embed/christianity2.0
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Wiki Activity

Added for PBF 1

embed 2023-10-04 09:25:32 +00:00
parent d6298a0b23
commit 426947e783
20 changed files with 1036 additions and 417 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

49
ChurchOfTheEastPeshitta.md

@ -5,36 +5,47 @@ Parent: [[PeshittAEnglishTranslations]]
## Church Of The East Peshitta
It's important to clearly distinguish (over simplified) between:
1. Church of the East PeshittA (Nestorian) This is the original
Aramaic, said to have been brought by the Apostle Thomas to India via
Persia with a [shipwreck](http://aina.org/articles/socotra.pdf) on
[the island](https://bethkokheh.assyrianchurch.org/articles/235) of
[socotra](http://www.trcmst.org/st-thomas/) (Eastern).
2. Old Syriac PeshittO, (Johnannite, affectionally referred to as Old
Scratch) said to have been translated from the Greek after the
Diatesseron, and westernized with added NT books (Western).
2. Old Syriac PeshittO, (Johnannite), affectionately/derisively referred to
as Old Scratch, said to have been translated from the Greek after the
Diatesseron, and westernized (Greeked) with added NT books (Western).
The added books are Revelation, Jude, 2Peter, 2John, 3John. I don't
know that these were rejected: the Canon may have been closed before
these later books were in wide circulation, which may point to the age
of the PeshittA.
3. [[CodexSinaticusSyriac]], which is an oddball similar to the Cureton,
and considered Old Syriac from around 700 AD.
and considered to be an Old Syriac, although not a very good copy
with lot's of copyist errors; it is is Palimpsest. It is
currently dated at [698 AD](https://esketikon.hypotheses.org/134).
Agnes Smith's Syriac Sinaiticus is Palimpsest, and it has a similar
provenance to the [[CodexSinaticusGreekFraud]].
The Church of the East Peshitta reads very differently, and much more
beatifully, than a Erasmus based English translation, and has different
content. There are at least 4 or 5 Codexes of it that have near perfect
agreement regardless of the century they date from:
* The Yonan Codex,
* The [[Khabouris]](https://www.dukhrana.com/khabouris/) Codex,
The [Church of the East Peshitta](https://peshitta.org) reads very differently,
and much more beautifully, than say a Erasmus based English translation,
and has different content. A lot of the minor differences makes on ask:
[[WastheNewTestamentReallyWritteninGreek]], especially the wordplays and
some things like Philemon 7 KJV. There are at least 4 or 5 Codicies of it
that have near perfect agreement regardless of the century they date from:
* The [Yonan](https://www.dukhrana.com/yonan/) Codex,
* The [Khabouris](https://www.dukhrana.com/khabouris/) Codex,
* The 1199 Houghton Codex, and
* The Mingana 148 Codex
* The [Mingana](https://archive.org/details/front-cover-converted)
[148](https://archive.org/details/alphonse-mingana-an-ancient-syriac-translation-of-the-kuran-john-rylands-library) Codex
The CoE PeshittA should also be free from Constantinunist or Roman
trampering, inlike the Westerns which were brought infor alignment, and I
think the OT is supposed to be from the Hebrew before 3 c., so neither
Masoretic nor LXX nor Constantinunist. There is no such thing as
"families" of PeshittA texts, unlike the Greek.
The differences to the TR are relatively small, and the Eastern PeshittAs
should also be free from Constantinunist or Roman or [[KjvTampering]],
unlike the Westerns which were brought info alignment with Zorba.
I think the OT is considered to be from the Hebrew before 3 c.,
so neither Masoretic nor LXX.
* [[PeshittasEasternOrWestern]]
* https://peshitta.org
* https://www.dukhrana.com/
---
[[Home]] [[TitleIndex]]

4
DidMarcionWritePaulsLetters.md

@ -67,8 +67,8 @@ be that as it may, but we can let the Tubingen school speak to that.
*
### JWO Web Site
* [[Recommended-Reading/marcionism]](.../Recommended-Reading/marcionism.html)
* [[JWO/marcionite-influence-on-rcc]](.../JWO/marcionite-influence-on-rcc.html)
* [Recommended-Reading/marcionism](.../Recommended-Reading/marcionism.html)
* [JWO/marcionite-influence-on-rcc](.../JWO/marcionite-influence-on-rcc.html)
* [books/205-marcionites-tampering-with-the-text](.../books/205-marcionites-tampering-with-the-text.html)
* [books/206-marcionite-influence-on-rcc](.../books/206-marcionite-influence-on-rcc.html)
* [books/453-antithesis-of-marcion](.../books/453-antithesis-of-marcion.html)

18
EbioniteCanon.md

@ -19,21 +19,27 @@ the condemnation of Christianity as an Illicit Religion by the Romans.
It is written to be pleasing to the pagan reader, and at the same time,
describes to conflict bewteen Paul and the Ebionite Church.
We read Luke's Gospel as possibly a later version of a Hebrew Matthew, or
an Aramaic Matthew in the Hebrew dialect. Matthew for us has primacy, but
Luke is valued as well. As our Canon lacks the first 2 chapters of Matthew
(or Luke), it lacks the Virgin Birth, so in that sense we would be classed
as Nestorian. We are this in congruence with the Church of the East.
### Was the New Testament Really Written in Greek?
We ask [[WastheNewTestamentReallyWritteninGreek]] and clearly the answer is no,
so we use the Aramaic ChurchOfTheEastPeshitta
so we use the Aramaic [[ChurchOfTheEastPeshitta]].
Similar to the [approach of Carlstadt](.../JWO/carlstadt-research.html)
at the beginning of the reformation, we could order the books by
importance, or rate them on a scale of 1-10 (lowest most important).
Anything attributed to Paul is probably written later by the Marcionites,
e.g. (1Cor. 15:26) - see [[DidMarcionWritePaulsLetter]] - but we can add
any of the books known to be circulating up to Nicea. So we can add
[[TheDidache]] as a community rule, and anything from of the NagHamadhi library;
there have been more early texts discovered in the last 150 years,
than in the previous 1800!
e.g. (1Cor. 15:26) - we ask if [[DidMarcionWritePaulsLetters]]?
We feel that we can add any of the books known to be circulating up to Nicea.
So we can add [[TheDidache]] as a community rule, and anything from of the
NagHamadhi library; there have been more early texts discovered in the last
180 years, than in the previous 1800!
### Church of the East Canon, without Paul

7
EbioniteChristianity.md

@ -2,6 +2,8 @@
Parent: [[Home]]
* We are led by the Apostles with James and followers of their followers,
who later fled to Pella just before the sack of Jerusalem in 70 AD.
* [[EarlyEbioniteMatthew]] Early Church "Fathers" on the Primacy of a Hebrew Dialect Matthew
* [[BnaiAmenEbionites]] The Ebionites were the early branch of "Jewish Christianity" led
by James, the brother of Jesus in Jerusalem.
@ -39,12 +41,15 @@ As Christians, we continue the traditions of the Early Church.
* we do not adopt [[ConstantinianChurch]] Cross as symbol: if we have a symbol
it is likely to be the sword (Matt. 10:34).
* Our [[EbioniteCanon]] follows that of the Jamsian church and
* puts the primacy on the Gospel of Matthew, without the first 2 chapters
* The law of circumcision applies and is encouraged for infants,
but we do not hold it to be a requirement for fellowship, nor is it
considered a ritual to be done in a special manner.
* The law of matriarcical heritage was not held by all Hebrew groups,
and was not detailed in the Pentach as far as we know. It is of a lesser
and was not detailed in the Pentauch as far as we know. It is of a lesser
importance to us a Christians in that we do not hold that one must be
a Christian (or Hebrew) by birth for fellowship.

2
GreekHierosolymitanus.md

@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ Imagine this story line:
immediately, even though one of the Codices was rejected by the TR's Erasmus,
and the other one comes in either lily-white or lemon-tea-yellow.
So the question naturally arises: what role does [[CodexHierosolymitanus]]
So the question naturally arises: what role does Codex Hierosolymitanus
play in all of this? Clearly the tea and lemon juice years imply that the
Greek Orthodox hierarchy is cooperating fully, as well as the Patriarch of
Jerusalem Orthodox hierarchy, and the Pope and Vatican hierarchy, just like

2
Home.md

@ -29,8 +29,6 @@ It's time for Christianity 2.0.
* We follow the [[EbioniteChristianity]] of Jesus' brother James, until his
murder by the Sadducees and Pharasees in ~63 AD
* we are led by the Apostles with James and followers of their followers,
who later fled to Pella just before the sack of Jerusalem in 70 AD.
* We hold to a revised [[EbioniteCanon]], augmented by [[RecentCanonAdditions]].
* We follow their rejection of Paul as an Apostate as shown in Acts,
and we reject of the "Pauline" Epistles: we ask [[DidMarcionWritePaulsLetters]].

