Shlama,


For the last several years I've worked with the translator in counseling, editing, and some translation, as well as writing the Forward, to bring this to publication.  The Aramaic text and English translation included should be representative of the Eastern Aramaic in every single instance, with all Western-exclusive readings noted as they appear in the text.  The rest of the Eastern Peshitta will follow in similar interlinear format.  I'm not financially-invested or compensated, for whatever that is worth, but I am trying to get the word around for all those interested in the Peshitta text.  Below is further info from the publisher on the publication, with sample excerpts and links to purchase, if desired.

in HIM,
Jeremy 


The New MESSIANIC ALEPH TAV INTERLINEAR SCRIPTURES - NEW TESTAMENT (MATIS-NT) The GOSPELS, Volume Four is Now Published.


This work is a “Study Bible” and unique because it is the first true interlinear New Testament to combine both the John W. Etheridge Eastern Aramaic Peshitta in both Aramaic and Hebrew font compared to the Greek, word by word, in true interlinear form. This is the first time the Aramaic Peshitta has ever been in true interlinear form word by word in this complete form...please check out sample Pdf's. 

ORDERING LINK for both the Red Letter or Bold Black: 

https://alephtavscriptures.com/product-category/matis-nt/

Red Letter Pdf Sample:

https://alephtavscriptures.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/MATIS-NT-GOSPELS-76-Pg-Red-Letter-SAMPLE.pdf

Bold Black Pdf Sample:

https://alephtavscriptures.com/wp-conten...SAMPLE.pdf

The Messianic Aleph Tav Interlinear Scriptures (MATIS-NT) The GOSPELS, both Red Letter and Bold Black Editions are the most unique Interlinear Study Bibles of the New Testament in the world. This work is a “Study Bible” and unique because it is the first true interlinear New Testament to combine both the John W. Etheridge Eastern Aramaic Peshitta in both Aramaic and Hebrew font compared to the Greek, word by word, in true interlinear form. This is the first time the Aramaic Peshitta has ever been in true interlinear form word by word. The John W. Etheridge Eastern Aramaic Peshitta English translation was provided by Lars Lindgren and incorporates his personal notes and also, the Hebrew pronunciation of the Aramaic is unique and was created and provided by Lars Lindgren of http://Dukhrana.com/ and used with his permission…all of which comes under copyright protection.

www.AlephTavScriptures.com

Hello,

  Can anyone translate/provide the lyrics for this? I'm not sure if he is singing in the eastern Peshitta dialect or not?

Thanks!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_K-J9VPAu2Y

Somebody pointed out to me a real argument which would point to Greek primacy. Seriously,

Now, this one is really one argument. If they would have such as list, it would impress.

So here we go...
Etheridge: John 14:9
Jeshu saith to him, All this time have I been with you, and hast thou not known me, Philip?




Now, in the Aramaic, it says: "ܦ݁ܺܝܠܺܝܦ݁ܶܐ" (Philipé)

This is a Greek nominativus. Primacists say: "Well, if this would have been Aramaic, originally, it would say: ܦܝܠܝܦܘܣ

This also would be the case in Acts 1:1; 10:3; 26:4 and 1 timothy 6:20

Here is an Aramaic bible study I'd like to share: The Strong Possibility That Lazar Wrote the Fourth Gospel -- Aramaic Peshitta Analysis

And here is my introduction to the paper...

Who wrote the fourth gospel?  Christian tradition says it was the apostle John, who was a fisherman from Galilee.  But if John was really the author, then why did he omit every event to which he is referred by name in the synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke)? And why is the author uniquely named while in same boat with the “sons of Zebedee” in John 21? 
 
Questions like these have naturally prompted scholars to wonder ‘who else other than John’ is a candidate for authorship of the fourth gospel.  And Lazarus has always been the number one ‘runner-up’.
 

In Matthew 12:21 in the Peshitta, it reads:
ܘܒܫܡܗ ܥܡܡܐ ܢܣܒܪܘܢ

"And in His Name the Nations will hope."

This is a direct quote by the Apostle Matthew from Isaiah 42:4b


The Peshitta OT for Isaiah 42:4b, reads thus:
ܘܠܢܡܘܣܗ ܓܙܪ̈ܬܐ ܢܣ̈ܟܝܢ

"And unto His Law the Islands will look."


We know that the Peshitta OT is a translation of the Hebrew OT text.


The Hebrew OT text for Isaiah 42:4b, reads thus:

ולתורתו איים ייחלו
 
"unto His Law the Islands will wait."


The Greek translation of the OT (Septuagint), reads thus:

και επί τω ονόματι αυτού έθνη ελπιούσιν

"And upon His Name the Nations will hope."


