the gun powder plan and plot by guyfawkes. As For a answer to the twisting. I do not think it was twisted. Because only the peopel who were leaders even knew the languages and did not need to do so. For a very long time it worked.

reply to post by infoseeker26754

Your words were quite humbling and I sincerely do not feel worthy of such high compliment.

Just another seeker and lover of Truth, striving to see and walk with a Clarity by Grace through these darkly earthly corridors. Often what I have revealed on this site is based upon a testimony personally experienced and supported by the Word for veracity of Divine based confirmation. It is a labour of love in testifying to such Gifts by Spirit.

Keep, trusting, leaning and seeking our Creator in faith and the Rewards will See all such faithful and striving obedient through the intensifying challenges and storms.

I thank you for your display of virtue, all complimenting aside Your sentiment was touching to say the very least.

reply to post by Awen24

He might be a native Aramaic speaker, but as he himself highlights, this is a language that has been dead since the 13th Century. What are his credentials? What makes him a good candidate for translating the Scriptures? To whom is he held accountable? ...I can find very little about the guy online, which isn't exactly a stellar start. [edit] This Translation Comparison doesn't look very favourably on the Aramaic text. It ranks among the lowest translations in terms of preservation of the original meaning and intent of the text. www.cob-net.org...

Hi Awen, what credentials would be satisfying to you? He is not an 'establishment' man, and to me that is a stellar indication of a lack of affiliation bias, not to mention he bears the generous virtue to offer his work free online for students. As a general rule, it is wise to be extremely wary of ANYTHING promoted and funded (research grants, part of government based employment etc.) by the political/corporate/university mainstream machine structure. It is the dominion of devils here as the Word denotes and those who bear all the money and power influence in worldly 'authority' positions are more often than not the agents of the enemy, whether they are aware of the deceptions they are foisting upon mankind or not by the paymasters they obediently serve with agenda.

I hope this link by the translator below offers a little more perspective of his work and position. It should also hopefully clear up why that very minor example of translation did not appear literally accurate to the texts that author was referencing in comparison.
www.v-a.com...

In addition, maybe you might also be interested in reading some examples of 'church authority' interference in regard to Gospel based texts. Just food for thought, though there are many more examples of political based interference against release of the Truth within the Word.
www.aloha.net...

More information to discern against the position of the Greek as the 'original' source of Gospel, utilised by the KJV. As you well know, I lean with the Semitic as bearing the moreso authentic basis regarding the first transcribed Apostolic Church manuscripts.

It seems certain that, even with the presence and probable familiarity with a Palestinian Greek Old Testament at this time, the Lord Jesus Christ and the Apostles were still familiar with and used the Old Testament in Hebrew. The Lord makes statements in the Gospels which seem to explicitly show His day to day reliance upon the Old Testament in Hebrew, and that when He thought of them and referred to them, it was to the Hebrew. In one of His most incisive statements concerning Biblical preservation, the Lord said, "Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." (Matthew 5:17-18) In this statement, the Lord explicitly refers to the Hebrew scriptures. The jot is the smallest of the Hebrew letters, and a tittle is any of the small strokes which serve to differentiate between Hebrew letters which are orthographically the same. Both are unique to the Hebrew when taken in relation to the Greek, and His statement explicitly directs the reader, and at the time His listeners, to the Hebrew Old Testament, not the Greek. Further, when the Lord read the scriptures and expounded upon them in the synagogues (as, for example, in Luke 4:17-22), He must necessarily have done so from the Hebrew scrolls, as that language only has been used in the synagogical readings of the Scriptures, even up to the present. This view is supported by Bruce, who says, "When Jesus was about to read the second lesson in the Nazareth synagogue...it was most probably a Hebrew scroll that he received." 8 Thus, as the Lord Jesus used the Hebrew scriptures, it necessarily follows that He was using the Hebrew canon of 22 books as well, without the Apocrypha. As the claim to the presence of the Apocrypha in an "Alexandrian" canon is already dubious, even more so would be such a claim for the Hebrew canon amongst the Jews of Palestine, who had never been separated from their spiritual heritage after the return from the Babylonian exile. That the Lord makes reference to the explicit Hebrew canon is shown at several points in the Gospels. For instance, "That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar." (Matthew 23:35) In this passage, the Lord records a concise history of the persecution of righteous men of God for speaking the Word of Truth through the entirety of the Hebrew scriptures, with Abel being the first recorded (Genesis 4:8) to the last recorded, Zechariah the priest (II Chronicles 24:20-21). This apparent order follows the traditional ordering of the Hebrew books, starting with Genesis and ending with II Chronicles, whereas the Septuagintic order most commonly used ends with the book of Daniel, specifically with Bel and the Dragon. Further, the Lord commonly spoke of, and thus delineated, the Old Testament scriptures (the only ones present at the time of His earthly ministry) using the term "the Law and the Prophets", which encompassed both the Pentateuch and all the other Jewish canonical books (see Matthew 7:12, 11:13, 22:40, etc.) Likewise, on occasion He would fully delineate the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms, making individual reference to the Pentateuch, the earlier prophets, and the other writings (thus, the Tanak, see Luke 24:27-44). And at other times, such as Matthew 5:18, He used "the Law" as a term to encompass all of God's Word.

