It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Lamsa Bible Controversy

page: 2
22
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 04:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


Its a farse. Read anything written by Gail Riplinger, Peter Ruckman, Sam Gibbs, William Grady or Henry Morris to see this bible is nothing more than a side show trick at a circus.




posted on Mar, 14 2011 @ 08:18 AM
link   
As an aside, I'd like to mention that the Assyrian Orthodox Church, which claims to be the true Eastern Church, has a long and glorious history:

nestorian.org...

The Lamsa Bible may have problems, what what translation does not? I tend to be a KJV loyalist, but love Ferrar Fenton's Old Testament and Andy Gaus' New Testament.



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by adjensen
reply to post by Skyfloating
 



For me, I'll stick with the "original"


Sorry but you have NEVER read the ''original'' bible because every single bible ever printed has been copied from an older source that was copied from an even older source that before that was re-written by monks/priests that before that was translated from one language into another etc. Your ''original'' is the version I imagine that was given to you by a loved family member or a member of your church, the version that inspired you to follow either Yahweh or Jesus teachings, to hopefully live a life for others as opposed to oneself. I have read many of your previous posts and you come across as a kind,loving and giving individual, so please do not delude yourself that your version is the original or the best because it is one of over 50 different translations currently available. My advise would be for you to buy a copy of ANY bible that is different to your translation. Pick your 10 favorite stories and then read these stories from the different versions at the same time line by line.You will find that certain words are different due to the differing knowledge of the translator/copier and as the OP stated. This in turn leads people of a common faith into conflict with each other due to the differing interpretations being told by essentially the same story which in turn causes one religion to become two religions to become four etc. Todays society is constantly told how we are all different and this keeps everyone at each others throats. I see the same senario in most religions and it saddens me.



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by WENEEDAREVOLUTION

Originally posted by adjensen
reply to post by Skyfloating
 



For me, I'll stick with the "original"


Sorry but you have NEVER read the ''original'' bible because every single bible ever printed has been copied from an older source that was copied from an even older source that before that was re-written by monks/priests that before that was translated from one language into another etc. Your ''original'' is the version I imagine that was given to you by a loved family member or a member of your church, the version that inspired you to follow either Yahweh or Jesus teachings, to hopefully live a life for others as opposed to oneself. I have read many of your previous posts and you come across as a kind,loving and giving individual, so please do not delude yourself that your version is the original or the best because it is one of over 50 different translations currently available.


My use of the quotation marks around "original" in that sentence are intentional -- I know full well that what I read today is not the original Koine Greek text.


And, actually, I don't think that anyone ever gave me a Bible. I commonly use an NIV translation that I bought myself a number of years ago, though I recently bought a Scofield Reference Bible that I've been slogging through, and there's a Catholic Bible and King James version around here someplace, as well.

I'm not a fundamentalist, so I'm not super concerned about this word, or that, so long as the overall sense of the text remains, and that's the problem that I have with the Lamsa Bible, because it is the holy book of a church which is not in communion with any other, so the text which differs likely does so in a way which changes the actual teaching to reflect the beliefs of the Assyrian Church of the East.



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 07:57 PM
link   
If you want something REALLY different, try the Old Testament compared to the Book of Jasher.



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 02:49 AM
link   
The problem with the Lamsa bible, and why it is not used by serious biblical scholars, is that it is a paraphrase, not a translation of the bible. Also, it does not apply to the parts of the bible which were originally written in greek.



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 04:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


The Word of God! A word is of course a vibration. All matter is really energy condensed to a slow vibration. The slower the vibration the more you are caught in matter (the material world) the faster the vibration the more spiritually advanced you will be. Therefore the word of God permeates all of matter (material existence). Hence the saying in the Bible attributed to Jesus "Split a piece of wood, and I am there. Lift up the stone, and you will find Me there". God is everywhere at all times, yes! even within you. That's why it's good to meditate, to stop your materialistic mind and find him. He's always been there youv'e just never found the time too look.

Hinduism :
As the air is everywhere,
Flowing around a pot
And filling it,
So God is everywhere,
Filling all things
And flowing through them forever.



