Ancient Hebrew vesion of Matthew- feed back needed

[COPLAND_3]

I am thinking hard of putting together a lexicon linked text and translation of an ancient Hebrew manuscript of the Gospel of Matthew, called the DuTillet. But I want to see if there is an interest in something like this. Here is a sample of what this will be like litteralchristianlibrary.wetpaint.com/page/Hebrew+Matthew You can click on each Hebrew word and it will give you the definition!

It’s a 14 century manuscript of the Gospel of Matthew in Hebrew. Church tradition tells us that Matthew wrote his Gospel in Hebrew, and this manuscript may or may not come from a much more ancient Hebrew manuscript that resembles Matthew’s original, but it could be useful to Christians to have it accessible to where Christians can consult the Hebrew text easily without having to know Hebrew. I would love some feed back on this, positive or negative. I am not claiming that this text is authoritative, but it is very interesting to say the least.

Thanks!

 

[Dan_Parker]

I am thinking hard of putting together a lexicon linked text and translation of an ancient Hebrew manuscript of the Gospel of Matthew, called the DuTillet. But I want to see if there is an interest in something like this. Here is a sample of what this will be like litteralchristianlibrary.wetpaint.com/page/Hebrew+Matthew You can click on each Hebrew word and it will give you the definition!

It’s a 14 century manuscript of the Gospel of Matthew in Hebrew. Church tradition tells us that Matthew wrote his Gospel in Hebrew, and this manuscript may or may not come from a much more ancient Hebrew manuscript that resembles Matthew’s original, but it could be useful to Christians to have it accessible to where Christians can consult the Hebrew text easily without having to know Hebrew. I would love some feed back on this, positive or negative. I am not claiming that this text is authoritative, but it is very interesting to say the least.

Thanks!

In my opinion it would be a worthwhile project. Also, pay close attention the the divine name in the book. The text has nomina sacra for the divine name which indicates that it was in the original.

 

[Harpazo]

I am thinking hard of putting together a lexicon linked text and translation of an ancient Hebrew manuscript of the Gospel of Matthew, called the DuTillet. But I want to see if there is an interest in something like this. Here is a sample of what this will be like litteralchristianlibrary.wetpaint.com/page/Hebrew+Matthew You can click on each Hebrew word and it will give you the definition!

It’s a 14 century manuscript of the Gospel of Matthew in Hebrew. Church tradition tells us that Matthew wrote his Gospel in Hebrew, and this manuscript may or may not come from a much more ancient Hebrew manuscript that resembles Matthew’s original, but it could be useful to Christians to have it accessible to where Christians can consult the Hebrew text easily without having to know Hebrew. I would love some feed back on this, positive or negative. I am not claiming that this text is authoritative, but it is very interesting to say the least.

Thanks!

I’m pretty sure that the Gospel of Matthew was written in Aramaic, not Hebrew. Someone can correct me if I’m wrong.

In Christ,
Andrew

 

[Dan_Parker]

I’m pretty sure that the Gospel of Matthew was written in Aramaic, not Hebrew. Someone can correct me if I’m wrong.

In Christ,
Andrew

What are your reasons for being pretty sure? The ECFs say Hebrew.

 

[COPLAND_3]

I’m pretty sure that the Gospel of Matthew was written in Aramaic, not Hebrew. Someone can correct me if I’m wrong.

In Christ,
Andrew

Its a worthy debate to say the least, over time I’ve argued both sides of it. To be honest I am not sure anymore, and I am going to have to rethink it all over again. St. Jerome has said numerous times that Matthew wrote it in Hebrew, fact he said he even had a copy of it from Hebrew, and since Jerome translated the OT from the Hebrew, then it would appear to me that Jerome would have not used Aramaic and Hebrew synonymously when referring to that.

 

[COPLAND_3]

What are your reasons for being pretty sure? The ECFs say Hebrew.

One arguement is that some of the Fathers refer to Matthew having written it in his native tongue, which would have been Aramaic. And sometimes Aramaic is meant when Hebrew is said.

 

[Nathan_Wagar]

If I remember correctly Dan, the ECF’s say “in the language of the Hebrews.” And the vernacular spoken at that time was largely Aramaic, not Hebrew. So he might not necessarily be wrong. Or I just may be full of it with a bad memory.

