The Becoming God

Saturday, July 25, 2020

The Mystery Post I Cannot Write: Gospel, Revelation, Reward, Power

God has been teaching me stuff about revelation; that I know, because the same stuff keeps coming up and going in the same direction. But I cannot explain it to others very well, because I am not sure I get it. And there is so very much of it. I think it is about a place I am supposed to be, but am not disciplined enough to commit to. Not mature enough. But write I must. Wrestling with it helps me sort it out.

 This is the beginning of a hodge-podge, the bits and pieces I am working with. It is something wonderful--that I can see, if you get the spirit of it. If you are a letter person ... not so much.

 I am of the view that Jesus is the revelation of God, the Milta. More than His agent, He is His total action here. So when I read Victor Alexander's translation of Mark 1:1 from the ancient Aramaic, "The beginning of the Revelation ...," I figured, "Okay, here's a guy that gets it." But there are problems with that.

 Because I write so much about Vic Alexander, a fellow in England asked me what was Vic's translation of Romans 1:9. 'Revelation' is also in that verse, which is part of the problem: in neither of these verse is it supposed to be ... which is the problem.

 Below is an edited e-mail exchange, actually two threads combined (not necessarily in order), which turned out to have something to do with my concern for God-demeaning LOAers. It started with Andrew asking me about Romans 1:9. I responded:
On June 12, 2020 10:55, imagicworldview@aol.com wrote:
Oh. Thank you. I hadn't noticed that. Although "His Revelation of His Son" is missing the asterisk in the text, there is a footnote on it:
Romans 1:9. For God is my witness that I serve Him in Spirit through His Revelation of His Son, as I remember you in my prayers ceaselessly in every season.
*1:9 Lit. Ar. name: "Evangalion" or "His Gospel."

Maybe I ought to share with you what I was writing tonight. It isn't finished, but I was talking about how euangelion means "He reveals" in ARAMAIC:

My upcoming post:

I have caught on that I am being taught something by God. A whole lot of things are piling up. It is that we are to reveal God to our fellow man. Reveal, not explain. Not announce. Revealing God is primary, rather than announcing the Gospel, the "good news," preaching, and teaching about Him. For knowledge of God comes by revelation, and Gospel MEANS revelation.

Back in the 1970s, at Melodyland School of Theology, I read a commentary on John which informed that because the last word in the Greek John 1:18, ἐξηγήσατο (exēgēsato), 'declared,' had no object, it HAD TO BE translated 'revealed': i.e., "He (Jesus) has revealed." THAT revelation burned into my skull. According to that Greek rule, Alexander's English translation from the ancient Aramaic would be: "No human ever saw Allaha, except for the only born Allaha, He who existed in the bosom of His Father, [Who] revealed." Revealed, Alexander's translation does not say that, but for over forty years that proposed Greek rule has been in the back of my mind--and often in the front--that Jesus Christ is the revelation of God rather than the explainer of God.

Interestingly, seemingly to avoid having to properly translate the Greek John 1:18's ἐκεῖνος ἐξηγήσατο (ekeinos exēgēsato) as "He has revealed," translators ADDED to the text an uncalled-for, not-in-the-Greek-text object: Him. This allows them to translate the words as "He hath declared--made known/explained/proclaimed/spoken of/told us about/interpreted--Him.” They know they are not supposed to add to the text, but if they didn't, "Well," they'd say, "we can't DO that!" (i.e., admit Jesus is God's own revelation). They have to distance us as talkers about God, lest we become accountable to reveal Him. God is telling me, "Yeah, but...that isn't what I said."

You can skip over this definition:
___________________________

From Biblehub: STRONGS NT 1834: ἐξηγέομαι

ἐξηγέομαι, ἐξηγοῦμαι; imperfect ἐξηγουμην; 1 aorist ἐξηγησαμην;
1. properly, to lead out, be leader, go before (Homer, et al.).

