Gehenna and Sheol in the Aramaic NT

[DavidFord]

First, stop throwing various versions at us and asking us which we 'prefer' as if our preference has any bearing on which is the  correct original version. Our preference towards something is no measure of truth. Altghough on this matter the Younan is clearly my least favourite.

Mental note:  don't ask CST for a preference of a verse rendition.
Paul Younan is a native Aramaic speaker and an honest translator.  His interlinear for Mt-Acts 16 is freely available for inspection.
Which of these do you suspect is correct?:

Mt 27 (NKJV)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%2027%3A9-10&version=NKJV;MOUNCE;NIV
9 Then was fulfilled what was spoken by Jeremiah [Greek:  Ieremias] the prophet, saying,
"And they took the thirty pieces of silver,
the value of Him who was priced,
whom they of the children of Israel priced,
10 and gave them for the potter's field,
as the Lord [Greek: kyrios] directed me."

Mt 27 (based on Younan), http://dukhrana.com
9. Then the thing was fulfilled which was spoken of by the nabia [prophet] who said,
"I took the thirty (pieces) of silver,
the price of the precious one
which (those) from the sons of Israel agreed upon.
10. And I gave them for the field of the potter
as MrYa [Master YHWH] commanded me."

Mt 27:9-10 (NIV)
9 Then what was spoken by Jeremiah [Greek:  Ieremias] the prophet was fulfilled:
"They took the thirty pieces of silver,
the price set on him by the people of Israel,
10 and they used them to buy the potter's field,
as the Lord [Greek: kyrios] commanded me."[a]
Footnotes:
Matthew 27:10 See Zech. 11:12,13; Jer. 19:1-13; 32:6-9.

[DavidFord]

as if our preference has any bearing on which is the  correct original version. Our preference towards something is no measure of truth

Do you think this is a true statement?:

Mt 1:17 (NKJV)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%201&version=NKJV;MOUNCE
So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations,
from David until the captivity in Babylon are fourteen generations,
and from the captivity in Babylon until the Christ are fourteen generations.

Which of the Mt 1:16 renditions below do you consider correct?

Mt 1:16 (NKJV)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%201&version=NKJV;MOUNCE
And Jacob begot Joseph the husband [Greek:  anēr] of Mary,
of whom was born Jesus who is called Christ.

Mt 1:16 (based on Younan), http://dukhrana.com
Yaqub fathered Yosip, the gowra [protective-male] of Maryam,
from whom was born Yeshua, who is called the Meshikha.

[Pronounced "gowra," GBRA literally means 'protective male.' It is unclear whether the text refers to Maryam's father or to her husband. --Paul Younan. PY had 'kinsman.' Roth used 'guardian.' Mt says it is 14 + 14 + 14 generations in the next paragraph, verse 17. The Josip in the paragraph starting with verse 18 is a different Josip. Interestingly, the next paragraph, paragraph 18, opens with a thought-switcher. Observes Lataster about thought-switchers,
"Another Aramaic word which causes problems for translators is Nyd which really has no equivalent in English, but it is more of a 'thought-switcher' - some English words come close to translating it - like 'And, For, But, Now, However'." - Lataster, 115. See also Younan's article "Mistranslating the Genealogies of Yeshua" in Lataster.]

[DavidFord]

preference towards something is no measure of truth

Re:  Mt 2:23, do you think:
"prophets" plural is correct?
"prophet" singular is correct?

the Greek 'prophets' in Mt 2:23 is Plural
https://biblehub.com/greek/prophe_to_n_4396.htm
Englishman's Concordance
προφητῶν (prophētōn) — 32 Occurrences
Matthew 2:23 N-GMP
GRK: διὰ τῶν προφητῶν ὅτι Ναζωραῖος
NAS: through the prophets: He shall be called
KJV: by the prophets,
INT: through the prophets that a Nazarene

Mt 2:23 (based on Younan), http://dukhrana.com
And he came (and) dwelled in the medintha [city] that is called Nasrath,
so that might be fulfilled the thing which was spoken b'nabia [by the prophet] that,
"He will be called a Nasraya."

[DavidFord]

as if our preference has any bearing on which is the  correct original version

Do you think this is a true statement?:
In Mt 10:5, Greek mss. have, "Do not go into the city of the Samaritans."

'city' in Mt 10:5 is Singular in Greek mss.
https://biblehub.com/greek/polin_4172.htm
Matthew 10:5 N-AFS
GRK: καὶ εἰς πόλιν Σαμαριτῶν μὴ
NAS: and do not enter [any] city of the Samaritans;
KJV: into [any] city of the Samaritans
INT: and into a city of [the] Samaritians not

Which of the renditions below do you consider correct?

Mt 10:5 (NASB)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew+10%3A5&version=NASB;MOUNCE
These twelve Jesus sent out after instructing them:
"Do not go in _the_ way of _the_ Gentiles,
and do not enter _any_ city of the Samaritans;

Mt 10:5 (based on Younan), http://dukhrana.com
Yeshua sent these twelve and commanded them and said,
"By the way of the heathen do not go,
a'l'medintha [and to the cities] of the Samaritans do not enter.

[CST]

Once there were two young friends who enjoyed reading stories and poetry. When they were a little older, one of the friends travelled to another country because there was much work there.

Many years later the friend returned to his childhood home and met his old friend, now a farmer, for the first time in 15 years.

"How did you cope with being away from your friends and family for so long?" said the farmer friend.

"Oh, I was fine, I made friends with the locals and I also had a most wonderful book full of stories with rhymes, teasing alternative meanings, and cultural treasures, which kept me fully enthralled for many a night!" replied the friend enthusiastically, and he sold it to his friend for a sack of corn.

When the friend took his new book home to read, he discovered it was in the language of the country that his friend had lived in for 15 years, so he took it to the baker's wife who was from that country, and after a few months she had translated it for him in exchange for a sack of barley.

Now, after many weeks of reading, the farmer was most disappointed with his new book, and he was even more unhappy with his old friend. He thought to himself:

"How mediocre this book is, there is no poetry in it, no depth or richness in the words, and I find what there are of cultural messages to be flat and unexciting. My friend has surely become a dishonest fox while he has been away. I now have 2 books that are good for nothing except to light my evening fire". And, with that, he placed the books on the hearth and set a flame to them.

.

Wow, you've tried to write a parable. Sometimes I try to do that but I'm not sure I'm ever terribly good at it. I also sometimes find myself expanding the parables Jesus gave us, I can't help doing it but I'm not sure it's a good idea.

I'm not sure if this parable of yours entirely works as you intend either but it's interesting to read.

[CST]

First, stop throwing various versions at us and asking us which we 'prefer' as if our preference has any bearing on which is the  correct original version. Our preference towards something is no measure of truth. Altghough on this matter the Younan is clearly my least favourite.

