Semitic Language Versions of the Lord's Prayer (Hebrew and Aramaic)

The Gospels record many instances of Jesus the Messiah praying, some of which are actually recorded. None of the prayers recorded in the Holy Scriptures are more precious to Christians than the Lord's Prayer, which is recorded in the Synoptic Gospels of Matthew (6:9-13) and Luke (11:1-4) The most popular Bible translations are from Greek (whether from the Byzantine or Alexandrian textual families), but Jesus taught to the common people of 1st century Israel, who spoke the Aramaic language. In many articles I have detailed my reasoning behind believing the New Testament to have originally been written in Aramaic and was best preserved by the Aramaic Peshitta, which is written in a slightly different Eastern dialect (Syriac or Assyrian) from the Lord's Western Aramaic dialect (Galilean). The sources for the three Aramaic versions of the Lord's Prayer are from the primary Syriac (Assyrian Aramaic) versions of the Gospels: the Old Syriac (Sinaitic Palimpsest and Curetonian) and the Eastern Peshitta. The Hebrew version of the Lord's Prayer is from Franz Delitzsch's translation of the Gospels into Hebrew.

First we'll do the Aramaic Peshitta's version of the Lord's Prayer. This is the standard version of the New Testament among Aramaic speaking Christians in the Church of the East, Syriac Orthodox Church, and Syriac Maronite Church. It is believed by some (including myself) that this is the original New Testament, or at least the closest to the original. The dialect of the Peshitta is Syriac.

 ܐܒܘܢ ܕܒܫܡܝܐ ܢܬܩܕܫ ܫܡܟ
ܬܐܬܐ ܡܠܟܘܬܟ ܢܗܘܐ ܨܒܝܢܟ ܐܝܟܢܐ ܕܒܫܡܝܐ ܐܦ ܒܐܪܥܐ
ܗܒܠܢ ܠܚܡܐ ܕܣܘܢܩܢܢ ܝܘܡܢܐ
ܘܫܒܘܩ ܠܢ ܚܘܒܝܢ ܐܝܟܢܐ ܕܐܦ ܚܢܢ ܫܒܩܢ ܠܚܝܒܝܢ
ܘܠܐ ܬܥܠܢ ܠܢܣܝܘܢܐ ܐܠܐ ܦܨܢ ܡܢ ܒܝܫܐ ܡܛܠ ܕܕܝܠܟ ܗܝ ܡܠܟܘܬܐ ܘܚܝܠܐ ܘܬܫܒܘܚܬܐ ܠܥܠܡ ܥܠܡܝܢ

Awun d'w'shmaya nith-qadash shmak 

tite malkutak nehwe tzewyanak acana d'w'shmaya aph b'ara 

haw lan lakhma d'sunqanan yawmana 

w'shbuk lan khawbayn acana d'aph khanan shwaqan l'khayawin 

w'la talan l'nesyuna ela ptzan mwn bisha metul d'dilak hi malkuta w'khala w'teshbukhta l'alam almin.

"Our Father in heaven, hallowed by thy name. 

Come thy kingdom, be done thy will; as in heaven, so on earth. 

Give us the bread of our need this day.

And forgive us our offences, as also we have forgiven those who have offended us.

And bring us not into trial, but deliver us from the evil one. For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory forever and ever."- Matthew 6:9-13, Paul Younan's Aramaic-English Interlinear Gospels

ܐܒܘܢ ܕܒܫܡܝܐ ܢܬܩܕܫ ܫܡܟ ܬܐܬܐ ܡܠܟܘܬܟ ܢܗܘܐ ܨܒܝܢܟ ܐܝܟ ܕܒܫܡܝܐ ܐܦ ܒܐܪܥܐ

 ܗܒ ܠܢ ܠܚܡܐ ܕܣܘܢܩܢܢ ܟܠܝܘܡ

ܘܫܒܘܩ ܠܢ ܚܛܗܝܢ ܐܦ ܚܢܢ ܓܝܪ ܫܒܩܢ ܠܟܠ ܕܚܝܒܝܢ ܠܢ ܘܠܐ ܬܥܠܢ ܠܢܣܝܘܢܐ ܐܠܐ ܦܪܘܩܝܢ ܡܢ ܒܝܫܐ

Awun d'w'shmaya netqadash shmak tite malkutak nehwe tzewyanak ak d'w'ashmaya aph b'ara 

haw lan lakhma d'sunqanan culyom w'shbuq lan khtahin

W'shbuq lan khatahan aph enakhnan ger shbaqan l'cul d'khayawin lan w'la talan l'nesyona ela pruqan bisha.

"Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name. Come your kingdom, be done your will; as in Heaven, so on earth. 

Give us the bread of our need everyday. 

And forgive us our sins also, for we forgive all who have offended us. And lead us not into trial, but save us from the evil one."- Luke 11:2-4, Paul Younan's Aramaic-English Interlinear Gospels

Next up is the Sinaitic Palimpsest's version of the Lord's Prayer. The Sinaitic Palimpsest is also referred to as the Syriac Sinaiticus. A palimpsest is a manuscript which has been "scratched over" with another writing, in this case a late biography of several female saints. This is believed by many scholars to be the oldest version of the Gospels in Aramaic, but I follow the position that the Syriac Sinaiticus is the product of 4th century Bishop Rabbula, who created this edition of the Gospels for theological and political reasons to replace the Peshitta and Tatian's Diatessaron. This is one of two versions of the Aramaic Gospels that is referred to as the "Old Syriac". Peshitta primacists like myself like to refer to the Sinaitic Palimpsest as the "Old Scratch". This was discovered in the 1800s by Agnes Smith Lewis and her sister, the former later went on to translate this interesting manuscript. Most of this version of the Lord's Prayer is missing.

 ܐܒܘܢ ܕܒܫܡܝܐ ܢܬܩܕܫ ܫܡܟ܂ 
 ܘܬܐܬܐ

Awun d'w'shamaya netqadash shmak 

w'tite...

"Our Father which art in heaven, hallowed by thy name.

And let come..."- Matthew 6:9-10, Agnes Smith Lewis's A Translation of the Four Gospels From the Syriac of the Sinaitic Palimpsest

ܐܒܐ ܢܬܩܕܫ ܫܡܟ ܘܬܐܬܐ ܡܠܟܘܬܟ

ܘܗܒ ܠܢ ܠܚܡܐ ܐܡܝܢܐ ܕܟܠܝܘܡ

 ܘܫܒܩ ܠܢ ܚܛܗܝܢ ܘܐܦ ܐܢܚܢܢ ܫܒܩܝܢ ܐܢܚܢܢ ܠܟܠ ܕܚܝܒ ܠܢ ܘܠܐ ܬܥܠܢ ܠܢܣܝܘܢܐ 

Awa netqadash shmak w'tite malkutak 

w'haw lan lakhma amina d'caliyom 

w'shbaq khtahin w'aph ankhnan shbaqin ankhanan l'cal d'khib lan w'la talan l'nesyona.

