| | APPENDIX
THIRTEEN--
Does the Aramaic Bible,
or the Peshitta,
call the God
of the Bible Allah? There
has recently developed a debate, mostly on the Web, as to the name of Allah used
in the Aramaic manuscript of the Bible. It is claimed by Islamic scholars that
this proves that the original name of God is Allah. There are several reasons
why this is a lie:1.
The Peshitta and the Aramaic
were not used in the translation of the King James Bible.
Only the Greek texts were used. God allowed the Muslim armies to attack Constantinople
BEFORE the Aramaic Bible was accepted by the Greek Church. The Greek monks of
Constantinople fled their churches with the Greek manuscripts they had from Antioch
and the Eastern churches NOT polluted by Syrian pagan notions from Mesopotamia.
Thus, the King James Bible was protected by God from pollution by the Aramaic
texts. There must be some reason that the Aramaic text of the Bible does not please
God.2. The
Muslims and "Jews for Allah" claim that the Western Aramaic text of
the Peshitta, was corrupted
and changed by Reformers to come in line with the King James principles or with
Erasmus. This is an old saw. Whenever things don't agree between the Koran or
Islamic myth, the Muslim scholars claim someone altered all the other texts than
the ones they like. The cute thing is that the Peshitta and Aramaic did not come
to Europe until at least the 18th century. Here is what Jews for Allah (This is
a real group of Jews) Say: The
real message of the life and teachings of Jesus, Muhammad and Nestorius can be
likened to that of the Peshitta and the Qur'an. The Church of the East claims
that every copy of the Peshitta ever made was certified by every Bishop to be
a true and clean copy, the meaning of the word "Peshitta" itself. The Qur'an is
likened unto it. The Peshitto or Peshitta of the West was changed, not so often
as present day Christian Bibles but changed in ancient times. The Torah was destroyed
with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. and since has suffered a worse fate.
There were only two such scrolls at the time. One was held by the priests, the
other by the King. In those times families were charged with the memory of whole
books and what was created has been re-written many times to suit the purpose
of the writers as with the many versions of the Christian Bible. So,
the final authority to these people, as to the authentic Word of God, is the word
of a Nestorian Patriarch who does not believe that Jesus was one person, that
is, God and man from birth to death and remaining both to this hour. (More on
this below) What lousy authorities these heretic bishops are, and so, what a lousy
manuscript these patriarchs offer us. No wonder the Muslims love the Peshitta
and the Aramaic, at least the late great model.3.
The fact is, the Aramaic and Peshitta were altered
and revised over and over through the ages, and when the Aramaic was finally delivered
to Europe in the 18th Century, it was not in any way close to the original Aramaic.
The altering of the "original" Aramaic was done by the people in the
Middle East, not Germany. Furthermore; the oldest Aramaic text is only dated to
about 450 AD. This was before Constantine had taken power in a big way, so the
claim is that it predates the Roman Western texts. The problem is, the Aramaic
text was the text of the Nestorians, and eventually, the Eastern Catholic Church.
Nestorianism
is a 5th-century Christological heresy. Nestorianism takes its name from Nestorius,
bishop of Constantinople (428-31). Nestorius taught that Christ had two natures--
a divine and a separate human nature. Nestorius was condemned by the Council of
Ephesus (431), which was convened specifically to settle the dispute. There the
orthodox doctrine on the nature of Jesus Christ was clarified: Christ was pronounced
true God and true man, as having two distinct natures in one person --a position
that was reaffirmed by the Council of Chalcedon in 451 A.D. Nestorius was deposed
as bishop and sent to Antioch. Today a Nestorian church survives in the East and
has since taught, in opposition to the orthodox doctrine, that there are two persons
in the incarnate Christ, human and divine. Copyright (c) Grolier Electronic Publishing,
Inc. As
to the Catholic impact on the choice of the Aramaic and Peshitta texts:
"With reference to....
the originality of the Peshitta text, as the Patriarch and Head of the Holy Apostolic
and Catholic Church of the East, we wish to state, that the Church of the East
received the scriptures from the hands of the blessed Apostles themselves in the
Aramaic original, the language spoken by our Lord Jesus Christ Himself, and that
the Peshitta is the text of the Church of the East which has come down from the
Biblical times without any change or revision."
Mar Eshai Shimun by Grace,
Catholicos Patriarch of the East So,
we see that the Nestorians, and the Eastern Catholics, had a two person Christ.
This is nothing but a modification of Gnosticism which claimed that Christ the
human was born, and at his baptism the second Christ the God took habitation in
the body of Christ the human. It
is only a small step to join with the Islamic notion of Christ being only one
person and not God. The Eastern Syrian Church has been tolerated for centuries
by the Muslims because they picked up the name Allah and used it in their Bible
instead of El or Elohim. 4.
