GOD'S SABBATH AND THE REAL TRUTH OF COL 2:14-17 WHO DO WE BELIEVE GOD or MAN?
- Thread starter LoveGodForever
- 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.
There is a deeper aspect than whether they were following the Law correctly or not:
"If there had been a law given which could have given life, verily salvation should have been by the law."
Fascinating mystery, the enemy would have been better able to keep men in bondage had he not killed the Lord.
(1 Corinthians 2:8) had they understood they would not have crucified the Lord.
By Killing the Lord the old covenant was made void, by the death of the One who made the covenant.
The religious leaders who desired to remain in charge nullified their own covenant with God.
Also now being under the law is an affront to the cross: To say they can fulfil the law, when law is done away with in Christ.
"The law is not made for the righteous man but for the lawless."
"Jesus disarmed rulers and authorities he has made a publics disgrace of them triumphing over them by the cross."
Their love of the law was for advantage, to have a better place for themselves.
"If there had been a law given which could have given life, verily salvation should have been by the law."
Fascinating mystery, the enemy would have been better able to keep men in bondage had he not killed the Lord.
(1 Corinthians 2:8) had they understood they would not have crucified the Lord.
By Killing the Lord the old covenant was made void, by the death of the One who made the covenant.
The religious leaders who desired to remain in charge nullified their own covenant with God.
Also now being under the law is an affront to the cross: To say they can fulfil the law, when law is done away with in Christ.
"The law is not made for the righteous man but for the lawless."
"Jesus disarmed rulers and authorities he has made a publics disgrace of them triumphing over them by the cross."
Their love of the law was for advantage, to have a better place for themselves.
There is no requirement to understand the old covenant to be saved, neither to understand the new covenant to be saved.
"Lean not on your understanding but trust in the Lord." this implies that leaning on our understanding can keep us from trusting the Lord.
What the lord told me recently is: Seek first the kingdom of God and all these things shall be added unto you."
"The kingdom of God is Righteousness and peace and Joy in the Holy Ghost."
"Let no one turn you away from the simplicity of Christ.'
"Lean not on your understanding but trust in the Lord." this implies that leaning on our understanding can keep us from trusting the Lord.
What the lord told me recently is: Seek first the kingdom of God and all these things shall be added unto you."
"The kingdom of God is Righteousness and peace and Joy in the Holy Ghost."
"Let no one turn you away from the simplicity of Christ.'
"It is a day of sabbath rest for you, and you must deny yourselves. From the evening of the ninth day of the month until the following evening you are to observe your sabbath."
Lev 23:32
From evening to evening. From evening Friday to evening Saturday is your Sabbath. After the sun is set, day begins. That means that on Saturday evening Sunday begins.
If Jesus was resurrected after the sun set on Saturday, it was on Sunday, if you want to do everything according to the Old Testament.
Hi shrume,
If you don't know There is no Ancient Hebrew copy. There is an Aramaic; not Hebrew.
There is a difference between the two languages.
The modern day Hebrew is translated from the Greek or Aramaic. I am not sure which. Anyone here know?
Personally I would not bother with it unless I spoke modern Hebrew. Here is the verses in question in a translation of the Aramaic Bible.
And he said to them, "The Scribes and the Pharisees have sat on the throne of Moses." Everything therefore that they will tell you to observe*, observe* and do*, but you should not do according to their works, for they are saying, and they are not doing. And they bind heavy burdens and place them on the shoulders of men, but they are not willing to touch them with their fingers. And they do all their works to be seen by the children of men, for they enlarge their phylacteries and they extend the blue fringes of their robes. And they love the first class places at feasts and first class seats in the synagogues And greetings in the marketplaces, and to be called, "Rabbi"*, by the people. But you shall not be called "Rabbi", for One is your Rabbi* , but you are all brothers. And you should not call yourselves "Father", in the earth, for one is your Father who is in Heaven. And you will not be called Leaders, because one is your Leader, The Messiah. But he who is great among you will be a servant to you.
(Mat 23:2-11 FCAB)
Jesus is speaking in general Not all of them were hypocrites. Some were saying and doing.
