How the Passion Translation Has Changed Preaching  🔗 **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 > ## 🧭 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 He started out the whole book under the idea of Aramaic primacy. That was the major selling point of his whole thing is that really the heart language of Jesus is Aramaic and the Bible, the New Testament was originally written in Aramaic and if you can understand the Aramaic, there's all of this missing data of there's emotional information that he is going to he's going to give to us. >> Yeah, so so let me chime in on that. So with that in mind, right? Brian told us in our in our private conversation that he's effectively trying to scrub all of the Aramaic out of the translation now. Despite for I mean, I guess almost a decade now, right? I mean, over a decade over a decade claiming that Aramaic is the actual heart language of Jesus, that Greek only reaches the mind, but Aramaic reaches the heart. Um this is the whole foundation of everything in uh in the translation and that's what caused people like Kevin Zadai, for example, who has a very large following to say things like this. >> ever quoted, you are actually an enemy of God. >> Right. >> Wow, really? >> Yes. >> And this is what I'm noticing. They took the Passion Translation off of most things. opposite to what Jesus spoke because he was speaking Aramaic, which is what the manuscript is taken from. And when I was with Jesus, I couldn't figure out what I was writing my first book, I couldn't figure out why what he was saying to me that I was a scholar. I was like I had a bachelor degree in theology. I thought I knew the Bible. I'd been to Rhema. I had Kenneth Hagin lay hands on me three times and I didn't know some of the scriptures that Jesus was quoting. And I'm telling you I had I had been to the best Bible schools. I had gotten more education than most people in this room and I didn't know some of the scriptures. I had to go look them up. I didn't believe Jesus. There were scriptures in there that I had never heard and I thought, you got to be kidding me. And they're they're there. Well, what why was I robbed as a believer all these years when I was sitting under teaching all the time and Jesus was referring to to scriptures that I had no idea. I had to look them up when I came back. Okay, not only that, when I read the Passion Translation, it was the closest to how Jesus spoke to me. So, it doesn't surprise me that they decide that that's not legitimate and they all all the organizations, almost all of them took them off. >> There's 900 problems with that clip, uh but this is not a this is not a video about Kevin Zadai, but I just want to point out a couple things. One, Kevin Zadai is, I guess, under the impression and is definitely giving the impression to his audience that the whole Passion Translation is based on Aramaic. That's the whole point of it to him. So, everything that Kevin Zadai goes around the world saying about the Passion Translation hinges on the fact that it's from the Aramaic, which Brian is attempting to undo as quickly as he can because it's almost all plagiarized uh from from three sources and we've identified those three sources. Um The other thing though is it's impossible to not comment on this man is claiming that he went to heaven and spoke with Jesus Christ, right? Which it sounds familiar to a similar encounter that Brian Simmons himself had and that he couldn't figure out why the Bible verses that he was reading were so different from what Jesus was saying. And the answer all along was that the Passion Translation is actually how Jesus speaks. And so, this kind of stuff was all built because Brian Simmons lied. And there's no other way around it. Brian lied and then let slip to Dr. Mark Strauss that he doesn't even know Aramaic. Uh and so, a guy who doesn't know Aramaic was plagiarizing from another guy, Victor Alexander, and all of that ends up in The Passion Translation to such a degree that as we're going to see, people have been building entire doctrines on fabricated footnotes from the Aramaic in The Passion Translation. >> Yeah, let's just look at Dutch Sheets doing just that. >> I'm but I'm hurting. So when he called him, he's a I'm sending you another helper. Paraclete. Some of you had heard teaching on that word. It means so many things, but the I'm going to give you the definition of the Aramaic word that is equivalent of Paraclete in Greek. It's Paracleta. In in the Aramaic in the Aramaic word, you can find this in the in The Passion Translation in your margin. And and this word means the word the equivalent of Paraclete in the Aramaic language means to end the curse. Prob means to end or finish or save. Leda means the curse. The Holy Spirit comes to end the work of the curse of sin in our lives and save us from its very effect. Paraclete means a redeemer WHO ENDS THE CURSE. I SAY TO YOU, HE IS COMING NOW. HOLY SPIRIT, THIS IS HIS QUARTER. THIS IS