"Father, hallowed be thy name, and thy kingdom come. 

And give us the continual bread of every day. 

And forgive us our sins; and we also, we forgive every one who is indebted to us. And lead us not into temptation."- Luke 11:2-4, Agnes Smith Lewis's A Translation of the Four Gospels From the Syriac of the Sinaitic Palimpsest

This is the Curetonian version of the Gospels, also included in the "Old Syriac" category. The Curetonian is a revision of the Syriac Sinaiticus.

ܐܒܘܢ ܕܒܫܡܝܐ ܢܬܩܕܫ ܫܡܟ܂ 

 ܬܐܬܐ ܡܠܟܘܬܟ܂ ܘܢܗܘܘܢ ܨܒ̈ܝܢܝܟ ܒܐܪܥܐ ܐܝܟ ܕܒܫܡܝܐ܂ 

ܘܠܚܡܢ ܐܡܝܢܐ ܕܝܘܡܐ ܗܒ ܠܢ܂

ܘܫܒܘܩ ܠܢ ܚܘ̈ܒܝܢ܂ ܐܝܟܢܐ ܕܐܦ ܐܢܚܢܢ ܢܫܒܘܩ ܠܚܝ̈ܒܝܢ܂ 

ܘܠܐ ܬܝܬܝܢ ܠܢܣܝܘܢܐ܂ ܐܠܐ ܦܨܢ ܡܢ ܒܝܫܐ܂ ܡܛܠ ܕܕܝܠܟ ܗܝ ܡܠܟܘܬܐ ܘܬܫܒܘܚܬܐ܂ ܠܥܠܡ ܥܠܡܝܢ ܐܡܝܢ܀

Awun d'w'shamaya neqadash shmak

tite malkutak w'nehwun tzewyanak b'ara ak d'w'shamaya

 w'lakhman amina d'yoma haw lan 

w'shbuq khubayn akana d'aph anakhnan neshbuq l'khiwian 

w'la tite l'nesyona ela patzan men bisha metul d'dilak hi malkuta w'teshbukhta l'alam almin amin. 

"Our Father in heaven, thy name be hallowed. 

Thy kingdom come. And thy wishes be done in earth as in heaven. 

And our continual bread of the day give us. 

And forgive us our debts, so that we also may forgive our debtors. 

And bring us not into temptation, but deliver us from the Evil One. Because thine is the kingdom and the glory, for ever and ever. Amen."- Matthew 6:9-13, F. Crawford Burkitt's Evangelion da-Mepharreshe: The Curetonian Version of the Four Gospels with the Readings of the Sinai Palimpsest and the Early Syriac Patristic Evidence (Volume 1)

ܐܒܘܢ ܕܒܫܡܝܐ ܢܬܩܕܫ ܫܡܟ܂ ܘܬܐܬܐ ܡܠܟܘܬܟ܂ 

ܘܗܒ ܠܢ ܠܚܡܐ ܐܡܝܢܐ ܕܟܠܝܘܡ

 ܘܫܒܘܩ ܠܢ ܚܛ̈ܗܝܢ܂ ܘܐܦ ܚܢܢ ܢܫܒܘܩ ܠܟܠ ܕܚܝܒ ܠܢ܂ ܘܠܐ ܬܥܠܢ ܠܢܣܝܘܢܐ܂ ܐܠܐ ܦܨܢ ܡܢ ܒܝܫܐ

Awun d'w'shamaya netqadash shmak w'tite malkutak 

w'haw lan lakhma amina d'culyom 

w'shbuq lan khtahin w'aph khnan netqadash l'cal d'khib lan w'la talan l'nesyona ela patzan men bisha.

"Our Father in heaven, thy name be hallowed. And thy kingdom come. 

And give us the continual bread of every day. 

And forgive us our sins, and we also will forgive every one indebted to us. And make us not enter into temptation. But deliver us from the Evil One."- Luke 11:2-4, F. Crawford Burkitt's Evangelion da-Mepharreshe: The Curetonian Version of the Four Gospels with the Readings of the Sinai Palimpsest and the Early Syriac Patristic Evidence (Volume 1)

The final version of the Lord's Prayer is a translation from the Greek Gospels into Hebrew by German Christian Hebraist Franz Delitzsch, who created the standard version of the New Testament in Hebrew in the 1800s.

אָבִינוּ שֶׁבַּשָׁמַיִם יִתְקַדַּשׁ שְׁמֶךָ

 תָּבֹּא מַלְכוּתֶךָ יֵעָשֶׂה רְצוֹנְךָ כַּאֲשֶׁר בַּשָׁמַיִם גַּם בָּאָרֶץ

 אֶת־לֶחֶם חֻקֵּנוּ תֵּן־לָנוּ הַיּוֹם

וּמְחַל־לָנוּ עַל־חֹבוֹתֵינוּ כַּאֲשֶׁר מָחַלְנוּ גַּם־אֲנַחְנוּ לְחַיָּבֵינוּ

וְאַל־תְּבִיאֵנוּ לִידֵי נִסָּיוֹן כִּי אִם־תְּחַלְּצֵנוּ מִן־הָרָע ((כִּי לְךָ הַמַּמְלָכָה וְהַגְּבוּרָה וְהַתִּפְאֶרֶת לְעוֹלְמֵי עוֹלָמִים אָמֵן

Avinu shabashamayim yitheqadash shemeka 

tava malekuteka ye'asheh retzvaneka casher b'shamayim gam b'aretz 

et lekhem huqenu ten lanu ha'yom 

v'mekhal lanu al khavutenu casher makhalenu gam anakhenu lekhayavinu 

v'el tevienu lide nisyon ci im tekhaletzenu min ha'ra ci leka ha'mamelaka v'ha'gevurah v'ha'tipheret l'evleme olamim amen.

"Our Father, who is in heaven, may your name be sanctified. 

May your kingdom come; as your will is done in heaven, may it also be on earth. 

Give us the bread that is our allotment today, 

and pardon us our debts, as we also have pardoned those indebted to us. 

