It is Finished! – What did Yeshua Mean?

It is Finished!
By
James Scott Trimm

There is a popular teaching that circulates in Messianic and Hebrew Roots circles that when the High Priest sacrificed the Passover Lamb, as part of the ritual, he would declare “It is Finished!” so that when Yeshua declared “It is finished” (Yochanan 19:30) upon his death, he declared “it is finished” at the same moment as the High Priest declared the same words. It is an inspirational and faith building teaching. It is also, using the words of Shakespeare “a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”

I first heard this teaching in the 1980’s, not too long after becoming a believer in Messiah. I have searched over thirty years now, looking for a single authoritative, primary source for this astounding claim. Over the last thirty plus years, I have studied the Mishna, the Talmuds, the Targums, the Midrashim, the Zohar and even the medieval Jewish commentators. I have studied the Dead Sea Scrolls, the writings of Josephus and even Philo of Alexandria. After more than thirty years of study, I am satisfied, at this point, that if I have not been able to find the source after more than thirty years of research, that no such source exists. I am always open to correction, if anyone can document this claim, but so far as I can find, after decades of searching, this is an “old wives tale”.

I cannot tell you how much harm false claims like these make in reaching Jewish people with the Messiah , they discredit the claim that Yeshua is the Messiah.

There is, however, a very beautiful insight about Yeshua’s declaration “It is finished!” that we should be teaching. It is a very deep and meaningful insight, and unlike the false claim above, it is 100% true.

The original Hebrew of this passage has been lost (perhaps it will turn up some day). Sadly the three pages that contained Yochanan 18:31b-19:40 are missing from the Old Syriac Aramaic (we only have two manuscript witnesses of the Old Syriac Gospels, comprising about 95% of the text, but this portion is part of the 5% that is missing. ) However, we do have an Aramaic witness to this text in the Peshitta Aramaic, and here the phrase “it is finished” is a single Aramaic word משלם , which is the passive participle of the root שלם from which we get the words “shlama” in Aramaic, or in Hebrew “shalom”.

And in Mark 15:37 and Luke 23:46 where the KJV says “he gave up the ghost” the Aramaic (both in the Old Syriac and Peshitta) have ושלם (Old Syriac Mark has שלם) meaning “and he finished”, but as we will see, this word שלם means so much more than just “finished”!

The translation “it is finished” is accurate, but woefully inadequate for this word. There is no easy way to express this word in English, certainly not in a single phrase, but maybe with a whole paragraph.

Shalom/Shalama does not just mean “peace” it means so much more than English can express in a single word. The SH-L-M root has to do with being completed, finished, whole, balancing the scales, satisfying debt. It can refer to being paid an earned reward, and in the form SHILUM refers to suffering retribution.

When Yeshua declared משלם he was not just saying “it is finished”, he was making a proclamation of truly cosmic significance! He was declaring that the debt has been paid in full, that the scales of been balanced, and that the universe itself has been made whole!

The cosmic significance of this statement in the Aramaic is far more exciting than the “old wives tale” that circulates about the High Priest at Passover. It also tells us just one example what a terrible loss was suffered, when the Ketuvim Netzarim (The Writings of the Nazarenes, commonly called the “New Testament”) was translated from the closely related Semitic languages of Hebrew and Aramaic into Greek, Latin, English and other European languages. So much has been literally lost in translation, and so much remains to be restored!

The situation has now become dire! We must now raise at least $731 by the end of the day today (10/21/24), or the account will plunge into the negative, starting a cascade of returned items and fees! We need your help today!

I want to thank all of you supporting this work. I literally could not do it without you!

This work takes hours of my time. As many of you know, my wife is very ill, and I spend most of my time at home as her caretaker. I work at a desk less than six feet from her bed. So I am in a position to dedicate many hours to this important work that I have been directed to do.

But I also realize that it is not the activity of James Trimm alone who is responsible to do this work, it is all of us together who are charged with the responsibility of accomplishing this work. I very much look on the efforts of this restoration work as a cooperative one with each one of you. We are all joint heirs with Messiah and should always be about our Father’s business. I am honored to be able to be partnered with truth seekers as this restoration of Scripture moves forward in fulfillment of prophecy.

Donations can be sent by Paypal to donations@wnae.orgor by Zelle or Go Fund Me.

Click HERE to donate

Restoring the Feast of Yeshua

Restoring the Feast of Yeshua
By
Rabbi Robert O. Miller

There is an amazing and important Holy Day which was first mentioned in the 3rd Book of the Maccabees that was called the Feast of Yeshua (Salvation) which had been lost and had not been observed for 2,000 years because of the close tie to the name YahShua and because this festival was very important to the Netzarim. Since we are living in the times of the restoration of all truth, one of the things that we need to restore is the lost, biblical Festival of Yeshua.

What is the background of this festival? At the Battle of Gaza during the Syrian Wars, which was one of the largest battles of the Hellenistic kingdoms, between Ptolemy IV Philopator, Pharaoh of Egypt and Antiochus III of the Seleucid kingdom of Syria, that would determine the sovereignty of the land of Lebanon, Syria, and Israel, Ptolemy was victorious, and Egypt took control of the land of Israel that had been dominated by the evil House of Antiochus.

One of the first things Pharaoh Ptolemy sought to do was ride to Jerusalem and forcibly enter the Holy of Holies of the Holy Temple in Jerusalem.

“After he had arrived in Jerusalem, he offered sacrifice to the supreme Elohim and made thank offerings and did what was fitting for the Holy Place…he marveled at the beauty of the Temple, and desired to enter the Sanctuary. When they said that this was not permitted…only the High Priest.once a year [could enter] –the Pharaoh was by no means persuaded… ‘why should not I at least enter, whether they wish it or not?’

Then the priests in all their vestments prostrated themselves and entreated the supreme Elohim to aid in the present situation and to avert the violence of this evil design, and they filled the Temple with cries and tears…” (3 Maccabees 1:9-16)

“Thereupon Elohim, Who sees all things, the supreme Father of all, Holy One among the Holy Ones, having heard the lawful supplication, scourged him who had exalted himself in insolence and audacity. He shook him on this side and that as a reed is shaken by the wind, so that he lay helpless on the ground and, besides being paralyzed in his limbs, was unable even to speak, since he was smittenby a righteous judgment. Then both friends and bodyguards, seeing the severe punishment that had overtaken him, and fearing that he would lose his life, quickly dragged him out, panic-stricken in their exceedingly great fear. After a while he recovered, and though he had been punished, he by no means repented, but went away uttering bitter threats.” (3 Maccabees 2:21-24)

Upon returning to Egypt he sought to punish all the Jews living in Egypt for his humiliation he had experienced in Jerusalem by the hands of Yahweh. “[Pharaoh] set up a stele on the obelisk in the courtyard with this inscription: None of those who do not sacrifice (to pagan deities) shall enter their sanctuaries, and all Jews shall be subjected to a registration involving poll tax and reduced to the status of slaves. Those who object to this are to be taken by force and put to death; those who are registered are also to be branded on their bodies by fire with the ivy-leaf symbol of Dionysus… But if any of them prefer to join those who have been initiated into the mysteries, they shall have equal citizenship with the Alexandrians.’” (3 Maccabees 2:27-30) Pharaoh tortured and killed those that refused to renounce the Faith of Yahweh. An elder priest named Eleazar prayed for the deliverance of his people (3 Maccabees 6:1-25).

“Then the most glorious, almighty, and true Elohim revealed his holy glory and opened the heavenly gates, from which two glorious angels of fearful aspect descended, visible to all but the Jews. They opposed the forces of the enemy and filled them with confusion and terror, binding them with immovable shackles. Even the king began to shudder bodily, and he forgot his sullen insolence. The animals turned back upon the armed forces following them and began trampling and destroying them.

Then the Pharaoh‘s anger was turned to pity and tears because of the things that he had devised beforehand. For when he heard the shouting and saw them all fallen headlong to destruction, he wept and angrily threatened his Friends, saying, ‘You are committing treason and surpassing tyrants in cruelty; and even me, your benefactor, you are now attempting to deprive of dominion and life by secretly devising acts of no advantage to the kingdom. Who has driven from their homes those who faithfully kept our country’s fortresses, and foolishly gathered every one of them here? Who is it that has so lawlessly encompassed with outrageous treatment those who from the beginning differed fromall nations in their goodwill toward us and often have accepted willingly the worst of human dangers? Loose and untie their unjust bonds! Send them back to their homes in peace, begging pardon for your former actions!Release the children of the almighty and living Elohim of heaven, who from the time of our ancestors until now has granted an unimpeded and notable stability to our government.’ … the Jews, immediately released, praised their holy Elohim and Savior, since they now had escaped death.” (3 Maccabees 6:18-29)

The Jews declared an annual festival called “The Feast of Yeshua (Salvation).” “Then they feasted, being provided with everything by the king, until the fourteenth day,on which also they made the petition for their dismissal. The king granted their request at once …they kept the day as a joyful festival, since they had destroyed the profaners.” (3 Maccabees 6:40, 41; 7:15)

The festival enacted from the 8th to the 14th of the Egyptian month of Epeiph corresponding to 19 -25 of August 217 BCE on the Julian Calendar and 12 – 18 of Elul 3544 on the Hebrew calendar. This festival should begin on the 12th of Elul each year.

[This year beginning at sunset, Sept. 7th, 2022]

How did they observe the Feast? “…they kept the day as a joyful festival…crowned with all sorts of very fragrant flowers, joyfully and loudly giving thanks to the one Elohim of their ancestors, the eternal Savior of Israel, in words of praise and all kinds of melodious songs.” (3 Maccabees 7:15, 16)

How did the Netzarim see this festival? Once again wicked Pharaoh tried to destroy Israel by profaning the Faith of Yahweh and enslaving the remnant of Israel. And once again Yahweh delivered them miraculously. The Hebrew word for “deliverance” is YESHUA. The deliverance of the remnant of Israel from the hand of Pharaoh points us forward to the deliverance of Israel by King Messiah YAHSHUA (Yahweh is our salvation), the express manifestation of “the eternal Savior of Israel”.

What do we do on the Feast of YahShua?

  1. A meal called “The Banquet of Salvation” or “The Banquet of Yeshua” akin to a barbecue. (3 Maccabees 6:31)
  2. shout(ing) the HalleluYah…joyfully,”  “singing song of their ancestors, praising Elohim, their Savior and worker of wonders.” Particularly appropriate are songs about “Salvation” or which speak of Yahweh’s defense as our shield. (3 Maccabees 6:32)
  3. “arranged the…Dance.” (3 Maccabees 6:35)
  4. Obviously the festival should involve recounting the Story of Salvation.

“The Feast of YAHSHUA” is now again being kept by a remnant of Israel

Originally written by Rabbi Robert O. Miller on August 28th, 2010
(Robert Owen Miller 1957-2021)

Donations have been low and our high electric bill (from the record summer heat wave here in Texas) is past due!

As you know we have been digging ourselves out of a budget shortfall.  As I have said to you many times, I look on this work as a co-operative one with me, and all of you combining our resources together in order to get the job done of helping to teach this great truth to all in the world who will listen. Thank you so much from the bottom of my heart for your continued support, you are the ones who make it all possible by your contributions and your prayers for our work. I truly appreciate your help in every way

If you can make a one time donation of $500 or $1,000 dollars to support this work.