2. metaphorically, (cf. German ausführen) to draw out in narrative, unfold in teaching;

a. to recount, rehearse: (with the accusative of the thing and the dative of person, Acts 10:8); with the accusative of thing, Luke 24:35; Acts 21:19; without an accusative, followed by relative pronoun or adverb, ὅσα ἐποίησεν, Acts 15:12; καθώς, 14 (so in Greek writings from Herodotus down; the Sept. for סִפֵר, Judges 7:13, etc.).

b. to unfold, declare: John 1:18 (namely, the things relating to God; also used in Greek writings of the interpretation of things sacred and divine, oracles, dreams, etc.; cf. Meyer at the passage; Alberti, Observationes etc., p. 207f).
___________________________

It would appear that the "talk about Him" translations of ἐξηγήσατο (exēgēsato) are all right. As I recall, my source agreed that indeed they were, IF ἐξηγήσατο (exēgēsato) had an object. Look at the Greek ἐξ, Strong's 1537. I think my source's problem was that without an object, the prepositional point of origin, "the point whence motion or action proceeds" (Strong's) becomes the talker; in this case ἐκεῖνος (ekeinos): "He." I.e., He (Jesus) was the point "discussed," the very revelation of God.

Yes, I see hands waving in the back. Do you have a question? What has this got to do with euangelion, the Greek word for gospel? Well, in reading Victor Alexander's translation from the ancient Aramaic, I noticed that Mark 1 begins: "The beginning of the Revelation* of Jesus Christ,* Son of God." Revelation? Of course, I know that the Greek word for 'revelation' here is εὐαγγελίου (euangeliou): gospel or good news. How the heck did Alexander get 'revelation' out of εὐαγγελίου? (Blue Letter Bible on 'euangelion.')

Alexander's footnote on Mark 1:1 explains that the Aramaic word here is: Awon-galee-yoon: "He reveals":

FOOTNOTES:
*1:1.1 Literal Aramaic idiomatic (Lit. Ar. id.) name: "Awon-galee-yoon," or He Reveals.
*1:1.2 Lit. Ar. id. name "Eashoa'," meaning "The Life-Giving, Living Branch," and, "M'shee-khah, "The Anointed One." For simplicity, then, in the proper English syntax "The Anointed Life-Giver."

This would make Mark 1:1 read: "The beginning of the Revelation of the Life-Giving, Living Branch, the Anointed One." Or, "The beginning of the Revelation of the Anointed Life-Giver."

Elsewhere I have read: "Aramaic: 'Awon-Galee-Yon,' which means the same thing (God's Revelation)," and "This is a correct name: 'The revelation of HIM.'"

It is revelation. Not announcement or preaching good news or glad tidings, but SHOWING, DEMONSTRATING, PERFORMING HIS OWN REALITY.

Also, the question arises, which language is borrowing from which? It goes without saying that the Aramaic awon-galee-yoon, he reveals; equals the Greek euangelion, glad tidings. I have no doubt that Jesus Christ could speak Hebrew, Egyptian, Greek, Latin, and Arabic, but his native home language was Aramaic. Except for some Latin with Pilate and some Greek Septuagint, all the Galileans LIVED 24/7 in Aramaic.

Here is something interesting: both the Greek and Hebrew do not make much out of 'Galilee'. Check the dictionaries yourself. (From Abarim): "for a meaning of the name Galilee, NOBSE Study Bible Name List reads 'Circle, Circuit'; Jones' Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names has 'Rolling, Revolving'; and BDB Theological Dictionary proposes 'Circuit, District.' The name Galilee probably started out as a derogative: 'that' region; the boondocks; out in 'the country', and its name means just that: Region." David's friend Hiram, called Galilee Cabul, meaning, 'like nothing'. Not very flattering. But worse, I found a dictionary entry which said that the meaning of Galilee was "a pile of dung."

The Galileans had a different opinion, as reflected in Mark 1:9's Aramaic: "And it happened in those days, Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee,* and he was baptized in the Jordan River by John."
*1:9 Lit. Ar. names, "Nussrat d'Ga-lee-la," meaning, "Victorious Revelation."

Jesus came from the Victorious Revelation. Well, that IS good news!!

Hmm. The Greek ἐξηγήσατο means he reveals. Awon-galee-yoon means he reveals. Galilee means he reveals. I wonder if God is trying to tell us something? Like maybe ... He reveals?

Mark 1:14. After John was betrayed, Jesus came to Galilee, and preached the Hope of the Kingdom of God, 15. And he said, "The Age has ended,* and the Kingdom of God has arrived. Repent and believe in the Hope [of Salvation.]