www.studytoanswer.net...

reply to post by BubbaJoe

The bible has been translated so many times. If it is the word of god, there would be one translation, not 100 different versions of it.

Our Creator allowed mankind the will to usurp His Creation and Gift of Inspiration.

We often do not abide with Instruction, for ever since the line of the Adams and Eves, we have borne a rebellion of heart, prey in this avenue of sin.

PrimeLight
reply to post by Awen24

 

Hi Awen, what credentials would be satisfying to you? He is not an 'establishment' man, and to me that is a stellar indication of a lack of affiliation bias, not to mention he bears the generous virtue to offer his work free online for students. As a general rule, it is wise to be extremely wary of ANYTHING promoted and funded (research grants, part of government based employment etc.) by the political/corporate/university mainstream machine structure. It is the dominion of devils here as the Word denotes and those who bear all the money and power influence in worldly 'authority' positions are more often than not the agents of the enemy, whether they are aware of the deceptions they are foisting upon mankind or not by the paymasters they obediently serve with agenda.

I hope this link by the translator below offers a little more perspective of his work and position. It should also hopefully clear up why that very minor example of translation did not appear literally accurate to the texts that author was referencing in comparison.
www.v-a.com...

Thanks for the reply - I appreciate it.
To clarify, I'm not particularly interested in attacking this guy, or his translation - but what I AM interested in is finding out whether the translation is worthwhile, whether it's verifiable, whether the translation is literal enough for my preference, and so on - information that I'm actually having difficulty finding on the site there (though the link you gave me helped - the 'confession' one).

One of the difficulties I have is that... when it comes to the Received Text, for example (I'm no KJV purist, I'm just using it as an example), we know what the texts are, what fragments have been used, and what the compilation of the text used as a starting point is. With Alexander, I don't see that kind of information provided.

What exactly is he translating? What is the year of that text's origin? ...and so on.

...because after all, if the text he's translating from (and he admitted himself on the site (as he should have, so kudos for that) that he spent a year and a half translating a Syriac translation from the 19th Century, inadvertently)) isn't close enough to the time of Christ, then who is to suggest that the accuracy and veracity of the text has been maintained?

Anyway - thanks for the links and additional info, I do appreciate it.
I've enjoyed reading the samples of the translation available on his site, too. It's certainly interesting to read what is essentially the same thing, but from a different linguistic perspective.

For yours is the Kingdom, the Power and the Glory to the end of the universe, of all the universes." Amen

I copied that from the part of the text that relates the Lords Prayer. I thought it was of interest when considering that scientists are now speculating the existence of parallel universes or "other" universes.

OP, you've done a fine job with this piece of work. I found it extremely interesting. And whatever people think about Christianity, (im not a follower, I believe religion has killed the true "spirit" of spirituality), if people did actually live by Jesus's commandments then the world would actually be a very groovy place.
Not much else to say sorry, I havnt woken up properly yet, only on my second cup of tea.