Donations can be sent by Paypal to donations@wnae.org

Or click HERE to donate

Official Declaration Concerning Vaccines from the International Nazarene Beit Din

International Nazarene Beit Din
Official Declaration Concerning Vaccines


The Torah commands,  ונשמרתם מאד לנפשותיכם “Guard your selves/lives carefully” (Deut. 4:15a)  This Biblical commandment requires one to be very vigilant in caring for one’s nefesh (life/self), and to refrain from any action that may put his life or health in danger.  Additionally, many vaccines contain unkosher substances. The benefits and risks of vaccination are a much-debated matter in medical and scientific circles. Although one may follow the opinion of most doctors and choose to vaccinate his/herself and his or her children, the individual who has done his or her own research has the obligation to act according to his or her own knowledge. If one’s research has led him or her to understand that the risks of vaccination outweigh its benefits, and especially when his or her view is supported by many medical doctors and researchers, the commandment of ונשמרתם מאד לנפשותיכם “Guard your selves/lives carefully” (Deut. 4:15a) obligates that person to shield himself/herself and his or her children from vaccines. Moreover, such an individual would also be bound to refuse such a vaccination due to its unkosher content. This is even more true when a parent has reasons to believe that his or her children are sensitive to vaccines. To act otherwise would be a transgression of the above Torah commandment.

The International Nazarene Beit Din
April 24th, 2019

This position was passed before Covid-19 is known to have existed, and long before Covid-19 vaccines existed. Where a religious exemption exists, Nazarenes may certainly claim such an exemption.

Yeshua’s Sabbath Halacha

Yeshua’s Sabbath Halacha
By
James Scott Trimm

The Essene Halacha concerning Shabbat was the strictest of any sect of Judaism. Josephus writes of the Essenes:

“…they [Essenes] are stricter than any other of the Jews in resting
from their labors on the seventh day; for they not only get their food
ready the day before, that they not be obliged to kindle a fire on
that day, but they will not remove any vessel out of its place, nor go
to stool thereon.”
(Wars 2:8:9)

There is a lengthy discussion of the Sabbath in the Damascus Document, I will include here only some key points:

“No man shall eat on the Sabbath day aught save that which is prepared
or perishing (in the field). Nor shall one eat or drink unless in the
camp. (If he was) on the way and went down to wash he may drink where
he stands, but he shall not draw into any vessel. … No man shall walk
after the animal to pasture it outside his city more than two thousand
cubits. None shall lift his hand to smite it with (his) fist. If it
be stubborn he shall not remove it out of his house. No man shall
carry anything from the house to the outside or from the outside into
the house, and if he be in the vestibule he shall not carry anything
out of it or bring in anything into it. … Let not the nursing father
take the sucking child to go out or to come in on the Sabbath. … No
man shall help an animal in its delivery on the Sabbath day. And if
it falls into a pit or ditch, he shall not raise it on the Sabbath. …
And if any person falls into a place of water or into a place of… he
shall not bring him up by a ladder or a cord or instrument. No man
shall offer anything on the altar on the Sabbath, save the
burnt-offering of the Sabbath, for so it is written `Excepting your
Sabbaths’.”
(Damascus Document 10:14-11:18)

Note that the Essene Halacha was so strict as to place Sabbath observance above human life.

On the other hand, Pharisaic Halacha placed human life above the Sabbath. As we read in the Mishna:

Rabbi Mattiah ben Harash said, “He who has a pain in his throat, they
drop medicine into his mouth on the Sabbath, because it is a matter of
doubt as to danger to life. Any matter of doubt as to danger to life
overrides the prohibitions of the Sabbath.”
(m.Yoma 8:6)

Yeshua’s halacha on this matter was very similar to that of the Pharisees, and very different from that of the Essenes.

For example the Talmud says:

R. Jonathan b. Joseph said: For it is holy unto you; I.e., it [the Sabbath] is committed to your hands, not you to its hands.
(b.Yoma 85b)

While Yeshua says:

“The Sabbath was created for man and not man for the Sabbath.”
(Mk. 2:27)

The Talmud days:

“R. Eleazar answered and said: If circumcision, which attaches to one only of the two hundred and forty-eight members of the human body, suspends the Sabbath, how much more shall [the saving of] the whole body suspend the Sabbath!”
(b.Yoma 85b)

While Yeshua said:

“If a man is circumcised on the day of the Sabbath that the Torah
of Moshe be not loosed, do you murmur against me because I have healed
a whole man on the Sabbath day?”
(John 7:23)

So in general terms, Yeshua and the Talmud are singing the same song concerning the Sabbath.  However there is a difference.

The Talmud looses the Sabbath only when there is a “matter of doubt as to danger to life” but Yeshua’s halacha takes the matter a bit further.  Yeshua’s halacha concerning Sabbath is based upon the following verse from Hosea:

For I desire mercy (Hebrew: CHESED), and not sacrifice:
and the knowledge of Elohim, rather than burntofferings.
(Hosea 6:6)

“CHESED” is a Hebrew word meaning “mercy, grace, undue favor, loving kindness.”

From this verse we learn that any matter of CHESED overrides the sacrifices.  This is important, because we know that the sacrificial offerings override the Sabbath, because they are performed on the Sabbath despite the fact that they involve acts normally prohibited on the Sabbath.  This is what Yeshua means when he says:

7 But if you had known what it means, For I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,(Hosea 6:6) you would not have condemned the guiltless.
8 For the Son of Man is Adonai; even of the Sabbath.
9 And when He had passed over from there, He entered into their synagogue.
10 And behold, a man which had his hand withered. And they asked Him, saying, Is it lawful on the Sabbath to heal the sick? And all this was, that they might accuse Him <before the beit din. >
11 And He said to them: What man among you, having one sheep that shall fall into a pit on the Sabbath, will not lay hold on it, and lift it out?
12 And is not a man better than a sheep? Therefore it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath.
13 Then said He to the man: Stretch out your hand. And he stretched it out, and it was restored to health, like as the other.
(Matt. 12:7-13)

This was not a “matter of doubt as to danger to life” but only a man with a withered hand.  So our halacha on what is permitted on Sabbath is broader than that of Rabbinic Judaism.  Rabbinic Judaism looses the Sabbath only when there is a “matter of doubt as to danger to life” however Nazarene Judaism looses the Sabbath whenever a matter of CHESED is at stake, this includes (but is not limited to) healing the sick, even when there is no question as to danger to life.

However if we allow Yeshua to teach us, we can go back to the second phrase of Hosea 6:6 and learn something new.

For I desire mercy (Hebrew: CHESED), and not sacrifice:
and the knowledge of Elohim, rather than burntofferings.
(Hosea 6:6)

Therefore, just as the Sabbath is loosed for a matter of CHESED, for the same reason, it is also loosed for a matter where “the knowledge of Elohim” is at stake.  For example carrying Scriptures to a Torah study, or taking notes in a Torah study, or driving to Synagogue would be permitted on Sabbath.

Donations in July have been very low, our rent is due in just over a week, and we do not have it! We need your help today!

You can now donate thru Paypal, Zelle or Go Fund Me!

I want to thank all of you supporting this work. I literally could not do it without you!

This work takes hours of my time. As many of you know, my wife is very ill, and I spend most of my time at home as her caretaker. I work at a desk less than six feet from her bed. So I am in a position to dedicate many hours to this important work that I have been directed to do.

But I also realize that it is not the activity of James Trimm alone who is responsible to do this work, it is all of us together who are charged with the responsibility of accomplishing this work. I very much look on the efforts of this restoration work as a cooperative one with each one of you. We are all joint heirs with Messiah and should always be about our Father’s business. I am honored to be able to be partnered with truth seekers as this restoration of Scripture moves forward in fulfillment of prophecy.

Donations can be sent by Paypal to donations@wnae.org

Or click HERE to donate

The Temptation of Yeshua – An Insight from the Midrash

The Temptation of Yeshua
By
James Scott Trimm

In the Goodnews according to Mattityahu, we read of HaSatan’s effort to tempt Yeshua:

1 Then Yeshua was led up by the Ruach HaKodesh into the wilderness, in order that He might be tempted by HaSatan.
2 And when He had fasted forty days and forty nights, afterwards He was hungry.
3 And the tempter came; he said to Him, If you are the Son of Elohim, say that these stones be made bread.
4 And Yeshua answered and said: It is written, For not by bread alone will man live, but by everything that proceeds from the mouth of YHWH, will man live. (Deut. 8:3)
5 Then HaSatan took Him up to the Set-Apart city, and set Him on a turret of the Temple,
6 And said to Him, If you are the Son of Elohim, drop yourself down. For surely it is written, For He will give His angels charge concerning you, to keep you in all your ways; upon the palms of their hands they will bear you up, lest you dash your foot against a stone. (Ps. 91:11-12)
7 And Yeshua answered him and said: It is also written, You shall not tempt YHWH your  Elohim. (Deut. 6:16)
8 And again HaSatan took Him up into an exceedingly high mountain, and showed Him all: from the kingdoms of the world, and their glory.
9 And said to Him, All these will I give you, if you will fall down and worship me.
10 Then said Yeshua to him: Get yourself gone, adversary, for it is written, YHWH your Elohim you shall worship, and Him alone you shall serve. (Deut. 6:13)
11 Then HaSatan left Him: and behold, angels drew near and attended Him.
(Matthew 4:1-11 HRV)

Note that in each and every case Yeshua responds to the Tempter by quoting Torah.  Yeshua is our example.  The best way to combat the Tempter is with the Torah!

The Midrash Pesikta Rabbati gives us information that gives us a remarkable insight on this event.  The Midrash says:

Our masters taught:  When the king Messiah appears  he will come and stand on the roof of the Temple and will make a proclamation to Israel, saying; “Meek ones, the day of our redemption is come.  And if you do not believe Me, behold, My light which rises upon you, as it is said. “Arise, shine, for your light is come, and the glory of the Lord is risen upon you. (Is. 60:1)”
(Pesiqta Rabbati 36)

From the Midrash we can see more clearly that HaSatan had hoped to tempt Messiah to skip his suffering and death as Messiah ben Yosef and instead immediately claim his Kingship as Messiah ben David.  This is a temptation that followed Yeshua every day of his life.

20 Then commanded He, His talmidim, that they should tell no man, that He, Yeshua, was the Messiah.
21 And then began Yeshua to make known to His talmidim, that He must go to
Yerushalayim, and to suffer there: many scourgings, and many mockings, of the elders and scribes, and of the Chief Cohenim, and to be killed, and to rise again the third day.
22 Then Kefa took Him, and began to rebuke Him, saying, Far be it from You, My Master: all this will not be unto You.
23 But He turned, and said to Kefa: Follow Me. Satan, you are an offense to Me, for you savour not the things that are of Elohim, but those that are of men.
(Matthew 16:20-23 HRV)

And later He prayed in the Garden as his death approached:

39 And He passed on a little, and fell on His face, and prayed, saying: O Father, if it is possible that this cup pass away from Me, let it be done. But let it not be done as I will, but as You will.
40 And He came to His talmidim, and found them sleeping, and said to Kefa: Could you not watch with Me a single hour?
41 Awake and pray, that you enter not [into temptation.] The spirit indeed is watchful, but the flesh is frail.
42 He went away again the second time, and prayed, saying: O Father, if this cup cannot pass away from Me, but I must drink it: be it as You will.
(Matthew 26:39-42 HRV)

This temptation must have been tremendous.  Yet Messiah overcame this temptation and faced suffering and death as Messiah ben Yosef and instead of immediately claiming his Kingship as Messiah ben David, and in doing so he made way for our redemption. 