Jesus settled it for us as
to the name of God in Hebrew and Aramaic: Matthew
27:45 Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth
hour.
46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying,
Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken
me?
47 Some of them that stood there, when they heard that, said, This man
calleth for Elias. We
see here two witnesses to the fact that the name of God is El.
Verse 46. Eli, Eli, etc.
This language is not pure Hebrew, nor Syriac, but a mixture of both, called commonly
Syro-Chaldaic. This was probably the language which he commonly spoke. The words
are taken from Psalm 22:1. (Barnes notes) Jesus
was speaking a combined use of Aramaic and Syriac, which is the alleged foundation
of the Aramaic from Chaldea where the present day Baith Catholic Church is located,
in Syria and in Iraq. Jesus used the Hebrew name for God, El, and he added the
possessive suffix, i. Thus, Eli, or "My God." This
also implies that Jesus never used the Aramaic name for God because it may have
already been corrupted. In this book I have shown that the name of Allah derived
from pagan forms staring at the Tower of Babel. This tower, and Sumer where the
gods IL and ILAH evolved, were just up the road from Israel. So some primitive
Allah form may have already been in use in Jesus' day. He rejected it and used
the name EL or ELOHIM for the God of the Bible. God
the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit have placed a number of highly urgent wordings
in the Word of God in an obvious way so that these wordings would be powerful
weapons against Satanic attacks on our faith 2000 years later. In his divine omniscience,
Jesus Christ spoke some very special words, in the midst of his suffering, with
us in mind. Jesus wanted us to win this debate against Muslim blasphemers. Praise
his holy Name. The
second proof in the Matthew text above is found in verse 47 where the people standing
by thought Jesus was calling to Elias, or Elijah, whose name means, Eli-Jah, or
"My God, Yaweh." If Jesus had said, "Allah, Allah, etc etc"
the bystanders would not have been able to make the association with Elias in
any way, shape, or form. ------------- What
is the issue with the Aramaic text? The
present Aramaic text, and probably many forms of the evolving Peshitta after Muhammed's
day, DO use the name Allah for God in various ways. Here is the list of close
ones anyway: AaLaH
AaLaHaA
AaLaHeA
AaLaHeH
AaLaHHuON
AaLaHY
AaLaHaK
AaLaHaN
B'aALaHaA (This lets Baal into God's name. This is a polution from
Babylon where the Nestorians lived.)
B'D,aALaHaA
D'aALaHaA
D'aALaHeA
D'aALaHeH
D'aALaHHuON
D'aALaHY
D'aALaHaN
D'B,aALaHaA
AaLaH (Not used of the God of the Bible in the Aramaic)
AiYL (This is a pure
pagan form based on Illah of Babylon)
LaALaHaN
And, 46 more variations You
can see that the Aramaic names of God in their alleged Bible never once made any
effort to use El or Elohim, as Jesus did. So, we see the post-Islamic pollution
of the later era Aramaic and Peshitta were polluted by Muhahhed's god, Allah,
whom Muhammed salvaged from the Kaaba when he evicted the other 365 pagan gods
stored there before 650AD. The Eastern Catholic Church has bowed to Mecca in order
to curry favor with Islam. CONCLUSION: There
is NO reason for any true Bible believer to apologize for the use of the name
Allah in the Aramaic or the Peshitta. The versions of those texts today are a
joke since the metropolitans and bishops of the Syrian Church have corrupted the
Word of God, if they ever really had it immediately after the Apostolic era, as
they claim. This
corrupting of the Word of God with LXX alterations and bringing in the name of
Allah into their Bible, is obviously why God made sure the Aramaic arrived in
the West as late as World War I. We would hope that a rational student of the
Word of God would see that God intends to keep the Peshitta and Aramaic of the
present editions OUT of our consideration. This is why Erasmus and Luther had
ONLY the Greek to work with. God WANTED it that way. If
some Mullah or Imam wants to show us the name of God in Aramaic, find us the original
manuscript. Of course, that will be a translation from the Greek which Paul wrote
and Jesus spoke. And, we don't want a Bible which a filthy Nestorian Bishop has
handled with his pagan hands please.
LINKS: HERE
ARE HEBREW ROOTS HERETICS WHO HAVE GOTTEN THEMSELVES ALL BOGGLED UP TRYING
TO USE THE ARAMIC, GREEK, PESHITTA, LXX, AND KING JAMES BIBLE TO PLAY ONE AGAINST
THE OTHER. THE RESULT IS A DO-IT-YOURSELF BIBLE THAT IS A HORRIFIC MESS. HERE
IS A LINK PAGE WHICH SHOWS THAT YOU CANNOT HAVE THE PESHITTA AND THE TEXTUS RECEPTUS
TOGETHER, AS SOME WOULD CLAIM
|