Hi Prime Light

Its a very long time since I studied the bible and read some of the other books not included in it. I have what my friends call a slightly odd feeling about the King James bible simply because I remember my history teacher told us that its was somewhat ironic for a man who decided to produce the bible for all to read to have acquired his throne by murder or at the very least having profited by murder. It simply doesn't quite sit right for me. I can't even remember who actually gave way for James to get the combined thrones of Scotland and England - unless this act was his atonement, I don't know.

I like your translation simply because for me its written to all humanity, not different sects of it. The best part of the translation for me is in the Lord's Prayer where one prays for serenity. I started to realise the power of serenity within one's spirit some time ago, but its hard to find at times with all that is going on and for so many the excruciating pressure most of us are being subjected to.

I would like to ask about the term Allaha. Is it a generic name for God. I often read comments that say that God and Allah are two different Gods? I have always instinctively felt that we cannot know God only his representatives through which he creates and nature functions. I also read recently that Christianity has more in common with `islam than would be 'comfortable' for most Christians to accept. I wondered if you had views of this?

reply to post by thedoctorswife

For yours is the Kingdom, the Power and the Glory to the end of the universe, of all the universes." Amen I copied that from the part of the text that relates the Lords Prayer. I thought it was of interest when considering that scientists are now speculating the existence of parallel universes or "other" universes.

I found it very very interesting that you pointed that verse out with inclusion here, because I was actually going to incorporate that 're-translated' Lord's Prayer into this thread (and use that same reference as example of likely censorship by influencing authorities that opted to keep their 'subjects' within specified bounds of knowledge in a 'hijacking' of the original Testaments). It is such examples that further leaned me into belief that this 'new' translation is one to be studied further. Joyed that you were Led to that also whilst seeking Truth and not membership within organised religion. There were other differences I noted also that rang moreso true to my being, however for the most part, I was aiming to keep my personal perspectives aside for this thread and to just share the links with content for those inclined to study and pray for a Leading throughout.

Thank you for your input and I am sure you can relate that we are Called to be the Church temple, living in Christ's Holy example (by faith and works in Grace).

In deed, if most did align with that narrow path, then this place would be much moreso a realm of Heaven and not this challenging earthly Testing ground.

reply to post by Shiloh7

I like your translation simply because for me its written to all humanity, not different sects of it. The best part of the translation for me is in the Lord's Prayer where one prays for serenity. I started to realise the power of serenity within one's spirit some time ago, but its hard to find at times with all that is going on and for so many the excruciating pressure most of us are being subjected to. I would like to ask about the term Allaha. Is it a generic name for God. I often read comments that say that God and Allah are two different Gods? I have always instinctively felt that we cannot know God only his representatives through which he creates and nature functions. I also read recently that Christianity has more in common with `islam than would be 'comfortable' for most Christians to accept. I wondered if you had views of this?

Hi Shiloh, I hesitate to get too deep into the more complex avenues, however I can express the most pertinent difference between the movements of Islam and Christianity is that one believes that 'Jesus' was a great teacher/messenger/healer and the other believes that He is part of the Godhead, Divinely Resurrected to the Right Hand of the Father. According to my knowledge, Islam is awaiting their messiah, whom based upon such denials is rumoured to be the antichrist (imitator) figure of Revelation that is written will deceive the nations further into greater Apostasy.

Understand your questioning of kings and rulerships also as most worldly powers are placed in their seats by the various unseen 'hidden hands' in power as their public 'figureheads' and selected via their 'serpentine' genetically corrupted bloodline. Those 'elitist' flesh beings born into such bloodlines, are Called to a Repentance in equality to all children by the one I simply prefer to call Father.

I started to realise the power of serenity within one's spirit some time ago, but its hard to find at times with all that is going on and for so many the excruciating pressure most of us are being subjected to.

Indeed the Kingdom can be harbored within before it's Return upon this earth and there is nothing of the flesh that cannot be conquered in the Good Spirit of Christ, our Hope for Means of Redemption.

