Peshitta Forum

Full Version: The Messiah IS YHWH ---> Proven
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6
Shlama,


@ Texas Rat: i sent you a pm earlier today with some further considerations on this subject - but here's the link i mentioned there:

<!-- l --><a class="postlink-local" href="http://www.peshitta.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=2569&hilit=marya+lord&start=135">viewtopic.php?f=17&t=2569&hilit=marya+lord&start=135</a><!-- l -->

it is worth going through to about page 15 or so. Paul made some indisputable explanations that lay to rest the whole "MARYA is not YHWH" debate. definitely worth spending some time reading the flow of thought and seeing where the errors creep in from the Western mindset of things.



@ Paul Younan: remember the article you hinted at working up on this topic from the above link? sure would be nice to have it up for us to point everyone to! i'm sure you could whip one up in the midst of your oh-so unbusy schedule! <!-- sWink --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/wink1.gif" alt="Wink" title="Wink" /><!-- sWink -->


Chayim b'Moshiach,
Jeremy
No, I appreciate your points and they are very pertinent. Thanks for sharing and participating.

We have this experience in the countries we live in, that we walk into a bookstore and purchase this "book" called the "Bible" and it has everything from Genesis to Revelation. This was not the case until recent times, relatively speaking. People consider this one work - the Word of God, and assume this was always the case here and in all of Christendom. But as you know this was a very gradual development and not uniform across all places.

There are other churches with even more books beyond Revelation even. And how they order things is different too.

For us it is good to know the 22 we have are accepted universally as "inspired" and "canonical". What we are lacking in Revelation or other books can be found in other holy books like Daniel and Isaiah. So we don't feel like there is anything we are unaware of concerning future events.
Burning one Wrote:<!-- l --><a class="postlink-local" href="http://www.peshitta.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=2569&hilit=marya+lord&start=135">viewtopic.php?f=17&t=2569&hilit=marya+lord&start=135</a><!-- l -->

it is worth going through to about page 15 or so. Paul made some indisputable explanations that lay to rest the whole "MARYA is not YHWH" debate. definitely worth spending some time reading the flow of thought and seeing where the errors creep in from the Western mindset of things.

WOW! I hadn't gotten that far in my reading of that thread but I just did and there is some impressive stuff there concerning the grammar of Aramaic and such. Very valuable info and IF I had any doubt as to the purpose of MarYah and its meaning, as you said in a post there, which I am going to quote in its entirety here because it completely expresses my feelings on the matter:

Burning one Wrote:Shlama akhi Paul,


thanks again for this extra information! this is wonderful info to have. this and the grammatical aspect seal the deal for me with no room for doubt. while i can at least understand Jerry's grammatical reluctance to accept MARYA as including the Divine Name, this added aspect of the usage of MAR in ancient times serves to really up the ante that it was originally formed of MAR+YAH.

And then there is this gem from Paul on page 15, also quoting in its entirety:
Paul Younan Wrote:Any dictionary or lexicon listing MRYA as the Emphatic for MRA is incorrect.

Mar Ephraem from the 4th century, rather than trying to define it, said it's an acronym that stands for:

Meem: Marutha ("lordship")
Resh: Rabbutha ("majesty")
Yodh-Aleph: Ethya ("self-existence')

The last part is the telling. Here Mar Ephraem tells us plainly that he believed the Yodh-Aleph (which are the only two letters he grouped together in the acronym) stood for the name of God, YHWH, which clearly means "self-existent" in Hebrew.

Not too different from our little theory, or is it identical?

Case solved? Debate settled ?

I love this forum. <!-- s:inlove: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/inlove.gif" alt=":inlove:" title="In Love" /><!-- s:inlove: -->
See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mar

+Shamasha Paul
OK,

after having read everything between page 10-15 viewtopic.php?f=17&t=2569&hilit=marya+lord&start=135

I am now thoroughly convinced of that not only does "MarYa" or "Mar-Yah" in deed stand for "Adon-YawHu", but also that I do not hardly know English much less Aramaic. Owe <!-- sBlush --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/blush.gif" alt="Blush" title="Blush" /><!-- sBlush -->. Thanks Jeremy for pointing out that thread.

