Yeshua’s Famous Last Words Amen, Emet, Truth

Michael Rood's Sabbat NIght Live Via Youtube ^ | 28 February 2014 | Michael Rood

[editor-surveyor]

Yeshua’s gospel message was preserved by Matthew, in Hebrew, less than a decade after his Earthly ministry was completed.

That is all that is needed to refute the false empty grace goons.

[RansomOttawa]

It becomes blatantly obvious that much was lost in translation from Hebrew to Aramaic and then to Greek

It's still your job to prove that the Greek is a translation from Hebrew and Aramaic.

So far, you haven't presented a single scrap from a Hebrew or Aramaic New Testament that clearly predates the Greek.

I wonder why that might be?

[editor-surveyor]

>> “But I serve a God who was able to uphold His promise to preserve His word for “all generations” in the original Greek” <<

.
Demonstrating that you serve a false god, not Yehova.

Yehova preserved his word in his own language, for his own people, as he identified in Matthew 15:24.
.

[CynicalBear]

What? No scripture includes a statement that you follow the laws only if you can? Say it ain’t so! Surely you use some part of scripture for you statement that you follow unless you can’t.

[roamer_1]

So what part of the Torah are we to do?

Again, ALL of it. What word of YHWH is empty? Now, saying that, a good portion is for priests, some for men, some for women... not all of it pertains to every_one... So what is *yours* to do varies.

[metmom]

So where are we to do the sacrifices?

[editor-surveyor]

>> “It’s still your job to prove that the Greek is a translation from Hebrew and Aramaic” <<

.
The English translations do that quite well through the inconsistencies that show up. The many Hebrew Pun sequences also do that quite well.

[CynicalBear]

>> I'm officially jealous. Congrats, CB!<<

Oh just stick around and make a few comments and he will include you. You see, we follow Jesus and he says the name Jesus is connected to Zeus and is Satanic and evil and all of that.

[CynicalBear]

>>Yeshua’s gospel message was preserved by Matthew, in Hebrew, less than a decade after his Earthly ministry was completed.<<

Would you please show where we can find the proof for that assertion?

[RansomOttawa]

Again, ALL of it. What word of YHWH is empty? Now, saying that, a good portion is for priests, some for men, some for women... not all of it pertains to every_one... So what is *yours* to do varies.

[A]fter fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along with me. I went up because of a revelation and set before them (though privately before those who seemed influential) the gospel that I proclaim among the Gentiles, in order to make sure I was not running or had not run in vain. But even Titus, who was with me, was not forced to be circumcised, though he was a Greek. Yet because of false brothers secretly brought in - who slipped in to spy out our freedom that we have in Christ Jesus, so that they might bring us into slavery - to them we did not yield in submission even for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you. (Gal. 2:1-5)

Please tell us:

1. When Paul refused to allow Titus to be circumcised, were either he or Titus in deliberate disobedience to the Torah? If so, would that also not mean that Paul is here boasting about disobeying the Torah?
2. What "truth of the gospel" is he preserving by refusing to allow a Gentile Christian to be circumcised?

[CynicalBear]

>>Yehova preserved his word in his own language, for his own people, as he identified in Matthew 15:24.<<

So you have said before. And that means that only those of the lost tribes of Israel are included. Would that also mean that He lied here?

1 Timothy 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

He really didn’t mean “all men” right? He only meant those that are genetically from the lost tribes of Israel right?

[RansomOttawa]

The English translations do that quite well through the inconsistencies that show up.

This is conjecture. Do you have actual evidence of a Hebrew and Aramaic New Testament predating the Greek? If so, present it. If not, just feel free to say that no such Hebrew or Aramaic New Testament exists.

But just never mind with the filibustering and obfuscation. This is as bad as Islamic distortion of the early history of the Bible.

[golux]

Yep! Worship him! He is the way and the light! The only way is through him! Father, son, holy ghost, sister, happy meal! worship! worship! Forget about that “I AM THE LORD YOUR GOD WHO BROUGHT YOU OUT OF EGYPT” business! When He said “Thou shalt have no other gods before me” he was NOT referring to other gods that you will have before him! LOL. Pretend Jews. What a laugh.

[Errant]

And yet no Hebrew texts predate the Greek texts.

Sounds like you're turning into a Hebrew Roots fan there CB... But don't be too sure about the above. There may come a day when we have plenty of physical evidence to accompany the circumstantial, as new discoveries are being made daily.

Some source material for the Aramaic claims to the New Testament:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aramaic_primacy

[FourtySeven]

I’m surprised it took this long (300+ replies) for this issue to come up on a thread like this. I’m also surprised that apparently everyone doesn’t know already you guys believe the (New Testament) Scriptures were originally written in Hebrew. It’s a key claim for your theology I’d say.

