Nazarene Space

Beware the Way of Anti-Nomian Bible Versions

In a recent blog I wrote of the Way International as an anti-Nomian organization.


The Way International’s founder, the late Dr. Wierwille, taught that the NT was originally written in Aramaic and that the Peshitta Aramaic NT is an important witness to the NT text:

"...Aramaic was the original language in which the New
Testament was written..."
-- Dr. Victor Paul Wierwille; Twenty-fifth Anniversay Souvenir Booklet,
p. 17

"For centuries, the Greek versions of the New Testament
have recieved their due attention while the Aramaic
versions, for the most part, have been neglected.
Discoveries in textual criticism in the last 150 years,
however, have shown the Peshitta [Aramaic] text,... and
other versions play as vital a role as the Greek in
ascertaining the original New Testament text... In recent
times some scholars have demonstrated that a Palestinian
Aramaic original lies behind the Greek versions of New
Testament documents...."
-- Dr. Victor Paul Wierwille; The Concordance to the Peshitta Version of the Aramaic New Testament; p. ix

In the 1980’s The Way International published an Interlinear translation of the Peshitta New Testament known as the AEINT (Aramaic English Interlinear New Testament).

Unfortunately, the Way International’s AEINT not only uses “false” and even Pagan names and titles for the names and titles of YHWH (such as “God”) and replaces the Name of YHWH with “Lord” it is also an antinomian (anti-Torah) translation. The AEINT is a translation which teaches the Torah is not for today and has been abolished, whereas the HRV maintains the Torah is for all generations forever.

The HRV Scriptures now available in hardbound and in e-text:
http://www.lulu.com/nazarene

The AEINT says:

“For the Messiah is the end of the law…”
(Rom. 10:4)

and then contrasts “the righteousness that is by the law” (Rom. 10:5) with “the righteousness that is by faith” (Rom. 10:6). This contrast comes from translating the Aramaic word DIN as “but” at the beginning of verse 6:

4 For the Messiah is the end of the Torah; for righteousness to all who believe.
5 For Moses thus wrote [about] the righteousness that is by the law, that he who does
these [things] will live by them.
6 But the righteousness that is by faith, thus says: Do not say in your heart: who
has ascended to heaven and brought down the Messiah?
7 And who has descended to the depth of sheol, and brought up the Messiah from
the dead?
8 But what does it say? The answer is near to you, to your mouth and to your
heart, which is the word of faith that we preach.
(Rom. 10:4-8 AEINT)

The Hebraic Roots Version translates this passage very differently. The HRV renders the Aramaic word SAKA in Rom. 10:4 as “goal” and the Aramaic word DIN in verse 6 as “and” rather than “but” thus eliminating an implied contrast between “the righteousness that is by the Torah” and “the righteousness that is by trust (faith)”. Thus the HRV translates this passage as follows:

4 For the Messiah is the goal of the Torah; for righteousness to all who believe.
5 For Moshe thus wrote of the righteousness that is by the Torah: that he who does
these, will live by them.
6 And the righteousness that is by trust, [he] thus says: Do not say in your heart, Who
has ascended to heaven and brought down the Messiah?
7 And who has descended to the depth of She'ol, and brought up the Messiah from
among the dead?
8 But what does it say? The answer is near to you, to your mouth and to your
heart, which is the Word of Trust we proclaim.
(Rom 10:4-8 HRV)

In like manner the AEINT creates the same false contrast in John 1:17:

because the law was given through Moses,
but truth and grace was through Jesus the Messiah.
(Jn. 1:17 AEINT)

Here the AEINT translates the VAV prefix as “but” although it is normally translated “and”. The HRV translates this passage more correctly as:

Because the Torah was given through Moshe,
and truth and grace was through Yeshua, the Messiah.
(Jn. 1:17 HRV)

The HRV translates the passage more correctly so as to clarify that there is agreement and not contrast between the Torah (law) and “truth and grace”.

In Ephesians 2:15 the AINT reads:

and the enmity, by his flesh. And he brought to an end
the law of commandments, that [from] the two of them
he might create in himself one new man, and he made
peace.
(Eph. 2:15 AEINT)

And enmity, (by His flesh and also the Torah,
because of commandments in His commands) He abolished,
that [from] the two of them He might create in Himself one new man, and He made peace.
(Eph. 2:15)

The [false] Way’s AEINT version is plainly antinomian as it falsely declares “he brought to an end the law of commandments”.

The [false] Way’s AEINT translates Hebrews to say that the law/Torah has been “changed” in Heb. 7:12 while the HRV says that there has been a “repetition” of the Torah/law.

