Hebrew/Aramaic
Origin of the New Testament
Textual analysis and scholarship supporting
an original Hebrew New Testament
__________________________________
We of Yahweh's Assembly in Yahshua accept
both the Old and New Testaments of the Bible, and generally follow the King
James translation because many reference works are based upon that version.
We do not accept, however, the substituted
names and common titles of our heavenly Father and His Son. We also
object to the Hellenized names give to the Hebrew worthies in the New
Testament, such Hezekiah appearing as "Ezekias" (Mat. 1:9), and Judah (Yahudah) as "Judas" (Mat. 1:2).
Beyond just names, churchianity itself is
tainted with Greek thinking, Hellenized creeds, and unscriptural practices
derived from Greco-Roman infusions through a Greek-translated New Testament.
Scholarship is increasingly validating the
case for a Hebrew original New Testament. We include some of their documentation
in this short study.
Examining all the evidence, we conclude
that the New Testament was inspired in Hebrew (or Aramaic) and then later
translated into Greek. The testimony to this is voluminous and
logical. One needs only to consider that the writers were themselves
Hebrews, and "while the language is Greek, the thoughts and idioms are
Hebrew" (Companion Bible, appendix 94).
At the end of this article is a list of scholars
and their treatises supporting an original Hebrew New Testament. This
list is by no means comprehensive. Other enlightened experts have come to
the same realization that the New Testament was originally a collection of
Hebrew works. The Bible's Hebrew writers were led by the Holy Spirit to
write in their native Hebrew language, just as Paul (Shaul) was spoken to from
On High in the Hebrew tongue, Acts 26:14.
New
Testament Based on Old
The
inquiring Bible student soon realizes that the New Testament is undeniably
Hebrew in grammar, idiom, and thinking. This opens up a whole new
understanding of the essence of truth for the New Testament believer. If
the New Testament is rooted in the Hebrew Language, then its teachings also
derive from the Hebrew culture and are embedded in the Hebrew - and not pagan
Greek - view of truth.
Those who would object to this reality must
be asked the question, does arguing for a Greek New Testament bring one closer
to the truth, or take one further from it, knowing that the Old Testament is a
thoroughly Hebrew work? Is the New Testament a complete replacement of
Old Testament teachings, with entirely new truth flavored with Hellenistic
thought, practice, and understanding?
Not according to the Apostle Paul. He
wrote that the New Testament is built on the foundation of the Old Testament
prophets as well as the apostles, Ephesians 2:20. Yahshua the Messiah
gave the directive to "search the
Scriptures," John 5:39. The only "scriptures" extant at that time were those of the Old
Testament. The New Testament writings were not yet finished and compiled.
In His parable of Lazarus, Yahshua again
advised the unknowing to listen to "Moses
and the prophets," meaning the Old Testament, Luke 16:29. It was
these same Old Testament Scriptures that the "noble Bereans" used to establish truth in Acts 17:11,
and the very ones Paul told Timothy would make one perfect, 2 Timothy
3:16-17.
Aside from approaching truth from the right
scriptural foundation, there is another important reason for coming to grips
with the original language of the New Testament.
One of the arguments advanced against the
verity of the sacred Names is that the Names would appear as "God" (Theos) and "Jesus" in the New
Testament Greek text. The logic goes, if such titles and names are in the
"original" text, then who are we to change them to something else?
Apart from this argument's erroneous
premise ("God" is not the same word as the Greek Theos: "Jesus" is only partly a Greek term), we must ask,
is it legitimate to change someone's name simply because you are writing about
him in some other language? Names are transliterated, not translated.
If a book about the president of the United
States were written in or translated into Russian, would the author or
translators look for a Russian equivalent name for "George Bush"?
Of course not. His name would still appear as George Bush.
By the same token, the Father's and Son's
Names are the same in every language. Therefore we must call on them by
their names revealed through the Hebrew tongue. There is no more a
Russian equivalent name for "George Bush" than there is a Greek or
English equivalent of the Hebrew "Yahweh" and
"Yahshua." "God", "Lord", and
"Jesus" are not equivalents, they are replacements.
Hebrew
Words Out of Place?
A
peculiar discrepancy within the New Testament is this: if the New
Testament were originally composed in Greek, why does it contain many
untranslated Hebrew words? Why did the writers go to all the trouble of
preserving Hebrew terms in their Greek writings?
The only valid explanation is that the Greek
language had no equivalent words for these uniquely Hebrew terms taken from an
original Hebrew text and translated into Greek.
These Hebrew survivals attest to a Hebrew
original - and a Greek (and English) translation that brought them across
unchanged from the Hebrew.
The following HEBREW words are included in
the King James New Testament, as taken from the Greek translation (some are
Aramaic).
Abba ("dearest
father"); Messiah ("Anointed
one"); Rabbi ("my
teacher"); hosanna ("Save!
