The New Testament Was Written In Hebrew
Posted: Wednesday, December 24, 2008
by Rabbi Stanley
Mosaic Ministries
What language was the Brit Hadasha
(New Testament) written in? Most people will tell you it was written in Greek. They go on to tell you that it was the "language of the day". They say everything during that time was written in Greek and that everybody also spoke Greek, including the Jews of HaAretz (The Land). Let's find out if this is indeed the truth.
First we have to look at a couple of facts. One fact is that we have a transcript of the Book of Matthew in Hebrew, which predates any manuscripts we have in Koinia Greek. (Koinia Greek was the Greek in Rome at the time of Yeshua. It is from the Koinia Greek that we have our current translations - the ones they say are the originals). This fact alone has to make us rethink if Greek was indeed the original language of the New Testament. It obviously wasn't. Another fact is that when we read in Josephus Wars 5:9:2 (Josephus lived during the time of Yeshua and even references Him as well as John the Baptist) we see that Josephus testifies that the people didn't even understand Greek. He had to translate what the Greek speaking Romans had to say to the Jews in order for them to surrender. In other words... they didn't know Greek!
We also have to look at New Testament passages themselves. We see that when Yeshua stopped Shaul (Saul) He didn't speak to him in Greek but rather Hebrew (some translations say Aramaic but even then in their footnotes say "or Hebrew". He didn't speak to him in Greek at all and we know that Paul DID speak Greek. We also have to understand a little about Jewish culture here. Hebrew has always been considered the "Holy language". The Scribes in Israel during the New Testament era also believed this. Writings that were considered to be holy were written in Hebrew, this was a given. Why would Holy Writ be done in a language of the pagans? Sure, later on there would be copies written in Greek for those who spoke Greek as their first language.
Another thing I hear often concerning this is that the New Testament was written in Greek so that the Jews of the Diaspora would be able to understand it as they all spoke Greek. This shows a lack of Jewish culture and understanding. Any Jew would know that Hebrew was taught to the Jews of the Diaspora. It was necessary in order to read the Old Testament in its original language! The letters that Paul wrote were to saved Jews in the synagogues in the Diaspora, Jews who knew Hebrew. That's not all.
Dr Robert Lindsey, who was my pastor when I was growing up in Israel, translated the book of Mark from Greek into Hebrew. He discovered something rather interesting. He found that when he read the translation in Hebrew rather then from Greek, it made more sense. It wasn't as disjointed as it was in Greek, rather it began to flow and many of the things that were written even had more meaning to the Hebrew ear.
Even the Church Fathers attest to this over and over again:
Papias (150-170 C.E.) Matthew composed the words in the Hebrew dialect, and each translated as he was able. (quoted by Eusebius Eccl. Hist. 3:39)
Ireneus (170 C.E.) Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect. (Irenaeus; Against Heresies 3:1)
Origen (c. 210 C.E.) The first [Gospel] is written according to Matthew, the same that was once a tax collector, but afterwards an emissary of Yeshua the Messiah, who having published it for the Jewish believers, wrote it in Hebrew. (quoted by Eusebius; Eccl. Hist. 6:25)
Eusebius (c. 315 C.E.) Matthew also, having first proclaimed the Gospel in Hebrew, when on the point of going also to the other nations, committed it to writing in his native tongue, and thus supplied the want of his presence to them by his writings. (Eusebius; Eccl. Hist. 3:24)
Epiphanius (370 C.E.) They [the Nazarenes] have the Gospel according to Matthew quite complete in Hebrew, for this Gospel is certainly still preserved among them as it was first written, in Hebrew letters. (Epiphanius; Panarion 29:9:4)
Jerome (382 C.E.) "Matthew, who is also Levi, and from a tax collector came to be an emissary first of all evangelists composed a Gospel of Messiah in Judea in the Hebrew language and letters, for the benefit of those of the circumcision who had believed, who translated it into Greek is not sufficiently ascertained. Furthermore, the Hebrew itself is preserved to this day in the library at Caesarea, which the martyr Pamphilus so diligently collected. I also was allowed by the Nazarenes who use this volume in the Syrian city of Borea to copy it. In which is to be remarked that, wherever the evangelist... makes use of the testimonies
It is undisputable! Of course it was written in Hebrew, as was anything else during that time that was considered Holy. It was all written in Mishnaic Hebrew. There are currently three different kinds of Hebrew. There is Biblical Hebrew, which is what was used in Old Testament times. Then there was Mishnaic Hebrew, which is where we get our modern Hebrew block letters from (called Mishnaic as it was during the time of the compilation of the Mishna, the Oral Law) and modern Hebrew which is what is spoken in Israel today. Mishnaic Hebrew was the common language of the time and Mishnaic Hebrew is what the New Testament was written in. Not Greek! Why is this important? Because it shows that the Greek manuscripts that we use are... a translation.
