# Hebrew New Testament



## Tallen (Jul 17, 2006)

Recently in a conversation with a Hebrew Roots fellow, the conversation turned to the New Testament texts. His claim that there is evidence that there is a Hebrew priority, and that the original texts where written in Hebrew. I have never came across this claim, in fact I am not familiar with any significant NT texts that are in anything but Greek.

Are any of you familiar with this Hebrew Roots claim?

And if there is some evidence that the Apostles wrote a Hebrew NT can you point me toward some reading.

Thanks.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Jul 17, 2006)

If anyone would have known, it would have been the writers themselves, and the early church fathers. But except for one or two vague references regarding the gospel of Matthew (found, I believe in Eusebius), there is not even a whisper of "Hebrew" originals. There are very few transliterations of Hebrew words in the text itself. There is abundant evidence of familiarity with both the Hebrew OT and the Septuagint Greek OT in quotations from both. Another question: why would Paul write to Greek (non-Jew, non-Hebrew speakers) in Hebrew?--he wouldn't have.

Such interpretation of the Greek texts that imply a Hebrew background to the NT documents is perfectly rational--all the witers were Jews; all probably spoke Hebrew as their native tongue; the original "apostolic tradition (prior to it's inscripturation) was originally in Hebrew, *or just as likely, in Aramaic (probably Jesus' everyday tongue)*--although starting on the Day of Pentecost, the NT gospel was being translated into every tongue under heaven; the church and its worship were in the common tongue of the huge majority (Jews) to begin with. Greek, as the Mediterranean universal _ligua franca_ of the age, was emminently the best "original" tongue for the autographs. Even the reference to Matthean priority, and the possibility of a "Hebrew original" is at least as well understood to refer to the Synoptic oral tradition. And, evidently, even if there was a Hebrew original to Mattew (or any other book) God did not intend to preserve his Word in that form, but rather the Greek that He did preserve.

This strikes me as a narrow preoccupation of some with an interest in possibilities--some of whom have raised the issue to a level of conviction. But all largely without any substantive proof. Better far to concentrate on the Bible God did, in fact, give us, and which he has providentially preserved.

Helpful?



{Moderator}
Talen:
Please update your signature to comply with the board rules. Click on link for board rules. Thanks.

[Edited on 7-18-2006 by Contra_Mundum]


----------



## Tallen (Jul 17, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Contra_Mundum _Helpful?



Yes, Rev. B. I have studied textual criticism for a few years and was not familiar with any "Hebrew Priority" of any of the NT writing. In fact, this caught me off gaurd as I haven't heard of any NT writings in Hebrew at all, only some rumors that Matthew and Hebrews may have been, but no hard evidence. Also the LXX, in my mind became a handy tool in the idea of preservation because we have a document that transitions from OT Hebrew, and adopts the language of the Hellenist society. Therefore giving a good record to compare the Hebrew to Greek OT and the Greek NT in such a way that it gives a continuity to the "religious language" that the Hebrew scholars were defining when they adopted the Greek. They used the common language, redefining it and applying for a special task, allowing those that followed the Apostles to see how the language was used from one language to another. If that makes sense. 

F. F. Bruce states this very well as he said that, "œthe Greek was not suited for Hebrew revelation but was adapted to Hebrew thought forms and transformed by them: To one accustomed to reading good Greek, Septuagint Greek reads very oddly, but to a Greek reader acquainted with Hebrew idiom, Septuagint Greek is immediately intelligible. The words are Greek, but the construction is Hebrew." From, The Books and the Parchments (London: Pickering and Inglis, Ltd. 1950, p. 70.

Although I stray from the topic somewhat, I think that you have answered my question very well. 

Thank you.


----------



## Jerusalem Blade (Jul 18, 2006)

Tallen,

I had come a cross a book some years back by two men, Bivin and Blizzard, who wrote, _Understanding the difficult Words of Jesus_: <Amazon.com: Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus: New Insights From a Hebrew Perspective: Books: David Bivin,Roy Blizzard Jr.. They asserted the Gospels were first written in Hebrew, and that the later Greek botched the meaning.

