Contact: Aramaic New Testament
Researcher Claims Breakthrough Discovery
in the Aramaic Version, Written in the Language of Jesus
By Rev. Glenn David Bauscher
My Hypothesis: If God were to put codes in the Bible, He would certainly leave a signature in it using the names and titles of God which are mentioned in the plain Bible text, and insure that they occur in highly significant numbers, far beyond or below statistically expected amounts. These would constitute a divine signature of the Author of the books individually, the separate testaments and the Bible as a whole.
Based on my previous long code findings in the Peshitta New Testament (The Aramaic New Testament, written in the tongue which Jesus and his countrymen of 1st century Israel spoke), I completed the results of a long series of comparisons of results from the Peshitta and control texts.
After Ed Sherman (Bible Code Digest director) introduced the Bible code Mosaics concept from Genesis, I experimented in that and other books. I analyzed the results statistically to see if there are patterns and low probabilities, using chi-square analysis and standard deviation calculations. I started with two letter names and titles, gradually including three, then four and five letter names and titles. I have found highly significant results in all the Old Testament books that I have searched using the names of God, including Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Esther and 2nd Chronicles. Control texts, such as Tolstoy’s War and Peace in Hebrew, and other texts, have not yielded similar results.
I applied this method to the Peshitta and modified it, searching for the titles of God, His Son and the Holy Spirit. I have not returned empty handed. The results are staggering!
I am still overwhelmed by all of this, because it seems that no matter which New Testament book I search or which of the considerable number of divine titles I enter into Codefinder, the search software I used for these comparisons, the probability for the actual number of occurrences compared to the expected occurrences is infinitesimal. I have also used control texts with which to compare each Bible finding. Control texts like War and Peace in Hebrew show nothing like the results I find in the Peshitta NT. In other words, the Peshitta NT contains highly significant numbers of divine names and titlesusually more, sometimes far fewercompared to what is expected by chance.
These divine names are the signature codes to which I referred at the beginning of this chapter and elsewhere. It is similar to the long series of prime numbers received from space, in the movie Contact, starring Jodie Foster. Not only do they indicate an intelligent author for the individual books of the Bible, but they also indicate a single superhuman intelligence as the author of the entire New Testament as a single unified whole.
Presentation of Sample Results
In the first table we have a comparison between the variations from the expected number of occurrences of Yahweh as an ELS in the Peshitta text and in a control text (a scrambled version of the Peshitta).
As an example, let’s look at the results for ELSs with skips in the range of 1,000 up to 50,000. Yahweh is expected to appear as an ELS 527,456 times in both the Peshitta and the control text. And yet the actual number of occurrences of the Yahweh ELS differ from the expected number by 22,524 in the Peshitta while only differing by 1,046 in the control text. So the size of the variation in the Peshitta is 21.5 times greater than that in the control text. While the variation was only 0.2% from expected in the control text, it was 4.3% in the Peshitta. The size of the variation for the control text is well within what would be expected on the basis of random phenomena. The Peshitta variations, however, are far greater than that for all but the fourth skip size category.|
The next table presents comparable results for occurrences of the Mariah ELS. Mariah is the Aramaic equivalent of Yahweh.
While the size of the variations in the control text are all within the range of what would be expected due to chance, the variations for all but the first skip size category are far greater than anything due to chance.|
The next table presents comparable results for occurrences of the Alaha ELS. Alaha is the Aramaic equivalent of Elohim, another Hebrew name for God.
Again we see that the size of the variations in the control text are all within the range of what would be expected due to chance, while the variations for the second and fourth skip size categories are far greater than anything due to chance.|
If we add up the variations from expected for each skip size category by divine name, we have the following comparison.