And do not bring us into the hands of testing, but rescue us from what is evil. For yours is the kingdom and the power and the majesty, forever and ever. Amen."- Matthew 6:9-13, Vine of David's The Delitzsch Hebrew Gospels

http://www.bible-geeks.com

Difficult Verses Explained By the Peshitta: Romans 5:7

"For hardly for the wicked one dieth; for on account of the good one may perhaps dare to die." Etheridge's Translation of the Peshitta

"For scarcely for a righteous man will any one die, for for the good man perhaps some one also doth dare to die..."- Young's Literal Translation

Which one of these makes more since? The Peshitta, obviously. Now how in the world could the Greek manuscripts have gotten this wrong? Let's look at the words "good" and "wicked" in the Aramaic language:

Wicked in Aramaic (Estrangela font): ܪܫܝܥܐ 

Righteous in Aramaic (Estrangela font): ܪܶܫܝܳܢܳܐ 

If you look very closely, you'll notice that these two words are only one letter apart! "Wicked" is resheya and "righteous" is reshyana. The letters ayin and nun look extremely similar, as you can see if you look at the second letter on each word if you read them from left to right (Aramaic is meant to be read from right to left, like most Eastern languages). This is similar to a mistake made that resulted in us transliterating the city name Amorrah as Gomorrah. Look at the letters ayin and gamal:

Ayin: ܥ

Gamal: ܓ

This type of scribal error is known as "polysemy" or "split words". This is when two letters look so similar in their respective fonts that one can easily be mistaken for another, resulting in two possible different readings. Think about the letter "O" and the number 0. When written by hand, the two can look very similar. If you were looking at a code written by hand like C1083, you could easily mistake it as being C1O83. This is a common phenomenon that is seen when studying the Peshitta. Read my article titled Aramaic Primacy for more examples of polysemy.

http://www.bible-geeks.com

Legalistically Applied Scriptures

Legalism is a cancer which has sadly spread its way into the majority of the Christian church in some form or another. Legalism is not only annoying, but spiritually harmful. By binding yourself to rules and regulations that are not set upon us by Scripture, we choke up our spiritual lungs and impair ourselves. This also can be harmful in evangelism. Who would want to be involved in a religion that seems as if it chokes the life out of you by making it where you can't do anything to enjoy yourself? Let's take a look at a few Scriptures and see how they actually apply to the life of a child of God.

Abstain from all appearance of evil.- I Thessalonians 5:22, King James Version

This is an easy verse to misinterpret, especially if you only use the King James Version, which mistranslates this verse. The Greek word behind this is eidous and the Aramaic says tzevutha. Eidous does not only talk about "appearance" but also "type" or "kind". Tzevutha is best translated as "affair" or "business". Either way, this verse is not talking about staying from stuff that "looks" evil. Jesus could easily have been sinning by drinking with tax collectors and sinners. Did that not look evil to the religious authorities?

This is often used by people to say that we shouldn't celebrate Halloween, go to the movies, or dress certain ways. This is not at all what the Apostle Paul is talking about! He is just talking about avoiding every form of sin and unrighteousness. Paul would not care if you celebrate Halloween or go to the movies with your girlfriend (I don't care if you're watching Saw or Bambi).

Finally, my brethren, what things are true, and what things are decorous, and what things are right, and what things are pure, and what things are lovely, and what things are commendable, and deeds of praise and approbation, on these be your thoughts. - Philippians 4:8, Murdock's Syriac New Testament

I get very aggravated when people put this one in my face. The first rule of exegesis should be reading the verses before the one you're trying to interpret, or better yet: read the entire Book! Context is key when studying the Bible, not matter what topic you are researching. Verse 4:4-7 say this, "Rejoice ye in our Lord, at all times; and again I say, Rejoice. Let your humility be recognized among all men. Our Lord is near. Be anxious for nothing; but at all times, by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving, make known your requests before God. And the peace of God, which surpasseth all knowledge, will keep your hearts and your minds, through Jesus the Messiah." Let's take a look at verse 4:9 whie we're at it: "What things ye have learned, and received, and heard, and seen, in me, these do ye: and the God of peace will be with you."

This verse is not telling you what to watch or read or play. This verse is talking about thinking on the things of God and on His Word. Is thinking about dusting your house pure and lovely? What about washing your car or even thinking about what to cook for supper? The entire tone of Philippians is upbeat and encouraging, so we can infer in context that Paul is telling us to have peace of mind by thinking on the things of God and about all that He's done for us. If you spent your life trying to live by Philippians 4:8's common interpretation, you would be no earthly good and would not be able to function!

And whatever ye do in word or act, do it in the name of our Lord Jesus the Messiah, and give thanksgiving through him to God the Father.- Colossians 3:17, Murdock's Syriac New Testament


Many people interpret this verse in such a way that it seems to make it where a person cannot really enjoy himself. I'm not saying that we shouldn't enjoy glorifying God; I am questioning what exactly glorifying the Father is in this verse. Many people will watch movies desperately trying to find redemptive messages and Christian messages and such things in an attempt to bring glory to God. I agree that this could be fun, but do you really think that this is something that we have to bind ourselves to like robots?

I believe that you are bringing glory to God merely by using your Christian liberty and not sinning! This is liberty that God gave us through what Jesus did on the cross. We are not bound to live our lives by 613 commandments that we cannot keep. We have the Holy Spirit of God the Father in our lives to guide us into righteousness if we submit to His Lordship in our lives.

Paul is not talking about doing mundane tasks like cleaning your house, washing your car, doing your laundry, or even doing hobbies for God's glory. I believe we are glorifying God by showing the liberty He has given us to do things that we enjoy (as long as they aren't morally reprehensible, of course). I can't find redemptive value in sharpening a pencil, or stapling two sheets of paper together, personally. If you can, I would love to hear your explanation on the matter! Paul is saying that we should live our entire lives to give glory to God. We should have the heavenly Father first in all things and seek to worship and praise Him with righteous lifestyles and not do anything in order to glorify ourselves.