I at this point am not sure that that means Yehoshuuah is His own Father though, or visee versee that YHWH is is own Son. Seems a bit strange. And it would make sense that "no one can call Yehoshuah Mar-Yah [that is He Himself is He] except through the Ruakh" because it would make no sense otherwise.


Paul,

you really should make an article on the linguistics of "MarYa". Post it here on this site as well as make a PDF so that we can pass it around in emails and such, and who knows one day some unsuspecting person from Timbuktu might re-post it here in the forum thinking they're going to teach some body something - and instead of you getting all mad and frustrated you can sit back and say to yourself - "it about time, Hallali-YaH awmain. Instead of time and time again rehashing this subject over and over, now and then. I really liked the way you started out with Jeremy taking your time starting off real simple and walking through one example unto the next. The only thing that seemed short throughout the thread was when you would get to Mar-Ya you seem to not break it down as good so that there should be no more debate. It's as if you though they should have the picture by then. I will say that I got the picture real good of the one you broke down and it was not until way late in the thread that things started to finally come together here a little there a little. Again please when you are making the article be sure and give the run down on mara/mra/ and the likes. I think if you were as thorough with mra as with bra, and then get a PDF spread world wide the debate would become mute, well except for them people off in Ho-Bumpkinville. In case your wondering were that is, it not all that far from were I live.


HWHY bless ya'll and keep ya'll;
HWHY cause His face to shine on ya'll, and be gracious to ya'll;
HWHY lift up His face to ya'll, and give ya'll shalom.

Your brother in Yehoshuah The Anointed One.
will brinson: ferguson
I had thought I had already settled this issue in my mind, but seeing how lengthy this thread has become, a certain demon comes back to torment me.

SERIOUSLY, why does a perfect God who demands his people to even be perfect allow such a textual mess of his Word? Im sorry, the Bible is a MESSY book. I hate divisions and dead ends,basically anything that doesnt end in a profitable way, but is just left on the wayside to rot/confuse.

My faith in the book, due to historical, archaelogical and personal matters, is quite strong right now. But seriously, why are we all going through this? Why am I growing gray hairs JUST to figure out what God's word is when its already an uphill battle to do what is right in what we already DO know to be authentic scripture.

I noticed even back then, the Sadduccees were doing their own things their way (rejecting angels and the resurrection), as well as the Pharisees and who knows how many countless other groups.

I had a Muslim friend who would always shake his head and chuckle when I discussed issues like this. Although the late, late, late religion of Islam is based on/copied from the original holy scriptures of the Bible, and Mohammad's new message CONTRADICTs the word (believe believe me, Im not planning to be a Muslim anytime soon), Kamran always had a good point when he pointed out there was only one Quran, word for word for word. Thats it, easy said, easy done.

A lot of us already admitted bias in this forum...how far does that bias extend, when we are all just crossing our fingers and saying, "Well, I HOPE this is the word of God"?
Shlama Texas Rat,


I'm glad things are somewhat clearer after reading the discussion.
I know what a blessing it was for me to finally get ahold of the hard evidence I had been lacking.

Maybe we'll see an article soon....


Chayim b'Moshiach,
Jeremy
Shlama rungold,

If you think Islam has only one word please think again.
Heck, google "the satanic verses" for starters and see if it doesn't change your mind immediately!


Chayim b'Moshiach,
Jeremy
Quote:I at this point am not sure that that means YawHu-Shuuah is His own Father though, or visee versee that YawHuWaH is is own Son. Seems a bit strange.

Hey Tex,

Blessings to you Brother.

Eshu/Y'shua is not His own Father, He is The Word of His Father, and The Son of His Father. The Word was WITH ALAHA/GOD/The Father, and is of the same substance of His Father, being brought forth from His Father before all time, to do His Will...as the Creed says, God from God, Light from Light, Spirit from Spirit....like a Flame that is kindled, says Justin Martyr...the Main Flame is The Father, the Flame that came from Him, The Word of The Father, is no less Fire, but not The Main Flame from which He came forth from.

Eshu/Y'shua...pre-incarnate, IS GOD's Miltha/Logos/Word, and this Word is what/whom The Father used to created the Universe...and what/whom He used/uses to reveal both Himself and His will to mankind, from Adam till today. It was The Word of Alaha/The Father/GOD, who communicated to Manking IN His Word to all the Prophets/Apostles of old.