 

[Nathan_Wagar]

Dude seriously Copland. You beat me by like 2 seconds haha.

 

[COPLAND_3]

Dude seriously Copland. You beat me by like 2 seconds haha.

haha, I’ve got a quick trigger finger!

 

[Eucharisted]

14 century manuscript of the Gospel of Matthew

I didn’t realize Jesus lived in the 14th century

You should use Greek instead, it is the oldest copy of the Bible.

 

[COPLAND_3]

I didn’t realize Jesus lived in the 14th century

You should use Greek instead, it is the oldest copy of the Bible.

The 14th century manuscript could very well be a copy of a much older Hebrew manuscript, which is the only reason why I would even be interested in it. Don’t get me wrong, I use the Greek, but there are tons of Greek study tools for Matthew that nobody else could really offer anything that has not been done many times. But I think that there might be a use for this manuscript if the everyday layman who does not know Hebrew can consult it like they can a Greek interlinear without knowing Greek. I see some possibilites with this Hebrew text that can assist in Bible study.

 

[Dan_Parker]

One arguement is that some of the Fathers refer to Matthew having written it in his native tongue, which would have been Aramaic. And sometimes Aramaic is meant when Hebrew is said.

I would like to see those quotes. This is from Insight on the Scriptures by the WTB&TS:
Lending further support to the use of a form of Hebrew in Palestine when Jesus Christ was on earth are early indications that the apostle Matthew first wrote his Gospel account in Hebrew. For instance, Eusebius (of the third and fourth centuriesC.E.) said that “the evangelist Matthew delivered his Gospel in the Hebrew tongue.” (Patrologia Graeca, Vol. XXII, col. 941) And Jerome (of the fourth and fifth centuriesC.E.) stated in his work De viris inlustribus (Concerning Illustrious Men), chapter III: “Matthew, who is also Levi, and who from a publican came to be an apostle, first of all composed a Gospel of Christ in Judaea in the Hebrew language and characters for the benefit of those of the circumcision who had believed...*. Moreover, the Hebrew itself is preserved to this day in the library at Caesarea, which the martyr Pamphilus so diligently collected.” (Translation from the Latin text edited by E.*C. Richardson and published in the series “Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur,” Leipzig, 1896, Vol. 14, pp. 8,*9.) Hence, Jesus Christ as a man on earth could well have used a form of Hebrew and a dialect of Aramaic.

It might be interesting to look at Mignes to see the original verbiage. Does this theory that they spoke Aramaic also include the following?

NJB Acts 22:2 When they realised he was speaking in Hebrew, the silence was even greater than before.

NJB Acts 26:14 We all fell to the ground, and I heard a voice saying to me in Hebrew, "Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me? It is hard for you, kicking against the goad.

What language would this be?
NJB Ezra 4:7 In the days of Artaxerxes, Mithredath, Tabeel and their other associates wrote to Artaxerxes king of Persia against Jerusalem; the text of the letter was written in **Aramaic **writing and dialect.

 

[COPLAND_3]

I would like to see those quotes. This is from Insight on the Scriptures by the WTB&TS:
Lending further support to the use of a form of Hebrew in Palestine when Jesus Christ was on earth are early indications that the apostle Matthew first wrote his Gospel account in Hebrew. For instance, Eusebius (of the third and fourth centuriesC.E.) said that “the evangelist Matthew delivered his Gospel in the Hebrew tongue.” (Patrologia Graeca, Vol. XXII, col. 941) And Jerome (of the fourth and fifth centuriesC.E.) stated in his work De viris inlustribus (Concerning Illustrious Men), chapter III: “Matthew, who is also Levi, and who from a publican came to be an apostle, first of all composed a Gospel of Christ in Judaea in the Hebrew language and characters for the benefit of those of the circumcision who had believed...*. Moreover, the Hebrew itself is preserved to this day in the library at Caesarea, which the martyr Pamphilus so diligently collected.” (Translation from the Latin text edited by E.*C. Richardson and published in the series “Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur,” Leipzig, 1896, Vol. 14, pp. 8,*9.) Hence, Jesus Christ as a man on earth could well have used a form of Hebrew and a dialect of Aramaic.

