translations without 'hell'? accurate translations?

[DavidFord]

A copyist's comment somehow got added into the text in Rev 20:5.

Revelation 20 (Aramaic Bible in Plain English, using Crawford manuscript), https://biblehub.com/aramaic-plain-english/revelation/20.htm
4 And I saw seats, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given to them, and these souls who were cut off for the testimony of Yeshua and for the word of God, and because they did not worship The Beast, neither its Image, nor received a mark between their eyes or on their hands, they lived and reigned with The Messiah for one thousand years; 5 And this is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy is he, whoever has part in the first resurrection, and the second death has no authority over these, but they shall be Priests of God and of The Messiah, and they shall reign with him one thousand years.

[rosered]

   Yes  David ,  this add on I see this in some translations in  parenthesis  ,

(But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished.)

In the  aramaic in plain english , it just says,   And this is the first resurrection 

Do you think this changes the meaning/ message  ?

  I can only  see  two ways   we can be dead   and yet still alive mortally
  and that is dead in sin  [ a moral condition    and called blindness   or darkness ]  wordly view

or dead in Christ [ seeing Jesus in the light ] spiritually  given  as new life breathed into us  and as one dead to the world , we are to overcome the world  by being  morally dead to its desires  and passions

If we are spiritually  dead by the law of sin,  than we are  being convicted by the Holy Spirit  , it done its work in us .

  and now we are waiting on  the Lord   to be raised to new life in Christ as born again = the  first resurrection and a different Spirit  leading us  called the Holy One .

He raises the dead  by the Holy Spirit  quickening our ''mortal bodies ''   to  His own  body  by  the Life in the Spirit  , God the Father raised His  , being in Christ  body and covered by His authority .

   The Revelation   book will make no logical sense   if we  cannot see past  the same vale= a valley (used in place names or as a poetic term) or veil The veil came to symbolize modesty and obedience. In many religions it is seen as a symbol of reverence for women to cover their heads.     with the mind of Christ obedience   as comparing us to the ten virgins   wise and foolish  with Holy Spirit  oil or lacking it  by not asking the Father for it . but buying from the marketplace [doctrines of devilish , rebellious spirits ]

  Same problem the children of Israel   encountered    , still bound up  under the law  of  sin = death  by rebellion [looking though a glass darkly ] ,not obedience to the Fathers desire , though His  perfect obedience Son, the Lord Jesus Christ . the lamb and Light of the whole world . 

  John 1  9The TRUE Light who gives light to every man was coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and though the world was made through Him, the world did not recognize Him....  cannot see and still spiritually blind  , wrong spirit  ruling .

  because they are blind still without the Holy Spirit  oil to teach them and guide them  and lead them to CHRIST as Paul states

  being born again by the Holy Spirit  as Jesus states also ......

  Jesus goes on to say to the religious leaders  , if you were blind  you would have no sin , but since you say you see, your sin remains     , so it is what we say  and do not do [obey]   that stumbles us all   and keeps us under the law of sin and death
  and showing us the great need for forgiveness of sin  and the mercy of God  for all mankind .  not just the few .  being  my opinion  , or as I believe  now .

what do you make of Rev 6  as the seals are opened  ?

the  same  symbolism here found in Jeremiah 14 of the four sore plagues  , this is making the Words of Jesus Christ the Spirit of prophecy true  in Matt 23  ,  you will not see ME  ,  than you will say , blessed is He whom comes in the name of the Lord ...

And I saw a pale horse, and the name of him who sat upon it was Death, and Sheol joined him and authority was given to him over a fourth of The Earth to kill with the sword, with starvation, with Death, and by the animals of The Earth

I personally see the book of Revelation as the keys  to the Kingdom  that unlocks  many of the  testimonies and witnesses  of all the prophets , the   whole book of revelation/ revealing the Light   so we can SEE  Jesus Christ  in the Spirit of truth and it  is   the Lords day   being  the  works the Father sent Him to complete /finnish   and John was in the Spirit when writing this all down  for us  to study   with the help of the Holy Spirit  teaching and guiding us to learn of Him ..

To help us all understand  what is going on  and things to come still , by being the Spirit of prophecy  , Paul  desired all to  have  working in them  as keeping a hope of glory alive ..

[DavidFord]

this add on I see this in some translations in  parenthesis  ,
  (But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished.)
  In the  aramaic in plain english , it just says,   And this is the first resurrection 
  Do you think this changes the meaning/ message  ?

Apparently many have speculated on the basis of a phrase that's not even part of the original Revelation:

_The Millennium:  Past, Present Or Future?  A Biblical Defense for the 40 Year Transition Period_ by Joseph Vincent (2012), 227pp., 159
https://www.amazon.com/Millennium-Present-Biblical-Defense-Transition/dp/1937501086/
Yet, even with so much controversy surrounding this questionable passage ["(The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended)"] many commentators have quoted it for years as a basis for many end times religious doctrines and schemes.

what do you make of Rev 6  as the seals are opened  ?  ....
And I saw a pale horse, and the name of him who sat upon it was Death, and Sheol joined him and authority was given to him over a fourth of The Earth to kill with the sword, with starvation, with Death, and by the animals of The Earth

I dunno.  Here's what someone else thinks:

A Preterist Commentary on Revelation 6: Summary and Highlights
https://revelationrevolution.org/revelation-6-a-preterist-commentary/
Who are the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse?  And what were the seven seals?  In the following preterist Bible commentary on Revelation 6 the reader will be exposed to answers to these questions in addition to compelling evidence that every verse in this chapter came to pass during the Jewish War in the first century. 

I believe the four horsemen of the apocalypse have human counterparts in the four kings that supplied auxiliary troops during the siege of Jerusalem.  I believe the four horsemen of the apocalypse are Antiochus, Agrippa II, Sohemus and Malchus.1  The Midrash says that Vespasian had four generals with him during the Roman assault on Israel.  It is also possible that these four horsemen are these four generals?  Regardless of whether they were four generals or four client kings, these four horsemen did indeed conquer as predicted in Revelation 6:2; "take peace from the earth" according to Revelation 6:4; induce famine as implied in Revelation 6:6; and "kill by sword, famine and plague, and by the wild beasts of the earth" when these four kings led their armies in the war on Palestine climaxing in the siege of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.  As a result of this allied assault, Jerusalem was conquered and thousands of Israelites were killed by "sword, famine and plague." 97,000 Jews were exiled2 many of whom were killed in Roman amphitheaters "by sword and wild beasts."3 

In A.D. 69, a year before the fall of Jerusalem, an omen of the coming tragedy was seen in the sky–the sun darkened, the moon turned blood red and a star fell in fulfillment of Revelation 6:12-13:  "There was a great earthquake.  The sun turned black like sackcloth made of goat hair, the whole moon turned blood red, and the stars in the sky fell to the earth."  The earthquake mentioned in v. 12 may refer to the earthquake that hit Jerusalem the year before, in A.D. 68. 

Amidst the fall of Jerusalem, many people fled to caves under the city or to the mountains and caves of the Dead Sea as predicted in Revelation 6:15: then the people "hid in caves and among the rocks of the mountains."  The last pocket of resistance held out at the mountain fortress of Masada.  Realizing that they could not overcome the Romans, 960 Jews took their lives.  In this mass suicide, one can see the eerie fulfillment of Revelation 6:16-17: "They called to the mountains and the rocks, "Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb!  For the great day of their wrath has come, and who can stand?"

[rosered]

  yes   David ,

I have a completely different view of  the millennium   or 1000 yr reign of Christ  . or DAY of the LORD
and entering the rest   spoken of  in the bible  from the beginning.   

   the total of 930 years , that being all in Adam  as dead  and the 70 years   of bondage to Babylon =1000  years
    or the rest from our labours   and the works of Holy Spirit  , being the Father  & Son and all   the hosts   conclude

we are entering that rest in Hebrews when we believe the HEAVENLY FATHER  [GOD ]  IS DOING IT ALL from the beginning

   the plan    of all the ages   surmised  by faith  .......suppose that something is true without having evidence to confirm it.


no one  has to agree  with me though  , I am fine with waiting on the Lord   , it does not prove anything , knowledge  of Gods love will be   the   end all    , faith , hope and love  are the pure   works  of the Holy Spirit in my own opinion ..

[DavidFord]

Reference that the Assyrian Church of the East-- the keeper of the Peshi tta OT (a translation into Aramaic from Hebrew) and the Peshi tta NT (the original Aramaic)-- split from the Catholic Church in A.D. 1054?
A "Catholic Bible" lacks books present in the Peshi tta OT, and thus, isn't "a complete Bible."
https://www.gorgiaspress.com/a-facsimile-edition-of-the-peshi tto-old-testament-based-on-codex-ambrosianus-7a1

[marie glen]

this add on I see this in some translations in  parenthesis  ,
  (But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished.)
  In the  aramaic in plain english , it just says,   And this is the first resurrection 
  Do you think this changes the meaning/ message  ?

Apparently many have speculated on the basis of a phrase that's not even part of the original Revelation:

_The Millennium:  Past, Present Or Future?  A Biblical Defense for the 40 Year Transition Period_ by Joseph Vincent (2012), 227pp., 159
https://www.amazon.com/Millennium-Present-Biblical-Defense-Transition/dp/1937501086/
Yet, even with so much controversy surrounding this questionable passage ["(The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended)"] many commentators have quoted it for years as a basis for many end times religious doctrines and schemes.

what do you make of Rev 6  as the seals are opened  ?  ....
And I saw a pale horse, and the name of him who sat upon it was Death, and Sheol joined him and authority was given to him over a fourth of The Earth to kill with the sword, with starvation, with Death, and by the animals of The Earth

I dunno.  Here's what someone else thinks:

A Preterist Commentary on Revelation 6: Summary and Highlights
https://revelationrevolution.org/revelation-6-a-preterist-commentary/
Who are the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse?  And what were the seven seals?  In the following preterist Bible commentary on Revelation 6 the reader will be exposed to answers to these questions in addition to compelling evidence that every verse in this chapter came to pass during the Jewish War in the first century. 

I believe the four horsemen of the apocalypse have human counterparts in the four kings that supplied auxiliary troops during the siege of Jerusalem.  I believe the four horsemen of the apocalypse are Antiochus, Agrippa II, Sohemus and Malchus.1  The Midrash says that Vespasian had four generals with him during the Roman assault on Israel.  It is also possible that these four horsemen are these four generals?  Regardless of whether they were four generals or four client kings, these four horsemen did indeed conquer as predicted in Revelation 6:2; “take peace from the earth” according to Revelation 6:4; induce famine as implied in Revelation 6:6; and “kill by sword, famine and plague, and by the wild beasts of the earth” when these four kings led their armies in the war on Palestine climaxing in the siege of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.  As a result of this allied assault, Jerusalem was conquered and thousands of Israelites were killed by “sword, famine and plague.” 97,000 Jews were exiled2 many of whom were killed in Roman amphitheaters “by sword and wild beasts.”3 

In A.D. 69, a year before the fall of Jerusalem, an omen of the coming tragedy was seen in the sky–the sun darkened, the moon turned blood red and a star fell in fulfillment of Revelation 6:12-13:  “There was a great earthquake.  The sun turned black like sackcloth made of goat hair, the whole moon turned blood red, and the stars in the sky fell to the earth.”  The earthquake mentioned in v. 12 may refer to the earthquake that hit Jerusalem the year before, in A.D. 68. 

