The Aramaic English New Testament


NOTE: For a magnificent breakdown and review of the AENT, please read this wonderful review by scholar Rob Vanhoff by CLICKING HERE

Price and Value

  • $59.95 + shipping – Value: 5/5
  • In addition to the translation, the appendices and footnotes make this worth the price.

  • Scroll to the bottom for pictures!

    DISCLAIMER - I wrote most of this review when I was fairly new to both Peshitta Primacy as well as the Messianic Movement. Considering this, the AENT was a well timed resource that seemed like it was exactly what I needed at the time. Therefore, my review is somewhat over zealous for the AENT and lacks the same critical nature that you would see in my other reviews. Rather than revise the entire review however, I am choosing instead to offer my critical comments here as a disclaimer. They are as follows:
  • Translation - It should be noted that this is not an original translation. Matthew 1 - Acts 15 uses Paul Younan's Aramaic/English interlinear of the Peshitta where as the remaining makes use of James Murdock's translation of the Peshitto (the only exception is the book of Galatians). Although this is mentioned in the introduction it was perhaps not made as clear as it could have been. What Roth then did was replace certain key terms and names with their Semitic forms (sometimes Hebrew, sometimes Aramaic) effectively turning this into what we could classify as a Sacred Name Bible. And then in some spots he updated the translation based on what he knows of Aramaic and his own theological understanding. Although not very much in comparison to a lot of translations, you will see this theology come through in some of the changes Roth makes so the translation is not completely bias free. For example, while you have typical changes like cross becoming stake, God becoming Elohim, etc. you also have some doctrinal insertions (that are admitted with parenthesis and a footnote) such as in Colossians 2:14 where instead of saying "let no man" it says "let no (pagan)". This is reflective of Michael Roods understanding of the text that he teaches in his episode "Let no Pagan Judge you". I disagree and think that the context has much more to do with fellowship of Jew and Gentile, but I won't get into that here (but think Noachide and how according to that theology Gentiles shouldn't be keeping those things). Relatively speaking though when we compare this to other translations (particularly sacred name translations) Roth does not do this too much. On the other hand however, places where there are genuine mistranslations in the base text (such as a couple phrases of "under the Law" that should actually be "in the Law") Roth leaves them unchanged, despite claiming to have tediously double checked every word with the original (though it's certainly possible to have missed certain phrases). He may have also done a 100% original translation if this was his original goal, but my impression is that his work on the Apostolic Scriptures was initially just supposed to be primarily commentary that he was then going to post on his website. His webmaster, Baruch ben Daniel, convinced him to publish it instead, and three years later that was when the AENT was released. I could be wrong, but based on that I think Younan and Murdock were used as a last minute "let's turn this into a study bible and publish it" decision which is great for the Netzari community but not as beneficial for the Peshitta community who were looking for something 100% new. In any case, Roth is more of a commentator than a translator in this work by far, so let's cover the commentary next.

  • Doctrinal Footnotes - Roth comes from a "modern day" Netzari perspective in his footnotes. Although I hail this as being one of the best commentaries for trying to attain a first century Hebraic understanding of the text, it does have it's downfalls. There is a heavy emphasis on Torah apologetics (which is a very good thing!) but then there is also quite a bit of explaining away of a lot of Christian theology which may not always be justifiable or needed. Things like Sacred Name theology is, in my opinion, sometimes off base and not always supported linguistically or historically (although there may be other reasons for use of the Divine Names not mentioned in this volume). So as with anything, you need to be able to glean properly and check up on issues that sound strange to you with other sources. Don't fall into the trap that this is the be all end all of Netzari theology; be critical in your assessment of it, just as you should be critical of all Study Bibles. Roth has done a lot of work of which I highly appreciate, but he is only one man and like the rest of us, is not perfect. Now although I highly appreciate some of the commentary on defending the Torah, my studies have led me to better, more contextually accurate explanations of certain Scriptures and key phrases (such as "Under the Law"). This is important because even when you are just a little bit off on one point, other points then begin to be misaligned, and it can get a little messy (for alternative resourced commentary, check out Tim Hegg's commentaries on Romans and Galatians). Another criticism is that there tends to be an overly critical attitude towards Christendom at times, but the target audience merely needs to be clarified on this one. And that is, these footnotes are designed for those who are already in the Hebrew Roots movement and convicted of Torah Observance. However, even if you are already convicted, if you do not have the right accountability in place, that overly critical spirit can be birthed inside of you and you will be more prone to sowing division within the body (I have seen this on more than one occasion). So, it would have been better if there was a lighter tone and more of a focus on what we should be doing rather than what other streams of theology have done wrong. I am purposely being critical here though and will say that my praise below is not without merit. I encourage you to read my glowing review as well and then make a balanced, educated decision of if you want to purchase this version or not. Truly, out of all the Sacred Name Bibles I review here, this is by far the best one and it does introduce you to A LOT of Hebraic concepts and things that you just don't learn in other study bibles.