God wants us to enjoy life without sinning. God understands that we get bored without hobbies. Aside from being obsessed with the things of God, theology, and scholarship, I am also a movie buff and gamer! I don't live my life for the cinema or for the Xbox though, I live my life for Jesus Christ my Savior. If you want to go see watch Harry Potter, go ahead! If you wanna play Grand Theft Auto V, go ahead! If you wanna listen to the Rolling Stones or Rhianna, be my guest! Don't be so heavenly minded that you can't enjoy life or help your brothers and sisters in non-religious tasks, but don't be so earthly minded that you can't serve God or hear His voice either! God loves you and wants you to enjoy life, but He mostly wants you to enjoy serving Him. Enjoy serving God most of all, and enjoy life without living like the devil. It's possible; did you know that? God bless.

http://www.bible-geeks.com

My View on the King James Only Controversy

I am from the Bible-Belt, where the King James Version is truly the king of the versions. It's a common belief that the King James Version is the inspired version of the Bible in English, but I find this belief to be totally against the evidence. Over time, I have grown to like the King James Version less and less, and I honestly don't care for it very much because of the following it has. Here are some reasons why I don't think that the King James Version is inspired or the only reliable Bible translation.

 Mistranslations

Like every other translation of the Bible, the King James Version is plagued by human error. The King James Version is translated from the Hebrew Masoretic text of the Old Testament and the Textus Receptus Greek New Testament. Here are a few mistranslations:

1. "James" is not in the Greek New Testament: it is actually "Jacob". The Greek says Iakobos, which is the Greek transliteration from the original Aramaic name Yakob.

2. Acts 12:4 should not have "Easter" in it, but Passover. The Greek, being translated from an Aramaic original, transliterated the Aramaic word paskha into Greek letters. The correct translation is not "Easter" but "Passover".

3. III John 1:1 should not read "I pray above all things that thou mayest prosper" but "I wish in all things that you prosper". This mistranslation has lead to false teachings, notably the prosperity preaching we see all over the televangelist community.

4. Monogenes should not be translated as "only begotten" Son. Monogenes means "only" or "unique" Son.

Faulty Base Text

I personally do not agree that the New Testament was written in Greek, but even those who do believe it was originally written in Greek will agree that the KJV New Testament is based on a very flawed text, which is from the 14th century and not from early manuscripts like today's translations from the Greek texts.

1. I John 5:7 appears in no Greek manuscript before the 14th century. It is only found before in some late manuscripts of the Latin Vulgate. Peshitta omits it also.

2. John 7:53-8:11 are not in many manuscripts. This passage is omitted in the oldest manuscripts. This story also appears in some manuscripts of the Gospel of Luke. The Peshitta, Old Syriac, and Diatessaron all omit this also.

3. Acts 8:37 is absent in all manuscripts before 600 AD. Peshitta omits it as well.

Not the First Translation

The KJV is not the first translation of the Bible into English. It is also not a very original translation, as it is heavily based on previous versions. Actually, over 80% of the KJV's New Testament is copied from the Tynedale New Testament! Here are some pre-KJV English Bibles:

1. The Wycliffe Bible (Circa 1385)

2. The Tynedale Bible (Never completed, translator executed in 1536)

3. Coverdale's Bible (1535)

4. Matthew's Bible (1537)

5. Tavner's Bible (1539)

6. The Great Bible (1539)

7. The Geneva Bible (1560)

8. The Bishop's Bible (1568)

9. Douay-Rheims Version (1609)

Modern Translations Are Not Heretical

It is a widely acknowledged fact that no textual variant of Scripture effects any major Christian doctrine. For example, many people accuse the NIV of denying Jesus's deity by using "who" instead of "God" in I Timothy 3:16. The oldest manuscripts do not say "God", but "who". The NIV clearly states the deity of Christ more than the KJV!

"While we wait for the blessed hope—the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ..."- Titus 2:13, New International Version

"Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ..."- Titus 2:13, King James Version

"Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours..."- II Peter 1:1, New International Version

"Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Savior Jesus Christ..."- II Peter 1:1, King James Version

Modern Translations Do Not Endorse Homosexuality

The King James Version condemns homosexuality, but not as clearly as our modern translations. Let's compare the KJV with the NLT in a few verses relating to homosexuality.

1. Romans 1:26-27

"For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: and likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the women, burned in their lust one toward another' mean with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet."- King James Version

"That is why God abandoned them to their shameful desires. Even the women turned against the natural way to have sex and instead indulged in sex with each other. And the men, instead of having normal sexual relations with women, burned with lust for each other. Men did shameful things with other men, and as a result of this sin, they suffered within themselves the penalty they deserved."- New Living Translation
2. I Corinthians 6:9


"Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind..."- King James Version

"Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men."- New Living Translation

Textual Variation

A common accusation aimed at the NIV and other modern translations is that they are removing verses of the Bible, but these verses were most likely not penned by the apostles and prophets! I John 5:7, for example, was never a part of the original Bible and did not come from the pen of the Apostle John! Is this to say that we can't be certain what is and what isn't original in our Bibles? Absolutely not!

From much study and research, I have come to the conclusion that the Aramaic Peshitta is God's perfectly preserved New Testament. Even if the Peshitta isn't the original and the Greek is, scholars are of the opinion that we can rest assured in the reliability of our Bible's. The New Testament's text is just a little over 1% uncertain, giving us 99% that is certain to have come from the pens of the original authors.

Why Should the King James Be the Standard?

Since I have established issues with the KJV-Only reasoning, I need to ask why we should set the King James Version (or any translation) as the standard for truth. God has provided us with many tools through which we can study the original Bible in it's original languages. All Bible's are interpretive and all reflect the translator's biases in some form, so we should go back to the original's as much as possible in order to get the truth. The Bible in it's original languages, Hebrew and Aramaic for the Old Testament and Aramaic or Greek (which ever you believe it was originally written in) for the New Testament, is the inspired Word of God. Any translation is only the Word of God in as much as it agrees with the original manuscript.

I am not an expert in the languages of the Bible. I want to learn Greek (even though I don't believe the Greek NT to be the original, but a fantastic witness), Hebrew, and Aramaic so that my understanding of the Scriptures won't be confined to translations, interlinears, or dictionaries. We should all study the original languages of Scripture in whatever way we can. You could even just check the accuracy of a translation using your Strong's or Vine's Lexicon! We should not limit ourselves to mere translations and set them up on pedestals.

I hear people say many times that they are leery of modern translations since "one word can change the entire meaning of the verse". This is true, but how can we be so certain that the King James didn't get it wrong and the modern translations got it right? III John 1:1 is a case of the King James Version being corrected by the modern translations.