Mental note:  don't ask CST for a preference of a verse rendition.
Paul Younan is a native Aramaic speaker and an honest translator.  His interlinear for Mt-Acts 16 is freely available for inspection.
Which of these do you suspect is correct?:

Mt 27 (NKJV)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%2027%3A9-10&version=NKJV;MOUNCE;NIV
9 Then was fulfilled what was spoken by Jeremiah [Greek:  Ieremias] the prophet, saying,
"And they took the thirty pieces of silver,
the value of Him who was priced,
whom they of the children of Israel priced,
10 and gave them for the potter's field,
as the Lord [Greek: kyrios] directed me."

Mt 27 (based on Younan), http://dukhrana.com
9. Then the thing was fulfilled which was spoken of by the nabia [prophet] who said,
"I took the thirty (pieces) of silver,
the price of the precious one
which (those) from the sons of Israel agreed upon.
10. And I gave them for the field of the potter
as MrYa [Master YHWH] commanded me."

Mt 27:9-10 (NIV)
9 Then what was spoken by Jeremiah [Greek:  Ieremias] the prophet was fulfilled:
"They took the thirty pieces of silver,
the price set on him by the people of Israel,
10 and they used them to buy the potter's field,
as the Lord [Greek: kyrios] commanded me."[a]
Footnotes:
Matthew 27:10 See Zech. 11:12,13; Jer. 19:1-13; 32:6-9.

Hmm, if I said the NKJV or the NIV would you take me at my word and consider the matter settled? Or would you just think I was wrong? I was about to thank you for agreeing not to ask my preference but all you did was ask me my preference based on a more narrow set of qualifications.

But to answer your question, if the text has the name of God (YHWH) in it then no I do not consider it correct because I know that that name which shall not be used falsely according to what we call the Ten Commandments came to be held as sacrosanct by Jews and they would not use it. As I know that the Hebrew word 'Adonai' (Lord) came to be substituted for it I'm  not at all surprised that the Greek word meaning the same thing might (but also might not) be put in its place.
I also think a Yahwist who then translated the Greek to Aramaic might then imagine (rightly or wrongly) the original writer meant YHWH and put that in their translation. Your argument proves nothing. And my authority on identifying evidence to 'suspect' which is true is little better than my personal preference.

And I do not doubt that Paul Younan is sincere, that doesn't mean all the translators of the Greek NT are not. There's a difference between being sincere and being correct. Paul Younan's translation could, for his part, be both sincere and correct yet incorrect because it is based on an incorrect Aramaic translation of a Greek original.

as if our preference has any bearing on which is the  correct original version. Our preference towards something is no measure of truth

Do you think this is a true statement?:

Mt 1:17 (NKJV)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%201&version=NKJV;MOUNCE
So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations,
from David until the captivity in Babylon are fourteen generations,
and from the captivity in Babylon until the Christ are fourteen generations.

Which of the Mt 1:16 renditions below do you consider correct?

Mt 1:16 (NKJV)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%201&version=NKJV;MOUNCE
And Jacob begot Joseph the husband [Greek:  anēr] of Mary,
of whom was born Jesus who is called Christ.

Mt 1:16 (based on Younan), http://dukhrana.com
Yaqub fathered Yosip, the gowra [protective-male] of Maryam,
from whom was born Yeshua, who is called the Meshikha.

[Pronounced "gowra," GBRA literally means 'protective male.' It is unclear whether the text refers to Maryam's father or to her husband. --Paul Younan. PY had 'kinsman.' Roth used 'guardian.' Mt says it is 14 + 14 + 14 generations in the next paragraph, verse 17. The Josip in the paragraph starting with verse 18 is a different Josip. Interestingly, the next paragraph, paragraph 18, opens with a thought-switcher. Observes Lataster about thought-switchers,
"Another Aramaic word which causes problems for translators is Nyd which really has no equivalent in English, but it is more of a 'thought-switcher' - some English words come close to translating it - like 'And, For, But, Now, However'." - Lataster, 115. See also Younan's article "Mistranslating the Genealogies of Yeshua" in Lataster.]

I don't know what you're trying to say here.

preference towards something is no measure of truth

Re:  Mt 2:23, do you think:
"prophets" plural is correct?
"prophet" singular is correct?

the Greek 'prophets' in Mt 2:23 is Plural
https://biblehub.com/greek/prophe_to_n_4396.htm
Englishman's Concordance
προφητῶν (prophētōn) — 32 Occurrences
Matthew 2:23 N-GMP
GRK: διὰ τῶν προφητῶν ὅτι Ναζωραῖος
NAS: through the prophets: He shall be called
KJV: by the prophets,
INT: through the prophets that a Nazarene

Mt 2:23 (based on Younan), http://dukhrana.com
And he came (and) dwelled in the medintha [city] that is called Nasrath,
so that might be fulfilled the thing which was spoken b'nabia [by the prophet] that,
"He will be called a Nasraya."

Given that Nazareth isn't mentioned at all in the Old Testament, I'd have to say neither to be honest. I don't doubt that one of them is correct. But there seems to be no way from the Bible to know which prophet or prophets foresaw this.

as if our preference has any bearing on which is the  correct original version

Do you think this is a true statement?:
In Mt 10:5, Greek mss. have, "Do not go into the city of the Samaritans."

'city' in Mt 10:5 is Singular in Greek mss.
https://biblehub.com/greek/polin_4172.htm
Matthew 10:5 N-AFS
GRK: καὶ εἰς πόλιν Σαμαριτῶν μὴ
NAS: and do not enter [any] city of the Samaritans;
KJV: into [any] city of the Samaritans
INT: and into a city of [the] Samaritians not

Which of the renditions below do you consider correct?

Mt 10:5 (NASB)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew+10%3A5&version=NASB;MOUNCE
These twelve Jesus sent out after instructing them:
"Do not go in _the_ way of _the_ Gentiles,
and do not enter _any_ city of the Samaritans;

Mt 10:5 (based on Younan), http://dukhrana.com
Yeshua sent these twelve and commanded them and said,
"By the way of the heathen do not go,
a'l'medintha [and to the cities] of the Samaritans do not enter.

They are both correct since they both say essentially the same thing.

[DavidFord]

Hmm, if I said the NKJV or the NIV would you take me at my word and consider the matter settled? Or would you just think I was wrong? I was about to thank you for agreeing not to ask my preference but all you did was ask me my preference based on a more narrow set of qualifications.
But to answer your question, if the text has the name of God (YHWH) in it then no I do not consider it correct because I know that that name which shall not be used falsely according to what we call the Ten Commandments came to be held as sacrosanct by Jews and they would not use it. As I know that the Hebrew word 'Adonai' (Lord) came to be substituted for it I'm  not at all surprised that the Greek word meaning the same thing might (but also might not) be put in its place.
I also think a Yahwist who then translated the Greek to Aramaic might then imagine (rightly or wrongly) the original writer meant YHWH and put that in their translation. Your argument proves nothing. And my authority on identifying evidence to 'suspect' which is true is little better than my personal preference.
And I do not doubt that Paul Younan is sincere, that doesn't mean all the translators of the Greek NT are not. There's a difference between being sincere and being correct. Paul Younan's translation could, for his part, be both sincere and correct yet incorrect because it is based on an incorrect Aramaic translation of a Greek original.