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 12:41 PM
link   
reply to post by BeenieWeenie
 


I have seen the Lamsa version for sale, and I recall that it is billed as a translation. If it is truly a paraphrase, I will avoid it.



posted on Mar, 24 2011 @ 09:12 PM
link   
What a great post!!! Thank you for posting it. I will now be getting a copy of this version!!!



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 12:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


i make sure that i use three different versions of the bible and one of then is that version by lamsa. its quite good. there are different interpretations to some stories not found in the NIV or like ESV NKJV and KJV. i always make it a point to have a dictionary,concordance handy at all times. To make sure everything is correct.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 12:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


Lamsa's personal views are interesting, if this site states his views accurately. I couldn't trust that Bible if these are his beliefs.

www.believersweb.org...



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 05:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dyax-

i often thought the bible was messed up
Constantine had an agenda when he wrote it


Back up the truck here! (To quote Tim the Tool Man ...
Constantine did not write the Bible! That's just your first mistake, and I can't be bothered dealing with the rest...
Vicky



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 06:04 AM
link   
I was under the impression that the earliest text's of the new testament are in Koine greek, this was the official language of the roman empire and would have made the original text's available to anyone who lived in the first century roman world. I am cautious of using para-phrase "translations", stick with KJV or NIV.

p00hbear



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 06:14 PM
link   
I assume all of you are aware of the findings of the Research over at the Chronicle Project

www.thechronicleproject.org...



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 10:11 PM
link   
Lamsa makes a good arguement. On the examples he lists(more shown in the beginning of the book), I agree with 80+% of them. It does appear that the greek came from the aramaic the way some of the words are off. Lamsa shows examples of the aramaic in his book where some words are almost identical and could easily have been mistranslated from aramaic to the greek. It could have been that some of the NT was originally in Greek, some of it could have been written at the same time in both languages, who knows for sure.

Aramaic is known as the common lagnuage of the Jews at the time while Greek was the universal business language of the time how English is today so many would have know both languages. Paul for intstance could have actually spoke Hebrew, Aramaic, Latin, and Greek.

Lamsa seemed to do the best he could. It's not easy for one man to translate the bible. Even in Stern's CJB, his OT was based of a PD 1917 Jewish publication. Lamsa in the same way seemed to use the KJV as his base language english reference. If you read it and are familiar with the KJV, you will see what I mean. Not a bad thing for me. The only problem is Lamsa's english also seems week at times. So you have an aramaic translation, with KJV words/phrases and sentence structure and with a weak command of the english language.

The Matthew 27 I don't agree with Lamsa. In the old days there was no chapter and verse numbers in the OT texts. When you mention the first few words of a chapter, My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?, for example, would be like today Just quoting Psalm 22. This makes more sense to me. The lamsa arguement of Jesus would have known he wasn't forsaken also backfires as Jesus also would have known he would have been spared from death until the time of the crucifiction. Also, the Lamsa Psalm 22 "My God, My God, why hast thou let me to live?" Be sure that no other bible has Matthew 27 and Psalm 22 with differing texts.

Lamsa also goes the KJV route on the Nephillim calling them Giants.

Some bad ones:

Job 40:15
"Behold the hippopotamus"
I always picture a hippo with the tail of ceder tree(no I don't). It is clear it is a dinosaur, following with the next chapter talking about a dragon.

Revelation 7:11
"and the four animals"
Every other translation lists it as the four living creatures, with the KJV lists them as beasts. These beings have human faces. Beasts is pushing it while animals takes it over the line.

I haven't had the Lamsa that long so I'll post more updates if I have any. It's great that the aramaic version seems to be the original and the LAMSA version is the least expensive by far. Also all other versions have only NT. So it's nice to have a complete version. Maybe a big committee should put one together in the future. I recommend getting this to have as a reference to your other bibles. Amazon has them used right now for under $8.00 if you don't want to break the bank or you can look at it online for free:

www.lamsabible.com...
edit on 8-6-2012 by TURBOTRON5000 because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-6-2012 by TURBOTRON5000 because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-6-2012 by TURBOTRON5000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 10:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating
Some consider the Lamsa Bible, which was translated from Aramaic instead of Greek, a better translation than all the rest. They say Aramaic, not Greek, is the original language of the Bible. The Lamsa Bible was translated from Syriac Aramaic which is closer to the Aramaic spoken by the people of Jesus time, than Greek. This view is not mainstream and certainly controversial among fundamentalist Christians. For example, on this page by Chick Publications the Lamsa Bible is called "perverted" and "occult", part of a conspiracy to subvert Christianity. This reflects the view of many Christians out there. But what if the opposite is true - that the Bible was mistranslated and even changed, some by accident but some with manipulative intent. Looking into this only peripherally, I was surprised to find such huge discrepancies amongst translations.

What follows are a few side by side comparisons that make the Lamsa Bible look more accurate.

Mathew 24:7

King James Bible : Jesus says: "My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?"

Lamsa Bible: Jesus says: "My God, My God, for this I was spared!"

Comment: Jesus, having predicted that he would be beaten, would most not likely say that God has forsaken him. It makes no sense in that context.

Ephesians 6:12

Bible, New International Version: "For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms".

Lamsa: "For your conflict is not only with flesh and blood, but also with the angels, and with powers, with the rulers of this world of darkness, and with the evil spirits under the heaven".

This, of course, completely changes the meaning of the text. The Lamsa version shows that the spiritual struggle is ALSO one with flesh and blood.

Lamsa:

Mathew 19:24

KJ: "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle..."

Lamsa: "It is easier for a rope to go through the eye of a needle"

Comment: The Aramaic word for "Camel" and "Rope" are the same. This proves that whoever translated it to Greek, most likely used the wrong translation, as "rope" makes much more sense in this context.

Mathew 7:3:

KJ: Why do you look at the speck in your brother's eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye?

Lamsa: Why do you look at the splinter in your brother's eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye?

Comment: Notice how "splinter" and "plank" are a better match.

Luke 14:25

NIV: "If any one comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters, yes even his own life, he can not be My disciple".

Lamsa: "He who comes to Me and does not put aside his father and his mother and his brothers and his sisters and his wife and his children and even his own life can not be a disciple to me".

Comment: Note how the regular bible asks you to hate and the Lamsa bible to "put aside".

Debate Welcome.



Your first quote of Math. 24:7 when Jesus spoke these words on the cross He was quoting from Psalms 22 , so Jesus was showing them he was fulfilling prophecy . So the commentary is wrong and also the Lamsa version .

On the Mathew 19:24 the KJV version is correct again because the correlation there is from the times they lived . The small gate next to the main gate was called the needle gate and you went thru the eye of it to get into the city after hours. A rich man would have a camel loaded with his goods and would have to unload the camel to get thru the gate.

Besides the people absolutely spoke Greek in this time and had ever since the Roman occupation began , the Romans insisted on their language and you could not deal with them unless you spoke Greek. Any notable historian of the time will verify this .



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 10:35 AM
link   
The 1611 King James Bible was based upon the over 5000 Greek manuscripts which are called the Majority Text or The Textus Receptus. Out of these 5000 Greek manuscripts over 95% of them agree one with the other. There are some words which do not agree but are then chosen as the majority of the texts dictate. That is why it is called majority text.

The Lamsa bible which George Lamsa printed in 1933 is called the Syriac Pe#ta of the Assyrian church. It was not based upon the majority Greek texts but upon the ancient Assyrian and Babylonian.

Wikipedia Encyclopedia reads --
"The traditional New Testament of the Pe#ta has 22 books, lacking 2 John, 3 John, 2 Peter, Jude and Revelation. The text of Gospels also lacks the Pericope Adulterae (John 7:53-8:11) and Luke 22:17-18.[2] These missing books were supplemented by the Syriacist John Gwyn in 1893 and 1897 from alternative manuscripts, and included them in the United Bible Societies edition of 1905. The 1997 modern Aramaic New Testament has all 27 books."

