Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Errors in the Peshitta OT from the Leiden instittute.
Non-blogger dave:

You answered my question just fine. Before I answer your good question concerning transliteration, I would like to further explore the Aramaic translation of Aramaic issue.

Chris Lancaster (quote)

However, there are three places where the ???translation??? (an explanation actually) still occurs in the Peshitta, and Greek primacists are only too eager to say ???Look at how silly the Peshitta is! It mentions the phrase in Aramaic, then says it in Aramaic again!??? These few examples actually have good reason for allegedly ???doubling up??? ??? and the repeated phrase is always different.

1) In Mark 3:17, Jesus calls James and John, ???sons of thunder???. The Peshitta then follows with the ???translation/explanation???, just like the Greek, because ???bnay raghshee???, ???sons of thunder???, can also mean ???sons of rage???. Gospel writer Mark merely explains that the intended meaning was ???thunder???.

2) The Peshitta again seemingly repeats itself in Acts 1:19 with ???akeldama???, ???field of blood???, followed by an explanation. This explanation is given, because ???akeldama??? was a local nickname for that field and would most probably not have been understood by foreigners, even if they spoke Aramaic.

3) In Mark 15:34, we have the famous ???my God, my God, why have you spared me???? As expected, in the Greek, we are given a translation. But in the Aramaic, we are also given this explanation. The reason is most likely that Jesus, coming from Galillee, spoke the Gallilean dialect of Aramaic. Mark, then ???translates??? the words into the Judean dialect of Aramaic, so his audience could understand. This is somewhat confirmed by some Jews at the time, thinking that Jesus called out to Elijah.

(end of quote)

Although I have already demonstrated that it was'nt jews who mistook Jesus's words for Elijah (and that it was the centurions standing near), I like Chris Lancaster's compilation. I wonder if it's complete.

My question is: Are there instances in the Peshitta - other than these three - where Aramaic of a different dialect is used and a translation was NOT provided by the author? In this case, it might be possible that the authors of the peshitta took their cue from a Greek text for the three passages listed by Chris Lancaster?

Ask me to re-phrase this if it is unclear.

As for the transliterations. This is a very good point. Do you have a complete list. It does'nt seem to be in Chris Lancaster's book.

I have a stupid question: Could the Aramaic authors have transliterated Greek terms which were borrowed from a semitic term - like a Hebrew or even Aramaic term (whithout direct gleaning from the Peshitta). I know this seems absurd - but maybe Greeks came to borrow terms from Aramaic - included it in their vocabulary, wrote the books - and then the Peshitta authors re-translated these terms back to Aramaic. You prabably think I'm nuts now - but I'm just trying to explore any possibility - I am already concivinced of Aramaic Primacy - but when I will encounter greek primacists, I want to be ready for anything.

Thanks a bunch.
Hi John,

Have you read my articles on my web site ?
I list the transliterated Aramaic words in the Greek NT (article on the Greek word "ermhneuo").

There is a list of all the words obtainable on the net. I will try to find it again. I believe I listed most of them in my last post . The locations would have to be searched on a good Bible program in the Greek NT . I can do that if you cannot. Let me know.

I know there are over 200 occurrences of these in the Greek NT.

As far as Aramaic transliterating Greek words, I don't believe it occurs. There are borrowed words in every language- words borrowed from another language. Some say "Eunglion" in Aramaic is borrowed from the Greek "euangelion" (gospel).

I disagree; "Eunglion" in Hebrew and Aramaic means "powerful scroll". It may be the Greek borrowed this from Aramaic !
"Chiliarch" (Tribune) in Aramaic probably comes from the Greek term . Also the word "Stratiota" -soldier is from the Greek "Stratioths" . These were local phenomena in Palestine which had Roman soldiers who spoke Greek and Latin. There are also Latin borrowed words in Aramaic and in the Greek NT. These are mostly place names local to Jerusalem. "Preatorium" is one Latin name.

It would be good to compile the lists. The Greek NT , however, testifies openly to being a translation of an Aramaic source. Have a look at my web site at the link on the bottom of this page.


Dave Bauscher
Get my NT translations, books & articles at :
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m --> and
I also have articles at
I'm sorry Dave,

You've been a good help and much of what you've had to say is congruent.

But the ELS model is very unscientific and brings your data into question, and this in turn casts a shadow over your contribution to the Aramaic Primacy discussions.