"if I said the NKJV or the NIV would you take me at my word and consider the matter settled? Or would you just think I was wrong?"
If you said you were quoting the NKJV or the NIV, I'd probably take you at your word.

"if the text has the name of God (YHWH) in it then no I do not consider it correct"
The text has "mrya," which in almost-all instances stands for "Master YHWH"—see below.

"that name which shall not be used falsely according to what we call the Ten Commandments came to be held as sacrosanct by Jews and they would not use it"
Are you saying that the ancient Jews:   didn't pronounce YHWH?  didn't write YHWH in their OT manuscripts?

I don't know what you're trying to say here.

Which if any of these statements do you consider correct?:
Matthew 1:17 says there are 14, 14, 14 generations.
Greek mss. of Matthew's genealogy list 14, 14, 13 generations.
In Aramaic mss. of Matthew's genealogy, with Mt 1:16's "gbra" translated as father/guardian, Matthew's genealogy lists 14, 14, 14 generations.
Mary had a father/guardian named Joseph (plus a husband also called Joseph).

Mt 7:9 (from Aramaic)
Or whom among you gbra [fathers],
that (if) his son asks of him bread,
why to him would hold out a rock?

"YHWH" in the Peshi tta
The Assyrian Church of the East's Peshi tta has the Aramaic equivalent of the Hebrew "YHWH."  It has the letters "mrya" which are almost-always representative of "Master YHWH."  The listing below doesn't cover any instances of "mrya" that might be in the "Western Five" books (II Peter, II John, III John, Jude and Revelation). The Church of the East reveres those 5 books and encourages their study, but they don't read from them during their church services-- unlike the other 22 NT books.  The *ed instances of the letters "mrya" don't mean "Master YHWH," are pronounced differently, and are discussed below.

Mt 1:20, 1:22, 1:24, 2:13, 2:15, 2:19, 3:3, 4:7, 4:10, 5:33, 12:4, 21:9, 21:42, 22:37, 22:43, 22:44, 22:45, 23:39, 27:10, 28:2
Mk 1:3, 2:26, 5:19, 11:9, 12:11, 12:29, 12:29, 12:30, 12:36, 13:20
Lk 1:6, 1:9, 1:11, 1:15, 1:16, 1:17, 1:25, 1:32, 1:38, 1:45, 1:46, 1:66, 1:68, 1:76, 2:9, 2:11, 2:15, 2:22, 2:23, 2:23, 2:24, 2:26, 2:38, 2:39, 3:4, 4:8, 4:12, 4:18, 4:19, 5:17, 6:4, 10:27, 13:35, 17:29, 19:38, 20:37, 20:42
Jn 1:23, 12:13, 12:38
Acts 1:24, 2:20, 2:21, 2:34, 2:36, 2:38, 3:19, 3:22, 4:24, 4:26, 4:29, 5:9, 5:14, 5:19, 6:3, 7:30, 7:31, 7:33, 7:37, 7:49, 8:26, 8:39, 9:10, 9:15, 9:27, 10:36, 11:21, 11:21, 12:7, 12:11, 12:17, 12:23, 13:10, 13:11, 13:12, 13:49, 14:3, 14:25, 14:26, 15:17, 15:17, 16:32, 18:9, 18:25, 18:26, 19:10

Romans 9:28, 9:29, 10:12, 10:13, 11:34, 14:9, 14:11, 14:14, 15:11, 16:6*
1Cor 1:31, 2:16, 3:5, 3:20, 4:4, 4:5, 4:17, 4:19, 7:17, 8:6, 10:26, 11:27, 11:27, 11:29, 12:3, 12:5, 14:21, 15:47, 15:58, 15:58, 16:10
2Cor 2:12, 3:16, 3:17, 3:17, 3:18, 3:18, 6:17, 6:18, 10:17, 10:18
Eph 2:21, 4:5, 4:17, 5:19, 6:9*
Philippians 2:11, 2:29
Colossians 3:22, 3:24, 4:1*, 4:7

2Thess 3:3
1Timothy 6:2*
2Timothy 2:19, 2:19
Hebrews 6:3, 7:21, 8:8, 8:9, 8:10, 8:11, 10:16, 10:30, 12:5, 12:6, 13:5
James 1:7, 3:9, 4:10, 4:15, 5:4, 5:7, 5:10, 5:11, 5:11
1 Peter 2:3, 3:12, 3:12, 3:15, 5:3*

Re:  the *ed items, their letters "mrya" don't mean "Master YHWH," but rather, considerations of grammar and of context reveal that those instances of the letters "mrya" have another meaning:

Ephesians 6:9 (Lamsa)
Also, masters [mrya], do the same things for your servants,
forgiving their faults,
because you also have your own Master [mrkun:  your Master] in heaven;
and there is no respect of persons with him.

Colossians 4:1 (Etheridge)
Masters [mrya], do equity and justice to your servants,
knowing that you also have a Master [mra] in heaven.

1 Timothy 6:2 (Etheridge)
But let not those who have believing masters [mrya] slight them,
because they are their brethren;
but serve them the more,
because they are believers,
and beloved who are refreshed by their ministry.
These things teach and require of them.

1 Peter 5:3 (Lamsa)
Live not as overlords [mrya] over the flock,
but as good examples to them.

Romans 16:6 (Etheridge)
Ask the peace of Maria [shalu b'shlma d'mrya],
who hath laboured much with you.

[DavidFord]

Given that Nazareth isn't mentioned at all in the Old Testament, I'd have to say neither to be honest. I don't doubt that one of them is correct. But there seems to be no way from the Bible to know which prophet or prophets foresaw this.

The prophet Isaiah foresaw this:

Isaiah 11:1-2 (HCSB)
1 Then a shoot [Hebrew:  ntzr] will grow from the stump of Jesse,
and a branch from his roots will bear fruit.
2 The Spirit of the Lord will rest on Him—
a Spirit of wisdom and understanding,
a Spirit of counsel and strength,
a Spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord.

interlinear PDF of Isaiah 11:1 has 'ntzr'/ scion
http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/OTpdf/isa11.pdf

Yeshayah 11:1 (Orthodox Jewish Bible)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=isaiah%2011%3A1-2&version=KJV;OJB
And there shall come forth a Khoter (Branch) out of the Geza (Stem, Stump, Stock) of Yishai,
and a Netzer [Branch [see Tzemach, Moshiach Jer 23:5; 33:15; Zech 3:8; 6:12, Ezra 3:8 which give as Moshiach's Namesake Yehoshua/Yeshua; compare Mt.2:23 OJBC] shall bear fruit of his roots:

Mt 2:23 (based on Younan plus looking at Khabouris), http://dukhrana.com
And he came (and) dwelled in the medintha [city] that is called N-tz-r-th [Natzrath],
so that might be fulfilled the thing which was spoken b'nabia [by the prophet] that,
"He will be called d'n-tz-r-i-a [of natzria]."

