Peshitta Forum
The Messiah IS YHWH ---> Proven - Printable Version

+- Peshitta Forum (http://peshitta.org/for)
+-- Forum: New Testament (http://peshitta.org/for/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: General (http://peshitta.org/for/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: The Messiah IS YHWH ---> Proven (/showthread.php?tid=2676)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6


Re: The Messiah IS YHWH ---> Proven - Paul Younan - 01-27-2012

PM Saunders Wrote:... IMO, the Greek just doesn't hold a candle to the Peshitta even if one can come to the same conclusions with either text.

Imagine if a Greek word, previously unknown in Greek literature, was to have been used in the Septuagint in place of YHWH instead of the common Kurios (which could have been used of anyone.) Imagine that obscure variant was even based on Kurios. Let's say, for the sake of argument, it was KuriYa.

Now, this obscure variant was found nowhere else in Greek literature before or after the Septuagint. In the Septuagint, it always referred to YHWH. Again, it was found nowhere else in any Greek literature ... until the Greek New Testament shows up on the scene.

All of a sudden, Jesus is being referred to as KuriYa. All over the New Testament, in an unmistakable way.

Isn't this the story of MarYa?

Another question...would this scenario have evoked so much debate on what was meant by calling Jesus, "KuriYa?"

+Shamasha


Re: The Messiah IS YHWH ---> Proven - The Texas RAT - 01-27-2012

Paul, I like your senerio. You should add it to the end of your article on this subject, possibly even do it in English a LORD and LORDYA for us English speaking clans.

And to answer your question, yes it would had mad a big splash either way even to this day.

That is until Paul Yoanan writes a detailed article to put it to rest that is.
Or you can do it one person at a time, as in the past, if you rather. <!-- s:dontgetit: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/dontgetit.gif" alt=":dontgetit:" title="Dont Get It" /><!-- s:dontgetit: -->

You and this site have been a big blessing to this day but most every thing is scattered and takes a long time to wade through. Please considered making an article specifically detailing the subject of MarYa in order to put that cartoon monster to rest and to help the world to see and come to know "MarYa is THE KING of kings", awmane.

HWHY will be done.

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


Re: The Messiah IS YHWH ---> Proven - The Texas RAT - 01-27-2012

PM Saunders Wrote:I decided to go back through my list and next to each verse in ( ) note what word exactly was found where. It turns out there are a total of 6 variances of MarYah meaning Master YHWH in the Renewed Covenant. They are listed below following my revised list along with how often they occur.

MarYah [97]
D'MarYah [84]
L'MarYah [19]
DL'MarYah [2]
B'MarYah [11]
W'MarYah [2]


Hi Saunders, could you translatable the D, L, DL, B, and W parts into English, please. <!-- s:eh: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/eh.gif" alt=":eh:" title="Eh" /><!-- s:eh: -->


Re: The Messiah IS YHWH ---> Proven - PM Saunders - 01-27-2012

The Texas RAT Wrote:
PM Saunders Wrote:I decided to go back through my list and next to each verse in ( ) note what word exactly was found where. It turns out there are a total of 6 variances of MarYah meaning Master YHWH in the Renewed Covenant. They are listed below following my revised list along with how often they occur.

MarYah [97]
D'MarYah [84]
L'MarYah [19]
DL'MarYah [2]
B'MarYah [11]
W'MarYah [2]


Hi Saunders, could you translatable the D, L, DL, B, and W parts into English, please. <!-- s:eh: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/eh.gif" alt=":eh:" title="Eh" /><!-- s:eh: -->

No.

Reason being, I do not speak Aramaic as I have mentioned. I am only going by identifying the words by sight and from certain things I have read here on this Forum. Paul Younan or other learned people in Aramaic would do a far better job. What little I do know is that they are called "proclitics" and are words added to the beginning of words. Not identifying which is which (that is the part I do not know) but I know that they mean words like "of", "that", "and"... so on and so forth.

Actually on page 1 of this thread, Paul says this:
Paul Younan Wrote:Proclitics always throw a monkey wrench into things. Think of the English element re- when it is prepended to a word. Rewritten, reworked, reworded, retold, etc. That's sort of like Aramaic Proclitics.

Proclitics go in front of the word. So you have D' (of) and L' (to) and W' (and). Sometimes the Proclitics are combined, so you get d'l' in front of the word.

Hope that helps some.


