The Original Aramaic Bible in Plain English Cited: An Analysis of Translation Choices and Implications for Biblical Studies

Andrew Gabriel Roth's translation, 'Aramaic-English New Testament' (NET), published by Netzari Press in 2012, has generated considerable attention within academic circles due to its claims about the origins and authenticity of the canonical Christian Bible. Victor Alexander's work, simply titled 'Aramaic New Testament,' released online without a specific publication date but available since at least 2011 through various digital platforms, also warrants scrutiny for similar reasons.

In contrast, Glenn David Bauscher's translation, 'The Original Aramaeyewy Aramaic Bible in Plain English with Psalms & Proverbs' (8th edition), published by Netzari Press in 2013 and available online through multiple sources including Etheridge's 'Bible Online,' presents a more traditional approach to biblical interpretation.

A comparison of these translations reveals significant differences, particularly regarding the rendering of key Aramaic terms. For example:

- Roth chooses 'Yeshua' for Jesus Christ throughout his translation, whereas Alexander preferentially uses both names (Jesus and Yeshua) depending on contextual considerations.

- Bauscher adopts a more conventional translational approach, consistently using 'Christ' to refer to the Messiah.

These divergences have far-reaching implications for biblical studies as they impact our understanding of Christian theology and its historical context. The choice between these translations thus reflects not only linguistic preferences but also deeply held theological convictions regarding Jesus Christ's nature and mission.

Furthermore, a close examination of Roth's introduction reveals an explicit agenda to challenge the traditional view that Jesus spoke Greek within his ministry in Galilee and instead advocates for Aramaic as the lingua franca. This stance aligns with more recent scholarly debates about early Christianity's linguistic landscape but remains highly contested among scholars.

In conclusion, when considering translations such as Roth’s 'Aramaic-English New Testament' alongside others like Alexander’s or Bauscher’s ‘Original Aramaic Bible in Plain English’, readers are advised to critically evaluate not only the translation choices themselves but also the broader theological and methodological assumptions that underlie them. The implications of these decisions can have far-reaching consequences for our understanding of Christian history, doctrine, and practice.

References:

1. Roth, A.G., (2012). Aramaic-English New Testament. Netzari Press.

2. Alexander, V., (2011) Online. Available at .

3. Bauscher, G.D., (2013). The Original Aramaic Bible in Plain English with Psalms & Proverbs. 8th edition. Netzari Press.

Online sources:

- Etheridge's 'Bible Online': John W., n.d.). Available at .

The original aramaic bible in plain english cited