Amidst the fall of Jerusalem, many people fled to caves under the city or to the mountains and caves of the Dead Sea as predicted in Revelation 6:15: then the people “hid in caves and among the rocks of the mountains.”  The last pocket of resistance held out at the mountain fortress of Masada.  Realizing that they could not overcome the Romans, 960 Jews took their lives.  In this mass suicide, one can see the eerie fulfillment of Revelation 6:16-17: “They called to the mountains and the rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb!  For the great day of their wrath has come, and who can stand?”

https://biblehub.com/interlinear/revelation/20-5.htm
 
Young's Literal Translation
and the rest of the dead did not live again till the thousand years may be finished; this is the first rising again.

quoting, tho I underlined :gsmile:

The Order of Resurrection (1 Cor.15:22-28)

20But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. 22For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. 23But each in his own turn: Christ the firstfruits; then at His coming, those who belong to Him.

24Then the end will come, when He hands over the kingdom to God the Father after He has destroyed all dominion, authority, and power. 25For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. 26The last enemy to be destroyed is death. 27For “God has put everything under His feet.”b Now when it says that everything has been put under Him, this clearly does not include the One who put everything under Him. 28And when all things have been subjected to Him, then the Son Himself will be made subject to Him who put all things under Him, so that God may be all in all.

https://biblehub.com/bsb/revelation/20.htm -- except I think of verse 15 as having an implied "by then" :gsmile:

[DavidFord]

"Greek word mistranslation excuse.... nor is it recognized by the scholars who have translated the Bible"
Not even the author of Young's Literal?

Revelation 20:10
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/revelation/20-10.htm
aiōnas/ αἰῶνας/ ages
tōn/ τῶν/ of the
aiōnōn/ αἰώνων/ ages

Matthew 25:41
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/matthew/25-41.htm
pyr/ πῦρ/ fire
to/ τὸ/  -
aiōnion/ αἰώνιον/ eternal

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////
For how many years was the company of Onesimus enjoyed by those to whom Paul sent him?  (an infinite length of time?)

Philemon 1 (King James Bible), https://biblehub.com/kjv/philemon/1.htm
10 I beseech thee for my son Onesimus, whom I have begotten in my bonds:  11 Which in time past was to thee unprofitable, but now profitable to thee and to me:  12 Whom I have sent again.... 15 For perhaps he therefore departed for a season, that thou shouldest receive him for ever; 16 Not now as a servant, but above a servant, a brother beloved, specially to me, but how much more unto thee, both

Philemon 1:15
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/philemon/1-15.htm
echōristhē/ ἐχωρίσθη/ he was separated [from you]
pros/ πρὸς/ for
hōran/ ὥραν/ a time
hina/ ἵνα/ so that
aiōnion/ αἰώνιον/ eternally
auton/ αὐτὸν/ him
apechēs/ ἀπέχῃς/ you might possess

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Sodom got destroyed by fire.  For how many years did Sodom experience the fire that destroyed it?  (an infinite number of years?)

Jude 1:7
https://biblehub.com/kjv/jude/1.htm
Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

Jude 1:7
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/jude/1-7.htm
deigma/ δεῖγμα/ an example
pyros/ πυρὸς/ of fire
aiōniou/ αἰωνίου/eternal
dikēn/ δίκην/ [the] penalty
hypechousai/ ὑπέχουσαι/ undergoing

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Did the mystery mentioned below cease to be a mystery?  or is it a mystery that never ever ceased to be a mystery?

Colossians 1:26 (King James Bible), https://biblehub.com/kjv/colossians/1.htm
Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations,
but now is made manifest to his saints:

Colossians 1:26
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/colossians/1-26.htm
mystērion/ μυστήριον/ mystery
to/ τὸ/  -
apokekrymmenon/ ἀποκεκρυμμένον/ having been hidden
apo/ ἀπὸ/ from
tōn/ τῶν/ the
aiōnōn/ αἰώνων/ ages

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////
How confident are you that there's a "forever" here, and not "age"?:

Jude 1:13 (Young's Literal Translation), https://biblehub.com/ylt/jude/1.htm
wild waves of a sea, foaming out their own shames;
stars going astray, to whom the gloom of the darkness to the age hath been kept.

Jude 1:13
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/jude/1-13.htm
hois/ οἷς/ to whom
ho/ ὁ/ the
zophos/ ζόφος/ gloom
tou/ τοῦ/  -
kotous/ σκότους/ of darkness
eis/ εἰς/ to
aiōna/ αἰῶνα/ [the] age
tetērētai/ τετήρηται/ has been reserved

The Aramaic Jude has:  l'ailm, i.e. to-the-world/age.
https://aramaicdb.lightofword.org/index.php/en/interlinear-search
Peshi tta tool at http://dukhrana.com

[rosered]

 
  I   see the dead spiritually  as just  earthly vessels  [vanity/  know nothing of the true and living God  ] but the evil spirits ruling over the flesh bodies  , as in the world and of the world  [sin and spirit of error ] 1 John 4:1-6


being born again of the HOLY SPIRIT  is the in " Christ anointing " sent by the Father  to do His will and desire by salvation of what was nothing to somthing   ,  whatever proceeds out of the mouth of God will never return to Him void , but purposed  exactly as He planned

  even the  BEAST  shall hate the whore and eat her flesh and burn her with fire  because GOD purposed it in their hearts to do so   in the  proper timing ..
 
rev 17 The Victory of the Lamb


...15Then the angel said to me, "The waters you saw, where the prostitute was seated, are peoples and multitudes and nations and tongues.


16And the ten horns and the beast that you saw will hate the prostitute

. They will leave her desolate and naked, and will eat her flesh and burn her with fire.

17For God has put it into their hearts to carry out His purpose by uniting to give their kingdom to the beast, until the words of God are fulfilled....

unless we can  grasp this action  by the Holy Spirit   witness  and knowing this  by His Word  and Spirit in our hearts and minds .....

we would see it is  as a fearful thing   and very disturbing   and be confused  as to why  GOD  would allow  such suffering   to take place  , but by faith  and having the substance of hope in something wonderful  will come of all the  madness  and warring  taking place   we could not  have any peace  in seeing this happening  in real life     , but now understand    that it is GODS purpose   and at the end of our faith and hope in God  it will bring a great glory to GOD  in the earth as it is in heaven  .
   I believe it will be impossible to discern   without the   HOLY SPIRIT    comforting us as to what is going on   in the world

  but our   Hope is in believing GOD and HIS WORD IS TRUE ,.    We see this happening in every generation in some sort of  way   to make us understand the desire of GOD  .
    I was using this as an example  only and know   the term  ,'' hell ''   is a judgement in the   earth     that  brings forth   the TRUTH   and knowing the truth sets us free .     and no longer bound up in her  / babylonian confusion ...   taste not touch not  , lest you recieve her plagues   , the beast is one of her plagues          .

[DavidFord]

Some Greek mss. for Romans 8:1 lack material present in the original Aramaic:

Romans 8:1, http://dukhrana.com
(Etheridge) Hence, there is no condemnation to them who do not walk according to the flesh, in Jeshu Meshiha.
(Murdock) There is therefore no condemnation, to them who, in Jesus Messiah, walk not after the flesh.
(KJV) There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

Romans 8:1 (HCSB), https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=romans+8%3A1&version=KJV;HCSB
8 Therefore, no condemnation now exists for those in Christ Jesus,[a]
a:  Other mss add _who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit_

[rosered]

Some Greek mss. for Romans 8:1 lack material present in the original Aramaic:

Romans 8:1, http://dukhrana.com
(Etheridge) Hence, there is no condemnation to them who do not walk according to the flesh, in Jeshu Meshiha.
(Murdock) There is therefore no condemnation, to them who, in Jesus Messiah, walk not after the flesh.
(KJV) There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

Romans 8:1 (HCSB), https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=romans+8%3A1&version=KJV;HCSB
8 Therefore, no condemnation now exists for those in Christ Jesus,[a]
a:  Other mss add _who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit_

  Yes!!    walking in the Spirit of life in   Jesus Christ peace  :thumbsup:

[DavidFord]

For Mark 3:29, is it:  "is guilty of an eternal sin"?  "is subject to eternal judgment"?

Mark 3:29 (HCSB)
But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit
never has forgiveness,
but is guilty of an eternal sin"[a: Other mss read
_is subject to eternal judgment_]--

As of A.D. 175, the text mentioned judgment and not sin:

Diatesseron 14:29
but whosoever shall blaspheme against the Holy Spirit,
there is no forgiveness for him for ever,
but he is deserving of eternal punishment:

The original Aramaic of the Peshi tta mentions judgment and not sin:

Mark 3:29 (Younan)
but he who blasphemes against the Rukha d'Qudsha [Spirit of Holiness]
has no forgiveness ever,
rather he is guilty before the dina [judgment] that is eternal."

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////
For Luke 9:54-56, did it have all the footnoted material?

Luke 9:54-56 (HCSB)
54 When the disciples James and John saw this, they said,
"Lord, do You want us to call down fire from heaven to consume them?"[a: Other mss add _as Elijah also did_]
55 But He turned and rebuked them,[b: Other mss add _and said,
"You don't know what kind of spirit you belong to.
56 For the Son of Man did not come to destroy people's lives but to save them,"_]
56 and they went to another village.

The complete text was present in both instances as of A.D. 175:

Diatesseron 38:45-47
And when James and John his disciples saw it, they said unto him,
Our Lord, wilt thou that we speak, and fire come down from heaven, to extirpate them, as did Elijah also?
And Jesus turned, and rebuked them, and said,
Ye know not of what spirit ye are.
Verily the Son of man did not come to destroy lives, but to give life.
And they went to another village.

The original Aramaic of the Peshi tta has the complete text in both instances:

Luke 9:54-56 (Younan)
54. And when his students Yaqub and Yukhanan saw (it), they said to him,
"Maran, do you desire us to speak and have fire descend from heaven and consume them as Eliyah also did?"
55. And he turned around and rebuked them and said,
"You do not realize of which rukha [spirit] you are.
56. For the Son of Man did not come to destroy souls,
but to make (them) live."
And they went to another village.