Re: The Messiah IS YHWH ---> Proven - PM Saunders - 01-27-2012

For the record, I would like to reiterate, I am no professional by any means when it concerns Aramaic/PeshittA/O studies. I am only two months(!) into all of this stuff. As I mentioned on the post I made my list:

PM Saunders Wrote:I want to make sure I do not give the wrong impression. When I was saying I am no expert, that also means I ONLY speak English. I cannot read or speak ANY other language... except maybe Klingon. <!-- s8) --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/cool.gif" alt="8)" title="Cool" /><!-- s8) --> All my info and knowledge comes from studying many people from here and elsewhere and comparing the words just by sight. For example, I downloaded the Khabouris Codex from Dukhrana.com and in Adobe, I did a simple Find command for MarYah without an exact word match, and with the exception of the word Samaritan which contains the word MarYah and I believe one other instance, I was able to confirm Baucher's list.

I have read threads here where so many people spout off things that are only opinion, but they state everything so "matter-of-fact" and actually try to argue with people who actually KNOW what they are talking about. Heck, one person who did not natively speak Aramaic (it was obvious) tried arguing with Paul about how to write and translate Aramaic. I am sorry but I admit I know next to nothing except from what I learn and pick up from the actual pro's here. If Paul or someone who OBVIOUSLY knows what they are talking about says "No... this word doesn't mean... it means... and here is why..." with a lengthy, verifiable and detailed explanatation, my response would be to say "Well I see you know what you are talking about, I stand corrected and thank you for setting me straight." Is that so hard?

In almost all my posts, I have tried to come across as saying... here is what I have learned/found. If I have missed anything, please let me know. I know no-one has attacked my work on the lists I provided or my comments concerning MarYah, but all the same I feel I should defend my knowledge (or lack thereof) while I am here trying to put something like my 2 lists (which as I mentioned on page 2, are not original to me... I simply reformatted them, compared them and put them here) out there for people to see and use. I see people who are doing what was called the "MarYah touch up" to their Bibles and I want to make sure that people have complete info so they can do such.

I hope I did not give anyone the wrong impression about my education in these matters. <!-- sSad --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/sad.gif" alt="Sad" title="Sad" /><!-- sSad -->


Re: The Messiah IS YHWH ---> Proven - The Texas RAT - 01-27-2012

Well it would seem as if you are two month ahead of me.

Anyway thanks for hunting down Paul' explanation of the Proclitics and reposting them here for me. Big Help.


Re: The Messiah IS YHWH ---> Proven - Paul Younan - 01-27-2012

Maybe it would help to write the Proclitics as different words when transliterating into English. They are attached to the word in Aramaic, but they are words in English.

Instead of d'Marya, maybe "de Marya" would work better.

Single proclitics:

"de Marya" (of Marya)
"al Marya" (to/unto/towards Marya)
"be Marya" (in/by Marya)
"aw Marya" (and Marya)

Compound proclitics:

"de al Marya" (that towards* Marya) (* - "unto" proclitic is related to the verb in the sentence...as in "towards the LORD you should prostrate")


Re: The Messiah IS YHWH ---> Proven - PM Saunders - 01-27-2012

Alright, One last time! (Not complaining, I am having a blast with this!) <!-- sBig Grin --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/happy.gif" alt="Big Grin" title="Happy" /><!-- sBig Grin -->

Taking the very good advice from Paul above, I have edited my initial list of 192/215 occurrences of MarYah here:
http://www.peshitta.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=2879&p=18365#p18365

I changed the words "D'MarYah, L'MarYah" and such using Paul's suggestion above. I hope more than before, it will assist in clarification and be helpful for anyone wanting this information regarding the wonderful word of MarYah.


Re: The Messiah IS YHWH ---> Proven - Thirdwoe - 01-28-2012

Exellent work PM...thanks for all that you do, its a blessing.

You too Shamasha Paul... <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->


Re: The Messiah IS YHWH ---> Proven - Thirdwoe - 02-05-2012

:

You know...the more I look at John 8:11, it seems to me unlikley that this Woman knew that Jesus was MarYah. And yet, in the western Peshitto text, it has Marya there, rather than the expected Maran or Mari.

Since it is believed that this passage came into the Aramaic text from the Greek or even the Latin text, could it be a scribal error?

But, if we are to believe that the passage is inspired and part of the Orginal NT Scripture, then we must believe that this Woman had a revelation that none seemed to have had at this point, about just who Jesus was...namley, God The Word manifested in Humanity.

