The Original Aramaic Gospels in Plain English. (An American Translation of the Aramaic New Testament). Translated (with notes and commentary) by Rev. Second, I want to thank Rotchy Barker, who was my first trading mentor. He took me into his Page How the Turtle W. The Aramaic English Interlinear New Testament Color Edition Volume 1 - Ebook download as PDF File .pdf), Text File .txt) or read book online. The Aramaic.
|Language:||English, Arabic, Japanese|
|ePub File Size:||29.34 MB|
|PDF File Size:||12.82 MB|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Registration needed]|
Description. The Aramaic English New Testament (AENT) 5th Edition [PDF] is a literal translation of the very oldest known Aramaic New Testament texts. This is. Aramaic English New Testament (AENT) Study Bible Software Apps, PDF, Language of Yeshua (Jesus), available now from Netzari Press. Original & accurate. download The Aramaic–English Interlinear New Testament - Color edition eBook ( PDF), Pages Thank you for sharing this in pdf for free!.
The Holy Spirit would not speak of Joseph as the father of Yeshua. The Critical Greek agrees with The Peshitta reading here. The Majority Greek text agrees with The Peshitta here. All Greek mss. It looks like a loan word from the Greek which had been incorporated into Aramaic. A tetrarch ruled a fourth of a country give or take a little.
The Peshitta has no verb at all here. It looks like that may be explained on the basis of the Aramaic of The Peshitta. The Aramaic form used here is a noun. There are some loan words in practically every language borrowed from neighboring or conquering countries.
All the Greek mss. This comports with the idea of the Greek being a translation of the Aramaic. Majority Greek. The Greek. The words of verses are from Isaiah That is less precise and leaves much more room for mischief in interpretation. The Aramaic is even more definite than the Greek. To take the Greek phrase. The LXX is lacking the verse of 1 Chronicles 1: The Greek of Luke. Joseph was a descendant of David. The genealogy of Mary is given in Matthew 1: The Aramaic reading is much more precise and definite: The loose Greek construction is construed by some to refer to Jesus.
This form is used throughout the Greek genealogy to indicate sonship.
aqs le aqs aqswp
Luke 3: It is playing too fast and loose with language and logic to be credible. It is not. See note on this at the end of the chapter. If Joseph were not descended from Heli. Mary descended from Solomon.
The Aramaic English Interlinear New Testament Color Edition Volume 1
And he was accounted the son of Joseph. Hebrew mss. Her name is in Matthew 1: Blue Greek words are. Bar Matthat. The two are definitely not the same. And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age. That is her genealogy. One would expect precision in such a case. These are practically all the names that differ in the two languages. Hebrew and Aramaic.
As such. Practically all of these may be explained as different transliterations and interpretations of the Aramaic letters in The Peshitta. The Greek is imprecise. All the other names found in The O.
Of the total We should expect a Semitic genealogy for all those Semitic names. In The Peshitta. Even the numbers of its words and letters point to a Divine author. There was also some revision of the Greek. The Assyrians imposed the language on all subjects of the Assyrian empire from the ninth century B. The Aramaic language was spoken by the Aramaeans Syrians and the Assyrians.
Aramaic which meaneth. Joh 1: Luke 8: It also indicates that the Greek word didaskale. Teacher Greek. Strongs Greek-English Lexicon has: In the parallel passage Mark 4: Where abidest thou? This is a plain indication that the Greek text is a translation of an Aramaic source. That is probably why the Greek transliterates it instead 18 times in Greek letters: English Lexicon 1 any sort of superintendent or overseer Compare Luke 8: The Aramaic text gave rise to the Greek reading.
A master was not necessarily a Rabbi. And she turned. Epistata occurs 7 times matching Rabbi. It is also a formal title for the clergyman leader of a synagogue. All of these Greek translations and transliterations are evidence supporting an Aramaic original.
The Greek words didaskalov. Aramaic and Hebrew share the same alphabet and both were written with the same script. The Peshitta has. Much better. The Greek could derive from the Aramaic. That is not a convincing reading when compared to The Peshitta reading. The Latin Vulgate seems to have been translated from a slightly different Greek ms. The Critical Greek P This is the only place where the word is found in any Greek writing. The Critical Greek text agrees with The Peshitta reading and word order exactly.
It looks as if The Peshitta book of Luke is pretty much in line with the other Peshitta Gospels in numbers of occurrences per text size. The Peshitta Gospels seem to be fairly consistent in the usage of the 0ame.