It might be interesting to look at Mignes to see the original verbiage. Does this theory that they spoke Aramaic also include the following?

NJB Acts 22:2 When they realised he was speaking in Hebrew, the silence was even greater than before.

NJB Acts 26:14 We all fell to the ground, and I heard a voice saying to me in Hebrew, "Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me? It is hard for you, kicking against the goad.

What language would this be?
NJB Ezra 4:7 In the days of Artaxerxes, Mithredath, Tabeel and their other associates wrote to Artaxerxes king of Persia against Jerusalem; the text of the letter was written in **Aramaic **writing and dialect.

Great case! I will have to approach this more tomorrow, but I will leave off from a quote formt he catholic Encylopedia

St. Irenæus and Eusebius maintain that he wrote his gospel for the Hebrews in their national language, and the same assertion is found in several writers. Matthew would, therefore, seem to have written in modernized Hebrew, the language then used by the scribes for teaching. But, in the time of Christ, the national language of the Jews was Aramaic, and when, in the New Testament, there is mention of the Hebrew language (Hebrais dialektos), it is Aramaic that is implied. Hence, the aforesaid writers may allude to the Aramaic and not to the Hebrew. Besides, as they assert, the Apostle Matthew wrote his Gospel to help popular teaching. To be understood by his readers who spoke Aramaic, he would have had to reproduce the original catechesis in this language, and it cannot be imagined why, or for whom, he should have taken the trouble to write it in Hebrew, when it would have had to be translated thence into Aramaic for use in religious services. Moreover, Eusebius (Church History III.24.6) tells us that the Gospel of Matthew was a reproduction of his preaching, and this we know, was in Aramaic.

 

[BerhaneSelassie]

In Jesus’ time Hebrew was also a sort of name for a dialect of Aramaic.

While St Jerome know the difference between Aramaic and Hebrew, the tradition he received said “Hebrew” and the word Hebrew used by the tradition may or may not refer to Aramaic, the earliest Church Father I know of that writes this tradition is St Papias, a bishop that lived around Turkey around AD 100, he was a disciple of St John. He says:

Matthew put together the oracles [of the Lord] in the Hebrew language, and each one interpreted them as best he could

I am fairly certain Papias was only fluent in Greek however.

In John 19:13 (DRB) says

Now when Pilate had heard these words, he brought Jesus forth, and sat down in the judgment seat, in the place that is called Lithostrotos, and in Hebrew Gabbatha.

However BOTH of these words are Aramaic, according to one source I read Hebrew refers to the Southern dialect of Judea, which is distinguished from the northern Galilean Aramaic word.

But from the word I read in Revelation, I am pretty sure Abaddon or Avadon is a Hebrew word, but I could be wrong and it maybe Aramaic (too?)

 

[Dan_Parker]

BerhaneSelassie:
In John 19:13 (DRB) says
DRA John 19:13 Now when Pilate had heard these words, he brought Jesus forth and sat down in the judgment seat, in the place that is called Lithostrotos, and in Hebrew Gabbatha

Dan:
Interesting example. To further complicate matters, some beleive the word was Latin in origin! Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich adds this after identifying it as Aramaic in origin.
CTorrey ZAW 65, ’53, 232f thinks the word is Latin, viz. gabata=‘platter’ and was adapted to Aramaic; the stone pavement resembled such a dish.

 

[COPLAND_3]

A thought that has occurred to me is that the Jews could have very well spoken Hebrew just as often as Aramaic. Just look at all the Hebrew scrolls among the Dead Sea Scrolls. Not that that closes the arguement, since of course those scrolls could have been read only by those who were fluent in Hebrew, which could have been a minority. Just a thought.

 

[BerhaneSelassie]

Yes,thats true some Aramaic words are loan words from Greek or Latin, sometimes other local languages, I’ve seen Rabbinical literature using loan words from Latin. The Aramaic version of Acts when referring to the Eucharist in Acts 20:7 I believe uses the word eucharist, which is Greek. In the bible words like Sanhedrin and Synagogue are used, and they are of course are Greek words used by Jews.