45
JWO/JWO_02_02_Will__0004.md

@ -194,4 +194,47 @@ Tertullian in Against Marcion (207 A.D.) thought Paul's words should be treated
Does Paul's Long Acceptance in NT Prove God's Will?
6. Has overlooking Tertullian's writings on Paul led to a crucial misunderstanding on Paul's supposed inspiration? A similar lapse in memory happened among Catholics regarding Jerome's view of the Apocrypha which he combined with the inspired Bible text. The Apocrypha represented seven books within the Vulgate Bible prepared by Jerome in 411 A.D. Why did Jerome include this section? Jerome in a commentary on Solomon explained the Apocrypha was "for the edification of the people, not for the authoritative confirmation of doctrine." However, the memory of Jerome's original purpose faded in time. In 1546, the Catholic Council of Trent affirmed the Apocrypha as sacred, and it belonged to the Bible. The Apocrypha still is considered an official inspired portion of the Catholic Bible. Thus, the memory of the purpose of joining a noninspired writing to inspired texts was, after eleven centuries, forgotten. However, the scholars who wrote the "Canon" article for the New Catholic Encyclopedia concede what really happened: "The latter [ i.e ., the Apocrypha] he [[Jerome]] judged were circulated by the Church as good spiritual reading but were not recognized as authoritative Scripture. The situation remained unclear in the ensuing centuries...." Thus, in other words, such close association between edifying material and inspired material caused confusion among Catholic authorities over the centuries. Meanwhile, Catholics later adopted doctrines about Purgatory that solely had support in the Apocrypha. Hence, it became embarrassing for Catholicism to later eject this section as noninspired. And thus it stands. A joinder to edify the reader became conclusive proof the writing was inspired! Yet, we cannot judge the Catholics too harshly for this error. It appears identical to what we did with Paul. If Tertullian was a voice of orthodoxy on Paul, as it appears he most certainly was, then as of approximately 200 A.D., the church which first added Paul to canon close in time must have done so with Tertullian's views in mind. This would mean that such close association of Paul with inspired canon later caused us confusion. The early church's original purpose became "unclear [to us] in the ensuing centuries...." Then we, like the Catholics, superimposed our belief system about what canon means today on a prior era which viewed canon quite differently. This is apparently how Paul went from an edifying writer who had virtually no impact on doctrine in both the Eastern and Western church for fifteen centuries (see page 425 et seq.) to a figure today whose every word is now hung upon by many as inspired text. Also, this episode of how the Apocrypha went from edifying material to inspired writ should remind us that the concept of canon has varied over time. We must not regard the mere fact something was joined as canon for centuries as proof that the item is anything more than reading material
6. Has overlooking Tertullian's writings on Paul led to a crucial
misunderstanding on Paul's supposed inspiration? A similar lapse in
memory happened among Catholics regarding Jerome's view of the
Apocrypha which he combined with the inspired Bible text. The
Apocrypha represented seven books within the Vulgate Bible prepared by
Jerome in 411 A.D. Why did Jerome include this section? Jerome in a
commentary on Solomon explained the Apocrypha was "for the edification
of the people, not for the authoritative confirmation of doctrine."
However, the memory of Jerome's original purpose faded in time. In
1546, the Catholic Council of Trent affirmed the Apocrypha as sacred,
and it belonged to the Bible. The Apocrypha still is considered an
official inspired portion of the Catholic Bible. Thus, the memory of
the purpose of joining a noninspired writing to inspired texts was,
after eleven centuries, forgotten. However, the scholars who wrote the
"Canon" article for the New Catholic Encyclopedia concede what really
happened: "The latter [ i.e ., the Apocrypha] he [[Jerome]] judged
were circulated by the Church as good spiritual reading but were not
recognized as authoritative Scripture. The situation remained unclear
in the ensuing centuries...." Thus, in other words, such close
association between edifying material and inspired material caused
confusion among Catholic authorities over the centuries. Meanwhile,
Catholics later adopted doctrines about Purgatory that solely had
support in the Apocrypha. Hence, it became embarrassing for
Catholicism to later eject this section as noninspired. And thus it
stands. A joinder to edify the reader became conclusive proof the
writing was inspired! Yet, we cannot judge the Catholics too harshly
for this error. It appears identical to what we did with Paul. If
Tertullian was a voice of orthodoxy on Paul, as it appears he most
certainly was, then as of approximately 200 A.D., the church which
first added Paul to canon close in time must have done so with
Tertullian's views in mind. This would mean that such close
association of Paul with inspired canon later caused us confusion. The
early church's original purpose became "unclear [to us] in the ensuing
centuries...." Then we, like the Catholics, superimposed our belief
system about what canon means today on a prior era which viewed canon
quite differently. This is apparently how Paul went from an edifying
writer who had virtually no impact on doctrine in both the Eastern and
Western church for fifteen centuries (see page 425 et seq.) to a
figure today whose every word is now hung upon by many as inspired
text. Also, this episode of how the Apocrypha went from edifying
material to inspired writ should remind us that the concept of canon
has varied over time. We must not regard the mere fact something was
joined as canon for centuries as proof that the item is anything more
than reading material

91
JWO/JWO_10_02_TertulliansPointsAboutPaul_0046.md

@ -3,8 +3,7 @@ Parent: [[JesusWordsOnly]]
## Tertullian s Points About Paul
What Tertullian wrote about Paul's validity has all the earmarks of
what one would expect would be a judicial decision at Ephesus
involving Paul.
what one would expect would be a judicial decision at Ephesus involving Paul.
Tertullian makes the following sobering points about Paul:
@ -12,29 +11,36 @@ Tertullian makes the following sobering points about Paul:
* Paul's claim to apostleship solely relies upon Paul's veracity.
* If Paul were a true apostle, he is still an inferior apostle because Paul in Acts 15 submitted his doctrine to the twelve.
* If Paul were a true apostle, he is still an inferior apostle because
Paul in Acts 15 submitted his doctrine to the twelve.
* If Paul later varied from the twelve, we must regard the twelve as more authoritative than Paul because he came later.
* If Paul later varied from the twelve, we must regard the twelve as
more authoritative than Paul because he came later.
* Paul's claim of being selected as an apostle later by Jesus seems implausible* That story asks us to believe Jesus had not planned things adequately with the twelve.
* Lastly, Jesus warned us of false prophets who would come doing miracles in His name and signs and wonders, and Paul perfectly matches that prophesied type of prophet.
* Paul's claim of being selected as an apostle later by Jesus seems
implausible* That story asks us to believe Jesus had not planned
things adequately with the twelve.
* Lastly, Jesus warned us of false prophets who would come doing
miracles in His name and signs and wonders, and Paul perfectly
matches that prophesied type of prophet.
This passage from Tertullian is quoted verbatim later in this book at page 408 et seq.
Tertullian's words are an echo of precisely what one would expect to
hear in a sensible verdict about Paul at Ephesus. Tertullian is
apparently revealing to us the findings in the (Rev. 2:2)
hearing. Paul is not to be regarded as an apostle on par with the
twelve, if at all. Whatever Paul truly represents in God's eyes, in
our finite eyes we must realize Paul is subject to the authority and
superior teaching of the twelve. Finally, Tertullian said Paul
possibly is a liar and a false prophet because he came in the name of
Christ with signs and wonders and only had himself as a witness of his
apostolic status. Tertullian said this meant Paul potentially fits
Jesus' express warning about false prophets. (See Matt. 7:21 et seq.)
Thus, Tertullian concluded we must quote from Paul cautiously. In
other words, only if Paul's words solidly line up with Jesus' words
should we follow Paul's words.
apparently revealing to us the findings in the (Rev. 2:2) hearing.
Paul is not to be regarded as an apostle on par with the twelve, if at
all. Whatever Paul truly represents in God's eyes, in our finite eyes
we must realize Paul is subject to the authority and superior teaching
of the twelve. Finally, Tertullian said Paul possibly is a liar and a
false prophet because he came in the name of Christ with signs and
wonders and only had himself as a witness of his apostolic
status. Tertullian said this meant Paul potentially fits Jesus'
express warning about false prophets. (See Matt. 7:21 et seq.) Thus,
Tertullian concluded we must quote from Paul cautiously. In other
words, only if Paul's words solidly line up with Jesus' words should
we follow Paul's words.
Tertullian's teachings not only reflect apparently the ruling at
Ephesus, but they also explain why we see the early church never
@ -48,33 +54,35 @@ facts make no sense:
all of Paul's unique doctrines, e.g., salvation by faith alone,
total depravity, predestination, man lacks free-will, docetism, etc.
13.See footnote 12 on page 225. On Paul's docetism, and its rejection, see "Did Paul Teach Jesus Did Not Truly Have Human Flesh?" on page 336 et seq.
13.See footnote 12 on page 225. On Paul's docetism, and its rejection,
see "Did Paul Teach Jesus Did Not Truly Have Human Flesh?" on page 336 et seq.
* The Orthodox Church (now totalling 250 million members) can trace
back its origins to that same early church. It existed in territories
outside the Roman Empire and was free therefore to reject most of the
errors later arising in Roman Catholicism (< e.g ., extreme Mariology,
etc). 14 Yet, its doctrines are identical to the early church of
125-325 A.D. To this day the Orthodox reject all of Paul's uniquely
Pauline doctrines. Furthermore, in direct contravention of Paul's
directive in Galatians, the Orthodox also keep the Mosaic law's
command to rest on the Saturday-Sabbath. The Orthodox claim it was
never abrogated. (They have always also worshipped on Sunday.) 15
back its origins to that same early church. It existed in
territories outside the Roman Empire and was free therefore to
reject most of the errors later arising in Roman Catholicism (e.g.,
extreme Mariology, etc). 14 Yet, its doctrines are identical to
the early church of 125-325 A.D. To this day the Orthodox reject all
of Paul's uniquely Pauline doctrines. Furthermore, in direct
contravention of Paul's directive in Galatians, the Orthodox also
keep the Mosaic law's command to rest on the Saturday-Sabbath. The
Orthodox claim it was never abrogated. (They have always also
worshipped on Sunday.) 15
* Roman Catholicism, in the form we know it today, arose after 325
A.D. 16 Despite all its flaws, it still retained some of the core
teaching of James and Jesus on salvation, claiming sin causes loss of
salvation. Thus, Catholicism has always rejected Paul's faith alone
and eternal security teaching. Augustine, however, misled Catholicism
to adopt a Sacramental system where the church dispensed regeneration
by baptism even to infants without faith. The Catholic church also did
accept two doctrines espoused uniquely by Paul: original sin and the
abrogation of the Mosaic law (e.g., abrogating Saturday Sabbath for
Christians). Thus, Catholicism in 363 A.D. broke the prior nearly
universal tradition among Christians of keeping Saturday Sabbath. By
contrast, the Orthodox-who long ago severed ties with Roman
Catholicism-reject the doctrine of original sin and Mariology while
they have kept the Saturday Sabbath for 2,000 years.
teaching of James and Jesus on salvation, claiming sin causes loss
of salvation. Thus, Catholicism has always rejected Paul's faith
alone and eternal security teaching. Augustine, however, misled
Catholicism to adopt a Sacramental system where the church dispensed
regeneration by baptism even to infants without faith. The Catholic
church also did accept two doctrines espoused uniquely by Paul:
original sin and the abrogation of the Mosaic law (e.g., abrogating
Saturday Sabbath for Christians). Thus, Catholicism in 363 A.D.
broke the prior nearly universal tradition among Christians of
keeping Saturday Sabbath. By contrast, the Orthodox - who long ago
severed ties with Roman Catholicism-reject the doctrine of original
sin and Mariology while they have kept the Saturday Sabbath for 2,000 years.
14.While the Orthodox do not engage in extreme Mariology, they do have
a potentially unhealthy attention on Mary. The Orthodox "do not view
@ -119,8 +127,7 @@ materialized late. It was a doctrine rejected in the so-called
patristic age (125-325 A.D.) As the Catholic Encyclopedia concedes,
"in regard to the sinlessness of Mary, the older Fathers are very
cautious: some of them even seem to be in error on the matter ."
("Immaculate Conception," C. Enc.,
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07674d.htm.)
("Immaculate Conception," C. Enc., http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07674d.htm.)
Thus, what makes Roman Catholicism distinctly Catholic arose after 325
A.D. There were many later accretions that we also think of as
Catholic, but they did not pre-exist 325 A.D. These include the

2
JWO/JWO_16_01_LongTraditionofJWOandMinimizationofPaul_0091.md

@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ Thus, the Ebionites were the first to insist Jesus' words alone were
canon. They excluded Paul. In fact, the Ebionites were the first to
propose a say Paul is a prophet. They never say Paul has specific
prophecies that would put him on par with Jeremiah, Isaiah, Ezekiel or
Jesus. Nor do they ever teach Paul's faithalone (/.<?., without works)
Jesus. Nor do they ever teach Paul's faithalone (i.e. without works)
doctrine is the valid test for salvation. The early church (125-325
A.D.) always found a way to fit Paul into what Jesus says, as recorded
by the twelve.