Greek This can be explained in one of two ways: Aramaic Mark and John is 1. The Greek values have a mean of 0. Another statistic to consider is the number of occurrences of the name per total words of text Peshitta Yeshua. Peshitta reading Greek reading in Aram. If the Greek is original. Adding 77 occurrences of Ihsouv to the Greek book of Luke the difference in the numbers of The 0ame between the two versions would put Greek Luke on a par with the other Gospels with regard to the 0ame frequency.
It would be much easier to misread such a word than to miswrite it. They do not look as similar in that script. The average for the other 3 Gospels is 1. That is a rather radical variation. Might this strange similarity explain the Greek reading?
One could probably easily be mistaken for the other. Square Aramaic: If The Peshitta is the original. Matthew Greek The Peshitta in Luke has Yeshua. On the other hand. The average for Matthew. That is not a likely event for a sober scribe. There are many examples like this one which I point out in this interlinear of the Gospels.
Luke used it only once in every words! That is less than half the frequency of the others.
O Daniel. The Peshitta has statistics which support its originality.
The other Gospel writers used it once for every words. Jos 8: His in place of the other half? Was Luke ashamed of the 0ame of His Lord? I think not I think the Greek primacy theory fails its proponents here. I have demonstrated this in a controlled experiment which I have included in my book.
The Aramaic English Interlinear New Testament Color Edition Volume 1
And another from Joshua 9: Why would an original inspired Gospel of Ihsouv contain Ihsouv Jesus only half as often as the other Gospels and substitute! The Peshitta does not. Below is a sample verse of the Aramaic text of Daniel 6: The above are three of many examples of the LXX dropping words from the original. The Hebrew book of Joshua has occurrences of the name of Joshua eswhy. The original Aramaic. Jos 9: Divine Contact.
Here is an example from Joshua 8: The Aramaic is quite clear. The Majority Greek text agrees with the Peshitta here. It was where 0ahum The Prophet had lived centuries before. Surely He was indicating He was about to change her sorrow into joy by some almost unimaginable means. The Greek versions contain those very errors: All the pertinent words for the above groups are Greek nouns.
Luke 6: This makes for great drama but very poor logic. Our Lord and The Holy Spirit would not speak so.
The poor are those who are in expectation. To receive the gospel message is as great a miracle as raising the dead. To be given good news or given hope. Jesus the Messiah.
They were henceforth rich men and women. Christ is not a hoping for glory. Tit 2: It gives sight to the blind. Col 1: That was the good news. In a word. Heb 6: Jer The following scriptures speak of hope as the very thing hoped for. Pr Most hopes men hold. It is the miracle of the ages. The past tense is the best for these people whom He had healed or resurrected: He is the Glory for which we hoped. It is giving. Hope is. Heb 7: This confirms again that the Greek texts come from the Aramaic Peshitta.
What does occur in 22 places. The Greek versions have wta. Tau is the last. I have identified approx. Omega code on the part of the original Greek translator. Most Aramaic nouns have the same form in plural as in singular. Alep is the first letter of the Aramaic alphabet. If atxrp were seen as the code word. See Mat. Can it be a coincidence that the Aramaic alphabet Alep to Tau has 22 letters?
The combination may be reversed in some places. One hearing ear is sufficient to receive the message. It also implies that the Greek text generally is a translation. According to the Greek of John 1: If The Peshitta were a translation.
Who preached and performed miracles in its streets. They rejected The Messiah Yeshua. That was their exaltation to Heaven.
Capernaum no longer exists today. The latter is a much more tenable position. When ye pray. In this and in many other similar comparisons. Thy kingdom come. And he said unto them. Hallowed be thy name. Give us day by day our daily bread. Which is more likely? Consider the following: In The Hebrew OT. It is also synonymous with adas. This looks like sabotage to me. Matthew Acts It is definitely a reference to Jesus. Leaves one a bit flat. All others refer to demons. On the basis of a Greek original.
And bring us not into temptation. Whom Paul was preaching to the Greeks. Why would a translator assuming a Greek original translate Daimonion twice as Sheda in verse 14 and then change it to Deeva twice in the next verse? All four references are in the same context.
Deeva-Sheda for each of the four occurrences of the Greek! I do believe the good eye-evil eye concepts involve much more than generosity and stinginess. Verse 41 would seem to validate that view in connection with verses Yes I say to you. He tells us in verse 7. He does want us to fear ourselves. We should fear Self. Her answer was simply. The power to commit sin logically indicates the power to do right.
