Assyrian Forums
 Home  |  Ads  |  Partners  |  Sponsors  |  Contact  |  FAQs  |  About  
 
   Holocaust  |  History  |  Library  |  People  |  TV-Radio  |  Forums  |  Community  |  Directory
  
   General  |  Activism  |  Arts  |  Education  |  Family  |  Financial  |  Government  |  Health  |  History  |  News  |  Religion  |  Science  |  Sports
   Greetings Shl盲ma B盲rev Dzez S盲ludos Gr眉脽e Sh盲lom 围伪喂蟻蔚蟿喂蟽渭慰委 袩褉懈胁械褌褋褌胁懈褟 闂 路 Bonjour 路 鎸ㄦ嫸 鬲亘乇蹖讴丕鬲  Selamlar 啶呧き啶苦さ啶距う啶 Groete 丕賱鬲賾丨賷賾丕鬲

Whats the difference?

Archived: Read only    Previous Topic Next Topic
Home Forums Peshitta Topic #886
Help Print Share
Dean
 
Send email to DeanSend private message to DeanAdd Dean to your contact list
 
Member:
Member Feedback

What抯 the difference?

Feb-14-2002 at 04:09 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

Last edited by Dean on Feb-14-2002 at 08:47 AM (GMT3)

Shlama Akhay,

Michael (judge) brought up the question in another post 朩hat difference does the Aramaic New Testament make?

There is a rather important reason why the existence and survival of the Aramaic New Testament is crucial and foundational to the message of Christianity as a whole and the difference it makes. Now, this difference (as akhi Paul rightly stated) is not so much an issue of salvation or even understanding the basic message of the bible. Rather it抯 about the credibility of the claims of Christianity and a much-needed correction in the understanding of the context and connection under which Christianity (or more correctly stated, 揗essianity) was first proclaimed!

Firstly, lets remember some of the last words of the last OT prophet.

Malakhi 4:4-5 揜emember the law of Moses My servant, even the statutes and ordinances which I commanded him in Khoreb for all Israel. 揃ehold, I am going to send you Eliyah the prophet before the coming of the great day of YHWH

There was virtual silence for about 400 years between the last prophet of the OT era and the words of Mattai 1:1 which begins to proclaim THE most important event in world history -the coming of Meshikha and the beginning of the fulfillment of all that GOD promised throughout Tanakh times. From Bereshit to Malakhi (or Bereshit to Chronicles-however you reckon it) GOD unfolded, among other things, specific information about WHO HE IS and WHO HE IS NOT. GOD used very specific names, titles and descriptive names about HIMSELF so as to not create confusion as it is written, 揻or God is not a God of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints (1 Corinthians 14:33)

Now imagine this, the last voice from Tanakh times (Malakhi) encourages the readers to basically remember who GOD is (YHWH) and what He did (reveal himself through Moses). But according to Greek Primacist and the GNT and the majority position of Christianity the world over, this same GOD in Malakhi enters the scene in the so-called original, divinely-inspired Greek Gospels calling himself Theos, Kurios, Iezeus Xristos, Pnuma Theon and Pnumotos Hagion.

WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE ?!?

Are these not well-documented pagan titles? What are these names doing in this book and why would the OT GOD (well now we must draw distinctions due the confusions introduced in the GNT) transgress His own commandment as it is written 揘ow concerning everything which I have said to you, be on your guard; and do not mention the name of other gods, nor let them be heard from your mouth (Exodus 23:13). By doing so, GOD also forces every NT writer to transgress and every person reading, translating and studying the GNT transgress as well!

At least with the Septuagint we all know it抯 a translation, the translators knew it was a translation 杗o one tried to dupe the world into believing that it was divinely inspired, that would have been laughable. So these titles & names were included (for better or for worse) as a means to accurately TRANSLATE the text into a foreign tongue, so the inclusion of foreign deities was to be expected. Much like it is in English. No one claims that 揕ORD GOD is what YHWH Elohim called himself.

SO WHY DO GNT PRIMACIST INSIST THAT GOD TOOK UPON HIMSELF THE NAMES OF PAGAN DEITIES?

I suppose it would have been possible, if the GNT was inspired, for the all names and titles of GOD to have been transliterated into Greek to have avoided this fundamental problem. THIS IS WHAT A DIVINELY-INSPIRED GNT WOULD HAVE LOOKED LIKE.

I could flip through any book, chapter and verse of the Peshitta and NEVER have this problem 朓 know who Eloha is, I know who Yeshua is, I know who mar-YAH is, I know who Rukha d扙loha is, I know who Meshikha is and I know who Rukha d抭udsha is.

Did theos speak the universe into existence?
Did kurios speak to Moses at the burning bush?
Did pnuma theon hover over the waters in Gen1:2?