4
JWO/JWO_30_PaulorJamesChurch.md

@ -562,8 +562,8 @@ Eastern Orthodox Church (with 250 million members). They are primarily
located in Israel, the Middle East, Ethiopia, Russia, Armenia, and
Turkey. They always have kept the true Sabbath for the past 2,000
years while worshipping on Sunday. They are extraordinarily
non-Pauline in all their teachings. (See my book Jesus' Words on
Salvation, Chapter Sixteen, viz., at page 422.)
non-Pauline in all their teachings.
(See my book Jesus' Words on Salvation, Chapter Sixteen, viz., at page 422.)
The pattern is clear. Paul had virtually no influence in the early church's
doctrine apart from his influence to raise the issue over circumcision which then

175
JwoVids.md

@ -1,178 +1,3 @@
* (Deut. 13:1-10): law of apostacy [297DKDiZdAE](https://youtube.com/watch?v=297DKDiZdAE)
* (Isa. 22:2): Changed from 'keep faithfulness' to 'keep truth' to help Paul [[JG51KVPva5Q]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=JG51KVPva5Q)
* (Matt. 7:22): '' refering to (Deut. 13:2) [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
* (Mark 13:21): '' refering to (Deut. 13:2) [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
* (Luke 1:3): Theophilus is a pagan magistrate to whom Luke addressed Acts as a apologia. [wk73wBCb36o](https://youtube.com/watch?v=wk73wBCb36o)
* (John 1:12): 'believe in' should be 'obey Him' [51895FppMMQ](https://youtube.com/watch?v=51895FppMMQ)
* (Acts 21:31): 'forsake Moses' is 'apostasis Moyses' in Greek (apostacyfrom Moses) [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
* (Rom. 1:1): The writings of the Apostate Paul were rejected by the Ebionite early Christians.
* (1Cor 1:1): The writings of the Apostate Paul were rejected by the Ebionite early Christians.
* (2Cor 1:1): The writings of the Apostate Paul were rejected by the Ebionite early Christians.
* (Gal. 1:1): The writings of the Apostate Paul were rejected by the Ebionite early Christians.
* (Eph. 1:1): The writings of the Apostate Paul were rejected by the Ebionite early Christians.
* (Phil. 4:15): Does 1Clem. 47:1-3 and 37:3 refer to Paul's Epistles in 100 AD? [30BA9XWUnUY](https://youtube.com/watch?v=30BA9XWUnUY)
* (Col. 1:1): The writings of the Apostate Paul were rejected by the Ebionite early Christians.
* (1Tim. 5:17): Paul conflicts with Matt. 10:8-9 and the Didache [2tdSsbo2AjU](https://youtube.com/watch?v=2tdSsbo2AjU).mp4
* (Heb. 1:1): Tertulian says Hebrews written by Barnabas [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
* (Jas. 2:17): 'faith alone without works is dead' in opposition to Paul [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
* (Jude 1:11): 'error of Balaam' is eating meat sacrificed to idols, condoned by Paul - (1Cor. 10:28) (1Cor. 8:4) [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
* (Rev. 1:1): Revelation of John is distinctly anti-Paul [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
---
[[Home]] [[TitleIndex]]
* (Deut. 13:1-10): law of apostacy [297DKDiZdAE](https://youtube.com/watch?v=297DKDiZdAE)
* (Isa. 22:2): Changed from 'keep faithfulness' to 'keep truth' to help Paul [[JG51KVPva5Q]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=JG51KVPva5Q)
* (Matt. 7:22): '' refering to (Deut. 13:2) [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
* (Mark 13:21): '' refering to (Deut. 13:2) [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
* (Luke 1:3): Theophilus is a pagan magistrate to whom Luke addressed Acts as a apologia. [wk73wBCb36o](https://youtube.com/watch?v=wk73wBCb36o)
* (John 1:12): 'believe in' should be 'obey Him' [51895FppMMQ](https://youtube.com/watch?v=51895FppMMQ)
* (Acts 21:31): 'forsake Moses' is 'apostasis Moyses' in Greek (apostacyfrom Moses) [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
* (Rom. 1:1): The writings of the Apostate Paul were rejected by the Ebionite early Christians.
* (1Cor 1:1): The writings of the Apostate Paul were rejected by the Ebionite early Christians.
* (2Cor 1:1): The writings of the Apostate Paul were rejected by the Ebionite early Christians.
* (Gal. 1:1): The writings of the Apostate Paul were rejected by the Ebionite early Christians.
* (Eph. 1:1): The writings of the Apostate Paul were rejected by the Ebionite early Christians.
* (Phil. 4:15): Does 1Clem. 47:1-3 and 37:3 refer to Paul's Epistles in 100 AD? [30BA9XWUnUY](https://youtube.com/watch?v=30BA9XWUnUY)
* (Col. 1:1): The writings of the Apostate Paul were rejected by the Ebionite early Christians.
* (1Tim. 5:17): Paul conflicts with Matt. 10:8-9 and the Didache [2tdSsbo2AjU](https://youtube.com/watch?v=2tdSsbo2AjU).mp4
* (Heb. 1:1): Tertulian says Hebrews written by Barnabas [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
* (Jas. 2:17): 'faith alone without works is dead' in opposition to Paul [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
* (Jude 1:11): 'error of Balaam' is eating meat sacrificed to idols, condoned by Paul - (1Cor. 10:28) (1Cor. 8:4) [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
* (Rev. 1:1): Revelation of John is distinctly anti-Paul [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
---
[[Home]] [[TitleIndex]]
Parent: [[JesusWordsOnly]]\n'n
* (Deut. 13:1-10): law of apostacy [297DKDiZdAE](https://youtube.com/watch?v=297DKDiZdAE)
* (Isa. 22:2): Changed from 'keep faithfulness' to 'keep truth' to help Paul [[JG51KVPva5Q]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=JG51KVPva5Q)
* (Matt. 7:22): '' refering to (Deut. 13:2) [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
* (Mark 13:21): '' refering to (Deut. 13:2) [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
* (Luke 1:3): Theophilus is a pagan magistrate to whom Luke addressed Acts as a apologia. [wk73wBCb36o](https://youtube.com/watch?v=wk73wBCb36o)
* (John 1:12): 'believe in' should be 'obey Him' [51895FppMMQ](https://youtube.com/watch?v=51895FppMMQ)
* (Acts 21:31): 'forsake Moses' is 'apostasis Moyses' in Greek (apostacyfrom Moses) [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
* (Rom. 1:1): The writings of the Apostate Paul were rejected by the Ebionite early Christians.
* (1Cor 1:1): The writings of the Apostate Paul were rejected by the Ebionite early Christians.
* (2Cor 1:1): The writings of the Apostate Paul were rejected by the Ebionite early Christians.
* (Gal. 1:1): The writings of the Apostate Paul were rejected by the Ebionite early Christians.
* (Eph. 1:1): The writings of the Apostate Paul were rejected by the Ebionite early Christians.
* (Phil. 4:15): Does 1Clem. 47:1-3 and 37:3 refer to Paul's Epistles in 100 AD? [30BA9XWUnUY](https://youtube.com/watch?v=30BA9XWUnUY)
* (Col. 1:1): The writings of the Apostate Paul were rejected by the Ebionite early Christians.
* (1Tim. 5:17): Paul conflicts with Matt. 10:8-9 and the Didache [2tdSsbo2AjU](https://youtube.com/watch?v=2tdSsbo2AjU).mp4
* (Heb. 1:1): Tertulian says Hebrews written by Barnabas [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
* (Jas. 2:17): 'faith alone without works is dead' in opposition to Paul [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
* (Jude 1:11): 'error of Balaam' is eating meat sacrificed to idols, condoned by Paul - (1Cor. 10:28) (1Cor. 8:4) [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
* (Rev. 1:1): Revelation of John is distinctly anti-Paul [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
---
[[Home]] [[TitleIndex]]
Parent: [[JesusWordsOnly]]\n'n
* (Deut. 13:1-10): law of apostacy [297DKDiZdAE](https://youtube.com/watch?v=297DKDiZdAE)
* (Isa. 22:2): Changed from 'keep faithfulness' to 'keep truth' to help Paul [[JG51KVPva5Q]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=JG51KVPva5Q)
* (Matt. 7:22): '' refering to (Deut. 13:2) [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
* (Mark 13:21): '' refering to (Deut. 13:2) [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
* (Luke 1:3): Theophilus is a pagan magistrate to whom Luke addressed Acts as a apologia. [wk73wBCb36o](https://youtube.com/watch?v=wk73wBCb36o)
* (John 1:12): 'believe in' should be 'obey Him' [51895FppMMQ](https://youtube.com/watch?v=51895FppMMQ)
* (Acts 21:31): 'forsake Moses' is 'apostasis Moyses' in Greek (apostacyfrom Moses) [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
* (Rom. 1:1): The writings of the Apostate Paul were rejected by the Ebionite early Christians.
* (1Cor 1:1): The writings of the Apostate Paul were rejected by the Ebionite early Christians.
* (2Cor 1:1): The writings of the Apostate Paul were rejected by the Ebionite early Christians.
* (Gal. 1:1): The writings of the Apostate Paul were rejected by the Ebionite early Christians.
* (Eph. 1:1): The writings of the Apostate Paul were rejected by the Ebionite early Christians.
* (Phil. 4:15): Does 1Clem. 47:1-3 and 37:3 refer to Paul's Epistles in 100 AD? [30BA9XWUnUY](https://youtube.com/watch?v=30BA9XWUnUY)
* (Col. 1:1): The writings of the Apostate Paul were rejected by the Ebionite early Christians.
* (1Tim. 5:17): Paul conflicts with Matt. 10:8-9 and the Didache [2tdSsbo2AjU](https://youtube.com/watch?v=2tdSsbo2AjU).mp4
* (Heb. 1:1): Tertulian says Hebrews written by Barnabas [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
* (Jas. 2:17): 'faith alone without works is dead' in opposition to Paul [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
* (Jude 1:11): 'error of Balaam' is eating meat sacrificed to idols, condoned by Paul - (1Cor. 10:28) (1Cor. 8:4) [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
* (Rev. 1:1): Revelation of John is distinctly anti-Paul [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
---
[[Home]] [[TitleIndex]]
Parent: [[JesusWordsOnly]]\n'n
* (Deut. 13:1-10): law of apostacy [297DKDiZdAE](https://youtube.com/watch?v=297DKDiZdAE)
* (Isa. 22:2): Changed from 'keep faithfulness' to 'keep truth' to help Paul [[JG51KVPva5Q]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=JG51KVPva5Q)
* (Matt. 7:22): '' refering to (Deut. 13:2) [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
* (Mark 13:21): '' refering to (Deut. 13:2) [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
* (Luke 1:3): Theophilus is a pagan magistrate to whom Luke addressed Acts as a apologia. [wk73wBCb36o](https://youtube.com/watch?v=wk73wBCb36o)
* (John 1:12): 'believe in' should be 'obey Him' [51895FppMMQ](https://youtube.com/watch?v=51895FppMMQ)
* (Acts 21:31): 'forsake Moses' is 'apostasis Moyses' in Greek (apostacyfrom Moses) [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
* (Rom. 1:1): The writings of the Apostate Paul were rejected by the Ebionite early Christians.
* (1Cor 1:1): The writings of the Apostate Paul were rejected by the Ebionite early Christians.
* (2Cor 1:1): The writings of the Apostate Paul were rejected by the Ebionite early Christians.
* (Gal. 1:1): The writings of the Apostate Paul were rejected by the Ebionite early Christians.
* (Eph. 1:1): The writings of the Apostate Paul were rejected by the Ebionite early Christians.
* (Phil. 4:15): Does 1Clem. 47:1-3 and 37:3 refer to Paul's Epistles in 100 AD? [30BA9XWUnUY](https://youtube.com/watch?v=30BA9XWUnUY)
* (Col. 1:1): The writings of the Apostate Paul were rejected by the Ebionite early Christians.
* (1Tim. 5:17): Paul conflicts with Matt. 10:8-9 and the Didache [2tdSsbo2AjU](https://youtube.com/watch?v=2tdSsbo2AjU).mp4
* (Heb. 1:1): Tertulian says Hebrews written by Barnabas [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
* (Jas. 2:17): 'faith alone without works is dead' in opposition to Paul [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
* (Jude 1:11): 'error of Balaam' is eating meat sacrificed to idols, condoned by Paul - (1Cor. 10:28) (1Cor. 8:4) [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
* (Rev. 1:1): Revelation of John is distinctly anti-Paul [[LQZAZKO4TxY]](https://youtube.com/watch?v=LQZAZKO4TxY)
---
[[Home]] [[TitleIndex]]
Parent: [[JesusWordsOnly]]\n'n
---
[[Home]] [[TitleIndex]]
Parent: [[JesusWordsOnly]]\n'n
---
[[Home]] [[TitleIndex]]
Parent: [[JesusWordsOnly]]\n'n
---
[[Home]] [[TitleIndex]]
Parent: [[JesusWordsOnly]]\n'n
---
[[Home]] [[TitleIndex]]
Parent: [[JesusWordsOnly]]\n'n
---
[[Home]] [[TitleIndex]]
Parent: [[JesusWordsOnly]]\n'n
---
[[Home]] [[TitleIndex]]
Parent: [[JesusWordsOnly]]\n'n
---
[[Home]] [[TitleIndex]]
Parent: [[JesusWordsOnly]]\n'n
---
[[Home]] [[TitleIndex]]
Parent: [[JesusWordsOnly]]\n'n
---
[[Home]] [[TitleIndex]]
Parent: [[JesusWordsOnly]]\n'n
---
[[Home]] [[TitleIndex]]
Parent: [[JesusWordsOnly]]\n'n
---
[[Home]] [[TitleIndex]]
Parent: [[JesusWordsOnly]]\n'n
---
[[Home]] [[TitleIndex]]
Parent: [[JesusWordsOnly]]\n'n
---
[[Home]] [[TitleIndex]]
Parent: [[JesusWordsOnly]]
---
[[Home]] [[TitleIndex]]
Parent: [[JesusWordsOnly]]
---
[[Home]] [[TitleIndex]]
Parent: [[JesusWordsOnly]]
* (Deut. 13:1-10): law of apostacy [297DKDiZdAE](https://youtube.com/watch?v=297DKDiZdAE)