I would not? The lesson is illustrated by the animal world: Who of us can do that by our efforts? That is a small thing. We believe we can do the great thing but not! These activities illustrate the care our Lord? The fact is. Our Lord does not challenge us to add a cubit 18 inches to our stature by worrying.
What has He to do with convention and the ways of the world 26 you Nwtna can do Nyxksm the small thing atrwez not al even Pa but Nyd if Na do you Nwtna take pains Nypuy the rest akrs over le why?
The people of the world worship and serve Mammon. I like that so much more than the conventional Greek based translations: This does not mean. The world seeks temporal things by their laboring for them..
If they would labor for the eternal. The Jewish leaders regularly insisted that Jesus violated the law of Moses by healing on the Sabbath. Such an error is possible. This is the word our Lord uses against him. They all seem to agree with the interlinear text I provide above. The scribe would have had to have meant to write yhnml and written yxnml instead.
I can find no evidence of any such reading in any Peshitta manuscript. As you can see. The Peshitta has no demonstrable errors of the hand or eye. In the words of C. Stand ye in the ways.
Jer 6: In returning and rest shall ye be saved. He speaks as the Deity of Israel and His words are: Zec 1: Thus saith the LORD of hosts. You will not see me. We will not walk therein. In my opinion. But they said. Turn ye now from your evil ways. The Holy One of Israel.
Many Greek variants can be so explained. The Majority Greek text. Which Greek text? Codex Beza D of the 6th cent. The Peshitta agrees with the Majority Greek text. In verse Where is the Greek text that can account for these different readings in three consecutive verses. The Peshitta agrees with the Critical Greek text. The Peshitta can in this way account for all Greek texts. The Majority Greek agrees with The Peshitta here. The Romans occupied Israel at this time.
Jesus Yeshua is missing in all Greek texts. What business had the Jews of Israel with Greek drachmas? It would contain the Jewish coins of the time. Aaaygod with one Alep still has the same meaning: All Peshitta mss. The Peshitta O. The Greek texts in this verse have Batouv.
Since the translator knew this word was of Hebrew origin. The Aramaic word is Nyrtm. It is more likely the Greek was translated from the Aramaic than vice versa. Grey shaded words are not found in most or any Greek mss. It is safe to say that our Lord Yeshua held to the infallibility of scripture and understood that to include the idea that even in His time. It was an apparent reference to the Massoretic scribal tradition of precision in copying scripture going back to the first century and before.
The Jewish people had repudiated Greek culture altogether. Two late Greek mss. They would not have been able to read them and it would have been an insult to their conscience to learn Greek. P75 2nd-3rd Cent. It was for Him Divinely inspired. Our Lord held a very high view of The Hebrew Bible.
All of these are symbols. W -most Greek mss. In every place. It is ludicrous to assume the original Gospels. In Matthew 5: We can place all confidence in it. The primary instruments in effecting that great transformation would be a cross and a tomb: He saw the Word of God as more sacred than all creation.
He lays down a new law. They were to be universal and eternal events. He lays down His law in the Gospels. Paul The Apostle explains this all later in his great epistles.
That law follows in verse We have His Word on it. Only The Peshitta has this reading. Greek omits verse Only Codex D and about 40 late miniscules and lectionaries contain it. The Latin Vulgate contains it in verse The idea of needing someone to push a man into the kingdom of God is unnatural and ridiculous. He asked of his own initiative and was told what he must do. Who is the subject pushing the rich man into the Kingdom of God? Surely if it were God. The real subject or subjects in that scenario is unnamed and unknown and is seen as pushing a rope and then a man through a very small opening.
I have read and rejected the translation.
A camel can move under its own power. Did he mean. All other Greek and Latin texts have it. A camel driver may be seen as pushing his camel to try squeezing him through the eye of a needle. A camel and a rich man are both living active agents capable of initiating and performing action.
The rope hypothesis only encourages rebellion. Our Lord used the same verb in the previous verse. Either he fits and can make it on his own or he does not belong there. It did not take long to occur. But He told Caiaphas the High Priest. Yeshua Meshikha was not a Greek and did not have a Greek name.
Many need to rethink their Eschatology and interpretation of prophecy.
But the Greek mss. Or see my note at John He was an Israeli Jew who spoke Aramaic and had an Aramaic name. See Acts Is not John 1: John 1: Does not Greek John 1: The Peshitta lacks the underlined portions of the two verses. That fact should give us serious pause and cause some serious contemplation of the immensity of His suffering and death on the cross and His resurrection. A table of weights and values is presented for comparisons: He is. The Greeks had no such word for their coins.