Donations in July have been very low, our rent is due in just one week, and we do not have it! We need your help today!

You can now donate thru Paypal, Zelle or Go Fund Me!

I have been busier than a one eyed tom cat watching two mouse holes, as I am caretaker for my disabled wife. Even so, the work however continues. I want to thank all of you supporting this work. I literally could not do it without you!

This work takes hours of my time. As many of you know, my wife is very ill, and I spend most of my time at home as her caretaker. I work at a desk less than six feet from her bed. So I am in a position to dedicate many hours to this important work that I have been directed to do.

But I also realize that it is not the activity of James Trimm alone who is responsible to do this work, it is all of us together who are charged with the responsibility of accomplishing this work. I very much look on the efforts of this restoration work as a cooperative one with each one of you. We are all joint heirs with Messiah and should always be about our Father’s business. I am honored to be able to be partnered with truth seekers as this restoration of Scripture moves forward in fulfillment of prophecy.

Donations can be sent by Paypal to donations@wnae.org

Or click HERE to donate

Discovery of a Lost Page of the Old Syriac Aramaic Gospels

In 1985 Dr. Daniel McConaughy discovered a previously missing page of the Curetonian manuscript of the Old Syriac Aramaic text of the Gospels.  Below is a copy of his report which was written and circulated at the time

At the time Daniel McConaughy was the Coordinator of the Biblical Research Department at the Way College of Emporia.  He is no longer a member of The Way International.

The reproduction of this item that once circulated in The Way International should in no way be taken as a endorsement of any of the unique doctrines of The Way International.

The material is presented here to show the important contribution that a small dedicated group can make to Aramaic NT Studies.

McConaughy holds a Ph.D. from the University of Chicago, where he specialized in Syriac, Greek, and early Church history.

McConaughy’s discovery was documented and published in the academic journal “Biblica” (“A Recently Discovered Folio of the Old Syriac (Sy(c)) Text of Luke 16,13-17,1”;  Biblica Vol. 68- Fasc. 1- 1987; pp. 85-90).

He has been published in at least two academic journals (The Biblia cite above and “An Old Syriac Reading of Acts 1:4 and More Light on Jesus’ Last Meal before His Ascension”; Oriens Christianus; Band 72 1988; pp. 63-67).

In the May-June 1985 issue of The Way Magazine, McConaughy published an article titled The Aramaic Origin of the New Testament.

* * *


Report on Syriac Manuscripts Research Trip
(October 31,  1985–February 14, 1986)
By
Dan McConaughy  


The purpose of this trip was to locate unknown Syriac MSS and photograph all the New Testament MSS found (and any others of importance) and to establish contacts for future trips. Itinerary: Cairo/Wadi el-Natrun and vicinity, Jerusalem, Damaskus, Dehli and numerous places in the Southwest Indian state of Kerala, the United Kingdom, and Ireland. I traveled over 30,000 miles.

In September 1984, I spoke to Dr. Wierwille at the Way College of Emporia about going to the East. He was enthusiastic and quite supportive. With his blessing, I began to solicit spiritual partners, because I felt that the mutual believing of a group would make the trip more successful. I was able to raise more than my goal of $6,000.

The idea of going to Egypt had intrigued me, even though it seemed that Syriologists prefer expending their efforts further east in Syria, Turkey, and Iraq. The current opinion is that nothing new is to be found in Egypt. Virtually all of the oldest known manuscripts in Syriac MSS is Deir el-Suryia, the Monastery of the Syrians, located in Wadi el-Natrun, midway between Cairo and Alexandria. Almost all the oldest known Syriac MSS have come from there. I didn’t believe what I had been told, that all the Syriac MSS were sold to the British Museum in the 1840s. For example, what if MSS were “checked out” at the time, MSS were lost, or MSS came in later from other places?

First, I went to St. Amba Bishoy Monastery, one of the four existing ancient monasteries established in the third and fourth centuries in the Wadi el-Natrun, to get oriented. Then I walked over to Deir el-Suryan, protected the occupants from Bedoiun raids. There was a small opening in the front, and I pulled on the rope hanging down from the bell. About five minutes later, I was greeted by a monk with a long beard, dressed entirely in black. After coffee and a tour of the monastary, I asked about the library. I was told, “Come back tomorrow.” Didn’t they realize how hard I had worked to come here and how much money I had spend? But the next day I arrived at 10:00 a.m. and was taken to the library. I then found out that the librarian is a hermit and comes in only twice a week! After coffee and conversation, I asked about Syriac MSS. The librarian said he had one and brought out a twelfth-century book of Psalms on parchment — not all that interesting. I asked if he had more, and he said, “Some papers.” Then he brought out a torn, dirty, folded piece of brown paper that held a stack of parchment sheets from 18 various MSS–some very old. All of these he kindly let me photograph. I became very good friends with the librarian and another monk. The library was now open to me anytime I desired! It was not until two month later that I found that one of the MSS, a folio containing Luke 16:13-17:1, is from the oldest known Syriac gospel MS (fifth century or earlier).

Next, I visited the Syrian Orthodox monastery of the St. Mark in Jerusalem ( the place of the Last Supper, according to the Syrian Orthodox Church). Unfortunately, the bishop with the key to the library had left for Amman, Jordan, that very morning, so I was unable to see the Syriac MSS there. Later, I met Bishop Behnam in Damascus, where I went next to use the Syrian Orthodox Patriarchal Library. There I met a number of the Middle Eastern archbishops because Patriarch Zakka was holding a meeting at the time. I was later able to eat with His Holiness, Patriarch Zakka, and the archbishops on two occasions, and twice I personally met with the patriarch. The library was in disorder, and I had to ask what I wanted. This was very difficult to do, since there was no catalog. I was told that all the Bibles are in Turkey; but thanks to some notes from Dr. Vööbus, I was able to see some rare, ancient commentaries by Moshe bar Kepha, which contain Biblical quotations of a very archaic nature. Some of these I photographed. Also, I got along well with His Holiness, and we even talked about the possibility of my coming out to teach Greek and Hebrew for a year at his seminary in Damascus. This would allow me to gain many connections and do much research.

I then went to India, not because of the really old MSS there, but because I thought it would be an easier place to work. My assumption was half right. The ecclesiastics were very helpful and friendly, but getting around was difficult, even with a native Indian believer traveling with me. I flew to Dehli and met my assistant, Sevi. Then we took a 52-hour train ride to Trichur in the southwest Indian state of Kerala, the home of the indigenous and Syriac-speaking church. We traveled extensively in Kerala, visiting churches, bishops’ houses, seminaries, schools, and scholars. I discovered over 40 unknown Syriac MSS of importance, adding 10 percent to the total of known MSS in India. We photographed 25 MSS, all or in part.

After a month, I went to London to use the resources of the British Museum. There I learned that the Old Gospel text I found was from their MS Add. 14,451, one of the two copies of the Old Syriac Gospels. Nothing this old has been found since 1892. I also visited libraries in Manchester and Dublin.

A few days before I was to return home, I got a telex from Walter Cummins telling me to return to Egypt to see if I could find more of the Old Syriac MS, since a lot of it is still missing, and to see what else I could find. Upon my return, I didn’t find any more of the Old Syriac Gospels, but a sixth-century text of I.Samuel did turn up at Deir el-Suryan. In addition, I found 10 unknown Syriac MSS at the Coptic Museum in Cairo, and I will publish a catalog for them. The oldest of these is from the fifth or sixth century. Two of these MSS are missing portions of the British Museum MSS. With help of my connections in Cairo, I should be the first to learn of any MSS that might turn up there in the future. I also found over 30 Syriac MSS at the Syrian Orthodox Church of St. Mary in Cairo. The scorecard for the second Egyptian trip was excellent: over 40 unknown MSS discovered!

The whole trip was a grand success. Dr. Brock, at Oxford, was amazed I found anything at all in Egypt on either trip, especially the second. He had tried twice and found nothing. During the trip I also located other places to look in Egypt, and I have solid evidence that there are more very ancient texts at Dei el-Suryan. The librarian just needs to find them.

* * *

The Missing Page (front) Above: Luke 16:12-22a
The Missing Page (back) Above Luke 16:22b-17:1

We must raise at least $475 by the end of the day tomorrow (6/9/23), or our account will plunge into the negative and start a cascade of returned items and fees!

I want to thank all of you supporting this work. I literally could not do it without you!

This work takes hours of my time. As many of you know, my wife is very ill, and I spend most of my time at home as her caretaker. I work at a desk less than six feet from her bed. So I am in a position to dedicate many hours to this important work that I have been directed to do.

But I also realize that it is not the activity of James Trimm alone who is responsible to do this work, it is all of us together who are charged with the responsibility of accomplishing this work. I very much look on the efforts of this restoration work as a cooperative one with each one of you. We are all joint heirs with Messiah and should always be about our Father’s business. I am honored to be able to be partnered with truth seekers as this restoration of Scripture moves forward in fulfillment of prophecy.

Donations can be sent by Paypal to donations@wnae.org

Or click HERE to donate

The Aramaic Origin of the Pauline Epistles

Many assume that , even if other portions of the “New Testament” were written in Hebrew or Aramaic, that surely the Pauline Epistles were originally written in Greek. After all, would Paul have written to the Corinthians or Thessalonians in Greek?

Certainly Paul did not write his epistles in the native languages of their geographic designations. Few, if any, would argue for a Latin origin for Romans, and certainly no one would argue for a Gaulish origin for Galatians.

In fact, there are many Aramaic words transliterated into Greek letters in the Greek texts of Paul’s letters, remnants of an earlier Aramaic version. Some examples are “Father” Abba (אבא) (Romans 8:15; Gal. 4:6). “our Lord comes” Maranatha (מרן אתא) (1Cor. 16:22) “hosts” tz’vaot (צבאות) (Rom. 9:29) “token” ra’hubuna (רהבונא) (2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:14) “basket” s’rigta (סריגתא)(2Cor. 11:33).

