Wanting to join Hebrew roots into christianity ?

[Ezra]

3 hours ago, junobet said:

Most authors of the New Testament, including Paul, were Hellenized Jews,...

Those simple fishermen in Galilee were NOT "Hellenized Jews" similar to those in Alexandria and other regions beyond Palestine. And Paul himself spent his youth and early manhood in Jerusalem in Judah learning to be an outstanding Pharisee. That they were familiar with everyday Koine Greek is obvious. But it is reasonable to believe that one would be more comfortable writing in his own native language than a second language.  

However, since we are dealing with Divine inspiration, that was immaterial.  It is the Holy Spirit who was the Author of all the New Testament books, and the apostles were merely the scribes, even though their personalities were allowed to come through. The real significance of the NT being written in Greek was to bring the Gospel to the whole world, since Greek had indeed become the lingua franca of the Roman Empire, and the early churches were Greek-speaking churches.

[junobet]

11 hours ago, Qnts2 said:

Just about all Jewish people had been trained in Hebrew. Hellenized Jews mostly spoke Aramaic, which is why the Targums were written. The Targums were a translation from Hebrew to Aramaic.

Paul might have been born in Tarsus, to be a Pharisee, he would have spent a considerable amount of time living in Jerusalem to receive his training. The every day language in Jerusalem was Hebrew, so Paul would have been accustomed to speaking Hebrew, and would have been completely fluent.

Jewish people knew Aramaic, and Hebrew. Jewish people would have been familiar with Greek as they would have needed to know enough Greek to communicate with people other the Jewish people, who would have had Greek as the primary language of Gentile. 

While the Greek translation of the books of Moses was available and used,  the entire OT was not translated yet. The Septuagint began when Ptolemy of Alexandria Egypt, conscripted 70 or 72 Rabbis to translate the  books of Moses from Hebrew to Greek. Additional books were translated at a slower pace and not necessarily by Rabbis. Judaism discontinued the use of the Greek when people who were not highly knowledgable attempted to translate Hebrew to Greek and made many errors. Due to the poor translations, Judaism considered it better to wholy discontinue use of the Greek translations, rather then correct the shoddy translations. 

The early church was entirely Jewish, and while Greek philosophy had some influence, Greek philosophy would not have had a major influence until the inclusion of the Gentiles. Paul, in speaking the gospel to the Gentiles used Greek philosophy to help explain the Gospel in a way to help Gentiles relate and understand.  Although Greek philosophy did not actually influence Christian theology, but was used as a vehicle to explain the gospel.  

 

Oh dear, I knew I should have just kept my mouth shut as to avoid being dragged into a discussion I’m not wildly passionate about.

However, I agree that Paul, being highly educated, was very likely fluent in Hebrew. Being from Tarsus would have meant that his first language was Greek though.

It’s well possible that I’m not up to date here, so correct me if I’m wrong, but as far as I remember, apart from a few pockets where it may still have been spoken, Hebrew had been widely replaced by Aramaic and – for the Diaspora Jews – Greek.  Hebrew would still have been used for liturgical purposes and among scholars of scripture, but the average 1th century Jew probably was as fluent in it as I am in Latin and Greek (i.e. - alas - very rudimentary).

Love,

junobet

[Qnts2]

9 hours ago, junobet said:

 

Oh dear, I knew I should have just kept my mouth shut as to avoid being dragged into a discussion I’m not wildly passionate about.

However, I agree that Paul, being highly educated, was very likely fluent in Hebrew. Being from Tarsus would have meant that his first language was Greek though.

It’s well possible that I’m not up to date here, so correct me if I’m wrong, but as far as I remember, apart from a few pockets where it may still have been spoken, Hebrew had been widely replaced by Aramaic and – for the Diaspora Jews – Greek.  Hebrew would still have been used for liturgical purposes and among scholars of scripture, but the average 1th century Jew probably was as fluent in it as I am in Latin and Greek (i.e. - alas - very rudimentary).

Love,

junobet

While it was a belief in Christianity for a while that the Jewish people had ceased using Hebrew, that theory had fallen by the wayside, and it is now believed that the Jewish people knew more Hebrew then previously assumed. 

The Jewish people who lived in cities outside of Jerusalem lived together and were not scattered among the Gentiles in a city. So, Aramaic in the diaspora would have likely been the first language. In Jerusalem, Hebrew was the first language as the language spoken in Jerusalem was Hebrew. Jewish people traveled to Jerusalem for 3 of the High Holidays and would have had to converse in Hebrew. When Peter spoke to the High Priest or the Pharisees in Jerusalem, the conversation would have been in Hebrew. The people living in Jerusalem would have known Aramaic and as a third language some Greek. For the Jewish people, the third language was Greek.