The Greek mna. A silver mina was 60 shekels.. There were three different standards of currency however: There was the gold standard. That was the Aramaic language. A gold talent was much more valuable than the silver. Translations delete information from the original; they do not create it, generally, and The Greek 0T throughout contains thousands fewer bits of data than The Peshitta 0T. It was similar to modern import duties. The Greek is incorrect here and the Aramaic is flawless.
In what first century culture were sons given in marriage? Of which Greek text or manuscript is The Peshitta a translation? Again, the Greek is incorrect and The Peshitta is flawless. Some have concluded from the Greek that people are gender neutral in the glorified state in Heaven. The Peshitta nowhere suggests that. Where did The Peshitta get this, if it is a translation of Greek?
Kylgr tyxt Kybbdleb Myoad amde Lu Heb 1: Acts 2: This shows four things: The Peshitta does not translate the Greek readings. In Mark That means the Greek readings may be derived from The Aramaic, but not vice versa. This is not a reasonable scenario for an Aramaic translation from Greek. All the data support a Greek translation from a Peshitta base. I show this because the word order is different here from the edition used in this interlinear, and may explain the difference in the Greek readings of the verse.
The 4th century Greek ms. This is closer to the Eastern Peshitta than to the Western. Practically all other Greek mss. Glenn David Bauscher. It was not pretending that was the problem. Chapter 21 1 those Nylya at the rich aryteb Yeshua ewsy but Nyd gazed rx their offerings Nwhynbrwq of treasure azg in the house tyb were wwh who casting Nymrd The Greek mss.
These facts lead me to believe that the Vaticanus manuscript is a translation of the Aramaic text according to the Eastern Peshitta and that the Majority Greek text is translated from the Western Peshitta text.
If The Son is at the right hand of The Father. Mark and Luke in The Peshitta have. With the Pharisees.
New Testament written in Aramaic
The Peshitta Old Testament also retains the correct reading in this and all the other places where the reading was later changed in Hebrew mss. The Father cannot be at the right hand of The Son. The Peshitta of Matthew The circumstances were different from the account of Matthew. There are very few differences between the two Peshittas. My understanding of Hebrew exposition is that the first verse of a Psalm signifies the whole Psalm. The Greek text of Matthew This may seem to be a contradiction in The Peshitta 0T.
Why did the Massoretes do this? Beats me. Psalm This is surely a defect in the Greek 0T in several places such as: Who is certainly Divine. I here translate it in the Divine sense. And the bread which I shall give. John 6: I am The Living God. The Holy Spirit alone can bring this home to the heart and soul and compel the mouth to confess it. In all major Greek texts. See how The Peshitta text accounts for this: Some day.
The Critical Greek text agrees with The Peshitta. Codex D often does agree more closely though by no means consistently with The Peshitta than do the major Greek texts. Reason will dictate that the latter is far more likely than the former. All these Greek texts are thus demonstrated to be probable translations of The Peshitta in this verse.
Old Syriac agrees with The Peshitta reading. One Greek ms. What is His 0ame and why all the persecution? His 0ame. The Greek translator appears to have mistaken the Aramaic hlbwql for hlwbql. The Critical Greek agrees better with The Peshitta word order.
D also has numerous strange. Paul would later write: Paul Younan. The Son of Man comes to us. An original text should have more such idioms than a translation would. The Greek is quite different. The translator would tend to simplify them and render a text that is simpler than the base text and simpler than an original text in the translation language. That a Greek translator simply dropped it is much easier to believe and support. Clouds often signify trouble and turbulence. And with each of these three gifts: The Son of Man is revealed and present.
Why in the name of Sam Hill would a translator add such a phrase? They are quite numerous. I do not accept the notion that The Peshitta writers were translating anything.
The Greek text is translated from The Peshitta. The Deity would comprise that glory. Would a translator add this to the text? I think not. Wherever there is despair or sorrow. All Aramaic words highlighted in purple in this interlinear are idioms. If the Greek were to be translated into Aramaic. I owe this observation to native Aramaean. This and other such statements demand that we reassess our doctrine of prophesy-eschatology.
He never changes. The Greek texts have the abbreviated form. Futurists need to go back to the words of The Son of God and rethink their prophecy schemes. Our Lord was not speaking of a future generation. Is this not tantamount to declaring times that the Greek 0T is a translation of an Aramaic original? Codex D 6th cent. According to the Greek mss. How about the name of The Messiah.
This Aramaic word occurs 29 times in the Greek 0T.