There are several scholars who have come to the conclusion that the Pauline Epistles were originally written in Aramaic, and not Greek at all. The following are a few examples:

Dr. Karen Tourne Masterson, who holds a Ph.D. in Near Eastern Languages from UCLA, has written:

The argument that Paul is a Hellenistic Jew because many of the quotes that appear in the Greek version of the Old Testament are from the Septuagint is inadequate. If his writings were originally written in Aramaic, his native language, the translator would not translate the Old Testament himself, but would use the version that was most familiar to his readers (the same approach is used today in translations). The evidence from God’s Word causes us to take issue with the tradition which contends that Paul wrote in Greek. Knowing that Aramaic was his native tongue should prompt us to consider the language of an Aramaic original which lies behind the Greek and other versions to which we have access today.
(An Aramaic Approach to the Church Epistles; The Way Magazine; March-April 1984 pages 17-20)

And Dr. Daniel McConaughy, who holds a Ph.D. from the University of Chicago, where he specialized in Syriac, Greek, and early Church history, wrote:

“God’s Word itself does not explicitly identify the language in which the New Testament was written, but it does provide information that indicates what the original language was. This information can be further augmented by historical facts known about Israel and its culture during the Testament era, as well as by the earliest non-Biblical writings about the early Church. Both the Biblical evidence, which is primary, and the church historical evidence strongly indicate that the original language of the New Testament was Aramaic. …
Knowing that the New Testament writers wrote in Aramaic, not Greek, opens up new vistas of understanding and research. Primarily, this knowledge further enables the Biblical researcher to see that the Bible is not a compendium of random written and oral sources. Rather, it is the Word of God, revealed to men who recorded that revelation in the native Aramaic and later oversaw its translation into Greek, Latin, and Syriac; and it is with the descendants of these first translation endeavors that today’s Biblical researcher must work.”
(The Aramaic Origin of the New Testament; The Way Magazine; May-June 1985 pages 17-20)

McConaughy is former Coordinator of the Biblical Research Department at the Way College of Emporia.  He discovered a previously lost page of the Old Syriac Curetonian codex of the Gospels, and has been published in at least two academic journals.*   

Finally native Aramaic speaker and Peshitta scholar George M. Lamsa wrote:

The Pauline Epistles were letters written by Paul to small Christian congregations in Asia Minor, Greece and Rome. These early Christians were mostly Jews of the Dispersion, men and women of Hebrew origin. Paul on his journeys always spoke in the Jewish synagogues. His first converts were Hebrews. Then came Arameans… Paul emphasizes Hebrew law and history. He refers to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as our fathers. In his letters and teaching he appeals to the Jewish people to accept Jesus as the promised Messiah. Paul’s mission was first to his own people… Paul was educated in Jewish law in Jerusalem. He was a member of the Jewish Council. His native language was western Aramaic but he acquired his education through Hebrew and Chaldean or Palestinian Aramaic… He defended himself when on trial in the Hebrew tongue. Acts 22:2… Very early the Epistles were translated into Greek for the use of converts who spoke Greek. Later they were translated into all tongues.
(George M. Lamsa; The New Testament according to the Eastern Text; 1940; pp. xi-xii)

In fact, in Ephesians 2:19-20 Paul begins a flow of logic, which only makes sense in the Aramaic not in Greek.

19 Henceforth, you are neither strangers nor foreigners, but sons of the city, who are sanctified, and sons of the house of Eloah.
20 And you are built upon the foundation of the emissaries and of the prophets: and Yeshua the Messiah has become the head of the corner of the building (Ps. 118:22-23).
(Eph. 2:19-20 HRV)

To begin with in verse 19 in the Greek, Paul identifies his audience as “fellow-citizens (συμπολιται) of the saints” and “of the household (οικειοι) of Eloah (Theos).”

However in the Aramaic Peshitta verse 19 literally says “sons of the city” (בני מדינתא) an Aramaic idiom for “citizen”.  Verse 19 then in the Aramaic has “and sons of the House of Eloah” (ובני ביתה דאלהא) in idiomatic way of saying “of the household of Eloah” in Aramaic.  It should be noted that the phrase “House of Eloah” (ביתה דאלהא) is also an idiomatic term in Hebrew and Aramaic for the Temple.  Remember, none of these idiomatic expressions appear in the Greek which simply reads “of the household (οικειοι) of Eloah (Theos).”

Then in verse 20 Paul refers to the “household of Eloah” as “having been built (θεντες) on the foundation of the emissaries and prophets, being the cornerstone (ακρογωνιαιον) himself, Messiah Yeshua”.  Verse 21 then says “In whom all the building (οικοδομη) being fitted together grows into a Holy Temple in YHWH.”  And finally verse 22 has “In whom also you are-being-built-together (συνοικοδομεισθε) into a habitation for God by the Spirit”.

However in the Aramaic “having been built” (v. 20) is ואתבניתון “cornerstone” is ריש קרנא דבנינא  literally “the head corner of the building”.  In verse 21 “the building” is בנינא  and “you are being built” is מתבנין .  The words for building here are all benyana (בנינא) and the verb root for “to build” in each case is b’na (בנא) which is the verb root for the word “stone” ‘abana (אבנא).

It is important to know that there is a common wordplay in Hebrew between “son(s)” ben (sing.) b’nai (plural) and “stones”.  A classic example is found in Matthew 3:9

And think not to say within yourselves,
We have Abraham to our father:
for I say unto you, that Elohim is able of these stones
to raise up sons unto Abraham.
(Matt. 3:9)

By using these related words Paul has implied a wordplay between believers as “sons of the House of Elohim” (2:19) and “stones of the Temple” (implied in 2:20-22).  The wordplay is very clear in the Aramaic and is clearly original to the document.  The use of the Aramaic idioms “sons of the house of” and “House of Eloah” becomes the transition point at which Paul’s argument turns to the subject of an allegorical Temple built out of believers in 2:20-22).  The whole point to Paul’s argument is embedded in an Aramaic word play that is absent in the Greek, that is itself rooted in an Aramaic idiom which is also absent from the Greek.  This is very clear evidence that Paul wrote in Hebrew or Aramaic and his work was then translated into Greek.

[*] (“A Recently Discovered Folio of the Old Syriac (Sy(c)) Text of Luke 16,13-17,1”;  Biblica Vol. 68- Fasc. 1- 1987; pp. 85-90.  and “An Old Syriac Reading of Acts 1:4 and More Light on Jesus’ Last Meal before His Ascension”; Oriens Christianus; Band 72 1988; pp. 63-67). 

Our rent is due today (6/1/23) and we do not have it! We need your help today!

I want to thank all of you supporting this work. I literally could not do it without you!

This work takes hours of my time. As many of you know, my wife is very ill, and I spend most of my time at home as her caretaker. I work at a desk less than six feet from her bed. So I am in a position to dedicate many hours to this important work that I have been directed to do.

But I also realize that it is not the activity of James Trimm alone who is responsible to do this work, it is all of us together who are charged with the responsibility of accomplishing this work. I very much look on the efforts of this restoration work as a cooperative one with each one of you. We are all joint heirs with Messiah and should always be about our Father’s business. I am honored to be able to be partnered with truth seekers as this restoration of Scripture moves forward in fulfillment of prophecy.

Donations can be sent by Paypal to donations@wnae.org

Or click HERE to donate

Yeshua the Pharisee

Yeshua the Pharisee
By
James Scott Trimm

Many use the term “Pharisee” as a slur. Yet, not only did Paul plainly proclaim in the present tense “I am a Pharisee” (Acts 23:6), but if we read the Scriptures carefully, we can see that it is revealed that Yeshua was also a Pharisee. We read in the Goodnews according to Yochanan:

19 And this is the witness of Yochanan: when the Judeans from Yerushalayim sent to him cohenim and Levites to ask him, Who are you?
20 And he confessed and did not refuse: but confessed, I am not the Messiah.
21 And they asked him again, Who then are you, Eliyahu? And he said, I am not. Are you a prophet? And he said, No.
22 And they said to him, Then who are you, that we may give an answer to those who sent [us]? What do you say about yourself?
23 He said, I am a voice that cries in the wilderness, Make smooth–the way of YHWH, as Yesha’yahu the prophet has said.
24 And those who were sent were from the P’rushim.
25 And they asked him and said to him, Why then do you immerse, if you are neither the Messiah, nor Eliyahu, nor a prophet?
26 Yochanan answered and said to them, I immerse with water: but among you stands One, whom you do not know.
27 This is the One, who will come after me–yet was before me: the straps of whose sandals I am not worthy to loose.
(Yochanan 1:19-27 HRV)

Yochanan tells us that when he says “among you… stands…. One, who will come after me–yet was before me: the straps of whose sandals I am not worthy to loose” he is speaking to a group of Pharisees who have come to him! And Yeshua was one of them! Yochanan is telling us Yeshua was a Pharisee!

This comes as a shock to many Christians who have a poor understanding of what it means to be a Pharisee.

Part of the reason for this is that the Christian understanding of what a Pharisee is has been defined by Christian commentators, not by Pharisaic sources. As a result, in Christian culture, the word “Pharisee” has come to be used idiomatically to mean “hypocrite”.

I recall some years ago seeing a Reverend Twistruth comic strip several years ago in which the Reverend had just been teaching on the parable of the Pharisee and the Plebian. He asked a church lady to close with a prayer and she begins “Thank you Lord for not making me like that Pharisee…”

Of course Rabbinic Judaism is the modern descendant of Phariseeism. If one wants a good understanding of what Phariseeism taught, one should look to primary sources of the actual teachings of the Pharisees, the Mishna, the Talmuds and the early Midrashim.

Upon the invasion of Jerusalem and the Babylonian captivity the monarchy of Israel was brought to an end. When the Babylonian captivity finally ended and exiles returned, Ezra reestablished the council of Elders:Ezra 7:25; 10:14, 16) which immediately began making halachic decisions (Ezra 10:10-19). This body became known as the Great Assembly.

The Mishna records the foundations of Pharisaic Judaism as follows:

Moses received Torah at Sinai and handed it on to Joshua, Joshua to the elders, the elders to the prophets, the prophets handed it on to the men of the Great Assembly…
(m.Avot 1:1)

This was a body of 120 Elders and is said to have introduced a regular order of prayers including the Shemoneh Esreh (eighteen benedictions) which eventually evolved into the Siddur. The Great Assembly collected the sacred writings and determined which books were to be regarded as canonical.

We do not know much more about the Great Assembly. We do know that one of the last members of this counsel was “Simon the Righteous” (219-196 B.C.E.). The Mishna says:

Simeon the Righteous was of the remnants of the Great Assembly. He used to say, “On three things the world stands: On the Torah, On the [Temple] Service, and on acts of piety (chasidim).
(m.Avot 1:2)

Ben Sira calls him “the leader of his brothers and the pride of his people.” (Sira 50:1) and dedicates an entire chapter to his good reputation. Simon was the earliest post-biblical sage cited in the Mishna. Simon was succeeded as High Priest by his son Onias III of whom we read in 2 Maccabees:

While the holy city was inhabited in unbroken peace and the laws were very well observed because of the piety of the high priest Onias and his hatred of wickedness.
(2 Maccabees 3:1)

About this time Antiochus Epiphanies rose to power over Israel and at about this same time period the High Priesthood passed from Onias III to his brother Jason by way of corruption:

…Jason the brother of Onias obtained the high priesthood by corruption, promising the king at an interview three hundred and sixty talents of silver and from another source of revenue, eighty talents… he at once shifted his countrymen over to the Greek way of life… and introduced new customs contrary to the Torah.
(2 Maccabees 4:7-8, 10, 11)

Jason’s High Priesthood was illegitimate and not regarded as valid as we read in 2Maccabees:

…Jason, who was ungodly and no high priest…
(2 Maccabees 4:13)

The corruption of the High Priesthood and the banishment of the true High Priest must have forced the disbandment of the Great Assembly.