Jewish people tended to live together in neighborhoods of communities, apart from Gentiles. In many countries Jewish people were forced to live in particular areas. The use of the word ghetto comes from Germany and refers to the areas Jewish people had to live in. Russia also only allowed the Jewish people to live in certain areas, and this was referred to as beyond the pale. The same with many other countries.  Prejudice against Jewish people meant they were not welcome to live truly among the Gentiles. And, the practice of Judaism/Mosaic law, meant the Jewish people needed to live in a community of Jewish people in close proximity.  

In closer to modern times, the Jewish language which was learned first depended on region. European Jews learned Yiddish first. Spanish Jews learned Ladino. (Just as a side note, I have a copy of a census sheet of my family when my father was a boy, and the census sheet has the primary language spoken in the house. It is listed as Yiddish. So English was a second language).  In Jesus time, the language learned first by Jewish people outside of Israel would have been Aramaic and not Greek. Almost all Jewish people could write and for common writing within the Jewish community, the language was Aramaic.  Very few Jewish people would have had Greek as a first language.

 

[junobet]

14 hours ago, Qnts2 said:

While it was a belief in Christianity for a while that the Jewish people had ceased using Hebrew, that theory had fallen by the wayside, and it is now believed that the Jewish people knew more Hebrew then previously assumed. 

The Jewish people who lived in cities outside of Jerusalem lived together and were not scattered among the Gentiles in a city. So, Aramaic in the diaspora would have likely been the first language. In Jerusalem, Hebrew was the first language as the language spoken in Jerusalem was Hebrew. Jewish people traveled to Jerusalem for 3 of the High Holidays and would have had to converse in Hebrew. When Peter spoke to the High Priest or the Pharisees in Jerusalem, the conversation would have been in Hebrew. The people living in Jerusalem would have known Aramaic and as a third language some Greek. For the Jewish people, the third language was Greek.

Jewish people tended to live together in neighborhoods of communities, apart from Gentiles. In many countries Jewish people were forced to live in particular areas. The use of the word ghetto comes from Germany and refers to the areas Jewish people had to live in. Russia also only allowed the Jewish people to live in certain areas, and this was referred to as beyond the pale. The same with many other countries.  Prejudice against Jewish people meant they were not welcome to live truly among the Gentiles. And, the practice of Judaism/Mosaic law, meant the Jewish people needed to live in a community of Jewish people in close proximity.  

In closer to modern times, the Jewish language which was learned first depended on region. European Jews learned Yiddish first. Spanish Jews learned Ladino. (Just as a side note, I have a copy of a census sheet of my family when my father was a boy, and the census sheet has the primary language spoken in the house. It is listed as Yiddish. So English was a second language).  In Jesus time, the language learned first by Jewish people outside of Israel would have been Aramaic and not Greek. Almost all Jewish people could write and for common writing within the Jewish community, the language was Aramaic.  Very few Jewish people would have had Greek as a first language.

 

Mhhh, so this article here is utterly outdated? It claims for example "The inscription forbidding strangers to advance beyond a certain point in the Temple was in Greek; and was probably made necessary by the presence of numerous Jews from Greek-speaking countries at the time of the festivals". http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/7535-hellenism

Yiddish is a good example for how the language of a group's environment gets to leak in, even if it is kept/keeps itself to itself. And it also brings me to a wild and utterly uneducated guess how an Aramaic speaking Peter could have conversed with Hebrew speaking Pharisees: Both Aramaic and Hebrew are semitic languages, I don't speak either but I would guess just like Yiddish and my mothertongue German they are rather similar. I don't speak Yiddish, but I can understand most of it.

[Ezra]

15 hours ago, Qnts2 said:

While it was a belief in Christianity for a while that the Jewish people had ceased using Hebrew, that theory had fallen by the wayside, and it is now believed that the Jewish people knew more Hebrew then previously assumed. 

I believe that is a very positive development, since I also had a question about that theory. There has to be something special about Hebrew, and the characters themselves are very beautiful. There may also be something to the Bible Code behind the Hebrew letters. One has to wonder if Adam spoke in Hebrew and it continued from there.

[Qnts2]

11 hours ago, junobet said:

Mhhh, so this article here is utterly outdated? It claims for example "The inscription forbidding strangers to advance beyond a certain point in the Temple was in Greek; and was probably made necessary by the presence of numerous Jews from Greek-speaking countries at the time of the festivals". http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/7535-hellenism

Yiddish is a good example for how the language of a group's environment gets to leak in, even if it is kept/keeps itself to itself. And it also brings me to a wild and utterly uneducated guess how an Aramaic speaking Peter could have conversed with Hebrew speaking Pharisees: Both Aramaic and Hebrew are semitic languages, I don't speak either but I would guess just like Yiddish and my mothertongue German they are rather similar. I don't speak Yiddish, but I can understand most of it.