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Was Mt 21:44 in the original Matthew?

Matthew 21:44 (HCSB)
[44 Whoever falls on this stone
will be broken to pieces;
but on whoever it falls,
it will grind him to powder!]"[a:
Other mss omit bracketed text]

The text was present as of A.D. 175:

Diatesseron 33:58
And whosoever falleth on this stone
shall be broken in pieces:
but on whomsoever it falleth,
it will grind him to powder.

The original Aramaic of the Peshi tta contains a slightly-simpler version of that text:

Matthew 21:44 (Younan)
And whoever falls upon this Stone
will be broken,
and any (that) it falls upon,
it will destroy."

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Was Mt 18:11 in the original Matthew?

Matthew 18:11 (HCSB)
[11 For the Son of Man has come to save the lost.][a: Other mss omit bracketed text]

All of the text was present as of A.D. 175:

Diatesseron 27:29
The Son of man came to save the thing which was lost.

The original Aramaic of the Peshi tta has the complete text:

Matthew 18:11 (Younan)
For the Son of Man has come to save that which was lost.

-- extracts from
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/aus.religion.islam/bzdQCJTVhyk/iI-uGFZ9CjwJ

[DavidFord]

Per Acts 9:29, I concede that Paul spoke Greek.
Do you think Paul thought in:  Greek?  Latin?  Hebrew?  Aramaic?
Do you think Paul dictated his letters in:  Greek?  Latin?  Hebrew?  Aramaic?
Do you think Acts 9:29 originally said Paul debated:  Yehudians who knew Greek?  Greeks?

Peshi tta verses that contains lexeme 1:1341, http://dukhrana.com 
Luke 23:38
(Etheridge) And there was also an inscription which was written over him in Greek and Roman and Hebrew, [Javanoith, Rumoith, Ebroith.] THIS IS THE KING OF THE JIHUDOYEE.
(Murdock) And there was likewise a superscription over him, written in Greek, and Latin, and Hebrew: THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS.
(Lamsa) There was also an inscription which was written over him, in Greek and Roman, and Hebrew, THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS.
(KJV) And a superscription also was written over him in letters of Greek, and Latin, and Hebrew, THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS.

John 19:20
(Etheridge) And this title many of the Jihudoyee read; for nigh to the city was the place where Jeshu was crucified; and the writing was in Hebrew and Greek and Roman.
(Murdock) And many of the Jews read this label; because the place where Jesus was crucified, was near to Jerusalem; and it was written in Hebrew and Greek and Latin.
(Lamsa) And a great many Jews read this tablet, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city; and it was written in Hebrew and in Greek and in Roman.
(KJV) This title then read many of the Jews: for the place where Jesus was crucified was nigh to the city: and it was written in Hebrew, and Greek, and Latin.

Acts 9:29
(Etheridge) And he spake in the name of Jeshu with boldness,
and disputed with those Jihudoyee who knew Greek; [Javanith.]
but they were wishful to kill him.
(Murdock) And he spoke openly in the name of Jesus
and disputed with those Jews who understood Greek.
But they wished to kill him:
(Lamsa) And he spoke openly in the name of Jesus,
and debated with the Jews who understood Greek:
but they wanted to kill him.
(KJV) And he spake boldly in the name of the Lord Jesus,
and disputed against the Grecians:
but they went about to slay him.

Acts 21:37
(Etheridge) And as they came to enter into the fortress, Paulos himself said to the tribune, May I be permitted to speak to the people ? But he said to him, Javanith knowest thou ?
(Murdock) And when he came near to entering the castle, Paul said to the Chiliarch: Wilt thou permit me to speak with thee ? And he said to him: Dost thou know Greek?
(Lamsa) And as Paul was about to be led into headquarters, he said to the chief captain, May I speak to you? The captain said, Can you speak Greek?
(KJV) And as Paul was to be led into the castle, he said unto the chief captain, May I speak unto thee? Who said, Canst thou speak Greek?

[DavidFord]

For Rom 5:1, was it originally: "we have peace with God"?  "let us have peace with God"?
Romans 5:1 (NIV)
Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we[a] have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,
a:  Many manuscripts _let us_

How did Rom 11:6 originally read?
Romans 11:6 (HCSB)
Now if by grace, then it is not by works; otherwise grace ceases to be grace.[a]
a:  Other mss add _But if of works it is no longer grace; otherwise work is no longer work._

Did Heb 10:38 originally have: "my righteous one"?  "the righteous one"?
Hebrews 10:38 (NIV)
38 And,
"But my righteous[a] one will live by faith.
    And I take no pleasure
    in the one who shrinks back."
a:  Some early manuscripts _But the righteous_

[DavidFord]

What specific verse(s) in Acts 21 leads you to suspect that Greek was Paul's preferred language?  (Acts 21:28?)

Paul understood spoken Aramaic, and spoke Aramaic; Jesus selected Aramaic to speak to Paul with:
From
https://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?qs_version=NIV&quicksearch=aramaic&begin=47&end=73
Acts 21:40 (NIV) After receiving the commander's permission, Paul stood on the steps and motioned to the crowd.  When they were all silent, he said to them in Aramaic:
Acts 22:2 When they heard him speak to them in Aramaic, they became very quiet.  Then Paul said:
Acts 26:14 We all fell to the ground, and I heard a voice saying to me in Aramaic, 'Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?  It is hard for you to kick against the goads.'

Paul used an Aramaic phrase at the end of one of his letters:
1 Cor 16:22 (HCSB)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20cor%2016%3A22&version=HCSB
If anyone does not love the Lord, a curse be on him.  Marana tha that is, Lord, come![a]
a:  Or Maran atha (an Aram expression transliterated into Gk) = Our Lord has come!

The Mary mentioned here spoke Aramaic:
John 20:16 (NIV) Jesus said to her, "Mary."  She turned toward him and cried out in Aramaic, "Rabboni!" (which means "Teacher").

Jesus spoke Aramaic:
From
https://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?qs_version=TPT&quicksearch=aramaic&begin=47&end=73
Matthew 27:46 (TPT) And at three o'clock Jesus shouted with a mighty voice in Aramaic, "Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?"—that is, "My God, My God, why have you deserted me?"
Mark 5:41 He tenderly clasped the child's hand in his and said to her in Aramaic, "Talitha koum," which means, "Little girl, wake up from the sleep of death."
Mark 7:34 Then he gazed into heaven, sighed deeply, and spoke to the man's ears and tongue, "Ethpathakh," which is Aramaic for "Open up, now!"

At the time of Jesus' crucifixion, the residents of Jerusalem spoke Aramaic:
Acts 1:18-19 (PHILLIPS)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+1:18&version=PHILLIPS
(This man had bought a piece of land with the proceeds of his infamy, but his body swelled up and his intestines burst. This fact became well known to all the residents of Jerusalem so that the piece of land came to be called in their Aramaic language Akeldama, which means "the field of blood".)

What led you to conclude that Greek was widely spoken among first-century Jews?

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
The Antiquities of the Jews, 20.263
Flavius Josephus  translated by William Whiston
https://lexundria.com/j_aj/20.263/wst, https://lexundria.com/j_aj/20.264/wst, https://lexundria.com/j_aj/20.265/wst
263 For those of my own nation freely acknowledge that I far exceed them in the learning belonging to the Jews; I have also taken a great deal of pains to obtain the learning of the Greeks, and understand the elements of the Greek language, although I have so long accustomed myself to speak our own tongue, that I cannot pronounce Greek with sufficient exactness;
264 for our nation does not encourage those that learn the languages of many nations, and so adorn their discourses with the smoothness of their periods; because they look upon this sort of accomplishment as common, not only to all sorts of free-men, but to as many of the servants as please to learn them. But they give him the testimony of being a wise man who is fully acquainted with our laws, and is able to interpret their meaning;
265 on which account, as there have been many who have done their endeavors with great patience to obtain this learning, there have yet hardly been so many as two or three that have succeeded therein, who were immediately well rewarded for their pains.

Against Apion, 1.50
Flavius Josephus  translated by William Whiston
https://lexundria.com/j_ap/1.50/wst
50 Afterward I got leisure at Rome; and when all my materials were prepared for that work, I made use of some persons to assist me in learning the Greek tongue, and by these means I composed the history of those transactions; and I was so well assured of the truth of what I related, that I first of all appealed to those that had the supreme command in that war, Vespasian and Titus, as witnesses for me,

[marie glen]

Jesus likely spoke the Aramaic, as He was not talking to gentiles.. It’s likely many knew Greek? It being so widespread and prevalent? But still seems most likely to me the Lord spoke to His listeners - a LOT of everyday folks - in the Aramaic.

Which to me means He would not have referred to ’Hades’ but to “Sheol” where “there is no thought nor doing” (called device in older translations than our more modern ones).

Where there is “dust” - Psalm 30:9. Where “the bed and covering is worms”. (Yes active imaginations love to see this differently. Isaiah 14)

But when the Lord talked about judgment it was fiery. Using Gehenna (valley, where children were sacrificed to Molech and later trash, dead animals and bodies of criminals were burned - “better you cast your evil eye there than your whole body be thrown there” - and the valley, one of three connected, where the notorious (fiery) Armageddon is prophesied to occur. And is referred to by the prophets as “judgment upon the nations”. Ps.2 - “Why do the nations rage?!” A blend of anger and madness?

...don’t you think Armageddon of the nations will turn into a lake of fire? the smoke if rising up in all memories forever and ever? The conclusion of God’s truth proving documentary...

AND, Jesus said - “All in the tombs” (where? in the Greek hades? in a temporary hell?) - “all in the tombs” (graves) “will hear His voice and will come forth” (from the graves/tombs!) “some in the resurrection of life” (at His return/appearing) “and some in the resurrection of judgment” (Jn.5:28-29; Rev.20).

“ForGod KNOWS how to preserve the unjust for CORRECTION/kolasis on day of judgment” (an age of 500 years? See the pattern of the Fall Holy Days - Leviticus 23).

The complete bubble called hell will be totally burst by The Truth.

[marie glen]

P.S. — “But the wisdom from above is first of all pure, then peaceable, gentle, accommodating, full of mercy and good fruit, impartial, and sincere.”

I cannot believe the resurrection of judgment is a waking up then dumping into a lake of fire. By end of “the judgment” (the Lord talked about) I believe He will have “drawn ALL to Himself” (Jn.12:32) And is when “ALL the ends of Earth will remember - Hebrew, come to their senses - and will turn to the LORD and ALL families of the nations will worship/rejoice before Him” (Ps.22:27 that so very literal prophecy psalm, not a bone of Him was broken, etc).

Thus during “the judgment” ALL names get written into the Book of Life. And the 2nd death remains what the verse says it is, the death of death and all its “shadow” caused by imperfection/“missing the mark” OR we could say, caused by His creating beings endowed with genuine thinking and reasoning ability and letting its fruit exist.