At this time (175-140 BCE) many who wished to remain true to Torah escaped into the wilderness (1 Maccabees 1:62-64; 2:29) These refugees became know as the Chassidim (pious ones) (1 Maccabees 2:42-43).

While we know little about these Chassidim, they were probably led by a certain Antigones of Soko. The Mishnah says of him:

Antigones of Soko received [Torah] from Simeon the Righteous. He used to say, “Be not like servants who serve their master for the sake of wages, but be like servants who serve their master with no thought of a wage – and let the fear of Heaven be upon you.”
(m.Avot 1:3)

The name “Chassidim” probably came from their devotion to the teaching of Simon the Righteous, that “CHASSIDIM” is one of the three things upon which the world stands.

The term CHASSEDIM is related to the same root as CHESED meaning “grace, mercy, loving kindness, charity”. You might say this was as “grace” movement.

One of Antigones’ talmidim (disciples, students), a certain Zadok, apostatized and formed the Sadducee sect (I laid this out in detail in my recent article “Paul argues Talmud Before the Sanhedrin).

The main line of Antigones’ talmidim went on to establish the body we know as the Pharisaic Sanhedrin (not to be confused with the political Sanhedrin that contained both Pharisees and Sadducees). In fact two of his talmidim went on to become the first Nasi and Av Beit Din of this Sanhedrin.

In other words Pharisaic Judaism was the succession of the Chassedim and the main line of Judaism. (The word “Pharisee” means “separate” and may well refer to the fact that the Chassidim had separated themselves from Jason’s corrupt apostasy from true Judaism). This was a CHESED (grace) based movement proceeding from the teachings of Simon the Righteous and Antigones of Soko.

Before proceeding let us therefore seek to understand the point of Antigones’ teaching:

“Be not like servants who serve their master for the sake of wages, but be like servants who serve their master with no thought of a wage – and let the fear of Heaven be upon you.”

Antigones taught that we should observe Torah not as one trying to earn something, but as one who serves a master because he sincerely wants to from inside, out of respect and love for Elohim. He taught that Torah Observance meant nothing unless ones heart was right. Without this inner CHESED, Torah Observance was an empty outer expression, works without faith. This was the foundation of Pharisaic Judaism!

The earliest generations of the Pharisaic movement were known as the Zuggot (pairs). Hillel and Shammai were the last two “pairs” to lead the Pharisee Sanhedrin. The rift between them was so great that Shammai, who was known for his bad temper, forced Hillel to sit and listen to him at the point of his sword, as though he were his student. (b.Shab. 17a) The result was a complete split of Phariseeism into two Houses: The House of Shammai (the stricter school) and the House of Hillel (the less-strict school).

From this point forward the only Pharisee Sanhedrin we know of was led, not by “pairs” but by Hillel’s descendents.

Pharisees at this time polarized into two schools of thought: The School of Shammai and the School of Hillel. The two schools held differing view on many halachic issues and argued throughout the first century. Eventually the School of Hillel prevailed in these arguments and serves as the foundation of modern Rabbinic Judaism. There are also many important connections between the School of Hillel and the ancient sect of the Nazarenes.

Within Rabbinic literature we have record of over 350 disputes between the School of Hillel and the School of Shammai. Generally Shammai gave the stricter interpretation, while Hillels understandings were more relaxed. According to the Zohar (Ra’aya Meheimna 3:245a) The School of Shammai was based on GEVURAH (“severity”) while the School of Hillel was based on CHESED (“grace”/”mercy”).

A classic example of the conflict can be seen in one of the first passages of the Mishna, which records a conflict between the two houses over how to recite the Shema:

The House of Shammai says: In the evening one should recline in order to recite the shema, and in the morning they should stand. As it is written “when you lie down and when you rise up.” (Deuteronomy 6:7)
But the House of Hillel says: Everyone may recite the Shema in his own way, as it is written: “And you shall go by the way” (Deuteronomy 7:7)

(m.Berachot 1:3)

Note that the House of Shammai were concerned primarily with the outward expression, with whether one was standing or reclining, while the House of Hillel were less concerned with such outward expression and much more concerned with the way in which one recited the Shema, that they made it their own way, that they meant it and walked in it. Note the difference in emphasis of the two houses.

Hillel was more concerned with the inner man, while Shammai was more concerned with the outer man. Hillel was concerned with the Spirit of the Law, while Shammai was more concerned with the Letter of the Law.

This overriding concept of sincerity is also found in the Mishna in tractate Menachot:

“…all are the same, the one who offers much and the one who offers little, on condition that a man will direct his intention to Heaven.”
(m.Menachot 13:11)

You can imagine that a movement founded on sincerity of heart, would have no tolerance for hypocrisy. The Talmud lists Hypocrites as one of four classes who will not receive the presence of the Shekhinah:

R. Hisda also said in the name of R. Jeremiah b. Abba: Four classes will not recieve presence of the Shechinah, — the class of scoffers, the class of liars, the class of hypocrites, and the class of slanderers. `The class of scoffers’ — as it is written, He withdrew His hand from the scoffers.(Hosea 7:5) `The class of liars’ — as it is written, He that telleth lies, shall not tarry in my sight.(Ps. 101:7) `The class of hypocrites’ — as it is written, For a hypocrite shall not come before him.(Job 13:15) `The class of slanderers — as it is written, For thou art not a God that hath pleasure in wickedness: neither shall evil dwell with thee,'(Ps. 5:5) [which means] Thou art righteous, and hence there will not be evil in thy abode.
(b.San. 103a)

The Talmud however does recognize a problem with hypocrisy among the ranks of the Pharisees:

King Jannai said to his wife’, `Fear not the Pharisees and the non-Pharisees but the hypocrites who are the Pharisees; because their deeds are the deeds of Zimri but they expect a reward like Phineas.’
(b.Sotah 22b)

It is this problem that Yeshua addresses when he criticizes hypocrisy among the Pharisees. Sincerity of heart is supposed to be the defining characteristic of the foundations of Pharisaic Judaism, Pharisaic Judaism stripped of its core principle became hollow. I believe this is what Yeshua meant when he said:

“You are the salt of the earth, and if the salt has lost its savor, how will it be salted? It is afterwards good for nothing, but to be cast aside, and trampled by men.”
(Matthew 5:13)

Note in Matthew Yeshua says:

“…they [hypocrites] delight to stand in the assemblies and at the corners of the streets to pray, that men may see them.”
(Matthew 6:5)

Some wrongly imagine that this is a blanket attack on a Pharisaic practice. In reality a similar condemnation appears in the Talmud “‘One who says the Tefillah so that it can be heard is of the small of faith’.” (b.Ber 24b)

Yeshua continues his attack on hypocrites saying:

“And when you pray, multiply not your words like the Goyim do…”
(Matthew 6:7-8)

Like verse 5 many mistakenly take this verse as a reference to Jewish liturgy. In fact the Pharisaic Mishna itself contains a similar instruction for behavior when praying:

Rabbi Simeon says: “Be meticulous in the recitation of the shema and the Prayer. And when you pray, don’t treat your praying as a matter of routine. But let it be a [plea for] mercy and supplication before the Omnipresent, blessed be He…”
(m.Avot 2:13)

Yeshua continues his criticism of “hypocrites” saying:

“…they begrime and disfigure their faces that they may appear in the sight of men to fast… when you fast anoint your head and wash your face…”
(Matthew 6:16-18)

Here Yeshua is not condemning a Pharisaic practice but an Essene practice as Josephus writes of the first century Essenes:

They think oil is defilement; and if one of them is anointed without his own approbation, it is wiped off his body; for they think to be sweaty is a good thing…
(Josephus; Wars; 2:8:3)

Yeshua continues his criticism of hypocrites saying:

“lay up for yourselves stores in heaven, where caterpillar and moth waste not, and where thieves do not steal, for just where your store is, there your heart will be also.”
(Matthew 6:19-21)

A similar teaching appears in the Talmud with very similar wording:

Our Rabbis taught: It is related of King Monobaz that he dissipated all his own hoards and the hoards of his fathers in years of scarcity. His brothers and his father’s household came in a deputation to him and said to him, ‘Your father saved money and added to the treasures of his fathers, and you are squandering them.’ He replied: ‘My fathers stored up below and I am storing above, as it says, Truth springeth out of the earth and righteousness looketh down from heaven. My fathers stored in a place which can be tampered with, but I have stored in a place which cannot be tampered with, as it says, Righteousness and judgment are the foundation of his throne. My fathers stored something which produces no fruits, but I have stored something which does produce fruits, as it is written, Say ye of the righteous [zaddik] that it shall be well with them, for they shall eat of the fruit of their doings. My fathers gathered treasures of money, but I have gathered treasures of souls, as it is written, The fruit of the righteous [zaddik] is a tree of life, and he that is wise winneth souls. My fathers gathered for others and I have gathered for myself, as it says, And for thee it shall be righteousness [zedakah]. My fathers gathered for this world, but I have gathered for the future world, as it says, Thy righteousness [zedakah] shall go before thee, and the glory of the Lord shall be thy rearward.’
(b.Baba Batra 11a)

When Yeshua criticized Pharisees for hypocrisy he was challenging Pharisees to return to the Chassidic roots of Pharisaic Judaism. He was encouraging Pharisees to return to their foundational teachings, the Tanak and the teachings of Simon the Righteous and Atigones of Soko.

Yeshua was teaching CHESED, he was teaching Chassidism and he was teaching the values of Antigones of Soko. He was teaching us that we should not keep Torah as one wishing to earn something, but as one who has a sincere heart and inner desire to serve YHWH out of sincere love and respect for our Father.

In fact the ironic thing is that by this measure it is Christedom which is hypocritical. Talk to a Christian about Torah Observance and invariably they will respond that they do not have to keep Torah to be saved, and therefore they do not need to keep Torah. They are as ones only concerned with doing what they get paid for, and not as one serving YHWH simply out of love and respect for Him.

When Yeshua was criticizing hypocrisy among Pharisees, he was calling for a return to authentic Pharisaic Judaism, which is why Paul was able to say confidently “I am a Pharisee” (Acts 23:6)

There is an interesting parallel in the teachings of a later movement that also took on the name Chassidic and whose founder the Baal Shem Tov (c. 1750) taught that Judaism must be centered not simply around doing the Torah, but around feeling the Torah.

Now in closing I want to emphasize that the early Nazarenes also had deep roots in Essene Judaism.

Our Messiah was bringing together Pharisaic and Essenic Judaism. He was introducing Hillel style halachic teachings to Esseneism and introducing Essene Apocalyptic teaching to Pharisaic Judaism.

We must raise at least $150 today to cover bills hitting our account tonight, and rent is due in just over a week! We need your help today!

I want to thank all of you supporting this work. I literally could not do it without you!

This work takes hours of my time. As many of you know, my wife is very ill, and I spend most of my time at home as her caretaker. So I am in a position to dedicate many hours to this important work that I have been directed to do.

But I also realize that it is not the activity of James Trimm alone who is responsible to do this work, it is all of us together who are charged with the responsibility of accomplishing this work. I very much look on the efforts of this restoration work as a cooperative one with each one of you. We are all joint heirs with Messiah and should always be about our Father’s business. I am honored to be able to be partnered with truth seekers as this restoration of Scripture moves forward in fulfillment of prophecy.