Here’s something I’ve always wondered about such a claim: if the Scriptures (NT portion) were indeed written in Hebrew originally, how can we be certain any etymological study will yield any truth?

I ask this for the obvious reason that no one claims to own these original Hebrew Scriptures (again for the NT portion). In addition, no Hebrew manuscripts exist that are older than the oldest Greek texts.

Thus, the only way “the original Hebrew” can be studied today is to translate the oldest Greek text into Hebrew. But that’s obviously not studying “the original Hebrew” since it’s a translation!

It seems to me given this conundrum, there really is no value in studying the Bible (NT portion) in Hebrew (or any language really). Sure the originals in the Greek are lost as well, but we have had for centuries the claim they were always written in Greek. It’s only been in relatively recent times that people have started to suggest they were in Hebrew.

Also, the oldest manuscripts by far are in Greek (even if they are just copies, they are still far older than any Hebrew manuscript, again for the NT portion of Scripture) so there’s no way to get nearly as close to the inspired original by studying a Hebrew translation of Greek.

So why not just study the Greek (where the NT is concerned. Obviously for the OT, a study of the Hebrew is best there). Greek is apparently the language that God has chosen to preserve historically, even if some older Hebrew manuscripts ever existed. That is, if the language of the originally inspired text was Hebrew, why did God let that be destroyed but yet let Greek texts remain, and how can we understand Scripture, from an etymological standpoint, by studying a Hebrew translation of the Greek? A translation is never inspired, in the strict sense.

[CynicalBear]

>> There may come a day when we have plenty of physical evidence to accompany the circumstantial, as new discoveries are being made daily.<<

But from the first century till “there may come a day” God has been unwilling or unable to keep His promise to maintain His word to “all generations”. Right?

[Syncro]

Funny, I thought Moses spoke Hebrew.

No way could that be Moses’ short name for God.

So no proof of your statement about vampires and the cross either, not to mention God vaporizing mythical creatures?

Come on, don't shy away from your pronouncements.

Offer up the proof. Show us how superior in intelligence you are then ALL other FR members re your tagline which actually mocks you.

[Errant]

So far, you haven't presented a single scrap from a Hebrew or Aramaic New Testament that clearly predates the Greek.

I wonder why that might be?

I do believe they exist even though I personally can't produce them. I would suggest it's directly related to why out of 6 million Jews living in Israel, only about 20K say they believe Yeshua was the Messiah. The Gentile was entrusted to safeguard the message, however poorly, until the time of the Gentile is finished when, IMO, the message will be restored to its original meaning and preached throughout the world. I also wouldn't rule out the possibility of new discoveries contributing greatly, as I recently saw in the news where additional Dead Sea documents are being examined even now for the first time.

[redleghunter]

Greek is the language of Pagans in character and does not have the ability to carry over the original Hebrew meanings. Another reason of the importance to study the root of the message we were given.

Which 'version' of the 'original' Hebrew are you talking about? The before or after Babylonian exile Hebrew?

[Iscool]

"We now know that the Hebrew word for "believe" is "aman" and has a very different meaning from our understanding of "believe". The Hebrew word "aman" appears to have the more Hebraic meaning of "support". Going back to the concordance we can look up this word looking for verses that contain parallels. Below are several verses with the word "aman" (#539) within them. As the books of Psalms and Proverbs are all poetic, this is the best place to find parallels."

We were looking at the word 'faith' which is emun, not aman

And I posted the definition for emun which is 'faith' as we know it...

So here's the word believe...

Believe=Hebrew
'âman
aw-man'
A primitive root; properly to build up or support; to foster as a parent or nurse; figuratively to render (or be) firm or faithful, to trust or believe, to be permanent or quiet; morally to be true or certain; once (in Isa_30:21; by interchange for H541) to go to the right hand: - hence assurance, believe, bring up, establish, + fail, be faithful (of long continuance, stedfast, sure, surely, trusty, verified), nurse, (-ing father), (put), trust, turn to the right.

The basic understanding of a translated word is to fit one or some of the many definitions with the context of the verse...To avoid the common sense meaning of anan and use 'support' instead is deception...A perversion...

All that is is an attempt to discredit the clear, plain, simple understand of a word which makes a complete, understandable sentence...

Exo_4:5 That they may believe (support) that the LORD God of their fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath appeared unto thee.

So if you tell it to each other enough times it begins to make sense to you, eh???

Exo_4:9 And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe (support) also these two signs, neither hearken unto thy voice, that thou shalt take of the water of the river, and pour it upon the dry land: and the water which thou takest out of the river shall become blood upon the dry land.

Joh_3:12 If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe (support) not, how shall ye believe (support), if I tell you of heavenly things?

Act_16:31 And they said, Believe (support) on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

In another word??? IDIOTIC...