Glad that there are elements that speak to your soul also within the translations as they did to my being also.

reply to post by Awen24

Anyway - thanks for the links and additional info, I do appreciate it.

You're most welcome.

What exactly is he translating? What is the year of that text's origin? ...and so on. ...because after all, if the text he's translating from (and he admitted himself on the site (as he should have, so kudos for that) that he spent a year and a half translating a Syriac translation from the 19th Century, inadvertently)) isn't close enough to the time of Christ, then who is to suggest that the accuracy and veracity of the text has been maintained?

In reading from his quote below...

One of the mistakes that I made at the very beginning was assuming that the modern Syriac translation of the P'#ta was authentic work of translating. This misconception set me back about a year and a half. At first the mistake depressed me, but later it turned into an unexpected advantage. I became familiar with the evolution of the Aramaic language. I had already translated the Gospels of Mark and Matthew, in that order. Then I had a conversation one day, with an old Church of the East priest. I told him that I had been translating the Bible from Syriac into English, for the sake of sharing the authentic Aramaic Bible with my American friends and English speaking people. At this time he did not say very much, except for smiling what I thought was approval. At a later meeting, he asked me what I was doing. I said that I was still translating the Bible. Then he had to tell me. He said, "The Syriac is all wrong!" Talk about being shocked! I had just finished translating Matthew and was getting ready to translate John. I had already translated Mark, before I met him the first time. I asked him, "Wasn't the Syriac translated from the ancient tongue?" The Church of the East is an Ashurai Church, and we do not use the term Aramaic. This is a modern-day designation. "Aramaic" really evolved from the language of the Ashurai, the people of Mesopotamia. He said, "No, the Syriac version was translated by the Protestants and Catholics from the Greek versions." I asked him, still incredulous, "You mean, no one has translated the ancient tongue original at all?" He said, "No." Then I purchased a copy of the official Ancient Church of the East New Testament Book from him. I began reading Mark, and later Matthew. I was amazed. It was different! It took me a while to recover emotionally. I had spent one and half years of my life translating the two Gospels from what I thought was the authentic Ancient Aramaic transcription into modern Syriac. Now I found out that I had been translating from a 19th century Syriac translation of what I finally determined was really a Syriac translation of mostly an English version. This 1897 Syriac version that I had, was translated in Urmi, Iran, by American and English missionaries with the help of proselytized Ashurai Christians.

It outlines that the 19th century Syriac version was apparently translated from the Greek texts also in rejecting. The project now involved translating directly from the ancient Aramaic Church of the East texts rendered from the early Apostolic period (transcribed disciple writings circa up to 100 AD), and without allegiance to any formally subscribed denominational influence.

PrimeLight

It outlines that the 19th century Syriac version was apparently translated from the Greek texts also in rejecting. The project now involved translating directly from the ancient Aramaic Church of the East texts rendered from the early Apostolic period (transcribed disciple writings circa up to 100 AD), and without allegiance to any formally subscribed denominational influence.

...this is the part I'm struggling with. "Ancient Aramaic Church of the East texts"?
What texts are those? He bought this in book form... what indication do we have that these texts are accurate, or even that they were written around the time of Christ? I don't know what fragments or texts he's referring to, and google doesn't seem to be helping!

reply to post by Awen24

what indication do we have that these texts are accurate, or even that they were written around the time of Christ?

What indication do we have that ANY texts received through history are accurate, including all our 'scientific' based findings (where we do not personally have the means to test and determine 'facts' for ourselves) funneled into consciousness? Is it because people with 'worldly credentials' told us so that we blindly accept? Were we present when these elements were passed on to be witness also in opportunity for closely determining the quality of men that deliver such 'passed on' knowledge?

We are always to first and foremost trust directly in our Creator's (Representing all that is True and Righteous) Guidance at all times in matters of unveiling, with our sincere faith in Him duly Rewarded, for there are too many snares and snarers to count now with ALL the major influential organised churches at this late hour that have already been corrupted and infiltrated by the enemy powers. Specific Judgement has been reserved just for them whom have led so many souls astray and whom will 'serve' to unify as idol worshiping abominations in whoring with the antichrist (all Foretold and manifesting).