All translations should be subject to scrutiny and study. You can use many tools in order to figure out the accuracy of a translation. There are various Study Bibles, concordances, lexicons, and other things that you can use to check out how accurate a translation is. Someone might say, "Well, if the Bible could be mistranslated, how can we be certain how much is the Word of God?" This is not something you need to be afraid of. Most of our translations are very accurate, including the King James, New International, and New American Standard.

http://bible-geeks.com

Difficult Bible Verses Explained By the Peshitta: Matthew and Luke's Genealogies for Jesus

The Gospel of Matthew is well known for opening up with Jesus's genealogy in 1:1-17. It is most commonly taught to be Joseph's genealogy, while Mary's genealogy is said to be found in Luke 3:23-38. These genealogies are vastly different and both are stated to be a legal genealogy of Jesus through Joseph (who was not Jesus's biological father) in the Greek versions (Matthew 1:16; Luke 3:23). If Luke's genealogy is Mary's, then how do we the issue of the kingship not being passed through Nathan's bloodline but Solomon's? Also, why does the genealogy in Matthew have thirteen generations in it's final set when there are supposed to be three sets of fourteen (Matthew 1:17). The answer is in the Aramaic word gowra.

Gowra is a generic term for a male in the Aramaic language. It is not only used of husband's, but also fathers and guardians. The more specific term for "father" in Aramaic is abba, while "husband" is balah, which is interestingly used in Matthew 1:19. If Joseph was already stated to be her husband in the genealogy, why do we have to hear that clarification again? It is likely that Mary's biological father is the Joseph (a very common name in 1st century Israel) in the genealogy, who raised up seed to her mother's first husband who died childless (see Deuteronomy 25:5). Since the seed was reckoned as the brother's, that could explain why the genealogy used gowra instead of abba. This not only establishes that the genealogy in Matthew is Mary's through Solomon, but also that there is 14 generations in all three sets. The final set according to the Greek is:

1. Jeconiah

2. Shealtiel 

3. Zerubbabel

4. Abihud

5. Eliakim

6. Azor

7. Zadok

8. Achim

9. Eliud

10. Eleazar

11. Matthan

12. Jacob

13. Joseph

In Aramaic it would/could be:

1. Jeconiah

2. Shealtiel 

3. Zerubbabel

4. Abihud

5. Eliakim

6. Azor

7. Zadok

8. Achim

9. Eliud

10. Eleazar

11. Matthan

12. Jacob

13. Joseph

14. Mary

If this is the correct interpretation of gowra, then this fixes three alleged Bible contradictions all in one. This shows that Matthew's genealogy is a biological one through Mary, while Luke's genealogy is a legal one given through Joseph, Jesus's stepfather. I have read on another site before that the Greek aner used in Matthew's genealogy of Joseph in the Greek New Testament could also be translated as father, but I have not seen anyone translate it that way. Paul Younan ("kinsman"), Andrew Gabriel Roth ("guardian"), Glenn David Bauscher ("guardian"), and The Way International ("mighty man") all translate it as such, adding credibility to the theory that the Joseph in Matthew's genealogy is Mary's father and not her husband.

Article written by Paul Younan on the subject:

http://www.aramaicpeshitta.com/Articles/key_articles/gowra.htm

http://www.bible-geeks.com

The Gift of Speaking in Tongues

The gifts of the Spirit are a major fixture among Pentecostal Christians, especially the gift of tongues. The term "Pentecostal" is derived from the word "Pentecost", which is the Jewish holiday on which the Holy Spirit was first poured out among believers in Acts 2, being manifested with the gift of tongues. In this particular incident, the Jewish Christians were speaking in various languages that would not have been known to them.

But there were men dwelling in Jerusalem who were worshipers of God, Jews from every nation under Heaven. And when that noise occurred, the entire populace gathered and was agitated, because each one of them heard that they were speaking in their dialects. And they were all marveling and were amazed as they were saying, each to the other, “Are not all these who are speaking Galileans?” “How are we hearing, everyone, his own dialect in which we were born?” “Parthians and Medes and Elanites, and those who dwell in Bayth- Nahrayn, Judeans and Qapodoqians and those who are from the regions of Pontus and of Asia,” “And from the regions of Phrygia and of Pamphylia and of Egypt and of the countries of Libya which are near to Cyrene and those who came from Rome, Jews and proselytes”, “And who are from Crete, and Arabians, behold, we are hearing from those who are speaking in our own dialects, the wonders of God.”- Acts 2: 5-11

Speaking in tongues is recorded several times in the Book of Acts, almost always in conjunction with someone receiving the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:1-4, 10:44-46, 19:1-6). In I Corinthians, the Apostle Paul goes more into detail about speaking in tongues and how it is to be used in the church. Paul first begins to talk about the Spiritual gifts in I Corinthians 12.

But about spiritual things my brethren, I want you to know, that you were pagans and you were being led without discrimination to those idols which have no voice.- I Corinthians 12:1-2

Paul's statement might sound strange, mentioning the former idolatry of the Gentile Christians before going into the spiritual gifts. The best explanation of this I heard is from a friend of mine, who believes that this was talking about not over-emphasizing the gifts of the Spirit. This is reminiscent of Israel beginning to worship the bronze serpent created by Moses at the command of God in the desert (Numbers 21:4-8), which was later destroyed because of the people worshiping it (II Kings 18:4). I believe much of Pentecostalism has come to over-emphasize the gift of tongues, but I will go into that more later.

But there are diversities of gifts, however The Spirit is One. And there are diversities of ministries, however, THE LORD JEHOVAH is One. And there is a diversity of miracles, but God is One who works all in every person. But the revelation of The Spirit is given to each man as He helps him. There is given to him by The Spirit a word of wisdom, but to another the word of knowledge by The Spirit; To another faith by The Spirit; to another the gift of healing by The Spirit; But to another, miracles and to another, prophecy; to another discernment of spirits; to another, kinds of languages; to another, translation of languages; But all these things, that One Spirit does and distributes to every person as he pleases.- I Corinthians 12:4-11

The gift of tongues and the other gifts all come from God, distributing these gifts through the power of His Spirit. Tongues is not placed above the other gifts, and is mentioned merely as one of the many gifts given by the Holy Spirit to the church. This translation translates the Aramaic word leshana as "languages" rather than the usual "tongues", which is more correct for modern English vernacular.

For in like manner, because the body is one and there are many members in it, while all of them are many members, they are one body; thus also is The Messiah. For we also are baptized by The One Spirit into one body, whether Jews or Aramaeans or Servants or free men, and we are all made to drink The One Spirit.- I Corinthians 12:12-13

Despite the diversity of the body, we are all united as one through the Holy Spirit.

