The Hebrew New Testament? (By Dr. Eli Lizorkin-Eyzenberg)
It is my opinion that the entire original text of the document we have come to know as the New Testament was written by Christ-following Jews (in the ancient sense of the word) in a language that can be best described not simply as Koine or Common Greek, but as “Koine Judeo-Greek”. Some authors who could afford a very good, professional scribe (like was the case with Paul and, possibly with Luke as well) had an excellent command of the language, while others like the authors of Gospel of John and the Book of Revelation naturally wrote on a much simpler level. Just like in English someone can write in an elegant style or express their thoughts in the same language, but in a much simpler fashion (much like myself).
But first of all what is Koine Greek?
Koine Greek (which is different from Classical Greek) was the common multi-regional form of Greek spoken and written during Hellenistic and Roman antiquity. New Testament collection was authored during this historic period.
Now… I do not think that the kind of Greek we see in the New Testament can be best described ONLY as Koine Greek. There is another component to this Koine Greek – a significant Jewish and Hebrew connection. For this reason I prefer to call it – Koine Judeo-Greek.
What in the world is Judeo-Greek?
Well… Judeo Greek, like the well-known Judeo-German (Yiddish), Judeo-Spanish (Ladino) and the less familiar Judeo-Farsi, Judeo-Arabic, Judeo-Italian, and Judean-Georgian languages, is simply a form of Greek used by Jews to communicate. This language retained many words, phrases, grammatical structures, and patterns of thought characteristic of the Hebrew language.
So is Judeo-Greek really Greek? Yes, it is, but it is Greek that inherited the patterns of Semitic thought and expression. In this way, it is different from the types of Greek used by other people groups.
So, I disagree that the New Testament was first written in Hebrew and then translated into Greek. Instead, I think it was written in Greek by people that thought Jewishly and what is, perhaps, more important multi-lingually. You see… the speakers of variety of languages manage to also think in variety of languages. When they do speak, however, they always import into one language something that comes from another. It is never a question of “if”, but only of “how much”.
The main point made by Christians who believe that parts of the New Testament was originally written in Hebrew is that the New Testament is full of Hebraisms. (Hebraism is a characteristic feature of Hebrew occurring in another language.)
Actually, this is a very important point. It shows that serious students of the New Testament must not limit themselves to the study of Greek. They must also study Hebrew. With knowledge of Biblical Hebrew they would be able to read the Koine Judeo-Greek text of the New Testament much more accurately.
So, I suggest, that one does not need to imagine a Hebrew textual base of the New Testament to explain the presence of the Hebraisms in the text. Though possible, this theory simply lacks additional and desperately-needed support.
Think with me on this a little further. Other than a multilingual competency of the New Testament authors their most trusted (and rightly so) source for the Hebrew Bible quotations was the Septuagint (LXX).
Now… we must remember that the Greek version of the Hebrew Bible was translated into Greek by leading Jewish scholars of the day. Legend has it that the 70 individual Jewish sages made separate translations of the Hebrew Bible and when they were done, all of it matched perfectly. As I said “it is a legend”. The number 70 is likely symbolic of the 70 nations of the world in ancient Judaism. This translation was not only meant for Greek-speaking Jews, but also for non-Jews so that they too could have access to the Hebrew Bible. You can imagine how many Hebraic words, phrases, and patterns of thoughts are present on every page of the Septuagint. (Click here to see the oldest version of the LXX).
So, other than the authors of the New Testament thinking Jewishly and Hebraicly, we also have the main source of their Old Testament quotations coming from another Jewish-authored document – the Septuagint. So is it surprising that New Testament is full of Hebraic forms expressed in Greek?!
As a side note, the use of the Septuagint by New Testament writers is actually a very exciting concept.
The Jewish text of the Hebrew Bible used today is the Masoretic Text (MT for short). When the Dead Sea Scrolls were finally examined, it turned out that there was not one, but three different families of Biblical traditions in the time of Jesus. One of them closely matched the Masoretic Text, one closely matched the Septuagint and one seems to have connections with the Samaritan Torah.
Among other things, this of course shows that the Septuagint quoted by the New Testament has great value since it was based upon a Hebrew text that was at least as old as the base Hebrew text of what will one day become – the Masoretic Text.
As I already stated, I believe that the entire New Testament was written in Koine Judeo-Greek. Please allow me to address one very important point. In several places in the writings of the early church fathers, there is mention of a gospel in Hebrew.