40
PeshittAEnglishTranslations.md

@ -2,26 +2,34 @@ Parent: [[Home]]
## PeshittA English Translations
<!-- -->
There are recent English translations of the [[ChurchOfTheEastPeshitta]]
which vary:
which vary (subjective opinion):
1. Lamsa's which is mainly CoE, but he took
1. The [Holy Aramaic Scriptures](https://web.archive.org/web/20211121073227/https:/theholyaramaicscriptures.weebly.com/)
which is CoE (Eastern)
2. "John Wesley Etheridge is primarily The PeshittA except for a very few
changes like Hebrews 2:9. The absence of Pericope Adulterae is in keeping
with the PeshittA text of the Khabouris. Etheridge used the same words
in his marginal notes as appears in the Khabouris."
3. Lamsa's which is mainly CoE, but he took
[personal liberties](http://www.peshitta.org/for/showthread.php?tid=871)
3. [[Murdoch]](http://books.google.com/books?id=_5IuQ1YXtgQC) which is
[[PeshittO]](http://www.peshitta.org/for/showthread.php?tid=1917) (Western)
4. Etheridge, which is PeshittA?
5. The [Holy Aramaic Scriptures](https://web.archive.org/web/20211121073227/https:/theholyaramaicscriptures.weebly.com/) which is CoE (Eastern)
6. Bauscher - [not a Peshitta/o](http://peshitta.org/for/archive/index.php?thread-2930-3.html)
7. Gabriel Roth - was based on Younan/Khabouris (Eastern) but discontinued
8. BFBS/UBS - said to be a Critical Text of about 70 to 80 Aramaic Manuscripts,
(Western see comment by [Steven Silver](http://www.peshitta.org/for/archive/index.php?thread-3284.html))
9. The Way International - based on UBS PeshittO (Western)
10. Georgia Press Antioch Bible PeshittA, but some don't like the translation style.
11. [et alia](http://www.peshitta.org/for/showthread.php?tid=2927)
4. Gabriel Roth - was based on Younan/Khabouris (Eastern) but discontinued.
He "is not much of a translator as much as he is an interpreter, just like David Glen Bauscher is."
5. [Murdoch](http://books.google.com/books?id=_5IuQ1YXtgQC) which is
[PeshittO](http://www.peshitta.org/for/showthread.php?tid=1917) (Western)
6. BFBS/UBS - said to be a Critical Text of about 70 to 80 Aramaic Manuscripts,
(Western see comment by [the lates Steven Silver](http://www.peshitta.org/for/archive/index.php?thread-3284.html))
7. The Way International - based on UBS PeshittO (Western)
8. Georgia Press Antioch Bible, [avoid](http://www.peshitta.org/for/showthread.php?tid=3384).
9. Bauscher - [not a Peshitta/o](http://peshitta.org/for/archive/index.php?thread-2930-3.html)
10. [et alia](http://www.peshitta.org/for/showthread.php?tid=2927)
The CoE PeshittA should also be free from Constantinunist or Roman
tampering, unlike the Western Peshittas which were intentionally
brought into alignment with Zorba.
See [[PeshittAEnglishTranslations]] for a comparison of 29 passages for
Eastern PeshittA vs. Western Peshitto. The CoE PeshittA (HAS Etherridge)
should also be free from Constantinunist or Roman tampering, unlike
the Western Peshittos which were intentionally Greeked.
The PeshittA OT is said to be a translation into Aramaic from the
Hebrew done before 3 c., so neither Masoretic nor LXX nor Constantined.