  • Promotion - There are a few critical things to mention with the promotion of the AENT. First, the header of the AENT website says "The official Messianic Peshitta Study Bible." The only thing official is the fact that the Peshitta text is the official text of the Assyrian Church of the East. There is nothing in particular that makes this translation or it's commentary official as there is no central agency or official governing body for the Netzarim. The other point I'd like to bring up is how on the main website page there is a claim that "The AENT however, employed a diverse group of scholars and Bible students from Christian and Jewish backgrounds who scrutinized the AENT, the objective is to keep this translation as devoid as possible of any theological bias." There is no list of this diverse group of scholars and Bible students however and a careful examination of the AENT can reveal that there is certainly a theological bias and that this was not peer reviewed in the sense that such a statement is aiming to convey. There are acknowledgements within the introduction to those who gave feedback to the translation, but all of them come from the same theological position as Roth himself. It should be noted however that all translations will have theological bias, even when peer reviewed from inter-denominational teams. In this regard, I feel that the AENT is not much worse off in terms of bias when compared to, for example, the popular NIV. Bias is a problem with every translation; we merely have the ability to choose whose bias we want and how much of it. For example, a literal translation (like the NASB) always has less bias than a paraphrased translation (like the NIV), but both will contain Evangelical bias. So with the AENT being a literal translation, you will have at least somewhat less bias and the bias present will be Netzarim as opposed to others camps. Now, the final thing I wish to address is the following claim from the page "About AENT" - "The Aramaic text used in the AENT is the most original autograph that modern scholars know of at time of publication – and most scholars agree that it is always best to translate from the oldest, most original text." This is wrong because the Aramaic text provided in AENT is the 1905 critical edition, and if we're talking about the Khabouris which was only consulted, then we have a problem. The majority of scholars do not think that the Khabouris represents the most original form of the text, and the Khabouris itself, relative to other manuscripts, is actually not very old. It is however known to be a copy of a very old manuscript (what would be the oldest known or identified Aramaic New Testament manuscript) and thus it then gives us a glimpse of what that old, closer to original manuscript said. But we cannot say with exact certainty that it is the most original autograph that we know of at this time. As for the age of the manuscript that Khabouris was copied from, there was a rumor circulating that it was a 165 AD manuscript which would mean that Khabouris was a copy of a very near original autograph. This however was a misinterpretation of the colophon and thus proven to be false, leading any scholars who once held to this to admit their error. But the 165 AD rumour for the manuscript that Khabouris was COPIED from has led to some outlandish claims regarding the Khabouris itself. One of the main ones I wish to address is that which is promoted on the back of the softcover editions of the AENT and on the Netzari Press website - "This rare Bible comes from a 165 CE Aramaic Codex, the oldest New Testament discovered thus far." I'm not sure if this is posted in ignorance or not, but this is flat out wrong. To learn about the actual date of the Khabouris manuscript and why it's important, please click here, and here. To learn about the date of the original manuscript that Khabouris was copied from, click here. To see a picture of the colophon, please click here. In summary, the Khabouris may be the third link in the chain from first century originals or near originals, being a copy of a manuscript from before all the great Christological debates where changes to the text may have been more prone to occurring. Since it has also been found to be near identical (other than variations in spelling) to the other Peshitta manuscripts by Paul Younan and Stephen Silver, this confirms for us the high reliability of the Eastern Peshitta family of manuscripts and their likelihood of reflecting what the original texts actually said. Herein lies the value of the Khabouris Codex. To learn more about the Khabouris Codex and to see it yourself, please click here.

  • The Aramaic Text Provided - The English translation of the AENT comes from several sources. For Matthew 1 - Acts 15 Paul Younan was translating from one text, for Galatians Andrew was translating from another, and then Murdock was translating from yet another text for the remainder. We then have on the opposing page the 1905 critical edition, edited in a couple spots by Andrew so that it lines up with certain readings in the Eastern Peshitta text. This compilation results in the text not exactly lining up with the English at times. While the variance between Aramaic texts is few and far between in comparison to the Greek, some of it still exists, particularely in Revelations which was never a part of the Eastern canon. While Andrew is very up front about his process with providing us an Aramaic text on the opposing pages, it would be much better if in the future the true Eastern Peshitta could be put in and the English translation completely revamped to line up with it perfectly (this would also eliminate the many syntax and other such errors). I understand that the 1905 was used because it is public domain, however, as the AENT increases in popularity and gains more money, attaining the Eastern Peshitta and updating the translation would be a good option if the AENT wants to become a truly professional and scholarly publication.

  • Scholarly Critique - Tim Hegg of Torah Resource, an elder at Beit Hallel and expert in the Biblical languages has taken the time to partially investigate the AENT and some of it's primacy claims. I can attest to Tim's language proficiency and level of scholarship as I have the privilege to midrash with him about these things once a year. My own personal language skills however are still just developing, and my Aramaic is a far cry from proficient as I am still in the process of mastering Hebrew first. Therefore, I offer the following critical examination of a few passages within AENT from Hegg which you can read on pages 9-11 here. Note that I do not think Tim's assessment of Aramaic Primacy was very thorough and I hope that he will have a chance at some point to look at some of weightier arguments (word plays, mistranslated words to Greek, poetry, etc.)

  • My Own Personal Critique - After surveying the 5th edition of the AENT for a few days, I compiled a list of approximately 75 translation and typographical errors, as well as some of my own personal feedback. If you are going to get an AENT, I suggest you go through this list and with some whiteout and pigment liner pen, update your copy. The PDF can be read here.
  • It is my hope that these critical comments will help to produce a more balanced review of the AENT, but once again, my praise that I gave earlier as shown below is not without merit and should be read in addition to these critical comments. From there, it is up to you to decide whether or not this is the right study version for you.

