How the Passion Translation Has Changed Preaching ![rw-book-cover](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/pWOrvrOH7Ek/sddefault.jpg) 🔗 **Source:** [How the Passion Translation Has Changed Preaching](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWOrvrOH7Ek) > [!note]+ Document Notes > tags: [passion-translation, biblical-scholarship, translation-criticism, preaching, nar-critique, plagiarism] > author: YouTube > source: YouTube > reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWOrvrOH7Ek > date created: 2026-06-23 00:00 > > # 🏷️ Title: How The Passion Translation Has Changed Preaching > <!-- deep-read:sections start --> ## 🧭 Table of Contents - [📝 Summary](#-summary) - [📖 Main Content](#-main-content) - [🗒️ Notes](#️-notes) - [📚 References](#-references) - [🗣️ Paraphrase](#️-paraphrase) - [📰 Newsletter](#-newsletter) - [✅ Action Items](#-action-items) - [🧪 Hypotheses](#-hypotheses) - [📊 Methodology](#-methodology) - [❓ Questions](#-questions) - [🔮 Future Research](#-future-research) - [💡 Implications](#-implications) - [🧠 Learning Styles Assessment](#-learning-styles-assessment) - [📊 Accessibility Assessment](#-accessibility-assessment) - [🌍 DEIB Assessment](#-deib-assessment) - [✅ Logical Validity](#-logical-validity) - [🛡️ DARVO Analysis](#-darvo-analysis) - [🎯 Conclusion](#-conclusion) ### 🔗 References - The Passion Translation (TPT), Brian Simmons (translator) - Andrew Roth, *Aramaic English New Testament* - Paul Younan (originator of the disputed Paraclete etymology) - Galatians 3 (the curse / redemption locus the critique appeals to) ## 📝 Summary - Two critics walk through how The Passion Translation (TPT), produced by Brian Simmons, has seeded charismatic preaching with a fabricated doctrine: that the Holy Spirit is a "second savior" who "ends the curse." - It matters because named ministries (Dutch Sheets, Damon Thompson, Jesse Duplantis, Kevin Zadai) are building teaching on a single TPT footnote at John 14:16-17 that the critics trace to plagiarism and an invented Aramaic etymology. - Key stakeholders: Brian Simmons and TPT, the charismatic/NAR preaching ecosystem, the original etymology author Paul Younan, intermediary Andrew Roth, and lay audiences receiving the doctrine as scholarship. - Risks and tradeoffs: the critique is one-sided (no Simmons rebuttal in the clip), relies on a paraphrased reading of Younan's "walk-back," and equates fabrication with the Book of Mormon — rhetorically forceful but argumentatively loaded. - Bottom line: the hosts argue TPT's "Aramaic" distinctives are a marketing frame over plagiarized, invented material, and that whole sermons now rest on it. ## 📖 Main Content - Core claim 1 — the Aramaic frame is the selling point and it is collapsing. TPT was marketed on "Aramaic primacy," the idea that Aramaic is "the heart language of Jesus" while "Greek only reaches the mind." The hosts say Simmons is now "scrubbing all of the Aramaic out of the translation" because the Aramaic material is "almost all plagiarized from three sources." - Core claim 2 — Simmons does not know Aramaic. The hosts assert Simmons "let slip to Dr. Mark Strauss that he doesn't even know Aramaic," yet built Aramaic-dependent footnotes anyway. - Core claim 3 — the Paraclete footnote is fabricated and plagiarized. TPT's John 14 footnote claims "parakleta" derives from Aramaic roots "proc" (to end/finish/save) and "lita" (the curse), yielding "a redeemer who ends the curse." The hosts trace this to Paul Younan via Andrew Roth's *Aramaic English New Testament* (page 306), noting TPT's rare external citations are copied from Roth's footnote including Roth's "PY" attribution to Younan. - Core claim 4 — the etymology is linguistically false. "Paraclete" in Aramaic/Syriac is a Greek loan word — they "didn't have a word for it" and "took the Greek word." So contrasts of the form "the Greek word is X but the Aramaic word is Y" collapse because it is the same word. - Core claim 5 — even the originator recanted. A 2011 forum screenshot (credited to Andrew Chapman) has Younan saying he was "probably wrong" and "probably just made it all up" — before TPT was