Re:  Mt 2:23, do you think:
"prophets" plural is correct?
"prophet" singular is correct?

the Greek 'prophets' in Mt 2:23 is Plural
https://biblehub.com/greek/prophe_to_n_4396.htm
Englishman's Concordance
προφητῶν (prophētōn) — 32 Occurrences
Matthew 2:23 N-GMP
GRK: διὰ τῶν προφητῶν ὅτι Ναζωραῖος
NAS: through the prophets: He shall be called
KJV: by the prophets,
INT: through the prophets that a Nazarene

They are both correct since they both say essentially the same thing.

Which of these statements do you consider correct?:
In Jesus' time, the Samaritans lived in a city.
In Jesus' time, the Samaritans lived in cities.

Mt 10:5 (NASB)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew+10%3A5&version=NASB;MOUNCE
These twelve Jesus sent out after instructing them:
"Do not go in _the_ way of _the_ Gentiles,
and do not enter _any_ city of the Samaritans;
Mt 10:5 (based on Younan), http://dukhrana.com
Yeshua sent these twelve and commanded them and said,
"By the way of the heathen do not go,
a'l'medintha [and to the cities] of the Samaritans do not enter.

[DavidFord]

They are both correct since they both say essentially the same thing

Do you think it's OK to amend the Greek by inserting "[of sickness]" into a passage that talks about throwing "on a bed" an adulterous woman?

Rev 2 (NASB + Strong's)
https://biblehub.com/nas/revelation/2.htm
21 I gave her time to repent,
and she does not want to repent of her immorality.
22 Behold, I will throw her on a bed [of sickness],
and those who commit adultery with her into great tribulation,
unless they repent of her deeds.

Strong's Concordance 2825b. kliné
https://biblehub.com/greek/2825b.htm
kliné: a couch
Transliteration: kliné
Short Definition: bed

Do you think it'd make more sense if she'd been said to have been thrown onto a mortuary couch i.e. a bier?  (Doing such is possible translating from the Aramaic Revelation.)

http://cal.huc.edu/oneentry.php?lemma=%28rs+N%20&cits=all
1  bed.... (a) mortuary couch, bier.... when they saw that their bier preceded his bier [i.e. they died before him]. (b) litter.... (c).... a luxurious couch.... (d).... a folding bed made of leather....

[CST]

Oh, great! Now this has gotten messy throwing question after question at me about how I respond to different renderings that you claim to be the Aramaic original verses renderings of what you claim is the Greek translation of that it serves no purpose you won't change your mind or leave your error, if error it is, just because I disagree with you. I don't care what i think about the Greek 'adding' the word 'of sickness' I don't even know it wasn't lost accidentally originally in the Aramaic. I know in the Joseph Smith translation it simply reads "into Hell" no bed mentioned. I'm more interested at this point in what the Aramaic version says the number of the Beast is.

I'm also aware of the Isaiah reference to Nazareth but that just a theory it's not the only one. Certainly no-one in the Old Testament specifically predicts Jesus will live in a town called Nazareth. However since Isaiah is one prophet who wrote a book in the book in the Jewish Tanak called Nevi'im (Prophets) the difference scarcely matters.

[DavidFord]

Oh, great! Now this has gotten messy throwing question after question at me about how I respond to different renderings that you claim to be the Aramaic original verses renderings of what you claim is the Greek translation of that it serves no purpose you won't change your mind or leave your error, if error it is, just because I disagree with you. I don't care what i think about the Greek 'adding' the word 'of sickness' I don't even know it wasn't lost accidentally originally in the Aramaic. I know in the Joseph Smith translation it simply reads "into Hell" no bed mentioned. I'm more interested at this point in what the Aramaic version says the number of the Beast is.

Rev 13:18 (NASB)
Here is wisdom.
Let him who has understanding
calculate the number of the beast,
for the number is that of a man;
and his number is six hundred and sixty-six.
Footnote:  One early ms reads 616

Rev 13:18 (using Aramaic Peshi tto), http://dukhrana.com
(Etheridge) Here is wisdom. Let him who hath mind, calculate the number of the beast of prey; for the number is of man; and his number is Six hundred and sixty and six.
(Murdock) Here is wisdom: let him that hath intelligence, compute the number of the beast of prey; for it is the number of a man: and its number is six hundred and sixty and six.

Greg Glaser's _Crawford Codex of Revelation - Aramaic Interlinear with English Translation_
http://www.lulu.com/shop/greg-glaser/crawford-codex-of-revelation-aramaic-interlinear-with-english-translation/paperback/product-22823002.html
https://www.amazon.com/Crawford-Codex-Revelation-Interlinear-Translation/dp/1365323293/
translates things as "six hundred and sixty and six."

666 or 616? – The Number of the Beast
https://www.endtime.com/blog/666-or-616-the-number-of-the-beast/
In this illuminating passage, Irenaeus states that 666 is the reading found in the most reliable copies of Revelation, including those copied by men who saw John. In addition, he acknowledges the existence of the 616 reading, but considers it erroneous, attributing it to copying errors and the failure of some to properly examine the authenticity of the alternate reading.

"it serves no purpose"
That you're aware of.  What do you think the word epiousios/ epiousion means?

Strong's Concordance 1967. epiousios
https://biblehub.com/str/greek/1967.htm
ἐπιούσιος, ἐπιούσιον, a word found only in Matthew 6:11 and Luke 11:3, in the phrase ἄρτος ἐπιούσιος  .... Origen testifies (de orat. 27) that the word was not in use in ordinary speech, and accordingly seems to have been coined by the Evangelists themselves.

English Wikipedia has an article on: Epiousios
https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/ἐπιούσιος
Etymology   Edit
From ἐπί (epí) +‎ ούσιος (oúsios). Not attested outside of the Lord's Prayer in Matthew 6:11 and Luke 11:3, in the phrase τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον (tòn árton hēmôn tòn epioúsion), traditionally rendered as "our daily bread".
Adjective   Edit
ἐπιούσιος • (epioúsios)
intended meaning uncertain; suggestions include essential, necessary

[DavidFord]

throwing question after question at me about how I respond to different renderings

Re: the woman that made the crumbs comment, was she:
Jewish?
heathen?
Gentile i.e. non-Jew?
from Phoenicia in Syria?
from Canaan?
Hellenis i.e. Greek?

Matthew 15 (NKJV)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+15&version=NKJV
https://biblehub.com/greek/chananaia_5478.htm
21 Then Jesus went out from there and departed to the region of Tyre and Sidon. 22 And behold, a woman of Canaan [Greek:  Chananaia] came from that region and cried out to Him, saying, "Have mercy on me, O Lord, Son of David! My daughter is severely demon-possessed." ....
24 But He answered and said, "I was not sent except to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." ....
26 But He answered and said, "It is not good to take the children's bread and throw it to the little dogs."
27 And she said, "Yes, Lord, yet even the little dogs eat the crumbs which fall from their masters' table."