    Summary of Features

    Publication Date Edition: Printing Date / Release Date
    1st Edition: August / October 17th 2008
    2nd Edition: August / September 21st 2009
    3rd Edition: August / September 20th 2010 (mispaginated) - October 29th 2010 (corrected)
    4th Edition: June / July 25th 2011
    5th Edition: October / November 29th 2012
    Cover Brown Hardcover with Gold Lettering (1st-5th Editions)
    Large Print Softcover with Blue and Gold Design (4th Edition)
    Regular Size Softcover with Blue and Gold Design (5th Edition)
    Size 9.25 x 6.1 x 1.96 inches (1st and 2nd Edition Hardcover)
    9.25 x 6.1 x 1.75 inches (3rd - 5th Edition Hardcover)
    11 x 7.9 x 1.6 inches (Large Print 4th Edition Softcover)
    ? x ? x ? inches (Regular Size 5th Edition Softcover)
    Binding Smyth-Sewn (hardcover)
    Glued (softcover)
    Thumb-Index Tabs No
    Text Format None
    Headings None
    Mashiyach's Words in Red No
    Number of Ribbon Markers One Basic (1st and 2nd Editions)
    One High Quality (3rd-5th Editions)
    (note: hardcover only)
    Gold Gilded w/ Rounded Corners No
    Extensive Cross References No
    Helps 350/360 Pages of Explanatory Notes/Appendices
    Weekly Parasha/Haftarah/Ketuvim Netzarim Readings
    Moedim Readings
    Footnotes 1672 Footnotes (1st Edition)
    1698 Footnotes (3rd Edition)
    1721 Footnotes (4th Edition)
    2019 Footnotes (5th Edition) including:
    -Cross References
    -Netzarim / Torah Apologetics
    -Hebrew and Aramaic word/idiom insight
    -Aramaic Primacy Proofs
    -Alternative Manuscript Readings
    -Some Variations from the Greek
    -Aramaic Poetry
    -Some Khabouris Codex variations from Standard Critical Peshitta text
    (there are very few relative to all other families of NT manuscripts)

    The 5th Edition has an added emphasis on the following:
    -Messianic Hebraic Spirituality
    -Prophecy (with a particular emphasis on Yeshua's Messiahship)
    -Systematic Theology
    -Textual Criticism
    -Calendar Issues
    -Matters of Torah Halacha
    -Aramaic Primacy
    -Elements of Scriptural Counsel
    -Messiah Consciousness / Kingdom Concepts
    (prayer, honor, humility, servitude, social dialogue, etc.)
    Concordance No
    Maps No
    Name of the Father Master YHWH
    Name of the Son Y'shua
    Hebrew Transliterations Some Names, Some Titles
    Book Order Eastern Aramaic Order
    Gospels and Emmissaries
    The Major Testimonies
    The Ten
    The Second Testimony of Yochanan
    Base Text Younan and Murdock
    Old Archaic English No
    Manuscript Origin Critical Aramaic Text (primary)

    -1905 Edition of the Syriac New Testament
    -Published by the British and Foreign Bible Society
    -Critical Edition based upon the best Eastern and Western Aramaic Manuscripts

    Eastern Peshitta (consulted)

    1) The New Covenant Aramaic Peshitta Text with Hebrew Translation
    -Taken from the Mosul Edition (1891)
    -Twenty-two Eastern Peshitta books with the Western Peshitto five
    -Published by the Aramaic Scriptures Research Society in Israel (2005)

    2) Ktaba d'dtiqua khadata d'Maran Eshoa Meshikha
    -Writings of the New Covenant of our Master Y'shua the Messiah
    -Standard Eastern Peshitta text used by the Church of the East
    -New York, 1982 (reprint of 1927 edition [original 1886])

    3) Khabouris Codex
    -10-12th century copy of a 3rd-4th century manuscript
    -3rd-4th century manuscript likely a copy of a 1st century manuscript
    -Confirmed to be a faithful copy of the Eastern Peshitta when compared to other manusripts

    R E V I E W


    Peshitta English Aramaic Critical Edition by

    Andrew Gabriel Roth

    1104 pages

    Aramaic English New Testament click here

    The Netzari Jewish New Testament, the original words of Y'shua (Jesus).

    Also known as Mari, or P.E.A.C.E (Peshitta Eastern Aramaic Critical Edition), the Aramaic English New Testament (AENT) is the gold standard for Ketuvim Netzarim (Writings of the Nazarenes, erroneously labeled as "New Testament") translations. Though it is widely held in the western tradition that these Scriptures were written in Greek, in the East, it has always been known that they were originally in Aramaic. Mr.Roth provides astounding evidence for this in 1700 footnotes and 350 pages of appendices. Things like poetry and word plays found only in Aramaic, or words that have dual meanings and were mistranslated into Greek, etc. It's very interesting to see what we're missing in our Greek texts. The AENT Scholarship DVD Volume 1 (available separately) also contains lectures on Aramaic Primacy where Mr.Roth provides ample evidence (both historically and from a textual standpoint) that the Greek had to have come from an Aramaic source.

