New American Standard Bible: Zechariah 12: 10 And I will pour out on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplication, so that they will look on Me whom they have pierced; and they will mourn for Him as one mourns for an only son, and they will weep bitterly over him, like the bitter weeping over a first-born.

Jewish Publication Society Tanakh (JPS): Zechariah 12: 10 But I will fill the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem with a spirit of pity and compassion; and they shall lament to me about those who are slain, wailing over them as over a favorite son and showing bitter grief as over a first-born.

Stone Edition Tanakh: Zechariah 12: 10 I will pour out upon the house of David and upon the inhabitant of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplications. They will look toward me because of those whom they have stabbed; they will mourn over him as one mourns over an only [child], and be embittered over him like the embitterment over a [deceased] firstborn.

(1) One huge omission in the JPS Tanach was the use of the next line, "and they shall mourn for him as one mourns for a YACHID son". YACHID is derived from the same word as ECHAD (one). But YACHID only appears about 10 times in Tanakh - very rare. The reason is that, unlike ECHAD, YACHID is an exclusive singularity, more akin to saying not just "one" but "utterly unique, never before and never again". Again, ECHAD shares this meaning, but ECHAD also allows the idea of compound unity (one Temple, many worshippers) or two things becoming one (day and night = yom echad = day one; man and woman = besar echad = one flesh) whereas YACHID can never mean this.

(2) So continuing from #1, why is this important? Answer: Because it shows hypocrisy on the part of the JPS translators. They insist that ECHAD means YACHID in Deuteronomy 6:4, but then turn around and say YACHID is not exclusive to the one Son/Messiah in Zechariah 12:10! You can't have it both ways. You can't then decide that YACHID applies to a group either, which is exactly what they try to do!

(3) Then there is the ET factor, another missed opportunity. First, as a direct object pointer, it shows the part of a sentence receiving an action. Rabbis have no problem using ET correctly in places like Bereshit 1:1, where the heavens and the earth receive the action of creation. But in Zechariah 12:10, where YHWH Himself is talking and clearly is receiving the action of impalement, they decide to ignore the ET - not just switch to plural - but ignore the most basic rule of Hebrew grammar. The inescapable conclusion then in reading the line is that the YACHID (utterly unique, never before and never again) Son of YHWH (again only one, Messiah), is pierced and dies - but wait, YHWH says HE IS PIERCED, BUT YHWH CAN'T DIE AND HE CAN'T BLEED. YHWH SAYS HE IS NOT FLESH BUT SPIRIT!!! So, what's going on?

(4) Well, the only answer is that 500 years before Y'shua was born we are told that an only begotten Son of YHWH is pierced, AND THE ONLY WAY YHWH IS PIERCED IS IF HIS SPIRIT DWELLS WITHIN THE SON'S FLESH!!! Now 700 years before Y'shua is born Isaiah 11:1-2 tells us the Spirit of YHWH rests in Messiah, too. Isaiah 9:5-6 calls Messiah "the Everlasting Father and the Ruler of Peace" - how can he be just a man then?

Then in Zechariah 3 we are told that a high priest and his disciples are symbols of people to come, and the high priest has the name of the Righteous Branch, a title for Messiah (Jeremiah 23:5-6). Branch in Hebrew = NETZER (as in Nazareth which is NETZER+ET - the direct object pointer). Zechariah 6:12 then says "Here is the man whose name is the branch", and what's the man's name - how about YEHOSHUA BEN YEHOZADAK - or YHWH is salvation; Yah who is the Son of Righteousness. Look at all this, and I haven't even gotten to NT yet! It would take 500 years for YEHOSHUA to shorten to Y'shua, but we can forgive the prophet for sticking to his own dialect while at the same time writing about his own four horsemen of the Apocalypse....

(5) And still there is more: Consider the word ET in Zechariah 12:10 - spelled ALAP-TAW, the first and last letters of the alap-beet. The original Aramaic Revelation reads:

Revelation 1: 8 "I am the Alap and the Taw," says YHWH Elohim, "who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty." (is, was, to come = Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh = I am/I was/I will be - Shemot 3:14-16, 23:20-22)

Revelation 21: 6 He said to me: "It is done. I am the Alap and the Taw, the Beginning and the End. To him who is thirsty I will give to drink without cost from the spring of the water of life.

Revelation 22: 13 I am the Alap and the Taw, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.

In the first citation it is YHWH talking; in the other two, Y'shua speaking as YHWH. Does this pattern exist elsewhere? In Tanakh perhaps? How about the Torah's first word: BERESHIT.

From here what can we tell? How about these words:

BAR (son)
BARA (make)
RESH (head)
RESHIT (beginning)

And....

ET, I am the ALAP and the TAW - and what is being talked about here except Creation? And then there is Psalm 33:6, which says by the Word of YHWH was everything made, and by His breath, all their starry host. Sound familar? Like, Yochanan 1 perhaps?

The JPS distorts other parts of the Tanakh as well. For example, take a look at Psalm 22:16. This is the headline:

Aramaic Tanakh (approx 50 BCE): "They have pierced my hands and my feet."
LXX (Septuagint--approx 150 BCE): "They have pierced my hands and my feet."
Dead Sea Scrolls (approx 100 BCE): "They have pierced my hands and my feet."
Masoretic Text (approx 1000 CE): "Like a lion, they are at my hands and my feet."

Andrew Gabriel Roth is author of the Aramaic English New Testament. He is a frequent scholarly contributor to peshitta.org, and author of the books ""Wheel of Stars", "Signs of the Cross" and "Ruach Qadim". He is a passionate advocate for his Hebraic culture, and the early Nazarene writings that sprang from it.