Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
How does the AENT 4th edition compare to the others?
#16
... Said the-Lord to-my-lord, "Sit to-thee from my-right until of-I-to-set thy-foes a-stool to-thy-feet." Surely hence to-know each-him among Yisroyel, of-the-Lord and-the-Anointed made-him the-Alah, to-such-this Yeshua; of-yourselves, ye-crucified.

- Acts 2:35-36

The "a-lord" / "the-lord" combo is not the only possibility for (mor:yo-). Other possibilities might be "that-of-the-Lord" or maybe "the-Lord-God". Both would work contextually in all uses, in my opinion, and would free up (moro-) to be used as "a-lord" / "the-lord".
#17
:

Thanks Jerry,

You rendered part of the verse thus: "Said the-Lord to-my-lord,"

I notice here that you have a capital L in the 1st instance and a small l for the 2nd...is this the way it must be linguisticly, or is that your choice of interpretation? Could it be thus? "Said the-Lord to-my-Lord"

Here is the way the others in the past 150 years have rendered it...are they all wrong here? Both Lord and Lord...Capital "L"

(Etheridge) that the Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand until I put thine adversaries beneath thy feet.
(Murdock) The Lord said to my Lord, Seat thyself at my right hand, until I place thy enemies under thy feet.
(Lamsa) The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at my right hand, until I put your enemies under your feet.



I also noticed that the way this is rendered..is very obsure...this would be very hard to decifer if it were an English translation.

Could you give an understandable English Translation of this part? As an English speaker/reader...this makes no sense at all to me. It is also backward in word order of course, so in English word order it would read like this if "Lord" were used rather than "Marya" or "Master YHWH" ---> "Assuredly, then, let all the house of Israel know, that Lord and Meshiha hath Aloha made this Jeshu, whom you crucified."
-Etherige

Where are you getting the "of" here in your rendering "of-the-Lord and-the-Anointed" ?

And I notice that you have the Capital "L" back in the verse...seeming to my mind, that you want to make a distiction that this is God, "big Lord"...and not Yeshua, "little lord". Is this what you are wanting to convey? And if so or if not...does the lingistics force you to do this..or is this just your personal choice?

You renderd part of the verse thus: ---> "of-the-Lord and-the-Anointed made-him the-Alah, to-such-this Yeshua; of-yourselves, ye-crucified."


Blessings.
#18
Thirdwoe, regarding the capital "L", I could write lord everytime with a small "l" and it wouldn't make a bit of difference, because it is the words and the context that matter, not the capital letter. The "y" in (mor:yo-) is likely indicative of a capital "L", except in Aramaic the "y" is more likely a word than a capitalized letter. Something like "that-of-the-lord" vs just "the-lord". Aramaic doesn't use capital letters.

Though Etheridge is seldom paid much respect, I find him to be the most sensitive to Aramaic nuances. Notice how he used "that the Lord said unto my Lord", when none of the others did.
#19
If English syntax helps you to understand the verse better, this may be of help:

That of the Lord said to my lord, "Sit to you from my right until of I to set your foes (as) a stool to your feet." Surely hence each him among Israel to know, of God made him to such this Yeshua that of the Lord and the Anointed; of you yourselves crucified.
#20
I guess I should just be greatful that you haven't produced another Peshitta translation in English, so as not cause more confusion...if this is what you would come up with as a rendering I mean...its hard enough to make some things out, without all that jumble... <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->

You wrote: But if English syntax helps you to understand the verse better, this may be of help: "That of the Lord said to my lord, "Sit to you from my right until of I to set your foes (as) a stool to your feet." Surely hence each him among Israel to know, of God made him to such this Yeshua that of the Lord and the Anointed; of you yourselves crucified."

I think I'll keep with the translations that are available Jerry... I don't think you're being serious though.... <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->
#21
I guess I should be grateful that all are not as ungrateful as you, or as inept.
#22
I'll take that as a compliment Jerry. <!-- s:biggrin: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/biggrin.gif" alt=":biggrin:" title="Big Grin" /><!-- s:biggrin: -->
#23
Your self adulation is what likely keeps you from discerning. It is not so much that you are inept, but froward (wilfully contrary), with never an intention of discerning.
#24
Jerry,

True Discerning is a spiritual gift...where the Holy Spirit gives the instruction...not something that is of the mind of men that comes through learning...

The Holy Spirit has instructed me (long before) I knew about the Peshitta, that Jesus is GOD in the flesh...Fully Both GOD & Man in ONE Person...that makes Him YHWH IN Human form...GOD with us (Emmanuel).

What I am seeing with you though Jerry...seems to be the willful attempt at trying with all your linguistic might to try to disprove this?

WHY? Does it bug your theology so much?

The Peshitta...much more so than the Greek text, shows that Jesus is indeed YHWH manifested in and through Him (The Messiah) and The Messiah is not just a Man with GOD in Him mind you...HE is GOD!

Like it or not.

If a person has The Holy Spirit of Jesus and His Father in them...they Have GOD in them, they being the dwelling place of GOD...which has many rooms.

Blessings,
Chuck

..
#25
Thirdwoe, I don't translate theologies, just words. You seem more interested in having your specific theology translated, than having the words of the Peshitta translated.

I'm sure there are plenty of theology forums, where you can promote your theology as superior to all others, without even knowing what the "theology" of the others is.
#26
I don't see you honestly translating there Jerry...I see you trying to force your theology, more than trying to be honest with the text...with the little "l"s and big "L"s...and added words that don't exist in the text...making things more obscure.

And perhaps this Scripture tells us why that is?