    One of the great things about the Aramaic is that any contradiction or difficult passage that people have tried to justify in the Greek, such as Yeshua dining at a lepers house when the Torah forbids it (Matthew 26:6-7 compared to Leviticus 13:45-46); a camel unable to fit through the eye of a needle indicating that it's impossible for a rich man to enter heaven; Elohim forsaking Yeshua, a righteous sinless man, on the stake; genealogy issues in Matthew where it states 14 generations from exile until Yeshua when there's only 13 listed; how about the Pharisees denying the Exodus (John 8:33) or being clueless that half a dozen prophets actually did come out of Galilee (John 7:52); what about eunuchs not being allowed to worship in the temple (Acts 8:27, compare it to Deuteronomy 23:1); or, here's a good one: no one dieing for a righteous man, but someone might die for a good man in Romans 5:7 (how does that make sense?). ALL of these things are cleared up in the Aramaic, and the list goes on and on! One more noteworthy point though is the whole slew of discrepancies/massive variations between the Greek family of texts (ending of Mark, story of the Adulteress, etc. what was originally written in the Scriptures???), with the Aramaic, we have an important additional witness to help clear up the confusion. So Greek vs Aramaic aside, the Aramaic is great for those caught up in the KJV-only cults because regardless of the primacy issues, textual criticism shows that the Aramaic has come from an earlier source than the texts which make up the Greek Majority text and Greek Critical text. Therefore, it is a very, very important third witness to the major players in textual studies and should be consulted much more often. Also, by being a sister language to Hebrew, many concepts you find in the Tanach are also found directly in the Aramaic text. Any Hebrew reading Jew will notice this vast difference from the Greek immediately, making this a very important witnessing tool for our Jewish brethren who don't yet see Mashiyach. The other benefit is that unlike Greek, Aramaic is much more straight forward. What I mean is, you can render several controversial passages in the Greek text several different ways because of the multiple meanings of the Greek words. Aramaic in comparison is a lot more simple and straight forward (as the very name "Peshitta" suggests!)

    Aramaic primacy issues aside, the other benefit to the Aramaic text is that it has the true kadosh or set-apart names and titles in the manuscripts. Those who are strict about their Torah Observance no longer have to worry about de-hellenizing a Greek text! The end result of the Aramaic context is transporting you back in time so that it actually feels like you are there with Yeshua and the disciples! The AENT boasts providing the very words which they spoke, and it does not disappoint! Imagine going back in time before any of the corrupted history of the church and seeing what it was like at the beginning... this is what the AENT provides! It is a very literal translation that is faithful to the original manuscripts. It makes use of the the Khabouris Codex, claimed in the AENT to be the oldest Aramaic text available (citing that the colophon states that it was copied 100 years after the Great Persecution, interpreted to be the persecution under Nero in 65 CE, making this a 165 CE copy) and it is diligently compared to the modern Aramaic authorities (i.e. 1905 Edition of the Syriac New Testament by the British and Foreign Bible Society). As a base text, Mr.Roth uses Paul Younan's translation of Matthew - Acts 15, and then uses James Murdock's translation for the remaining. Both of these are public domain and not copyrighted, so they are perfect for a base text. Using these, a word for word critical analysis of the text has been done to Khabouris and the Eastern Peshitta with the result being an updated fresh translation with no archaic words or sentence structuring. Proper names and titles have also been restored, adding in a substantial amount of clarity and cultural context. On top of that, you will find extensive textual criticism through the 1700 footnotes and 350 pages of appendices. Many, many variations from the Greek and any small variation in the family of Aramaic texts are noted (it's very surprising how few variations there are in the Eastern Aramaic Peshitta, and none of them change the meaning of the text...).

    Beyond these features, one of the best things that the AENT has to offer is CONTEXT! We always hear about how we have to study the Scriptures in context, etc. Well, Mr.Roth is one of the few that actually provides key insight into the historical first century culture and context. With in the 1700 footnotes, we gain special insight into the Hebraic mindset/thought patterns of Yeshua and His disciples, and learn about what was really going on in the first century. Without knowing why something was taught or emphasized in the early letters according to the contextual situation of the day, many passages become useless and do nothing more than cause division from the many interpretations out there. This was the big problem during the Reformation when everyone could finally read the Scriptures for themselves... nobody knew the context and as such, they disagreed and split up. This is why we have so many denominations and off shoots in modern day Christianity. But much of this confusion is avoided and cleared up by the contextual clarity that the AENT provides. This alone makes it a very valuable addition to any library.

    The AENT measures 6.1 inches x 9.25 inches x 1.96 inches. It is a beautiful brown hardcover with gold lettering and comes with a brown ribbon marker. The text quality is crisp, clear, and of a good font size. The footnotes are of a smaller font size but still very readable. Although I am a sucker for double column, paragraph format, Mashiyach's words in red, genuine leather Scripture kind of guy, I must say that I enjoy this book. The binding I don't quite give 5 stars because while it's nice, it's still not of the quality of say, a Koren Tanak. The translation receives a 4.5/5 for a few minor errors that I noticed, such as a tense issue in Colossians 2:16 and an instance of MarYah (see next paragraph) that was missed at the end of Revelations. There was also an error in Galatians that was corrected in the second edition. Compared to any other translation though this is nothing!

    The BEST thing about this translation however is that it is FINALLY an accurate and faithful translation in restoring the name of the Almighty, YHWH, in it's proper location. In the Greek texts, there is no distinction between Master (referring to the Son) and MASTER (referring to the Father). The Greek uses Kurios for both. In the Aramaic text however, the Aramaic equivalent of the tetragrammaton (MarYah) actually exists, and the AENT is one of the very few translations that recognizes and translates this correctly. The result is astounding! There is an intense theological clarity which comes from this, and I will let you find out for yourself by reading through the text. So unlike the various Sacred Name Bibles out there that obsess over inserting the name into Greek translations, there is absolutely no guesswork with the name of YHWH in the Aramaic text. This alone makes the AENT a gem to be treasured. MarYah is translated as Master YHWH, allowing you to pronounce the name however you wish (and avoiding the highly disputed translation of "jehovah"). You will also find proper titles, such as Elohim in the text (instead of "god") and more literal, accurate renderings of other words (such as "Set Apart" for holy, indicating more precisely what the word holy is supposed to mean). Since this comes from the Aramaic, you will not find any hellenized words, and unlike George Lamsa, Mr.Roth does not translate according to the tradition of hellenization. This again gives us a new clarity not offered in other versions of the Scriptures.