I don't think any had come to the understanding at this point of His Ministry, or am I wrong? John the Immerser seems to have known though, but in prison he seemed to have lost some faith...but maybe it was understood by a number of other people at this time?


Re: The Messiah IS YHWH ---> Proven - Burning one - 02-06-2012

Thirdwoe Wrote::

You know...the more I look at John 8:11, it seems to me unlikley that this Woman knew that Jesus was MarYah. And yet, in the western Peshitto text, it has Marya there, rather than the expected Maran or Mari.

Since it is believed that this passage came into the Aramaic text from the Greek or even the Latin text, could it be a scribal error?

But, if we are to believe that the passage is inspired and part of the Orginal NT Scripture, then we must believe that this Woman had a revelation that none seemed to have had at this point, about just who Jesus was...namley, God The Word manifested in Humanity.

I don't think any had come to the understanding at this point of His Ministry, or am I wrong? John the Immerser seems to have known though, but in prison he seemed to have lost some faith...but maybe it was understood by a number of other people at this time?


Shlama,

this is something that has bugged me, too, for some time. it makes it even more obvious that this was not part of the original text, imo. while the content of the account seems at least plausible and doesn't give any problems theologically, this statement she makes is entirely unreasonable when you consider WHO was making it: a Samaritan woman. it is bad enough that Samaritan's didn't even believe in the Messiah (they hold only to the Torah, and a corrupted version at that), so her saying she found the M'sheekha is "dubious" at best. they do have belief in a Messiah-like figure whom they call TAYEB (as in the prophet like unto Mushe), but they didn't call him the "Messiah."

so it makes it even more implausible that she would call Messiah "MarYa" - doesn't it?

to me, if this account REALLY happened, and it might have, i don't think it would have been written as the PESHITTO text has it written, with MarYa in the text. seems to me that it came from a Greek source.

Chayim b'Moshiach,
Jeremy


Re: The Messiah IS YHWH ---> Proven - PM Saunders - 02-06-2012

I somewhat agree with what has been said concerning John 8:11. I probably should mention on my list PeshittA/O.

Personally I use the AENT 4th which leave out that section entirely so although I include it in my list of readings for completion sake, I would not use it.

HOWEVER... that being said, in relation to what Thirdwoe said:

Quote:But, if we are to believe that the passage is inspired and part of the Orginal NT Scripture, then we must believe that this Woman had a revelation that none seemed to have had at this point, about just who Jesus was...namley, God The Word manifested in Humanity.

Despite the objections that the woman is a Samaritan... I would certainly be willing to believe she had a revelation of sorts concerning Y'shua and his identity. I myself... if I had to accept this passage would not have a hard time with it. So what if it is contrary to the norm of Samaritans? We are not quite talking about normal circumstances in general with the entire story of Y'shua.

However, I am not convinced the story should be included in the first place. But if it was to be...


Re: The Messiah IS YHWH ---> Proven - Burning one - 02-06-2012

D'oh, sorry, i just looked at the post i wrote and realized i had a MAJOR stupid moment --- mixing up the story of the woman caught in adultery with that from John 4 and the Samaritan woman... was recently doing some study on that and for some reason they merged in my mind ... wish i could say i'd been drinking <!-- s:crazy: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/crazy.gif" alt=":crazy:" title="Crazy" /><!-- s:crazy: --> ... so ignore that part of my previous post. no, she was not a Samaritan....


Chayim b'Moshiach,
Jeremy


Re: The Messiah IS YHWH ---> Proven - Thirdwoe - 02-06-2012

lol...nice one Jeremy. <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->

I'm going to look into this verse from other ancient sources and see if there is anything to be found that might explain it better.


Re: The Messiah IS YHWH ---> Proven - The Texas RAT - 10-24-2012

rungold315 Wrote:I no longer believe I should have crossed out 1 John 5:7 from my Bible, nor should I have considered questioning the Western 5 in my mind at any point, because these things dont take away from the meaning of the word.
If that be so then maybe you might want to add Proverbs 32:1 to you Bible as well
(i.e. - "And Remember:
Wisdom Never Lies Inked To The Pages Coddled By A Book
But Rather At Rest Supply About The Inside Of Open Minds
That Render The Confounds Thereof."