We beseech"); Amen (suggests trust, faithfulness); talitha
cumi ("maid arise"); ephphatha ("be opened"); corban ("a dedicated gift"); Sabbath ("repose",
"desist" from exertion); Satan ("adversary"); mammon ("riches"); raca ("to spit in one's face"); cummin (herb); Maranatha ("Master, I
pray you overthrow"); Passover ("pass over"); Emmanuel (title meaning "El with us"); Eli lama
Sabachthani ("my El, why have
you forsaken me?")
Even more compelling evidence for a New
Testament originally composed in Hebrew is found in the clear Hebrew word order
extant in the New Testament. Many sentences contain the verb-noun
reversal common to Hebrew and Semitic languages.
Scholars also have long recognized that the
grammar of the New Testament does not befit good Greek, but does reflect
excellent Hebrew grammar.
In addition, many Hebraic idioms and
expressions are scattered throughout the New Testament. Had the original
been composed in Greek, these sayings would have been put into Greek form and
expression.
For example, what did Yahshua and others
mean by statements that don't make good sense in Greek (Or English) but are
powerful in the Hebrew? Such expressions include: "If your eye is evil" (Matt. 6:23); "let the dead bury the dead" (Matt. 8:22); "for if they do these things in a green
tree, what shall be done in the dry" (Luke 23:31), and "thou shalt heap coals of fire on his
head" (Paul in Rom. 12:20).
Numerous examples of Semitic poetry and
reverse couplets (chiasmus) are dead giveaways to the original Hebrew of these
books. Hebrew is also distinct for its colorful descriptions of simple,
common acts.
For example, a beautiful expression in
classical Hebrew is found in Luke 16:23: "...he lift up his eyes...and saw..." Other sayings
peculiar to Hebrew and found in the Evangels include: "Lay these sayings in your years,"
"Cast out your name as evil," "He set his face to go," and "The appearance of his
countenance was altered."
Whole sentences or paragraphs in the New
Testament can be retranslated word for word back into the Hebrew. Luke
10:5-6 is just one example: "And
into whatsoever house you enter, first say, Peace be to this house. And
if the son of peace be there, your peace shall rest upon it: if not, it
shall turn to you again." This passage is a synthesis of vivid
Hebrew idioms unknown in the Greek.
Greek
Unpopular in Palestine
Many
linguists and historians now attest that the Evangels, the Acts, and the Book
of Revelation were composed in Hebrew (see listing of these scholars included
herein). Early "church fathers" validate that the Book of
Matthew was originally written in Hebrew (see Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History 3:39; Irenaeus' Against Heresies 3:1; Epiphanius' Panarion 20:9:4; Jerome's Lives of Illustrious Men 3 and De Vir. 3:36).
Hebrew was the language of Judah and
Galilee in the first century. Its sister language, Aramaic, remained the
secondary tongue and the language of commerce. Jews in this area were not
Greek-speaking. Their revulsion to the Greeks and the Greek language
derives from the fact that the Maccabees had just defeated the Greeks and
driven them and their pagan defilement from the Temple and Palestine.
The eminent first century Jewish historian,
priest, and scholar Josephus admitted that he could not speak Greek fluently
and that the Jews frowned on any Jew who did.
"I have also taken a great deal of
pains to obtain the learning of the Greeks, and understanding the elements of
the Greek language although I have so long accustomed myself to speak our own
language, that I cannot pronounce Greek with sufficient exactness: for
our nation does not encourage those that learn the languages of many nations"
(Antiquities,
20:11:2).
If this illustrious scholar was unable to
speak Greek sufficiently, how could the uneducated disciples write their books
in Greek? From what we've learned, why would they even want to do so?
A
Hebrew Writing to Hebrews
The
common perception is that Paul was a Hellenist Jew from Tarsus who wrote his
letters to Greek-speaking assemblies in Asia minor, Rome and Greece.
Paul (Heb. "Shaul") was first and
foremost a Pharisee - a Jewish sect opposed to Hellenization. He was of
the tribe of Benjamin and a "Hebrew
of Hebrews," Philippians 3:5. A note in the NIV Study
Bible says the expression "Hebrew of
Hebrews" means "in language, attitudes and life-style."
Paul was educated at the feet of Gamaliel,
a great doctor of Hebrew law, Acts 22:3. Although he was born in Tarsus
(a city speaking mainly Aramaic), Paul grew up in Jerusalem, the center of
Pharisaic Judaism, Acts 22:3.
The epistles Paul wrote were to various
assemblies of the Dispersion. Each assembly was composed of a nucleus
group of Jews and supplementary collections of gentiles (read about the
Thessalonia Assembly, Acts 17:1-4, as well as the Corinthians, 1 Cor.
10:1-2). The converted Jews in these assemblies would receive Paul's
letters and then teach the gentiles among them. It wasn't the gentiles
who were converting Jews to a Grecian-Roman faith with a Greek Savior and
doctrines of mystery worship!
