For example, take this Hebrew text from Matthew 6:19-24:
"Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal: But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal: For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light. But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness! No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon."
In these verses we have Yeshua speaking about money(Yeshua is the original Hebrew proper name for Jesus of Nazareth), and not making it more important than God. Note that He begins speaking about money, then says something about "an evil eye," then finishes His statement about money. If this were penned in Greek originally, you would have to ask, "Why this odd verse about an "evil eye" in the midst of a money topic?" It makes no sense. However, if you happen to know that having an "evil eye" is a Hebrew idiom of that time for "being stingy with your money," then, a) the passage makes sense, and b) you realize it HAD to be written in Hebrew first, then whoever translated it into Greek, (unaware of the idiom), simply took it word-for-word from Hebrew into the Greek.
There are many "New Testament" verses that are very hard, if not impossible, to understand without knowledge of the deeper teachings of the Judaism of that day. There are also many places where Yeshua and Paul quote from Jewish literature as shown elsewhere in this study: http://www.yashanet.com/studies/matstudy/mat3a.htm
It is important to note who these letters were originally meant to be read by "leaders" in the Messianic community (most likely Jews), who were well versed in the Judaism of the first century and its understanding of Torah.. (Note Peter's concerns about Paul's letters being hard to understand and often twisted about by "lawless" people -- "lawless" meaning not knowing or respecting Torah, the "Law.")
Nothing in the "New Testament" was ever meant to be read out of context, by people from another culture ignorant of the Hebrew meaning to the words and the concepts behind them, and replacing this with their own personal meaning. Nor were any of the "New Testament" documents ever meant to stand on their own, apart from being interpreted in the context of the Torah (God's direct revelation/instruction), which of course came first.
Posts
2 comments:
Wait a minute. It is important, I believe, to take a step back and re-examine a few things. I realize this post is actually more than a year old, but I've only just discovered it and find some things worth questioning.
First, I am a Christian, a conservative (mostly), and I absolutely believe that the Bible is the inspired, inerrant, and only Word of God. However, there are still some things here I can't agree with, and I must point these out to open them for possible further discussion.
Second, it is important to realize that the authors of these statements, if one reads the rest of the material it came from, are evaluating CHRISTIAN documents from a VERY Jewish mystical mindset - perhaps they can do no other, but we must recognize that this will and has heavily influenced their conclusions, even to the point of misconstruing/misinterpreting certain aspects of the Christian faith.
Third, the statement that all of the Christian New Testament was originally written in Hebrew is not really as supportable as they claim. We have thousands - yes, thousands - of Greek copies from various periods throughout history, yet not one Hebrew copy that could not possibly be a translation itself. The evidence they cite is consistently taken out of context or dogmatically misused.
Fourth, the New Testament documents were meant to stand alone, some written largely to Jews who understood the Law but also some largely to Gentiles who did not. Christ came to fulfill the Law, not abolish it (see Matt 5.17-20). He is the promised Messiah, but not only for the Jews under the Law. In only some respects he lived by it, because it is still a guide from God towards living a holy life. But, since Christ and his victory over death as a sacrifice for us, we are no longer SAVED by the Law (Gal. 3.24-25); therefore Christ's work rendered some aspects - not all, mind you - of it obsolete.
Fifth, the letters were meant for all Christians, not an elite group of "understanding" leaders. The letter to the Colossians was to be read publicly and in the neighboring churches as well (4.16). The elitist leadership view was taken by the medieval Catholic Church to establish control over religious life, not because that was the way God wanted it.
Sixth, and on a different note, I strongly agree that further study is required of the Scriptures, as things do get lost in translation - from Greek, not Hebrew, as said above. The many different English translations alone point to this issue.
If anyone would like to discuss this stuff more, please feel free to respond here.
In Christ Alone,
Aaron
Regarding reliability of Matthew:
A logical analysis (found here: www.netzarim.co.il) of the earliest manusscripts (including the logical implications of the research by Ben-Gurion Univ. Prof. of Linguistics Elisha Qimron of Dead Sea Scroll 4Q MMT)) of “the gospel of Matthew”, implies that Ribi Yehoshua was a Perushi (Pharisee). Ribi Yehoshua ha-Mashiakh (the Messiah) from Nazareth was called a Ribi and only the Perushim (Pharisees) had Ribis.
The current earliest manuscripts of “the gospel of Matthew” contains words a first century Ribi would never have said, and thus a reconstruction is needed.
[Even according to the most authoritative Christian scholars, e.g., The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, NT contains redactions (see quote from that book in the above website; click on "Glossaries"; click on "NT")]
Paqid Yirmeyahu Ben David made a reconstruction named Netzarim Reconstruction of Hebrew Matityahu, using a logical and scientific methodology. That is an essential read for those whom want to know what Ribi Yehoshua actually taught and didn’t taught.
Post a Comment