For also the body is not one member, but many. For if a foot should say, “Because I am not a hand, I am not of the body”, is it therefore not of the body? And if an ear should say, “Because I am not an eye, I am not of the body”, is it therefore not of the body? For if all the body were an eye, where would the hearing be? And if it all were hearing, how would there be smell? But now God has set everyone of the members in the body just as he has chosen. But if they were all one member, where is the body? But now there are many members, but the body is one. The eye cannot say to the hand, “I do not need you”; neither can the head say to the feet, “I do not need you.” But all the more, those members that are considered weak, on the contrary are needful. And those which we think are shameful in the body, we increase greater honor to these and for those that are contemptible we make greater attire. But those members which we honor do not need honor, for God unites the body and he has given greater honor to the small members, Lest there would be divisions in the body; but all the members should be caring equally one for another. So now, when one member shall suffer, all of them shall share the pain. And if one member rejoices, all the members shall rejoice.- I Corinthians 12:14-26

Just because we are not gifted in a particular way or placed in a particular position in the church, we should not feel inferior to anyone else. If everyone had the same function in the church, the church would not be effective. We should also not treat with dishonor those who seem to be less in stature than someone else, but treat them with more honor because they are lesser in stature. We should all esteem each other equally and operate with unity, compassion, and empathy.

But you are the body of The Messiah and members in your places. For God has set first in his church, Apostles; after them Prophets; after them, Teachers; after them, miracle workers; after them, gifts of healing, helpers, leaders, different languages. Are they all Apostles? Are they all Prophets? Are they all Teachers? Are they all miracle workers? Do all have gifts of healing? Do all of them speak with languages, or do all of them translate? But if you are zealous for great gifts, I again shall show you a better way.- I Corinthians 12:27-31

God has set everyone in a particular place in the Body of Christ. Not everyone is gifted in the same way and not everyone will do the same thing. Notice that Paul says that not everyone speaks in tongues, just like not everyone works miracles or healings, or interprets tongues. Not everyone is called to be an apostle, prophet, or teacher also. Everyone should abide in their particular calling and gifting, as God has placed you there.

If I shall speak with every human and Angelic language and have no love in me, I shall be clanging brass or a noise-making cymbal. And if I have prophecy, and I know all mysteries and all knowledge and if I have all faith so that I may remove mountains, and I have no love in me, I would be nothing. And if I should feed everything that I have to the poor, and if I hand over my body to be burned up and I have no love in me, I gain nothing.- I Corinthians 13:1-3

Paul's statement about speaking in human languages and angelic languages seems to show that not every "tongue" is a human language on earth as in Acts 2, but sometimes unknown languages. Paul's real point is not this about the different kinds of tongues, but about the fact that no matter what you do, if it is not done in love it is meaningless and vain. 

Love is patient and sweet; love does not envy; love is not upset neither puffed up. Love does not commit what is shameful, neither does it seek its own; it is not provoked, neither does it entertain evil thoughts, Rejoices not in evil, but rejoices in the truth, Endures all things, believes all things, hopes all, bears all.- I Corinthians 13:4-7

This is true love. This isn't romantic love like between a husband and wife, but godly love. Godly love leads to righteousness.


Love never fails; for prophecies shall cease, tongues shall be silenced and knowledge will be nothing; For we know partially and we prophesy partially, But when perfection shall come, then that which is partial shall be nothing. When I was a child, I was speaking as a child, I was led as a child, I was thinking as a child, but when I became a man, I ceased these childish things. Now we see as in a mirror, in an allegory, but then face-to-face. Now I know partially, but then I shall know as I am known. For there are these three things that endure: Faith, Hope and Love, but the greatest of these is Love.- I Corinthians 13:8-13

Paul is saying that there will be a time prophecies, tongues, and knowledge will be meaningless. This is at the coming of Christ, when we will receive an understanding of everything from our Lord Jesus Christ. Love is greater than all spiritual gifts, and as such, it will endure throughout eternity.

Run after love and be zealous for the gifts of The Spirit, but especially that you may prophesy. For whoever speaks in languages does not speak to men, but he is speaking to God, for no man understands what he speaks, but by The Spirit he speaks mysteries. But he who prophesies speaks edification, encouragement and comfort to children of men. He who speaks in languages builds himself up, and he who prophesies builds the church up. I wish that all of you might speak in languages, but all the more that you may prophesy, for he who prophesies is greater than he who speaks in languages, unless he translates; but if he translates, he edifies the church.- I Corinthians 14:1-5

Contrary to popular belief, tongues is not the most important spiritual gift a Christian could have. Love is greater than all, but prophecy is better than tongues. If tongues was the initial evidence of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, then why would Paul state that he would rather the Corinthian church prophesy than speak in tongues?  Paul clearly states that the tongue does no good to the church at large (it does edify the individual) unless it is interpreted. 

And now my brethren, if I come to you and speak languages with you, what do I benefit you, unless I shall speak with you either by revelation or knowledge or by prophecy or by teaching? For even inanimate things which give sound, whether a flute or harp, if they make no distinction between one tone and another, how will anything that is played or anything that is harped be known? For if a trumpet make a sound which is not distinct, who will be prepared for battle? So you also, if you will say words in languages and you will not translate, how will anything be known that you say, for you yourselves will be as one who is speaking to the air. For behold, there are many kinds of languages in the world, and there is not one of them without sound. And if I do not know the import of the sound, I am a foreigner to him who speaks, and also he who speaks is a foreigner to me. So also you, because you are zealous of the gifts of The Spirit, seek to excel for the edification of the church.- I Corinthians 14:6-12

Again, tongues do not good to the body unless they are interpreted. When addressing a crowd, it is obviously imperative to be understood, and you will not be understood when speaking in tongues unless it is interpreted into the language of the church. Paul says to to seek to edify the entire church, and not just yourself.

And he who speaks in languages, let him pray to translate. For if I should pray in languages, my spirit is praying, but my understanding is unfruitful. What therefore shall I do? I shall pray with my spirit, and I shall pray also with my understanding. I shall sing with my spirit, and I shall sing also with my understanding. Otherwise, if you say a blessing in The Spirit, how will he who fills the place of the unlearned say amen for your giving of thanks, because he does not know what you said? For you bless well, but your neighbor is not edified. I thank God that I am speaking in languages more than all of you, But in the church I would rather speak five words with my understanding, that I may instruct others also, than 10,000 words in languages.- I Corinthians 14:13-19

If you address a crowd in the gift of tongues, it must be translated. This is a reiteration of Paul's point that you need to edify the church, and you can't do so if you are speaking in an untranslated language unknown to the believers. Pray for the interpretation/translation of the language so that you can edify the church. 

