Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
How does the AENT 4th edition compare to the others?
#31
Jerry,

Perhaps it would be helpful if you understood Aramaic/Syriac at all. The "of" is totally off in your rendering, it's BS and you know it.

The Daleth Proclitic in that verse points to the verb "know", and in no way signifies "of." The Daleth Proclitic in that usage means "that." Not "of."

The English rendering is :

"Truly, therefore, let all the house of Israel KNOW THAT God has made this Yeshua whom you crucified Maryah and Meshikha."

I can't believe you actually wrote that. You don't know the first thing about Aramaic, yet you think by throwing around terms you can fool people.

That's just pathetic, Jerry. You have no business pretending to know the first thing about Aramaic, you are a fraud plain and simple. You would fail the most basic university class if you tried that garbage above.

"of-that-the-Lord" - what a monstrous construct you have created in your denial. Absolutely shameful. I am so thoroughly disgusted, I can't put it into words. You should be ashamed of yourself. Seriously. But you have no shame apparently, pretending to play translator of something you haven't the first clue about.

I don't think you realize how many people are laughing at your post, but go right ahead don't let that stop you, continue to publicly make a fool out of yourself.

Wow.

+Shamasha
#32
Matthew 22: 42-46

42. and said. What do you say about the Messiah? Whose son is he? They were saying to him, The son of David.

43. He said to them, Then how does David in the spirit call him lord? For he said,

44. The lord said to my lord, sit at my right [hand] until I place your enemies under your feet.

45. If therefore David called him lord, how is he his son?

46. And no man was able to give him an answer. And no man dared to question him again from that day [on].
#33
Hi Otto,

Could you please show what this verse reads in the latest edition of the AENT if you have one. I just have the 1st edition you sent me here.

Also...if no man can say Y'shua is "lord" but by the Holy Spirit as is taught in 1 Corinthians 12:3...and that word there "Marya" means just a "lord"...then how is it that we see Y'shua saying that when He returns, many will be saying to Him, "lord, lord"...Matt 25:11, Luke 13:25...yet He will be telling them, that He never knew them?

If Jesus did not know these people who call Him "lord", how can they be calling Him "lord" by the Holy Spirit, since 1 Corinthians teaches us they can't do so?

I believe that "Marya" is to be translated as both Roth & Baucsher indicate, and which Paul Younan attests to as the correct translation. It can't be the same term as a regular "lord"...as I have shown above and line up with the teaching of Scripture.

If we say that "Marya" is the same thing as "Maran" in the Aramaic Scriptures...then 1 Corinthians 12:3 "Marya" and Matthew 25:11, Luke 13:25 "Maran" is a contradiction in teaching by the Holy Spirit...and we know that is never true.

"...no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Spirit." 1 Cor 12:3

"Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in your name? and in your name have cast out devils? and in your name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess to them, I never knew you: depart from me, you that work iniquity." Matt 25:11

The Greek shows no distiction of "lord" as both show the word kurios in these verses...whereas the Aramaic does show a distinction of the words used by Paul, Matthew and Luke, as inspiried by the Holy Spirit to write down the words.



Blessings.
#34
I have only the First and Seccond Editions of AENT. They are the same in these verses.

In Paul Younan's translation he uses the term "LORD" in snall capital letters to distingish it from the common word "lord".

Otto
#35
To me "LORD"...means "YHWH" and MARYAH does as well..as both Younan, Roth, and Baucsher have taught.

We know that it has always been taught that The Word of God did ALL the speaking and interacting with mankind from the start...and He became a Human Being for our salvation.

I thus have ZERO hesitency in believing that Y'shua IS YHWH in the flesh. NONE has ever seen GOD at ANY time...but the Only Begotten of GOD, The Word of GOD...has made HIM known.

The teaching of the early Christians was always that THE FATHER was unnamed...And that the Word of GOD, was the one who spoke to the Patriarchs and Prophets through various ways, until at last He was manifested in flesh.

Blessings.
#36
Paul Younan Wrote:Jerry,

Perhaps it would be helpful if you understood Aramaic/Syriac at all. The "of" is totally off in your rendering, it's BS and you know it.

The Daleth Proclitic in that verse points to the verb "know", and in no way signifies "of." The Daleth Proclitic in that usage means "that." Not "of."

The English rendering is :

"Truly, therefore, let all the house of Israel KNOW THAT God has made this Yeshua whom you crucified Maryah and Meshikha."

I can't believe you actually wrote that. You don't know the first thing about Aramaic, yet you think by throwing around terms you can fool people.

That's just pathetic, Jerry. You have no business pretending to know the first thing about Aramaic, you are a fraud plain and simple. You would fail the most basic university class if you tried that garbage above.