Q: If The Apostle Matthew wasn't quoting from the Greek translation of the OT, then where did he get his quotaton from?

His quotation does not match either the Hebrew, or the Peshitta translation of the Hebrew OT for Isaiah 42:4.

It matches the Greek translation of the Hebrew OT for Isaiah 42:4.

Any help on this would be appreciated.

Shlama

Hello all, 

My question regards the Aramaic of Ephesians 3:9. I have found a difference (with the help of a previous post by Larry Kelsey) in the ASV and its updated version (the uNAS) against the KJV and its updated version (the NKJV).
 
The ASV has: and to make all men see what is the dispensation of the mystery which for ages hath been hidden in God who created all things;

The uNAS has: and to bring to light what is the administration of the mystery which for the ages has been hidden in God who created all things;

However, 

The KJV has: And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery which from the beginning of the world hath been hid from God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:
 
The NKJV has: and to make all see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the ages has been hidden in God who created all things through Jesus Christ;
 
The Greek word for "administration" (in uNAS) and "dispensation" (in ASV) is οἰκονομία (oikonomia).
 
The Greek word for “fellowship” (in KJV) is a similar (but different Greek word) κοινωνία (koinonia).
 
This Greek word (οἰκονομία [oikonomia]) is also found in Ephesians 1:10, 3:2 in the KJV/NKJV as well as in both the ASV and the uNAS. Clearly, the context of Ephesians 1:10, 3:2, and indeed 3:9 requires the word "dispensation" not "fellowship". 
 
I wonder if "fellowship" in Ephesians 3:9 as found in Erasmus'/Stephanus' Greek is a mistranslation from the Aramaic word "dispensation". Do the words for "fellowship" and "dispensation" ("administration") look alike in Aramaic?
 
Thanks,
 
Keith

Hello everyone.

Someone began Posting on another site about John found in Mark.  Of course, in my blundering naivete, this was "Settled Science".
"I'll just get my notes, enlighten some people and..."

Uh-Oh!  There is a gap in the language at just this point.

Mark 1: 7 (RSV):

[7] And he preached, saying, "After me comes he who is mightier than I, the thong of whose sandals I am not worthy to stoop down and untie.

John 1: 27, 30 (RSV):

[27] even he who comes after me, the thong of whose sandal I am not worthy to untie."
...
[30] This is he of whom I said, `After me comes a man who ranks before me, for he was before me.'

This is simply amazing to me.  In every sense of the word, Amazing!

For years, I've been looking at the Mishmarot Priesthood.  Look at 1 Chronicles 24 and "The House of Eleazar".  Eleazar and Ithamar provide 24 Groups for Temple Service.

1 Chronicles 24: 1 - 4, 7, 14  (RSV):

[1] The divisions of the sons of Aaron were these. The sons of Aaron: Nadab, Abi'hu, Elea'zar, and Ith'amar.
[2] But Nadab and Abi'hu died before their father, and had no children, so Elea'zar and Ith'amar became the priests.
[3] With the help of Zadok of the sons of Elea'zar, and Ahim'elech of the sons of Ith'amar, David organized them according to the appointed duties in their service.
[4] Since more chief men were found among the sons of Elea'zar than among the sons of Ith'amar, they organized them under sixteen heads of fathers' houses of the sons of Elea'zar, and eight of the sons of Ith'amar...
...
[7] The first lot fell to Jehoi'arib, the second to Jedai'ah...
...
[14] the fifteenth to Bilgah, the sixteenth to Immer...

There are different orderings which may point to some Editing.  The Hasmoneans are assigned to Jehoiarib and the position of "Johoiarib" in 1 Chronicles 24 may indicate that the Hasmoneans wanted to be in the Leading Position (Eisenman and Wise, Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered).  BTW, the sixteenth Group, "Immer", believes that the Hasmoneans came from them (Uzi Leibner, Settlements in Galilee...).  Excavations of the settlement of Jabnit and others show that this view is true.  There are real, in-your-hand artifacts attesting to the existence of these Groups in Galilee

It's tedious here, but the payoff should be worth it.

Immer is absolutely critical to understanding this.  They are the last of the House of Eleazar and they do have history behind them.  They were on Duty, after Bilgah, at the Passover of 4 BCE, where 3000 are murdered and Passover is cancelled.

Bilgah?  Oh...Yes:

"According to a Talmudic tradition preserved in "Halakot Gedolot" (ed. Hildesheimer, p. 631), Bilgah was assigned to the group which officiated on the second and sixth days of the Feast of Tabernacles. The priests, when entering upon their duties, received their share in the northern part of the Tabernacle, because this was near the seat of their activity. The section assigned to each division of the priesthood was furnished with an iron ring fastened to the floor, for the purpose of securing the animal designed for slaughter, and there were accordingly twenty-four openings in the wall where the knives used for slaughtering were kept. Bilgah alone received his share in the south, his ring being nailed down, and his wall-closet tightly sealed, as a punishment..." ( http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/3298-bilgah )

Can you see where this is going?  