    Finally, I should make a very important note in terms of translation bias. Since the AENT is translated by an individual, Andrew Gabriel Roth, it is a valid concern that translational bias will be entering the text. It should be noted however that Mr.Roth's translation has employed a diverse group of scholars and Bible students from Christian and Jewish backgrounds who scrutinized the AENT. The objective was to keep the translation as devoid as possible of any theological bias, and it has been quite successful in doing so. Of course, bias will always creep up in the footnotes, but this is no different than any other study edition of the Scriptures. In fact, since you shouldn't be going to just one source when you're reading commentary, the AENT is extra important based on the fact that it comes from an Eastern Hebraic perspective (the one in which the Scriptures were written) as opposed to a Western Greco-Roman mindset that's so prevalent in other translations. Therefore, regardless of whether or not you agree with the conclusions in the footnotes, they are valuable in our overall study of the Scriptures.

    So, to sum things up, by coming back to the original Hebraic context and mindset of the first century believers, reading this translation is like getting to know Yeshua and reading the Ketuvim Netzarim for the first time all over again. You will clearly see how they did not embrace hellenized culture and stayed faithful to the Torah of YHWH according to Mashiyach. There are absolutely NO contradictions in the original faith. If you long for the ancient paths of Jeremiah 6:16, this is your book! With the 1700 footnotes and 350 pages of appendices, this is the first and only scholarly Messianic/Netzarim study version of the Scriptures. The footnotes alone are worth the price of the book. The only downfall to the AENT is that it leaves you thirsting for a faithful version of the Tanak with the same kind of scholarly footnotes and appendices. Thankfully, YHWH is blessing us with Mr.Roth's work, because he is indeed working on a Tanach that, although years away from publication, will be a beautiful companion (note: his Tanach translation is called Matara: Masoretic Targummic Amplified Edition).

    If you do not have this, I suggest you stop reading and go buy one right now! May YHWH bless you in the study of His word and allow you to grow closer to Him through this wonderful resource. Amen.

    Updates to the Second Edition

    The second edition AENT has improved print (darker) and several text corrections and additions. A few spelling errors (such as in Luke 3:23 and John 11:17) have been corrected, and some of the translation has been improved as well. The best example I can give is Galatians 4:29 which in the first edition reads "And just as he who was born through the flesh was persecuted by he who was (born) through the Spirit, so it also is now." This is saying that we who are born of the Spirit persecute those who are born of the flesh. It should be the other way around, and this has been corrected to read "And just as he who was born after the flesh persecuted he who was (born) after the Spirit, so it is today."

    Originally, I was disappointed to see that Colossians 2:17 was not updated to what I saw as being the "correct" translation. Originally I was under the impression that since Murdock's translation was used as a base text, Colossians 2:17 carried some "baggage" from the translation. My issue was that the text reads "which WERE shadows of the things then future; but the body of Mashiyach" when I thought it should say "which ARE a shadow of things to come" like we read in the Greek. While it's true that these were shadows of Mashiyach's first coming, they are also still shadows of His second coming and translating the former way (were) as opposed to the latter (are) has caused some theological discrepancy. HOWEVER, when I asked Andrew about this personally, he was able to clear up the issue. Here is his response, which I think is noteworthy,

    This is a longer story than I can tell here, but basically the Aramaic word for “to be” AYTI is more properly past tense, though it can on occasion be thought of as present tense. George Lamsa, an Aramaic translator who was writing for a KJV centered Protestant audience, followed the Greek reading “are a shadow of things to come”. This was also the opinion of JW Etheridge, who did a translation of the Western Aramaic into English in 1846.

    However, I have stayed with the traditional Eastern reading which puts AYTI as past tense, as it is used in John 8:58 (Eastern version, 8:47). In that place Y’shua is thought to have said, “Before Abraham was, I AM”, which makes no sense literally and has been taken to mean “I am YHWH” but the reality is he would still mean “I WAS YHWH before Abraham”. Hence, the correct reading there and here is “Before Abraham was, I was”. The same word applies to Colossians 2:17, and that is also how James Murdock translates it.

    The discussion on why sometimes the tense (or more accurately, state of being) is somewhat open to interpretation is beyond the scope of this discussion here. But instinctively, you have already seen other examples of this, such as in YHWH’s Name, that can be “I am” or “I was” or “I will be” depending on interpretation. It is the same thing with AYTI.

    Even if it could be shown then that Lamsa and Etheridge are correct with “are”, the line would still be understood in past tense technically speaking because the shadows come BEFORE.

    The good news though is that in neither case is the reading genuinely affected. I agree with your interpretation and find it supported in the AENT reading as well. These things “were shadows” but their ultimate fulfillment is still FUTURE, and even if some think such is not clear in this passage it is abundantly clear in many others and ALL of Scripture must be used to make a right judgment.
    Moving on to genuine mis-translations, the only other one I noticed is in Revelation 22:20 where there is an instance of MarYah that is still missed. In the first edition it was rendered "Lord" which in this edition has been corrected to read "Master", but in the Aramaic it's not Mari but MarYah. Some versions of the Scriptures out there have also footnoted the beginning of Jude verse 4 as having an occurrence of MarYah (where in the KJV text it reads "Lord God"), but if you check the Aramaic text, the vowel pointing is slightly different. Roth has an extensive footnote in both editions on this particular word though, so you can check that out to see what he says.