My brethren, do not be children in your intellects, but be infants in evil and be fully mature in your intellects. It is written in the law, “With foreign speech and with another language I shall speak with this people, and not even in this way will they hear me, says THE LORD JEHOVAH.” So then languages are established for a sign, not for believers, but for unbelievers, but prophecy is not for unbelievers, but for those who believe. If therefore it should happen that the whole church assembles and everyone would speak in languages, and the uninitiated or those who are unbelievers should enter, would they not say that such have gone insane? But if all of you would prophesy and the unlearned or an unbeliever should enter, he is searched out by all of you and he is reproved by all of you. And the secrets of his heart are revealed and then he will fall on his face and worship God and he will say, “Truly, God is in you.”- I Corinthians 14:14-24

This is again showing the superiority of prophecy over tongues. Tongues is used by God to confirm the Gospel message to those who don't believe, which is why the gift of tongues sometimes occurs when someone first receives the Spirit (or is saved, see Romans 8:9). Prophecy is always understood, therefore someone who comes from outside the church and sees prophecy in action will be convinced of the truth of the Gospel message. If tongues are used but not interpreted, they will walk away thinking that you are insane.

I say therefore, my brethren, that whenever you gather, whoever among you has a Psalm, let him speak, or whoever has a teaching, or whoever has a revelation, or whoever has a language, or whoever has a translation, let all things be done for edification. And if any speak in languages, let two speak, or as many as three, and let each one speak and let one translate. And if there is no translator, let him who speaks in a language be silent in the church and let him speak to himself and to God. But let two or three Prophets speak and the others discern. And if something is revealed to another while the first is sitting, let him be quiet. For you can all prophesy one by one, that each person may teach and everyone may be comforted. For the spirit of the Prophet is subject to the Prophet, Because God is not chaotic, but peaceful, as in all the assemblies of The Holy Ones.- I Corinthians 14:25-33

Paul's point is that everything should be done in order so that the church can be edified. Tongues should be interpreted when addressed to the crowd, but if the tongue is not interpreted the speaker should speak to himself. Paul says that two or three at most should address the church in tongues, one after the other in the tongue and then in the translation given to the person by God. Prophecy should also be done in order, not a whole bunch of people should speak at once. The rest of the body should remain silent and judge the prophecy to see if it is true or not. 

There is nothing in the New Testament that shows that tongues is essential for salvation or that it is the "initial evidence" of receiving the Spirit. If this was true, how would we know if someone was saved until they spoke in tongues? Even if they speak in tongues, could we be certain? Demons often manifest themselves in those possessed and mimic speaking in tongues. How do we tell if someone is truly living with the Holy Spirit abiding within? We examine their lives.

"There is not a good tree that produces bad fruit, neither a bad tree that produces good fruit,” “For every tree is known by its fruits, for they do not pick figs from thorns, neither do they gather grapes from a bush.” “A good man brings forth good from the good treasure that is in his heart and the evil man brings out evil from the evil treasure that is in his heart. For the lips speak from the fullness of the heart.”- Luke 6:43-45

Paul lists the fruit of the Spirit and the fruit of the flesh in the following passage:

But I say that you should be walking in The Spirit and the craving of the flesh you will never do. For the flesh craves anything that opposes The Spirit and The Spirit craves whatever opposes the flesh, and they both are contrary one to another, lest you would be doing whatever you want. But if you are led by The Spirit, you are not under The Written Law. For the works of the flesh are known, which are fornication, impurity, whoredom, The worship of idols, witchcraft, hate, contention, rivalry, rage, insolence, dissensions, divisions, Envy, murder, drunkenness, reveling and all such things; those who are committing these things, as I said to you from the first, I say now also, that they shall not inherit The Kingdom of God. But the fruits of The Spirit are love, joy, peace, patience, sweetness, goodness, faith, Humility, endurance; the law is not set against these things. But those who are of The Messiah have crucified their flesh with all its weaknesses and its cravings.- Galatians 5:16-24

All scriptural quotations from The Original Aramaic New Testament in Plain English by Reverend Glenn David Bauscher.

http://www.bible-geeks.com

Is Jesus the Father? Properly Understanding the Terms "Father" and "Son"

Oneness Pentecostals hold the belief that Jesus Christ is the same Person as God the Father and the Holy Spirit. This is in stark contrast to the mainstream Christian dogma that teaches that Jesus Christ ("God the Son") is the second Person in the Godhead, distinct but not separate from God the Father and "God the Holy Spirit", while all three exist in the same divine essence. As a result, Jesus is referred to by Apostolic Christians as the Father. This also causes Trinitarian Christians to accuse the Oneness crowd of teaching that Jesus is His own Father. This is not what we believe at all.

Many Oneness people do not completely understand that there is distinction between the manifestations of the Father and the Son. The term "Father", in relation to the incarnation, refers to deity alone, while "Son" refers to humanity and deity united in Jesus Christ. The terms "Father" and "Son" refer to how these two ways in which God is subsisting relate to one-another. While they are the same divine Person (Yahweh), in the context of the incarnation the Father cannot be called the Son, nor can the Son be called the Father.

The term "Father" is used in various different ways when referring to God. God refers to Israel as His Son in Hosea 11:1: "When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt." God is the Father of Israel in the sense that He redeemed Israel and chose that nation. God is also our Father in creation. Malachi 2:10 says, "Have we not all one father? Hath not one God created us?" This is further shown in Luke 3:38 when Adam is referred to as the son of God. We are also the spiritual children of God, like in Galatians 4:6 which states, "And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father." King David is also referred to as a son of God in Psalms 2:7, "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee." David is called this because God chose him and anointed him as the king of Israel, and also because of David being a man after God's own heart (I Samuel 13:14; Acts 13:22). 

Jesus is referred to not only as the Son of God, but as the only begotten Son of God. The term "only begotten" comes from the Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic words monogenes, yachid, and ekhidaya. This word is better translated as "unique", as Jesus is the unique Son of God. The term "Son of God" when referring to Jesus is also a confession of His divinity. 

"But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work. Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God."- John 5:17-18

"I am my Father are one. Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me? The Jews answered him, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?"- John 10: 30-36

The Jews understood that Jesus was claiming to be of the same essence as Yahweh, and they reacted as if He was blaspheming because they did not believe that His Words were true. The term "Son of God" is used similarly to "Son of man". "Son of man" does not mean that Jesus is not human, but it is a Semitic idiom for a human being. "Son of God" does not mean that He isn't God, but that He is God Himself made manifest. 