If you are looking for hidden meaning within the letters of the text, I strongly suggest reading up on Kabbalah. The foremost author is Gershom Gerhard Scholem. Two good books to start up on are:

Gershom Gerhard Scholem. Kabbalah. (New York Quadrangle/New York Times Book Co. 1974) Read the section on "BASIC IDEAS IN KABALLAH"

Gershom Gerhard Scholem. Kabbalah and its symbolism. (Shocken books ??? New York 1969) Read chapter 3 - 'THE MEANING OF THE TORAH IN JEWISH MYSTICISM"

In understanding Kabbalah, you will understand the futility of ELS.

Thanks for your help.
Hi John,

I'm sorry too !


Dave Bauscher
Get my NT translations, books & articles at :
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""></a><!-- m --> and
I also have articles at
Hmmmmm, interesting.

So John, me understand something here, are you saying that this code theory that Dave has been promoting is linked with Kaballah?

Really I would like to understand what you just eluded to and how this is similar, if you would explain please.
The ELS model is based on math, in the relative numerical spacings between letters in the Hebrew OT, whereas the Kabbalah, at it's core, deals with the symbolism involved in each letter, and only in the most degraded forms deals with numerology, what is called Gematria.

I will be publishing soon in a work called Bob.

If you want to explore it further for now, the two books I mentioned above are a very good start.
I see, interesting!

Then according to what you have just said, that made what I commented on here before correct then, that Dave's methods in this were completely dependant upon book arrangment, and if one book was taken out of the current arrangement, the code display would completely disapear.

This could be demonstrated by the books that Luke wrote in the NT.

Anyone can say with relative boldness, that The Acts of The Apostles was written by Luke as his second book, so it would stem to reason that his second book should have followed his gospel, and it would be easy to arrange it chronologically like that.

I suppose Dave would be vehemently against that, to say the least, but it is quite reasonable to do it that way. One of the Old Syriac manuscripts was actually arranged to where it could do just that: Matthew, Mark, John, Luke,...and Acts, if it had a manuscript in that language, would have followed in that progression.

Anyways, thank you for the explanation John. I don't know if I would find time to study the word in the manner that you explained, as The Lord has more things for me to do at the moment, but the method you mentioned seems to have more thought placed in it for the individual then a numerical method, as your actually reviewing the words, structures, and symbolisms involved rather than a numerical calculation.

I hope I understood you correctly in that.
You seem to judge our friend Dave with quite a heavy hand.

Is it not written: 'do not judge lest ye be judged by the same measure'

Dave has many valid points and has been quite helpful to me.

The modern state of Aramaic scholarship is so poor that any of us should be commended for trying to make heads or tails of the mess on our own accord, with our spare time.

I simply stated my views on ELS.

To me, the issue is even simpler than my abstract Kabbalah thing. If ELS were true then every word of the good book would have had to have been tailored to meet the needs of the code. Try writing an intricate parable like Jesus taught and write it with a strict amount of letters! Impossible. I think the guy who first came out with it believes that Aliens planted the message or something and discusses this in his new book.

But we all need to just chill and take this whole Aramaic thing with a grain of salt. The good book is just a set of symbols! And symbols are not perfect, even if Aramaic is the Original language of the text. Language has limits.

Actually, I do have that sort of scrutiny applied to me considerably, not just here, but in life. I think it all relegates back to satan and I personally hating each other. But yea, I tend to apply that back at folks at times.

Dave is a great teacher of Hebrew, he has a nack for explaining it very well to the laymen and inviting the interest during the explanation, but it is overshadowed by this code theory thing and his personal peshitta-onlyism beliefs. With that in mind, I've seen some outlandish claims and excuses applied by many here when the text would be questioned against the greek. Basically, it looked and felt more like a prejudice directed squarely against the greek from a culturistic standpoint. This is still apparent in a majority of the messianic communities as you breeze through what they uphold.

Other than that, I do still feel that the syriac text is very good for manuscript comparisons with the greek, but I don't pit it against the greek and it's mound of manuscript and historical evidence, especially against The Lord and His desire to use greek down through the ages. There are certain things one must pick up on to see the hand of GOD in, and that is one of them. But enough on that for now.

Thanks for making me more aware of some of the Kabbalah aspects and those things you are working with!

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)