Eshu/Y'shua said He and The Father are One...but they are NOT the same Person. GOD/The Father has always revealed Himself and His will to mankind IN and Through His Word/Son...who gave His Name to Moses as YHWH/YAW-HU-WAH...and that is why Eshu/Y'shua is called Mar-Yah/Master YHWH in the New Testament...because that is who He truly is, The Word of ALAHA/GOD.

Shlama,
Chuck
Paul Younan Wrote:No, I appreciate your points and they are very pertinent. Thanks for sharing and participating.

We have this experience in the countries we live in, that we walk into a bookstore and purchase this "book" called the "Bible" and it has everything from Genesis to Revelation. This was not the case until recent times, relatively speaking. People consider this one work - the Word of God, and assume this was always the case here and in all of Christendom. But as you know this was a very gradual development and not uniform across all places.

There are other churches with even more books beyond Revelation even. And how they order things is different too.

For us it is good to know the 22 we have are accepted universally as "inspired" and "canonical". What we are lacking in Revelation or other books can be found in other holy books like Daniel and Isaiah. So we don't feel like there is anything we are unaware of concerning future events.


Good point, so it does, in the end, just take that mustard seed of faith in the sea of doubt and human error. If this Paul Younan can just accept that whatever is, is, then I suppose I could too. <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->
If I may change gears for a moment, I would like to get back to the purpose and heart of this thread based on the name of it:
"The Messiah IS YHWH ---> Proven".

On page 2 of this thread, I listed all (?) verses where the different forms of MarYah appear. 192/215 times in the PeshittA/O respectively. Again using the document I found by Dave Bauscher (and by using his info, I am not endorsing his beliefs as true or not? all though I do not agree with his PeshittO viewpoint as I am a PeshittA primacist), I wanted to make a second list showing ONLY the verses showing the correlation between Y'shua and MarYah. It is a much shorter list but coming in at 50 (49?) verses, it still is a powerful testimony when you take into account everything else said in this thread.
Some of the verses are more clear than others at first sight, but there are quite a few which are so painfully obvious you have to WANT to deny the association to not see it. Then admittedly there are a couple I look at and think? maybe/maybe not.
And keep in mind, I said these show the "correlation". I am not saying Y'shua is His own Father in the sense Texas RAT was having issues with. But there is a very strong relation which Thirdwoe excellently explained. All that being said, here is the list with the numbers in [ ] showing the total occurrences within a certain book.

[4] ?
Matthew 3:3
Matthew 22:43
Matthew 22:45
Matthew 28:2 (not so clear IMHO so I ? the inclusion of it in this list)

[1]
Mark 1:3

[3]
Luke 1:76
Luke 2:11
Luke 3:4

[2]
John 1:23
John 8:11

[8]
Acts 2:20
Acts 2:21(Basuscher has a note on this and the above verse: "See verse 36, 1 Cor. 8:6, 1 Cor 12:3-6 & Eph. 4:4-6 to establish that Y'shua is the sole bearer of the Sacred Name "Maryah")
Acts 2:36
Acts 2:38
Acts 9:10
Acts 9:15
Acts 9:27
Acts 10:36

[5]
Romans 10:12
Romans 10:13
Romans 14:9
Romans 14:11
Romans 14:14

[8]
1Cor 4:5
1Cor 8:6
1Cor 11:27 x2
1Cor 11:29
1Cor 12:3
1Cor 12:5 (Bauscher's note: "See verses 4-6.")
1Cor 15:47

[2]
2Cor 3:18 x2 (Bauscher's note: "See v.14 & 4:6")

[1]
Eph 4:5 (Basuscher repeats his note from earlier: "See verse 36, 1 Cor. 8:6, 1 Cor 12:3-6 & Eph. 4:4-6 to establish that Y'shua is the sole bearer of the Sacred Name "Maryah")

[1]
Phillpians 2:11

[1]
Collosians 3:24

[3]
James 3:9
James 5:7
James 5:10

[2]
1Peter 2:3 (Bauscher's note: "See 2:4")
1Peter 3:15

[1]
Jude 1:14

[8]
Revelation 1:8
Revelation 4:8
Revelation 11:17
Revelation 14:10
Revelation 15:3
Revelation 15:4
Revelation 22:6
Revelation 22:20

Even if you reject some of these verses as proving the case, as I said earlier, there are quite a few that so solidly establish
"The Messiah is YHWH ---> Proven", I can only accept this as fact.
I don't understand how someone reading Matthew 3:3 (Isaiah 40:3) in *any* language would fail to make the connection.