474
PeshittasEasternOrWestern.md Normal file

@ -0,0 +1,474 @@
Parent: [[ChurchOfTheEastPeshitta]]
## PeshittasEasternOrWestern
http://www.peshitta.org/for/showthread.php?tid=2927
10-13-2012, 06:31 AM (This post was last modified: 05-04-2021, 12:04 AM by
Thirdwoe.)
Differences between The Peshitta Text, (as witnessed in The Khabouris
Codex, The Asahel Grant Codex, and The Mingana Codex, and other standard
Eastern copies of The Peshitta) & The Western PeshittO version (as edited
in the BFBS/UBS 1905/1920 printed edition), showing most of the available
English translations compared with each other to see which versions,
Eastern/Western, they agree with.
Murdoch sometimes puts the Eastern reading of the verse in [brackets], and
I've put his name in brackets to indicate when he does so.
I've also compared the Sinaitic Palimpsest (Old Scratch) and The Curetonian
texts where applicable, as well as the readings of MS. ADD 14453, 14470,
14473, and 14475 all 5th-6th century Aramaic New Testament Manuscripts,
which display some Eastern and some Western readings, as printed in The Way
International's "The Aramaic New Testament: Estrangela Script".
### **1:** (Matt. 4:21)
The Peshitta: has "and Eshu' called them" Vat. Sir.13 (736 A.D.), The
Khabouris, The Asahel Grant Manuscript, The Mingana, The 1886 Mosul, and
Paul Younan's Interlinear text, all have "and Eshu called them." The
Curetonian has "and Eshu called them'", but the Sinaitic has "and he called
them". English translations that have the Khabouris or Eastern Peshitta
reading: Paul Younan, Andrew Roth, James Murdock, John Etheridge, George
Lamsa, Joseph Pashka, Lonnie Martin, Victor Alexander, The Aramaic
Scriptures Translation, and Kiraz's Antioch Bible.
UBS Peshitto: has "and He called them", as does ADD MSS 14470 (5th-6th
century) and the Sinaitic (Old Scratch) version. English translations that
go with the Western Peshitto version: David Bauscher, Janet Magiera, The
Way International, Herb Jahn, Francis A. Werner.
### **2:** (Matt. 6:32)
The Peshitta: The Khabouris, in its secondary script (East Adiabene), which
is a later scribal replacement page, has "the Nations/Peoples of the World"
as does Younan's Interlinear, Etheridge, Murdock, Roth, Magiera, Alexander,
Pashka, Lamsa, The Aramaic Scriptures Translation, and Kiraz's Antioch
Bible. The Curetonian text reads as The Khabouris Peshitta text does here.
The Diatessaron of 165 A.D. text in its extant 10th century Arabic
translation from an 8th century Aramaic MS has the Khabouris Peshitta
reading. And the 1886 Mosul Printed Peshitta has "of the world". Neither
the Latin vulgate version or any of the Greek versions have "of the World"
in their text.
UBS Peshitto: has "the Nations/Peoples", as does Bauscher, Jahn, and A.
Frances Werner. Lon Martin has "the Heathen" and The Way International's
ANT & MS. ADD 14453 (5th-6th century) doesn't have "d'Alma" (of the World)
in that Aramaic MS. Vat. Sir.13 (736 A.D.), The Mingana MS. reads the same
as the UBS text and the 1199 A.D. "Asahel Grant" MS. does too, both being
clearly Eastern Peshitta Ms, ....which begs the question...is the reading
"of the World" actually an Eastern Peshitta reading?
### **3:** (Matt. 21:4)
The Peshitta: has "all this happened" as does Younan, Etheridge, Murdock,
Alexander, Pashka, The Aramaic Scriptures Translation, and Lamsa. Martin
has "This all took place". The Diatessaron of 165 A.D. also has the
Peshitta reading. The Byzantine Greek (Greek Orthodox Church, Majority
Greek Text, and the Textus Receptus) and The Latin Vulgate text has the
Eastern Peshitta reading. The Mingana Ms. reads the same as the Khabouris
text.
UBS Peshitto: has "this happened" as does *Younan's interlinear (see note),
Bauscher, Magiera, *Roth, Jahn, Werner and Kiraz's Antioch Bible.
The Curetonian text reads the same as the Western Peshitto does here. The
Way International's ANT & MS. ADD 14453 (5th-6th century) does not have
"K'uleh" (all) in its text. The Alexandrian Greek text has the Western
Peshitto reading.
*Note: Paul Younan has said that this is a mistake in his interlinear
readings, and should have the Eastern reading of The Peshitta.* Roth
follows Paul Younan's mistaken Interlinear reading, as it was his base
text.
### **4:** (Mark 1:20)
The Peshitta (i.e. The Khabouris and all Eastern texts) does not have the
added clause "in the boat/ship" in the verse, as the Western Peshitto text
has. The Greek versions all have it as far as I have checked. Etheridge,
Lamsa, Alexander, and The Aramaic Scriptures Translation, have The
Peshitta's (Eastern Text) reading.
UBS Peshitto:
Bauscher, Magiera, Pashka, Martin, Werner, Jahn and Kiraz's Antioch Bible
all have The UBS Peshitto's (Western version) reading. Vat. Sir.13 (736
A.D.) has the "in the ship" clause, which seems to indicate it is of
Western origins.
While Roth has the UBS (Peshitto/Western) reading, he does have a note
there, which is interesting, that indicates he thinks the clause was simply
mistakenly left out of the Khabouris manuscript. But, we find that the much
older MS 14453 5th/6th century does not have "in the boat/ship" present in
its text either. The text that the Khabouris scribe used for his copy thus
most likely did not have the clause in it either, and it is thought to be
from the mid 5th century (or much earlier). The Church of the East's Holy
Scriptures has never had the clause "in the boat/ship" present in its text.
### **5:** (Mark 14:31)
The Peshitta: has "all" the Disciples said" as does Younan, Etheridge,
Murdock, Roth, Alexander, Pashka, Lamsa, Martin, and The Aramaic Scriptures
Translation.
The Way International's ANT & MS. ADD 14453 (5th-6th century) has
"T'almiyd'e" (the Disciples). The Diatessaron of 165 A.D. also has the
Peshitta reading. Neither the Latin Vulgate or any Greek version has "the
Disciples", nor do they have "my Lord" in this verse, as does both the
Eastern and Western forms of the Aramaic NT. The Diatessaron though, has
the Peshitta text's reading "my Lord". The Mingana Ms. reads the same as
the Khabouris text.
UBS Peshitto: has "they all said" as does Bauscher, Magiera, Jahn, Werner,
and Kiraz's Antioch Bible, lacking "the Disciples". The Syriac Sinaitic
Palimpsest (Old Scratch) and The Curetonian versions have "and so all of
them also said".
### **6:** (Luke 22:17)
The Peshitta: Younan, Magiera, Roth, Martin, The Aramaic Scriptures
Translation, and Kiraz's Antioch Bible does not have this verse. Neither
does the Syriac Sinaitic Palimpsest (Old Scratch) or the Curetonian. The
Way International's ANT & MS. ADD 14453 (5th-6th century) does not have it.
The Diatessaron of 165 A.D. also lacks the reading. Vat. Sir.13 (736 A.D.),
and The Mingana MS. doesn't have it.
UBS Peshitto: Bauscher, Etheridge, [Murdock], Alexander, Pashka, Lamsa,
*Jahn, and Werner, has it. All Greek versions and the Latin Vulgate have
this verse.
*Herb Jahn has a note for this verse which says, "not in the Aramaic", yet
he has it translated.
### **7:** (Luke 22:18)
The Peshitta: Younan, Magiera, Roth, Martin, The Aramaic Scriptures
Translation, and Kiraz's Antioch Bible does not have this verse. Neither
does the Syriac Sinaitic Palimpsest (Old Scratch) or the Curetonian. The
Way International's ANT & MS. ADD 14453 (5th-6th century) does not have it.
The Diatessaron of 165 A.D. also lacks the reading. Vat. Sir.13 (736 A.D.),
and The Mingana MS. doesn't have it.
UBS Peshitto: Bauscher, Etheridge, [Murdock], Alexander, Pashka, Lamsa,
*Jahn, and Werner, has it. All Greek versions and the Latin Vulgate have
this verse.
*Herb Jahn has a note for this verse which says, "not in the Aramaic", yet
he has it translated.
### **8:** (John 7:53)
The Peshitta: Younan, Etheridge, Roth, and The Aramaic Scriptures
Translation, does not have it. Neither does the Syriac Sinaitic Palimpsest
(Old Scratch) or the Curetonian. The Diatessaron of 165 A.D. also lacks the
reading. The Mingana does not have it.
UBS Peshitto: Bauscher, Magiera, Murdock, Lamsa, Alexander, Pashka, Jahn,
Werner, Kiraz's Antioch Bible, and Martin (citing Bauscher's notes), have
it. Kiriaz has a note saying it is not part of the Peshitta proper, but
includes it in the text within brackets. The Way International's "The
Aramaic New Testament'' which uses MS ADD 14453 (5th-6th century) for the
Gospel of John, shows this verse in [brackets]. The old Latin and the Latin
Vulgate has it, as do the standard Greek texts, which the translations use,
though many Greek Ms copies lack it.
### **9:** (John 8:1-11 (The story of the Woman caught in adultery))
The Peshitta: Younan, Etheridge Roth, and The Aramaic Scriptures
Translation, does not have it. Neither does the Syriac Sinaitic Palimpsest
(Old Scratch) or the Curetonian versions. The Diatessaron of 165 A.D. also
lacks the reading. Many Greek Ms copies lack it, and some have the passage
in other places, such as John chapter 21. The Mingana Ms. does not have it.
UBS Peshitto: Bauscher, Magiera, Murdock, Lamsa, Alexander, Pashka, *Jahn,
Werner, Kiraz's Antioch Bible [in brackets], and Martin, (citing Bauscher's
notes), all have it. Kiriaz has a note saying it is not part of the
Peshitta proper, but includes it in the text within brackets. The Way
International's ANT which uses MS ADD 14453 (5th-6th century) for the
Gospel of John, shows these verses in [brackets].
(*Herb Jahn has a note for this verse which says, "not in the Aramaic", yet
he has it translated.) The old Latin and the Latin Vulgate have this
passage, some Greek Ms copies have it.
### **10:** (John 16:27)
The Peshitta: has "from the presence of The Father" as does Younan,
Etheridge, Murdock, Roth, Lamsa, Alexander, Martin, and The Aramaic
Scriptures Translation. The Diatessaron of 165 A.D. has "from my Father".
Alexandrian Greek versions have "from The Father". Vat. Sir.13 (736 A.D.),
and The Mingana MS. reads the same as the Khabouris text.
UBS Peshitto: has "from the presence of God" as does Magiera, Bauscher,
Pashka, Jahn, and Werner, who has "from next-to God". The Curetonian
version has "from God" as does The Way International's ANT & MS. ADD 14453
(5th-6th century), and Kiraz's Antioch Bible as well. Byzantine Greek
versions and the Latin Vulgate text, have "from God".
### **11:** (Acts 3:6)
The Peshitta: reads, "...of our Lord Eshu' Meshikha..." Etheridge, Murdock,
Lamsa, Pashka (and shows the variant in brackets), Martin, Alexander, and
The Aramaic Scriptures Translation, have the Eastern Peshitta reading. The
1199 Asahel Grant Mss has the Khabouris reading, as does the Mingana Codex,
and the 1886 Mosul Peshitta.
UBS Peshitto: reads, "...of Eshu Mshikha..." Roth, Bauscher, Werner, The
Way, Magiera, Jahn, and Kiraz's Antioch Bible, and MSS 14473 (Jacobite),
have the Western reading. Paul Younan's Interlinear text shows the Western
reading for some reason as well.
### **12:** (Acts 8:37)
The Peshitta: Younan, Etheridge, Magiera, Roth, Martin, The Aramaic
Scriptures Translation, and Kiraz's Antioch Bible don't have it. The Way
International's ANT & MS. ADD 14473 (5th-6th century) does not have it. The
Mingana does not have it.
UBS Peshitto: Bauscher, [Murdock], Alexander, Pashka, Lamsa, *Jahn, and
Werner, have it.
(*Herb Jahn has a note for this verse which says, "not in the Aramaic", yet
he has it translated.)