I don抰 think so, and If GOD went by these names during all the years of Tanakh times, we would have known it. Remember, the NT covers a short time span, it is inconceivable that there would be such a sudden shift in Deity identity during the few years of NT times against the backdrop of thousands of years during Tanakh times.

So this is what I see as a huge and fundamental difference that the PNT brings to the table -credibility and connection to the same GOD, the Creator revealed in the Old to the same GOD, the Savior revealed in the New!

After all, only the Peshitta boldly declares, 揻or today in the city of David there has been born for you a Savior, who is YHWH the Messiah (Luqa 2:11). All other versions keep you guessing as to who the 慙ord is?

b扢eshikha,

Akhi Dean

Print Top

 
Forums Topics  Previous Topic Next Topic
Andrew Gabriel Roth
 
Send email to Andrew Gabriel RothSend private message to Andrew Gabriel RothView profile of Andrew Gabriel RothAdd Andrew Gabriel Roth to your contact list
 
Member: Sep-6-2000
Posts: 384
Member Feedback

1. RE: What抯 the difference?

Feb-14-2002 at 05:18 AM (UTC+3 Nineveh, Assyria)

In reply to message #0
 

Well said Akhi Dean!

Time and time again we see how the clarity and force of Aramaic trumps the vagueness and ambiguity of the GNT. Even today, westerners debate what it means that the Word is made flesh, or how does God die if He is Y'shua.

But one look at Maryah Mshikha (Luke 2:12), Maryah Haw Eshoa (1 Corinthians 12:3) or even the significance of ENA-NA which permeates Yochanan and the answers are clear. Confusion over words like RUACH and NAPHSHAH which are both translated as spirit or soul, or ORAYTA and NAMUSA, which are both rendered "Law" can at times make the Greek incomprehensible and even render its intended meaning contradictory from its source.

Finally, even if we did not believe in an original Aramaic NT, we would still need it since 2/3 of the Gospels are filled with Mshikha's ARAMAIC TEACHINGS. Which tradition then is most likely to preserve his original intent? OR how about his ORIGINAL WORDS????

Following the GNT, scholars in the Middle Ages debated whether or not Mshikha ever laughed or even had a sense of humor. If they read Peshitta, they would have no doubt on the matter at all.

Having said that though, I love the GNT too as it continually bears witness to its Semitic parent. If reaching behind a text like Luke 1:72 doesn't prove it, I don't know what will.

Shlama w'burkate
Andrew Gabriel Roth

Print Top

Forums Topics  Previous Topic Next Topic


Assyria \茫-'sir-茅-盲\ n (1998)   1:  an ancient empire of Ashur   2:  a democratic state in Bet-Nahren, Assyria (northern Iraq, northwestern Iran, southeastern Turkey and eastern Syria.)   3:  a democratic state that fosters the social and political rights to all of its inhabitants irrespective of their religion, race, or gender   4:  a democratic state that believes in the freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture in faithfulness to the principles of the United Nations Charter 鈥 Atour synonym

Ethnicity, Religion, Language
Israeli, Jewish, Hebrew
Assyrian, Christian, Aramaic
Saudi Arabian, Muslim, Arabic
Assyrian \茫-'sir-茅-an\ adj or n (1998)   1:  descendants of the ancient empire of Ashur   2:  the Assyrians, although representing but one single nation as the direct heirs of the ancient Assyrian Empire, are now doctrinally divided, inter sese, into five principle ecclesiastically designated religious sects with their corresponding hierarchies and distinct church governments, namely, Church of the East, Chaldean, Maronite, Syriac Orthodox and Syriac Catholic.  These formal divisions had their origin in the 5th century of the Christian Era.  No one can coherently understand the Assyrians as a whole until he can distinguish that which is religion or church from that which is nation -- a matter which is particularly difficult for the people from the western world to understand; for in the East, by force of circumstances beyond their control, religion has been made, from time immemorial, virtually into a criterion of nationality.   3:  the Assyrians have been referred to as Aramaean, Aramaye, Ashuraya, Ashureen, Ashuri, Ashuroyo, Assyrio-Chaldean, Aturaya, Chaldean, Chaldo, ChaldoAssyrian, ChaldoAssyrio, Jacobite, Kaldany, Kaldu, Kasdu, Malabar, Maronite, Maronaya, Nestorian, Nestornaye, Oromoye, Suraya, Syriac, Syrian, Syriani, Suryoye, Suryoyo and Telkeffee. 鈥 Assyrianism verb

Aramaic \ar-茅-'m谩ik\ n (1998)   1:  a Semitic language which became the lingua franca of the Middle East during the ancient Assyrian empire.   2:  has been referred to as Neo-Aramaic, Neo-Syriac, Classical Syriac, Syriac, Suryoyo, Swadaya and Turoyo.

Please consider the environment when disposing of this material 鈥 read, reuse, recycle. ♻
AIM | Atour: The State of Assyria | Terms of Service