As we can see, the total amount of variation from expected in the Peshitta ranges from six times to 13.5 times more than the total variation from expected in the control text—for the different divine names. This is an extremely significant result statistically because the sample sizes are exceptionally large (i.e., 400,000 or more in each category).|
To summarize, the graph below presents the above comparisons in terms of Z-values (the size of the variation in terms of standard deviations). Ordinarily, differences from expected almost always are less than 4 standard deviations (defined as the square root of the expected number of occurrences). However, some of the variations from expected for the control texts are greater than 4. This is due to the fact that variations from expected for a given ELS at one skip size tend to be similar to those for adjacent skip sizes. For example, if the Yahweh ELS appears 20% more often than expected with skips of 1,000, it will also tend to appear much more often than expected with skips of 999 and 1,001. That the Yahweh ELS appeared 20% more often than expected with a skip of 1,000 was probably due, at least in part, to segments of the text where the letter frequencies of the letters in Yahweh were greater than average. When that occurs, it will also tend to cause the Yahweh ELS to appear much more often for skips slightly greater or smaller than 1,000.
Because of the sensitivity of variations from expected to differences in letter frequencies in different parts of a text, the size of the variations from expected in the control text can be as great as 15 standard deviations, rather than just 4.
If variations due to chance should almost never be greater than 15 standard deviations, how then can we explain many of the variations noted above that are far greater than that? The largest variations are 111.5, 88.1, 62.2, 41.6, 32.6 and 31.1 standard deviations from expected. Variations of these magnitudes basically eliminate chance as an explanation.|
A Comparison From the Torah
What would the above types of comparisons look like if we examined occurrences of the Yahweh ELS in the Torah—versus a control text of comparable length from a Hebrew version of Tolstoy’s War and Peace? That comparison is provided in the next table.
Again, we see that the size of the variations is radically higher in the Torah than in the War & Peace control text.|
While there are major difficulties in accurately determining the probability that any or all of the above dramatic variations exhibited in the Peshitta text and the Torah were due to chance, no matter what method is used to estimate that probability, the result is conclusive—such enormous variations cannot be due to chance.
The effects described above are not only observable in the whole New Testament, but also in the individual Gospels, the book of Acts, the book of Hebrews and the Revelation, as well as the first twelve chapters of Matthew as a separate section. The individual books overall would generally need to exhibit the same traits in order for the entire New Testament to contain such significant and unusual numbers of ELS’s (equidistant letter sequences), compared to the expected numbers for the entire New Testament! (Note: Recent testing of additional epistles show the same effect in Acts,Titus, Romans ,1st and 2nd Corinthians and even Philemon, which is only one page.)
The results of the comparisons presented above are very compelling evidence to support the assertion that the Peshitta-Peshitto New Testament is the original and divinely-inspired text of the apostles.
To those who are conversant in New Testament textual criticism, I know all this may sound fanciful. The ruling school of thought is that the Peshitta is simply a retranslation of the traditional (revised) Greek text in the early 5th century. But it is my personal belief that we need a fresh look at all that is considered sacrosanct in the field of New Testament textual criticism. Much of it is mere conjecture. There is no historical evidence for either a Syrian revision or a Greek revision in that time period.
Something as drastic as changing, overnight, the sacred text of the Bible which had been accepted for centuries, is not likely to occur without a prolonged resistance and struggle, and even then will most likely only be received by some, not all. However, it is stretching credulity beyond the breaking point to affirm that two such revisions occurred (Syrian and Greek), replacing all other Aramaic and Greek texts in all Syrian and Greek churches, without one word of mention by any of the church fathers, historians, or anyone at all. There is no council, edict, or order such as one finds when church doctrine (Council of Nicaea) was debated or the canon of the Bible was settled (Council of Carthage).
To reiterate my original hypothesis: If God were to put codes in the Bible, He would certainly leave a signature in it using the names and titles of God which are mentioned in the plain Bible text, and insure that they occur in highly significant numbers, far beyond or below statistically expected amounts. These would constitute a divine signature of the Author of the books individually, the separate testaments and the bible as a whole.
I conclude that the data support the hypothesis overwhelmingly. My comparisons apply specifically to the Jacobite Peshitto New Testament. It appears that this text has the divine signature all through its 27 individual books and the work as a whole, having extreme variations in the actual numbers of divine names, as compared to expected values and the control results in War and Peace.