published — yet Simmons carried it forward. - Core claim 6 — downstream doctrine. Dutch Sheets preaches the Spirit "ends the curse"; Damon Thompson builds a full "another savior" teaching where believers "partner" to finish a "cosmic curse" Jesus "didn't quite take care of"; Jesse Duplantis calls the footnote "even better" than the Bible text. The hosts counter from Galatians 3 that Christ alone ends the curse and that Trinitarian roles "cannot be mixed." - Contested/uncertain: the Younan "walk-back" is admittedly the hosts "reading a little bit into what he says." Simmons's intent, the "three sources," and the Strauss admission are asserted, not shown in-clip. ### 🗒️ Notes #### ⏱️ [00:00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWOrvrOH7Ek?t=0) Aramaic primacy as the founding frame - TPT sold on Aramaic being Jesus's "heart language"; "Greek only reaches the mind, but Aramaic reaches the heart." - This frame is "the whole foundation of everything in the translation." #### ⏱️ [00:00:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWOrvrOH7Ek?t=30) Scrubbing the Aramaic - Host: Simmons is "effectively trying to scrub all of the Aramaic out of the translation now" after a decade-plus of Aramaic claims. - Reason offered: it is "almost all plagiarized from three sources" the hosts say they've identified. #### ⏱️ [00:01:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWOrvrOH7Ek?t=60) Kevin Zadai clip and the heaven-encounter pattern - Zadai tells an audience that quoting against TPT makes you "an enemy of God." - Zadai claims a Jesus encounter where TPT was "the closest to how Jesus spoke to me" — paralleled to Simmons's own claimed encounter. #### ⏱️ [00:01:45](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWOrvrOH7Ek?t=105) "Brian lied" - Host: "Brian Simmons lied... a guy who doesn't know Aramaic was plagiarizing from another guy, Victor Alexander." - People are "building entire doctrines on fabricated footnotes from the Aramaic." #### ⏱️ [00:02:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWOrvrOH7Ek?t=120) Dutch Sheets preaches the footnote - Sheets gives the "Paracleta = end the curse" definition from the TPT margin, applying it to the Supreme Court, "child sacrifice," and the church. #### ⏱️ [00:02:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWOrvrOH7Ek?t=160) The footnote's chain of custody - TPT John 14: "he will give you another savior" — the Spirit as a "second savior." - Traced to Younan → Roth (*Aramaic English New Testament*, p. 306) → TPT; TPT's citations copied from Roth's, including Roth's "PY" credit. #### ⏱️ [00:03:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWOrvrOH7Ek?t=210) The loan-word problem - "Paraclete" is a Greek loan word in Aramaic/Syriac — they took the Greek word. So the special etymology is "completely fabricated." #### ⏱️ [00:03:50](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWOrvrOH7Ek?t=230) Younan's 2011 walk-back - Screenshot (via Andrew Chapman): Younan says he was "probably wrong" and "probably just made it all up" in 2011, before TPT published. #### ⏱️ [00:04:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWOrvrOH7Ek?t=240) Theology: Galatians 3 and Trinitarian roles - "Christ is the only one spoken of in scripture as ending the curse" (Gal 3). - Trinitarian actions "cannot be mixed": the Father/Spirit don't die on the cross; the Son doesn't pour out the Father at Pentecost. #### ⏱️ [00:04:40](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWOrvrOH7Ek?t=280) Damon Thompson extends it - Thompson cites "Dr. Simmons" footnotes; builds an "another savior" teaching with a believer-partnered "cosmic curse." - Host: he "actually believes that Brian Simmons is a doctor" — a doctorate "in prayer from an unaccredited institution." #### ⏱️ [00:06:20](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWOrvrOH7Ek?t=380) "Might as well be from the Book of Mormon" - Host equates the doctrine's inspiration to the Book of Mormon "because it's invented." - Duplantis and others quote the footnote as "even better" than the Bible. ## 📚 References - [The Passion Translation](https://www.thepassiontranslation.com/) — the