Jesus's close relationship to the Father is also a reason behind His being called His Son. John 1:18 says, "No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him." The phrase "in the bosom of the Father" is the same one used of John the Apostle in John 13:23. This denotes a special relationship and a place of prestige. Because Jesus has such an intimate relationship to the Father, He is able to communicate and reveal Him to us. Matthew 101:27 says, "All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him."

Now that we have established the meaning behind "Father" and "Son" in relation to Jesus and Yahweh, now let's see how Jesus can be referred to as the Father. Jesus cannot be referred to as the Father, as stated previously, in the same way as "Father" is used when speaking of the incarnation. Jesus is however the Creator (John 1:3), therefore He can be called the Father in that way. We are also the children of Christ, as Isaiah 53:10 speaks of Christ seeing His seed (posterity). Jesus has no physical descendants, so this must be speaking of those who have faith in Him. So yes, Jesus Christ is the same Person as God the Father, but is distinct from Him. A simple way of putting it would be "The same Person, different manifestation." Jesus is our Father through creation and adoption through the Holy Spirit, but Jesus is not His own Father. I hope this article was a blessing and brought a greater understanding of the Father and Son's relationship!

http://www.bible-geeks.com

The Old Syriac Gospels and Their Relationship To the Peshitta

The Old Syriac is composed of two ancient versions of the Gospels written in the same Aramaic dialect as the Peshitta (Syriac). The two versions are called the Curetonian Gospels and the Sinaitic Palimpsest. These manuscripts both appear to have originated in the fourth century, while the mainstream scholarly view is that they originated in the 2nd century, predating (in their view) the Peshitta, which is the standard text of the New Testament used by Assyrian Christians in the Assyrian Church of the East, Ancient Church of the East, Syriac Orthodox Church, and Syriac Maronite Church.

The first one to be discovered was the Curetonian text, discovered by William Cureton (after whom the text is named). This text of the Gospels was discovered among many other manuscripts, brought from a Syrian monastery of Egypt in 1842. Currently it is being preserved in the English Library. Cureton noted that the manuscript was extremely different from any known version of the Gospels, and believed it was not a translation from Greek, but Henry Herman later concluded that they were translations from the Greek. Cureton published the manuscript in 1858, calling the book Remains of A Very Ancient Recension of the Gospels in Syriac, Hitherto Unknown in Europe. Francis Crawford Burkitt later published the Aramaic text with an English translation (now known as the standard text of the Curetonian text). The Sinaitic Palimpsest was used in order to replace the missing portions of the Curetonian manuscript. 

The Sinaitic Palimpsest (also called Syriac Sinaiticus) was discovered in the library of Saint Catherine's Monastery during the year 1892 by sisters Agnes Smith Lewis and Margaret Dunlop Gibson. They later returned with other scholars to photograph the manuscript and transcribe it. Agnes Smith Lewis published some pages of the original manuscript in her book Some Pages of the Four Gospels Re-transcribed From the Sinaitic Palimpsest With A Translation of the Whole Text. She published the translation alone in A Translation of the Four Gospels From the Syriac of the Sinaitic Palimpsest. A palimpsest is a text that has had another text written over it, in this case, this version of the Gospels was overwritten by a biography of saints and martyrs from the 778 AD. Because of this, the Sinaitic Palimpsest is frequently referred to as "Old Scratch" by Peshitta primacists. Ironically, the Sinaitic Palimpsest is better preserved than the Curetonian Gospels. This text has several notable readings, including one that denies the Virgin Birth by saying that Joseph begat Jesus in Matthew 1:16. This manuscript was also dated to the 4th century AD and is held by many to be the oldest copy of the Gospels in Aramaic.

The Curetonian appears to be a revision of the Sinaitic Palimpsest. It's said by scholar E. Jan Wilson (who published a comparative translation of the Old Syriac Gospels) that the Curetonian Gospels tend to have better grammar than the Sinaitic also. They are also very similar, but also disagree about as much as the Greek manuscripts. Most scholars believe that the Peshitta is a revision of the Old Syriac Gospels, but I, along with other Peshitta enthusiasts, disagree. Both of the Old Syriac versions are referred to as Evangelion de Mapharreshe ("The Separated Gospels"). 

Many people say that the Old Syriac versions appear to be quoted by Assyrian Christians like Ephrem the Syrian instead of the Peshitta, but several Peshitta scholars have analyzed this popular claim and found it to be false. Assyrian scholar Paul Younan has observed that sometimes Ephrem will quote the Peshitta, and sometimes he will paraphrase, and sometimes he appears to quote the Old Syriac. Younan shows that this is the same case with Aphrahat, who quotes the Peshitta quite a bit instead of the Old Syriac. The Arabic version of the Diatessaron (the only surviving complete version of Tatian's 2nd century harmony that is written in a Semitic language and was translated directly from the Aramaic) also agrees with the Peshitta against the Old Syriac. Aramaic scholars James Scott Trimm, Steve Caruso, and George Anton Kiraz follow the mainstream belief that the Old Syriac predates the Peshitta, but Trimm is the only one of the three that believe that the Old Syriac represents an original version of Mark, Luke, and John (holding that Shem-Tob Matthew is the original version of Matthew, written in Hebrew). Peshitta scholars Paul Younan, Andrew Gabriel Roth, Glenn David Bauscher, Janet Magiera, and the late William Norton hold the Peshitta to predate the Old Syriac Versions.

Peshitta primacists hold that 4th century Syriac Orthodox bishop Rabulla created the Old Syriac in order to combat the Diatessaron, which was popular among Aramaic-speaking Christians and appears to use the Peshitta. The most damning evidence for this is a statement from Rabulla himself: "Let the presbyters and deacons give heed that in all the churches there be provided and read a copy of the Distinct Gospel [Aramaic: Evangelion d' Mapharreshe]." The name "Distinct" or "Separated" Gospels was given in order to distinguish it from the Diatessaron, which is referred to as Evangelion d'Amhalte ("Mixed Gospels") in Aramaic. This is the argument that really convinces me that the mainstream opinion is incorrect. 

As stated before, Francis Crawford Burkitt and Agnes Smith Lewis published translations of the Old Syriac Gospels. George Anton Kiraz of Gorgias Press published A Comparative Edition of the Syriac Gospels, which contains the Aramaic text of the Western Peshitto, Harklean, Curetonian, and Sinaitic Palimpsest. Another Gorgias Press affiliate, E. Jan Wilson, published The Old Syriac Gospels: Studies and Comparative Translations in two volumes. Wilson's publication includes the Aramaic text of both the Curetonian and Sinaitic Gospels, with translations of both verse-by-verse in a format perfect for easy comparison.

http://www.bible-geeks.com