The most important and earliest reference is that of the early Christian writer, Papias of Hierapolis (125 CE-150 CE). He wrote: “Matthew collected the oracles in the Hebrew dialect and interpreted each one of them as best he could.” So… we do have a very early Christian testimony about Matthew’s document in Hebrew.
Was this a reference to the Gospel of Matthew in its Hebrew original? Perhaps. Was it a reference to a document that Matthew composed, but that is different from the Gospel of Mathew? Possibly.
This whole discussion is complicated by the fact that all the Gospels are anonymous and do not contain unequivocal references to a particular author (though some are attested very early). The Gospel of Mathew is no exception. We do not know if Mathew (the disciple of Jesus mentioned in the Gospels) was in fact the author of the gospel that we call the “The Gospel according to Matthew.”
Moreover, the phraseology, “he interpreted each one of them as best he could,” used by Papias of Hierapolis is far less than inspiring. One does not leave with a feeling that the majestic Gospel of Matthew that features such key texts as the Sermon on the Mount and the Great Commission is in fact in view. It is possible that Papias was referring to something less grandiose. Namely, that he had heard that Mathew had collected Jesus’ sayings in Hebrew, piecing them together as best he could. There is no reason to deny that such a document once existed, but neither is there particularly strong reason to identify it with the Gospel of Matthew.
Later Church Fathers also mention that Matthew wrote the Gospel in Hebrew dialect, but their information is 1) most-likely based on Papias’ statement and 2) guided by Christian theology to show that Jews were witnessed to sufficiently.
Archeological discoveries have shown that Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek and even Latin were all used by the people of the Holy Land during the first century of the Common Era. But the New Testament itself, as best we can tell, was in fact written by Christ-following Jews in Koine Judeo-Greek. This is the simplest and most factually accurate possibility. This view readily explains the amount of underlying Hebraic patterns of thought, reasoning, grammar, and vocabulary that make the New Testament a thoroughly Jewish collection.
Reconstructing history is a little bit like putting a puzzle with many missing pieces together. The more pieces of the puzzle you have, the better you can see the contours of the image! The more you know about the historical background of the New Testament and the more familiar you are with the languages intricately connected with it (especially Hebrew and Greek); the better you are able to interpret it accurately for yourself and others.
Something of interest to Jesus lovers. For those of you who know Barabbas was the thief that was let go and Jesus took his place. Well here is written in Hebrew helps. Barabbas translates as Son of the Father. So the guilty Son of the Father was let go and the real Son of the Father was crucified. Paradoxical, Wow. Thank you Dr Arnold Fruchtenbaum and for bringing that one to my attention..
Another one? on me Messiah could do the three message in a miracles as field Hebrew school of thought was. Jesus performed all three in front of the religious hierarchy.what were those miracles?
what was the unpardonable sin that the nation of Israel in that time frame only was guilty of?
I wonder if anyone has made a comparison to the good Son of the Father and the guilty Son of the Father possibly representing the lamb and the goat used in the Pesach sacrifice in the Temple….the lamb was slain and the goat was let go. Anyone care to comment?
I would like to reply to Jerry S. and I concur that the body of Christ has not been taught everything they should have known BUT that is changing praise G-d! Believers all over are beginning to awaken to a desire to learn their Hebrew roots. HaShem is bringing the church full circle back to its origin in completion of His plan, one new man, Jew and Gentile worshiping the one true G-d. We learned some of it in seminary but now my seminary has a diploma program in Messianic ministry! The seminary is one of the finest the Southern Baptist Convention has, NOBTS.
Baruch Adonai ha’mevorach le-olam va’ed.
Praised be Adonai, to whom our praise is due, now and forever!
J.
Todd Maloney Your comment Oct. 28, 2014: Would that Southern Baptist Convention seminary be located in Ft Worth, TX? I have a Messianic friend who is currently enrolled in the seminary and finds good acceptance of his research and opinions as relates to Messianic beliefs and teachings.
Kat,
By faulty translations and misapplied interpretations a false theology, “Replacement Theology” plagues us today. Again, simply put; the Church replaces Israel in the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacobs plan for mankind, either for all time or a period of time. The separation of scripture into new and old (Torah), ours and theirs (Torah), grace and works (Torah), is what I believe the reason why Mr. Chambers “do(es)n’t know how it was accomplished.” And that is a shame, because he really should understand how we are “Justifi(ed) by Faith”.
