Amy Welborn's blog [my comment]

Tom Haessler wrote:

We DO know that Jesus spoke Aramaic and that "for many" in biblical context is an Aramaism for "for all". This is found in standard orthodox commentaries.

--

So Jesus said "many" when He wanted to say "all"? What would He do if He wanted to say "many", or isn't that possible in Aramaic? If it was not possible for Jesus to say "for many", why did St. Matthew and St. Mark record that He did? You can compare the original Greek and an English translation side by side at
http://www.sacrednamebible.com/kjvstrongs/B40C026.htm#V28 and
http://www.sacrednamebible.com/kjvstrongs/B41C014.htm#V24 . If you look carefully, you may notice that the evangelists record our Lord's words as "for many", not "for all" or even "for the many".

You could also look at these translations of the Gospels from someone who seems to be fluent in Aramaic. According to him, Jesus said His blood "is shed for the sake of many", NOT "all".
http://www.peshitta.org/pdf/Mattich26.pdf
http://www.peshitta.org/pdf/Marqsch14.pdf

I would like to see the "standard orthodox commentaries" that claim that "for all" is a valid translation of the Aramaic words for "for many".