The Hope of the Kingdom, the Hope of Salvation, was and is the revelation of God. You can have your stories and illustrations, your systematic theologies are marvelous--oh so well worked out--we should learn them all, but the thing that convinces people is miracles: the revelation of God. And the Apostles went out and preached Christ crucified WITH SIGNS AND WONDERS--works of faith and power--revelations of God.
__________________________________

-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew
To: imagicworldview@aol.com
Sent: Fri, Jun 12, 2020 4:30 am
Subject: Re: Romans 1.9

Attachment
On 12/06/2020 12:29, Andrew wrote:
Dan,
Amazing that you had already written about this!
Just thought I would send you Bauer-Danker on ἐξηγέομαι. t.t. means technical term.
Well, here also is Westcott:
..................
Plummer:
.............
Bernard: (edit note: links to these were not received)

Don't you normally need an object with 'reveal' as much as 'declare'. Here, 'He has revealed' (God), makes sense, as does 'He has made declaration' (concerning God).
Supplying an object is a pretty common thing in Greek I would say. No-one has seen God at any time.. - creates an expectancy and a question: so how can we get to know Him.. - the only-begotten Son (God in some texts) has made (Him) known (to us).
ευαγγελιον really has to come from ευ (good, well) + αγγελλω (to announce) or αγγελος a messenger.
I would be interested to know whether Alexander's 'Awon-galee-yoon," or He Reveals' stands up as etymology?
I had a look at paraqlēṭā in John 14.6 and Paul Younan's idea that it had a separate derivation and wasn't a loan word from παρακλητος. He changed his mind about it: https://theriveroflife.com/2017/05/03/john-14-16-in-brian-simmons-passion-translation-a-false-etymology/
Regards,
Andrew
________________________________

On June 13, 2020 00:20, imagicworldview@aol.com wrote:
Andrew,
Don't you normally need an object with 'reveal' as much as 'declare'. Here, 'He has revealed' (God), makes sense, as does 'He has made declaration' (concerning God).
No. If the object is not specified, 'he' IS the object. In a sense, 'he' is declaring, "I am." He is revealing Himself. Your second example isn't valid as it either is specifying the object, or is violating the rule. Can't have your cake and eat it, too, you know.

I want to thank you again for contacting me. It is very exciting to be on the supply side for a change. As you know, when God is teaching you something, the single idea he is teaching seems to come from every direction. It is always exciting to be taught by him. To be part of the idea he is teaching someone else is very humbling.

May I suggest searching the Internet for a pdf of Col. J. Garnier's The Worship of the Dead (if you do not already have it)? It is one of the most valuable and enlightening books I have found, a very lengthy and detailed discussion of the spread of peoples, languages, and religions after the flood. I think you will find the flow going FROM the Semites TO the Greeks. I find it highly unlikely that the Greeks had an idea for the Messianic Anointing that was equivalent to or flowed to the Jews, or that the Greek idea of Good Tidings became awon-galee-yoon. Abram the historical figure was an Assyrian who would have spoken an ANCIENT ARAMAIC. Good tidings of God's revelation would have flowed from the Assyrians, and euangelion would be a loan word TO the Greek language FROM those ancient times.

You might want rather to thank Brian Simmons. Even if he is a fraud and a con-man (if you sit in a chair at a university long enough, they will give you a doctorate of something), you might owe him a debt of gratitude for putting you onto the fact that the Greek New Testament is a translation of Aramaic-lived lives. I think this is something God wants you to 'get'. Even if he is bs, God has used him to teach you.

Vic anti-evangelistic? I think he was more interested in correction. Just the word there, evangel, to him would not mean to announce, but TO REVEAL. We do not want to be caught saying (I exaggerate) a 500 BC word in one language is a loan word from a 50 BC foreign language usage. Vic has always been very secretive about which Aramaic text he is using. He has said it doesn't matter which text; it matters how well one knows the language. I asked him about some names in Proverbs 30. He said Strong's was all but useless. That dictionaries were all but useless, because they were written backwards--by people who didn't really know the language as a native. Like the case we have here, where it is assumed that awon-galee-yoon must mean Gospel because it is from euangelion, when it is the opposite--the Aramaic revelation is Good News! Vic has said he is virtually rewriting the dictionary. I hope someone good gets his papers when he passes.