Mark 7 (NKJV)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark+7&version=NKJV
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/mark/7-26.htm
24 From there He arose and went to the region of Tyre and Sidon.  .... 25 For a woman whose young daughter had an unclean spirit heard about Him, and she came and fell at His feet. 26 The woman was a Greek [Greek:  Hellēnis], a Syro-Phoenician by birth, and she kept asking Him to cast the demon out of her daughter. 27 But Jesus said to her, "Let the children be filled first, for it is not good to take the children's bread and throw it to the little dogs."
28 And she answered and said to Him, "Yes, Lord, yet even the little dogs under the table eat from the children's crumbs."

Acts 17:12 (NKJV)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=acts+17%3A12&version=NKJV
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/acts/17-12.htm
Therefore many of them believed, and also not a few of the Greeks, prominent women as well as men. [Greek for 'Grecian women': Hellēnidōn gynaikōn]

Mark 7:26, http://dukhrana.com/
(Etheridge) But that woman was a Gentile of Phuniki of Suria,
and she prayed of him to cast out the demon from her daughter.
(Murdock) (the woman was a Gentile from Phenicia of Syria),
and besought him, that he would expel the demon from her daughter.
(Lamsa) But the woman was a heathen, from Phoenicia in Syria;
and she besought him to cast out the demon from her daughter.

Matthew 15:22
(Etheridge) And, beheld, a Canaanite [Aramaic: k-n-ai-n-i-th-a] woman from those coasts came forth crying, and saying, Have mercy upon me, my Lord, son of David ! my daughter is grievously possessed with the demon !
(Murdock) And lo, a woman, a Canaanitess from those confines, came forth, calling out and saying: Compassionate me, my Lord, thou son of David: my daughter is grievously distressed by a demon.

The Mark 7:26 Aramaic word in question is "kh-n-p-th-a" -- godless, Gentile, heathen, foreigner, profane.  Lexeme 1:1096 appears in
Matthew 6:7, 10:5, 18:17
Mark 7:26
John 7:35
Acts 18:4, 18:17
1Cor 5:1, 10:20, 10:27, 12:2
1Peter 4:3

Greek mss. have 'politically-correct' references to non-Jews, and have a particular place's more-current name;
the Aramaic Peshi tta has 'politically-_in_correct' references to non-Jews, and has a particular place's antiquated name:

Norton, William. 1889. _A Translation, in English Daily Used, of the Peshi to-Syriac Text, and of the Received Greek Text, of Hebrews, James, 1 Peter, and 1 John, With an Introduction on the Peshi tto-Syriac Text, and the Revised Greek Text of 1881_ (London: W. K. Bloom), ~140pp. What's below is from a Google books copy; the book is also at
https://archive.org/details/translationineng00nort
In the Introduction, pages l - li:
In the names of places, the Peshi to shows the same independence of the Greek. . . . . in Acts xxi. 7, the Gk. has, Ptolemais; the Syriac has, Acu.

Mr. Jer. Jones, in his work on the Canon, 1798, contends that the use of the name Acu, for Ptolemais, is a decisive proof that the Peshi to must have been made not far in time from A.D. 70, when Jerusalem was destroyed. (vol. i. p. 103. ) He says that the most ancient name of this place among the Israelites was Aco, or Acco, Judges i. 31; that this name was afterwards changed to Ptolemais; that some say it had its new name from Ptolemy Philadelphus, about 250 B. C. He says it is certain that the old name Aco, was antiquated and out of use in the time of the Romans, and that the use of the old name Acu, in the Peshi to, can be accounted for in no other way, but by supposing that the persons for whom the version was made were more acquainted with it, than with the new name Ptolemais; that upon any other supposition it would have been absurd for him to have used Acu. He says, that until the destruction of Jerusalem, one may suppose that the Jews may have retained the old name Aco still, out of fondness for its antiquity; but, he says,

"how they, or any other part of Syria, could, after the Roman conquest, call it by a name different from the Romans, seems to me impossible to conceive. . . To suppose, therefore, that this translation, in which we meet with this old name, instead of the new one, was made at any great distance of time after the destruction of Jerusalem, is to suppose the translator to have substituted an antiquated name known to but few, for a name well known to all" (pp. 104, 105. )

Mr. Jones says that a similar proof that the Peshi to cannot have been made much after A.D. 70, is found in the fact that the Peshi to often calls the Gentiles, as the Jews were accustomed to do, _profane persons_, where the Greek calls them _the nations_, that is, the Gentiles. The Peshi to calls them profane, in Matt. vi. 7; x. 5; xviii.17; Mark vii. 26; John vii. 35; Acts xviii.4, 17; 1 Cor. v. 1; x. 20, 27; xii. 2; 1 Pet. iv.3. The expression is used, therefore, throughout the Peshi to. Mr. Jones says, that it shows that the writer was a Jew, for no other person would have called all the world profane; and that after the destruction of the temple, all Hebrew Christians must have seen that other nations were not to be reckoned unclean and profane in the Jewish sense, and that therefore this version must have been made either before, or soon after, A.D. 70. (On Canon, Vol. i., pp. 106-110.)

[GodIsLove]

David,
Like I said before I'm interested in your ideas, but you don't seem to be sharing your thoughts, just asking questions of us which we don't know how to answer.
Could you formulate your posts in a way that showed your thoughts on these matters, such as why it matters if these things are translated slightly differently.

For example when we talk of translation errors with aionios it is with the intent to show that the word doesn't no mean eternal and therefore disuputes eternal punishment.

Thanks!

[DavidFord]

I'm interested in your ideas, but you don't seem to be sharing your thoughts, just asking questions of us which we don't know how to answer.
Could you formulate your posts in a way that showed your thoughts on these matters, such as why it matters if these things are translated slightly differently.

Saying "I don't know" is an answer-- and an answer I'm likely to follow-up with another question.  I'm hesitant to share my thoughts; if I were to share my thoughts, a moderator might once again disapprove.  What are 2 things that you're wondering about the significance of whether they "were... translated slightly differently"?
Aramaic's "ailma" means world/age.  What does "aionios" mean?

[DavidFord]

The instances of "Gentile/s" and "Greek/s" appearing below are in the Aramaic Peshi tta as 'heathens/ pagans'; slight exception:  Jn 7:35.

Matthew 6:7 (NKJV)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=mt+6%3A7&version=NKJV
And when you pray,
do not use vain repetitions as the heathen do.
For they think that they will be heard for their many words.

Matthew 10:5-6 (NKJV)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=mt+10%3A5-6&version=NKJV
5 These twelve Jesus sent out and commanded them, saying:
"Do not go into the way of the Gentiles,
and do not enter a city of the Samaritans.
6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Matthew 18:15-17 (NKJV)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=mt+18%3A15-17&version=NKJV
15 "Moreover if your brother sins against you,
go and tell him his fault between you and him alone.
If he hears you,
you have gained your brother.
16 But if he will not hear,
take with you one or two more, that
'by the mouth of two or three witnesses
every word may be established.'
17 And if he refuses to hear them,
tell it to the church.
But if he refuses even to hear the church,
let him be to you like a heathen and a tax collector.

Mark 7:26 (NKJV)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=mK+7%3A26&version=NKJV
The woman was a Greek, a Syro-Phoenician by birth, and she kept asking Him to cast the demon out of her daughter.