    There are some additional footnotes thrown in which you will notice when there is a footnote #1 and then a footnote #1a. All the new footnotes have a letter like that, so it's easy to see what's been added. Looking through the text though, there aren't that many new additions.

    The binding and ribbon marker are the same as the first edition.

    Updates to the Third Edition

    The third edition AENT is awesome! Most notable at first is that there is a new cover with improved binding, paper quality, print quality and ribbon marker. These aesthetic features are great and can be seen in the pictures below. The book itself is a lot more thin (almost a quarter inch) because of the improved paper quality, and the ribbon marker is longer and fray-proof (BIG bonus), unlike the one from the first two editions. Even though the print quality was improved in the second edition, it's even further improved in the third! Crisp, dark and clear!

    The biggest change that's immediately apparent upon opening the book is that the Aramaic text has been put into Hebrew letters. This means that for those of us who can read Hebrew, we now will be able to sound out the Aramaic and have a better indication of what's in the text. This is helpful in a few instances where word order is important, and if you can read Hebrew you will be able to figure out the Semitic context of the word ordering (which is often changed in English for clarity sake, but sometimes the Semitic order is important).

    Before I get into the text changes, let me note that the mis-translation in Revelation 22:20 still haven't been corrected in this edition. Some other parts of the text that seem a bit choppy remain the same as well. In my personal study copy I make note of how the translation could be smoother and I was hoping that there would be some changes like this in the third edition, but, not this time. Things I have noticed I will eventually compile and send to Andrew so he can make note of them, but until then, they are there. It needs to be noted however that these are very minor issues and do not change the meaning of the text.

    There are again some additional footnotes added, but unlike the second edition, all the footnotes have been re-numbered. So instead of saying footnote "12a" and "12b" for additional footnotes added, footnote 12a becomes 13, and what was footnote 13 is now 14. (and so on and so forth). This will make it more difficult to find the new footnotes, but they'll be things you find as you keep referencing the text in your studies. Alternatively, you can reference the chart at the bottom of this section where I've made note of all the ones I have found so far.

    The biggest changes I've noticed that are worth noting right now though are in Acts 2:36, 1 Corinthians 8:6, 12:3, and Philippians 2:11. At first I had wondered about the changes but reading through one of the new appendices called "Divinity Passages", it became very clear why it was done. It has to do with the Semitic thought pattern of how you would say something, and the more I study the Hebraic understanding of the YHWH-Yeshua connection, the more that it's making sense to me. I won't go into too much detail on these passages though, but rather, let you explore them (and the corresponding appendices) for yourself.

    There are two new appendices in the third edition. The first one is called "Alef Tav" which simply explains what this phrase means. The second, as mentioned above, is called "Divinity Passages". It goes over several passages from both Tanach and the Netzarim Writings concerning the divinity of Yeshua. The passages from Tanach have in-depth commentary on them where as the passages from the Netzarim writings are mostly just showing the text itself (and the text really is pretty straight forward). At the end however the word ordering change found in places like Philippians 2:11 is explained in detail. It's actually a very controversial subject, but it's one that I really encourage you to approach with an open mind. We often get so stuck in a certain way of thinking that anything contrary to it raises a red flag where we become quick to scream "heresy". But I would really pay attention to what Andrew Roth is trying to say here, because I believe that he's really on to something. Whether I agree 100% with him or not is another question, but I know that his perspective has some key points that I strongly believe will play a part in bringing the faith to our Orthodox Jewish friends who will never accept the idea of Elohim being a trinity. It will also help to point us to a deeper understanding of our Mighty One, YHWH!

    Overall, the third edition is definitely worth picking up. While no translation is perfect, the AENT still serves as being one of the top translations out there that should be referenced in all of our studies of the Ketuvim Netzarim (especially considering how Eastern Hebraic commentary for the NT is so very scarce!) From reading the subsequent editions and having been through the AENT cover to cover almost twice, my five star rating is retained 100%!

    Special Summary of Third Edition Updates

    Additional Footnotes (26)
    Matthew 6 new footnotes, 1 updated
    #273 (updates 268)
    Mark 1 new footnote
    Luke 1 new footnote
    John 3 new footnotes
    Acts 4 new footnotes, 1 updated
    #144 (updated 142)
    Hebrews 1 new footnote, 1 updated
    #45 (updated)
    Jude 0 new footnotes
    James 0 new footnotes
    1 Peter 2 new footnotes
    2 Peter 0 new footnotes
    Romans 0 new footnotes
    1 Corinthians 1 new footnote
    2 Cornthians 0 new footnotes
    Galatians 0 new footnotes
    Ephesians 0 new footnotes
    Philippians 1 Updated footnote
    #6 (updated)
    Colossians 0 new footnotes
    1 Thessalonians 1 new footnote
    2 Thessalonians 0 new footnotes
    1 Timothy 0 new footnotes
    2 Timothy 0 new footnotes
    Titus 0 new footnotes
    Philemon 0 new footnotes
    1 Yochanan 2 new footnotes
    2 Yochanan 0 new footnotes
    3 Yochanan 0 new footnotes
    Revelation 1 new footnote
    NOTE This is a comparison
    to the first edition,
    so some footnotes
    I list here might already
    be in the second edition.