HIS SEASON. HE'S BEEN BREAKING THE CURSE OFF OF US. HE BROKE THE CURSE OF CHILD SACRIFICE THAT FLOWED OUT OF THE SUPREME COURT. HE'S BREAKING THE CURSE OFF OF OUR CHURCHES WHERE WE PUSHED HIM OUT AND HE'S SAYING, "I'M COMING BACK TO TAKE MY PLACE." >> [cheering] >> I >> OKAY. SO, BRIEFLY, let me tell you the story of how this footnote came about. And then we're going to look at Sadly, there are at least three to four, probably more, major charismatic ministries that are basing doctrine off of this footnote. Okay, so first let me read to you from The Passion Translation of this passage. It says uh in John 14, "And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another savior." So, this is calling the Holy Spirit effectively a second savior. Now, that's already problematic for a lot of theological reasons, even if that were actually what the Aramaic says. And the footnote is going to be what Dutch Sheets uh just read. But, here's the only problem. This footnote that Brian uses to derive this spurious translation of that the Holy Spirit is another savior, it comes originally from a guy named Paul Younan, but it comes by means of Andrew Roth's Aramaic English New Testament. This is plagiarized from page 306 of the edition I have of Andrew Roth's Aramaic English New Testament. And um maybe we'll throw the images on the screen so you can see, so I don't have to read through. Um it's definitely plagiarized because here's what's very ironic about this plagiarism here is that this is one of the only times that there's citations given to outside works in the Passion Translation. But, as you'll see from the images, those citations are copied directly from the citations in Andrew Roth's footnote. So, the only reason outside attribution is being given at all is because it was already given by Andrew Roth. It goes even further because Roth took this from a guy named Paul Younan and actually offers attribution to Paul in this footnote. He adds the initials PY at the end, which in his uh intro he says that's referring to this guy named Paul Younan. So, this entire idea comes from a guy named Paul Younan who states that the word for Paraclete in the Aramaic comes from two roots that mean uh you know, basically end up meaning a redeemer who ends the curse. Okay. There's a massive problem with this, and that's that it's completely fabricated. It the whole idea is a fabrication. Because the word in Aramaic is the Greek word. This is what we call a loan word, which means that they didn't have a word for it in Aramaic and Syriac, right? So, they just took the Greek word. It is the Greek word. They took it from the Greek language. So, the whole thing is invented. But, it gets even worse than that because we have a screenshot, thanks again to Andrew Chapman. We have a screenshot where Paul Younan seems to basically, I mean, he doesn't fully retract it, but basically says, "You know what? I think I was probably wrong about this. It's probably just the Greek word. Like this this this whole this root comes from this root. I probably just made it all up." I mean, again, I'm I'm reading a little bit into what he says, but that's effectively the message of it. So, this this forum is from 2011. So, in 2011, before the Passion Translation is ever published, the guy who invented this out of thin air basically walks it back, but that does not stop Brian Simmons from copying it through Andrew Roth's work into his own work. Why does this matter? Well, you heard Dutch Sheets getting all animated, and he's like, "The Holy Spirit ends the curse here. The Holy Spirit ends the curse." Okay, theologically, um Jesus Christ is the only one spoken of in scripture as ending the curse. This is Galatians 3, right? Christ has set us free from the curse. And we know that when it comes to the Trinity, of course, the Father, Son, and Spirit are always working together, but there are unique aspects uh in the work of the Trinity in our salvation. Those actions cannot be mixed. So, the Father does not die on the cross. The Holy Spirit does not die on the cross, right? The the Son does not pour out the Father on the day of Pentecost, right? Like, it's just nonsense because we cannot speak of these actions equally because that's the way God's revealed it to us. And so, in one sense, that's a big enough issue, but what we're going to see is um Damon Thompson. Now, I don't know almost anything about Damon Thompson. I know that he has a fairly significant ministry, so we're not here to comment on Damon Thompson and whether or not his ministry is good or bad. I we really don't know much about him. But, I do want to point out that the clip we're about to see, he takes what Dutch Sheets has done even further, and he builds an entire teaching that he knows is controversial on this single this single fabricated footnote. >> The one who is called to do more than come alongside and help. And we learned a little bit about that Friday night. We're going to review a bit of that because