This Article has been viewed 5,180 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
More commentsThanking for your posts and your references that support your statement. As asked before is there original manuscript of Matthew in Hebrew that is from that time period? A yes or no will suffice.yesFor additional arguments in favor of a Hebrew, rather than an
Aramaic, urtext edition of the Synoptic Gospels, see David N.
Bivin, “Hebraisms in the New Testament," Encyclopedia of
Hebrew Language and Linguistics (Leiden: E. J. Brill, forthcoming).
See also the articles in The Linguistic Background of the
Synoptic Gospels: Jerusalem Studies in the Synoptic Gospels,
Volume 2 (ed. R. Steven. Notley and Randall Buth; Leiden: E. J.
Brill, forthcoming), especially: Guido Baltes, “The Use of Hebrew
and Aramaic in Epigraphic Sources of the New Testament Era";
Baltes, “The Origins of the ‘Exclusive Aramaic Model’ in the Nineteenth
Century: Methodological Fallacies and Subtle Motives";
Randall Buth, “Distinguishing Hebrew from Aramaic in Semitized
Greek texts, with an Application for the Gospels and
Pseudepigrapha"; and, Daniel A. Machiela, "Hebrew, Aramaic,
and the Differing Phenomena of Targum and Translation in the
Second Temple Period and Post-Second Temple Period."
I just want to say thank you for your article Rabbi Stanley. With this I am not saying that I have been completely convinced about this subject. Of course you cannot convince anyone, you gave study sources and it is our task to read them and continue investigating, but what I want to highlight is that you give a light on this road to find the truth on this matter. There are not many websites giving a different view on what "majority people" believe to be true.
I was interested in reading the commentaries on this because I think it is a good practice to discuss in community and try to help each other, however I found Caleb's comment and I just saw he wants to continue believing which he has been taught, like "most people" do, because it is easier to be part of the majority.
I know it is painful to discover that you are deceived because I have experienced that so many times. I come from a Catholic and then Evangelical background and now that I come to learn about Hebrew Roots I have been discovering so many more deceptions in my beliefs. My prayer is that the Lord guides me to get out of deception and He has been answering this little by little.
Why do I want to know the original language in which the NT was written? It is so important to me now because I understood translations miss out so much and even change the meaning of things. Like what I discovered has happened with the translations of the OT, I thought they were accurate and none of them can be, they are just translations of the original Hebrew. English is not my first language but by learning it I have come to understand many things that without it I would have not been able to. (Saying this in general or in a secular sense). Now I am learning Hebrew and I am so marveled about the richness of the original Hebrew Bible, and if Greek or Hebrew is the original of the NT I dont want to miss out by reading just translations.
Thanks so much for the sources, now my task is to search them, analyze them and pray so that the Holy Spirit reveals His truth to me. Thanks again for not going with the majority... centuries ago the "majority of scientists" had said the earth was not round.Thanks Carol, I appreciate the encouragement. I do catch quite a bit of flack on this particular website and am often censored by the owner of this site, but that's ok. I've been doing this for quite a while and am used to any persecution or argumentation. I've lived in many countries where being a Believer or for being Messianic or for just being Jewish has been a life or death situation (India, Israel, West Bank just for starters). So I've developed a thick skin. It is a great study concerning the original language of the Brit Hadasha (New Testament). It opens ones eyes and allows some very difficult passages to finally make sense. Hebrew idioms become apparent and then we can finally understand what the Church has missed for so many years. The major things we need to know are there in the translations. We can understand how to come to the L-rd and live righteous lives. But it leaves out some of those precious nuggets that G-d has hidden away for those who are willing to search for them. The ultimate scavenger hunt lol. Bless you sister and if you have any questions, I'm at your service. Rabbi Stanley
Carol asked "I want to know the original language in which the NT was written?" but you didn't answer. Could you answer that please?
And, what is the website you refer to in other articles/comments?
Thank you,
T1T (closest ASCIII to my Hebrew name, heh).Did you see the title of this article (The New Testament Was Written In Hebrew)? I think what she asked was this "Why do I want to know the original language in which the NT was written?" It was a rhetorical question and she then answered it. The site I'm referencing is linked at the top of this page where it says "Mosaic Ministries".