-- The Texas R.A.T. (2000 AD) --

I mean really it kinda in thought tops of the Book of Proverbs. I wrote it after the close of the Book of Proverbs as an endnote in my Bible, so in time you think some idiot will actually put it in the main text of their translation? And then unlearned people can either study upon the evidence or just simply follow right along and teach this to their children as part of the inspired Scriptures, yeah/nah? Oy! As you stated it does not take away from the real Scriptures other than if you take into account the verse that say do not add to or take away? <!-- sBlush --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/blush.gif" alt="Blush" title="Blush" /><!-- sBlush -->

But just because the Western 5 Books did not make it to the Eastern Assemblies hand by an Apostle does not mean that they where not written by Apostles. Kayphah[Kepha/Peter] wrote his first Epistle in Babylon and the Eastern Assemblies got their copy, but when he wrote his second Epistle he was in Rome and then he became a martyr before he could take a copy back to the Eastern Assemblies. Not his fault he did not get to deliver a copy of his second Epistle to the Eastern Assemblies. Like things happened with the other 4 of the Western 5, they just did not get delivered to the Eastern Assemblies by an Apostle is all so the Church of the East refused service is all. But they do use them for study as it is well know that they are authentic. The evidence is there.


rungold315 Wrote:And without at least Revelation, the Bible certainly wouldnt seem as complete compared to us having it (Though without it, the message still survives loud and clear and has all of what we need to be saved.
The Book of Dawnee-Ail[Daniel] and some of the other of the Books of the Scriptures actually contain enough prophecy to more than adequately make up for the lose of the Book of Revelations! But that does not mean we should throw it out as it is attested to be authentic by many ancient witnesses, along with the other of the Western 5 Books.


rungold315 Wrote:*******Note-Im still, however, really confused about the Pericope Adulterae because in THIS particular verse, there does appear to be a contradiction in what YHWH previously commanded which thus in my mind "takes away from the word" and causes damage to my spiritual trust.********

Again do not sweat the additive, just scratch them out and forget them, whether they go against Scripture or not. I had no problem drawing a line through both the Pericope Adulterae story or 1st Yo-Khawnawn 5:7 just as I suppose you would not want a Bible with my saying attached at the end of the text of Proverbs. Truly no matter how many people try to make these perverted writing Scripture (and I only call them perverted because they have been inserted into Scripture as if they were of such) they will never be as all things are to be attested to by two or three eyewitnesses and all the eyewitnesses accounts attest to the fact that these were not Scripture and therefore will not be, unless Dawnee-Ail's little Scroll is found and has these writings within! So do not ever loose Trust in the Scriptures over someone's footnote! for a good article as to the inauthenticity of the Pericope Adulterae story see:
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/103553859/23-the-Woman-Caugth-in-Adultry">http://www.scribd.com/doc/103553859/23- ... in-Adultry</a><!-- m -->

And if you are still going to cling to 1st Yo-Khawnawn 5:7 as good stuff as incerted into Scripture then you might as well take out your pen and get to writing the following into you Bible as it is all good, and actually can come in handy now and then, awmain?

All truth passes through three stages.
1)First, it is ridiculed, <!-- s:lol: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/laugh.gif" alt=":lol:" title="Laugh" /><!-- s:lol: -->
2) second it is violently opposed, <!-- s:angry: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/angry.gif" alt=":angry:" title="Angry" /><!-- s:angry: --> and
3) third, it is accepted as self-evident." <!-- s:oha: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/oha.gif" alt=":oha:" title="Oha!" /><!-- s:oha: -->
-- Arthur Schopenhauer, Philosopher, 1788-1860

"A truth's initial commotion is directly proportional to how deeply the lie was believed.
When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations,
the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker, a raving lunatic." -- Dresden James <!-- s:crazy: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/crazy.gif" alt=":crazy:" title="Crazy" /><!-- s:crazy: -->

The TRUTH is stranger than fiction only because we have been indoctrinated with a lie. <!-- sConfusedhocked: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/shocked.gif" alt="Confusedhocked:" title="Shocked" /><!-- sConfusedhocked: -->

Also:
When a man or woman is honestly mistaken and hears the truth, <!-- s:wow: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/wow.gif" alt=":wow:" title="Wow" /><!-- s:wow: -->
they will either quit being mistaken, or they will cease to be honest.
<!-- s:eh: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/eh.gif" alt=":eh:" title="Eh" /><!-- s:eh: -->

Really one needs to learn what to let go of and what to hang on to!!! Personally I will not lose Faith over the uninspired words just because someone else put them in a Bible. I may quickly lose faith in the so-called translator but not YHWH or Yehoshuah as His Anointed One. I will even lose faith in my ability to understand or fathom a thing before I will loose faith in my Creator and Saviour!