I reviewed it negatively, as its premises were false. I still have the review, but only in hard copy (wrote it before I had a computer). If you're interested, I can dig it out and give you the gist of it.

I think what Bruce says is right.

Steve


----------



## Tallen (Jul 18, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Jerusalem Blade_
> Tallen,
> 
> I had come a cross a book some years back by two men, Bivin and Blizzard, who wrote, _Understanding the difficult Words of Jesus_: <http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/156043550X/002-1902698-7716844?v=glance&n=283155>. They asserted the Gospels were first written in Hebrew, and that the later Greek botched the meaning.
> ...



Steve,

If you would do that I would greatly appreciate it. I am greatly interested in this topic because I have two brothers (siblings) who are being influenced by the Jewish Roots movement. Some of the literature and things being said, are quite frankly, based upon propositions that have no basis in reality or truth. 

For instance, the belief that the Ephramites are lost Jew's being called into national Israel for the end times, which is a repackaged British Israelism that has been around for awhile. 

Another is that the Jewish langauge is being restored to the church so that we will have the proper language to pronounce the name of God and His son, which is said will bring greater authority and power to the believer. So much so that the enemies of God and the birds in the air would die if they heard the proper name. 

And this idea, that when the "original documents" are discovered, and the church is being restored to her roots, the Hebrew NT and the Hebrew language will be discovered and define true believers. 

Thanks again.


----------



## Jerusalem Blade (Jul 19, 2006)

Tallen,

Will do. But be patient, please, as it's buried among my papers, and will require a hunt. And I'll respond to some of what you spoke of in the above post; being a Jew by blood, I have come across some of these things in earlier days when I was involved with "Messianic Judaism."

Steve


----------



## Tallen (Jul 20, 2006)

Will be patient Steve, thank you I appreciate your effort.


----------



## Tallen (Jul 21, 2006)

Last email I recieved about the issue said the following:

"There are many recent Hebrew scripture discoveries in the last 20 or so years coming out of the former Soviet Union including the Shem Tov Hebrew Matthew. There are over twenty other New Testament writings in the Hebrew language stored at Hebrew University in Jerusalem. This has been recently brought to light by a renowned Hebrew translator and Karaite jew, Nehemiah Gordon, who has access to these writings. He is also recognized in Judaism as one of the leading translators of Hebrew in the world. 

Nehemiah does not believe that Jesus (Yeshua) is the Messiah, so he has no hidden agenda's in his translations to confirm or discredit the Greek. Nehemiah is one of an extremely few number of jews who is interested in New Testament writings. Obviously, the Orthordox only study and translate the Tenach, or Old Testament. (Torah, Prophets, and Writings) He has discovered that in many critical area's the Hebrew translations leave you with a very different meaning than that of the Greek, and to understand the New Testament one must understand Hebrew thought. 

Nehemiah indicates that there is growing evidence that the Greek was translated from another source, such as Aramaic and Hebrew. Again, one must understand Hebrew thought to understand. Specifically, Hebrew "puns". 

A Hebrew pun is where two similarly spelled words with different meanings are placed in different parts of a sentence or paragraph to support each other. This is a very common in Hebrew thought. He sees these puns, because he is so accustomed to them from translating the Old Testament writings. He says the Greek texts are riddled by mistranslations coming from the lack of understanding of these puns. He doesn't feel that the Greek scribes did it intentionally, but out of lack of their understanding of Hebrew thought. 

There are other places where he's found direct mistranslations, such as when Yeshua appeared to Shaul (Paul) and spoke to him in "Aramaic". The Hebrew translates in "Hebrew". Again, he feels that the error was unintentional. He's also pointed out that the Greek texts only document thirteen generations from David to Mariam (Mary), when there were prophesized fourteen. Thus, the Greek and English translations show that Jesus was not the Messiah, where the Hebrew translation proves that he was. 

