OR
How to turn...
1 omission + 2 mis-translations + 1 fantasy into 13 extra words
"translated" into English
which are NOT in the Aramaic Text of the New Covenant, in one verse of the Sacred Text, that of Galatians 1:6.
SAINT PAUL by Bartolomeo Montagna Courtesy of en.wikipedia.org |
Galatians 1:6 - ܡܶܬ݁ܕ݁ܰܡܰܪ ܐ݈ܢܳܐ ܐܰܝܟ݁ܰܢܳܐ ܒ݁ܰܥܓ݂ܰܠ ܡܶܬ݂ܗܰܦ݂ܟ݁ܺܝܢ ܐܢ݈ܬ݁ܽܘܢ ܡܶܢ
ܡܫܺܝܚܳܐ ܗܰܘ
ܕ݁ܰܩܪܳܟ݂ܽܘܢ ܒ݁ܛܰܝܒ݁ܽܘܬ݂ܶܗ ܠܰܐ݈ܚܪܺܬ݂ܳܐ ܣܒ݂ܰܪܬ݂ܳܐ ܀
Galatians 1:6 - I am amazed how soon you have been turned from the Meshiha himself, who called you by his grace, |
Galatians 1:6 - I admire, how soon ye have turned from the Messiah, who called you by his grace, unto another gospel ; |
Galatians 1:6 - I am surprised how soon you have turned
to another gospel, away from Christ who has called you by his grace;
The Aramaic Text ( above ) and Dr. John Etheridge, Dr. James Murdock, and Mr. George Lamsa's translations below the Aramaic Text of Galatians 1:6, are all courtesy of DUKHRANA. com / Peshitta Tool, a free online and scholarly analytical tool of the Aramaic Text, with several Lexicons available for each word of each verse of the New Covenant, including CAL, the Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon of the Hebrew Union College in Cincinnati, Ohio. CAL distinguishes between 30 Aramaic dialects, including Syriac, in its workings, from a scholarly perspective ( i.e., it is a secular language work and does not present its information from any religious doctrinal viewpoint.)
The Netzarim Publishing House version of Galatians 1:6 is taken from that "golden, best, and historic" ( via Amazon reviews ) translation which they publish and helped edit. Here is their English translation with nothing changed nor added.
"I am stunned into silence, as if dead ( dead of speaking)3 that you have so quickly forgotten Mashiyach who has called you to his grace and (have) gone to another gospel. "
Perhaps even more astonishing is footnote # 3 found on that same page 560, mis-pag. edition:
" Usually translated as "amazed" or "astonished," but this word parses out literally as
met ( dead ) d (of ) amar ( saying/speaking).
It would therefore appear to be an idiom akin to saying " the crowd was stunned into dead silence" ; thus indicating deep surprise that renders one speechless like the dead.
As usual with this Netzarim volume, one is forced to look closely at the Aramaic Text itself in order to ascertain EXACTLY what the verse is saying. With the help of Dukhrana.com's most excellent Peshitta Tool , we will be able to see if the Netzarim New Covenant is honestly translating the Sacred Text into English... or if it is not. Alas, the problems start with the VERY FIRST WORD in the verse ܡܶܬ݁ܕ݁ܰܡܰܪ
Analyzing this verb, we find
How do we KNOW it is a participle ? In Aramaic grammar, the Mem letter ܡܶ ( "M" ... it looks like an R fallen flat on its face ) at the beginning of the verb indicates that it is a participle form. That "M" at the beginning is called a "preformative." Next we notice the Tav letter ܬ݁ ( " T " ... it looks like a wheelchair ). That "T" tells us something, especially because of the short "e" vowel pointing in front of the T, over the Mem. ܡܶܬ݁ It tells us
Ethp AE L verb forms are passive or reflexive.
Thirdly, we notice the ROOT of the verb is ܕ݁ܰܡܰܪ DMR .