"of-that-the-Lord" - what a monstrous construct you have created in your denial. Absolutely shameful. I am so thoroughly disgusted, I can't put it into words. You should be ashamed of yourself. Seriously. But you have no shame apparently, pretending to play translator of something you haven't the first clue about.

I don't think you realize how many people are laughing at your post, but go right ahead don't let that stop you, continue to publicly make a fool out of yourself.

Wow.

+Shamasha
Since you yourself repeatedly translate (d:mor:yo-) as "of the LORD", then you must be disgusted with yourself. And rightfully so, for if you cannot translate it consistently that way, then it is the fault of you and your grammar; not a fault of mine.

And if your heart tells you to personally assault others in the way you did to me above, then you need to examine your heart as well. For in your attempts to blindly judge me, you have judged only yourself. And lastly, how can you claim to be a moderator, let alone the chief moderator, if it is you who needs to be moderated?
#37
Shlama Akhi Jerry:
One thing is obvious to me. Yuo do not know when instruction is available and in what form it is being presented. Shamasha Paul Younan is correct in his admonition to you. To the hungry soul every bitter (or perceived bitterness) is sweet. Akhi Paul doesn't pull his punches. He doesn't have to when it comes to Aramaic and the Peshitta in particular. Aramaic is his mother tongue and all of the Aramaic speakers who plug into Peshitta.org and Dukhrana Biblical Research at Dukhrana.com have nothing to be ashamed of. However, I am not an Aramic speaker and barely understand the language. I do my best with what I have at 60 years of age. In spite of my limitations I have learned a tremendous amount of very useful knowledge from watching and listening and reading the posts arguments and counter-argments as well as the clear as a bell teaching fro Shamasha Paul Younan.
Someimes Akhi Jerry, the only thing that keeps us from knowledge is pride and pre-conceived ideas. So read the posts carefully and ask Alaha, YHVH our Elohim to target your attitude as we all should, indeed must do. When you are corrected it is in a spirit of love with a healthy helping of sarcasm. That's Shamasha Paul's style and it works well for him and those of us who appreciate his no nonsense, down to earth teaching methods. You are not the first and you won't be the last to experience his tongue in cheek methodology. <!-- sBlush --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/blush.gif" alt="Blush" title="Blush" /><!-- sBlush -->

Shlama,
Stehen Silver
(another Moderator at Peshitta.org)
#38
Jerry Wrote:Since you yourself repeatedly translate (d:mor:yo-) as "of the LORD", then you must be disgusted with yourself. And rightfully so, for if you cannot translate it consistently that way, then it is the fault of you and your grammar; not a fault of mine.

Neda Kula Beth Israel d'Marya w'Meshikha Awdeh Alaha l'Hana Yeshua = "Let be known to all the house of Israel ... That LORD and Messiah has God made this Yeshua..."

The Daleth Proclitic in front of Marya there is NOT "of"...as evidenced also by the subsequent Waw Proclitic (and) in front of Meshikha. This is elementary, Jerry. But in your dogmatic blindness you cannot see what an elementary schoolboy can with very beginning grammar lessons.

Utterly ridiculous. You have no business claiming to be a translator of this language. None whatsoever. You are a loose canon translating from dictionaries with only barely the most basic understanding of how to read letters and look up words in lexicons. A totally loose canon you are.

You cannot translate a language from books, you do not understand the grammar nor can you hold the most basic conversation in this language. Please stop pretending to be something you are not, because it is painfully obvious that you are not.

Jerry Wrote:And if your heart tells you to personally assault others in the way you did to me above, then you need to examine your heart as well. For in your attempts to blindly judge me, you have judged only yourself. And lastly, how can you claim to be a moderator, let alone the chief moderator, if it is you who needs to be moderated?

Sometimes harsh words are warranted and deserved. Do not make a mockery of this language and this text, as you are doing. I've said before and I'll say it again, the one thing that gets under my skin like nothing else is when someone like you, who knows nothing, alters this language and this text for his own purpose. You may think we don't know what you're doing, but we do, trust me.

+Shamasha
#39
Paul Younan Wrote:Neda Kula Beth Israel d'Marya w'Meshikha Awdeh Alaha l'Hana Yeshua = "Let be known to all the house of Israel ... That LORD and Messiah has God made this Yeshua..."
+Shamasha
It is more appropriately written and translated in this way:

shariy:ro-yith hokiyl neda' kuleh `beyth -iys:royel ; d:mor:yo- wamConfusedhiy:cho- 'ab:reh -aloho- ; l:hono- yesuw' da-n`tuwn z:qap`tuwn

Surely hence to-know each-him among Yisroyel; of-that-of-Lord and-the-Anointed made-him the-Alah; to-such-this Yeshua, of-yourselves ye-crucified.

