12-15-2012, 08:24 PM
:
How about these two in the 5th, Luc?
In Rev 14:10, Roth has "...the wine of the wrath of Elohim..." Where the text actually reads "...the wine of the wrath of Marya (Master Yah)..." both Baucsher and Magiera has the right reading, though they use the form of Marya that they like..."The Lord Jehovah" (B) and The LORD (M).
In Rev 14:13, Roth has "...that die in Master YHWH from now on." Where the text actually reads d'Maran = The Master, so it should read thus. "...that die (or depart) in The Master from now on." Which both Baucsher and Magiera have in their translations of the same text that Roth says he uses. No note in Roth's edition that I have.
Do you see his doctrinal bias there, Luc? I do. Here is even a bolder statement. Andrew is doing everything he can to try to make the text read the way he wants it to, even to the point of adding to God's word, to make it seem as if it supports his pet doctrines.
Here are two literal examples of what the text actually has there...
2 Corinthians 13:5 ?Examine your soul, if in The Faith you stand. Repair your soul; or else, you are not understanding of Eshu M?shikha, that you are in Him, and if not, you are rejected ones.? Literal Khabouris rendering.
2 Corinthians 13:5 ?Examine your souls ? if you stand in the trust ? you ? test your own souls. Or know you not that Yah Shua the Meshiah is within you, and if not, that you be rejected?? - Aramaic New Covenant - Herb Jhan
..
How about these two in the 5th, Luc?
In Rev 14:10, Roth has "...the wine of the wrath of Elohim..." Where the text actually reads "...the wine of the wrath of Marya (Master Yah)..." both Baucsher and Magiera has the right reading, though they use the form of Marya that they like..."The Lord Jehovah" (B) and The LORD (M).
In Rev 14:13, Roth has "...that die in Master YHWH from now on." Where the text actually reads d'Maran = The Master, so it should read thus. "...that die (or depart) in The Master from now on." Which both Baucsher and Magiera have in their translations of the same text that Roth says he uses. No note in Roth's edition that I have.
Quote:And... I wanted to get your guys' take on an updated, amplified passage. 2 Corinthians 13:5 - "Don't you acknowledge that Y'shua the Mashiyach is in you? And if he is not, you are despised and against Torah."
There is a very lengthy footnote explaining that this is a double simultaneous exploitation of the singular word and root maslaya, a competent synonym for being against namusa/auryata. Elsewhere this same word remains as lawbreakers (i.e. verse 7). I found this to be an interesting and bold statement, although looking into it myself I can see how this translation has come about. Also interesting to note is that in this verse "he is" is taken out of brackets, even though it is added for clarity by Murdock. Hmm...
Do you see his doctrinal bias there, Luc? I do. Here is even a bolder statement. Andrew is doing everything he can to try to make the text read the way he wants it to, even to the point of adding to God's word, to make it seem as if it supports his pet doctrines.
Here are two literal examples of what the text actually has there...
2 Corinthians 13:5 ?Examine your soul, if in The Faith you stand. Repair your soul; or else, you are not understanding of Eshu M?shikha, that you are in Him, and if not, you are rejected ones.? Literal Khabouris rendering.
2 Corinthians 13:5 ?Examine your souls ? if you stand in the trust ? you ? test your own souls. Or know you not that Yah Shua the Meshiah is within you, and if not, that you be rejected?? - Aramaic New Covenant - Herb Jhan
..