I think it's important. Let's look at Dr. Simmons footnotes. If you have a Passion Translation, if not, I'll read it for you. But, this is what he says regarding John 14:16 and 17. The Greek word used here is parakletos. It's a technical word that could be translated as advocate, comforter, a a defense attorney. There's a lot of ways it could be translated. But, none of these are adequate to really communicate what the writer here is using, John specifically in parakletos. Various translations have rendered this counselor, comforter, advocate, encourager, intercessor, or helper. However, none of those words alone are adequate and fall short in explaining the in explaining the full meaning. The translator has chosen the word savior. For it depicts the role of the Holy Spirit to protect, defend, and save us from our self and our enemies, and keep us whole and healed. He is the one who guides and defends, comforts, and consoles. Keep in mind that the Holy Spirit is the spirit of Christ our savior. The word parakleta out of the Aramaic is taken from two words, proc, which means to end, finish, or save, and lita, which means the curse. What a beautiful word picture. The Holy Spirit comes to end the work of the curse in our lives and save us from its every effect. Parakletos means a redeemer who ends the curse. >> So good. >> Now, one of the reasons people struggle with this and I I'm already wanting my mind's wanting to go somewhere that's going extend the review, but I'm so I'm trying to watch myself. But this is something that I think is important for us to understand. We have seen Jesus correctly as the finisher of the curse. Therefore, people will struggle with the idea that there's a curse left for the Holy Spirit to finish. And the issue with that is it creates this disconnection in the oneness of the Father, Son, and Spirit. As if the Holy Spirit cannot be as involved in the redeeming or finishing of the curse as is Yeshua the Christ. And because we don't understand the measure of fellowship >> Okay. So, this is building an entire doctrine on a footnote from a fraudulent translation. Not only that, and I don't think he's doing it intentionally. I think Damon Thompson actually believes that Brian Simmons is a doctor. But you notice how he started. Let's go to Dr. Simmons' footnotes. So, the people in this church presumably are going, "Okay, Dr. Simmons, so this is a scholar. This is a guy who knows what he's talking about." Well, this is a guy who doesn't know Aramaic, who's about to tell you about an Aramaic word that he's producing an entirely new doctrine. And uh elsewhere I believe that Damon has a video called The Holy Spirit uh another savior or something like that. Right. So, this is an entire doctrine that actually Jesus is a savior in one sense, and Jesus ends the curse in one sense, but the Holy Spirit has to be our savior in a different sense, and he has to end a different curse in like a different way. >> And so >> And we have to be the ones to partner with him, and this is the extra curse that Jesus didn't quite take care of. It's he calls it the cosmic curse that we are participating with the Holy Spirit in ending. And so, you know, it's like the other savior is actually you. >> Yeah, I mean, it it's it's very much Yeah, the point is here's the point, folks. It's not in the Bible. So, this is a doctrine. This might as well be from the Book of Mormon. There's no like there's no difference. In other words, this has the equal amount of inspiration from the Holy Spirit as the Book of Mormon has because it's invented. And the guy who made it up said effectively that he knows it's not true. And so, it just if you read the Syriac, it's just the Greek word. And so, these contrasts that Brian draws, he does this frequently. Brian will draw a contrast, he'll say, "The Greek word is blank, but the Aramaic word is blank." And when you actually read read it, it's the same word and it's translated the same way. So, all of these contrasts are to try to get you to think that there is something special, something revelatory that you do not know that he's going to reveal to you. And so, I just find this to be one of the most troubling things in the world that people are beginning to accept entire doctrines based on fabricated footnotes from the man who has a doctorate in prayer from an unaccredited institution built by the guy who founded the New Apostolic Reformation. So, this is not okay and it's not just Damon Thompson. Jesse Duplantis has quoted this footnote and has said his wife quoted the footnote. And then he goes, "Wow, that's even better." And he means even better than the actual Bible that he had just read from John chapter 14. Um And you already mentioned Dutch Sheets, Kevin Zadai, they have all referenced this footnote intentionally to make at least suggestions that this is a doctrine that people should believe in., How the Passion Translation Has Changed Preaching, youtube.com, 01kvt7tm0f55ksprnbb2700ass.