Dear Mr. Stanley,
Thank you for the providing the quotes regarding the Gospel of Matthew being written in Hebrew. I have not studied this subject long or well enough to know where I personally stand. I have been in the Messianic Movement for some twenty years and prefer not to use the title Rabbi as I am unacquainted with you, or your credentials. There are lots of guys out there who like the title but really should not carry it. I think that your response to Caleb was written in an immature and condescending manner. Within Messianic Judaism there are lots of controversies and we must all use a civil tongue and wisdom in how we deal with people with whom we disagree. "The anger of man does not achieve the righteousness of G-d." Shalom, Simon SmithYou're entitled to your opinion just as I am entitled to mine. I don't believe in "political correctness" as you seem to. If someone is acting like a dolt, I say so. And how do you know if I'm angry or not. You don't have a clue. If you really want to know, I'm usually laughing when I make these comments. I think it's hilarious most of the time. If you think it's immature, then don't do it yourself but don't think you're the "Messianic police". I've been in Messianic Judaism for 2ce as long as you so maybe you should have a little humility? Maybe you could learn something yourself and pull the beam out of your own eye? Has that ever crossed your mind? No obviously not, you already think you're more mature then I am don't you? How condescending that you would talk to a Rabbi in such a way that you have never even met. Funny how you have accused me of something that you yourself just did. Isn't that usually how it is? BTW... still laughing under my breath. As for my credentials, I studied at the Akiva Yeshiva in Jerusalem (Orthodox) and got my Smicha in both Italy and the USA. I also did 4 years in Christian Bible college at various Bible colleges in Israel and the US. Not that you'll understand any of that anyway... If you thought I talked to Caleb in a condescending manner, how in the world did you think I was going to address you???, I happen to know all about Caleb (he has a well known reputation in our area in Washington State as a drunkard and wanna be playboy). But now, now I know a little bit more about you Mr. Smith and so far, not impressed. Rabbi StanleyShalom Simon and Mr. Stanley.
Although I feel like some of your words in response to me are untrue Mr. Stanley, I do have to thank you. You have posed some good questions. Because of this I have started a full study on this subject, and hope to learn more from looking into some of the things you have posed. I did not realize that I had any reputation in my area or any other for that matter, I am not sure what your definition of a playboy is, however, I'll let my wife know that I apparently am one. To get back to the conversation. I think all that Simon was trying to say was that we do have quite a bit of disagreement in the Messianic movement, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. But in conversations it could be more fruitful to dialogue on the subjects at hand rather then attack people. I read your post above, and you are correct Mr. Stanley, my words were not chosen correctly. I should not have said that you had a Jewish superiority complex. What I was trying to get at is that I personally don't think that one language is more holy then the next. Although Jewish culture is something to be proud of, I believe that some people (and I am not talking about Mr. Stanley here) have thought that the Apostolic scriptures would in someway be more authentic, and more "holy" if written in Hebrew.
To what Carol said above. It is not that I am against changing my mind, or that it would be a problem for me if the Apostolic scriptures were written in Hebrew. But at the end of Mr Stanley's paper he states that the Greek manuscripts that we use are a translation. The reason that I have some issue with this is because if Mr. Stanley is correct, then we don't actually have a inspired text, we have a translation of an inspired text. We see this problem when we look at English translations. Although they are very useful and should be read and used for study, it is always good to look at the Hebrew (of the Tanach) and the Greek (for the Apostolics). If we had first century or second century manuscripts of the synoptic gospels in Hebrew then I would feel that the argument for these books being written in Hebrew the argument for the Hebrew as the original language would be much stronger. But perhaps I just have not looked in the right place, and there are such manuscripts. Once again I thank you Mr. Stanley for putting a burden on me to look deeper into this issue. I hope and pray that the Holy One will help me in this study to gain wisdom and understanding on this subject.