So it is then in the some places where Petrov occurs in The Greek 0T. Easter That should tip off the reader that The Greek 0T is a translation. I Corinthians and Hebrews. And if the name is a translation in those places. I include it here. The reader may also be interested to know that this writer has found several long Bible codes in this edition which span the entire 0T. I cannot believe they were simply invented and added by a Greek translator. They were in the original Peshitta manuscript in order to occur in all Greek mss.
If one letter were added or deleted from the In John 5: The Greek sometimes translates names. If The Peshitta were translated centuries later in Syria or a country other than Israel.
An original text in the original language of the country would have the original names of the towns and people of that country in the same language and forms familiar to the people who lived there. Several old Greek mss.
Vulgate 4th cent. B 4th cent. Armenian 5th cent. Old Syriac Curetonian 5th cent. Itala 4th cent.. In fact. In regular Hebrew-Aramaic they are y. That means it is highly unlikely any Greek reading was translated into the Peshitta reading. The difference between the two Greek readings is twenty one Greek letters. The Peshitta has a Lexical Density ratio of vocab. These I highlight in red below. He wants a single straightforward document in front of him to translate.
Waw is simply longer on the down stroke. I sent for you to him Majority Greek: Aramaic syntax and sentence structure for that to be the case. In the square Aramaic of Dead Sea Scroll script. N is called a final 0un.. It is too plain a document and uncluttered with variant readings. That is what I believe happened with the Majority Greek translation.
The Critical Greek can be more easily explained: So it would be much easier to account for both Greek readings on the basis of an Aramaic base. But I will show how the Greek texts may have gotten their readings from the Aramaic: The Critical Greek: Rotherham The Latin Vulgate: The Majority Greek text contains it.
The Old Syriac also contains the phrase. May God! The Messiah was an evil doer like the two robbers crucified with Him! How can anyone who has sincere faith in Messiah countenance such blasphemies in supposedly inspired Bible texts?! There is a world of difference. Can such witnesses as these be trusted to testify truly to the very words of God Himself when they omit and distort the plainly inspired utterances of our Savior and LORD such as this one?
If these words be not inspired of The Holy Spirit. Old Syriac adds. If they were bilingual in Aramaic and Greek. His name was not Greek. It says. John uses the phrase several times: It does not say. That would not be so if Greek were a second language there. Practically no one had a Greek name in Israel. Emmaus was 7. Does that not support the premise that the Greek text is a translation and that the original was Aramaic?
Hard to tell the difference. The clincher in this kind of Aramaic-Greek variation is that we do not find that the Aramaic can be explained by a possible slight difference between two Greek words which differ significantly in meaning [i.
As it stands. One Old Latin ms. The Peshitta has the same word there that it has here in v. Thus it is very difficult to support that The Greek was original and a hypothetical Peshitta translator miswrote his translation as dyqy instead of ryqy. The Peshitta was copied by scribes trained in their art in Monasteries to be exact and to uphold the Massoretic tradition of verifying and making notes of all variants and spelling irregularities observed.
The data support the concept that The Greek text is a translation of The Aramaic. The Greek tradition was not nearly as rigorous and precise. Internal evidence also supports the Peshitta reading. We find the converse. That seems highly unlikely. Textual Criticism seems to have run amuck and to be without accountability toward rhyme or reason.
He is risen and returned victorious from the greatest war ever waged The war against sin. That is the proper effect of The Messiah and His word upon the human spirit. Let us not walk in unbelief and sadness as they did. In The Name of Yeshua. Thus says The Peshitta Amen. Old Syriac is not Peshitta omit. If we read and believe. He has won that war for all time and eternity.
He Who walked with the two on the road to Emmaus walks with us. We must celebrate and worship Him Whose Name is above every name. Chapter 1 Verse 1: Genesis 1: This may seem odd and out of order for most people who have been reading English translations, though this is actually the original order of the Hebrew Bible with the exception of Daniel, which is sometimes placed among the Writings.
The goal in creating LEV was four-fold. Restore proper nouns. All too often Biblical terms and names are altered in English Bibles to an Anglicized pronunciation.
For the LEV however, these names are restored back to a more proper transliteration. This leads into the most important names of all: the Names of our Creator and His Son. These Names are very rarely ever translated or transliterated correctly in modern Bibles.
This retains their proper Names, without causing dogmatic debate over pronunciation. There is always translational bias. The LEV seeks to remove as much bias as possible.Jesus the Messiah. Re More evidence of an Aramaic original. The Greek could derive from the Aramaic. But Ps. And he said unto them. These are so common however. Square Aramaic: The first Aramaic word is abtk.