...."neither can a man say that Y'shua is Master YHWH, except by the Ruach haKodesh." 1 Corinthians 12:3b

Jerry...can you say it?

I can...Praise YHWH!

If this verse is not correct, as Andrew Gabrial Roth renders it such...and Paul Younan agrees with the translation, then perhaps you would have the text read in English ---> "neither can a man say Y'shua is lord, except by the Ruach haKodesh." Small "l" and all.

If so...how is it that Y'shua tells us that many false anointed ones will say to Him on the day of judgment "lord, lord" or "my master, my master"...if only the Ruach haKodesh can inspire that belief in God's people?

And notice that they don't call Him MarYah or "Master YHWH" there in the Aramaic text...as in 1 Cor 12:3 ...but rather "mari"...which can carry the meaing of just a regular "master" ...and that should tell you something.

Being ignorant of who Y'shua is, is one thing...but seeing it spelled out in God's Holy Scriptures and still denying it, and even trying to hide the Truth of what is revealed there...is much, much more serious a matter...But as we are told...its only by the Holy Spirit that one can call Y'shua "Master YHWH".

I am going to go with what The Holy Spirit has witnessed to me these 30 years...and what my Brothers, Roth & Younan, have confirmed that The Aramaic Peshitta text reveals to be so.

Jerry,

You would be wiser to focus on some correct theology studies, more than you do on linguistic studies..because its much more important for you.

May MarYah help you see the Truth.

..
#27
Shlama Chuck,

I think you could be kinder to Jerry. In fact, I have not seen him to twist the text to support any theology. Rather, if anything, he tends to be so careful and literal that the English translation is difficult to understand. However, the point is that he tries very hard to capture every nuance in the original text, which is as unbiased as you can get. In any case, it doesn't help discussion to adopt the tone you have.

Jerry, I don't know why you want to translate "marya" as "of-the-Lord". Where does the "of" come from? Are you speculating that "marya" could be an adjective rather than a noun?

bar Sinko
#28
Greetings bar Sinko,

I don't see things as you do.

I see major bias in the way in which Jerry is going about to "translate" these verses.

And my tone has not been bad or wrong with him, as far as I can detect...but it is critical of what Jerry is doing in my judgment, which I see as an attempt to twist the meaning that is not there...it seems to me to be that way.

And if you would correct me for this....then this is the same thing that he has said I am doing...if you took notice of the whole conversation...will you be ballanced in your corrections?

And as to being "kinder"...I'll do my best to be as gentle as possible concerning this matter, since I know people can be offended easily...did you think that Jerry's tone with me was kind and sweet? If so, perhaps I can use some of his terms when referring to him, as he did for me...would that be going in the right direction in your judgment?

And do you believe that Andrew Gabriel Roth, has mis-translated all the places where he renders "Marya" as "Master YHWH". And if so, how would you translate the verses?

Lamsa, often in the same passages, translates "Marya" as LORD...rather than Lord or lord...as Jerry is doing here...is Jerry more accurate than both Lamsa and Roth...and Younan for that matter, who supports Roth's translation in this instance I believe, from other posts where Jerry and Paul have spoken about the issue.

What is your belief about Y'shua being YHWH in the flesh...? Do you believe it, don't believe it, don't know?

I am not upset with Jerry in the slightest, just in case you might think that way...just calling him on what I see as a theological bias in what he is doing...and he seems to think that same things of me, and those who would translate the way as it stands in the Lamsa and Roth versions.

Slamah,
Chuck
#29
bar Sinko Wrote:Jerry, I don't know why you want to translate "marya" as "of-the-Lord". Where does the "of" come from? Are you speculating that "marya" could be an adjective rather than a noun?

I'd like to know the answer to this question as well.

Thirdwoe Wrote:I see major bias in the way in which Jerry is going about to "translate" these verses.

*this*

I'm leaning towards this explanation myself. My opinion is based on prior discussions on this board where Jerry seemed to be searching for any sort of evidence to justify what appeared to me to be his denial of the established Aramaic/Syriac usage of MRYA, as demonstrated ad nauseum in both the primary texts and patristic history.

I don't really like to delve into theological wars here, but when someone alters words to fit into an agenda, that's when I get irked...

+Shamasha
#30
bar Sinko Wrote:Jerry, I don't know why you want to translate "marya" as "of-the-Lord". Where does the "of" come from? Are you speculating that "marya" could be an adjective rather than a noun?
bar Sinko
Greetings bar Sinko,

I appreciate your interest in word-for-word translation, although it does require some acclimation to the Aramaic syntax. I presume you are referring to where I used "of-the-Lord" in Acts 2:36. The "of" comes from the "d" prefix, seventh word down:

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://dukhrana.com/peshitta/analyze_verse.php?lang=en&verse=Acts+2:36&source=ubs&font=Estrangelo+Edessa&size=150">http://dukhrana.com/peshitta/analyze_ve ... a&size=150</a><!-- m -->%
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://dukhrana.com/lexicon/word.php?adr=2:12375&font=Estrangelo+Edessa">http://dukhrana.com/lexicon/word.php?ad ... elo+Edessa</a><!-- m -->

So if one presumes (mor:yo-) to be "the-lord", or more likely "that-the-lord", then (d:mor:yo-) would be either "of-the-lord" or "of-that-the-lord". So the problem is not with the "of", but perhaps in understanding the nature of the "of" in the Aramaic syntax.

For Act 2:36, it might be helpful to look first at the English syntax, then the Aramaic syntax:

"... the Alah made him of-that-the-Lord, and the Anointed ..." (English syntax)
"... of-that-the-Lord and the Anointed, made him the Alah ..." (Aramaic syntax)

Best regards


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)