The point that I want to make is that if this Lamsa bible was so accurate and above the Textus Receptus, why after over 1500 years would they then supplement their literature with additional literature? This is not because their literature was lost in translation but only because it was not complete. That in itself shows me that the Greek Majority Texts were more complete from the onset. In other words they realized that their work was not complete and that by adding the missing literature they then embraced the Greek work and added it to their own work. To me this is disingenuous to say the least. I can understand an entire book being added to their literature but not a portion of a book being added. A portion of missing literature is the same as incomplete.

I would rather accept the literature of over 5000 manuscripts than that of two. What are the odds of two to five thousand?? If 5000 scribes agree in over 95% of their work, doesn't this show that the majority of their work is accurate or to say the least believable? Not being a Greek scholar myself, I depend upon a word for word translation from a good source of scholars who are. If I accept the Lamsa literature then I also accept the translation from Aramaic to English which involves the Aramaic literature of being from only two groups of literature with no known background of scholarship to me.

For those of you who accept this rendition of the bible, You should be aware that it is not accepted by the known scholars of literature. It is considered a book of the occult and full of misconceived paraphrases. The decision is yours.



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 01:00 PM
link   
Mistakes in the King James Bible (KJV)
The verse(s) in question are given first and then what is the correct or Correction.

Genesis 1:2
KJV: "And the earth was without form, and void; . . . "
Correction: "And the earth became without form, and void; . . . "
Comments: The word translated "was" is hayah (Hebrew: היה, Strong's Concordance Number #H1961) and denotes a condition different than a former condition, as in Genesis 19:26.

Genesis 10:9
KJV: " . . . Even as Nimrod the mighty hunter before the LORD."
Correction: " . . . Even as Nimrod the mighty hunter in place of the LORD."
Comments: The word "before" is incorrect and gives the connotation that Nimrod was a good guy, which is false. Nimrod placed himself in OPPOSITION to God.

Leviticus 16:8, 10, 26
KJV: "And Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats; one lot for the LORD, and the other lot for the scapegoat. . . . But the goat, on which the lot fell to be the scapegoat, shall be presented alive before the LORD, to make an atonement with him, and to let him go for a scapegoat into the wilderness. . . . And he that let go the goat for the scapegoat shall wash his clothes, and bathe his flesh in water, and afterward come into the camp."
Correction: "And Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats; one lot for the LORD, and the other lot for Azazel. . . . But the goat on which the lot fell for Azazel shall be presented alive before the LORD, to make an atonement upon it and sent away into the wilderness for Azazel . . . And he that let go the goat for Azazel shall wash his clothes and bathe his flesh in water, and afterward come into the camp." (Holy Bible in its Original Order Translation)
Comments: The meaning of the word scapegoat is different today than it was during the time of the King James translators. The Online Etymology Dictionary states concerning the word scapegoat and its original meaning that it is:
" . . . a mistranslation in Vulgate of Hebrew 'azazel (Leviticus 16:8,10,26), which was read as 'ez ozel or the "goat that departs," but is actually the proper name of a devil or demon in Jewish mythology . . . "
Today the word scapegoat has the connotation of someone who is UNJUSTLY blamed for the sins of others. The Azazel goat represents Satan, who is no scapegoat. He is guilty of his part in our sins.

Deuteronomy 24:1
KJV: "When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house."
Correction: "When a man takes a wife and marries her, and it happens that she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some uncleanness in her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce, puts it in her hand, and sends her out of his house . . ."
Comments: As the Savior explained in Matthew 19, Moses did not command divorce. This statute is regulating the permission of divorce because of the HARDNESS of the people's hearts.

2Kings 2:23
KJV: "And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head." Correction: "And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth young men out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head."

Isaiah 65:17
KJV: "For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind."
Correction: "For, behold, I am creating [am about to create] new heavens and new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.

Ezekiel 20:25
KJV: "Wherefore I gave them also statutes that were not good, and judgments whereby they should not live; "
Correction: "Wherefore I permitted them, or gave them over to, false statutes that are not good, and judgments whereby they should not live."
Comments: God's laws are good, perfect and right. This verse shows that since Israel rejected God's laws, He allowed them to hurt themselves by following false man made customs and laws.

Malachi 4:6
KJV: "And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse."
Correction: "And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with utter destruction."
Comments: The word curse doesn't give the proper sense here. The phrase should be translated as utter destruction as it is in Zechariah 14:11.