He “is perfect” and perfect never, ever misses the mark.

“God is love” and “love never fails” 1 Jn.4:8 and 1Cor.13:8.


But I do believe the potential of being in an afterlife lake of fire is possible even for humans, but shall not occur. And I believe Satan&Co. spend time there being purified.. A lake of fire occurring when “all things are made new” at the “all in all” event.. a drastic burning away of the chaff.

      10But the day of the Lord will come like a thief” - the Lord’s return amidst fiery Armageddon - “in which the heavens will pass away with a roar, and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up. 11Since all these things are to be destroyed in this way, what sort of people ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness, 12looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be destroyed by burning, and the elements will melt with intense heat! 13BUT according to His promise we are looking for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.”

Two fiery events, like bookends to the Lord’s long second advent..?

[DavidFord]

How do you think Mark 7:3 originally read?:
"unless they ceremonially [literally: "with a fist"] wash [their] hands"?
"unless they carefully wash their hands"?

http://web.ovc.edu/terry/tc/lay04mrk.htm
Mark 7:3:
TEXT: "unless they ceremonially wash [their] hands"
EVIDENCE: A B D K L X Theta Pi f1 f13 28 33 565 700 892 1010 1241 Byz Lect most lat syr(h)margin
TRANSLATIONS: ASV RSVn NASV NIV NEBn TEV
RANK: A
NOTES: "unless they wash [their] hands"
EVIDENCE: Delta syr(s) cop(south)
TRANSLATIONS: RSV* NEB
NOTES: "unless they frequently wash [their] hands"
EVIDENCE: S W three lat vg syr(p,h) cop(north)
TRANSLATIONS: KJV NEBn
COMMENTS: The word translated "ceremonially" literally means "with a fist." Since the exact ceremony referred to is unknown, some copyists omitted the word while others replaced it with a word that makes more sense.

4435. pugmé
https://biblehub.com/greek/4435.htm
pugmé: the fist
Original Word: πυγμή, ῆς, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: pugmé
Phonetic Spelling: (poog-may')
Definition: the fist
Usage: the fist.

Mark 7:3, http://dukhrana.com
(Etheridge) For all the Jihudoyee and Pharishee, unless they carefully wash their hands, do not eat, because they hold the tradition of the elders;
(Murdock) For all the Jews and the Pharisees, unless they carefully wash their hands do not eat; because they hold fast the tradition of the Elders.

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
How do you think Luke 7:45 originally read?:
"since she entered"?    "since I entered"?

Luke 7:36-37 (Etheridge) NOW there came one of the Pharishee requesting of him to eat with him: and he entered into the house of the Pharisha, and reclined.  And a woman, a sinner, was in that city; and when she knew that in the house of the Pharisha he reclined, she took a vase of ointment,

Luke 7:45
(Murdock) Thou gavest me no kiss; but this woman, since she came in, hath not ceased to kiss my feet.
(Lamsa) You did not kiss me; but she, since she entered, has not ceased to kiss my feet.
(KJV) Thou gavest me no kiss: but this woman since the time I came in hath not ceased to kiss my feet.

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
How do you think Luke 7:47 originally read?:
"her many sins have been forgiven, because she did love much"?
"because her sins that are forgiven her are many, she has loved much"?

Luke 7:47 (Young's Literal Translation)
therefore I say to thee, her many sins have been forgiven, because she did love much;
but to whom little is forgiven, little he doth love.'

Luke 7:47 (based on Younan), http://dukhrana.com
For I say this to you:
because her sins that are forgiven her are many,
she has loved much.
But he that is forgiven little,
him loves little."

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
What's the better understanding of John 6:21: 
the disciples wanted/ were willing to receive Jesus into the boat?
the disciples were glad/ rejoiced to receive Jesus into the boat?

John 6:21
(Murdock) And they were glad to receive him into the ship. And, directly, the ship was at the land to which they were going.
(Lamsa) So they wanted to receive him into the boat; but soon the boat reached the land to which they were going.

http://cal.huc.edu/getlex.php?coord=620430621&word=0
cby verb G
ṣby vb. to desire
G
  1 to desire Com.
  2 to be pleased Syr. --(a) p.p. + l_ X : to please X CPA.
  3 (of inanimate) : to prefer, to deserve to be Syr.
C
  1 to arouse the will Syr.
Gt
  1 w. ܒ‏_ : to be pleased with, find pleasing Syr. --(a) to be in favor of, prefer Syr. --(b) to love Syr. --(c) to wish Syr, JBA.
  2 to consent, to be mutually willing Gal, Syr, JBAg.

John 6:21 (YLT)
21 they were willing then to receive him into the boat, and immediately the boat came unto the land to which they were going.

2309. theló
https://biblehub.com/greek/2309.htm
theló: to will, wish
Original Word: θέλω
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: theló
Phonetic Spelling: ( eth-el'-o,)
Definition: to will, wish
Usage: I will, wish, desire, am willing, intend, design

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Greek is a very precise language.  Improved understanding of the text can be gotten by inspecting the original prior to its being translated and recopied numerous times.

What's the better understanding of John 10:1-18, specifically verses 7 and 9:
Jesus is "the gate for the sheep"?
Jesus is "the door of the sheep"?
Jesus is "the gatekeeper of the sheep"?

John 10:7,9 (NIV)
7 Therefore Jesus said again, "Very truly I tell you, I am the gate for the sheep.
9 I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved....
John 10:7,9 (HCSB)
7 So Jesus said again, "I assure you:  I am the door of the sheep.
9 I am the door.  If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved....

John 10 (based on Younan, and based on analysis of verses 7 and 9 and Mark 13:34 using the Peshi tta tool at http://dukhrana.com)
1. "Amain, amain I say to you that,
he who does not enter into the sheepfold of the flock by the gate,
but climbs up by another place,
he is a thief and a robber.[Rabban Yeshua uses a wordplay here between TARA (gate) and TYARA (sheepfold). -- PY]
2. But he who enters by the gate
is the shepherd of the flock.
3. And to this man the gatekeeper opens the gate,
and the flock hears his voice
and he calls his sheep by their names
and he leads them out.
4. And when he leads out his flock
he goes before it 
and his sheep go after him
because they know his voice.
5. However, the flock does not go after a stranger,[literally: foreigner]
rather it flees from him
because it does not know the voice of the stranger."
6. Yeshua told them this pelatha [parable] but they did not comprehend what he spoke with them. 7. Now Yeshua again said to them,
"Amain, amain I say to you that,
ENA-NA the Gatekeeper of the flock.[a wordplay exists here with ENA (I) and ANA (Flock). The word for flock here is plural. -- PY]
8. And all those who have come are thieves and robbers
if the flocks have not heard them.[is that flock plural?]
9. ENA-NA the Gatekeeper,
and if a man should enter by me he will live
and will enter and go out and he will find pasture.
10. A thief does not come but that (he) may steal and kill and destroy.
I have come that they may have life,
and they may have something which is abundant.
11. ENA-NA the Good Shepherd.
The Good Shepherd lays down napshah [his life, literally: his breath] for his flock.
12. But a hireling who is not the shepherd,
nor are the sheep his,
leaves the sheep and flees when he sees a wolf coming.
And the wolf comes (and) plunders and scatters the flock.
13. Now the hireling flees because he is hired
and he does not care about the flock.
14. ENA-NA the Good Shepherd,
and I know those who are mine,
and I'm known by those who are mine,
15. just as Abbi [my Father] knows me,
and I know Abbi.
And I lay down my life for the sake of the flock.
16. And I also have other sheep,
those who were not from this sheepfold.
And it is necessary for me to also bring them,
and they will hear my voice,
and all the flocks will become one,
and (there will be) one Shepherd.
17. Abbi loves me because of this:
that I lay down my life,
that I might take it up again.
18. No man takes it from me,
but I lay it down by my own will.
For I have authority to lay it down,
and I have authority to take it up again,
for I have received this commandment from Abbi."

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
What's the better understanding of John 14:2?:
"and if not, I would have told you"?
"and it is necessary I would have told you"?

John 14:2 (YLT)
in the house of my Father are many mansions;
and if not, I would have told you;
I go on to prepare a place for you;

John 14:2 (based on Younan, on looking at the Aramaic for it and for Acts 3:21, and on Torrey, 113)
The rooms (in) the house of Abbi [my Father] are many,
wala [and it is necessary] I would have told you,
for I go to prepare a place for you.

Acts 3:20-21 And He sent to you that which He had prepared for you, Yeshua the Meshikha, whom wla [it is necessary] for heaven to receive until the fullness of the times of all these (things) that Allaha spoke by the mouth of qedisha nabiuhi [of His holy nabia] of old.

_Our Translated Gospels: Some of the Evidence_ (1936), 172pp. by Charles Cutler Torrey
https://archive.org/details/OurTranslatedGospelsCCTorrey/page/n1

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Do you think Acts 4:25 originally did, or didn't, mention:  'our father'?  'the Holy Spirit'?

http://web.ovc.edu/terry/tc/lay11act.htm
Acts 4:25:
TEXT: "who by the mouth of our father David, your servant, did say through the Holy Spirit, 'Why did the Gentiles'"
EVIDENCE: p74 S A B E Psi 33 945 1739 one lat syr(h)?
TRANSLATIONS: ASV RSV NASV NIV TEV
RANK: D
NOTES: "who through the mouth of David, your servant, did say, 'Why did the Gentiles'"
EVIDENCE: P 614 1241 2495 Byz
TRANSLATIONS: KJV ASVn NEBn
NOTES: "who through the mouth of David, your servant, did say through the Holy Spirit, 'Why did the Gentiles'"
EVIDENCE: D (both Greek and Latin) syr(p) most cop
TRANSLATIONS: ASVn? NEB
OTHER: "the Holy Spirit, through the mouth of our father David, your servant, did say, 'Why did the Gentiles'"
EVIDENCE: 629 two lat vg syr(h)? some cop(north)
COMMENTS: The word order of the text reading is very confusing, "our father" preceding "through the Holy Spirit" which precedes "the mouth of David." This difficult word order probably accounts for the changes made in this passage. Several copyists omitted "our father" which seems to be grammatically stranded at the beginning of the sentence. Perhaps others questioned the theology of having God speak "through the Holy Spirit," like they are two different entities, and omitted the words "the Holy Spirit," leaving "through" to precede "the mouth of David."

Acts 4 (based on Younan)
24-26. And they, when they heard, they raised their voice as one to Allaha, and they said,
"MrYa [Master YHWH],
you are Allaha,
He who made heaven and earth
and the seas and everything that is in them.
And you are He who spoke
through the Rukha d'Qudsha [Spirit of Holiness]
by the mouth of Dawid your servant,
'Why do the nations rage,
and the peoples plan worthless (things)?
The malka [kings] and rulers of the earth have risen
and have deliberated as one
against MrYa and against Meshikheh [His Meshikha].'