J.
Jerry S,
I am just a pest in this site, but… :) What I have questioned is why when I hear “testimonies” at church the church, program, or whatever gets credit instead of God. My conclusion has to do with the word “saved” vs. the “work of God”. The word “saved” happens immediately. All of the words that show salvation as a process seem to have disappeared in translation. I see my faith as God’s work. I turned to God not because I got caught doing wrong, but because I needed God. This turning made me conscious of sin (thus the sorrow). In a nutshell I refused to renounce the Commandments in a hard spot thus my faith in God budded. Exodus 32:16 John 6:29
Pest? absolutely not! It appears by the questions you’re on “The Way”. Follow Messiahs lead and I’m sure many on this site willing to help out a sister toward the Hebrew Roots of her faith. This blog leans toward the academic, but Dr. Eli and other contributors seem to “Always put the cookies on the bottom shelf so the kiddos can get them.” –Dr. Harry Ironside. There are many Hebrew Roots web sites, perhaps too many, books and articles to help also. I’m sure you’ll meet new friends and lose old friends along your journey.
J.
P.s. here’s a question for your study group; is Jesus Christian or Jewish? Be careful though it can be like “putting the cat amongst the pigeons” 😉
Here’s one my wife and I frequent; http://messianiccovenant.com/resources/torah-commentaries. We especially enjoy Julie Parker.
J.
Jerry S, Pest!… this group has been most helpful and patient. Jesus has definitely been Christian in my circle. I didn’t even know what Judaism really was except bad. I saw Exodus 19:8 as a child and commitment to keeping the Ten Commandments. I had know idea it was a form of Judaism. I have been split down the middle much like the Torah and NT until I found this site 🙂
Kat, My life verse; Heb 4:11-13 (Gen 15) just happens to produce the same state separation you find yourself in now.
Hollisa Alewine’s study The Creation Gospel, http://thecreationgospel.com/ teaches a wonderful Law of First Mention lesson about separation, the 1-2-1 principle found in Gen 1; one, separated into two, made into one.
J.
You’d better ask: how many of the Jewish Jesus is present in the life of the Jew or in the life of the Christian?
So: what’s in a name?
Much. Those two particular names carry an historical significance of the kind not often brought up in many circles of friends. And let’s not forget Islam.
J.
Unfortunately, “replacement theology” is nothing new. The roots of it are within the early church fathers and, in keeping with the political will of the first and second centuries CE, a lot of church practices and doctrine was explicitly anti-Jewish. Why is the date for Easter (or should I refer to the pagan festival of Estre) calculated to avoid Pesach,(at least most of the time)? Why was a mid-winter pagan festival chosen for Christmas?
Even today, we hear phrases like “the G_d of the Old Testament”, as if he has ever changed.
If you take out of the Brit Hadasah every passage with a reference or hint of the TaNaK, what do you have left? Nothing.
Kat,
Not knowing how it is accomplished is what I call one of those “gaps” of understanding in my past Christian knowledge of scripture. But now, understanding Torah and how it fits my Faith I do know how it was accomplished and those gaps are being filled in. To try and describe as simply as writing space allows, Messiah “accomplished” all that is required of mankind from the Creator of all things in Torah. And was Himself the “innocent” sacrifice, as animals are innocent sacrifices, from Torah. This satisfies the requirement and brings mankind “justification” before HIM. TBC
J.
Kat,
Allow me to join in with yet another believing gentile perspective and I pray the Ruach HaKodesh helps you as He did me if this is information overload.
I read, among other things, a daily devotional “My Utmost for His Highest” – Chambers, a Christian man who was blessed with insight. In today’s 10/28/2014 passage titled “Justification by Faith”, the last sentence of the first paragraph caught my attention, he writes “The Spirit of God brings justification with a shattering, radiant light, and I know that I am saved, [even though I don’t know how it was accomplished.]” TBC
J.
I think there is an overwelming need to devote a reflection on your part, Dr. Eli, on the state of translations and the current state of the art on its practice. That is, how are translations NOW being made, revised and, lets say, used. Right now, there is a lot of material in most denominations that is written by influencing pastors (including those FAD ones) whose sole knowledge of Bible, even taking into account their Divinity doctorates, is on READING THE RVKJ BIBBLE. That is, they have never made a single cross comparison of meaning of the translation or reflection on that. This situation has led to the prevalent FUNDAMENTALISTIC approach to Bible studies. Please enlighten us.