You are correct when saying one would have to actively try to not believe.

This is proclaimed loudly in the Greek and the Aramaic. In the Aramaic a bit more strongly. But it's not as if the Greeks didn't understand who Messiah is. They didn't need the special title to know.

It is nice to have, though.
Paul Younan Wrote:I don't understand how someone reading Matthew 3:3 (Isaiah 40:3) in *any* language would fail to make the connection.

Oh I agree with you completely there. The only verse I was really uncertain of was Matthew 28:2:
AENT 4th: And behold a great earthquake occurred for a Messenger of Master YHWH descended from heaven and came and rolled away the boulder from the entrance, and he was sitting upon it.

Now in Mr. Bauscher's note in his list, (which I accidentally omitted above) he says "The Angel calls Yeshua 'our Lord' in verse 4."
The problem is in verse 4 (I am assuming he is referring to Matthew 28 here...) the Messenger (Angel) is not even speaking yet.
AENT 4th Matt 28:4 And from the fear of him, those who were watching trembled and they became like the dead.

I mean I have no problem interpreting 28:2 as referring to Y'shua but I would be reluctant to say it is a definitive proof as he does. Hence why I question it.

As for Matt 3:3... I agree, it really goes without saying. <!-- s:biggrin: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/biggrin.gif" alt=":biggrin:" title="Big Grin" /><!-- s:biggrin: -->

Paul Younan Wrote:You are correct when saying one would have to actively try to not believe.

This is proclaimed loudly in the Greek and the Aramaic. In the Aramaic a bit more strongly. But it's not as if the Greeks didn't understand who Messiah is. They didn't need the special title to know.

It is nice to have, though.

Before I had even heard of the PeshittA, I was a "Majority Text" fan of the Greek texts. I first came to the same conclusions about Y'shua with that text. Heck, even in the Critical Text of Wescott & Hort and Nestle-Aland, I could still see this conclusion all over the place.
The reason I am so in love with the Aramaic aspect of this though is that it is not just a bit more strongly... IMHO it blatant. So much more so that it really hits you like a hammer. I mean I have introduced the Peshitta to my family who had never even heard of it like me. They had only really ever heard of the KJV, NKJV and the NIV. As amateurish as I am, I am considered the scholar of the family. When I showed them 1Cor 12:3 in the AENT... Oh my word. It was shocking their reaction. It was like the entire Bible became clear. Just from that one verse. Now they certainly do take it all in, but that is the effect the Aramaic can have on people, even if the theology really doesn't change. I know the Aramaic PeshittA has only made my faith stronger as has this forum and seriously... IMO, the Greek just doesn't hold a candle to the Peshitta even if one can come to the same conclusions with either text.
Since Eshu/Yshu'a spoke to Apostle Paul that day on his way to Damascus, from Heaven in His glorifed body, does that mean that the language He spoke to Apostle Paul in, was also glorified? <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile --> I mean, He was speaking from Heaven right? The Scriptures are clear, that Heaven must recieve Him, until the appointed time. If Eshu/Yshu'a speaks Aramaic from/in Heaven, will we all speak in Aramaic to Him, and He to us, when we are present with our Master after we depart this world, or will we all speak our native tongues?

I've often wondered about it.

Shlama,
Chuck
Thirdwoe Wrote:Since Eshu/Yshu'a spoke to Apostle Paul that day on his way to Damascus, from Heaven in His glorifed body, does that mean that the language He spoke to Apostle Paul in, was also glorified? <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile --> I mean, He was speaking from Heaven right? The Scriptures are clear, that Heaven must recieve Him, until the appointed time. If Eshu/Yshu'a speaks Aramaic from/in Heaven, will we all speak in Aramaic to Him, and He to us, when we are present with our Master after we depart this world, or will we all speak our native tongues?

I've often wondered about it.

Shlama,
Chuck

I've wondered about that, too. I think that since God spoke to the people in whatever language they spoke in their time (be it an antediluvian language spoken by Noah, the ancient Hebrew of Moses, or the Aramaic of Paul), one would think that He would speak to us in whatever language we speak when He returns....or perhaps no human language at all.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6