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
The Aramaic Peshi tta NT is replete with explicit references to 'YHWH.'  Do you think the NT originally did, or didn't, have such?

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
For Acts 10:36, do you agree that "the text reading is not proper Greek but it is the sort of Greek that one would expect in a translation from Aramaic"?

http://web.ovc.edu/terry/tc/lay11act.htm
Acts 10:36:
TEXT: "plYou know the word which he sent to the sons"
EVIDENCE: p74 S* C D E P Psi 945 1241 2495 Byz Lect one lat syr
TRANSLATIONS: KJV ASV RSV NASV NIV TEV
RANK: C
NOTES: "plYou know he sent the word to the sons"
EVIDENCE: Sa A B 81 614 1739 most lat vg cop
TRANSLATIONS: ASVn NASVn NEB
COMMENTS: The difference in the two readings is the inclusion or omission of "which" which is included in brackets in the UBS text. The text reading is not proper Greek but it is the sort of Greek that one would expect in a translation from Aramaic. Since the last two letters of the Greek word for "word" spell the Greek word for "which," it is possible that the word "which" was accidently added when copyists saw those letters twice. On the other hand, it is also possible that the word "which" was originally present and it was accidently omitted when copyists' eyes jumped from the end of "word" to the end of "which."

====================================================.
My response to Ehrman is below.  How would you respond to him?

_Jesus, Interrupted:  Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible (And Why We Don't Know About Them)_ by Bart D. Ehrman (2009), 292pp.  On 36, 37
https://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Interrupted-Revealing-Hidden-Contradictions/dp/0061173940/
Joseph is not Jesus' father.  But that creates an obvious problem.  If Jesus is not a blood-relation to Joseph, why is it that Matthew and Luke trace Jesus' bloodline precisely through Joseph?  This is a question that neither author answers:  both accounts give a genealogy that can't be the genealogy of Jesus, since his only bloodline goes through Mary, yet neither author provides her genealogy.  ....  Luke explicitly indicates that the family line is that of Joseph, not Mary (Luke 1:23; also Matthew 1:16).  ....
There are other problems.  In ... Matthew's genealogy .... from the Babylonian disaster to the birth of Jesus, fourteen generations (1:17).  Fourteen, fourteen, and fourteen-it is almost as if God had planned it this way.  ....  The problem is that the fourteen-fourteen-fourteen schema doesn't actually work.  If you read through the names carefully, you'll see that in the third set of fourteen there are in fact only thirteen generations.

////////////////////////////
Matthew 1:17 says there are 14, 14, 14 generations.
Greek manuscripts of Matthew's genealogy mistakenly list 14, 14, 13 generations.
In Aramaic mss. of Matthew's genealogy, with Mt 1:16's "gbra" correctly 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).
Jesus is a descendant of King David on his biological mother Mary's side (per Mt's genealogy), and on his step-dad Joseph's side (per Lk's genealogy).

====================================================.
Re: Jeremiah, my response to Ehrman is below.  How would you respond to him?

_Jesus, Interrupted:  Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible (And Why We Don't Know About Them)_ by Bart D. Ehrman (2009), 292pp., 51
https://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Interrupted-Revealing-Hidden-Contradictions/dp/0061173940/
3. _Why does Matthew quote the wrong prophet?_  When Matthew indicates that Judas betrayed Jesus for thirty pieces of silver, he notes (as by now we expect of him) that this was in fulfillment of Scripture:  "Then was fulfilled what had been spoken through the prophet Jeremiah, And they took the thirty pieces of silver ... and they gave them for the potter's field" (Mathew 27:9-10).  The problem is that this prophecy is not found in Jeremiah.  It appears to be a loose quotation of Zechariah 11:3.

////////////////////////////
For Mt 27:9-10, Greek manuscripts have the erroneous addition that Jeremiah said a particular remark, when there's no Old Testament evidence that Jeremiah said that.  The Aramaic original leaves unspecified the name of the prophet, avoiding an unnecessary contradiction:
(based on Younan)
"Then the thing was fulfilled which was spoken of by the 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."

====================================================.
As it was originally written, do you think Luke 2:1 read:  "his dominion"/"his empire"?  "the world"?

Luke 2:1
(Etheridge) NOW it was in those days that there went forth a mandate from Augustus Caesar to enrol the people of his dominion.
(Lamsa) AND it happened in those days that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, to take a census of all the people in his empire.
(KJV) And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed.

====================================================.
As it was originally written, do you think Luke 2:11 did, or didn't, explicitly refer to YHWH?

Luke 2:11 (based on Younan)
For today is born to you in the medintha [city] of Dawid the Paruqa [Deliverer] who is MrYa [Master YHWH], the Meshikha.
Luke 2:11 (KJV)
For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.

From
https://biblehub.com/commentaries/luke/2-11.htm
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary  ....
Christ the Lord-- "magnificent appellation!" [Bengel].  "This is the only place where these words come together; and I see no way of understanding this "Lord" but as corresponding to the Hebrew Jehovah" [Alford].
....
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges  ....
the Lord] In the lower sense the word is used as a mere title of distinction; in the higher sense it is (as in the LXX.) the equivalent of the Hebrew 'Jehovah'—the ineffable name.

[marie glen]

Greek is a very precise language.  Improved understanding of the text can be gotten by inspecting the original prior to its being translated and recopied numerous times.

A-men!! And context of course.. For myself, I believe in an annual (extensive) reading of our 'loaf'/daily bread, our New Testament of His covenant with us.. As we continue reading and studying by the language tools we now have at our fingertips.. by reading and receiving as a child.. and of course context and also considering "all" pertaining verses.. We will finally come to understand all truth.. True from not true.. And there sure is aLOT of untrue upon the planet! :doh: :laughing7: But which we can be assured only Truth, ultimately will remain standing.. hence wanting our works to be based upon and consist only of Truth... "householders being faithful in feeding His sheep/lambs/little ones"..

Meaning NO doctrine no matter HOW strongly held (stronghold) is beyond intense biblical scrutiny! :gsmile: (Especially one which blasphemes His holy name.. "Hallowed, be His name"!)

[DavidFord]

As it was originally written, do you think Luke 1:39 originally read:  'to the city Judah'?  'to the city Jutta'?  'to the province of Judah'?

Pulpit Commentary
https://biblehub.com/commentaries/luke/1-39.htm
Verse 39.  ....  Into a city of Juda.  There is no such city known as "Juda."  Some have supposed that the text is corrupt here, and that for "Yuda" we should read "Jutta," which, according to Joshua 15:55, was a priestly city in the hill country.

Charles C. Torrey, "The Translations Made from the Original Aramaic Gospels" in _Studies in the History of Religions, Presented to Crawford Howell Toy by Pupils, Colleagues and Friends_ (1912), 269-317.   From 290-292 
https://archive.org/stream/studiesinhistory00lyonuoft/studiesinhistory00lyonuoft_djvu.txt
The best starting point is afforded by the 'Gospel of the Infancy,' comprising the first two chapters of Luke.  Here is a narrative which was certainly not invented by Luke himself.  It is not based on oral tradition, in fact it has none of the characteristics of such tradition, but is from beginning to end the conception of a _litterateur_ of skill and taste, who wrote in the spirit of the Old Testament narratives.  The style, which is homogeneous throughout, is as far removed from that of the preceding prologue as the east is from the west.  The Greek is distinctly of the 'translation' variety, altogether like that of the Greek books of Samuel, or 1 Maccabees, or Judith.  It is not a matter of occasional or frequent Hebraisms, the style is one continuous Hebraism.  I have already touched upon the language of these two chapters, in the preceding general discussion, reserving for this place the proof that the narrative was composed in a Semitic tongue.

Luke i.39 reads as follows : ....  "And Mary arose in those days and went into the hill country with haste, to ... , and entered into the house of Zachariah," etc.  The phrase εἰς πόλιν Ἰούδα has been an unsolved riddle.  It cannot mean 'to _a_ city of Judah (or Judea),' which would be εἰς πόλιν τῆς Ἰουδαίας, as in verse 26 of this chapter.  The only permissible rendering is 'to the city (named) Judah,' but there was no city of that name.  No commentator has been able to suggest any plausible explanation of the phrase.  The Greek text shows no variation, and there is no reason to doubt its correctness. 

But as soon as we go back of the Greek to the underlying Semitic, the original meaning of the troublesome phrase is evident.  What the author of the narrative wrote was ... , and the translation should have been ... 'to _the province_ of Judea.'  It is the phrase which occurs, for example, in Ezra v.8, ... , where the Greek has ... , and in 2 Macc. i.1, ... ; cf. also Neh. i.3, xi.3.

That this was the intent of the author is made still more evident by the comparison of verse 65, ... , and ii.4, ....  In mentioning the journey from Nazareth to the neighborhood of Jerusalem, it was most natural to speak of passing _through the hill country into Judea_ ; thus in the book of Judith, where the narrator is dealing with this same route, he represents the high priest in Jerusalem as calling upon the people of Shechem and Samaria "to hold the passes into the hill country, because through them was the entrance into Judea," .... 

The reason why the Greek of Luke i.39 mistranslates is perfectly obvious, and a very good one : because in the first century A.D. the use of ... in the signification _'province'_ was practically obsolete, having been supplanted by the meaning 'city.'  As I have pointed out elsewhere,["Notes on the Aramaic Part of Daniel," in the Transactions of the Connecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences, 15. 259 f. (1909)] the uniform meaning of the word (whether Hebrew or Aramaic) in the Old Testament was 'province' ; yet its use to mean 'city' was also common as early as the second century B.C., as seems to be shown by the old Greek translation (πόλις) in Dan. xi.24.  By the second century A.D. the meaning 'city' was the only usual one.  Thus we have ... , 'the city of Chalcis,' in the _Megillath Taanith_; and the translator Symmachus even 'corrects' the ... of the older Greek versions of the Old Testament to πόλις in 1 Kings xx.14, Dan. viii.2 ; and (presumably also his correction) in the conflate Hexaplar text of Neh. i.3, ....   The mistranslation in Dan. viii.2 is a perfect parallel to the one in Luke, for the Hebrew reads ... , which Symmachus renders 'in _the city_ (!) Elam.'  The word continued to keep its old meaning in the phrase 'the province of Judea,' in Jewish circles, long after the beginning of the Christian era ; as appears, for example, from the occurrence of the phrase in the _Midrash Echa_ (see Dalman's Dialektproben, p.15, line 5 from the bottom). 

Taken in connection with all the other indications of translation-- the glaring Hebraisms, the constant presence of a Semitic idiom underlying the Greek-- this evidence of mistranslation is absolutely decisive.  I believe that the original document was Hebrew, not Aramaic....

