12-29-2010, 08:42 PM
konway87 Wrote:Hello Stephen,
I do disagree with Dave Bauscher on certain things. But I do feel that he is right when it comes to Revelation. This is because of the Aramaic poetry and other interesting things in Revelation.
I believe Revelation was written in Aramaic, because of several reasons.
Let me give some outside reasons. Apollonius of Tyana was a Greek philosopher who lived during the time of Nero. He calls Nero a "Beast." He says like this about Nero - "In my travels, which have been wider than ever man yet accomplished, I have seen man, many wild beasts of Arabia and India; but this beast, that is commonly called a Tyrant, I know not how many heads it has, nor if it be crooked of claw, and armed with horrible fangs. ... And of wild beasts you cannot say that they were ever known to eat their own mother, but Nero has gorged himself on this diet."
Also More about Nero and 666 can be seen in this link.
Shlama:
Excellent insights. However, I don't spend very much time with the Western Five (II Peter, II John, III John, Jude and the book of Revelation. So far, in repeat, there is no proof that any present version of the book of Revelation is the Original Aramaic. It is more likely that they were written after 70 A.D. and were not hand delivered by an Apostle to the Church of Babylon as was the 22 book Aramaic Peshitta by the Apostle Peter. Therefore they do no have the same authority as the Peshitta New Testament. To teac otherwise is speculative at best and David Bauscher seems to have done just that. Western Christianity is absorbed by the Book of Revelation because of the way it ties end times together into a seeming chronological prophetic message. However, I think that it was written around 70 A.D. and refers to Caesar Nero and was not written in 95 A.D. In my honest opinion the W-5 were late books originally written in Aramaic which were not included with the 22 bok Aramaic New Testament. Again, in my personal opinion, in spite of David Bauscher's claims to the contrary, the Book of Revelation in it's original K'tav Ashuri were copied into Greek, before the end of the first Century. The Church of the East has had no knowledge of them till they circulated in Europe around 1000 years later. There may have been at that time in Europe Aramaic translations from the Greek. This is why the Assyrian Church of the East uses the Western-5 but not to the degree of authority that the 22 book Aramaic Peshitta New Testament is held as the absolute authority. There is no ambiguity with any of the books of the 22 book Aramaic New Testament Peshitta used by the Holy Apostolic Catholic Assyrian Church of the East today. However Western Christianity is absolutely fascinated by the Book of Revelation as the quintessential prophetic text of End-Time events. I just don't buy into the Revelation teaching.
I'm not a preterist in all things but I am concerning what is written in the Book of Revelation.
As for II John and III John, there is no proof that John the Presbyter is the same John that wrote the Gospel of John and who wrote the book of Revelation. There are repeated portions between Jude and II Peter and so there is doubt in my mind that either book is originally Apostolic.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beast_(preterism">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beast_(preterism</a><!-- m -->)
Shlama,
Stephen Silver
Dukhrana Biblical Research
<!-- w --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- w -->