translation under critique - [Galatians 3 (BibleGateway)](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians+3) — "Christ redeemed us from the curse" basis - Andrew Roth, *Aramaic English New Testament* — cited intermediary source (p. 306) - Paul Younan / Peshitta forum (2011) — origin and claimed recant of the etymology ## 🗣️ Paraphrase - TPT was built and sold on the premise that Aramaic carries emotional truth Greek misses, but the hosts say that premise is now being quietly dismantled because the Aramaic content was lifted from a handful of sources by a translator who can't read Aramaic. - The clearest case is John 14: TPT renders the Spirit "another savior" and footnotes an Aramaic etymology ("end the curse") that came from Paul Younan through Andrew Roth — an etymology Younan himself later abandoned and that is false because the word is just a Greek loan. Preachers like Sheets, Thompson, and Duplantis have nonetheless turned that footnote into doctrine. ## 📰 Newsletter - Not applicable to this source — this is a biblical-translation critique with no WordPress, plugin, or developer-community angle. ## ✅ Action Items - Not applicable to this source — the content is a theology/translation critique with no DevRel, OSPO, Community, WordPress, WPCC, or FAIR work items to assign. ## 🧪 Hypotheses - If TPT's Aramaic footnotes were independently audited against Roth's *Aramaic English New Testament*, a high share would match Roth's wording and citations (plagiarism signal). - If Syriac/Aramaic lexica are consulted, "parakleta" will resolve as a Greek loan word with no native "end-the-curse" root decomposition. - If sermons from Sheets, Thompson, Duplantis, and Zadai are catalogued, the "Spirit as second savior / curse-ender" theme will trace predominantly to the single TPT John 14 footnote. - If TPT editions are diffed across years, later editions will show reduced Aramaic-dependent footnotes ("scrubbing"). - If the 2011 Younan forum post is recovered in full, it will show qualified self-doubt rather than a formal retraction (testing the hosts' paraphrase). ### 📊 Methodology - Textual collation: line up TPT footnotes with Roth (and Younan source posts) to quantify overlap and citation copying. - Lexical analysis: check Aramaic/Syriac dictionaries (e.g., CAL, Payne Smith) for "paraclete" loan-word status. - Sermon corpus coding: transcribe and tag named-preacher clips for doctrinal lineage to the footnote. - Edition diffing: compare TPT print/digital editions over time for footnote changes. ### ❓ Questions - What are the "three sources" the hosts say they identified, and is the attribution documented? - Did Simmons ever respond to the Strauss "doesn't know Aramaic" claim on record? - Is Younan's 2011 statement a recant, a hedge, or a narrower qualification? - How many distinct ministries actually cite this footnote versus arrive at similar teaching independently? ### 🔮 Future Research - A full provenance map of TPT's Aramaic apparatus across all disputed verses. - Reception study: how lay audiences distinguish (or fail to distinguish) a footnote from inspired text. - Comparative analysis of TPT against mainstream critical editions on the same passages. ### 💡 Implications - Practice: preachers should verify a translation's apparatus before doctrinizing a footnote, especially when credentials ("Dr.") and unaccredited institutions are involved. - Policy: publishers and ministry networks face a governance gap when paratext (footnotes) carries doctrinal weight without scholarly review. - Education: lay Bible literacy needs explicit teaching on loan words, manuscript languages, and the authority gap between text and footnote. ### 🧠 Learning Styles Assessment - Reading level estimate: roughly Flesch-Kincaid grade 9-10 (conversational, transcribed speech with theological vocabulary; long run-on spoken sentences raise complexity). #### 👀 Visual learners - Present: the hosts reference on-screen images of the Roth page and the Younan screenshot ("throw the images on the screen"). - Improve: a side-by-side citation-overlap graphic and a lineage diagram (Younan → Roth → TPT → preachers). #### 🔊 Aural learners - Present: native audio/video format with multiple speaker clips. - Improve: a 3-minute audio summary isolating the claim chain from the embedded sermon clips. #### 🗣️ Verbal learners - Present: definitions of "loan word," "parakletos," and the root decomposition are spoken. - Improve: a glossary callout and a plain-language "what a footnote is vs. what scripture is." #### 🧩 Kinesthetic learners - Present: implicit "look it up" demonstration (the host describing checking Roth p. 306). - Improve: a reader exercise to trace one footnote to its source. #### 🧠 Logical learners - Present: a clear if-then chain (frame → plagiarism → false etymology → recant → downstream doctrine). - Improve: a decision tree separating verified claims from asserted ones. #### 🧑‍🤝‍🧑 Social learners - Present: dialogue format between two hosts plus quoted third parties. - Improve: moderated Q&A or a response panel including a TPT defender. #### 🧘‍♀️ Solitary learners - Present: self-contained argument one can follow alone. - Improve: reflection prompts on how to vet a translation personally. #### 🌿 Naturalistic learners - Present: minimal — none. - Improve: analogize textual transmission to an ecosystem/lineage of sources. ### 📊 Accessibility Assessment #### Screen reader semantics - Present: spoken content is inherently linear. - Improve: provide a structured transcript with headings for each clip and speaker labels. #### Keyboard navigation - Present: standard YouTube player keyboard support. - Improve: chaptered timestamps for keyboard jump navigation. #### Contrast and readability - Present: depends on the on-screen image overlays (not verifiable from transcript). - Improve: ensure overlaid citation images meet 4.5:1 and include readable captions. #### Text resizing and reflow - Present: not applicable to video runtime; applies to any companion notes. - Improve: offer a reflowable text version of the citation evidence. #### Media and captions - Present: auto-transcript exists (this file). - Improve: human-corrected captions (the auto-transcript garbles "proc"/"prob" and "lita"/"leda"), plus a downloadable transcript. #### Forms and interactions - Not applicable to this source — no forms or interactive controls. #### Standards reference - Map gaps to WCAG 2.2 AA: 1.2.2 Captions, 1.4.3 Contrast, 1.4.5 Images of Text (citation screenshots should have text alternatives). ### 🌍 DEIB Assessment #### Cultural breadth - Present: engages Aramaic/Syriac and Greek language history. - Improve: include a credentialed Semitic-languages scholar's voice rather than only the hosts' assertions. #### Inclusive language - Present: generally accessible; jargon ("loan word," "parakletos") is mostly defined. - Improve: define "New Apostolic Reformation," "Peshitta," and "unaccredited" for newcomers. #### Neurodiversity support - Present: repetition of the core claim aids retention. - Improve: chunk the argument with on-screen headers; the spoken digressions ("my mind's wanting to go somewhere") reduce predictability. #### Representation - Present: multiple named figures quoted. - Improve: the critique quotes only critics and targets; no defender of TPT is represented, narrowing the viewpoint range. #### Psychological safety - Present: some hedging ("we're not here to comment on Damon Thompson... whether his ministry is good or bad"). - Improve: temper personal verdicts ("Brian lied") with a stated standard of evidence and a right-of-reply note. ### ✅ Logical Validity #### Strong reasoning - Causal/evidential chain (≈[00:02:40]–[00:03:50]): the plagiarism argument is strong because it offers a verifiable mechanism — TPT's external citations match Roth's footnote including Roth's "PY" attribution, which is hard to explain by coincidence. Clarify further by publishing the side-by-side images referenced. - Linguistic deduction (≈[00:03:30]): "paraclete is a Greek loan word, therefore an Aramaic root decomposition is impossible" is a sound deductive move if the loan-word premise holds; it is checkable against standard lexica. - Self-undercutting-source point (≈[00:03:50]): citing the etymology's originator