Lk 1:39 (based on Younan), http://dukhrana.com
And Maryam arose in them-- in those days-- and went quickly to a tuora [mountain; high pasture, field], to a medintha [province; country; territory, region; city; the government/the state] d'Yehud [of Judah/Judea].

==========================================.
Do you agree that Luke 12:49 has an Aramaic idiom?

Charles C. Torrey, "The Translations Made from the Original Aramaic Gospels" in _Studies in the History of Religions, Presented to Crawford Howell Toy by Pupils, Colleagues and Friends_ (1912), 269-317.   From 315
https://archive.org/stream/studiesinhistory00lyonuoft/studiesinhistory00lyonuoft_djvu.txt
[Luke] xii.49 f. -- .... 'I came to cast fire upon the earth, and _what will I if it is already kindled?_  I have a baptism to be baptised with, and how am I straitened till it be accomplished!'  I have given the second clause of verse 49 in the words of the English Revised Version.  The rendering is nonsense, to be sure, but it at least has the merit of following the text.  Many interpreters, including some of the foremost of the Germans, have rendered according to the sense : 'How I wish that it were already kindled!' but this, as Plummer fairly objects, "does rather serious violence to the Greek."  Turning the Greek back, word by word, into Aramaic, we have: .... But whoever has before him this Aramaic, not feeling obliged to render word for word, but rather to give the sense, can only translate it:  'And how I wish that it were already kindled!'  The idiom is the regular one in Aramaic.  We are given in Luke a too literal rendering-- though any ancient translator would have been likely to render in just this way.

==========================================.
When originally written, do you think Matthew 28:1 had:
σαββάτων i.e. sabaton twice?  b'Shabatha... b'shaba?

Do you think the Greek word for 'Saturday' should have been used in the Greek NT instead of transliterations of the Semitic 'Shabatha'?

Matthew 28:1
(Etheridge) FROM the evening (end) of the sabbath [Aramaic:  b'Shabatha], when the first (day) in the week [Aramaic:  b'shaba] was lightening, Mariam Magdolitha and the other Mariam came to see the sepulchre.
(Murdock) And in the close [evening] of the sabbath, as the first [day] of the week began to dawn, came Mary of Magdala and the other Mary, to view the sepulchre.
(Lamsa) IN the evening of the sabbath day, when the first day of the week began, there came Mary of Magdala and the other Mary, to see the tomb.

Matthew 28:1
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/matthew/28-1.htm
After then σαββάτων, it being dawn toward [the] first [day] σαββάτων came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary, to see the tomb

Charles C. Torrey, "The Translations Made from the Original Aramaic Gospels" in _Studies in the History of Religions, Presented to Crawford Howell Toy by Pupils, Colleagues and Friends_ (1912), 269-317.   From 300 https://archive.org/stream/studiesinhistory00lyonuoft/studiesinhistory00lyonuoft_djvu.txt
Schmiedel himself remarks (_ibid._) that the Gospel of Matthew is the one in which the citations from the Old Testament most often follow the Hebrew rather than the Greek, and that its author "could not have given such quotations as, for example, ii.15, 23, viii.17, xxvii.9 f. after the LXX at all."  Highly significant admissions!

More than all this, the framework, connecting fabric, and merely embellishing matter of the book as we have it (and not merely the underlying sources) give plain evidence of translation.  A typical case of the sort is found in xxviii.1, parallel to Mark xvi.1 f. and Luke xxiv.1.  Several scholars have pointed out the fact that the monstrous 'Greek' in Matthew, Ὀψὲ δὲ σαββάτων, τῇ ἐπιφωσκούσῃ εἰς μίαν σαββάτων, is merely one of the painfully close translations with which we are familiar.  The original was .... , that is, 'after the Sabbath, in the night introducing the first day of the week.'^18  The evidence of translation is perfect, for the Aramaic phrases are the ones regularly used, the Greek rendering fits them exactly, and no Greek author could ever have devised such a form of words.

18:   The evidence has been set forth most fully and convincingly by Professor Moore, in the Journal of the American Oriental Society, 26. 323-329 (1905).  Moore also refers to Geiger, and points out the fact that Jerome was the first to suspect imperfect translation in this passage. See also the reference to Professor Kennett in Wright's Synopsis of the Gospels in Greek, 3d ed., p. 171.

==========================================.
Luke 23:54's ἐπέφωσκεν/ epephosken comes from:  epi (on, to, against, on the basis of, at), and phos (light).  Ref:
https://biblehub.com/greek/2020.htm
Do you agree, or disagree, with Torrey's claim that "no Greek writer would ever in this place have written ἐπέφωσκεν unless he were translating the Semitic word which actually lay before him in a document"?

Charles C. Torrey, "The Translations Made from the Original Aramaic Gospels" in _Studies in the History of Religions, Presented to Crawford Howell Toy by Pupils, Colleagues and Friends_ (1912), 269-317.   From 315-316
https://archive.org/stream/studiesinhistory00lyonuoft/studiesinhistory00lyonuoft_djvu.txt
[Luke] xxiii.54.-- ..... _καὶ σάββατον ἐπέφωσκεν._  'Now it was the Day of Preparation, and the next day was the Sabbath.'  The same idiom which has already been mentioned, above, in interpreting Matt. xxviii.1.  Moore, in the Journal of the American Oriental Society, 26. 328 f., showed that the original of Luke's phrase was something like : .... I have noticed the very same phrase in the Syriac Chronicle of Joshua the Stylite, p. 22, line 9 : .... , where Wright translates : 'It was the night between Friday and Saturday.'  In the evangelist's narrative, the hour is not stated ; we only know that it was the time when the sixth day was _passing over into_ the Sabbath.  Any Aramaic text would have used here the word .... , "dawn," but no Greek writer would ever in this place have written ἐπέφωσκεν unless he were translating the Semitic word which actually lay before him in a document.

==========================================.
When it was originally written, do you think Hebrews 11:37 did, or didn't, mention being tempted?

Hebrews 11:37, http://dukhrana.com
https://biblehub.com/text/hebrews/11-37.htm
(Murdock) others were stoned; others were sawed;
others died by the edge of the sword; others roamed about clothed in sheep skins and goat skins, and were needy, and afflicted, and agitated;
(KJV) They were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted,
were slain with the sword:  they wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins; being destitute, afflicted, tormented;

From
https://biblehub.com/commentaries/hebrews/11-37.htm
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers....
They were sawn asunder.-- An ancient tradition, mentioned both by Jewish and by early Christian writers, relates that Isaiah was thus put to death by order of Manasseh. The following words, "they were tempted," are very remarkable in such a position; and many conjectures have been hazarded on the supposition that a mistake of transcription has occurred.
....
Barnes' Notes on the Bible....
Were tempted -- On this expression, which has given much perplexity in critics, see the notes of Prof. Stuart, Bloomfield, and Kuinoel. There is a great variety of reading in the mss. and editions of the New Testament, and many have regarded it as an interpolation. The difficulty which has been felt in reference to it has been, that it is a much milder word than those just used, and that it is hardly probable that the apostle would enumerate this among those which he had just specified, as if to be tempted deserved to be mentioned among sufferings of so severe a nature.
....
Matthew Poole's Commentary....
Were tempted: whether epeirasyhsan should not be epurasyhsan, is much doubted, temptation being no manner of death; and the Spirit had instanced in it before, Hebrews 11:35. It may therefore be a slip of the transcriber....
Meyer's NT Commentary....
ἐπειράσθησαν] were tempted. This general statement has about it something strange and inconvenient, inasmuch as it occurs in the midst of the mention of different kinds of violent death. Some, therefore, have been in favour of entirely deleting ἐπειράσθησαν (Erasmus, Calvin, Beza, Marloratus, Grotius, Hammond, Whitby, Calmet, Storr, Valckenaer, Schulz, Böhme, Kuinoel, Klee, Delitzsch, Maier, al.), in doing which, however, we are not justified by external evidence;[111] while others have thought that ἘΠΕΙΡΆΣΘΗΣΑΝ is a corruption, in itself early, of the original text, which latter must be restored by conjecture. It has been conjectured by Beza, edd. 3, 4, 5, that.... Others yet other conjectures; see Wetstein, Griesbach, and Scholz ad loc. Bleek, too, assumes an error in the text....
If ἘΠΕΙΡΆΣΘΗΣΑΝ is genuine, it must have been added by the author for the sake of the paronomasia with ἘΠΡΊΣΘΗΣΑΝ, and be referred to the enticements and temptations to escape a violent death by means of apostasy (comp. e.g. 2Ma 7:24).

[DavidFord]

Do you think Matthew 16:18 speaks of: 
gates of Hades?  stratagem of Sheol?

Matthew 16:18, http://dukhrana.com
(Etheridge) Also I say unto thee, that thou art Kipha, and upon this rock will I build my church, and the gates of Sheul shall not prevail against her.

CAL for the Aramaic word Etheridge rendered as "gates"
http://cal.huc.edu/oneentry.php?lemma=tr%28+N%20&cits=all
trˁ, trˁˀ   (traˁ, tarˁā)   n.m.  gate
1  gate ....
2  entrance, opening .... (a) fig. (a.1) .... beginning of winter .... (a.2)  way of accomplishing something, *stratagem,* approach .... (b) section of the horizon wherein an object rises or sets....
3  of "king" or "palace" : royal court .... (a) ellipt. : court, entourage....
Fri, 11 Oct 2019 15:40:08 -0400

[marie glen]

No, I think the Lord would have said "gates of sheol" - death. Opposite of life. "The gates" being poetic and not literal gates.. That death, and all its shadow, will not prevail, no matter what, against the church, His spiritual body, He is the head of..

Peter stood in the square that Pentecost morning and spoke to the people while God poured out His Spirit, and 3000 people were added to the believers that day. The 'church' beginning upon that Pentecost morning. And death shall not prevail against it.

Even now, out of the husk of organized Christianity - made of bricks and mortar, but within some/many sparkling jewels, like grains of salt, in it, we see the glorious complete gospel rising up, shining forth, and making a stand. And if she will stand on the Rock of God's logos - "reasoning expressed in words" (and reasoning expressed in Jesus!) God's reasoning! / Truth, then she will stand. But anybody's works built on sand shall fall with all the rest.
:Peace2:

[DavidFord]

No, I think the Lord would have said "gates of sheol"

IMO, 'prevail' goes better with an offensive weapon/approach, than with a defensive weapon/approach.  'The battering ram prevailed over the city gate' sounds better than 'The city gate prevailed over the battering ram.'  To me, 'The stratagem prevailed' sounds better than 'The gates prevailed.'
What do you think of the possibility that what was meant was 'entourage of Sheol'?