Note that the verse is parsed with two hard breaks ";", creating 3 separate clauses in the verse. You can derive these parsings by looking at the verse on the CAL website.

And (`beyth) is a split word, seldom used as the construct form of "house", typically when applicable to a building, as in "the-house-of the-prayer". Instead, by default, (`beyth) is almost always a particle meaning "among". As in "and-another (seed) fell among the-thorns".
#40
Stephen Silver Wrote:Shlama Akhi Jerry:
One thing is obvious to me. Yuo do not know when instruction is available and in what form it is being presented. Shamasha Paul Younan is correct in his admonition to you. To the hungry soul every bitter (or perceived bitterness) is sweet. Akhi Paul doesn't pull his punches. He doesn't have to when it comes to Aramaic and the Peshitta in particular. Aramaic is his mother tongue and all of the Aramaic speakers who plug into Peshitta.org and Dukhrana Biblical Research at Dukhrana.com have nothing to be ashamed of. However, I am not an Aramic speaker and barely understand the language. I do my best with what I have at 60 years of age. In spite of my limitations I have learned a tremendous amount of very useful knowledge from watching and listening and reading the posts arguments and counter-argments as well as the clear as a bell teaching fro Shamasha Paul Younan.
Someimes Akhi Jerry, the only thing that keeps us from knowledge is pride and pre-conceived ideas. So read the posts carefully and ask Alaha, YHVH our Elohim to target your attitude as we all should, indeed must do. When you are corrected it is in a spirit of love with a healthy helping of sarcasm. That's Shamasha Paul's style and it works well for him and those of us who appreciate his no nonsense, down to earth teaching methods. You are not the first and you won't be the last to experience his tongue in cheek methodology. <!-- sBlush --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/blush.gif" alt="Blush" title="Blush" /><!-- sBlush -->

Shlama,
Stehen Silver
(another Moderator at Peshitta.org)
Stephen, if you consider personal assault and intimidation to be instruction, then you have a lot to learn about instruction, and correction as well. Some of the things in your post are accurate, you just haven't figured out yet who they apply to.
#41
Jerry Wrote:It is more appropriately written and translated in this way:

shariy:ro-yith hokiyl neda' kuleh `beyth -iys:royel ; d:mor:yo- wamConfusedhiy:cho- 'ab:reh -aloho- ; l:hono- yesuw' da-n`tuwn z:qap`tuwn

Surely hence to-know each-him among Yisroyel; of-that-of-Lord and-the-Anointed made-him the-Alah; to-such-this Yeshua, of-yourselves ye-crucified.

Note that the verse is parsed with two hard breaks ";", creating 3 separate clauses in the verse. You can derive these parsings by looking at the verse on the CAL website.

No, it is not more appropriately written and translated that way: there are no hard breaks in the text, you made them up to suit your purpose. The proper way to write "of-that-of-Lord" is *not* to include a single Daleth Proclitic. You're missing a Proclitic there buddy. To say "that-of-the-LORD" in Aramaic would be da'd'MarYah.

Jerry Wrote:And (`beyth) is a split word, seldom used as the construct form of "house", typically when applicable to a building, as in "the-house-of the-prayer". Instead, by default, (`beyth) is almost always a particle meaning "among". As in "and-another (seed) fell among the-thorns".

Not when used in "beth Israel" and other constructs, which refers to the nation of Israel.

Again, you have no place translating this language. God help your readers if they trust you understood anything about what you are translating.

+Shamasha
#42
Paul Younan Wrote:there are no hard breaks in the text, you made them up to suit your purpose.
+Shamasha
So did the Peshitta text on the CAL site make them up to suit my purpose as well?
#43
Paul Younan Wrote:Not when used in "beth Israel" and other constructs, which refers to the nation of Israel.
+Shamasha
I don't think so. Consider this example:

and-the-many the-lepers being they-were among Yisroyel, in-the-days-of Elisha the-prophet - Luke 4:27

I know others often translate it as "the-house-of", but I think it is a misread of the word. The probability is that "among" is the default word, and the construct "the-house-of" a rare exception, when it actually refers to a house or building. I have yet to see it used next to "Israel" when it could not be translated as "among".
#44
Paul Younan Wrote:Again, you have no place translating this language. God help your readers if they trust you understood anything about what you are translating.

+Shamasha
You have no place insulting me the way you do, and I have as much place in translating the Peshitta as any other.
#45
Jerry Wrote:So did the Peshitta text on the CAL site make them up to suit my purpose as well?

I don't translate from the CAL site: I translate from the text itself. Find a manuscript with the hard breaks you and CAL propose and we'll discuss it.


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)