Ancient Eastern Text Bible-OE: George M. Lamsa's Translations from the Aramaic of the Peshitta

by George M. Lamsa

Book Overview

This handsome new edition of the authoritative English translation of the Aramaic (Syriac) Old and New Testaments--the language of Jesus--clarifies difficult passages and offers fresh insight on the Bible's message.

• Format: Paperback
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0060649232
• ISBN13: 9780060649234
• Release Date: May 1985
• Publisher: HarperOne
• Length: 1243 Pages
• Weight: 3.33 lbs.
• Dimensions: 1.9" x 6.1" x 9.2"

Customer Reviews

BEST TRANSLATION OF GOD'S BESTSELLER

Let me quickly dispense with the negative aspects of this Bible first: The words of Christ are not printed in red; the personal pronouns for God and Jesus are not capitalized; there is no center-column referencing; and quotation marks are not employed. What this version needs is an overhaul by a good editor, and to be made available in a durable leather-bound and/or hardcover edition. In his book, NEW TESTAMENT ORIGIN, Dr. George Lamsa states, 'Not a word of the Scriptures was originally written in Greek...the Scriptures were written in Aramaic.' I believe that he is correct and that those Christian apologists and ministers scrutinizing the nuances of Greek words for deeper understanding would be better served investigating the subtle meaning of Aramaic words and the cloaked truth behind Aramaic idioms. The Aramaic word for 'camel' is written identically to the word for 'rope.' When the original scrolls were being transferred into Greek, an error occurred due to the translator's limitations. Matthew 19:24 is commonly translated as, 'It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into the Kingdom of God.' This is an obvious 'non sequitur', whereas the Aramaic manuscripts read 'rope' instead of 'camel'. Rope, of course, is much more in keeping with the imagery of a needle, and is probably what Jesus said, and what was originally recorded. Similarly, Matthew 7:3 says, 'Why do you look at the speck in your brother's eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye?' And yet, in Lamsa's version the word 'splinter' appears in place of 'speck.' The organic relationship between a splinter and a plank (or beam) is obvious while speck is more nebulous. Again, Lamsa's translation remains true to the imagery being conveyed. The ninth chapter of Daniel contains the amazing Old Testament prophecy concerning the surprisingly sudden death of the long-awaited Messiah and the subsequent destruction of Jerusalem. A portion of verse 26 in other Biblical translations states, 'The end of it shall be with a flood.' The most well written and spiritually mature approach to 'The Tribulation' and the events of 'The Revelation' that I am aware of is David Haggith's, END-TIME PROPHECIES OF THE BIBLE. But even the ordinarily clear-minded Mr. Haggith had trouble correlating this passage with known history. 'Blood covered the land like a flood', he overreaches. It comes as no surprise then that the Aramaic manuscripts do not make mention of any unknown flood. Lamsa's translation accurately reads, 'And the end thereof shall be a mass exile.' Although there is much more evidence, these three examples should be sufficient to convince most serious Bible students that Lamsa's translation from the ancient Aramaic offers us the most trustworthy rendering of Scripture. Finally, I'd like to elaborate on the comment of brother Ram Munjal from his good 2004, Jan. 21 review: All Bibles tell us that from the Cross, Jesus (quot

A good translation of a good book

The Bible is a source of wisdom and knowledge, and for many, it is also the source of religion. I view it as a source of wisdom. I'm not a Christian, so if you want a Christian review of the book, please look elsewhere.However, I am curious about the bible, and wanted to read the best possible version of it. This appears to be it - a book translated from the closest to original possible manuscript, fixing many translation errors that have cropped up over the years into the standard "King James" version. These errors have caused the Bible to at times seem beyond surreal, transforming it into a rather convoluted narrative. This version fixes those errors and makes the Bible a much more reasonable and understandable narrative. An example:In the King James version, when Christ is crucified, he calls out "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?", which, when you think about it, basically means that Christ gave up hope and decided that God had forsaken him in his greatest hour of need! Not a very encouraging statement.In the Lamsa version, the translation is "My God, My god, for this I was spared!", a bit more obtuse, but it conveys a sense of worthiness and value, rather than despair. It is certainly more encouraging!If you are interested in what claims to be the most correct possible translation of the Bible, this is probably it.

Illumination of the TEXT

This edition of the Holy Bible lifted my heart with the knowledge that although the authors of the King James and Greek translators tried their best to duplicate each thought, sometimes idioms can be lost in translation. This edition gives possible differing translations of the same text and supplies us with the original words and the similiar looking words that explain why newer Bibles have different terms than perhaps were intended. I recommend this as a companion to all study Bibles in the home.

Best translation according to the Customs of Jesus' time.

To understand the people of Jesus' time we needed a persona to translate the Bible with full understanding of the people and the customs. George Lamsa is such a person. His translation of the Bible is the most accurate that I have seen. buy it and start comparing passages and understand the true meaning behind mis-translated passages. It will be most enlightening.He also has a book entitled Gospel Light which is a great companion to his work on the Bible.