John 7:35 (NKJV)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=jn+7%3A35&version=NKJV
Then the Jews said among themselves, "Where does He intend to go that we shall not find Him? Does He intend to go to the Dispersion among the Greeks and teach the Greeks?
John 7:35, from Aramaic, http://dukhrana.com
(Etheridge) The Jihudoyee say among themselves, Whither is this about to go, that we cannot find him ? To the countries of the nations is he to go, and to teach the Heathens ?
(Murdock) The Jews said among themselves: Whither is he about to go, that we cannot find him? Will he go to some region of the Gentiles, and teach the profane?
(Lamsa) Then the Jews said among themselves, Where is he going, that we cannot find him? why, is he planning to go to the countries of the Gentiles, to teach the pagans?

Acts 18:4 (NKJV)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=acts+18%3A4&version=NKJV
And he reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and persuaded both Jews and Greeks.
Acts 18:4, from Aramaic, http://dukhrana.com
(Etheridge) And he discoursed in the synagogue every shabath, and persuaded the Jihudoyee and the Heathens.
(Lamsa) And he spoke in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the pagans.

Acts 18:17 (NKJV)
Then all the Greeks took Sosthenes, the ruler of the synagogue, and beat him before the judgment seat. But Gallio took no notice of these things.
Acts 18:17
(Etheridge) And all the Heathens seized Sosthenis the presbyter of the synagogue, and beat him before the tribunal. And Galion was careless of these.
(Lamsa) Then the pagans seized Sos'the-nes, the priest of the synagogue, and beat him before the judgment seat. And Gal'li-o disregarded these things.

1 Corinthians 5:1 (NKJV)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Cor+5%3A1&version=NKJV
It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and such sexual immorality as is not even named among the Gentiles—that a man has his father's wife!

1 Corinthians 10:20 (NKJV)
Rather, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice they sacrifice to demons and not to God, and I do not want you to have fellowship with demons.

1 Corinthians 10:27 (NKJV)
If any of those who do not believe invites you to dinner, and you desire to go, eat whatever is set before you, asking no question for conscience' sake.
1Corinthians 10:27, from Aramaic, http://dukhrana.com
(Etheridge) But if a man of the Heathens invite you, and you be willing to go, whatever is set before you eat, without inquiry on account of conscience.
(Lamsa) If any pagan invite you, and you wish to go, whatever is set before you eat, without question for conscience sake.

1 Corinthians 12:2 (NKJV)
You know that you were Gentiles, carried away to these dumb idols, however you were led.

1 Peter 4:3 (NKJV)
For we have spent enough of our past lifetime in doing the will of the Gentiles—when we walked in lewdness, lusts, drunkenness, revelries, drinking parties, and abominable idolatries.

[DavidFord]

Do you think the original Mt 5:47 had:  tax-collectors?  pagans?  Gentiles?

NKJV and Peshi tta:  tax-collectors
Matthew 5:47 (NKJV)
And if you greet your brethren only, what do you do more than others?
Do not even the tax collectors do so?
Matthew 5:47 (from Aramaic), http://dukhrana.com
(Etheridge) And if you wish peace to your brethren only, what more do you than they ?
do not also the tribute-gatherers this ?
(Murdock) And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye that is not common?
Do not even publicans do this?
(Lamsa) And if you salute only your brothers, what is it more that you do?
Do not even the publicans do the same thing?

Strong's Concordance 5057. telónés
https://biblehub.com/greek/5057.htm
telónés: tax collector
Original Word: τελώνης, ου, ὁ
Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: telónés
Phonetic Spelling: (tel-o'-nace)
Short Definition: a collector of taxes
Definition: a publican, collector of taxes

In contrast, the NASB has for Mt 5:47 "ethnikos."

Strong's Concordance 1482. ethnikos
https://biblehub.com/greek/1482.htm
ethnikos: national, foreign, i.e. spec. a Gentile
Original Word: ἐθνικός, ή, όν
Part of Speech: Adjective
Transliteration: ethnikos
Phonetic Spelling: (eth-nee-kos')
Short Definition: pagan, heathen, gentile; a Gentile, non-Jew
Definition: pagan, heathen, gentile; subst: a Gentile, non-Jew.
HELPS Word-studies
Cognate: 1482 ethnikós(from 1484/éthnos, "nation") – Gentile; heathen, usually referring to non-Israelites; a pagan, a "non-covenant person," standing outside God's covenant (salvation). See 1484 (ethnos).

Matthew 5:47 (HCSB)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%205%3A47&version=NKJV;NASB;HCSB
And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing out of the ordinary?
Don't even the Gentiles do the same?
Footnote:
Matthew 5:47 Other mss read tax collectors

Matthew 5:47 (NASB)
If you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others?
Do not even the Gentiles do the same?

[CST]

Oh, great! Now this has gotten messy throwing question after question at me about how I respond to different renderings that you claim to be the Aramaic original verses renderings of what you claim is the Greek translation of that it serves no purpose you won't change your mind or leave your error, if error it is, just because I disagree with you. I don't care what i think about the Greek 'adding' the word 'of sickness' I don't even know it wasn't lost accidentally originally in the Aramaic. I know in the Joseph Smith translation it simply reads "into Hell" no bed mentioned. I'm more interested at this point in what the Aramaic version says the number of the Beast is.

Rev 13:18 (NASB)
Here is wisdom.
Let him who has understanding
calculate the number of the beast,
for the number is that of a man;
and his number is six hundred and sixty-six.
Footnote:  One early ms reads 616

Rev 13:18 (using Aramaic Pecrapto), http://dukhrana.com
(Etheridge) Here is wisdom. Let him who hath mind, calculate the number of the beast of prey; for the number is of man; and his number is Six hundred and sixty and six.
(Murdock) Here is wisdom: let him that hath intelligence, compute the number of the beast of prey; for it is the number of a man: and its number is six hundred and sixty and six.

Greg Glaser's _Crawford Codex of Revelation - Aramaic Interlinear with English Translation_
https://www.amazon.com/Crawford-Codex-Revelation-Interlinear-Translation/dp/1365323293/
translates things as "six hundred and sixty and six."

666 or 616? – The Number of the Beast
https://www.endtime.com/blog/666-or-616-the-number-of-the-beast/
In this illuminating passage, Irenaeus states that 666 is the reading found in the most reliable copies of Revelation, including those copied by men who saw John. In addition, he acknowledges the existence of the 616 reading, but considers it erroneous, attributing it to copying errors and the failure of some to properly examine the authenticity of the alternate reading.

"it serves no purpose"
That you're aware of.  What do you think the word epiousios/ epiousion means?

Strong's Concordance 1967. epiousios
https://biblehub.com/str/greek/1967.htm
ἐπιούσιος, ἐπιούσιον, a word found only in Matthew 6:11 and Luke 11:3, in the phrase ἄρτος ἐπιούσιος  .... Origen testifies (de orat. 27) that the word was not in use in ordinary speech, and accordingly seems to have been coined by the Evangelists themselves.