The binding of heavy burdens mentioned above were things they added to the Word of GOD, not the Word of GOD. The Mitzvot; the 613 laws were from the Word of GOD; given by GOD through Moses. These are not the heavy burdens bound by them; for they were bound by GOD. These heavy burdens were their traditions (the traditions of men) which they added to the teachings of GOD as if they were from GOD.
In general the text says they got haughty, thinking more into their ministry than they ought.
If you don't know There is no Ancient Hebrew copy. There is an Aramaic; not Hebrew.
There is a difference between the two languages.
The modern day Hebrew is translated from the Greek or Aramaic. I am not sure which. Anyone here know?
Personally I would not bother with it unless I spoke modern Hebrew. Here is the verses in question in a translation of the Aramaic Bible.
And he said to them, "The Scribes and the Pharisees have sat on the throne of Moses." Everything therefore that they will tell you to observe*, observe* and do*, but you should not do according to their works, for they are saying, and they are not doing. And they bind heavy burdens and place them on the shoulders of men, but they are not willing to touch them with their fingers. And they do all their works to be seen by the children of men, for they enlarge their phylacteries and they extend the blue fringes of their robes. And they love the first class places at feasts and first class seats in the synagogues And greetings in the marketplaces, and to be called, "Rabbi"*, by the people. But you shall not be called "Rabbi", for One is your Rabbi* , but you are all brothers. And you should not call yourselves "Father", in the earth, for one is your Father who is in Heaven. And you will not be called Leaders, because one is your Leader, The Messiah. But he who is great among you will be a servant to you.
(Mat 23:2-11 FCAB)
Jesus is speaking in general Not all of them were hypocrites. Some were saying and doing.
The binding of heavy burdens mentioned above were things they added to the Word of GOD, not the Word of GOD. The Mitzvot; the 613 laws were from the Word of GOD; given by GOD through Moses. These are not the heavy burdens bound by them; for they were bound by GOD. These heavy burdens were their traditions (the traditions of men) which they added to the teachings of GOD as if they were from GOD.
In general the text says they got haughty, thinking more into their ministry than they ought.
Considering the haughtiness I've seen in our own churches.
I am Thinking we should rethink the cast system to which we love so much in our own churches. I am wondering if we Pastors, Elders. Deacons and what not ought to be without being wrapped up in being so named.
Last edited:
This is from microfilm of the olderst hebrew copy:
it has the proper geneology, the only version that has the geneology right, has the seat of Moses passage explained an other proper renderings that are in no other copy.
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]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.)[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]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)[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]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,[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Ecclesiastical History, Book V, Chapter VIII.)[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]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.)[/FONT]
“[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]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)[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Matthew 1:16[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Shem Tob Hebrew Mattithyah[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]And Ya‛aqoḇ brought forth Yosĕph the father of Miryam, of whom was born [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]יהושע [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]who is called Messiah.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]New International Version[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]and Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, and Mary was the mother of Jesus who is called the Messiah.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]New International Version - Mat 23:2-3, "The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach."[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]King James Bible - Mat 23:2-3, "Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not."[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Shem Tob's Hebrew Mattithyah - Mat 23:2-3, "The Pharisees and Sages sit upon the seat of Mosheh. Therefore, all that he (Mosheh) says to you, diligently do, but according to their takanot (reforms) and their ma'asim (precedents) do not do, because they talk (Torah) but they do not do."[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Takanot: rabbinical reforms or enactments that falsely change or add to YHWH's Law.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Ma'asim: acts or deeds that serve as precedents for rabbinic law.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Both Takanot and Ma'asim are laws of the Talmud. The Savior said this to the Pharisees;[/FONT]
it has the proper geneology, the only version that has the geneology right, has the seat of Moses passage explained an other proper renderings that are in no other copy.