I think any attempt to interpret Revelation (for example) outside of the natural Jewish, Apocalyptic, Poetic, Parabolic contest would we misleading. I do not wish to disrespect people traditions, but new traditions deserve to be born. Otherwise there is no new life. We propose – study Judaism, not just the Bible. Then revise the familiar text in newly gained perspective. This is a long path, but most fruitful.
Thank you Dr. Eli….you have articulated exactly what I have thought for many years but have not been able to verbalize concisely. Todah Rabah…..!!!! I thoroughly enjoy and have gained so much clarity already from your eHebrew courses.
Sheila, this is wonderful to hear.
Could Hebraisms be translated improperly because of an anti-Judaism bias? I see a pattern of problematic interpretations that seem to miss the connection from Judaism to Christ.
BS”D
Shalom Kat!
of course, that is possible… anti-semitism is hard..
I see that now and am determined to change that where I can. My Good Gospel rather New Testament study group ask me about Jesus and I started with Exodus 19:8 and the Ten 🙂
Kat,
It is not just errors introduced into a translation that are the problem. There is the further issue of interpretation and exposition of passages which can completely distort a passage.
On Sunday, for instance, the passage we had in church was Acts ch 3. Expounding Peter’s speech to the crowd (v12 ff) totally failed to explain that v12-16 was spoken to the “Men of Israel” – i.e. to the leaders of the Jewish nation – and hence the strong condemnation regarding the killing of the prince of life was quite valid, whereas verses 17 – 26 was spoken to the “people of the land” – i.e. the common people – and offered them salvation if they repented.
This is the true message of the prophets.
Donald, agreed. I see in Acts the word ignorance instead of the word warning. Is a person accountable if they have not been warned? I also see the word repentance and in church that typical means “sinner” gone wild. I don’t believe I have seen a word study on repentance, but I question its traditional meaning. I wonder if Gen 32:24-28 could also be a picture of repentance? We seem to interchange the word repentance with the word confession of sin—not sure we should.
Perhaps the prophecy of the watchman in Ezekiel is significant here. Chapter 33 explains about our responsibilities (v8), G_d’s loving kindness (v11), G_d’s justice (v13), repentance of the sinner (v14-15) and G_d’s grace (v19).
The culmination of all things is described in chapter 34, with the great shepherd (v12-16) caring for His sheep. “Who is the great shepherd?” you ask. This is answered in verses 23 – 31.
Just to put the cat amongst the pigeons – I have never found any teaching in the Brit Hadashah (NT) that is not already clearly presented in the TaNaK (OT) [Torah (Law), Nephihim (prophets) & Khatuvim (writings)]. It is not a new covenant, but rather a renewed covenant.
You are not the first person who suggested this. I think there is some truth in that. Some mistranslations are done in ignorance, some deliberate.
30
SEP
2014
The Jewish N.T. by Dr. Eli Lizorkin-Eyzenberg
TorahThe Jewish New Testament
Was the New Test. written in Heb …,
Dr Eli,
Thanks for your above article on Jewish Hebraeisms. Maybe i have it wrong but the one phrase i like Jesus uses: For not one Jot (Yod) or tittle shall pass away: Til the law is fulfilled, But in Gal:3 6-9 say all who have faith in Christ are sons of Abraham and we r justified thru faith. Vs 10-13 no one can be justified by the law..from the curse of the law. Gal: 3: vs 24 says the law was our schoolmaster to point us in the direction of Christ…, then we r Abrahams seed according the promise. Me & U. Jesus ,TheWord, is waiting 4 YOU. His death is 4 U
I understand your point about Hebraeisms in the Greek.
Can you give an example?
I’ll be looking for them now.
I appreciate your point.
Dear Sir:
There is a statement that the early Christians were ignorant and unlearned med. It has always puzzled me how the apostles learned enough Greek to write the Gospels. I personally know Greek, Latin and basic Hebrew, and a lot of study went into learning them.
Since Biblical Hebrew had drifted into Arameic, they would have also had to learn Hebrew.
Although Greek was used in the sophisticated Alexandrian culture, wouldn’t Latin have been more logical to write the Gospels in since it was Latin that had blanketed the word?
Did Jesus speak with Pilet in Latin?
Were these Biblical people masters of 4 languages?
I wish I knew the answer to this one.