Rev 22:15 mentions sorcerers, whoremongers, murderers, and idolaters.  Do you think Rev 22:15 originally also spoke of people who were:   loving a lie?  seers?

From https://biblehub.com/revelation/22-15.htm
(Young's Literal Translation)
and without are the dogs, and the sorcerers, and the whoremongers, and the murderers, and the idolaters, and every one who is loving [Greek: φιλῶν/ philōn] and is doing a lie.
(Aramaic Bible in Plain English)
"And outside are fornicators, murderers, idol worshipers, the defiled, sorcerers and all seers and workers of lies."

https://biblehub.com/interlinear/revelation/22-15.htm linking to:
5368. phileó
https://biblehub.com/greek/5368.htm
phileó: to love
Original Word: φιλέω
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: phileó
Phonetic Spelling: (fil-eh'-o)
Definition: to love
Usage: I love (of friendship), regard with affection, cherish; I kiss.

http://dukhrana.com linking to
http://cal.huc.edu/oneentry.php?lemma=xzy%232+N%20&cits=all
ḥzy, ḥzyˀ   (ḥazzāy, ḥazzāyā)   n.m.  seer; watcher
1  seer  OA, Syr. Zak.a12 .... then Baalshamayin ap[peared] to me by means of seers and by means of diviners. P 1S9:9 : .... come let us go to the seer; for a prophet of today previously used to be called a seer.
2  spectator, watcher  Sam, Syr, Man. JSBhom 126:398 : .... the fighter was victorious and a clamor arose from the spectators. (a) eyewitness  Syr. P Lk1:2 : .... eyewitnesses and ministers of the Word.

Bauscher notes that the Aramaic for 'seers' and for 'friends/beloved' look extremely similar in Dead Sea Scrolls script.  See
David Bauscher, _Aramaic Bible in Plain English_, pg. 590 in the 7th edition
https://www.lulu.com/shop/rev-david-bauscher/the-original-aramaic-new-testament-in-plain-english-with-psalms-proverbs-8th-edition-with-notes/hardcover/product-21273790.html

Greg Glaser also has 'seers.'
http://dukhrana.com/crawford/
http://www.lulu.com/shop/greg-glaser/crawford-codex-of-revelation-aramaic-interlinear-with-english-translation/paperback/product-22823002.html

[DavidFord]

Matthew 5:32 But I tell you that whoever sends away his wife, except for the cause of sexual immorality, makes her an adulteress. And whoever marries the one sent away commits adultery.

Do you think it's a true statement that "whoever sends away his wife, except for the cause of sexual immorality, makes her an adulteress"?

////////////////////////////////////////
_Our Translated Gospels: Some of the Evidence_ (1936), 172pp.
by Charles Cutler Torrey, on 18-19
https://archive.org/details/OurTranslatedGospelsCCTorrey/page/n1
Exhibit III, B (Mt. 5:32, 19:9, and parallels).
The saying attributed to Jesus in the Grk. of Mt. 5:32a is a very
strange utterance indeed. The husband divorces his wife,
without any flagrant infidelity on her part, and the result
is, that _she_ commits adultery. Whether the husband incurs
similar guilt, is not stated. Hebrew law, and Jewish public
opinion, in such cases gave the wife a clean slate, and in
this decision the opinion of our own day would doubtless
concur. Will Jesus now reverse this judgment, pronouncing
the dissolved union adulterous, and with such emphasis that
only the guilt of the woman is mentioned? This seems
incredible, and it is not a view which interpreters of the
passage have thought reasonable.

He "makes her commit adultery." In what way? Montefiore,
_Syn. Gospels_, II, 66, gives the accepted explanation:
"by marrying another man." But the woman was under no
obligation to marry again-- and she might well think that
one trial was quite enough. However, she probably _would_
marry, say the commentators, and the second marriage
would be adulterous. But this is mere quibbling. The plain
fact is, that the declaration attributed to Jesus, if made
without qualification, _is not true._ The divorcing husband does
_not_ compel the divorced wife to commit adultery. If she
chooses to marry again, it is not her former husband who
makes her do so. It is hardly necessary to add, that the saying,
"he puts her in the way of committing" the sin, would
be a very weak conclusion after the impressive introduction.

_This_ difficulty disappears as soon as the original language
is called in to help. The translator saw before him the
derived stem of the verb, and rendered it as causative, for
the reason which will presently appear; but he was mistaken.
In each of the several verbs, Heb. and Aram., which
have this signification, "commit adultery," the simple stem
and the derived (intensive) stem are interchangeable, with
no difference in meaning. Moreover, the noun or pronoun
designating the person with whom the adultery is committed
is very likely to be appended to the verb as (or in
the manner of) the direct object. These facts are set forth
in every lexicon, and may be seen illustrated in Jer. 29:23
(Heb. and Targ.), Lev. 20:10, Prov. 6:32, Targ. Hos. 4:13,
and especially Targ. Job 36:20, an exact parallel to the phrase
in Mt. The true rendering here is, "he commits adultery
_with her_." But with whom?

The real source of the difficulty with the passage is now
brought plainly to light. The verse is defective, with two
words missing. The phrase, _"and marries another,"_ which
is found in 19:9, and in the parallels in Mk. and Lk., is
indispensable to the sense, and _must have been omitted by
accident from the Aram, text of 5:32._ The fact of the omission
gave the Grk. translator the best of reasons for his
rendering. For the cause of the accident, and the two missing
words, see p. 159.

[DavidFord]

Do you think the Peshi tta passages below were translated from Greek?
When the passages below were originally written, do you think they did, or didn't, mention Arameans?

Act 16:1 (Aramaic Peshi tta NT), https://aramaicdb.lightofword.org/index.php/en/english-word-search
And he arrived at the city [of] Derbe and of Lystra. And there was a certain disciple there, whose name [was] Timothy, the son of a certain faithful Judean woman and *his father was an Aramean.*   
KJV  Then came he to Derbe and Lystra: and, behold, a certain disciple was there, named Timotheus, the son of a certain woman, which was a Jewess, and believed; but *his father was a Greek:*

Act 16:3 Paul wanted to take this [man] with him, so he took [and] circumcised him because of the Judeans that were in the place, for all of them *knew his father was an Aramean.*
KJV Him would Paul have to go forth with him; and took and circumcised him because of the Jews which were in those quarters: for they *knew all that his father was a Greek.*

Act 19:10   And this continued [for] two years, until all who lived in Asia, *Judeans and Arameans,* heard the word of the LORD.
KJV And this continued by the space of two years; so that all they which dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus, both *Jews and Greeks.*

Act 19:17 And this was known by all the *Judeans and Arameans* who lived in Ephesus. And fear fell on all of them and the name of our Lord Jesus Christ was lifted up.   
KJV And this was known to all the *Jews and Greeks* also dwelling at Ephesus; and fear fell on them all, and the name of the Lord Jesus was magnified.

Act 20:21 witnessing to the *Judeans and to the Arameans* concerning repentance towards God and the faith that is in our Lord Jesus Christ.
KJV Testifying both to the *Jews, and also to the Greeks,* repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.

Act 21:28 crying out and saying, "Men of Israel, help! This is the man who is against our own people, teaching in every location against the law and against this place. And he has also *brought Arameans into the temple* and defiled this holy place."   
KJV Crying out, Men of Israel, help: This is the man, that teacheth all men every where against the people, and the law, and this place: and further *brought Greeks also into the temple,* and hath polluted this holy place.

1Co 1:22 because the Judeans ask for signs and the *Arameans seek wisdom.*
KJV For the Jews require a sign, and the *Greeks seek after wisdom:*

1Co 1:23 But we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to the Judeans, and *to the Arameans, foolishness.*
But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and *unto the Greeks foolishness;*

1Co 1:24 But to those who are called, *Judeans and Arameans,* Christ [is] the power of God and the wisdom of God,
KJV But unto them which are called, both *Jews and Greeks,* Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.

Gal 2:3 Even Titus, who *was an Aramean* with me, was not compelled to be circumcised.
KJV But neither Titus, who was with me, *being a Greek,* was compelled to be circumcised:

Col 3:11 where there is *not Judean and Aramean,* not circumcision and uncircumcision, *not Greek and barbarian,* not servant and free[men], but Christ is all and in all men.   
KJV Where there is *neither Greek nor Jew,* circumcision nor uncircumcision, *Barbarian, Scythian,* bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all.

Do you think Col 3:11 originally mentioned: 
"not Greek and barbarian"?  "Barbarian, Scythian"?

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
As originally written, do you think the NT spoke of:  'profane persons'?  'the nations'?
As originally written, do you think Acts 21:7 had:  Ptolemais?  Acu?

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 to-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.)

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Do you think the woman at Mark 7:26 and Mt 15:22 was:  Greek?  Syrophoenician?  Canaanite?

version 1.2
7:26 Now the woman was a Greek, a Syrophoenician by race. She begged him that he would cast the demon out of her daughter.
15:21 Jesus went out from there, and withdrew into the region of Tyre and Sidon.
15:22 Behold, a Canaanite woman came out from those borders, and cried, saying, "Have mercy on me, Lord, you son of David! My daughter is severely demonized!"

Mark 7:25-28 (based on Younan), http://dukhrana.com
"For immediately a certain woman whose daughter had an unclean rukha [spirit] heard about him [Yeshua], and she came (and) fell before his feet. Now that woman was kanapta [a heathen/ foreigner] from Phoenicia in Syria, and was entreating him to cast out the shada [shade/devil] from her daughter. . . . . even the dogs eat from under the tables the crumbs of the children.'"

Mt 15:21+ (based on Younan)
"And Yeshua went out from there and came to the border of Tsur and of Tsidon. And behold, a Canaanite woman from those borders came out while crying and saying, "Have mercy on me Mari [my Lord], the Son of Dawid. My daughter is seriously vexed by a shada. . . . even the dogs eat from the crumbs which fall from the tables of their masters and live."

[DavidFord]

As they were originally written, do you think Lk 21:24, Hebr 4:12, Hebr 11:34, Rev 1:16, and Rev 2:12 spoke of the 'mouth/mouths' of a sword?  How about Rev 19:15?

From
https://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=mouth+sword&qs_version=YLT&limit=500
Genesis 34:26 and Hamor, and Shechem his son, they have slain by the mouth of the sword, and they take Dinah out of Shechem's house, and go out.
Exodus 17:13 and Joshua weakeneth Amalek and his people by the mouth of the sword.
Numbers 21:24 And Israel smiteth him by the mouth of the sword....
Luke 21:24 and they shall fall by the mouth of the sword, and shall be led captive to all the nations, and Jerusalem shall be trodden down by nations, till the times of nations be fulfilled.
Hebrews 11:34 quenched the power of fire, escaped the mouth of the sword, were made powerful out of infirmities, became strong in battle, caused to give way camps of the aliens.