### **13:** (Acts 15:34)
The Peshitta: Younan, Etheridge, Magiera, Roth, Martin, The Aramaic
Scriptures Translation, and Kiraz's Antioch Bible does not have it. The Way
International's ANT & MS. ADD 14473 (5th-6th century) does not have it. The
Mingana Ms. does not have it.
UBS Peshitto: Bauscher, *[Murdock], Alexander, Pashka, Lamsa, *Jahn, and
Werner, have it.
(*Murdoch has this note: "this verse is removed to the margin in the
editions of the British and Foreign Bible Society.")
(*Herb Jahn has a note for this verse which says, "not in the Aramaic", yet
he has it translated.)
### **14:** (Acts 18:23)
The Peshitta: reads "...in the regions of Phrygia and of Galatia." as does
Etheridge, Murdock, Roth, Pashka, Alexander, Lamsa, and The Aramaic
Scriptures Translation. Also, the 1199 (Asahel Grant MS.), the Mingana MS.,
the 1846 Urmia printed Peshitta text, and the 1886 printed Peshitta text
have the same reading as the Khabouris does here.
UBS Peshitto: reads "...in the regions of Galatia and of Phrygia." as does
Bauscher, Magiera, The Way International, Werner, Martin, Jahn, and Kiraz's
Antioch Bible. Also, MS. 14473 has this reading, which seems to be the
source for the UBS text, as I have seen it match up many times against the
Eastern text's readings. It is a Western "Jacobite" text, not the Eastern
Peshitta text.
### **15:** (Acts 20:28)
The Peshitta: reads "...The Church of Meshikha... as does Etheridge, Roth,
*Alexander, Lamsa, Martin, and The Aramaic Scriptures Translation, all
having the Eastern reading. The Mingana reads as the Khabouris does.
UBS Peshitto: reads "...the Church of Alaha..." as does Bauscher, Magiera,
Pashka, Murdock, Jahn, Werner, and Kiraz's Antioch Bible, having the
Western reading. The Way International's ANT & MS. ADD 14473 (5th-6th
century) has the Western reading.
(*Victor Alexander has this reading “to shepherd the church of Jesus
Christ, that which he established by his blood.”)
### **16:** (Acts 21:13)
The Peshitta: reads "...Eshu Meshikha." at the end of the verse. Etheridge,
Murdock, [^1]Roth, [^2]Pashka, Alexander, Martin, Lamsa, and The Aramaic
Scriptures Translation, all have it as the Khabouris does. Also The 1199
Asahel Grant MS, The Mingana MS, The 1886 printed Peshitta text, and The
1846 Urmia printed Peshitta text has it as The Khabouris MS does.
*Roth has the same Eastern Peshitta reading here as Murdock, since he
revised Murdock's translation, but, his Aramaic text to the right in his
editions have the UBS reading, since he revised the UBS Peshitto text,
while leaving a number of Western readings in...like this one. His note
says as much.
[^2]: Pashka has the Eastern Peshitta reading in his translation, but his
Aramaic text, which I believe is the UBS edited to some degree, has the
Western Peshitto reading.
UBS Peshitto: reads "...Eshu." at the end of the verse. Bauscher, Magiera,
The Way International, Werner, Jahn, and Kiraz's Antioch Bible have it as
the UBS has it. Also MS 14473 (Jacobite) has the UBS reading. The Greek
texts match the UBS Peshitto text.
### **17:** (Acts 26:28)
The Peshitta: reads "...King Agrippa said..." as does Etheridge, Murdock,
Lamsa, Martin, Alexander, [^1]Roth, [^2]Pashka, and The Aramaic Scriptures
Translation. The 1199 Grant MS, The Mingana MS, the 1846 Urmia Peshitta,
and the 1886 Peshitta, all agree with the Khabouris.
[^1]: Roth has the same reading as Murdock here, though his interlinear (UBS
with edits) has the Western Peshitto reading still there.
[^2]: Pashka has the Eastern Peshitta reading in his translation, while his
Aramaic text has the UBS reading.
UBS Peshitto: reads ..."Agrippa said...'' as does Bauscher, Magiera, The
Way International, Werner, Jahn, and Kiraz's Antioch Bible. The UBS follows
MS 14473, which is a Jacobite (Syrian Orthodox Church) MS. The Way
International's Aramaic text is taken from the same MS 14473.
### **18:** (Acts 28:29)
The Peshitta: Etheridge, Magiera, Roth, Martin, The Aramaic Scriptures
Translation, and Kiraz's Antioch Bible, does not have it. The Way
International's ANT & MS. ADD 14473 (5th-6th century) doesn't have it. The
Mingana Ms. does not have it.
UBS Peshitto: Bauscher, [^1]Murdock, Alexander, Pashka, Lamsa, [^2]Jahn, and
Werner, have it.
[^1]: Murdoch notes, "this verse 29 is not in the MS., nor in any of the
earlier editions: and the later editions place it in the margin."
(*Herb Jahn has a note for this verse which says, "not in the Aramaic", yet
he has it translated.)
### **19:** (Rom. 8:39)
The Peshitta: reads literally "...will be able that it might separate me
from the love of Alaha..." The Goodspeed MS 716 (6th century), The 1199
Asahel Grant MS, The Mingana MS, the 1846 Urmia Printed Peshitta text, and
the 1886 Mosul Printed Peshitta text all read as the Khabouris here. Note:
No English translator in a published printed edition has translated this
distinction of the Eastern text for this verse, and while it may be a small
difference, it is present there in the manuscripts. The only translation I
know of that has this distinction is from the online translation found at
TheAramaicScriptures.com
UBS Peshitto: reads literally "...will be able to separate me from the love
of Alaha..." The MS 14475 (6th century) reads as the UBS text.
### **20:** (1Cor. 16:24)
The Peshitta: reads "...in Mshikha Eshu. Amen." the same as the Byzantine
Greek text form, as does Etheridge, Murdock, Roth, Lamsa, Norton,
Alexander, Martin, and The Aramaic Scriptures Translation.
Also The Mingana Codex has the same reading as the Khabouris, and the other
Eastern Peshitta Manuscript I can see, from 1199, given to the English
Protestant Missionary Asahel Grant, by Mar Abraham, The
Patriarch/Catholicos of The Church of the East, has the same reading as the
Khabouris.
UBS Peshitto: reads "...in Mshikha Eshu." the same as the Alexandrian Greek
text form, as does Bauscher, Magiera, Werner, Jahn, and Kiraz's Antioch
Bible. Also, MS ADD. 14475 (5th-6th century), as well as The Way
International's translation of its text has this reading.
### **21:** (2Cor. 13:1)
The Peshitta: reads "...three times that I'm ready to come unto you." as
does Roth, Murdock, Etheridge, Lamsa, Norton, *Alexander, **Martin, and The
Aramaic Scriptures Translation.
* Victor Alexander's version reads "...three seasons that I have desired to
come to you." The Mingana reads the same as the Khabouris text.
** Lonnie Martin's version reads "...the third time that I have prepared to
come to you. As does Roth's and Murdock's version.
UBS Peshitto: reads "...three times that I come unto you." as does
Bauscher, Jahn, Werner, Magiera, Kiraz's Antioch Bible, and The Way
International's translation.
### **22:** (Gal. 6:17)
The Peshitta: reads "Our Lord Eshu Mshikha" as does Roth, Etheridge,
Murdock, Norton, Alexander, Martin, Lamsa, and The Aramaic Scriptures
Translation.
The Mingana reads the same as the Khabouris text.
UBS Peshitto: reads "Our Lord Eshu" as does Magiera, Bauscher, Jahn, and
Werner, The Aramaic Scriptures Translation, and Kiraz's Antioch Bible.
The Way International's translation and MS. ADD. 14475 (5th-6th century)
has the Peshitto reading.
### **23:** (Ephesians 1:8)
The Peshitta: reads "of The Spirit" at the end of the verse, as does
Etheridge; where Roth, Murdock, Lamsa, and Martin, and The Aramaic
Scriptures Translation, all have ("Spiritual") and Norton has ("the
Spirit's") and Alexander has ("of Spirit").
The Mingana reads the same as the Khabouris text.
UBS Peshitto: doesn't have any mention of "Spirit" or "Spiritual" in the
text, nor does Magiera, Bauscher, Jahn, Werner, and Kiraz's Antioch Bible.
The Way International's ANT & MS. ADD 14475 (5th-6th century) doesn't have
it.
### **24:** (Eph. 1:15)
The Peshitta: reads "all the Holy Ones" as does Etheridge, Murdock, Roth,
Lamsa, Norton, Alexander, Martin, The Aramaic Scriptures Translation, and
Kiraz's Antioch Bible, and even *Bauscher, (though his Interlinear Aramaic
text and word for word translation has the Western Peshitto reading).
The Mingana reads the same as the Khabouris text.
UBS Peshitto: reads "the Holy Ones" as does Magiera, Jahn, and Werner. The
Way International's TANT & MS. ADD 14475 (5th-6th century), have the
Western reading.
### **25:** (2Thess. 3:18)
The Peshitta: reads "all of you, my brothers; Amen." as does Roth,
Etheridge, Alexander, Norton, Murdock, and The Aramaic Scriptures
Translation.
The Way International's TANT & MS. ADD 14475 (5th-6th century), has the
Eastern reading. The Mingana has the same reading as the Khabouris text.
UBS Peshitto: reads "all of you; Amen." as does Lamsa, Bauscher, Magiera,
Jahn, Martin, Werner, and Kiraz's Antioch Bible.
### **26:** (Phil. 1:25)
The Peshitta: has "be with your spirit, my brothers. Amen." as does Roth,
Etheridge, Murdock, Norton, Alexander, and The Aramaic Scriptures
Translation.
The Mingana reads the same as the Khabouris text.
UBS Peshitto: has "be with your spirit. Amen." as does Magiera, Bauscher,
Lamsa, Jahn, Martin, Werner, and Kiraz's Antioch Bible. The Way
International's ANT & MS. ADD 14475 (5th-6th century), which doesn't have
"my Brothers".
### **27:** (Heb. 2:9)
The Peshitta: Roth, Lamsa, *Martin, and The Aramaic Scriptures Translation,
have the Eastern reading. The Mingana Ms. has the Eastern reading "who
apart from God, for all men, tasted death".
UBS Peshitto: Bauscher, Magiera, Murdock, [^1]Alexander, Norton, Etheridge,
Jahn, Werner, and Kiraz's Antioch Bible all have the Western reading.
While The Way International's ANT & MS. ADD 14475 (5th-6th century), has
the Western reading, it's odd that the text agrees with the Khabouris
readings in the other places in the verse where the Khabouris varies with
the UBS text.
[^1]: Victor Alexander has this reading: "He is, then, very little like the
angels, for we have seen that He is Eashoa because of the Passion of His
death, and the glory and honor that was consecrated on His head is,
therefore, imposed by God in tasting death on behalf of every human
being."
* Lonnie Martin has a strange reading here, which doesn't line up with what
is actually in the text itself. "9 But now we see Someone who was made
slightly inferior to the spirit messengers, namely, Yeshua Himself, crowned
with majesty and honor, because He suffered death. Due to YHVH's mercy, He
could experience death for everyone."
### **28:** (Heb. 2:16)
The Peshitta: Etheridge, Roth, Murdock, Magiera, Alexander, Norton, Lamsa,
Martin, and The Aramaic Scriptures Translation, all have the Eastern
reading.
The Mingana has the Eastern reading.
UBS Peshitto: Bauscher, Jahn, Werner, and Kiraz's Antioch Bible, all have
the Western reading. The Way International's ANT & MS. ADD 14475 (5th-6th
century), has the Western reading, exactly as the UBS text reads.
### **29:** (Jas. 3:10)
The Peshitta: has "curses and blessings" as does Etheridge, Roth, Murdock,
Norton, Alexander, Lamsa, Martin, and The Aramaic Scriptures Translation.
This is a unique reading only found in the Eastern Aramaic text. The
Mingana reads the same as the Khabouris text.
UBS Peshitto: has "blessings and curses" as does Bauscher, Magiera, Jahn,
Werner, and Kiraz's Antioch Bible, which reading aligns with both the Greek
and Latin reading. The Way International's ANT & MS. ADD 14473 (5th-6th
century), has the Western reading.
* [[PeshittasEasternOrWesternStats]]

