Hebrew version of Matthew

[COPLAND_3]

I have been working on a project lately on an ancient Hebrew manuscript called the DuTillet, while providing a fresh translation of it and also linking each word to a lexicon. There are some other ancient Hebrew manuscirpts of Matthew though I have found they are quite inferior to the DuTillet, that would be the Shem Tov and Munster. I have been providing a critical apparatus and comparing the readings of the Shem Tov with the DuTillet. So far I have noticed that the Shem Tov appears to be a translation from the Greek, while the DuTillet appears more original. Maybe the DuTillet is a decendant from the mother text that would be Matthew’s original! I’ve got so much more work ahead of me but so far I’m having a blast with it! I look forward to eventually providing a Hebrew version of Matthew that can be used for study purposes. I will keep people posted on my progress. litteralchristianlibrary.wetpaint.com/page/Hebrew+Matthew

 

[crowcounty]

so in the hebrew matt does jesus quote greek or hebrew scripture

 

[COPLAND_3]

So far I am only on chapter 2, and it is the Hebrew, though it is Matthew actually quoting the OT, I have not gotten to the Jesus quotes (even though Matthew is quoting Jesus, and probably more like quoting the passages that Jesus quotes more than actually quoting what version He quoted from). Matt 1:23 is that famous quote from Isa 7:14, “Behold, a virgin is with child, and shall bring forth a son, and shall call his name Emanuel.” The passage is quoted word for word from the Hebrew OT, which tells me one of 2 things, that if this manuscript is a translation from the Greek, then the scribe understood parthenos-virgin to be equivalent to almah, or, if the Greek is a translation of the Hebrew then the translator also understood almah to means parthenos as did the Septuagint translators. In my speculation, I believe Matthew wrote his Gospel in more than one language (as well as most Biblical authors), perhaps Hebrew, Aramaic,and Greek.

 

[Luke65]

In my speculation, I believe Matthew wrote his Gospel in more than one language (as well as most Biblical authors), perhaps Hebrew, Aramaic,and Greek.

I’m with you on that. Can’t wait for the updates!

 

[Ron_Conte]

So far I am only on chapter 2, and it is the Hebrew, though it is Matthew actually quoting the OT, I have not gotten to the Jesus quotes (even though Matthew is quoting Jesus, and probably more like quoting the passages that Jesus quotes more than actually quoting what version He quoted from). Matt 1:23 is that famous quote from Isa 7:14, “Behold, a virgin is with child, and shall bring forth a son, and shall call his name Emanuel.” The passage is quoted word for word from the Hebrew OT, which tells me one of 2 things, that if this manuscript is a translation from the Greek, then the scribe understood parthenos-virgin to be equivalent to almah, or, if the Greek is a translation of the Hebrew then the translator also understood almah to means parthenos as did the Septuagint translators. In my speculation, I believe Matthew wrote his Gospel in more than one language (as well as most Biblical authors), perhaps Hebrew, Aramaic,and Greek.

Good work Copland!

One of the reasons that Jerome gives for saying that Matthew was originally written in Hebrew is that Matthew quotes the Hebrew OT.

'almah can be understood and translated as parthenos because 'almah (unmarried woman of marrying age) would be a virgin in the context of ancient Jewish religion and society. But parthenos would just be translated as betulah. Even though, in modern times, translators take great liberties with the text, in ancient times it is very unlikely that a translator would translate parthenos as 'almah. So this seems to be a piece of evidence that the manuscript you are working with is descended from the original Matthew in Hebrew.

I don’t think Matthew would combine Hebrew and Greek. He wrote for a Jewish audience, and they knew Aramaic and Hebrew. The greek-speaking synagogues did not get along with the Hebrew synagogues, so combining the two languages would be offensive to both groups. The ordinary Jew in Judea did not know much if any Greek.

 

[COPLAND_3]

Good work Copland!

One of the reasons that Jerome gives for saying that Matthew was originally written in Hebrew is that Matthew quotes the Hebrew OT.

'almah can be understood and translated as parthenos because 'almah (unmarried woman of marrying age) would be a virgin in the context of ancient Jewish religion and society. But parthenos would just be translated as betulah. Even though, in modern times, translators take great liberties with the text, in ancient times it is very unlikely that a translator would translate parthenos as 'almah. So this seems to be a piece of evidence that the manuscript you are working with is descended from the original Matthew in Hebrew.

I don’t think Matthew would combine Hebrew and Greek. He wrote for a Jewish audience, and they knew Aramaic and Hebrew. The greek-speaking synagogues did not get along with the Hebrew synagogues, so combining the two languages would be offensive to both groups. The ordinary Jew in Judea did not know much if any Greek.

Thanks Ron!

As for combining 2 languages, I did not necessarily mean combing them through one manuscript like Daniel did with Hebrew and Aramaic, but that he could have written more than one copy of his Gospel into more than one language. But that is nothing more than speculation and a theory I have.

 

[patrick457]

I have been working on a project lately on an ancient Hebrew manuscript called the DuTillet, while providing a fresh translation of it and also linking each word to a lexicon. There are some other ancient Hebrew manuscirpts of Matthew though I have found they are quite inferior to the DuTillet, that would be the Shem Tov and Munster. I have been providing a critical apparatus and comparing the readings of the Shem Tov with the DuTillet. So far I have noticed that the Shem Tov appears to be a translation from the Greek, while the DuTillet appears more original. Maybe the DuTillet is a decendant from the mother text that would be Matthew’s original! I’ve got so much more work ahead of me but so far I’m having a blast with it! I look forward to eventually providing a Hebrew version of Matthew that can be used for study purposes. I will keep people posted on my progress. litteralchristianlibrary.wetpaint.com/page/Hebrew+Matthew

Hey, very interesting! Thanks for that.