Donations can be sent by Paypal to donations@wnae.org or by Zelle or Go Fund Me.

Click HERE to donate

The Aramaic Origin of the New Testament

The Aramaic Origin of the New Testament
By
Daniel L. McConaughy

God’s Word itself does not explicitly identify the language in which the New Testament was written, but it does provide information that indicates what the original language was. This information can be further augmented by historical facts known about Israel and its culture during the Testament era, as well as by the earliest non-Biblical writings about the early Church. Both the Biblical evidence, which is primary, and the church historical evidence strongly indicate that the original language of the New Testament was Aramaic.

The Greek of the New Testament has a Semitic flavor. It contains words, phrases, and constructions that are typical not of Greek, but of Aramaic. Because of this flavor, the Greek New Testament differs  from all other Greek literature except the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament) and a few other early Jewish and Christian writings that were translated into Greek. That the New Testament has words, phrases, and constructions typical of Aramaic has been explained in various ways. Most New Testament scholars feel that this particular Greek is the result of an imitation of the Semitic style of the Septuagint or the use of source documents originally written in Aramaic. Some scholars have maintained that there was little or no Aramaic literature at this time of the writing of the New Testament and that Christians were less literary than others. These arguments have been thoroughly disproved by A.T. Olmstead and A. Vööbus. (A.T. Olmstead, “Could an Aramaic Gospel Be Written?” Journal of Near Eastern Studies, vol. 1 (1942), pp. 41-75; and Arthur Vööbus, “Some Notes on the Possible Aramaic Gospel,” The Chicago Lutheran Seminary Record, vol. 55 (1950), pp. 27-32) A few have even denied that the Greek of the New Testament is peculiar. (E. C. Colwell, The Greek of the Fourth Gospel (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1931).) Some have searched high and low in the contemporary Koine Greek literature, especially the papyri from Egypt, to show its parallels with the Greek New Testament. To search in this way is misleading, because one can find any peculiar grammatical construction in any large body of literature if he looks long enough.

A. T. Olmstead wrote:

Any man who knows his classical Greek authors and reads the New Testament and then looks into the papyri is astonished at the similarities which he finds. Any man who knows the papyri first and turns to Paul is astonished at the differences. There has been much exaggeration of the element in the New Testament…in the vulgar Greek of the Levant there was nothing corresponding to the flavor of the early Christian writers.
(Olmstead, p. 44)

Another fact concerning the Egyptian papyri is that there is no evidence of Egyptian grammar exerting itself on the Greek, although many of the scribes writing the Greek were native speakers of Egyptian. Bearing this in mind, how can one insist that the Israelite writers, if they had written in Greek, would produce Aramaized, that is, Semitized, Greek? For help, New Testament scholars have invoked the pseudosciences of source criticism and for criticism to explain away Semitism. Source criticism assumes that the writers of the New Testament took their material from partially written sources. Form criticism analyzes the Scriptures to determine the types of oral genres, or “forms,” that supposedly preceded the Greek New Testament. In using these methods, one can explain away troublesome linguistic phenomena by saying they are due to the influence of written or spoken Aramaic sources upon written Greek. This is totally misleading, because the writers of the New Testament scriptures had no sources but divine revelation from God. They recorded it verbatim in their own language, as we shall see was Aramaic.

Why have many New Testament scholars clung to these explanations? First, being traditionally oriented to Greek, they are generally ignorant of Semitic languages and culture. They favor Greek because Greek was the language of the early Western Hellenistic church. Consequently, the mass of Western manuscripts is Greek, or Latin translated from Greek. Furthermore, the early leadership in the church was centered in the great Hellenistic urban centers of the Roman world. Those urban centers were virtually the sole location for governmental, financial, and academic leadership. Therefore, they became the centers of ecclesiastical leadership as well. These urban centers used the language of the dominating governmental, financial, and academic world – Greek and Latin. From this it follows that almost all the literature produced in this period would be Greek or Latin. Subsequently there was an ecclesiastical and Hellinistic sifting process which natural took place, thereby removing all traces of any literature other than that which the dominating Hellenistic ecclesiastical body wanted preserved. This was due to two factors: (1) purposeful censoring or alteration and (in case of Aramaic) (2) disuse, as a result, most scholars have been bound by unproven and unsubstantiated Western tradition maintaining that the New Testament was originally written in Greek. The New Testament status quo in seminaries, universities, and denominations holds that the original documents were written in Greek. If this status were shaken, it would upset the vested interest in these institutions. On the other hand, many other equally qualified scholars in the Semitic languages and the Old Testament, without vested interests in Greek, find the hypothesis of an Aramaic original very plausible. They understand the Eastern culture and language and see this reflected in the Greek New Testament writings. These scholars have approached the problem from a primary philological point of view. C. C. Torrey, C. F. Burney, Frank Zimmerman and others have tried to demonstrate that the Greek text was translated from Aramaic by focusing on instances of mistranslation. Their hypothesis and methodology are essentially correct, but they do not base their studies upon the revealed origin of the Word of God. Thus they find mistranslations where there are none.

Others like George Lamsa, a Syrian, have argued from the point of view of Eastern tradition and history that has maintained for centuries that Aramaic was the original language of the New Testament. In the East, the vast majority of manuscripts is in Syriac, an Eastern dialect of the Western Aramaic spoken in Israel; in fact the widespread belief in the East of an Aramaic original in the West. In line with this are the investigations into the origin of the early versions. Some scholars have noted the stronger Semitic flavor that is impressed upon the oldest Greek and Latin sources. (Frederick Henry Chase, The Old Syriac Element in Codex Bezae (London: Macmillian and Co., 1893); and H. C. Hoskier, Concerning the Genesis of the Version of the New Testament (London: Bernard Quaritch, 1910). pp. 3, 5, 6.) They have misinterpreted this as being due to Syriac influence upon an assumed Greek original rather than the influence of an Aramaic original upon Greek and Latin versions.

In the light of the above it can be seen that many scholars have observed these Semitisms in the Greek and have interpreted them in different ways. Their methodology, however, is not based upon the premise of an accurate, perfect, and God-breathed original. Therefore they do not reach accurate conclusions. These scholalrs have not approached the subject from the point of view that the Bible is the revealed Word and will of God and that it was given to holy men of God operating revelation, who in turn, had written down verbatim.

The evidence from Josephus, the great first – century Jewish scholar and historian, who also was a Pharisee, supplements what we know about Paul. Josephus stated that Greek was not spoken in Israel and that only a few Jews had even made an attempt to learn the language of the Greeks. He wrote: … Those of my own nation freely acknowledge that I far exceed them in the learning belonging to the Jews; I have also taken a great deal of pains to obtain the learning of the Greeks and understand the elements of the Greek language, although I have so long accustomed myself to speak our own tongue, that I cannot pronounce Greek with sufficient exactness: for our own nation does not encourage those that learn the language of many nations…because they look upon this sort of accomplishment as common…On which account as these been many who have done their endeavors with great patience to obtain this learning, there have yet hardly bee so many as two or three that have succeeded therein, who were immediately well rewarded for their pains.  [Antiquities XX.XI. 2.]

Furthermore , although Josephus claims to have written The Jewish Wars in Aramaic, many consider it to be excellent Greek:  I have proposed to myself, for the sake of such as live under the government of the Romans, to translate those books into the Greek tongue, which I formerly composed in the language of our own country [Palestinian Aramaic], and send to the Upper Barbarians, I, Joseph,… a Hebrew…[Preface I]

Differing styles in the Greek are not difficult to explain. Josephus wrote in Aramaic, and detailed examinations have proven that the Greek text of The Jewish Wars changes style. This is not attributed to his various sources, but rather to various translators. Where Josephus used the term “translate,” it is literally, “to turn or change.” The result was a second edition produced not by himself but by skilled translators who wrote it into a fine Greek form which preserved the original meaning. Josephus was an upper class citizen and scholar and had great resources available to him. Therefore what was produced “appears” to be an original Greek work, yet it is a translation.

The Jewish Wars, in its translation from Aramaic to Greek, parallels the situation with the New Testament. The New Testament original in Aramaic no longer exists. However, the majority of scholars is so attracted to the Greek that the idea of an Aramaic original is not seriously considered. No doubt Paul knew some Greek. Nevertheless, conversing in a foreign tongue is one thing, while writing important documents is quite another.

Karen Masterson presented evidence that the Apostle Paul wrote in Aramaic. (Karen Masterson, ” An Aramaic Approach to the Church Epistles, ” The Way Magazine (March/April 1984), pp. 17-20) This naturally follows when one understands Paul’s background. (“Hebrew of the Hebrews” in Philippians 3:5 indicates that Paul was culturally Aramaic speaking, not Greek. See H. J. Cadbury, “The Hellenists, ” The Acts of the Apostles: Additional Notes to the Commentary, vol. 5 of The Beginners of Christianity. Part 1, ed. by Kirsopp Lake and Henry J. Cadbury (reprint; Grand Rapids: 1979), p. 62.) That this is so is exhibited many times in Acts. For example, Paul’s manner was to witness first in the synagogues, where he would find men of his kindred and beloved background in which he was most comfortable. It is known that the dispersed Jews used Aramaic all over the world. Aramaic inscriptions have even been found in England, Rome, and Pompeii.( A. Löwy, “Note on a Billingual Inscription in Latin and Aramaic Recently Found at South Shields, ” Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaeology (Decmeber 3, 1878), pp. 11 and 12; and W.R. Newbold, “Five Transliterated Aramaic Inscriptions,” The American Journal of Archaeology, vol. 30 (1926), pp. 288ff.)  This obviates another natural objection. Why would Paul write Aramaic epistles to the believers in Greek-speaking communities? We know from Acts that the first people Paul witnessed to upon entering a city were Jews who knew Aramaic. Many of the first-century believers spoke Aramaic. From these same Aramaic-speaking people the first translations into Greek, Latin, and Syriac would come. It is absurd to believe that a space of fifty to seventy five years would elapse before the early versions in other languages would be produced. Undoubtedly they were produced in the first century, as the evidence of the most ancient form of the early versions show.

The Jewish element in the early Church all over the world was massive. Our knowledge of the early Church after Acts indicated that it, too, was very Jewish in outlook, even in Rome. Hellenization was a very thin, urban veneer, serving only the upper classes in the governmental, military, financial and academic circles. Hellenism was not all-pervasive. When necessary, Paul may have spoken Greek from a knowledge of the language he had picked up after his conversion. But he certainly would not have written the New Testament documents which he and the other apostles considered so vital and important in a language with which he was not totally fluent and comfortable.

We can clearly see concerning the Apostle Paul’s life (about which we know the most) that he would have written in Aramaic. (The only record in the whole Word of God that mentions the language in which a revelation was given is Acts, which clearly states that Paul received revelation in Aramaic. See Acts 26:14.) Yet, the majority of scholars does not even consider the thought of an Aramaic original for the Pauline epistles because of their relative lack of Semitism, compared to the Gospels. Somehow they do not see that Paul’s arguments more often followed Jewish rather than Greek style. (Olmstead, p. 46) Though the Book of Hebrews is an example of the finest style of Greek in the New Testament, most scholars so not recognize its Hebraic thought, and none take Clement of Alexandria’s testimony seriously. (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History III. XXXVIII. 2,3) The same is true for II.Peter, which was very refined Atticistic Greek in places (II.Peter 1:3-5) although it was written by an “unlearned and ignorant” Galilean fisherman. The same is true of the rest of the Aramaic and were not multilingual scholars. Why do there appear to be differing styles of Greek in the New Testament,  and even in the same books? This feature has led many to feel that the New Testament books were written from different written or oral sources and by different authors.

Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles, was obviously in the best position of the apostles to acquire experts help in translating his epistles into Greek and other languages to make the truth available to the believers who did not know his native Aramaic. Hence, we can expect his epistles to be more polished Greek translations than those of the Galilean writers who never left the East.

Furthermore, there may have been more than one translator for a given book or epistle. Certainly Acts indicates this. The second half of Acts is less Semitized than the first half. This also explains why the Gospel of John, though thoroughly Semitized, is much better Greek than the Book of Revelation.  When Revelation was written in the first century, John was standing almost alone. All of Asia had left the accuracy of God’s Word (II. Tim. 1:15) and the Judean and Eastern churches had fallen into legalism (Acts 21:20). John had fewer resources for help in translating Revelation than in translating his gospel – hence, the difference in quality.

Besides the Biblical testimony, there is another area from which to draw evidence – the early Christian writers of the second century. One such writer, Papias, who wrote in Greek about 120 A.D., collected as much information as he could about early Jewish Christianity. He is known only through the fourth-century Church historian Eusebius’ quotations of him in his Ecclesiastical History. In one place Eusebius recorded that Papias wrote, “Mathew collected the oracles in the Hebrew language” (III,39:16).

“The Hebrew language” here means “Aramaic.” Eusebius goes on to write about Hegesippus (ca. 150), who was also very interested in the Jewish church, and who was very concerned about orthodoxy in the church: “…he makes extracts from the Gospel according to the Hebrews and from the Syriac and particularly from the Hebrew language…(IV, 22:8).” Here we can read that Hegesippus quoted from Syriac and Hebrew (Aramaic) texts. Why did he quote “particularly from the Hebrew language”? Because Aramaic was the original language. The Syriac, a derivative from the Aramaic, was a revision for the use of converts further East. Interestingly, Eusebius, a Greek writer, who is considered to be the father of the church history, quoted the two earliest church historians who wrote also in Greek and who both were concerned  about the early Jewish church and maintaining orthodoxy. This speaks strongly, because if there had been any prejudices by these writers, it should have been in favor of the Greek. These are not only witnesses. Justin Martyr, a Roman (though from Samaria, ca. 140 A.D.), refers to an Aramaic gospel, and Irenaeus (ca, 180 A.D.) of Gaul, far from Israel also speaks of “The Gospel” as being Aramaic. According to Eusebius, Clement of Alexandria (ca. 180 A.D.), a Greek-speaking Hellenist, even stated that Paul wrote his epistle to the Hebrews in Aramaic. (Ibid., VI.XIV.2) In spite of this wealth of testimony, not once has this writer found reference to this fact by modern scholars in dealing with the history of the New Testament text.

What happened to the Jewish Aramaic manuscripts? The adversary, in attempting to obscure the Word of God, did his best to destroy all manuscripts, especially those that most closely represented and resembled the Jewish Aramaic originals. C.C. Torrey wrote that Palestinian Aramaic came into disuse as the Christians were assimilated into the Greek, Latin and Syriac cultures after the decimation of Jerusalem and the ensuing very severe persecution by the Pharisees.

By the end of the first century the original Aramaic documents of the nascent Church had practically disappeared.  A large proportion doubtless, had perished in the catastrophe of the year 70.  Those which remained were condemned to be destroyed on sight in every orthodox Jewish community, by virtue of the year 80 under Gamaliel II. The Greek-speaking Jewish Christians would have no conflict with their Gentiles brethren on the important matter of the scriptural authority, but of course adopted the Greek translations and did go away with the Semitic texts. It is easy to see why the latter, banned by both church and synagogue, vanished soon and completly. From this time on, the language of the New Revelation to Israel, which had been Aramaic, was Greek. (Charles Cutler Torrey, Documents of the Primitive Church (New York: Harper and Brothers, n.d.), p. 129)

In another place he wrote: another very query concerns the total disappearance of the Aramaic literature, and again the reason for the fact is hardly obscure. Literature disappears very rapidly when it is no longer wanted…  as for the Christian documents, we may imagine with what eagerness and thoroughness these arch-heretical and dangerous writings would have been destroyed, all through the land, by the Jews, who had the aushtority and might to do this…and when the Christians cut loose from the Jews they had no further use for the language of their enemies. (Charles Cutler Torrey, Our Translated Gospels (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1936), pp. XIII, XIV)

With the breakup of the early Church in the years following the death of the Apostle Paul and the destruction of Jeruslaem, which was the original headquarters of the Church and the center of Judaic Christianity, the strong Jewish flavor of the Church was lost. Thus, the need for, desire for, and use of texts in Jewish Aramaic died with the early believers. The tendency toward Greek would have prompted the adoption of the Greek text in favor of all the others, especially at the great Hellenistic church centers at Alexandria, Rome, Caeserea, Antioch and Ephesus. As a result, the smaller churches would adopt the same texts  as their metropolis, i.e., their mother-city. In fact Greek so dominated the intellectual and theological world that Aletheria at the end of the fourth century recorded that the bishops spoke Greek and needed presbyters who translated the scripture lessons and sermons into Aramaic or Syriac. (Arthur Vööbus, Early Versions of the New Testament, Papers of the Nestorian Theological Society in Exile, vol. 6 (Stockholm: 1954), p. 126.  ) The Greek-speaking churches had control, and only small groups of Aramaic Christians, who quickly left the mainstream, continued to use the Jewish Aramaic texts.

Knowing that the New Testament writers wrote in Aramaic, not Greek, opens up new vistas of understanding and research. Primarily, this knowledge further enables the Biblical researcher to see that the Bible is not a compendium of random written and oral sources. Rather, it is the Word of God, revealed to men who recorded that revelation in the native Aramaic and later oversaw its translation into Greek, Latin, and Syriac; and it is with the descendants of these first translation endeavors that today’s Biblical researcher must work.

*  *  *

(Originally published in The Way Magazine; May-June 1985  pages 17-20; this article has been reproduced with two changes throughout- “Judean(s)” has been changed to “Jew(s)”/Jewish and “Palestine” has been changed to “Israel”/”Judean”.)  Special thanks to NazareneSpace volunteer Mikha’Ela for typing in the original article).

The reproduction of this single article that once appeared in The Way Magazine should in no way be taken as a endorsement of any of the doctrines of The Way International. 

Daniel McConaughy was the Coordinator of the Biblical Research Department at the Way College of Emporia.  He is no longer a member of The Way International.  He holds a Ph.D. from the University of Chicago, where he specialized in Syriac, Greek, and early Church history. 

In 1985 (just a year after this article was first published), McConaughy discovered a previously lost page of the Old Syriac Curetonian ms. of the Gospels (“A Recently Discovered Folio of the Old Syriac (Sy(c)) Text of Luke 16,13-17,1”;  Biblica Vol. 68- Fasc. 1- 1987; pp. 85-90).  He has been published in at least two academic journals (The cite above and “An Old Syriac Reading of Acts 1:4 and More Light on Jesus’ Last Meal before His Ascension”; Oriens Christianus; Band 72 1988; pp. 63-67).

This article appeared originally in a copyrighted magazine.  It is presented here in accordance with the Fair Use policy in that it is presented here for a non-profit, educational purpose, the original work was non-fiction, educational article, the material here comprises only four pages of the original copyrighted work, and this use has essentially no effect on the potential market for, or value of the original work.

Our rent is due tomorrow (6/1/23) and we do not have it! We need your help today!

I want to thank all of you supporting this work. I literally could not do it without you!

This work takes hours of my time. As many of you know, my wife is very ill, and I spend most of my time at home as her caretaker. I work at a desk less than six feet from her bed. So I am in a position to dedicate many hours to this important work that I have been directed to do.

But I also realize that it is not the activity of James Trimm alone who is responsible to do this work, it is all of us together who are charged with the responsibility of accomplishing this work. I very much look on the efforts of this restoration work as a cooperative one with each one of you. We are all joint heirs with Messiah and should always be about our Father’s business. I am honored to be able to be partnered with truth seekers as this restoration of Scripture moves forward in fulfillment of prophecy.

Donations can be sent by Paypal to donations@wnae.org

Or click HERE to donate

An Aramaic Approach to the Church Epistles

An Aramaic Approach to the Church Epistles
By
Karen Masterson

Commentaries and biographies almost unanimously regard the Apostle Paul as a Hellenistic Jew. They regard him as a Jew whose native language was Greek, who thought in terms of Greek ideas and culture. They compare him to men such as Philo, who explained Judaism in terms of Greek philosophy. They regard Paul as the man who took the Semitic ideas and teachings of Jesus Christ and reexplained them in terms palatable to the current Greek thought outside of Israel.

For centuries men have pointed to Paul’s birth in Tarsus, a great center of Greek learning and pagan religion, and have conjectured that he was raised there also. They insist that Paul wrote all his epistles in Greek and quoted the Septuagint version of the Old Testament because it was that with which he was most familiar.       

The commonly held beliefs that Paul was a Hellenistic Jew and that he grew up in the Hellenistic influence of Tarsus present a problem because they contradict the testimony of God’s word. The problem exists in part because theologians have failed to recognize that differences between Paul’s and Jesus Christ’s teaching results from the change of administration rather than from Paul’s Hellenistic background. A study of the administration change, however, is beyond the scope of this article. Rather, it is a study of Paul’s historical and cultural background which will show the Aramaic basis of his life and epistles.  In order to understand Paul’s background and it’s significance, it is necessary to understand the terms used to describe Jews of the day, the differences between the terms, and the origins of these differences.

And in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplied, there arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration.
(Acts 6:1)

“Grecians” (Hellenistes in Greek)  refers to the Hellenistic Jews. This is contrasted with the word “Hebrews,” meaning Aramaic-speaking Jews. A Hellenistic Jew is also called a Hellenist or, as the King James Version translates it, a Grecian. These were Jews who spoke Greek and were influenced by Greek civilization. The headquarters of their theology was Alexandria, and their great spokesman was Philo, who admittedly knew no Hebrew. The work of the Hellenists was “to accommodate Jewish doctrines to the mind of the Greeks, and to make the Greek language express the mind of the Jews. ” (W.J. Conybeare and J.S. Howson, The Life and Epistles of St. Paul (Grand Rapids:  Eerdmans, 1980), p.30.) The Hellenists used the Greek version of the Scriptures called the Septuagint. The direct opponents of the Hellenists were Hebrews as the King James Version has it. These were Jews who opposed Greek learning as repugnant to Judaism. They had a saying: “Cursed be he who teacheth his son the learning of the Greeks. ” (Conybeare and  Howson, The Life and Epistles , p. 30) 

To the Hebrews, Greek was the speech of idolatry, of dangerous doctrines, of vain speculation. It   was the speech of the tyrant Antiochus who had endeavored to introduce the worship of Jupiter into the Temple at Jerusalem. The event of the cleansing of the Temple is still commemorated from the “abomination” of Antiochus after his overthrow by the Maccabees, the champions of Judaism’s purity from Greek influences. (Conybeare and  Howson, The Life and Epistles , p. 21, p.30.)  This feast is known as Hanukkah (see John 10:22).