The only priority that I'm inclined to cite is the Torah, the Prophets, and the Writings of the Old Testament, and even most of the English translations of these have questionable areas. Specifically, the substitution of the Sacred Name Yud Hay Vav Hay (YHWH). True, we aren't sure of the proper pronunciation, but it is because of this unauthorized substitution of the titles "Lord", or "God" that we don't. When the Name is reinserted or restored, the Old Testament becomes more meaningful and alive. We were warned initially in the Torah not to add to or take away from the writings, and that's what was done with this substitution. 

When you weigh the writings of the New Testament with the Old Testament as your priority, you have to come to the conclusion that either the New Testament writings are corrupt or the translations aren't quite right. Shaul's writings are a good example. Was he saying that the written law (Torah) was done away with, or was he referring to Ma'asah and Takenot, or orally law and traditions of men. Hebrew scholars of today know that the oral law of Yeshua's era had already taken "priority" over the written law. So Yeshua nailed the oral law to the execution stake. He didn't give His life so ham sandwiches could be kosher."

Sounds like dangeruos ground to me.


----------



## Peter (Jul 21, 2006)

The Karaites are an interesting sect and their views fall right in line with what this man is saying. You might call the Karaites 'Protestant' Jews because they reject the Oral Tradition of Moses and they are hated by other Orthodox Jews.


----------



## Tallen (Jul 24, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Peter_
> The Karaites are an interesting sect and their views fall right in line with what this man is saying. You might call the Karaites 'Protestant' Jews because they reject the Oral Tradition of Moses and they are hated by other Orthodox Jews.



Thanks for that tidbit Peter. I am very interested in this area of study right now and appreciate the input.

BTW, I am looking for a book or an Internet article by Gordon on this topic, if you could direct me to such that would be appreciated also.

Thanks.


----------



## Jerusalem Blade (Jul 29, 2006)

Ted,

I found my paper, and essentially it says in more length what you briefly quoted by F.F. Bruce. As it´s only 4 pages, I´ll see if a friend can scan it next week and I can just email it to you.

You said,

<blockquote>I am greatly interested in this topic because I have two brothers (siblings) who are being influenced by the Jewish Roots movement. Some of the literature and things being said, are quite frankly, based upon propositions that have no basis in reality or truth. 

For instance, the belief that the Ephramites are lost Jew's being called into national Israel for the end times, which is a repackaged British Israelism that has been around for awhile. 

Another is that the Jewish langauge is being restored to the church so that we will have the proper language to pronounce the name of God and His son, which is said will bring greater authority and power to the believer. So much so that the enemies of God and the birds in the air would die if they heard the proper name. 

And this idea, that when the "original documents" are discovered, and the church is being restored to her roots, the Hebrew NT and the Hebrew language will be discovered and define true believers.</blockquote>

A woman, Batya Ruth Wootten, wrote two books (probably more by now), _In Search 0f Israel_ (PA, Destiny Image 1988), and, _The Olive Tree of Israel_ (VA, House of David 1992), which asserts the return of Ephraim from diaspora in the form of "œGentile" converts to Messiah "“ if I remember her teachings correctly. Destiny Image publishes a number of books dealing with Messianic issues, and is likely to find readers among Messianic Jews. Plus there are a number of Gentiles who are attracted to this sort of stuff. In my earlier years, as a Messianic Jew myself, I sought out and read much in this vein, seeking to understand the place of national "œIsrael" in the economy of God (I will refer to it as the Jewish State henceforth "“ perhaps you have seen my brief pdf on the subject on page 4 of the KJV/Westcott and Hort MSS thread I am posting on).