"After me comes he who is mightier than I, the thong of whose sandals I am not worthy to stoop down and untie.."
"After me comes a man who ranks before me, for he was before me".

After John, of Bilgah, comes Jesus, of Immer.

The problem: It would be SOOOOO easy if "thong" meant "The loop of the sandal, either around the big toe or around the toes.  PERFECT!

Only: when you go to the Greek Interlinears, you find the word is "straps", which gets translated into "Thong" or "Latchet".

Quoting the Younan Interlinear of the 2 passages:

"...and he preach-would-and say-behold-comes after me-one who is more powerful-than I- he [who]-not-am worthy-I-to stoop-[and] loosen-the straps-of his sandals"      
"...this is-he-who after me-will come -yet-before me-is-that <I>-not-am worthy-I-to loosen-the straps-of his sandals..."

Vic Alexander: "I am not even worthy of untying the belts of his sandals..."
Steve Caruso: "...The thong of whose sandals..."

There seems to be an intermediate step that is missing.  The Word Play on "Thong/Loop/Strap" seems very important - Or perhaps I am asking too much.

Thank you all,

Charles

I was reading Luke just for the enjoyment recently.  I came across Luke's listing of Disciples in Chapter 6, and the last two of verse 16 caught my attention.  My KJB had the first "Judas" listed as [I]brother of[I] (James), which the KJB uses to indicate no manuscript words, these words are implied.  Okay, then the margin notes referred readers to Jude 1.  Jude 1 carries the same words, which virtually yanked at my attention! Does this lead to an understanding that the half-brother of our Lord was also one of His 12? 

Fortunately AGR came to my rescue, as usual.  He pointed out that the Aramaic clearly annunciated the proper relationship, which was "Son of" (James).  Moreover, a check of the Greek text confirms that Greek does in fact fail to establish that relationship, forcing all translators from Greek to speculate.  My brother read me his NASB with a correct rendering.  However since the NASB is a "modern translation" from revised Greek Texts, it gives me problems.  One is its rendering of Luke 2:33 which specifies Yacob (Joseph) as father of our Lord.  The KJB says "Joseph and His mother......".

Dr. Luke gives clear purpose to his Gospel in in his preamble in the first four verses.  He sets out to confirm all the stories conveyed to listeners from the eye-witnesses.  Luke would not have allowed this relationship to remain unspecified.  The Aramaic is precise, and true to Dr. Luke's writing.

But another point is one I am making on a website under construction.  We Christians of the 21st Century have tools others who came before us did not have.  We have the work of Younan in setting up this site, free to use, and having transliteration of the Aramaic into English.  Although this is a somewhat trivial case, it easily emphasizes a tool for Christians.  When we find issues with our translations, we can easily track them down by returning to the original authentic writings, which all profess to be the Word of GOD.  I am thankful for this magnificent gift.   TB

This text is from the UBS copy of the western version of the Peshitta, commonly called "the Peshitto" to distinguish its text from that of the original Peshitta. Can you find the mistake?

ܓܒܪܐ ܕܝܢ ܚܕ ܥܬܝܪܐ ܐܝܬ ܗܘܐ ܘܠܒܫ ܗܘܐ ܒܘܨܐ ܘܐܪܓܘܢܐ ܘܟܠܝܘܡ ܡܬܒܣܡܝܢ ܗܘܐ ܓܐܝܐܝܬ ܀

I am doing a study on the fruit of the Spirit, and I am hoping someone can help me understand something.  The word often translated "patience" (2:12715 ܡܓܪܬ, Greek is makrothymia) is, as I understand it, better translated as "long suffering", which I think is referring to having patience with people.  The word most often translated "self control" (2:13789 ܡܣܝܒܪܢܘܬܐ) could also be "patient" or "endurance".  The Aramaic word used here, when translated to Greek, is most often G5281 (hupomonē), but the Greek in this verse is G1466 (egkrateia).  G5281 is a word that seems to be used for patience with things or circumstances, and my question is whether that is the intent of the Aramaic word used here.

Maybe a better way to ask this is what you would say the opposite of 2:12715 ܡܓܪܬ and 2:13789 ܡܣܝܒܪܢܘܬܐ would be.

*I believe the original language of the New Testament is Aramaic, but my knowledge of Aramaic is weak at best, and my study is often laborious.  Forgive my back and forth with Greek.  I am just trying to cross reference to better understand.