    Additional Appendices (2)
    -Alef Tav
    -Divinity Passages

    Updated Translations
    -Luke 19:17
    -Acts 2:36
    Acts 15:17
    -1 Corinthians 8:6
    -1 Corinthians 12:3
    -Philippians 2:11

    (there's bound to be more but again, these are just the few I've come across so far)

    Updates to the Fourth Edition

    The hardcover 4th edition AENT still has the same binding, cover, page quality, print quality, and ribbon marker quality of the third edition (which, to re-iterate, is excellent). The big thing however is that after many requests for a large print edition of the AENT, Netzari Press is finally providing one in a nice soft cover format.

    The soft cover large print edition has an 8x10 page size with very nice paper and very crisp, clear print quality. On the right hand side you have the Aramaic text and on the left hand side you have the English translation (the book, however, opens from left to right like most English books, not right to left like you'd get in Koren or ArtScroll). The Aramaic text, which is advertised both on amazon and the website as being in HEBREW characters (though it is still Aramaic) are very easy to read. The reasoning for this is because many can read the Hebrew alphabet, but not as many are familiar with the estrangelo Aramaic script. With the Hebrew characters it allows one to easily find and look up a word in their BDB or Aramaic lexicon without having to learn a whole new alphabet.

    Now the consonants are perfectly clear, and the vowel points are more crisp than most Semitic texts on the market. Of course, with an 8x10 page size this is easy to accomplish, but I thought it would be worth noting nonetheless. The English text as you can imagine is just as legible.

    The soft cover design is very cool, but it should be noted that there is no ribbon marker, as is standard on all soft cover texts.

    For those who have a third edition AENT, there are a number of updates to the 4th edition. Searching through the pages it seems that for the most part things are the same, but there are a few updates to the translation itself and as always, new footnotes. I haven't found all of the updated translations, but here is a list of the new footnotes if you have a third edition and would like to see them,

    Footnote #20, 208 (updated reading with 23:1), 273

    Footnote #43

    Footnote #19, 84, 88, 98, 135, 136

    Footnote #15, 87, 174, 175, 176 (updated reading with 19:14), 185, 197

    Footnote # 145, 146, 147, 207 (I especially like 207!)

    Footnote #19, 20 (updated 2:12)

    23 new footnotes in total (where as the 3rd edition had 26 new footnotes and two new appendices). Now, many of the new footnotes deal with issues regarding the sequence of events during the week of Yeshua's death and resurrection. Specifically, it helps to clear up the apparent confusion or contradiction of John's accounts VS the Synoptics. Roth did an excellent job covering this in the first three editions, but the detail provided here is even better! With in the Aramaic text there are some very interesting textual interpretation issues in the Gospels's which seems to provide more evidence for both Aramaic primacy as well as Greek mistranslation. But I'll let you dive into the footnotes for yourself to see just what I mean. There is also an updated appendix. Baruch's account of "When Was the Resurrection Part 2" is updated with a refined understanding in light of Andrew's research on "Wheel of Stars" and a few other things.

    The complexity of the sequence of events in the "Passion Week" are quite deep as there are several concrete theories floating around to explain the timing of Yeshua's death and resurrection. The insight into the Aramaic text is something that Andrew and Baruch verified by talking with native Aramaic speakers of the Church of the East, since it is a divergence from the traditional understanding of the passages based on the Greek texts, but it is certainly a justifiable interpretation. On God's Learning Channel, Andrew had a TV series called "Hard Teachings of the Scriptures" (currently his TV program is called "As it is written) and in a couple of the episodes he addresses all of these things. To watch these episodes, please click below,
    What day did Yeshua die? Part 1

    What day did Yeshua die? Part 2
    There are any other updates such as small translation clean ups, but I have not found them all at this point. Nonetheless, the AENT was and still remains one of the best translations and study bibles for anyone within the Hebraic Roots or Messianic movement. It may not be perfect of course, but with over 1700 footnotes and 350 pages of appendices, you are bound to find at least ONE thing that will touch you and help your faith and understanding of the Scriptures. Is that worth the price of this text? Absolutely! May our Heavenly Father bless you all as you study His word and seek a deeper relationship with Him through our awesome Mashiyach!

    Updates to the Fifth Edition

    The Aramaic English New testament 5th edition has the most updates yet out of any of the previous revisions. Although there is not a big change such as the Estrangelo script being put into modern Hebrew font, and neither is the binding any different (however, my 5th hardcover edition seems to have a stiffer binding than my 3rd edition hardcover, and we also have a regular size soft cover edition now available as well.) But these things aside, the 5th edition has a tremendous amount of footnote updates in comparison to the previous editions, as well as quite a few updated passages. There are so many new footnotes that I will not be going through and finding each one. I will however let everyone know how many new footnotes are in each book. The list is as follows,
    These are the number of new footnotes in each book of the AENT:
    Matthew - 23
    Mark - 8
    Luke - 26
    John - 45
    Acts - 61
    Hebrews - 7
    Ya'akov - 7
    Yehuda - 4
    1 Peter - 3
    2 Peter - 6
    Romans - 16
    1 Corinthians - 10
    2 Corinthians - 8
    Galatians - 3
    Ephesians - 4
    Philippians - 3
    Colossians - 7
    1 Thessalonians - 4
    2 Thessalonians - 3
    1 Timothy - 4
    2 Timothy - 3
    Titus - 2
    Philemon - 0
    1 Yochanon - 0
    2 Yochanon - 0
    3 Yochanon - 0
    Revelation - 34