1366. distomos
https://biblehub.com/greek/1366.htm
distomos: double-mouthed, two-edged
Original Word: δίστομος, ον
Part of Speech: Adjective
Transliteration: distomos
Phonetic Spelling: (dis'-tom-os)
Definition: double-mouthed, two-edged
Usage: (lit: twain-mouthed; hence: of a sword, as a drinker of blood), two-edged.
HELPS Word-studies
1366 dístomos – properly, two-mouthed (having two edges), like a "two-edged" sword with both sides of the blade sharpened to an edge; (figuratively) what penetrates at every point of contact, coming in or going out.
[A two-edged sword is an ideal defensive-offensive weapon and was known as "a drinker of blood" (Souter).]
....
Hebrews 4:12...
GRK: πᾶσαν μάχαιραν δίστομον καὶ διικνούμενος ...
Revelation 1:16...
GRK: αὐτοῦ ῥομφαία δίστομος ὀξεῖα ἐκπορευομένη ...
Revelation 2:12...
GRK: ῥομφαίαν τὴν δίστομον τὴν ὀξεῖαν

Looking at the parallel Greek for Revelation 19:15 at
https://biblehub.com/texts/revelation/19-15.htm
there is:
ῥομφαία ὀξεῖα δίστομος, ἵνα
ῥομφαία ὀξεῖα, ἵνα
ῥομφαία δίστομος ὀξεῖα, ἵνα

When it was originally written, do you think Revelation 19:15 had "δίστομος"?  (i.e. 2-mouthed)
Do you think that that's something a native Greek speaker would use to describe a 2-edged sword?

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
When Jesus originally spoke Luke 14:26, do you think he meant: 
"put aside his father"?  "hate... his father"?

Luke 14:26, http://dukhrana.com, https://biblehub.com/interlinear/luke/14-26.htm
(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, he cannot be a disciple to me.
(KJV) If any man come to me, and hate [Greek:  misei/ μισεῖ/ hates] not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.

CAL, http://cal.huc.edu/oneentry.php?lemma=sny+V%20&cits=all
1  to hate  ... some of them love me, and some of them hate me. (a) fig.: (of inanimates)  .... how much the eye hates something that falls into it. (b) as a performative : to divorce  ....  should... rise in the assembly tomorrow or any other time and say "I hereby divorce" my wife....
2  to be ugly....

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
When it was originally written, do you think Acts 2:24 had:
"loosed the cords of Sheol"?  "loosed the pains of death"?

Acts 2:24 (Young's Literal Translation)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=acts+2%3A24&version=YLT
whom God did raise up, having loosed the pains of the death, because it was not possible for him to be held by it,

Acts 2:24, http://dukhrana.com
(Etheridge) But Aloha raised him, and loosed the bands of Shiul, because it was not possible that he should be holden in Shiul.
(based on Younan) But Allaha loosed the cords of Sheol and raised him because it was not possible that he be held in it, in Sheol.[re: 'the cords':  The Greek versions mistranslated this word as 'pain.'  Cf. Jn 2:15 & 2 Samuel 22:6. -- PY]

John 2:15 And he made for himself a whip from cords, and drove out all of them from the temple....

https://biblehub.com/interlinear/acts/2-24.htm
odinas ὠδῖνας agony .... thanatou θανάτου death

https://biblehub.com/greek/5604.htm
[5604 (ōdín) suggests intense suffering (similar to birth pain) – hence, "to suffer greatly, great pain" (L & N, 1, 24.87) like "a birth-pang, travail-pain; figuratively, extreme suffering" (A-S).]
....
Acts 2:24, after the Sept. who translated the words מָוֶת חֶבְלֵי by ὠδῖνες θανάτου, deriving the word חֶבְלֵי not, as they ought, from חֶבֶל, i. e. σχοινίον 'cord', but from חֵבֶל, ὠδίς, Psalm 17:5 (); Psalm 114:3 (); 2 Samuel 22:6.

YLT
https://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=death+cord&qs_version=YLT
https://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=cord+sheol&qs_version=YLT
2 Samuel 22:6 The cords of Sheol have surrounded me,
Before me have been the snares of death.
Psalm 18:4 Compassed me have cords of death,
And streams of the worthless make me afraid.
Psalm 18:5 Cords of Sheol have surrounded me,
Before me have been snares of death.
Psalm 116:3 Compassed me have cords of death,
And straits of Sheol have found me,
Distress and sorrow I find.

2 Samuel 22 (Brenton Septuagint)
https://biblehub.com/sep/2_samuel/22.htm
5 For the troubles of death compassed me,
the floods of iniquity amazed me:
6 the pangs of death surrounded me,
the agonies of death prevented me.

Psalm 18 (Brenton Septuagint)
https://biblehub.com/sep/psalms/18.htm
4 The pangs of death compassed me,
and the torrents of ungodliness troubled me exceedingly.
5 The pangs of hell came round about me:
the snares of death prevented me.

Psalm 116 (Brenton Septuagint)
https://biblehub.com/sep/psalms/116.htm
3 The pangs of death compassed me;
the dangers of hell found me:
I found affliction and sorrow.

From
https://biblehub.com/commentaries/acts/2-24.htm
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers ....
Having loosed the pains of death.—The word for "pains" is the same as that for "sorrows" in Matthew 24:8 : literally, travail-pangs. The phrase was not uncommon in the LXX. version, but was apparently a mistranslation of the Hebrew for "cords," or "bands," of death.  ....
Barnes' Notes on the Bible ....
Having loosed the pains of death - The word "loosed," λύσας lusas, is opposed to bind, and is properly applied to a cord, or to anything which is bound.  See Matthew 21:2; Mark 1:7.  Hence, it means to free or to liberate, Luke 13:16; 1 Corinthians 7:27.   ....
Vincent's Word Studies ....
Pains (ὠδῖνας)
The meaning is disputed.  Some claim that Peter followed the Septuagint mistranslation of Psalm 18:5, where the Hebrew word for snares is rendered by the word used here, pains; and that, therefore, it should be rendered snares of death; the figure being that of escape from the snare of a huntsman.  Others suppose that death is represented in travail, the birth-pangs ceasing with the delivery; i.e., the resurrection.  This seems to be far-fetched, though it is true that in classical Greek the word is used commonly of birth-throes.  It is better, perhaps, on the whole, to take the expression in the sense of the A. V., and to make the pains of death stand for death generally.

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
When Luke 9:10-12 was originally written, do you think it spoke of a "deserted place" in verse 10 (compare verse 12)?

Luke 9:10-12 (HCSB)
10 When the apostles returned, they reported to Jesus all that they had done. He took them along and withdrew privately to a[a] town called Bethsaida. 11 When the crowds found out, they followed Him. He welcomed them, spoke to them about the kingdom of God, and cured those who needed healing.
12 Late in the day, the Twelve approached and said to Him, "Send the crowd away, so they can go into the surrounding villages and countryside to find food and lodging, because we are in a deserted place here."
Footnotes:
a:  Other mss add _deserted place near a_

From https://biblehub.com/commentaries/luke/9-10.htm
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges....
_into a desert place belonging to the city called Bethsaida_] There are here great variations in the MSS. and the best reading is _to a city called Bethsaida._

I used https://translate.google.com to translate the parallel Greek at https://biblehub.com/texts/luke/9-10.htm
and none of the lines mentioned a deserted place in verse 10.  Calling Bethsaida deserted (see verses 9 and 12) is absurd.

The Darby Bible Translation had the decency to used brackets:
https://biblehub.com/luke/9-10.htm
And the apostles having returned related to him whatever they had done.  And he took them and withdrew apart into [a desert place of] a city called Bethsaida.

From the Luke Commentary PDF at http://www.willker.de/wie/TCG/
Strange collection of all thinkable variants.
It is possible that ... was the original reading and that scribes felt the discrepancy between the "deserted place" mentioned in verse 12 and the .... It makes no sense to have a feeding in the city. So they changed the passage in various ways.
On the other hand it is also possible that the Byzantine reading is original. It has the same difficulty: Either there is a deserted place or it is the city Bethsaida.  So the reading .... ("a desert place of a city called Bethsaida") is a contradiction or at least a difficulty. The other readings are then attempts to correct this.

Codex Zacynthius
https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Zacynthius
Luke 9:10 it has the textual variant εις πολιν καλουμενην Βηθσαιδα (to a city called Bethsaida), as do codices B, L, and 33; but later hand-written in the margin εις τοπον ερημον πολεως καλουμενην Βηδσαιδα (into a deserted place belonging to the city called Bethsaida).

Luke 9:10, http://dukhrana.com
(Etheridge) And when the apostles returned, they showed Jeshu all that they had done. And he took them by themselves to a desert place of Bethtsaida.
(Murdock) And when the Legates returned, they narrated, to Jesus all they had done. And he took them aside, to the desert part of Bethsaida.
(Lamsa) When the apostles returned, they told Jesus everything which they had done. And he took them all alone to a lonely place in Bethsaida.
(KJV) And the apostles, when they were returned, told him all that they had done. And he took them, and went aside privately into a desert place belonging to the city called Bethsaida.

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Re:  Mt 5:37, do you disagree with any of this Torrey?:
Charles Cutler Torrey,  _The Four Gospels:  A New Translation_, 331pp.  On 291
https://archive.org/stream/fourgospels00torruoft/fourgospels00torruoft_djvu.txt
The Greek follows the Aram. exactly, word by word, but the result is mistranslation; the second occurrence of the "yea" or "nay" is in each case the predicate.  James 5:12 has it right.

Mt 5:37 (YLT)
https://biblepic.com/matthew/5-37.htm
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/matthew/5-37.htm
but let your word be, Yes, Yes, No, No, and that which is more than these is of the evil.

Mt 5:37 (based on Younan), http://dukhrana.com
Your 'yes' word should be but 'Yes,'
and 'no,' 'No.'
Anything that is more than these is from evil.

James 5:12 (YLT)
https://biblehub.com/james/5-12.htm
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/james/5-12.htm
And before all things, my brethren, do not swear, neither by the heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath,
and let your Yes be Yes,
and the No, No;
that under judgment ye may not fall.

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
When Jesus first said Mt 11:19 ( = Lk 7:34-35), did he say wisdom is justified by her:  children?  deeds?

Matthew, version 1.3
11:19 The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, 'Behold, a gluttonous man and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!'
But wisdom is justified by her children."
Luke
7:34 The Son of Man has come eating and drinking, and you say, 'Behold, a gluttonous man, and a drunkard; a friend of tax collectors and sinners!'
7:35 Wisdom is justified by all her children."

Matthew 11:19 (NIV) The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, 'Here is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners.'
But wisdom is proved right by her deeds."

When it was originally written, did 1 Timothy 2:15 say women would be saved through:  childbearing?  deeds?

1 Timothy 2:15 (NIV) But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.