This is a hot topic for many. Where I am in Cyprus, a man showed up calling himself "œElijah," (his real name Ernest) and stating he was one of the two "œend-time" witnesses of Revelation 11 <http://www.two-olive-trees.org/>, and sought to take over a church I was attending at the time. He had to be forcibly (but gently) ejected, as he was noisy and disruptive. And there is an entire _serious_ following of such fringe beliefs. I mean, this is the result of the dispensational end-times schema; there are all sorts of psychiatric/spiritual delusion cases trying to get into the Jewish State to take their prophetic stand. Ernest himself got in once and was put into a psychiatric hospital there, prophesying divine retribution on those who did it. There´s a ban on him now. One can easily tell his unsoundness, as he insists on Sabbath (Saturday) worship, denies the full deity of Christ (I have studied his writings on his site closely), and preaches law without gospel. He said the resurrection was on the Jewish Sabbath (contra Mark 16:9 "“ and he does hold to the KJV, which included the verse). I needed to have withal to say to him to support my grounds for ejecting him, besides his rowdiness. 

I personally do not know if there will be an actual "œpersonal" antichrist, or as many Reformed say, it is rather the spirit of antichrist embodied by many. Nor do I know for sure if there will or will not be two actual witnesses per Revelation 11. I have studied the various views, and some of the expositors I respect most say the "œwitnesses" are not individuals. I suspend judgment.

My point is, this kind of thinking is pandemic, albeit not so extreme. The _Left Behind_ series sure didn´t help. So everywhere "“ among Christians "“ one can find variation on this type of thinking. Mostly the Reformed communions are immune from it, due to their sound theology.

The alleged potency of the Hebrew names of God is bizarre. In Hebrew the "œname" of God pertains not merely to an appellation or "œlabel" as we know names these days, but to the very nature, character, and _presence_ of His Majesty. When we say His name, we invoke His presence. In John 17:11 Jesus asks the Father to keep the flock through the mighty protective power of "œThine own name"¦" So the power is not in mere words of this language or that, but in Him with whom we have to do, whatever language we speak.

As for the "œoriginal [Hebrew] documents" being discovered, don´t anyone be holding your breath!

When the person sent the email to you, Tallen, I think they miscalculated or something:

<blockquote>He [Nehemiah Gordon]'s also pointed out that the Greek texts only document thirteen generations from David to Mariam (Mary), when there were prophesized fourteen.</blockquote>

Count the geneology.

When the article says,

<blockquote>There are other places where he's found direct mistranslations, such as when Yeshua appeared to Shaul (Paul) and spoke to him in "Aramaic". The Hebrew translates in "Hebrew". Again, he feels that the error was unintentional.</blockquote>

While the NIV has "œAramaic" in Acts 26:14, and "œHebrew" in the margin, the KJV has "œHebrew" in the text. The Greek is _Hebrais_, and refers to "œthe language of the Hebrews", and can be either Hebrew or Aramaic. Aramaic was considered a dialect of the ancient Hebrew, and was often called Hebrew. F.F. Bruce in his, _The Books and the Parchments_, affirms this (pp. 70-72), as do Geisler and Nix in their, _A General Introduction to the Bible_: 

<blockquote>"œAramaic was no doubt the spoken language of the Lord and His disciples. It was the source of such words as Cephas, Matthew, Abba (Mark 14:36), and Maranatha (1 Cor 16:22 KJV). It is also noteworthy that in the hour of His agony on the cross, Jesus cried out in His native Aramaic tongue, "˜Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani,´ that is to say, "˜My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?´" (Matt 27:46) (p. 217)</blockquote>

Underneath such "œHebrew or Jewish Roots" stuff there are hidden agendas, which all sorts may use for their own ends.

A careful and Biblical examination "“ plus what I would call good common _spiritual_ sense "“ can see through the errors and agendas. What I like to do is ask for documentation of all assertions (not necessarily taking such at their face value), and then scrutinize them. I know what I believe, and that on the basis of what our God has revealed to us in His word. That is the standard by which I judge all things.