One last thought (or two): Are you familiar with Surprised By The Power Of The Spirit by Jack Deere, or its ilk? It just happened to come to mind now. I've got a lot of Pentecostal-leaning writing in my library. And I am going to put Alexander's Ephesians on another e-mail. The second thought: your church doesn't give you an allowance for books? Amazing.
_________________________________

-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew 
To: imagicworldview@aol.com
Sent: Mon, June 15, 2020 1:38 am
Subject: Re: Romans 1.9
When the American missionaries came to Urmiyah in 1835, they found that the 'Assyrian' Christians didn't understand the Syriac of the Peshitta, so they translated the scriptures into modern Syriac - the Old Testament from the Peshitta, the New from Greek (the latter on instructions from head office).
Vic had a copy of the modern Syriac bible, and started translating from that. Then a Church of the East priest told him that he should be translating from the Peshitta. Vic found that it was very different - eg in John 1.1, where the modern Syriac doesn't have milta. Rather than applying himself to learn the ancient Syriac of the Peshitta, I think he just made things up. I believe I pretty much worked this out here:
He is a film-maker, who follows Fellini, who he quotes as saying that 'the layer of ‘fantasies, dreams and imagination’ is ‘the real person’'.
Andrew
_________________________________________

On June 16, 2020 22:34, imagicworldview@aol.com wrote:
Andrew,

"When Alexander bought a copy of the New Testament in ancient Syriac, he found it ‘different’. The first reason would have been that the language was different. In addition, it would have had some readings from the Greek text. If it was the 1864 edition, it would have incorporated all the readings found in the Received Text. If it was the 1893 edition, the text would probably have been brought into line with modern critical editions of the Greek text. There would still have been textual differences between this edition and the ancient Syriac edition that he purchased from the elderly priest."

I was looking up all the occurrences of 'Gospel' in the KJV to see how awon-galee-yoon had been translated as opposed to euangelion; Greek incorporated into Syriac? That might explain Alexander's uses here: 

Romans

1:1. Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called and commissioned to be an apostle, chosen to reveal the Gospel of God,

1:9. For God is my witness that I serve Him in Spirit through His Revelation of His Son, as I remember you in my prayers ceaselessly in every season.
*1:9 Lit. Ar. name: "Evangalion" or "His Gospel."

1:16. For I am not embarrassed by Him, as He is revealed through the Gospel,* because He is the Power of God, [proffering] Life to whoever believes in Him, whether from the Jews first or from the Aramaic* speaking people first.
*1:16.1 Lit. Aramaic name: "Evangalion."

2:16. On the day God shall judge the hidden acts of humanity, according to my Gospel, by the hand of Jesus Christ.

15:29. For I know when I come to you, it shall be wholeheartedly through the blessings of the Gospel's Revelation through Eashoa the Messiah that I come.

16:25 (Alexander's 16:24). To God then, Who can justify you through His revelation of His Gospel, Who preached it concerning Jesus Christ by the Revelation of the Sermon that lay covered from the ages of the universes.

1 Corinthians

9:18. What is then my recompense? As I preach, without pay, I worship the hope of Christ, and not because I am worthy through the authority that was given to me by the Revelation of God.*
*1 Cor 9:18 Or: Gospel.

Revelation

6. And I saw another angel flying in heaven, who has the evangelizing gospel for [all ages of] the universe,* proffering Hope for those who dwell on earth, for every motherland and generation and tongue and nation [,]
14:6*Lit. Ar. idiomatic construction: "'His-Revelation' ("Oengelion," or "Evangelion," or: I-have-revealed-it) to [the end of] the universe."

Dan Steele
____________________________________

-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew
To: imagicworldview@aol.com
Sent: Wed, Jun 17, 2020 4:30 am
Subject: Re: Romans 1.9

Dan,
Are you suggesting that the Greek word εὐαγγέλιον had been incorporated into the Aramaic spoken in the land of Israel at the time of Christ and the apostles - this would be one way of upholding Aramaic primacy (not sure whether you believe in that for Paul's letters?) But then it would mean good news, not revelation.
It occurs in Homer's Odyssey, so is old in Greek. Syriac has its own word for good news:
Re Alexander's etymology, it is true that GLA - gamal-lamad-alaf - root means 'he revealed'. But to get a fit of two consonants - GL - out of 8 is not that impressive. If it's 'I have revealed it' as in Alexander's note to Revelation 14.6, is that a fit with "Awon-galee-yoon,"? In Mark 1.1 he says it means He Reveals. Personal pronouns are suffixed not prefixed to verbs I think, and I can't see anything like yod-waw-nun in the suffixes:
Andrew
___________________________________

On June 20, 2020 00:58, imagicworldview@aol.com wrote:
Andrew,

Thanks. That was something to think about. Just a bit here from scrolling down on Millar Burrows' The Origin of the Term Gospel: euaggelion is the REWARD PAID to the preacher FOR his revelation. Should we be reading "preach the gospel" as "preach the reward to be received for revelation"? As in "if I do this willingly, I have a reward." Maybe we're just not reading either language correctly.