walking it back is strong because it removes the friendliest authority for the claim. #### Fallacies - Genetic fallacy — "this might as well be from the Book of Mormon... equal amount of inspiration" (≈[00:06:20]). Attacking the doctrine via a damning analogy to its (alleged) invented origin rather than only its merits. Fix: keep the origin argument (fabrication) separate from the truth argument (it contradicts Galatians 3), which the hosts actually do have. - Ad hominem / poisoning the well — "a doctorate in prayer from an unaccredited institution built by the guy who founded the New Apostolic Reformation" (≈[00:05:00]) and "Brian lied." Credentials are relevant to expertise, but "lied" asserts intent not proven in-clip. Fix: distinguish "demonstrably wrong and uncorrected" from "lied," and cite the Strauss admission directly. - Hasty generalization — "almost all plagiarized" and "all of these contrasts" (≈[00:00:30], [00:06:40]) generalize from the John 14 case and unspecified "three sources." Fix: quantify the sample audited. - Appeal to authority (countered, not committed) — the hosts correctly diagnose the audience's "Dr. Simmons, so this is a scholar" inference as the fallacy doing the persuasive work in the sermons. #### Tone of voice - Polemical, confident, occasionally exasperated ("There's 900 problems with that clip"; "I just find this to be one of the most troubling things in the world"). Mixes careful sourcing with rhetorical heat; the heat is strongest exactly where the evidence is thinnest (intent claims). ### 🛡️ DARVO Analysis - Deny: not from the accused — Simmons does not speak in the clip. The hosts note the in-frame denial pattern of the movement: Kevin Zadai pre-empts criticism by telling his audience that quoting against TPT means "you are actually an enemy of God," which functions to deny the legitimacy of any critique. - Attack: present on both sides. The hosts attack credibility ("Brian lied," "doctorate in prayer from an unaccredited institution"). The quoted TPT defenders attack critics' standing (Zadai's "enemy of God"; the implicit framing that doubters were "robbed as believers"). - Reverse victim/offender: visible in the quoted defenders — Zadai casts TPT readers/believers as the wronged party "robbed all these years" by mainstream teaching, recasting the disputed translation as the victim being unfairly "taken off" platforms. The hosts, by contrast, frame lay audiences as the victims of fabricated doctrine. - Emotional cues / rhetoric / fallacies: appeals to a Jesus-encounter ("the closest to how Jesus spoke to me") and persecution framing ("enemy of God") are emotional authority moves; on the critics' side, the Book-of-Mormon analogy and "lied" carry the emotional load (genetic fallacy + unproven-intent ad hominem). ## 🎯 Conclusion - Bottom line: the hosts make a substantively sourced case that TPT's signature "Aramaic" footnote at John 14 is plagiarized through Andrew Roth from Paul Younan, rests on a false loan-word etymology its own originator abandoned, and now underwrites a "Holy Spirit as second savior / curse-ender" doctrine in named charismatic ministries — but the argument is weakened where it shifts from "fabricated and uncorrected" to "lied" and from the audited John 14 case to sweeping "almost all" claims. - Next steps for readers: ask to see the side-by-side citation images, check "paraclete" loan-word status in a standard Syriac lexicon, read the full 2011 Younan post before accepting the "recant," and keep the fabrication argument distinct from the theological (Galatians 3) argument so each stands on its own. ## 🔄 Refactor Appendix — How The Passion Translation Has Changed Preaching > Density: 2–5 Literature atoms (H3), 0–3 Permanent candidates (H4). > Defaults: 3 Literature, 1 Permanent. ### 📚 Literature Atoms (H3) #### [H1] TPT's Aramaic frame is the translation's whole selling point > [!quote] ID:rw_pWOrvrOH7Ek_1 > "Greek only reaches the mind, but Aramaic reaches the heart. Um this is the whole foundation of everything in uh in the translation" **Context & use**: - ≈[00:00:00]–[00:00:30]; the marketing premise the rest of the critique dismantles. - Matters because if the frame is invented, the distinctives lose their warrant. **Tags**: #xref **Highlight**: [view highlight](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWOrvrOH7Ek?t=0) <!