Typically Paul went first to the synagogue
when he traveled to contact these and other assemblies (Acts 13:14; 14:1; 17:1;
17:10, 18:4, 19:8). The language of the second Temple and synagogues at
this time was Hebrew and Aramaic, not Greek.
His letters in Hebrew to these Jews (and
gentiles) of the various assemblies would reflect his mission to take the Good
News to "the Jew first and then to
the Greek," Romans 1:16.
As an example, Paul specifically addressed
Jews of the Corinthian assembly: "Moreover,
brethren, I would not that you should be ignorant, how that all our fathers
were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; and were all
baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea" (1 Cor. 10:1-2).
Truth
from Greek or Hebrew?
Understanding
basic truth is to know that Yahweh chose the Hebrew peoples with whom to make a
Covenant and through whom to bring the truth.
How much of a gentile should the True
Worshiper be who is bathing in Scriptures first delivered to Hebrew patriarchs,
Hebrew prophets, Hebrew apostles and lived by a Savior from the human lineage
of King David? Paul was no champion of the gentile cause. He was
the champion of a Hebrew Messiah and scriptures given in a Hebrew Old
Testament. These were what he taught in his epistles. Note:
"But
this I confess unto you, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship
I the Elohim of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law
and in the prophets" (Acts 24:14). "Law and prophets" refers to the Old Testament
Scriptures.
Which culture, world-view, and mentality
should prevail among True Worshipers today? A Greek-gentile
heritage? Or the birthright of those grafted into the promised of Israel
established by the Heavenly Father Yahweh Himself?
Paul wrote to the assembly at Rome,
"Who are Israelites; to whom pertains the adoption, and the glory, and the
covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of Elohim, and the
promises" (Romans 9:4).
If Christianity were honest with itself, it
would openly acknowledge that it derives its faith from Hebrew and not
Greco-Roman Scriptures. That its salvation comes from a Savior who came
as a Hebrew not to establish a new religion but to build on what went
before. Yahshua and the Scriptures are Hebrew.
If this one pivotal truth were taught
today, real understanding of the Scriptures would break out everywhere, and the
Bible would at last be revealed.
Scholars
Who Support A Hebrew Original New Testament
Following
is a listing of some linguistic and Biblical authorities who maintain or
support a belief in a Hebrew origin of the New Testament:
●
Matthew Black, An Aramaic Approach to
the Gospels and Acts, third edition, entirety.
●
D. Bivin and R. B. Blizzard, Understanding
the Difficult Words of Jesus, entirety.
●
E. W. Bullinger, The Companion Bible,
Appendix 95.
●
Dr. F. C. Burkitt, The Earliest
Sources for the Life of Jesus, pp. 25, 29.
●
Prof. C. F. Burney, The Aramaic
Origin of the Fourth Gospel, entirety.
●
Epiphanius, Panarion 29:9:4
on Matthew.
●
Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History,
III 24:6 and 39:18; V8:2; VI 25:4.
●
Edward Gibbon, History of
Christianity, two footnotes on p. 185.
●
Dr. Frederick C. Grant, Roman
Hellenism and the New Testament, p. 14.
●
Dr. George Howard, The Tetragram and
the New Testament in Journal of Biblical Literature, vol. 96/1
(1977), 63-83. Also, Hebrew
Gospel of Matthew, entirety.
●
Dr. George Lamsa, The Holy Bible from
Ancient Eastern Manuscripts, Introduction, pp. IX-XII.
●
Dr. Alfred F. Loisy, The Birth of the
Christian Religion and The
Origin of the New Testament, pp. 66, 68.
●
Dr. Isaac Rabinowitz, Ephphata...in Journal of Semitic Studies vol.
XVI (1971), pp. 151-156.
●
Ernest Renan, The Life of Jesus,
pp. 90, 92.
●
Hugh J. Schonfield, An Old Hebrew
Text of St. Matthew's Gospel, (1927) p. 7.
●
Dr. Albert Schweitzer, The Quest of
the Historical Jesus, p. 275.
●
R. B. Y. Scott, The Original Language
of the Apocalypse, entirety.
●
Prof. Charles C. Torrey, Documents of
the Primitive Church, entirety. Also, Our Translated Gospels,
entirety.
●
Dr. James Scott Trimm, The semitic Origin
of the New Testament, entirety.
●
Max Wiolcox, The Semitism of Acts (1965), entirety.
●
F. Zimmerman, The Aramaic Origin of
the Four Gospels, entirety
© 2007 Yahweh’s Assembly in Yahshua
2963 County Road 233, Kingdom City, Missouri 65262
View us online at: www.YAIY.org
Call Toll Free: (877) 642-4101
Main Line: (573) 642-4100
Home | Newsletter | Literature | Sabbath Services | Links | Contact | Search
Copyright © 2007-2008 Yahweh's Assembly in Yahshua
All Rights Reserved