To make MTDMR = "dead of speaking" , one would have to
Because the standard rules of Aramaic / Syriac grammar were IGNORED or not followed, a fantastical "parsing" of MTDMR rendered a translation of the Sacred Text which includes 9 extra words " stunned into silence, as if dead ( dead of speaking)" ... of which translation NOT ONE Aramaic language scholar of the four renown scholars said was even possibly correct. At all. Does this word " parse out literally " as the author claims in footnote # 3, page 560, mis-pagination edition of the Netzarim version of the New Covenant? Because the standard rules of Aramaic / Syriac grammar were cast aside, Galatians 1:6 omitted translating the words "how" ܐܰܝܟ݁ܰܢܳܐ and "from" ܡܶܢ , leaving them out altogether. Because the rules were not followed, the translation included words NOT in the text: "so" and "forgotten." Other oddities: The Beyt- ܒ݁ prefix on "his grace" ܒ݁ܛܰܝܒ݁ܽܘܬ݂ܶܗ was translated "TO" instead of "IN" or even with the instrumental "BY", and an additional verb phrase was added ( have ) gone ... which is not in the ARAMAIC TEXT. Because the rules were forsaken in lieu of that erroneous fantasy, the literal translation from Aramaic to English had to be padded and adjusted and SKEWERED in order for this verse to make sense.
Why would ANYONE
of integrity
allow
such a travesty with the Sacred Text ?
This error-packed translation was done under the auspices of editorS and proof-readerS and committee memberS. It is highly lauded by Amazon reviewers who will not address the errors.
It is apparent that the Netzarim must change Scripture in order to substantiate their doctrinal stands.
Would not it be wiser to be HONEST in the translation so as to be CORRECTED in doctrine
.... rather than to TRY to correct Scripture ?
How can one or one's group ever HOPE to please ALAHA or ALOHA or THE ELOHIM or GOD if the Scriptures are "corrected" rather than we ourselves ?
It is a fearful thing
to fall into the Hand
of the Living GOD, ALAHA, ALOHA,
THE ELOHIM.
|
2 comments:
This was a very insightful post. However, do you not think it is possible that, given the context, that there is a possible play on words going on in the verse? There are many instances in the Aramaic Peshitta where words are compressed to form other words (e.g. barnasha=bar anasha) and possibly "to wonder" could be a contraction of "dead from speaking"?
Thanks for your superb website - I need to spend MUCH more time looking at it! (Ewan MacLeod, JesusSpokeAramaic.com)
Dear Mr. MacLeod,
Dear friend, thank you for your kind response and interesting comment.
I have seen in footnotes in this Netzarim version of the New Covenant some "word plays" in the Aramaic language. Paul Younan's translation sometimes includes such footnotes and this Netzarim edition usually quotes him.
I assume a native speaker would cherish this characteristic of his language, naturally enough.
However, in a translation of such an important volume as the SACRED TEXT, it seems risky to utilize those language techniques when translating this Text. There may be some who translate it into their own native languages and thereby an element of confusion could possibly be added into the serious message of Salvation.
However, this is a moot point with Galatians 1:6 for the author himself stated in his footnote that "this word parses out LITERALLY as MET D'AMAR" ... which it most assuredly does NOT, for all the reasons I have carefully listed in the post.
I check and re-check my research and parsing before posting.
After my parsing and checking
on this verse, I contacted 4 Aramaic experts and they verified my grammatical parsing and were rather non-plussed at the printed and published translation of that verse, although they did not know its origin.
If you wish to know who those experts are, I will tell you personally their identity and exactly what they said if you send me your email address on a comment. ( I moderate my comments and I will not publish your email address; I like my privacy also.)
I did not identify them because I did not ask their permission to be identified and quoted publicly Some shy from this kind of interaction.
However, besides the honesty-in-translation issue, this contrived verse would likely not do the reader as much harm as the AWFUL translation of Galatians 1:4.
Galatians 1:4 bespeaks of YeSHu (JESUS) giving HIMSELF+ for our sins so that we might be delivered from this evil world ... in the Aramaic Text.
Unfortunately, the Aramaic TRANSLATION by the Netzarim Publishing House totally convoluted the passage, ignored the standard rules of grammar again, ... and hid the true message of that verse. ( See the two posts on verse Galatians 1:4).
This constituted a MUCH MORE SERIOUS error for the reader, especially one who is NOT rooted and grounded in M'SHIKHA (CHRIST.)
What baffles me is WHY the Netzarim group has not recalled this version as erroneous.
Certainly there must be SOMEONE of integrity in that group who eschews such unsubstantiated work in this translation, wouldn't you think ?
Okay, I'll close for now. Thank you for responding, once again.
Yours for Truth in the Inner Man... and on the printed page.
Sincerely,
Sr. Judith Hannah + + +
Order of the GOOD SHEPHERD+
Post a Comment