    TOTAL - 291 New Footnotes.
    Many of the new footnotes I actually find quite edifying! There are quite a few encouraging footnotes admonishing us on how to live by faith according to a Hebraic based understanding of certain key terms. This is all part of what was advertised as "Elements of Scriptural Counsel" and "Messiah Consciousness / Kingdom Concepts". I love that stuff because it really helps us to attain a proper mindframe in how we are to approach our faith walk in Messiah. There is also a lot of footnotes pointing out when and where Yeshua fulfilled a Messianic prophecy and which prophecy it was. Something else that wasn't covered in much detail before was the concept of "hell", and this is now addressed in several footnotes in several different books. The footnotes are also not short either - many of the updated notes are quite lengthy, some spanning half a page or more.

    For updated translations, there are several things. I gave a list of feedback right after the 4th edition was released, and the following was updated from it,
    Mark 14:53 (second unneeded "were" taken out)
    Luke 11:32 (Yonan name which was mispelt was corrected)
    John 9:21 (removed extra "he")
    Acts 8:5 - (Meshikha updated to Mashiyach)
    2 Corinthians 7:11, 15, and 2 Thessalonians 2:14 - (older English updated)
    But beyond this, there is also a number of updates to the translation in several spots. I have only had my 5th edition for a few days as I write this, and may continue to add more as find them, but these are a few of the instances I have found so far.

    2 Corinthians 13:5 now reads - "Don't you acknowledge that Y'shua the Mashiyach is in you? And if he is not, you are despised and against Torah."

    There is a very lengthy footnote explaining that this is a double simultaneous exploitation of the singular word and root maslaya, a competent synonym for being against namusa/auryata. Elsewhere this same word remains as lawbreakers though (i.e. verse 7). Now maslaya means "despised, rejected, reprobate, contemptible" etc. and from just a basic standpoint could perhaps be interpreted or paraphrased to mean rejecting Torah (reprobate = unprincipled person and principles = G-d's instructions/principles which = Torah). But then if it is a competent synonym for being against namusa/auryata, the issue is even clearer. I do not have an exact expanded lexical reference for the latter though, that is merely what the lengthy footnote goes on to explain.

    The issue however is whether or not it is apropriate to paraphrase and amplify the text when the text does not directly state this. What do you think? While it is clear that going beyond a simple, literal translation tends to reveal bias, and this is the certainly the case here, I should point out that the bias is not a judgment on those who do not keep aspects of Torah such as Shabbat and the Moedim. Rather, Andrew goes on within the footnotes to contrast the Corinthians morally illicit (especially sexually illicit) culture, behaviour and lifestyle with that of their new found faith in Mashiyach. Andrew states "Belief in the Mashiyach brings an open heart towards Torah, not a rejection of Torah" where Torah is meant to be interpreted as the heart change of no longer living according to the old man but rather according to the new man who is holy and blameless, walking rightouesly according to faith in Mashiyach. When we remember the appendix where Andrew outlines how much Torah that Christians already keep, we can see that he is simply stating that any genuine believer, regardless of the camp they belong to, will have their faith evidenced by walking in some form of righteousness (which is what Torah is all about). And on this point I completely agree with Andrew, however, I would not have directly amplified this word in the text but kept it instead within the footnotes.

    Another updated translation is 2 Corinthians 7:1 which states - "and let us bring about (that which is) Set-Apart". Roth is choosing to render kadishota in the more literal sense, with the footnote emphasizing sanctification. Philippians 3:9 is also updated with an added emphasis on clarifying the context of oral Torah and how the superficial religiousity did not in any way make Paul righteous, but rather it is his faith in Mashiyach which then of course causes him to walk righteously as Mashiyach walked (but that's the outpouring of his righteousness which comes by faith, not the cause of his rightousness which comes by faith).

    There is bound to be more, but these are the ones that have popped out to me from flipping through the AENT the past few days. But despite these good points, I do have a fair amount of criticism to give the AENT. I have been with this volume since it was first released and have read it all the way through more than once. As my theology and language skills continue to improve, I am beginning to notice more and more errors within the translation, the Aramaic text, the formatting, and so on. My critical comments for the AENT are listed at the top of this page, and in addition to them I have compiled a list of approximately 75 errors as well as a few of my own suggestions. Please read them below,

    AENT 5th Editions Errors and Sugestions (PDF)

    The above list was last updated December 17th, 2012. If I continue to use the AENT I will likely be adding to this list, but my goal is to get good enough with the language that I can carry around a BHS and the Peshitta text with Hebrew translation for study, and then just use a good devotional like the Tree of Life Bible for most other things. Then I no longer have to worry about these translational, typographical or doctrinal issues. I have had a long journey with the AENT, but the Almighty is calling me forth to something new these days. Something far beyond simple ministry within this movement, let alone sitting alone at home dissecting the texts. May You be my guide O L-RD.

    "When I was a child,
    I spoke like a child,
    I thought like a child,
    I reasoned like a child.
    When I became a man,
    I put away childish things."
    (1 Corinthians 13:11, TLV)



    Click on an edition to view the pictures!

    1st and 2nd Editions (Hardcover) 3rd Edition (Hardcover) 4th Edition (Large Print Softcover) 5th Edition (Regular Size Softcover)


    Chazak Chazak, V'nit Chazek!