Nowadays there are many "œwinds of doctrine" which toss men to and fro, from men with their sleight of hand, "œand cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive." (Eph 4:14) But in the evil day we stand, and withstand, our Lord Jesus Christ being "œmade unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption." (1 Cor 1:30)

Whatever they send you, if it troubles you, I´ll interact with it. Your two sibs, they probably could use to hear some good common sense as regards all these things. How deeply are they involved?

Steve

[Edited on 7-29-2006 by Jerusalem Blade]


----------



## Jerusalem Blade (Jul 29, 2006)

Ted,

You can get info on Gordon from googling nehemiah gordon karaite.

A critique of Gordon and his associate, Rood (from the Google links): <http://www.seekgod.ca/roodnewsflash.htm>

When one gets into the Messianic Jewish world one gets into some strange stuff -- it is quite diverse. I want to be careful what I say, as I have some dear friends there. Some in the Jewish state now sacrificially serving the Lord, and bearing fruit. Despite their errors.

It is widely charismatic and dispensational (some even into the "Toronto Experience" and similar stuff), and the theology is often poor. Apart from its legitimacy in Jewish congregations in Palestine, for Jews to sequester themselves and separate from Gentiles I do not see as Biblical. But much is built upon the supposed legitimacy of the Jewish state as the recipient of the OT promises for the people of God, and many see themselves as being part of the ruling elite come the supposed Millennial Kingdom. The mixture of these draughts of Zionism and Millennialism foment a strange brew.

It is this view, imported into our (U.S.) president's thinking that has made the Middle East -- and even the world -- such a tinderbox, if that word can rightly be used for chemical, biological, and nuclear conflagrations, which some folks are itching to set off. This is where bad theology can spill rivers, no, _oceans_, of blood.

Withstanding Islam -- or seeking to convert it -- are one thing, but deeply provoking it by supporting the Zionist agenda of land-theft, murder, pillage, and regional hegemony is quite another, and we shall pay a steep price for this.

How shall we make the Jews jealous, as Paul spoke of in Romans? By speaking of the true and eternal Temple God is building, the glory of it, and of Him who is the Light within it; by speaking of the Torah of Messiah, how He has given us the essence of the Law in profound simplicity, it being no burden to keep, as He has poured forth such grace and shalom that we do it with joy and gratitude, unlike the bondage of those who claim to keep Moses' Law yet reject the Prophet he foretold would come, whom to reject would cause _their_ rejection by the God of Israel, which we have seen in the disaster of the Jewish people these last twenty centuries. It is especially the Reformed, with their pure doctrine, who may best convey this glorious revelation to world Jewry, in my view. To let them know that the true Israel is the one that shall inherit the Land -- not merely of Palestine, but the whole earth; but the imposter Israel shall inherit Gehenna and the demon king. The time for return from exile and diaspora is now, the _true return_. To Him who is the glory of Israel.

This Jewish and Hebrew Roots stuff is a smokescreen seeking to cloud the issues of life and death that confront the Jewish people, _my_ people after the flesh, and I consider it a toxic little cloud that needs to be forcefully dispelled.

Steve

[Edited on 7-29-2006 by Jerusalem Blade]


----------



## Jerusalem Blade (Aug 3, 2006)

Ted,

I've attached the letter on the Bivin/Blizzard book in 4 pdfs. Hope it's some help.

Steve

P.S. Evidently I can upload only one file per post, so I will put in three following.

[Edited on 8-3-2006 by Jerusalem Blade]


----------



## Jerusalem Blade (Aug 3, 2006)

pdf #2


----------



## Jerusalem Blade (Aug 3, 2006)

#3


----------



## Jerusalem Blade (Aug 3, 2006)

#4

Beth-Or was the name of the private Library I ran in Woodstock, open for lending to the Christian community.


----------



## Tallen (Aug 8, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Jerusalem Blade_
> #4
> 
> Beth-Or was the name of the private Library I ran in Woodstock, open for lending to the Christian community.



Thanks for the article Steve, I am studying it now and will get back to you about it. I appreciate your effort very much. 

[Edited on 8-8-2006 by Tallen]


----------