The Hebrews spoke Aramaic as their native language and studied either the Hebrew Scriptures or the Aramaic targums. In contrast, the Hellenistic Jews praised the Greek translation of the Scriptures (the Septuagint) as inspired. But later Hebrews from Israel said that when the law was translated into Greek, “Darkness came upon the world for three days. (F.J. Foakes-Jackson, The Biblical History of the Hebrews to the Christian Era (New York: George H. Doran Co., 1922), p. 385.) They also stated that “the day was a hard day for Israel, like as when Israel made the Golden calf.” (Foakes-Jackson, Biblical History of the Hebrews, pp. 385-386.)

Even after members of these two factions (the Hellenists and the Hebrews) were born again and became members of the Church of God, there arose a division in the Church, “a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration.” Understanding the distinction between Greek-speaking Jews (Hellenists) and the Aramaic-speaking Jews (Hebrews) lays an important foundation for a study of Paul’s life.

Almost  all of those who have written on the life of Paul assume that the greater part of Paul’s childhood was spent in Tarsus, where he was heavily influenced by Greek thought and language. For example, T. Wilson writes, “The environment in which a man spends the most impressionable years of his life leaves an indelible mark upon his character. It is therefore highly important that we should get a true estimate of the influence of Tarsus in the making of St. Paul.” (T. Wilson, st. Paul and Paganism, quoted in W.C. Van Unnik, Sparsa Collecta, The Collected Essays of W.C. Van Unnik, Part One , Supplements to  Novum Testamentum, Vol. 29 (Leiden, E.J. Brill, 1973), p. 263.)

F.W. Farrar writes:

Now certainly, in it’s proper and technical sense, the word “Hebrew” is the direct opposite of “Hellenist,” and St. Paul, if brought up at Tarsus, could only strictly be regarded as a Jew of the Dispersion – a Jew of that vast body who, even when they were not ignorant of Hebrew – as even the most leaned of them sometimes were – still spoke Greek as their native tongue. It may, of course, be said that St. Paul uses the word Hebrew only in its general sense, and that he meant to imply by it that he was not a Hellenist to the same extent that, for instance…Philo was…St. Paul might call himself a Hebrew, though technically speaking he was also a Hellenist….( F.W. Farrar, The Life and Work of St. Paul, 2 vols. (London: Casswell, Petter, Galpin and Co., 1879), 1:16.)                                                                                                                            

Paul was not a Hellenist. Consider the Scriptures.

Are they Hebrews? So am I. are they Israelites? So am I. Are they of Abraham? so am I.
(2Cor. 11:22)

Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee.
(Phil. 3:5)

The expression ” Hebrew of the Hebrews” is an idiom peculiar to Semitic languages which do not possess the superlative. In this idiom “a noun is repeated in the genitive plural in order to express very emphatically the superlative degree.” (E.W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible (1898; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1968), p.283.)  Paul, by revelation emphasizes that he is a Hebrew of the highest possible degree, not a Hellenistic Jew as many claim today. However, many theologians say that technically he was mistaken, that in reality he was not a Hebrew but a Hellenist.

Men and bretheren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question.
(Acts 23:6b)

The Aramaic and some Greek manuscripts read instead of “son of a Pharisee: : son of Pharisees,” indicating he was a tripharisaios, a Pharisee of the third generation. (Farrar, The Life and Work, 1:4 note 3)

And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?
(Acts 26:14a)

The “Hebrew tongue” mentioned here means Aramaic. The very first “heavenly vision” received by Paul came to him in Aramaic. Do you suppose that God would give Paul a vision, his very first, which was absolutely crucial to his getting born again and setting his whole ministry to the Gentiles, in a language that was not his native tongue? Why would God have even mentioned the “Hebrew tongue” in the record if it were not important? The clearest record about Paul’s upbringing occurs in Act 22:3.

(And when they heard that he spake in the Hebrew tongue to them, they kept the more silence: and he saith,) I am verily a man which am a Jew, born in Tarsus, a city in Galicia, yet brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, and taught according to the perfect manner of the law of the fathers, and was zealous toward God, as ye all are this day.
(Acts 22:2-3)

As translated in the King James Version, the verse says that Paul was born in Tarsus, but brought up in this city, Jerusalem. Some have taken the words “brought up” to refer here only to a mental or spiritual nurture. Conybeare and Howson and others agree that Paul came to Jerusalem as a “young man,” after he had received his earliest impressions and formation of his mind in the Hellinistic culture of Tarsus. They have taken the words “brought up” and “taught” as the figure of speech hendiadys, expressing the same idea of Paul’s Pharisaic training with Gamaliel, which would not have begun before the age of ten and probably closer to fifteen. There is a evidence, however, that the verse has been wrongly translated due to both a wrong understanding of the Greek word for “brought up” and wrong punctuation of the verse. The words “brought up” are the Greek word anatrepho  meaning “to bring up, nurse, cherish, educate.” The root trepho means “to make firm, thick or solid, hence,   to… fatten, nourish,… make to grow.” (E.W. Bullinger, a Critical Lexicon and Concordance to the English and Greek New Testament, (1877; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1975), s.v. anatropho and  tropho.) The word anatrepho occurs twice in Acts 7:20 and 21: In which time Moses was born, and was exceeding fair, and nourished up, [anatrepho]  in his father’s house three month:

And when he was cast out, Pharaoh’s daughter took him up, and nourished [anatrepho]  him for her own son.

Tischendorf and other authorities prefer the reading anatrepho for trepho in Luke 4:16: And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up  : and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on he sabbath day, and stood up for to read.

In Acts 22:3 there are three Greek verbs of the same form, nominative perfect passive participles, which Paul uses to give the background of his early days. These are gegennemenos , born; anatethrammenos, brought up; and  pepaideumenos, taught. These three words occur in the same sequence in Acts 7:20-22, referring to Moses’ life: He was born  [gennao], then nourished up [anatrepho] in his fathers house three months; Pharaoh’s daughter nourished [anatrepho] him up for her own son; and Moses was learned [paideuo] in all the wisdom of the Egyptians. W.C. Van Unnik, in an article entitled “Tarsus or Jerusalem,” has cited exhaustive evidence to show that these three words form a “fixed literary unit”: (1) birth; (2) life in the home and the upbringing received there; and (3) education received outside of the parental home. (Van Unnik, Sparsa Collecta. p. 287)

The question of the translation of Acts 22:3 depends therefore on the placing of the comma in the text, whether “at the feet of Gamaliel” goes with “brought up” or with “taught.” The American standard version translates it:”…a Jew, born in Tarsus of Cilicia, but brought up in this city and educated at the feet of Gamaliel according to the strict manner of the Law of our fathers.” From the literary evidence given by Van Unnik, “at the feet of Gamaliel” can only go with the word “taught.” He concludes: In this context anatethrammenos can refer only to Paul’s upbringing in the home of his parents from the earliest years of his childhood until he was of school age: pepaideumenos refers to the instruction which he received in accordance with the Eastern custom “at the feet of” Gamaliel. This of itself solves the problem about the punctuation. Greek readers, who knew the significance of anatrepho in such a context, would of course have regarded it as quite foolish to connect “at the feet of Gamaliel” with that word.

This is not undone by any considerations about the rhythm of the sentence. The name Gamaliel in its third member has probably been brought forward in order that full emphasis may fall upon it at once… from the contrast between Tarsus as the place of birth and Jerusalem as the city of the  (upbringing in the home circle) and the paideia (study under Gamaliel), it is clear that according to this text Paul spent the years of his youth completely in Jerusalem. (Van Unnik, Sparsa Collecta. pp. 295-296)

A literal translation according to usage of Acts 22:3 is: I am a Jew, born in Tarsus in Cilicia, but my parental home, where I received my early upbringing, was in the city [Jerusalem]; and under Gamaliel, a person well known to you, I received a strict training as a Pharisee, so that I was a zealot for God’s cause as you all are this day. (Van Unnik, Sparsa Collecta. p. 295)

Here Paul states that his life from the first was not among the idolaters at Tarsus, but among his own nation at Jerusalem. Conybeare and Howson write: …St. Paul himself must be called a Hellenist; because the language of his infancy was that idiom of the Grecian Jews in which all his letters were written. Though, in conformity with the strong feeling of the Jews of all times, he might learn his earliest sentences from the Scripture in Hebrew, yet he was familiar with the Septuagint translation at an early age. For it is observed that, when he quotes from the Old Testament, his quotations are from that version; and that, not only when he cites its very words, but when ( as is often the case) he quotes it from memory… (Conybeare and Howson, The Life and Epistles, pp. 32-33)

These authors qualify their above statement with “the family of St. Paul, though Hellenistic in speech, were no Hellenizers in the theology.” (Conybeare and Howson, The Life and Epistles, p. 33) The argument that Paul is a Hellenistic Jew because many of the quotes that appear in the Greek version of the Old Testament are from the Septuagint is inadequate. If his writings were originally written in Aramaic, his native language, the translator would not translate the Old Testament himself, but would use the version that was most familiar to his readers (the same approach is used today in translations). The evidence from God’s Word causes us to take issue with the tradition which contends that Paul wrote in Greek. Knowing that Aramaic was his native tongue should prompt us to consider the language of an Aramaic original which lies behind the Greek and other versions to which we have access today.
* * *

(Originally published in The Way Magazine; March-April 1984 pages 17-20; this article has been reproduced with two changes throughout- “Judean(s)” has been changed to “Jew(s)” and “Palestine” has been changed to “Israel”.)  Special thanks to NazareneSpace volunteer Mikha’Ela for typing in the original article).

The reproduction of this single article that once appeared in The Way Magazine should in no way be taken as a endorsement of any of the doctrines of The Way International.  

Karen Tourne Masterson now has a Ph.D. from UCLA in Near Eastern Languages (Phi Beta Kappa, Summa Cum Laude graduate).   She is no longer a member of The Way International and did not have her Ph.D. when she wrote this article.

This article appeared originally in a copyrighted magazine.  It is presented here in accordance with the Fair Use policy in that it is presented here for a non-profit, educational purpose, the original work was non-fiction, educational article, the material here comprises only four pages of the original copyrighted work, and this use has essentially no effect on the potential market for, or value of the original work.

Our rent is due in just two days (6/1/23) and we do not have it! We need your help today!

I want to thank all of you supporting this work. I literally could not do it without you!

This work takes hours of my time. As many of you know, my wife is very ill, and I spend most of my time at home as her caretaker. I work at a desk less than six feet from her bed. So I am in a position to dedicate many hours to this important work that I have been directed to do.

But I also realize that it is not the activity of James Trimm alone who is responsible to do this work, it is all of us together who are charged with the responsibility of accomplishing this work. I very much look on the efforts of this restoration work as a cooperative one with each one of you. We are all joint heirs with Messiah and should always be about our Father’s business. I am honored to be able to be partnered with truth seekers as this restoration of Scripture moves forward in fulfillment of prophecy.

Donations can be sent by Paypal to donations@wnae.org

Or click HERE to donate