The ancient church of the east was stated to be the FIRST formally established church by the discipleship after the Resurrection, therefore it's aspects of the Gospel are said to be penned directly by those first hand witnesses whom walked side by side with our Messiah.

The Christian Church was established by the Apostles around 33 A.D. The Apostles spread around the world to preach Christianity, and became the first Patriarchs of the Christian Church in Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, Rome and Constantinople. And so the Grace of the Holy Spirit passed from the Apostles to each new Patriarch after the Apostles died. All five Patriarchs (Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, Rome and Constantinople) formed the New Testament and held councils to decide different issues in the Church. But around 1054 the Patriarch of Rome changed the words of the Nicean Creed and declared that he had power over all of the other Patriarchs. When he was not recognized as the supreme leader, he excommunicated the Patriarch of Constantinople. Immediately the Patriarch of Constantinople called together the Patriarchs of Jerusalem, Antioch, and Alexandria, and they all agreed to excommunicate the Patriarch of Rome. The Patriarch of Rome lost the Grace of the Holy Spirit and broke off to make his own Church, the Roman Catholic Church. The other Patriarchs stayed true and united to the True Church of Christ and later came to be known as the Eastern Orthodox Church. Therefore, the Eastern Orthodox Church is the first church that stays true to the teachings of Christ.

Acts 11:20-26 supports aspects of the above.
20 However, some of these, men from Cyprus and Cyrene, when they arrived at Antioch, began speaking to the Greeks too, proclaiming the Good News of the Lord Yeshua. 21 The hand of the Lord was with them, and a great number of people trusted and turned to the Lord. 22 News of this reached the ears of the Messianic community in Yerushalayim, and they sent Bar-Nabba to Antioch. 23 On arriving and seeing for himself the grace of God at work, he was glad; and he encouraged them all to remain true to the Lord with their whole hearts; 24 for he was a good man, full of the Ruach HaKodesh and trust. 25 Then Bar-Nabba went off to Tarsus to look for Sha'ul; 26 and when he found him, he brought him to Antioch. They met with the congregation there for a whole year and taught a sizeable crowd. Also it was in Antioch that the talmidim for the first time were called "Messianic."

It all comes down to faith and trusting the Holy Spirit that is with all genuine seekers obedient to the first two most vital Commands to aid their discernment. If anything 'pricks' at you heavily within the texts as being wrong intuitively, then pray about it. I do not place full faith in any man to be 100% infallible in interpretation and translation in this 'end times' day and age so heavily aligned to the beast system. Take what is of the Good and discard the rest in any seeking pursuits you bear in a love for our Creator---Whom has Called all above the age of accountability to the Truth in a spiritually and physically dangerous world steeped in lies. The avenue of Truth is not for the lazy, the lovers of the worldly path and the faint hearted at all---and the Father knows all our hearts to both reward and punish deed, performed in good spirit or otherwise.

Know though that our Father is in control at all times, and that all the garbage that we now wade through is due to the willful mass sins amounted by errant children Granted will toward so much gross selfish rebellion from the precepts of Obedience to Virtue. We loved our sin so much, that we have as a whole, on a global consciousness level been given over to it's power. This is why the beast of persecution will rise to such heights before being torn usunder by Grace.

The willing Sacrifice of Christ is a Bridge to Reconciling in a purity with the Truth we so often forsake.

reply to post by PrimeLight


It would be interesting if you could go into further detail with each command to further explore in a refining our understanding.

I believe that this thread is hugely pertinent to our walk in faith and in a growing wisdom. Don't want to see it disappear as I do believe it is one of the most important threads here.

reply to post by Egyptia

That would be quite the endeavor to essay, though it would certainly be a good work of faith for any adepts in the Word willing to take it on.

Could be worthwhile to seek an online resource prior to see if such has been done before freely for the public. Certainly would be a worthy thread for seekers/students in Christ.

Still looking forward to some more compilation of testimony from you--just noticed your efforts in that your previous post.