Dan
_______________________________


-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew
To: imagicworldview@aol.com
Sent: Sat, Jun 20, 2020 5:45 am
Subject: Re: Romans 1.9

Thanks, Dan, I didn't know that was the first meaning in classical Greek. But see http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=euaggelion&la=greek#lexicon for usage according to the second meaning.
A
______________________________

-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew
To: imagicworldview@aol.com
Sent: Sat, Jun 20, 2020 5:51 am
Subject: Re: Romans 1.9

 Dan,

 re the links, was it this: http://theriveroflife.com/2017/03/19/brian-simmons-sid-roth-the-passion-anti-translation-and-ephesians-5-22-submit-or-be-tenderly-devoted/
New meaning apparently invented by Alexander, adopted by Simmons. They have corrected most of the mis-translations I pointed out in 2017, but only half corrected this one, and invented an entirely new meaning for υποτασσομαι :

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ephesians+5.22-24&version=TPT
So it is not me that has a problem with this scripture.
(Edit added note: Elsewhere I share Vic Alexander's explanation that modern Aramaic/Syriac dictionaries do not adequately cover native language speakers' sense of inference. He has had to rewrite the dictionaries not making up new definitions, but recalling the old ones.) 

A
_______________________________
On June 20, 2020 06:23, imagicworldview@aol.com wrote:
Andrew,

I am glad you attached Bauer. I gave my Arndt and Gingrich to a local church. The second definition, "to set forth in great detail," goes on: "for the activity of priests and soothsayers who impart info or reveal divine secrets; also used with ref. to divine beings themselves." Is it too much of a stretch to rewrite this as "for the activity of divine beings who reveal (divine secrets of) themselves"?

I appreciate your making me slow down on awon-galee-yoon meaning he reveals/revelation. The idea of revelation is there, but I thought euaggelion meant the announcement, not the reward for its revelation. I guess preaching YHWH's revelation for the reward of those saved by it is laying up treasure in heaven.

While I am here, I didn't open them, but was there about a dozen links about wives submitting to their husbands in a post? Like this is hard or something? Adam is God's consciousness, Eve his imagination, a facet of His consciousness. Keep our imagination in line with God's consciousness: our maker is our husband. We should be as sold out, dedicated, devoted to God as Achan's treasure was supposed to be.

Dan
_______________________________

 On June 20, 2020 20:15, imagicworldview@aol.com wrote:
Andrew,

I sense an interesting tension here, that the second "Christian sense" is an aberration of the first. The link II. good tidings, good news, in pl., LXX 2 Ki.4.10 connects to 2 Samuel 4:10 in the Vulgate, where the messenger expected a reward for his revelation - prospera? - that Saul was dead. 2 Kings 4:10 is instead the reward the Shunammite woman gave the prophet Elisha. Why 2 Ki ? Providence was way ahead of us.

I'll have something to share with you in the subject to vs devotion matter.

Dan
_________________________________
AndrewTo:you Details
Dan,
Having now looked it up, I agree with you about 2 Samuel 4.10 - ᾧ ἔδει με δοῦναι εὐαγγέλια. To whom it was necessary [obliged I guess] for me to give a reward for good news.
But I think it's a natural development of the word - especially when ευαγγελιζομαι meant to bring good news - as in the same 2 Samuel 4.10 - αὐτὸς ἦν ὡς εὐαγγελιζόμενος ἐνώπιόν μου - he was as one bringing me good news.
Andrew
_____________________________


On June 21, 2020 09:22, imagicworldview@aol.com wrote:
Andrew,

Sorry, my mistake. I was talking about The meaning of κεφαλή in the New Testament. In that post you've got twenty links plus articles about what a head is and what submission to one's head is. You are nothing if not thorough. I associated this project of yours with the question about wives be subject vs be devoted.

 My perspective on the matter was formed in my baptism in the Holy Spirit experience. It was just one experience. When I read 'devoted' in Alexander's version, I immediately thought of devotion a la Joshua 6:17. In the baptism of the Holy Spirit, having found myself accursed of God, I devoted, verily destroyed myself to God in my submission. I made myself--recognized that I was--subject to, as He is our head. I repented, shut up, and waited humbly for his direction. It is all one thing: a found attitude and place. It's hard for me to imagine anyone, especially Christians, not getting it now. Every wife should be as happy as I was in my subjection to my "Head." He said, "Remember this, and it is all right." The euphoria of acceptance--the baptism in the Holy Ghost!



Dan

posted by Daniel C. Branham-Steele at 1:17 AM

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home