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 01:04 PM
link   
Matthew 5:48
KJV: "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect."
Correction: "Become ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect."
Comments: "Perfect" here means "spiritually mature." Sanctification is a process of overcoming with the aid of the Holy Spirit.

Matthew 24:22
KJV: "And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened."
Correction: "And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved alive: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.
Comments: This verse needs an additional word to clarify its meaning.

Matthew 27:49
KJV: "The rest said, Let be, let us see whether Elias will come to save him."
Correction: "The rest said, Let be, let us see whether Elias will come to save him. And another took a spear and pierced His side, and out came water and blood."
Comments: Matthew 27:49 omits text which was in the original. The Moffatt translation correctly adds it, while the RSV puts it in a footnote: "And another took a spear and pierced His side, and out came water and blood." The Savior's death came when a soldier pierced His side, Revelation 1:7.

Luke 2:14
KJV: "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men. "
Correction: "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among men of God's good pleasure or choosing."
Comments: There will be peace on earth among men who have God's good will in their hearts.

Luke 14:26
KJV: "If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple."
Correction: "If any man come to me, and love less by comparison his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple."
Comments: This verse has the unfortunate translation of the Greek word miseo, Strong's Concordance Number #3404, as "hate", when it should be rendered "love less by comparison." We are not to hate our parents and family!

John 1:17
KJV: "For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.
Correction: "For the law was given through Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ."
Comments: This is another instance of a poor preposition. Moses did not proclaim his OWN law, but the law that GOD gave him to proclaim.

John 1:31, 33
KJV: "And I knew him not: but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water . . . And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost."
Correction: "And I knew him not: but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing in water . . . And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize in water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost."
Comments: Pouring or sprinkling with water is not the scriptural method of baptism, but only thorough immersion in water.

John 13:2
KJV: ". . . And supper being ended, the devil having now put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, to betray him; "
Correction: " . . . And during supper, the devil having now put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, to betray him; "
Comments: This verse is correctly translated in the New Revised Standard Version Bible Translation.

Acts 12:4
KJV: "And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people."
Correction: "And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Passover to bring him forth to the people."
Comments: The Greek word pascha (Greek: πάσχα, Strong's Concordance Number #G3957) in this verse has been inaccurately translated as Easter. This word should be translated as Passover, which agrees with the translation of pascha as Passover as found in Matthew 26:2 and other verses.



posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 01:07 PM
link   
1Corinthians 1:18
KJV: "For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God."
Correction: "For the preaching of the cross is to them that are perishing foolishness; but unto us which are being saved it is the power of God."
Comments: Salvation is not a destination completely reached in this life. Believers must endure and remain faithful to God to the end of their lives before being fully saved. (See Matthew 24:13, Mark 13:13, 2Timothy 2:10, etc.)

1Corinthians 15:29
KJV: "Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?"
Correction: "Else what shall they do which are baptized for the hope of the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the hope of the dead?"

2Corinthians 6:2
KJV: "(For he saith, I have heard thee in a time accepted, and in the day of salvation have I succoured thee: behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation.) "
Correction: "(For he saith, I have heard thee in a time accepted, and in a day of salvation have I succoured thee: behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation.) "
Comments: This verse in the New Testament is a quote from Isaiah 49:8 which writes about a day, NOT the day, of salvation. The day of salvation is not the same for each individual. The firstfruits have their day of salvation during this life. The rest of humanity will have their full chance at salvation in the second resurrection.

2Thessalonians 2:10
KJV: "And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. "
Correction: "And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that are perishing; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. "

1Timothy 4:8
KJV: "For bodily exercise profiteth little: but godliness is profitable unto all things, having promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come. "
Correction: "For bodily exercise profiteth for a little time: but godliness is profitable unto all things, having promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come. "

1Timothy 6:10
KJV: "For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows."
Correction: "For the love of money is a root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows."

Hebrews 4:8-9
KJV: "For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day.There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God. "
Correction: "For if Joshua had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day.There remaineth therefore a keeping of a sabbath to the people of God. "



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join