Hebrew NT?

[wavy]

Matthew 1:21
And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS [Yeshua]: for he shall save [yasha] his people from their sins.

Yeshua means "He [YHWH] will save" and is derived from the tetragrammaton (YHWH) and the Hebrew word for "save", i.e. yasha.

This is a Hebraic play on words. The two words (Iesous/sozo) are unrelated in the Greek. A person reading in Greek would be clueless as to how his name has anything to do with his primary act (to save). Hence, evidence for a Hebrew original.

Romans 2:29
But he is a Jew [Yehudi], which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise [yadah] is not of men, but of God.

Another Hebraic play on words. "Yehudi" (Jew) comes from the word Yehudah, which is in turn derived from the Hebrew term yadah, which means "praise" (see Genesis 29:35). Again, a person reading in Greek would not capture what Paul was trying to do here.

Thus, more evidence of a Hebrew original. Don't get me wrong. I have no problem with the Greek. And I can understand the argument that if God wanted us to have a Hebrew original instead of the Greek, then he would have preserved it for us.

Nevertheless, this is enlightening...

 

[ChristineES]

That is really fascinating!!

 

[wavy]

Yeah, it is fascinating.

 

[BenJasher]

What you say is good... But Paul was a Hebrew, speaking to those of hebrew heritage. It would have been no big deal for him to use a Hebrew play on words to emphasize a point. But it isn't necessarily evidence of a Hebrew N.T.

On the same note, however, there is quite a bit of good evidence for the original N.T. being written in Aramaic, which was the native language of the Jewish people of that day, and the universal language of that whole region of the world at that time.

A case in point: The oldest Greek MSS are within 400 years of the original, and each varies, sometimes widely, from one MSS to the next in their reading.
The oldest Aramaic MSS are within 100 yeras of the original, and are poinpoint duplicates of one another.

Just an interesting tidbit of trivia for you. ;-)

 

[wavy]

It would have been no big deal for him to use a Hebrew play on words to emphasize a point.

But that is exactly my point. In Greek, there is no "play on words". You can't see it because the terms are unrelated.

 

[BenJasher]

I'm sorry!
I must have somehow allowed you to miss my point.
Let me reiterate:
Paul was a Hebrew, speaking to those of Hebrew heritage. His play on words there was not indicative of a Hebrew NT. But his use of word play would have been a good method of getting a point across. As a matter of fact, this type of word play is quite common in the Hebrew. And you don't have to go far to begin finding examples of it.

Gen.1:2 uses Bohoo and Tohoo to indicate that the earth had fallen into a state that some scientists describe as being similar to a black hole. Words that are almost identical, differing only in a letter, such as these two, words that rhyme, words that are opposite of each other, and various other types of word play are common occurences in the Hebrew scriptures. E.W. Bullinger wrote quite a bit about the different figures of speech and word play in the Hebrew. If you have a copy of his Companion Bible, you will find it in the appendix. If you don't have a copy, it would be a good addition to any student's library, I recommend you get one.

But none of this is indicative of the existence of an alledged Hebrew NT. But that is not to say that there isn't one, either. (Again, that was also an intended part of my original point.) :-D

 

[wavy]

But his use of word play would have been a good method of getting a point across. As a matter of fact, this type of word play is quite common in the Hebrew.

Not to be a thorn here, but you have caused me to repeat myself.

I understand a Hebraic play on words in the Hebrew. There is no play on the words in Greek, thus there is no point to get across (one cannot see it reading the Greek).

Romans 2:29
But he is a Jew [Ioudaios], which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise [epainos] is not of men, but of God.


Unless there is a Hebrew original, or a primary Hebrew text from which this is based off of, you can't see the relation.

 

[BenJasher]

:-D

Unless there is a Hebrew original, or a primary Hebrew text from which this is based off of, you can't see the relation.

My friend Wavy, I get your point precisely. But you fail to get mine.

Of course it would not have been obvious to a Greek who was unaccustomed to such linguistic customs, but Paul was a Hebrew, speaking to those of Hebrew origin and heritage. They would have understood precisely what he was doing when he said what he said, the way he said it.

If necessary, I can go into lengthy commentative detail about what he was saying here to the Roman Israelite Christians, to whom the book of Romans was addressed. He wasn't divulging the existence of some secret Hebrew NT.

And, no. You're not a thorn.

 

[wavy]

Ah, I see now.

 

[BenJasher]

Ok, but why do I feel bad that you finally understood what I was saying?
:

No, really! For some reason it gives me no pleasure for you to see what I was saying. :smt090

 

[wavy]

However, I do believe the Roman congregation was made up of both Jews and non-Jews.

Not that that matters (unless you disagree).

 

[BenJasher]

You very well might be right on that point. But one of the principals there in Rome was a woman by by the name of Claudia, daughter of Caractacus. She was an Israelite, married to a Roman General. And that is quite an engaging story all by itself.

But I will not tell that story here.

 

[einstein]

hebrew nt

Without entering into the debate regarding a Hebrew NT, I wish to point out that the etymology of the Hebrew root yud-sheen-ayin from which the Hebrew noun yeshu'ah and the Hebrew proper name yeshu'a derive are NOT related to the tetragrammaton, the name of G-d, in the Tanach.

In fact, the words are spelled differently in Hebrew, and are 2 different genders. Yeshu'ah (yud-sheen-vav-ayin-hay) means salvation,not yeshu'a (yud-sheen-vav-ayin).

 

[wavy]

Of course, you are correct. "Yehoshua" is what I meant.

I'm just used to typing "Yeshua".

"Yeshua" (that is, yud-shen-vav-ayin) does mean "he will save".

I was talking to a guy the other day who believes His name was "Yeshuah" (on a different forum website). We (well, not me, but others) got on him and pointed out to him that "hey" makes a big difference (makes it feminine).