Shalom
CalebLook, you're not thinking Caleb. since the texts were written in Hebrew, it doesn't change one iota concerning an inspired text. Do you know how many different Greek texts are used to make what is today called the New Testament? THOUSANDS! Many of these various texts disagree on MAJOR points. Let's speak as if there was NOT a Hebrew original. All the texts that are used can't possibly be inspired! G-d doesn't contradict Himself. Every serious scholar today knows that there isn't one text that the New Testament is derived from. Every denomination is aware of this EVERY Church father is also aware of this. So rather the original was written in Greek originally or not, there's no reason to hold onto the belief of inspiration. Did G-d preserve the Brit Hadasha in order that we could learn more about Him? Of course! Is everything there that we need in order for us to live a holy and righteous life? Of course! We don't have to hold on to fables in order to hold on to our faith Caleb. All that does is make us look like fools and hasn't Christianity done that long enough? Of course it was originally written in Hebrew. Very few Jews knew Greek, it was a language detested by the Jews. Hebrew IS the holy language, it's what G-d used to speak to Paul in the Brit Hadasha. What's wrong with a "holy language"? Nothing! G-d gave it, thus it is holy. He made the ground holy, He can make a language holy. On the other note, yes, you do have a reputation. Your father is well known in Messianic circles. Believe me, I understand, my dad is also a well known speaker. Because of that, you're under a microscope. Everything you've done is known clear out here in Eastern Washington. You're known as a drunk. I'm not trying to give you advice, I have no idea how you can clear your name even if you have or will change. If you have any questions concerning that particular issue, I'd rather have done that via email privately but you didn't give me much choice. As for my feeling superior for being Jewish... I'm not proud, I'm grateful! The Brit Hadasha says "For what advantage is there to the Jew? Much in every way". Also, if you look closely to any of the responses where I appear harsh, EVERY time it's when someone first attacks me. If someone responds in kindness, I respond in kindness. If they attack, I attack. A little something I picked up living in Israel lol. When all is said and done... I win! You went back and studied your Bible more and that's my mission, to get people to take another look. You may say it's not a game or competition where one wins or loses. Well, to me, getting people to study G-d's Word is a win/lose situation and this time, I count it a win. RavSome more evidence to consider...On August 12th, 1553 Pope Julius III signed a decree banning the Talmud in Rome. The decree was executed on Rosh HaShanna, and anything that looked like the Talmud, (anything written in Hebrew letters) was confiscated. Jean DuTillet, Bishop of Brieu, France was visiting Rome at the time. DuTillet was astounded to take notice of a Hebrew manuscript of Matthew among the other Hebrew manuscripts. DuTillet acquired the manuscript and returned to France, depositing it in the Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris. It remains there to this day as Hebrew ms. No. 132. While most scholars have ignored the DuTillet Hebrew version of Matthew, Hugh Schonfield stated his opinion that this Hebrew text underlies our current Greek text. Schonfield writes: ....certain linguistic proofs ... seem to show that the Hebrew text [DuTillet] underlies the Greek, and that certain renderings in the Greek, may be due to a misread Hebrew original. (An Old Hebrew Text of St. Matthew’s Gospel; 1927, p. 17)
Rabbi Stanley,
I find it very comical and yet very sad that people feel they have the right to reprimand or "correct" your article/research when they themselves do not spend the energy to research the subject for themselves, develop a website, and post their findings on that website. They think it's acceptable to critique you, yet are not willing to be critiqued themselves. I'd love to see anyone here take the time and brain power required to write about this subject so we can rip YOU apart. It amazes me people have to have a countering OPINION for everything. We can say, "It's a beautiful sunny day!" and inevitably someone will criticize us for it! Sigh. Well, Rabbi, I appreciate your article and your efforts to enlighten the world that Greek is not the end all, be all! In fact, I am leery of anything Greek as it does nothing to compliment or support a Hebrew culture, language, peoples, and Holy G-d. Shalom!Thanks Jennifer,
That's very kind and I appreciate it. Is this Jennifer Cuddy or a different Jennifer? If a different Jennifer, do you have any articles here or a website? Anyway, thanks again for your response, it was very encouraging. Rabbi StanleyHi Rabbi! No, this is not Jennifer Cuddy, nor do I have articles on this website. I doing some research on the very subject you wrote about and happened upon your article! Needless to say, I was very encouraged!Ah, ok, well it's very nice to meet you. If there's anything I can do to help in your studies on this or any other topic, please let me know. I have many articles here on this site but also on our Mosaic Ministries website. We have video teachings on www.aveinu.com as well. Let me know if I can be of any assistance. Rav.
I believe the Greek translation is a blasphemous corruption of THE NAME, THE TABERNACLE, THE BEINGS, which is prophesied by YAHSHUA [H3091] Himself. I prefer Yahshua and not Yeshua, because HE came in His Father's Name of Yahh, as Halleluyah in H3050. HIS NAME is to be kept QODESH and YHVH [H3068] would never permit His QODESH name to be blasphemed by every Tom, Dick and Harry with a Phoenician deity of G-D = “But you are those who forsake ????, who forget My set-apart mountain, who prepare a table for Gad, and who fill a drink offering for Meni.