English Wikipedia has an article on: Epiousios
https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/ἐπιούσιος
Etymology   Edit
From ἐπί (epí) +‎ ούσιος (oúsios). Not attested outside of the Lord's Prayer in Matthew 6:11 and Luke 11:3, in the phrase τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον (tòn árton hēmôn tòn epioúsion), traditionally rendered as "our daily bread".
Adjective   Edit
ἐπιούσιος • (epioúsios)
intended meaning uncertain; suggestions include essential, necessary

Oh, dear! I'm inclined to reject any text of the Revelation as original if it gives the number of the beast because I find that self-defeating if the writer has instructed the reader to calculate the number of the beast as a test of their understanding and then immediately tells they what it is.

That Origen testifies that one word wasn't in common use is proof of nothing. Even today there are words used in dialects and areas where people outside of the area are completely ignorant of them unless they encounter them and even then may not know what they mean. And this is a time where we have dictionaries which record what word mean and are much more interconnected than people in the days of the Bible ever were. What people definitely saids hasn't been recorded as the technology didn't exist to do so.

Working out what words even in the Bible mean is a piece of very educated guess work. Based on comparing how words are used in various context trying to work out how broad the word usage might be and what sort of homonyms there might be. I have no doubt much of the nuance is in translation and even then that assumes there is a final consensus of what most of the words ultimately mean.

Greek is generally taken to be clearer than Hebrew/Aramaic which much less chance for misunderstanding and nuance so, yeah the idea that God would give us the Old Testament in Hebrew and Aramaic, and give us the New Testament in Greek doesn't surprise me at all. In fact it seems theologically sounds.

The ignorance of Origen or any one else is no proof of anything.

I'm not going to to answer your question of the woman who talked about crumbs. I'm sure all the writers had their own reasons for picking the words they did and didn't necessarily see the contradictions we see so the discussion is pointless.

I don't even know who those last questions are directed to.

[DavidFord]

I'm inclined to reject any text of the Revelation as original if it gives the number of the beast because I find that self-defeating if the writer has instructed the reader to calculate the number of the beast as a test of their understanding and then immediately tells they what it is.

Are you aware of any manuscript of the Revelation that _lacks_ giving the reader the number of the beast?

Greek is generally taken to be clearer than Hebrew/Aramaic which much less chance for misunderstanding and nuance so, yeah the idea that God would give us the Old Testament in Hebrew and Aramaic, and give us the New Testament in Greek doesn't surprise me at all. In fact it seems theologically sounds.

Do you agree with the claim that the quality of the Greek grammar for Greek Revelation texts is extremely wretched?

Christopher Lancaster aka "Raphael Lataster," _Was the New Testament Really Written in Greek? A Concise Compendium of the Many Internal and External Evidences of Aramaic Peshi tta Primacy_ (2011), 328pp., 138-139. Cited at URL below, and tweaked to more closely conform to how it appears in Lancaster.
https://jmshistorycorner.wordpress.com/2018/08/28/the-original-language-of-the-new-testament/
In addition to the evidence for Semitic grammar embedded in the Greek New Testament, the fact that serious grammatical errors are found in the Greek New Testament books should also be revealed.  Speaking of the Greek of Revelation, Charles Cutler Torrey states that it "...swarms with major offenses against Greek grammar." He calls it "linguistic anarchy", and says, "The grammatical monstrosities of the book, in their number and variety and especially in their startling character, stand alone in the history of literature."  Torrey gives ten examples listed below:
1. Rev. 1:4 "Grace to you, and peace, from he who is and who was and who is to come." (all nom. case)
2. Rev. 1:15 "His legs were like burnished brass (neutral gender dative case), as in a furnace purified"(Fem. gender sing. no., gen. case)
3. Rev. 11:3 "My witness (nom.) shall prophesy for many days clothed (accus.) in sackcloth."
4. Rev. 14:14 "I saw on the cloud, one seated like unto a Son of Man (accus.) having
(nom.) upon his head a golden crown."
5. Rev. 14:19 "He harvested the vintage of the earth, and cast it into the winepress
(fem), the great (masc.) of the wrath of God."
6. Rev. 17:4 "A golden cup filled with abominations (gen.) and with unclean things" (accus.)
7. Rev. 19:20 "The lake of blazing (fem.) fire (neutral)."
8. Rev. 20:2 "And he seized the dragon (accus.), the old serpent (nom.), who is the Devil and Satan, and bound him."
9. Rev. 21:9 "Seven angels holding seven bowls (accus.), filled (gen.) with the seven last plagues."
10. Rev. 22:5 "They have no need of lamplight (gen.) nor of sunlight (accus.).

I'm not going to to answer your question of the woman who talked about crumbs.

[DavidFord]

I have no doubt much of the nuance is in translation and even then that assumes there is a final consensus of what most of the words ultimately mean

There's even uncertainty often about what text to use. 

Rev 6:15
On a listing of Greek texts for Rev 6:15 at
https://biblehub.com/texts/revelation/6-15.htm
doing control-f/ 'find' for:  ἰσχυροὶ
reveals that all but 3 of the Greek texts listed contain it.  (Tischendorf 8th Edition instead has the slightly different ἰσχυρός.)  Doing control-f/ 'find' for:  δυνατοὶ
on that webpage reveals that only 2 of the texts have it.  Both words mean basically the same thing-- strong, powerful-- but look and sound very different.

Rev 6:15 http://dukhrana.com
(Etheridge) and the kings of the earth and great ones, and the chiefs of thousands, and the rich and the mighty ones [Aramaic:  khilutha: power, mighty work, strength, virtue, force], and every servant, and every freeman, hid....

Rev 14:6
On a listing of Greek texts for Rev 14:6 at
https://biblehub.com/texts/revelation/14-6.htm
doing control-f/ 'find' for:  καθημένους
reveals that all but 3 of the Greek texts listed contain it.  (Tischendorf 8th Edition instead has κάθημαι.)
Doing control-f/ 'find' for:  κατοικοῦντας
on that webpage reveals that only 2 of the texts have it.  Both words mean kind of the same thing-- sit, dwell-- but are rather different in spelling.

Rev 14:6 (from Aramaic), http://dukhrana.com
(Lamsa) And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel [Aramaic:  sbrtha d'l'ailm:  hope that-to a world/age], to preach to those who dwell [Aramaic:  y-th-b-y:  to sit; to dwell; to stay, remain] on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,

Rev 14:18
On a listing of Greek texts for Rev 14:18 at
https://biblehub.com/texts/revelation/14-18.htm
doing control-f/ 'find' for:  φωνῇ μεγάλῃ
reveals that 4 of the Greek texts listed contain it.  A separate 4 instead have
κραυγῇ μεγάλῃ  (Tischendorf 8th Edition has φωνή μέγας.)  The μεγάλῃ part means 'large, great':

Strong's Concordance 3173. megas
https://biblehub.com/greek/3173.htm
megas: great
Original Word: μέγας, μεγάλη, μέγα
Part of Speech: Adjective; Adverb, Comparative
Transliteration: megas
Phonetic Spelling: (meg'-as)
Short Definition: large, great
Definition: large, great, in the widest sense

We now turn our attention to the first part of the phrase, with its contrasting κραυγῇ vs. φωνῇ.