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]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.)[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]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)[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]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,[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Ecclesiastical History, Book V, Chapter VIII.)[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]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.)[/FONT]
“[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]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)[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Matthew 1:16[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Shem Tob Hebrew Mattithyah[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]And Ya‛aqoḇ brought forth Yosĕph the father of Miryam, of whom was born [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]יהושע [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]who is called Messiah.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]New International Version[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]and Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, and Mary was the mother of Jesus who is called the Messiah.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]New International Version - Mat 23:2-3, "The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach."[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]King James Bible - Mat 23:2-3, "Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not."[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Shem Tob's Hebrew Mattithyah - Mat 23:2-3, "The Pharisees and Sages sit upon the seat of Mosheh. Therefore, all that he (Mosheh) says to you, diligently do, but according to their takanot (reforms) and their ma'asim (precedents) do not do, because they talk (Torah) but they do not do."[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Takanot: rabbinical reforms or enactments that falsely change or add to YHWH's Law.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Ma'asim: acts or deeds that serve as precedents for rabbinic law.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Both Takanot and Ma'asim are laws of the Talmud. The Savior said this to the Pharisees;[/FONT]
Thank you sir!
I am going to probably save your post. I haven't read it the whole way through yet but will.
Question; Is that which Sebastian Münster produced in 1537. From what I gather that is the first edition compiled. Do you know weather he translated it from the Aramaic or Greek? I haven't read that far into it yet. Here is a link for anyone interested. Petersen, Some Observations on a Recent Edition of and Introduction to Shem-Tob's "Hebrew Matthew"
I am going to probably save your post. I haven't read it the whole way through yet but will.
Question; Is that which Sebastian Münster produced in 1537. From what I gather that is the first edition compiled. Do you know weather he translated it from the Aramaic or Greek? I haven't read that far into it yet. Here is a link for anyone interested. Petersen, Some Observations on a Recent Edition of and Introduction to Shem-Tob's "Hebrew Matthew"
It is from the oldest from the 1300s by Shem-Tov ben Isaac Shaprut
It seems and content would agree, that it was originall ritten in Hebrew and all versions come from the Hebrew:
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)
This is a late copy, but the content is more correct than any other version, proof of this is found in the 1st chapter, in which every version has only 12 generations from Babylon to Messiah and this version has 13 of the said 13. This is but one correct rendering.
There are many differences, some minor, some vital. very interestiong. Also I have four different versions (and veriations of those, more than 10-15 in total but I can only find 4 right now, been years since I looked at these) including Munsters and Tillet.
This is from wikipedia:
Shem Tov's Matthew, 1385
The Shem Tov Matthew (or Shem Tob's Matthew) consists of a complete text of Gospel of Matthew in the Hebrew language found interspersed among anti-Catholic commentary in the 12th volume of a polemical treatise The Touchstone (c.1380-85) by Shem Tov ben Isaac ben Shaprut (Ibn Shaprut), a Jewish physician living in Aragon, after whom the version is named. Shem Tov debated Cardinal Pedro de Luna (later Antipope Benedict XIII) on original sin and redemption in Pamplona, December 26, 1375, in the presence of bishops and learned theologians. Nine manuscripts of The Touchstone survive, though if an independent version of the text of Matthew used by Ibn Shaprut ever existed then it is lost.
Spanish Jews of Ibn Shaprut's period were familiar with the New Testament in Latin. Jacob Ben Reuben in his Wars of the Lord translated Gilbert Crispin's Disputation of Jews and Christians from Latin into Hebrew, along with quotes from Matthew. Lasker (1998) remarks that "By the fourteenth century, most likely every Iberian anti-Christian Jewish polemicist knew Latin." Moses ha-Kohen de Tordesillas made proficient use of Latin phrases. Profiat Duran (fl.1380-1420) had extensive knowledge of Latin Christian texts, and devoted a chapter of his Disgrace of the Gentiles (Klimat ha-goyim) to criticism of Jerome's Latin Vulgate. Hayyim ben Judah ibn Musa argued with Nicholas de Lyra in his Book of Shield and Spear (Sefer magen va-romah).[9] Likewise converts to Christianity such as Abner of Burgos (Alphonso of Valladolid, ca. 1270-1347) continued to write polemical, theological, philosophical, and scientific works in Hebrew.
