The scriptures 2009
- Thread starter Stunnedbygrace
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Angela,
Of the 5 dialects of Hebrew, only the Ashkenazi has any connection with German.
The Saphardic dialect used in Spain, Turkey, The Caucuses, Iran, and Yemen is older than German; so it can't have come from German. The Saphardic is much softer and less guttural than the Ashkenazi but still uses the vahv.
Of the 5 dialects of Hebrew, only the Ashkenazi has any connection with German.
The Saphardic dialect used in Spain, Turkey, The Caucuses, Iran, and Yemen is older than German; so it can't have come from German. The Saphardic is much softer and less guttural than the Ashkenazi but still uses the vahv.
Its fine to study it, but remember, on the day of pentecost He caused each man to hear in their own language and the Holy Spirit still does that when He teaches each of us.
So studying it is fine. But understanding the spirit is better.
So studying it is fine. But understanding the spirit is better.
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Psalm 119:105, “Your word is a lamp to my feet And a light to my path.”
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif] [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]John 17:17, “Set them apart in Your truth – Your Word is truth.”[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
[/FONT]
The olest manuscripts we have are Hebrew OT and the Dead Sea Scrolls, which confirm the accuracy of the Hebrew OT. The NT Hebrew manuscripts of Mat are accurate in content and are copies of copies, there are also other Hebrew NT manuscripts and every manuscript we have OT or NT are copies, we have not a single 1st original copy of any manuscript, the important thing is that nothing is changed in the copying of manuscripts.
I have a hard copy and a digital copy of the Dead Sea Scrolls translation, some of the manuscripts in microfilm. Many OT manuscripts in microfilm and in Bible Software, including the Ben Asher Codex, Leningrad Codex among others. I have microfilm of Hebrew Mat and translations of it also. I also have many Greek manuscripts in microfilm and Ssoftware including the LXX and NT. This in iteself means nothing, yet I pray and study that YHWH may grant me understaniing in His truth.
Concerning what book? there are many books in Scripture. There is a complete OT, that Ben Asher is the oldest and true to the oldest copies, it is trustworthy.but if we are talking indivigul texts/books, there aer older that may not have content differences but that I personally prefer, the Dead Sea Scrolls have their value in confirming that our copies are accurate. The oldest Hebrew version of Mat have proper readings in places that other copies error, the most prominent is chapter 1 where the geneology has the full 14 people, while other copies have 13, as Mary and Joseph (her husband) are not 2 seperate generations, for that would go against the very meaning of what a generation is. Then there are many brancing manuscripts in the NT in which each one had to be consid\ered for authenticity and content, at the end of the day it may be a complex issue but a woth wileissue IMO. When I first saw a chart of the branching manuscripts I was overwhelmed, but after some study it becase clear some has leter additions/alterations and were thus not authentic. Let each man be convinced in his own mind because each will walk their walk before the Creator as their own being, I don't know everything nor as much as I would like to but none the less I pray and seek understanding.
the mosoretic text is the oldest but not complete, ben asher is a little newer but complete. I like the writings before the use of vowel points. If the vowel points are ignored every sigle letter is the same, it is a personal preference, like I said content is the same (besides vowel points)
From the differences I have seen they are minor enough that the meaning does not change in the Dead sea Scrolls, with that said I ahve not read every scroll that was found, but I have found that it confirms what we already had rather than disagree with it.
most of it seems to have been, but Matt wrote his gospel record in Hebrew and all versions are translated from his Hebrew original. have we not gone over this many times?
The Ebionites were a Christian sect that claimed to preserve the original autograph of apostle Matthew in Hebrew. It is quoted often by Epiphanius in the 300s. He said its official title was “The Gospel according to Matthew.” (Epiphanius, Panarion 30, 13, 2-3.)
Apostle John told Papias around 90 A.D. about this book of Matthew: “Matthew put together the oracles [of the Lord] in the Hebrew language, and each one interpreted them as best he could.” (Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. iii. 39, quoting Exposition of the Oracles of the Lord)
Irenaeus likewise says: “Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect.” (Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book III, Chapter I, quoted in Eusebius,
Ecclesiastical History, Book V, Chapter VIII.)
Jerome around 404 A.D. wrote of this too: “The Hebrew [Matthew] itself has been preserved until the present day in the library at Caesarea which Pamphilus so diligently gathered.” (Jerome, Lives of Illustrious Men, Chapter III.)
“Matthew collected the oracles (ta logia) in the Hebrew language, and each interpreted them as best he could.” – Papias (Eusebius, H.E. 3.39.16)
From the differences I have seen they are minor enough that the meaning does not change in the Dead sea Scrolls, with that said I ahve not read every scroll that was found, but I have found that it confirms what we already had rather than disagree with it.
most of it seems to have been, but Matt wrote his gospel record in Hebrew and all versions are translated from his Hebrew original. have we not gone over this many times?
The Ebionites were a Christian sect that claimed to preserve the original autograph of apostle Matthew in Hebrew. It is quoted often by Epiphanius in the 300s. He said its official title was “The Gospel according to Matthew.” (Epiphanius, Panarion 30, 13, 2-3.)
Apostle John told Papias around 90 A.D. about this book of Matthew: “Matthew put together the oracles [of the Lord] in the Hebrew language, and each one interpreted them as best he could.” (Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. iii. 39, quoting Exposition of the Oracles of the Lord)
Irenaeus likewise says: “Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect.” (Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book III, Chapter I, quoted in Eusebius,
Ecclesiastical History, Book V, Chapter VIII.)
Jerome around 404 A.D. wrote of this too: “The Hebrew [Matthew] itself has been preserved until the present day in the library at Caesarea which Pamphilus so diligently gathered.” (Jerome, Lives of Illustrious Men, Chapter III.)
“Matthew collected the oracles (ta logia) in the Hebrew language, and each interpreted them as best he could.” – Papias (Eusebius, H.E. 3.39.16)
Even if Matthew was written in Hebrew that does not equate to the whole NT, which you seem to imply. Simply put there is no original Hebrew New Testament. Any NT text that is in Hebrew are very late (that is very late) translations from another language.
Anyhow an important question regarding Matthew.. Did he quote from the LXX? And if this is so what does that tell you?