[Jesaja 65:11 The Scriptures 1998 ] H1408 ??? gad A variation of H1409; Fortune, a Babylonian deity: - that troop. = a troop of monkeys Absolute blasphemy!! Secondly, the Greek word for 'church' is 'kuriakon' and never ever appears in the Greek translation.
Thirdly; there is in the Jerusalem archive library the SHEM-TOB original of Matthew in Hebrew, which makes much more sense than the translations. I wish I knew Hebrew, to prove to the CHRISTIANS that they have been misled with a corrupted bible translation.
I believe the Greek translation is a blasphemous corruption of THE NAME, THE TABERNACLE, THE BEINGS, which is prophesied by YAHSHUA [H3091] Himself. I prefer Yahshua and not Yeshua, because HE came in His Father's Name of Yahh, as Halleluyah in H3050. HIS NAME is to be kept QODESH and YHVH [H3068] would never permit His QODESH name to be blasphemed by every Tom, Dick and Harry with a Phoenician deity of G-D = “But you are those who forsake ????, who forget My set-apart mountain, who prepare a table for Gad, and who fill a drink offering for Meni.
[Jesaja 65:11 The Scriptures 1998 ] H1408 ??? gad A variation of H1409; Fortune, a Babylonian deity: - that troop. = a troop of monkeys Absolute blasphemy!! Secondly, the Greek word for 'church' is 'kuriakon' and never ever appears in the Greek translation.
Thirdly; there is in the Jerusalem archive library the SHEM-TOB original of Matthew in Hebrew, which makes much more sense than the translations. I wish I knew Hebrew, to prove to the CHRISTIANS that they have been misled with a corrupted bible translation.
Rabbi Stanley,
I aggree with you as it concerns to the New Testament being written in Hebrew. I have studied Biblical Hebrew and can see how some of the coarseness atributed to the New Testament being written in Koine Greek (by the way, it is Koine Greek and not "koinia" Greek) is in fact the result of a poor traslation to Greek from the original Hebrew. The "scholars" called later ??????st??? ????? or Koine Greek {common} because it was "spoken", not found in the written or classical literary Greek. Taking the Septuagint and the Christian New Testament as the foundation new manuscripts in Koine Greek began to be written and took hold in the Greek language until its evolution into modern Greek. Of course, it's also clear to me that the jewish people spoke Hebrew during Yeshua's times, not even aramaic. I read and understand Hebrew because the majority of the "Old Testament" was written in Hebrew, however I don't understand Aramaic, though I can read it, because only small portions of the Bible were written in it (found in Daniel, Ezra, and Jeremiah mainly) and I haven't gotten around to study and memorize the words of what is a different language to Hebrew. It's logical that if I understand and read Hebrew I speak Hebrew specially if my nation has been conquered by people that speak another language and don't speak my language, isn't it?
Rabbi Stanley,
I aggree with you as it concerns to the New Testament being written in Hebrew. I have studied Biblical Hebrew and can see how some of the coarseness atributed to the New Testament being written in Koine Greek (by the way, it is Koine Greek and not "koinia" Greek) is in fact the result of a poor traslation to Greek from the original Hebrew. The "scholars" called later ??????st??? ????? or Koine Greek {common} because it was "spoken", not found in the written or classical literary Greek. Taking the Septuagint and the Christian New Testament as the foundation new manuscripts in Koine Greek began to be written and took hold in the Greek language until its evolution into modern Greek. Of course, it's also clear to me that the jewish people spoke Hebrew during Yeshua's times, not even aramaic. I read and understand Hebrew because the majority of the "Old Testament" was written in Hebrew, however I don't understand Aramaic, though I can read it, because only small portions of the Bible were written in it (found in Daniel, Ezra, and Jeremiah mainly) and I haven't gotten around to study and memorize the words of what is a different language to Hebrew. It's logical that if I understand and read Hebrew I speak Hebrew specially if my nation has been conquered by people that speak another language and don't speak my language, isn't it?
shalom! rabbi stanley!
thank you for your article! for years i've felt something in my heart that something was wrong with the christian churches! so i started researching on my own and started studying torah and discovered a few years ago that im hebrew (jewish) thru spanish jews! El SHADDAI has returned me to TORAH and his HOLY COMMANDMENTS! and now i keep his holy feasts! and again thanks for your article this will help me in my walk with EL SHADDAI.
shalom alechum!
More comments
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.