This investigation will continue. I welcome others to join in it. I am impressed with an overwhelming sense of awe.
“My heart standeth in awe of thy word.” - Psalm 119:161
I believe the heavens have made contact.
What is the Peshitta?|
There are two ancient versions of the Peshitta, the New Testament in Aramaic; one is used by the Assyrian Nestorians and the other, called the Peshitto, is used by the Syrian Monophysites—also called Jacobites.
These groups were formed by a split in the Eastern Church concerning Christologythe doctrine of who Christ iswhich occurred in A.D. 451. Both groups had used the same Aramaic Bible and have continued to hold fast to it, even to this day. Neither group would have held to a text which the other produced, so it is in vain to suggest that either side produced or revised the text at that or a later time.
Another distinctive feature of both these versions, which helps to more precisely date them, is the fact that each originally excluded (the Eastern Church does still) 2 Peter, 2 John, 3 John, Jude and Revelation. This is a testament to the fact that the Peshitta-Peshitto was formed before the Council of Carthage in AD 397, when the canon of scripture became official and standard. Apparently, the Eastern Churches received their New Testament at a very early stage of its formation, even before the canon included John’s revelation, the last book to be written, circa A.D. 95. It would seem they took the New Testament “hot off the press.”
There are very few and slight variations in the two versions. I have copies of both versions and have compared them. Results are below.
Remember that the Eastern Church has always insisted that its New Testament is unchanged from the apostles’ time unto the present.
—The gospel of Matthew in both versions has exactly 57,798 letters.
—Mark in the Jacobite Peshitto has 36,326 lettersthe same as the Nestorian peshitta.
—In Luke, the Peshitto has exactly 62,649 letters, 46 more than the Peshitta.
—In John, the former is just 50 letters longer than the latter, after compensating for the exclusion of chapter 7:53-8:11 from the Nestorian text and its inclusion in the Jacobite version.
—The book of Hebrews in the Jacobite Peshitto has 78 letters more than the Nestorian Peshitta.
I have been unable to compare more than these five books thus far. These are computer counts, so they should be reliable. They are incredible statistics in themselves, considering that these texts must be at least 1600 years old.
The text that I used for analysis of codes throughout is the Jacobite text. Both texts now include the formerly missing Revelation, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John and Jude. The ancient manuscripts of the Peshitta extant today include a considerable number of 5th and 6th century documents.
If there is any New Testament text which answers to the Hebrew Old Testament text for carefulness and faithfulness of preservation as well as consistency among its approx. 350 manuscripts, that New Testament text is the Peshitta-Peshitto. Moreover, Aramaic has the best claim for being the original language of the New Testament. Historical evidence (Josephus) and internal evidence (“to the Jew first”, “beginning at Jerusalem, in Judea,” etc.) are decidedly in favor of an original Aramaic New Testament which was translated into Greek, rather than vice-versa.
Scholars have generally agreed that The Peshitta and Peshitto Bibles are in very close agreement with the Traditional Received Text of the New Testament (and Old Testament, for that matter). No other text type is closer to it than the Majority Greek Text, also known as the Textus Receptus, for most of the New Testament. The Peshitta is the earliest witness for the Majority text type, which was the foundation of The King James Version of the Bible, first published in 1611.
My comparisons of The Peshitta and The Majority Text in the Gospels show 75% agreement between these two when The Critical Text (the text used by NIV, Living Bible, New American Standard Version and most other modern translations) differs from the Majority.
The Old Testament portion is probably a first century translation of the Hebrew Bible by Christian translators, making it the second oldest translation and complete witness to the Hebrew Bible (and the oldest Semitic witness), the Greek Septuagint being the oldest.
Mr. Bauscher is a code researcher and pastor in Cambridge, New York. He has also taught high school science and mathematics.
A page with the Hebrew alef-bet and English spellings of its letters has been added to the site.