-- atomicity: 1 idea ✓ --> #### [H2] The Paraclete footnote is plagiarized through Roth from Younan > [!quote] ID:rw_pWOrvrOH7Ek_2 > "This is plagiarized from page 306 of the edition I have of Andrew Roth's Aramaic English New Testament." **Context & use**: - ≈[00:02:40]–[00:03:00]; the verifiable core of the case — TPT's rare citations copy Roth's, including Roth's "PY" credit. - Matters because it provides a checkable chain of custody, not just an opinion. **Tags**: #xref **Highlight**: [view highlight](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWOrvrOH7Ek?t=160) <!-- atomicity: 1 idea ✓ --> #### [H3] "Paraclete" is a Greek loan word, so the Aramaic etymology is invented > [!quote] ID:rw_pWOrvrOH7Ek_3 > "the word in Aramaic is the Greek word. This is what we call a loan word" **Context & use**: - ≈[00:03:30]; the linguistic refutation of the "end the curse" root decomposition. - Matters because it converts a credibility dispute into a checkable lexical fact. **Tags**: #xref **Highlight**: [view highlight](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWOrvrOH7Ek?t=210) <!-- atomicity: 1 idea ✓ --> #### [H4] Whole sermons now rest on a single fabricated footnote > [!quote] ID:rw_pWOrvrOH7Ek_4 > "building doctrine off of this footnote. Okay, so first let me read to you from The Passion Translation of this passage." **Context & use**: - ≈[00:02:30] and [00:04:40]; Sheets, Thompson, Duplantis trace teaching to the John 14 note. - Matters as the reception/harm claim: paratext drives doctrine. **Tags**: #xref #articleseed **Highlight**: [view highlight](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWOrvrOH7Ek?t=160) <!-- atomicity: 1 idea ✓ --> ### 🧠 Permanent Candidates (H4) #### [P1] A footnote carries no scriptural authority and must be vetted before it becomes doctrine **Claim** (one sentence, Courtney's voice): Paratext such as a translator's footnote has the authority of its sourcing, not of the text it annotates, so doctrine built on it inherits every defect of that sourcing. **Evidence pointer**: [[#H4]] **Scope & conditions**: Holds when paratext makes claims unverifiable from the base text (here, an Aramaic etymology); breaks when the footnote merely restates well-attested scholarship. **Links**: - [[Authority of translation vs. paratext]] — because extends - [[NAR revelation-over-scholarship pattern]] — because applies-in charismatic preaching - [[Plagiarism as provenance failure]] — because evidence-for <!-- atomicity: 1 idea ✓ --> ### ✏️ Fleeting Queue - [F1] Recover the full 2011 Paul Younan forum post to test "recant vs. hedge." — https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWOrvrOH7Ek #fleeting #inbox - [F2] Identify the "three sources" the hosts say TPT's Aramaic is drawn from. — transcript ≈[00:00:45] #fleeting #inbox ### → Things 3 (max 2 actions) - [ ] Check "parakletos/parakleta" loan-word status in a Syriac lexicon (CAL or Payne Smith) — verify atom [H3] #things <!-- deep-read:sections end --> 📄 **Full text:** [[Full Document Contents/Articles/How the Passion Translation Has Changed Preaching.md|How the Passion Translation Has Changed Preaching by youtube.com]] ## Highlights - Greek only reaches the mind, but Aramaic reaches the heart. Um this is the whole ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01kvt8d6s8khxec2f4g7msrnhs)) - Note: TPT's Aramaic-primacy claim is the whole selling point. - Tags: atom/literature/h1 - Because the word in Aramaic is the Greek word. This is what we call a loan word, ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01kvt8d8kr8ykw2vad8bb9vxb2)) - Note: It's a loan word — the Aramaic etymology is invented. - Tags: atom/literature/h2 ## Links - [[3. Resources/Permanent Notes/Blurring Scripture Commentary and Devotion Lets Invented Text Acquire Divine Authority]] — already captures the mechanism this episode demonstrates: invented wording acquires scriptural authority in preaching.