Shem Tov's The Touchstone (Eben = stone, bohan = test) has never been translated into English or published. It follows the model of Milhamoth ha-Shem of Jacob Ben Reuben in use of Matthew but contains not just sections of Matthew as Jacob Ben Reuben, but the whole text of Matthew and parts of Mark. George Howard excised the text of Matthew from among Shem Tov's comments and published it separately as The Gospel of Matthew according to a primitive Hebrew text (1987), a revised version Hebrew Gospel of Matthew (1995).[10]
Shem Tov's quotations of Matthew in The Touchstone are marked by Jewish thought, and are interspaced with the comments of the author. As a consequence several scholars[who?] feel it is difficult to determine which parts are Shem Tov's commentary, and which parts are the actual text of the source he was quoting. Many scholars[who?] view the text as a mediaeval translation from the Greek text of the Gospel of Matthew, as well as being the likely source of all later Hebrew versions of Matthew prior to the 20th century.
Where the Tetragrammaton occurs in Tanakh quotations, instead one finds a single Hebrew He (ה) except in one place where the word "ha-shem" (השם, the name) is spelled out. There are some interesting readings of Matthew in The Touchstone.[11]
It seems and content would agree, that it was originall ritten in Hebrew and all versions come from the Hebrew:
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)
This is a late copy, but the content is more correct than any other version, proof of this is found in the 1st chapter, in which every version has only 12 generations from Babylon to Messiah and this version has 13 of the said 13. This is but one correct rendering.
There are many differences, some minor, some vital. very interestiong. Also I have four different versions (and veriations of those, more than 10-15 in total but I can only find 4 right now, been years since I looked at these) including Munsters and Tillet.
This is from wikipedia:
Shem Tov's Matthew, 1385
The Shem Tov Matthew (or Shem Tob's Matthew) consists of a complete text of Gospel of Matthew in the Hebrew language found interspersed among anti-Catholic commentary in the 12th volume of a polemical treatise The Touchstone (c.1380-85) by Shem Tov ben Isaac ben Shaprut (Ibn Shaprut), a Jewish physician living in Aragon, after whom the version is named. Shem Tov debated Cardinal Pedro de Luna (later Antipope Benedict XIII) on original sin and redemption in Pamplona, December 26, 1375, in the presence of bishops and learned theologians. Nine manuscripts of The Touchstone survive, though if an independent version of the text of Matthew used by Ibn Shaprut ever existed then it is lost.
Spanish Jews of Ibn Shaprut's period were familiar with the New Testament in Latin. Jacob Ben Reuben in his Wars of the Lord translated Gilbert Crispin's Disputation of Jews and Christians from Latin into Hebrew, along with quotes from Matthew. Lasker (1998) remarks that "By the fourteenth century, most likely every Iberian anti-Christian Jewish polemicist knew Latin." Moses ha-Kohen de Tordesillas made proficient use of Latin phrases. Profiat Duran (fl.1380-1420) had extensive knowledge of Latin Christian texts, and devoted a chapter of his Disgrace of the Gentiles (Klimat ha-goyim) to criticism of Jerome's Latin Vulgate. Hayyim ben Judah ibn Musa argued with Nicholas de Lyra in his Book of Shield and Spear (Sefer magen va-romah).[9] Likewise converts to Christianity such as Abner of Burgos (Alphonso of Valladolid, ca. 1270-1347) continued to write polemical, theological, philosophical, and scientific works in Hebrew.
Shem Tov's The Touchstone (Eben = stone, bohan = test) has never been translated into English or published. It follows the model of Milhamoth ha-Shem of Jacob Ben Reuben in use of Matthew but contains not just sections of Matthew as Jacob Ben Reuben, but the whole text of Matthew and parts of Mark. George Howard excised the text of Matthew from among Shem Tov's comments and published it separately as The Gospel of Matthew according to a primitive Hebrew text (1987), a revised version Hebrew Gospel of Matthew (1995).[10]
Shem Tov's quotations of Matthew in The Touchstone are marked by Jewish thought, and are interspaced with the comments of the author. As a consequence several scholars[who?] feel it is difficult to determine which parts are Shem Tov's commentary, and which parts are the actual text of the source he was quoting. Many scholars[who?] view the text as a mediaeval translation from the Greek text of the Gospel of Matthew, as well as being the likely source of all later Hebrew versions of Matthew prior to the 20th century.