Strong's Concordance 5456. phóné
https://biblehub.com/greek/5456.htm
phóné: a voice, sound
Original Word: φωνή, ῆς, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: phóné
Phonetic Spelling: (fo-nay')
Short Definition: a sound, noise, voice
Definition: a sound, noise, voice, language, dialect.

Strong's Concordance 2906. kraugé
https://biblehub.com/greek/2906.htm
kraugé: an outcry
Original Word: κραυγή, ῆς, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: kraugé
Phonetic Spelling: (krow-gay')
Short Definition: a shout, clamor, outcry
Definition: (a) a shout, cry, clamor, (b) outcry, clamoring against another.

Both words mean kind of the same thing-- a shout, clamor, outcry; a sound, noise, voice-- but are quite different in their all-but-last letters.

Rev 14:18 (from Aramaic), http://dukhrana.com
(Murdock) And another angel came out from the altar, having authority over fire. And he cried with a loud voice [Aramaic:  raba b'quala:  in a great voice; sound, noise], to him who had the sharp sickle, saying: ....

[marie glen]

I had to laugh a little at the phrase "extremely wretched" in connection w/ the Book of Revelation. Lol.
Extremely wretched understanding! Locked it in at least one box (called 7 years only). Okay.. carry on.. :Peace2:

Interesting, CST, about the # being in the manuscript.. vs. 13:18.

[GodIsLove]

Ok, you don't want to share your thoughts because you are worried about moderation, but then how is there to be a conversation? You asking questions and people answering them or not answering them can hardly benefit anyone.

I will offer my two cents:

There are translation errors.

The word of God is Jesus; the Bible is ancient profitable scripture that teaches us of the life of Jesus but Jesus said he would send the Holy Spirit to us. The Holy Spirit will guide us into all truth (John 16).

When doubt of translation discrepancies creeps in, ask for understanding and the spirit will guide us.

[DavidFord]

Ok, you don't want to share your thoughts because you are worried about moderation, but then how is there to be a conversation? You asking questions and people answering them or not answering them can hardly benefit anyone.

Very easily; are you saying you haven't benefited in the least from reading my question-asking posts?
What's the correct translation within Rev 22:14: 
"who wash their robes", or "who keep His commands"?

Rev 22:14 (HCSB)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=rev%2022%3A14&version=NKJV;HCSB
"Blessed are those who wash their robes,[a]
so that they may have the right to the tree of life
and may enter the city by the gates.
Footnotes:
Revelation 22:14 Other mss read who keep His commands

"Do his commandments" or "wash their robes" in Revelation 22:14?
http://www.kjvtoday.com/home/do-his-commandments-or-wash-their-robes-in-revelation-2214
Although... is in earlier extant copies, these early manuscripts are demonstrably full of careless transcription. ....  The word "wash" in the NA/UBS reading is a present participle in the Greek, signifying an ongoing action.  Hence the washing of robes is expressed to be an ongoing action, not a single occurrence.  However, this notion of ongoing washing is at odds with what the Bible says elsewhere about being washed.  Revelation 7:14 says that those who came out of great tribulation "washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb."  "Washed" is in the aorist tense which does not necessarily suggest ongoing action.  This makes sense because, as is revealed by this verse, the washing of robes symbolizes the cleansing by the blood of Christ.  Such an act is a completed event at the time of conversion.  Revelation 1:5 says that Christ "washed us from our sins in his own blood".  To "do his commandments", however, is an ongoing act even in other passages of scripture ("keep his commandments": 1 John 2:3, 3:22, 5:2-3, Revelation 12:17, 14:12). 

Revelation 22:14 (from Aramaic), http://dukhrana.com/
(Murdock) Blessed are they who do his commandments [Aramaic for 'his commandments': puqdanuhi],
that they may have a right to the tree of life,
and may enter through the gates into the city.

I will offer my two cents:
There are translation errors.
The word of God is Jesus; the Bible is ancient profitable scripture that teaches us of the life of Jesus but Jesus said he would send the Holy Spirit to us. The Holy Spirit will guide us into all truth (John 16).
When doubt of translation discrepancies creeps in, ask for understanding and the spirit will guide us.

"There are translation errors" from what to what?  (from Greek to English?  from Aramaic into Greek?)
Do you think there are transmission errors, e.g. from sloppy copying of manuscripts through the years?
Do you think the book of Revelation was originally composed in:  Greek?  Aramaic?

[MusicLover123]

Just a question David. Are these supposed to be rhetorical questions? Where the answer is supposed to be obvious? 

[DavidFord]

Are these supposed to be rhetorical questions? Where the answer is supposed to be obvious?

I avoid asking rhetorical questions. Re: Acts 6:7, which remark here is correct?:
"a great many of the _priests_ were obedient to the faith"
"many people from among the _Jews_, were obedient to the faith"

Acts 6 (NKJV)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=acts+6&version=NKJV
7 Then the word of God spread, and the number of the disciples multiplied greatly in Jerusalem, and a great many of the priests were obedient to the faith.
8 And Stephen, full of faith and power, did great wonders and signs among the people.

Acts 6:7 (from Aramaic), http://dukhrana.com
(Etheridge) And the word of Aloha increased, and the number of the disciples increased in Urishlem greatly: and much people of the Jihudoyee were obedient to the faith.
(Murdock) And the word of God increased, and the number of disciples was enlarged at Jerusalem greatly; and many people from among the Jews, were obedient to the faith.
(Lamsa) And the word of God spread; and the number of the converts in Jerusalem increased greatly; and many people of Jewish faith became converts.

[CST]

I'm inclined to reject any text of the Revelation as original if it gives the number of the beast because I find that self-defeating if the writer has instructed the reader to calculate the number of the beast as a test of their understanding and then immediately tells they what it is.

Are you aware of any manuscript of the Revelation that _lacks_ giving the reader the number of the beast?

No, but since I'm confident even the earliest manuscripts we have are several generations removed from the original that doesn't mean very much.

I'm not going to talk to you any more as whatever your intention I'm just indulging you and think it unhelpful to continue.

I had to laugh a little at the phrase "extremely wretched" in connection w/ the Book of Revelation. Lol.
Extremely wretched understanding! Locked it in at least one box (called 7 years only). Okay.. carry on.. :Peace2:

Interesting, CST, about the # being in the manuscript.. vs. 13:18.

Yeah, I thought so.

Ok, you don't want to share your thoughts because you are worried about moderation, but then how is there to be a conversation? You asking questions and people answering them or not answering them can hardly benefit anyone.

I will offer my two cents:

There are translation errors.

The word of God is Jesus; the Bible is ancient profitable scripture that teaches us of the life of Jesus but Jesus said he would send the Holy Spirit to us. The Holy Spirit will guide us into all truth (John 16).

When doubt of translation discrepancies creeps in, ask for understanding and the spirit will guide us.

I understand David's concerns about moderation. I'm somewhat surprised he's got this far, I've been censured for less in the past.