84
PeshittasEasternOrWesternStats.md Normal file

@ -0,0 +1,84 @@
Parent: [[PeshittasEasternOrWestern]]
## Peshittas Eastern Or Western Stats
http://www.peshitta.org/for/showthread.php?tid=2927
Below are the stats on how often an English translation or text goes with
The Eastern Peshitta vs The Western Peshitto in the 28 places (so far) as
listed above. I've only listed those editions which have a complete New
Testament, 22 or 27 book canon...so Younan, Norton and Pashka, are not
listed here, as they are in the main list. "The Way Trans" stands for The
Way International's "The Aramaic New Testament: Estrangela Script" which
uses four 5th-6th century MSS for the 22 book canon.
The Stats:
The Khabouris Text:
Eastern Peshitta readings = 29 vs Western Peshitto readings: = 0
The [Aramaic Scriptures Translation](https://theholyaramaicscriptures.com/):
Eastern Peshitta: = 29 vs Western Peshitto = 0
John Etheridge: Eastern Peshitta readings: = 25 vs Western Peshitto
readings: = 4
Andrew Roth: Eastern Peshitta readings = 25 vs Western Peshitto readings:
= 4
Lonnie Martin: Eastern Peshitta readings: = 21 vs Western Peshitto
readings: = 8
Victor Alexander: Eastern Peshitta readings: = 20 vs Western Peshitto
readings: = 9
George Lamsa: Eastern Peshitta readings: = 19 vs Western Peshitto
readings: = 10
James Murdock: Eastern Peshitta readings: = 18 vs Western Peshitto
readings: = 11
Kiraz’s Antioch Bible: Eastern Peshitta readings: = 8 vs Western Peshitto
readings: = 21
The Way Translation: Eastern Peshitta readings = 7 vs Western Peshitto
readings: = 22
Janet Magiera: Eastern Peshitta readings: = 7 vs Western Peshitto
readings: = 22
David Bauscher: Eastern Peshitta readings: = *1 vs Western Peshitto
readings: = *29
The BFBS/UBS Text:
Eastern Peshitta readings = 0 vs Western Peshitto readings: = 29
David Bauscher: Eastern Peshitta readings: = *1 vs Western Peshitto
readings: = *29
Herb Jahn: Eastern Peshitta readings: = 0 vs Western Peshitto readings: =
29
A. Frances Werner: Eastern Peshitta readings: = *0 vs Western Peshitto
readings: = 29
Note: For Matthew 21:4 Paul Younan has said that this is a mistake in his
interlinear reading, and should have the Eastern reading of The Peshitta
and Roth follows Paul Younan's mistaken Interlinear reading, as it was his
base text. It thus should read as the Eastern Peshitta does here.
Note: Roth has the Eastern Peshitta reading at the end of the verse of Acts
21:13 for his translation/revision of Murdock, but keeps the UBS reading in
his Aramaic text, which is the UBS text revised by him to match the
readings of the Khabouris...but not here...and his note says as much. Not
sure why.
Note: * David Bauscher's regular translation has an Eastern Peshitta
reading for Ephesians 1:15 "all the Holy Ones", while his Interlinear text
and it's translation for the same verse, has the Western Peshitto reading
"the Holy Ones".
Note: * A. Frances Werner, states that the translation is based on the text
that is "supported by The Apostolic Catholic Assyrian Church of the East"
...but it does not, as it has all the western readings of the Peshitto
version text instead, which are no part of The Peshitta NT.

123
PeterToJames1.md

@ -1,21 +1,128 @@
//Peter to James, the lord and bishop of the holy Church, under the Father of all, through Jesus Christ, wishes peace always.//^^1^^ //// === Chapter I.-Doctrine of Reserve.
Knowing, my brother, your eager desire after that which is for the advantage of us all, I beg and beseech you not to communicate to any one of the Gentiles the books of my preachings which I sent to you, nor to any one of our own tribe before trial; but if any one has been proved and found worthy, then to commit them to him, after the manner in which Moses delivered //his books// to the Seventy who succeeded to his chair. Wherefore also the fruit of that caution appears even till now. For his countrymen keep the same rule of monarchy and polity everywhere, being unable in any way to think otherwise, or to be led out of the way of the much-indicating Scriptures. For, according to the rule delivered to them, they endeavour to correct the discordances of the Scriptures, if any one, haply not knowing the traditions, is confounded at the various utterances of the prophets. Wherefore they charge no one to teach, unless he has first learned how the Scriptures must be used. And thus they have amongst them one God, one law, one hope. === Chapter II.-Misrepresentation of Peter's Doctrine.
Knowing, my brother, your eager desire after that which is for the
advantage of us all, I beg and beseech you not to communicate to any
one of the Gentiles the books of my preachings which I sent to you,
nor to any one of our own tribe before trial; but if any one has been
proved and found worthy, then to commit them to him, after the manner
in which Moses delivered //his books// to the Seventy who succeeded to
his chair. Wherefore also the fruit of that caution appears even till
now. For his countrymen keep the same rule of monarchy and polity
everywhere, being unable in any way to think otherwise, or to be led
out of the way of the much-indicating Scriptures. For, according to
the rule delivered to them, they endeavour to correct the discordances
of the Scriptures, if any one, haply not knowing the traditions, is
confounded at the various utterances of the prophets. Wherefore they
charge no one to teach, unless he has first learned how the Scriptures
must be used. And thus they have amongst them one God, one law, one
hope. === Chapter II.-Misrepresentation of Peter's Doctrine.
In order, therefore, that the like may also happen to those among us as to these Seventy, give the books of my preachings to our brethren, with the like mystery of initiation, that they may indoctrinate those who wish to take part in teaching; for if it be not so done, our word of truth will be rent into many opinions. And this I know, not as being a prophet, but as already seeing the beginning of this very evil. For some from among the Gentiles have rejected my legal preaching, attaching themselves to certain lawless and trifling preaching of the man who is my enemy.^^2^^ And these things some have attempted while I am still alive, to transform my words by certain various interpretations, in order to the dissolution of the law; as though I also myself were of such a mind, but did not freely proclaim it, which God forbid! For such a thing were to act in opposition to the law of God which was spoken by Moses, and was borne witness to by our Lord in respect of its eternal continuance; for thus he spoke: "The heavens and the earth shall pass away, but one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law."^^[[https://www.tertullian.org/fathers2/ANF-08/footnote/fn32.htm
&P3265_1017466|3]]^^ And this He has said, that all things might come to pass. But these men, professing, I know not how, to know my mind, undertake to explain my words, which they have heard of me, more intelligently than I who spoke them, telling their catechumens that this is my meaning, which indeed I never thought of. But if, while I am still alive, they dare thus to misrepresent me, how much more will those who shall come after me dare to do so! === Chapter III.-Initiation.
Therefore, that no such thing may happen, for this end I have prayed and besought you not to communicate the books of my preaching which I have sent you to any one, whether of our own nation or of another nation, before trial; but if any one, having been tested, has been found worthy, then to hand them over to him, according to the initiation of Moses, by which he delivered //his books// to the Seventy who succeeded to his chair; in order that thus they may keep the faith, and everywhere deliver the rule of truth, explaining all things after our tradition; lest being themselves dragged down by ignorance, being drawn into error by conjectures after their mind, they bring others into the like pit of destruction. Now the things that seemed good to me, I have fairly pointed out to you; and what seems good to you, do you, my lord, becomingly perform. Farewell. === Chapter IV.-An Adjuration Concerning the Receivers of the Book.
Therefore, that no such thing may happen, for this end I have prayed
and besought you not to communicate the books of my preaching which I
have sent you to any one, whether of our own nation or of another
nation, before trial; but if any one, having been tested, has been
found worthy, then to hand them over to him, according to the
initiation of Moses, by which he delivered //his books// to the
Seventy who succeeded to his chair; in order that thus they may keep
the faith, and everywhere deliver the rule of truth, explaining all
things after our tradition; lest being themselves dragged down by
ignorance, being drawn into error by conjectures after their mind,
they bring others into the like pit of destruction. Now the things
that seemed good to me, I have fairly pointed out to you; and what
seems good to you, do you, my lord, becomingly perform. Farewell.
=== Chapter IV.-An Adjuration Concerning the Receivers of the Book.
1. Therefore James, having read the epistle, sent for the elders; and having read it to them, said: "Our Peter has strictly and becomingly charged us concerning the establishing of the truth, that we should not communicate the books of his preachings, which have been sent to us, to any one at random, but to one who is good and religious, and who wishes to teach, and who is circumcised, and faithful. And these are not all to be committed to him at once; that, if he be found injudicious in the first, the others may not be entrusted to him. Wherefore let him be proved not less than six years. And then according to the initiation of Moses, he //that is to deliver the books// should bring him to a river or a fountain, which is living water, where the regeneration of the righteous takes place, and should make him, not swear-for that is not lawful-but to stand by the water and adjure, as we ourselves, when we were re-generated,^^4^^ were made to do for the sake of not stoning.
2. "And let him say: `I take to witness heaven, earth, water, in which all things are comprehended, and in addition to all these, that, air also which pervades all things, and without which I cannot breathe, that I shall always be obedient to him who gives me the books of the preachings; and those same books which he may give me, I shall not communicate to any one in any way, either by writing them, or giving them in writing, or giving them to a writer, either myself or by another, or through any other initiation, or trick, or method, or by keeping them carelessly, or placing them before //any one,// or granting him permission //to see them,// or in any way or manner whatsoever communicating them to another; unless I shall ascertain one to be worthy, as I myself have been judged, or even more so, and that after a probation of not less than six years; but to one who is religious and good, chosen to teach, as I have received them, so I will commit them, doing these things also according to the will of my bishop.
3. "`But otherwise, though he were my son or my brother, or my friend, or otherwise in any way pertaining to me by kindred, if he be unworthy, that I will not vouchsafe the favour to him, as is not meet; and I shall neither be terrified by plot nor mollified by gifts. But if even it should ever seem to me that the books of the preachings given to me are not true, I shall not so communicate them, but shall give them back. And when I go abroad, I shall carry them with me, whatever of them I happen to possess. But if I be not minded to carry them about with me, I shall not suffer them to be in my house, but shall deposit them with my bishop, having the same faith, and setting out from the same persons //as myself.//^^5^^ But if it befall me to be sick, and in expectation of death, and if I be childless, I shall act in the same manner. But if I die having a son who is not worthy, or not yet capable, I shall act in the same manner. For I shall deposit them with my bishop, in order that if my son, when he grows up, be worthy of the trust, he may give them to him as his father's bequest, according to the terms of this engagement.
4. "`And that I shall thus do, I again call to witness heaven, earth, water, in which all things are enveloped, and in addition to all these, the all-pervading air, without which I cannot breathe, that I shall always be obedient to him who giveth me these books of the preachings, and shall observe in all things as I have engaged, or even something more. To me, therefore, keeping this covenant, there shall be a part with the holy ones; but to me doing anything contrary to what I have covenanted, may the universe be hostile to me, and the all-pervading ether, and the God who is over all, to whom none is superior, than whom none is greater. But if even I should come to the acknowledgment of another God, I now swear by him also, be he or be he not, that I shall not do otherwise. And in addition to all these things, if I shall lie, I shall be accursed living and dying, and shall be punished with everlasting punishment. "And after this, let him partake of bread and salt with him who commits them to him." === Chapter V.-The Adjuration Accepted.
1. Therefore James, having read the epistle, sent for the elders; and
having read it to them, said: "Our Peter has strictly and becomingly
charged us concerning the establishing of the truth, that we should
not communicate the books of his preachings, which have been sent to
us, to any one at random, but to one who is good and religious, and
who wishes to teach, and who is circumcised, and faithful. And these
are not all to be committed to him at once; that, if he be found
injudicious in the first, the others may not be entrusted to
him. Wherefore let him be proved not less than six years. And then
according to the initiation of Moses, he //that is to deliver the
books// should bring him to a river or a fountain, which is living
water, where the regeneration of the righteous takes place, and should
make him, not swear-for that is not lawful-but to stand by the water
and adjure, as we ourselves, when we were re-generated,^^4^^ were made
to do for the sake of not stoning.
James having thus spoken, the elders were in an agony of terror. Therefore James, perceiving that they were greatly afraid, said: "Hear me, brethren and fellow-servants. If we should give the books to all indiscriminately, and they should be corrupted by any daring men, or be perverted by interpretations, as you have heard that some have already done, it will remain even for those who really seek the truth, always to wander in error. Wherefore it is better that they should be with us, and that we should communicate them with all the fore-mentioned care to those who wish to live piously, and to save others. But if any one, after taking this adjuration, shall act otherwise, he shall with good reason incur eternal punishment. For why should not he who is the cause of the destruction of others not be destroyed himself? "The elders, therefore, being pleased with the sentiments of James exclaimed, "Blessed be He who, as foreseeing all things, has graciously appointed thee as our bishop; "and when they had said this, we all rose up, and prayed to the Father and God of all, to whom be glory for ever. Amen.^^6^^
### Footnotes
2. "And let him say: `I take to witness heaven, earth, water, in which
all things are comprehended, and in addition to all these, that, air
also which pervades all things, and without which I cannot breathe,
that I shall always be obedient to him who gives me the books of the
preachings; and those same books which he may give me, I shall not
communicate to any one in any way, either by writing them, or giving
them in writing, or giving them to a writer, either myself or by
another, or through any other initiation, or trick, or method, or by
keeping them carelessly, or placing them before //any one,// or
granting him permission //to see them,// or in any way or manner
whatsoever communicating them to another; unless I shall ascertain one
to be worthy, as I myself have been judged, or even more so, and that
after a probation of not less than six years; but to one who is
religious and good, chosen to teach, as I have received them, so I
will commit them, doing these things also according to the will of my
bishop.
3. "`But otherwise, though he were my son or my brother, or my friend,
or otherwise in any way pertaining to me by kindred, if he be
unworthy, that I will not vouchsafe the favour to him, as is not meet;
and I shall neither be terrified by plot nor mollified by gifts. But
if even it should ever seem to me that the books of the preachings
given to me are not true, I shall not so communicate them, but shall
give them back. And when I go abroad, I shall carry them with me,
whatever of them I happen to possess. But if I be not minded to carry
them about with me, I shall not suffer them to be in my house, but
shall deposit them with my bishop, having the same faith, and setting
out from the same persons //as myself.//^^5^^ But if it befall me to
be sick, and in expectation of death, and if I be childless, I shall
act in the same manner. But if I die having a son who is not worthy,
or not yet capable, I shall act in the same manner. For I shall
deposit them with my bishop, in order that if my son, when he grows
up, be worthy of the trust, he may give them to him as his father's
bequest, according to the terms of this engagement.
4. "`And that I shall thus do, I again call to witness heaven, earth,
water, in which all things are enveloped, and in addition to all
these, the all-pervading air, without which I cannot breathe, that I
shall always be obedient to him who giveth me these books of the
preachings, and shall observe in all things as I have engaged, or even
something more. To me, therefore, keeping this covenant, there shall
be a part with the holy ones; but to me doing anything contrary to
what I have covenanted, may the universe be hostile to me, and the
all-pervading ether, and the God who is over all, to whom none is
superior, than whom none is greater. But if even I should come to the
acknowledgment of another God, I now swear by him also, be he or be he
not, that I shall not do otherwise. And in addition to all these
things, if I shall lie, I shall be accursed living and dying, and
shall be punished with everlasting punishment. "And after this, let
him partake of bread and salt with him who commits them to him." ===
Chapter V.-The Adjuration Accepted.
James having thus spoken, the elders were in an agony of
terror. Therefore James, perceiving that they were greatly afraid,
said: "Hear me, brethren and fellow-servants. If we should give the
books to all indiscriminately, and they should be corrupted by any
daring men, or be perverted by interpretations, as you have heard that
some have already done, it will remain even for those who really seek
the truth, always to wander in error. Wherefore it is better that they
should be with us, and that we should communicate them with all the
fore-mentioned care to those who wish to live piously, and to save
others. But if any one, after taking this adjuration, shall act
otherwise, he shall with good reason incur eternal punishment. For why
should not he who is the cause of the destruction of others not be
destroyed himself? "The elders, therefore, being pleased with the
sentiments of James exclaimed, "Blessed be He who, as foreseeing all
things, has graciously appointed thee as our bishop; "and when they
had said this, we all rose up, and prayed to the Father and God of
all, to whom be glory for ever. Amen.^^6^^ ### Footnotes
1. https://www.tertullian.org/fathers2/ANF-08/footnote/fn32.htm#P3257_1014982
2. https://www.tertullian.org/fathers2/ANF-08/footnote/fn32.htm#P3264_1016833