Where the Tetragrammaton occurs in Tanakh quotations, instead one finds a single Hebrew He (ה) except in one place where the word "ha-shem" (השם, the name) is spelled out. There are some interesting readings of Matthew in The Touchstone.[11]
SO I onlt have a english translation of the oldest version, the Tillet version, I can send it to you, the other versions I would have to translate myself other than fragments which have been translated by others, here is a tidbit that has been translated in the 80s.
this is from the shem tob version
this is from the Tillet version:
notive the difference
verses 23:2-3 are translatedher from shem tob:
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Shem Tob's Hebrew Mattithyah - Mat 23:2-3, "The Pharisees and Sages sit upon the seat of Mosheh. Therefore, all that he (Mosheh) says to you, diligently do, but according to their takanot (reforms) and their ma'asim (precedents) do not do, because they talk (Torah) but they do not do."[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Takanot: rabbinical reforms or enactments that falsely change or add to YHWH's Law.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Ma'asim: acts or deeds that serve as precedents for rabbinic law.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Both Takanot and Ma'asim are laws of the Talmud. The Savior said this to the Pharisees;[/FONT]
as they are key verses. but the rest will take me some time, I can not do it right now, honestly I need to study Hebrew more, I used to know much netter, when I originally got these, but I have not studied henrew in years to be honest.
So this is the oldest version I have Tillet version, different from the Shem Tob version, but it is the only english one I have from the Tillet version:
23:1 Then Yeshu (Jesus) talked with the crowds, and
with his TalÊmidei (Disciples),
23:2 saying, "The Sofre (Scribes) and the PÊrishe
(Pharasee) sit on chair of Mushe (Moses).
23:3 Everything, therefore, that they tell you to
observe, observe and do, but don't practice their
works; for they say, and don't do.
23:4 And they bind heavy burdens, and lay them on
men's shoulders -- but they do not want to support
them with a finger.
23:7 and salutations in the marketplace, and to be
called a Rabbai (Leader) by men.
23:8 But don't you be called 'Rabbai (Leader),' for only
one is our Rabbai (Leader), and all of you are brothers.
23:9 Call no man on the earth your father, for one is your Father, he who is in heaven.
23:10 Neither be called leaders, for one is your leader,
the MÊshicha (Messiah).
23:11 But he who is greatest among you will be your
servant.
this is from the shem tob version
this is from the Tillet version:
notive the difference
verses 23:2-3 are translatedher from shem tob:
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Shem Tob's Hebrew Mattithyah - Mat 23:2-3, "The Pharisees and Sages sit upon the seat of Mosheh. Therefore, all that he (Mosheh) says to you, diligently do, but according to their takanot (reforms) and their ma'asim (precedents) do not do, because they talk (Torah) but they do not do."[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Takanot: rabbinical reforms or enactments that falsely change or add to YHWH's Law.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Ma'asim: acts or deeds that serve as precedents for rabbinic law.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Both Takanot and Ma'asim are laws of the Talmud. The Savior said this to the Pharisees;[/FONT]
as they are key verses. but the rest will take me some time, I can not do it right now, honestly I need to study Hebrew more, I used to know much netter, when I originally got these, but I have not studied henrew in years to be honest.
So this is the oldest version I have Tillet version, different from the Shem Tob version, but it is the only english one I have from the Tillet version:
23:1 Then Yeshu (Jesus) talked with the crowds, and
with his TalÊmidei (Disciples),
23:2 saying, "The Sofre (Scribes) and the PÊrishe
(Pharasee) sit on chair of Mushe (Moses).
23:3 Everything, therefore, that they tell you to
observe, observe and do, but don't practice their
works; for they say, and don't do.
23:4 And they bind heavy burdens, and lay them on
men's shoulders -- but they do not want to support
them with a finger.
23:7 and salutations in the marketplace, and to be
called a Rabbai (Leader) by men.
23:8 But don't you be called 'Rabbai (Leader),' for only
one is our Rabbai (Leader), and all of you are brothers.
23:9 Call no man on the earth your father, for one is your Father, he who is in heaven.
23:10 Neither be called leaders, for one is your leader,
the MÊshicha (Messiah).
23:11 But he who is greatest among you will be your
servant.