Its not enough to turn to the Original Aramaic (and or Hebrew) to understand the text, if one reads anti-nomianism and Pagan names into the text. Beware of anti-nomian Bible translations, even if they are based on Aramaic!

You make this work possible. Don’t forget to do your part, we are in this together.

Is this work worthy of your support? What other ministry provides this kind of teaching? Please don’t forget to help pay for these studies.


You can donate by going to the chip-in counter at http://www.nazarenespace.com or donations can be sent by paypal to donations@beitnetzarim.com.

Donations can also be made out to “Nazarene Judaism” and sent to:

Nazarene Judaism
PO Box 471
Hurst, TX 76053

James Trimm
Worldwide Nazarene Assembly of Elohim
http://www.wnae.org

Views: 100

Comment by James Trimm on August 4, 2009 at 12:21am
Since someone asked, let me clarify that the Way International's AEINT version is not to be confused with Roth's AENT version of the Peshitta, which is not Anti-Nomian (though I do not agree with some of its renderings on other grounds).
Comment by Judah Himango on August 4, 2009 at 9:54am
"it not only uses “false” and even Pagan names and titles for the names and titles of YHWH (such as “God”) and replaces the Name of YHWH with “Lord”

When are we going to get over the "everything's pagan" mindset? Using terms like God, when addressing our Father, or names like Jesus, when addressing our Messiah, while not proper names, should not be considered wrong. Calling them "pagan" does nothing to contribute to unity among brothers in Messiah, and instead creates a false superiority as we look down on others who use unauthentic names or titles for our King. Messiah wouldn't approve of this.
Comment by James Trimm on August 4, 2009 at 12:15pm
Whether I call "God" "pagan" or not will not change it's pagan origin. The English "God" was originally the name of a false Anglo-Saxon god. This word actually goes back to the Cananite go known at Ba'al Gawd ("The Lord God").

Now I am not saying that it is a sin to ever use the word "God", but I am saying that it is not preferred, and that it is wrong to CHANGE ELOHIM to "God" in the Scriptures. It is even MORE wrong to change the NAME YHWH to the TITLE "Lord". This violates the commandment not to bring the Name of YHWH to naught.

Yes truth is superior to error.
Comment by Aish Tamid on August 4, 2009 at 7:01pm
I don't mind the term "God" when used as a linguistic equivalent to Elohim, but I can't stand when people say "Jesus this" or "Jesus that", instead of Yahshua, or use "God" instead of Yahweh. Regardless of His title, His name changes not.
Comment by nadia tomazic on August 4, 2009 at 7:46pm
There are 4 diferent names for the Messiah used by Jewish believers......Each of them claim they name is correct ...Who know what is the trut...... Buth we have Messiahs promise ...Elijah will come TO RESTORE EVERITHYNG...and I wil not relie on the mans confusion Humans are alveys WRONG WRONG WRONG
Comment by Brian Forbes on August 5, 2009 at 10:34am
I can't imagine that the Creator (if it's permissible to call Him (again!) by an English word) wouldn't hear the prayers of a person that mispronounced his name. It's really an impatient person who gets upset every time they hear their name said wrongly. I see the Omniscient (is Latin ok?!) as extremely patient. Even with a common name like Brian, I get strange iterations. One is ringing in my head as I type...
Comment by Brian Forbes on August 5, 2009 at 10:37am
That's not to say that we shouldn't learn the Hebrew names. I appreciate that you're willing to teach us. Thanks James.
Comment by James Trimm on August 5, 2009 at 1:39pm
I like the way Rabbi Miller puts it...

Imagine a woman who is in the throws of passion with her husband, and she yells out his ex-lover's name...
I suppose her husband might not like that very much and would insist on being called by his OWN name.

YHWH is a jealous Elohim... we are the bride... he does not want us to call him by the names of pagan gods we used to worship (like "Gawd").
Comment by Brian Forbes on August 5, 2009 at 3:11pm
Considering that many Christians never really sacrificed to Gawd, it would be slightly more accurate to say that we use the name that our great-grandma called our great-grandpa when they were in bed. I suppose this analogy breaks down when you consider that we are recent and He is immortal.

For all I know, you could be right, though. Without direct revelation, all we have is an educated choice.
Comment by Brian Forbes on August 5, 2009 at 4:04pm
After considering the issue for about an hour, this is what I think:
It's clearly not wrong to call YHWH by His proper name.
It might be irritating to Him to call him by His improper name.

It's better to err on the side of caution, especially when you're being intimate.

Comment

You need to be a member of Nazarene Space to add comments!

Join Nazarene Space

 

 

 

















 

LINKS

 

 

 

 

Badge

Loading…

© 2019   Created by James Trimm.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service