28
TheDidache.md

@ -4,12 +4,10 @@ Parent: [[EbioniteCanon]]
From https://www.thedidache.com
Read the Catholic Teachings of St. Peter and His Apostles as written
in the Didache (circa 96 A.D.) Historically these sacred instructions
are [also] known as The Lord's teaching to the heathen by the Twelve Apostles.
The Didache (circa 96 A.D.) was known as The Lord's teaching to the
heathen by the Twelve Apostles.
* [[TheDidache1]]
* https://prophecytoday.uk/study/resources/item/1457-the-didache.html
## Background
@ -35,6 +33,7 @@ may be as early as the 5th century. It lacks Didache 1:5-6 and
13:5-7. The title includes the words "written in the year 90 or 100
after the Lord Christ." Although never published, readings were
made available in 1931.
The Greek "Apostolic Constitutions" has many references to the
Didache, re-worked with additional Scriptures and other traditions,
as does the Ethiopic "Ecclesiastical Canons of the Apostles."
@ -51,6 +50,27 @@ community.
from:
http://ministries.tliquest.net/theology/apocryphas/nt/didache.htm
### Links
* https://prophecytoday.uk/study/resources/item/1457-the-didache.html
Although the Didache has been known of since early christianity,
it was only recently "found" in Constantinople in the library of the
Patriarch of Jerusalem, after having been overlooked for 1800 years,
in a Codex of documents called [[GreekHierosolymitanus]]. In the "find"
are other documents linking it directly the [[CodexSinaticusGreekFraud]],
such as the copy of the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermes.
So we cannot be sure that the Greek Hierosolymitanus codex is not somehow a
part of that fraud - perhaps related to its Letters of Ignatius of Antioch.
Unfortunately, although it is referred to often by early church writers,
it is quoted rarely, or they haven't survived, so it's difficult to validate
the Didache in Codex Hierosolymitanus.
Although this is unfortunate we will accept it as is, because of its great beauty
and its great simplicity. It leads to a Christian Community wil a very different
flavour than the Church.
### JWO Videos
* **1Cor. 9:7 **: Paul conflicts with (Matt. 10:8-9) and the Didache [2tdSsbo2AjU](https://youtube.com/watch?v=2tdSsbo2AjU).mp4

35
WastheNewTestamentReallyWritteninGreek.md

@ -4,8 +4,6 @@ Parent: [[Home]]
## Was the New Testament Really Written in Greek
https://archive.org/details/WastheNewTestamentReallyWritteninGreek1e/
Western Tradition teaches that New Testament is written in Greek while
many of Eastern Tradition (especially Church of the East) teaches that
New Testament is written in Aramaic. Aramaic NT in Eastern Tradition
@ -129,6 +127,39 @@ of his messianic ideology.
This video about Aramaic New Testament is also recommended:
* https://archive.org/details/NTAramaic
### Was the New Testament Really Written in Greek
The author of this book has a download page that disclaims the book:
https://web.archive.org/web/20140403194855/http://www.aramaicpeshitta.com/downloadbook.htm
Was the New Testament Really Written in Greek?: A Concise Compendium of
the Many Internal and External Evidences of Aramaic Peshitta
Primacy</i> argues that the New Testament was originally written in
Aramaic. It is the first of two books I wrote long before I had decided
to become a bona fide scholar and commenced post-graduate Religious
Studies. Some of my unjustified assumptions were that Christianity is
the true faith, that Jesus’ speaking Aramaic would somehow mean that
the New Testament was originally written in Aramaic, that the Bible is
the inerrant word of God, and that Jesus even existed as a historical
figure (my scholarly work reveals that this may not be the case).
I have all but disowned this work, but still allow others to view it,
in the interests of transparency, as an example of how religious
motives and beliefs can result in poor scholarship, because despite
these assumptions there are still some interesting points and the
conclusion could actually be correct, and for the interest of the few
Aramaic primacists that remain. In fact, this book still serves some
good purpose, in introducing the theory, in revealing the corrupt and
contradictory nature of the Bible, in revealing the suspect methods and
motives of many Biblical scholars, as well as clearing up the meaning
of many confusing Biblical passages (Aramaic idioms are typically
misunderstood by mainstream Church-goers).
If I understand correctly, his theology has now turned toward mythiscm,
and his new book is called: "There was no Jesus, and there is no God."
* https://archive.org/details/WastheNewTestamentReallyWritteninGreek1e/
* https://archive.org/download/WastheNewTestamentReallyWritteninGreek1e/WastheNewTestamentReallyWritteninGreek1e.pdf
* https://purebibleforum.com/index.php?threads/the-languages-involved-in-mark-matthew-hebrews-and-revelation-can-include-greek-latin-hebrew-and-aramaic.2720/