06-16-2011, 02:39 AM
One who cannot separate a speculative theory from a theological belief has proven only his own arrogance.
One posts a fervent requirement for believing in a MarYah interpretation, then posts a translation that renders it as "Master YHWH". You would think they would at least live by their own dogma. These people change the words of the Peshitta to fit their own opinions. They even pretend to know better what Kipha had in mind in Acts 2:38 than the original authors of the Peshitta itself.
The same people who believe that 7,000 instances of a placeholder MarYah is proof of a sacred proper noun, want us to believe that 7,000 instances of a placeholder Lord is not. They are right on the latter, and wrong on the former. They want us to believe that MauR-Yau` and Mau-Ra-Yau` are completely unrelated, as though one is a sacred proper noun, and the other is just a word that means "the-lords". They want us to believe that the sacred proper noun MauR-Yau` (MarYah as they say) just coincidentally falls into the same root as the one for "the-lord" Mau-Rau`. They want us to believe the impossible.
In their wildest imaginations, if all their assumptions were correct, the farthest they could ever take the word is "Lord God", a slightly more embellished placeholder than "the-Lord". Yet they market it as some sacred proper noun, even a test of one's theological belief. As though your entrance into heaven is dependant upon you believing their version of MarYah. Or that one cannot not know the relationship between Yeshua and YHWH unless first believing their speculative theory of a proper noun.
A significant reason for me learning to do my own translation of the Peshitta NT, is to get away from the hype and pseudo doctrine being marketed on the internet, and sadly even on sites like this.
One posts a fervent requirement for believing in a MarYah interpretation, then posts a translation that renders it as "Master YHWH". You would think they would at least live by their own dogma. These people change the words of the Peshitta to fit their own opinions. They even pretend to know better what Kipha had in mind in Acts 2:38 than the original authors of the Peshitta itself.
The same people who believe that 7,000 instances of a placeholder MarYah is proof of a sacred proper noun, want us to believe that 7,000 instances of a placeholder Lord is not. They are right on the latter, and wrong on the former. They want us to believe that MauR-Yau` and Mau-Ra-Yau` are completely unrelated, as though one is a sacred proper noun, and the other is just a word that means "the-lords". They want us to believe that the sacred proper noun MauR-Yau` (MarYah as they say) just coincidentally falls into the same root as the one for "the-lord" Mau-Rau`. They want us to believe the impossible.
In their wildest imaginations, if all their assumptions were correct, the farthest they could ever take the word is "Lord God", a slightly more embellished placeholder than "the-Lord". Yet they market it as some sacred proper noun, even a test of one's theological belief. As though your entrance into heaven is dependant upon you believing their version of MarYah. Or that one cannot not know the relationship between Yeshua and YHWH unless first believing their speculative theory of a proper noun.
A significant reason for me learning to do my own translation of the Peshitta NT, is to get away from the hype and pseudo doctrine being marketed on the internet, and sadly even on sites like this.