Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean
My point brothers is that the New Testament was not written in Hebrew(Aramaic is not Hebrew at all)...There are folks trying to claim it was, and tell us our Greek translations are full of errors and cannot be trusted. They tell us the Hebrew N.T.(that doesnt exist) is the only accurate source we have. The N.T. they use is transliterated from Greek and think it is from original Hebrew(they are told). They have been snookered by this group. Even the Old Testament was (transliterated) into Greek(Septuagint)in the days before Christ because everyone spoke Greek in the times of Christ. There are NO ancient (Hebrew) New Testament manuscripts in the world today. If they actually had at least one, they would have an argument.
I am not debating anyone but I did my research last year on this subject. I spent a lot of time debating some friends I care about that fell into this stuff. They went from running the aisles(in Pentecostal churches) to wearing strange hats and garments keeping O.T. feast days, Sabbaths, Blowing rams horns, long flowing beards(trying to look like rabbis) and trying to Keep the Law of Moses the best they can(they dont say Jesus anymore, they call Him Yashua)which they claim comes from the "Hebrew" N.T.. Every time I showed them their errors in the N.T., they would tell me the N.T. could not be trusted because our Bible is written in Hebrew. They completely excused Galatians as translator errors. They even said "Paul was wrong" when I backed them into a corner. This is just a warning to my brothers....do not try to insert "Hebrew" meanings into the New Testament...it doesnt exist.
Thanks guys for hearing me out. There is a "fascination" these days even with High Ranking ministers to get more "Jewish" in our worship. I believe this has opened the door to this trend.
|
These are all valid concerns. But note, no one here is doing or even advocating such.
This isn't really about anything in the New Testament at all, except for how it relates back to the name of God in the Old Testament.
But I will say this:
Although we only have Greek manuscripts, and even if none of the New Testament was never first written in Hebrew (a point I am willing to concede), we can still use some common sense.
In an Aramaic speaking region like the Galiyl (i.e. Galilee), where an angel named G'vri-EL (i.e. Gabriel) visited a young virgen named Miryiam (i.e. Mary) espoused to a man named Yusef (i.e. Joseph) we might readily and correctly assume that when this
malakh elohim spoke to her in what is probably the only language she was fully capable of speaking, which would have been her native tongue of Aramaic, he in fact did so.
Thus, though all the manuscript evidence points to a Greek version of the name Jesus (i.e. Iesous), we can nonetheless admit that the angel told her and her fiance to name the child Yeshua.
And undoubtedly, when they took the Moschiach to be circumcised on the 8th day according to Jewish law and custom, when asked the name of the child, it would be an injustice to assume, that in that present moment, Miryiam and Yusef uttered the Greek version of His name.
Will we ever know for sure? Not this side of heaven. But it does no damage to the Lord to say in Hebrew, His name is Yehoshua and in Aramaic, it is Yeshua; that both His mother and step-father spoke Aramaic, that the angel who visited them therefore spoke to them in a language they could understand, and onward.
The name of Jesus isn't denigrated to a lesser value, any more than John is less of a name than Juan, Sean, Jean, Ivan, or Yochanan. It's all the same name.
Linear Mode