I do not agree with much written in the 'Jewish encyclopedia'.  That inscription had to be in the outer court, where Gentiles were allowed, it makes sense to me that it was in Greek. 'Strangers' almost always refers to Gentiles. Jewish men could enter further into the court of the Jewish men so it makes no sense to assume it was for Jewish men, as they could advance further in.

Yiddish is a mix of German, Russian and Hebrew, with a little bit of English thrown in. Like you, but in reverse, knowing Yiddish (I'm definitely not fluent) I have found I can pick up some of what is being said by German speakers. However, some words which are of German origin have a different meaning. I am thinking through words in common and at this minute, all I can think of is shloffen, so I think I must be tired. Another major difference between German and Yiddish is that Yiddish is written using the Hebrew Alphabet. Yiddish was also spoken by Jewish people who lived in Russia. The Hebrew words in Yiddish do not always mean the exact same thing as they do in the Hebrew language.

Peter would have been able to speak Hebrew, although his first language was likely Aramaic. For me, I know enough Hebrew to read the OT in Hebrew, but I am not proficient in conversational Hebrew. Modern conversational Hebrew has evolved enough in usage so that it has a lot of words which are not in scripture. I have tried to read the Aramaic sections of scripture, and found Aramaic to be different enough from Hebrew, so that my comprehension is not there.    

[Guest]

On ‎1‎/‎18‎/‎2016 at 9:28 AM, SINNERSAVED said:

Okay ,this is a topic that I believe has touched the surface on many areas as I have seen through the threads, I am not trying to start a new cult or , put something together that does not belong, I know that water and oil does not mix,

but we can say that we are Gentiles and following a jewish style , and Hebraic walk with God, for us to know the ways of God and to make sense of a lot that is told to us in the bible it is apparent , that we know and understand the customs of the jewish people and of Old, to put together what is being foretold of our future and the up coming events to take place as the end of the age I closing in, and Jesus or(Yeshua ) is coming back

so this is my thought ? if we are Christians like we profess to be , and study jewish and Hebrew, and get translation from the greeks also

then what would be the problem , that if there is a lot that we don't agree with in Christianity , that we could  place, and have Hebrew and jewish ways woven with in each other , and not think its a cult or that it be against the will of God, for a lot are Gentiles like my self, and I am interested to follow customs and ideas  and the ways of hebriac and jewish roots to my belief , and to affirm what God wants us to know,

for we are the called out ones, and so it should not be a big deal , when people see that we call God  Yashua ,. or Yeshua , or Elohim, or to follow what was set before us , that had to be translated from the past to the future, so you see, I have to be honest, and don't get upet with what I say , this is where we can discus the and work out what we believe and why we believe  and see other view points, I do not want anyone making it personal thank you , its a simple open topic,  and so

if Christians started calling Jesus Yashua, or yahshua , which spelling is proper, for there is a few, so I am still working on this,

ad following the old laws  of the torah , and to join both to todays christianity what would be wrong with that ?

I think most that really study the bible, will gravitate to using the ways of old, for it was simple and clear back in the day , and now we have made it complicated and no one knows the truth anymore, and everyone has  gone in too deep in to the word , and have not found the true power of it, I am speaking in general, for many do not pick up there bibles so they would not know what a faithful Christian , or a person that is really seeking God,

so we have what I believe a devotion in love, with wanting to love God and bring in some of the old simple and easy love, and then you have the today and technical , and destruction of scripture and what God is trying to tell us, the Christians preaching one thing and living secular with no belief during the rest of the week , so I am not trying to invent anything but thoughts and ideas to this topic

please give your comments and responses , I would be glad to hear them , thank you and blessing

Hi Sinnersaved.

I am glad you are concerned about being able to speak honestly, without upset as you said here.

Quote

I have to be honest, and don't get upet with what I say , this is where we can discus the and work out what we believe and why we believe  and see other view points, I do not want anyone making it personal thank you , its a simple open topic,  and so

First of all my view of things thinks "Hebrew roots" goes deeper than a "Jewish style" or Judaism. Rather it Goes back to Abraham.

Ge 14:13  And there came one that had escaped, and told Abram the Hebrew; for he dwelt in the plain of Mamre the Amorite, brother of Eshcol, and brother of Aner: and these were confederate with Abram.
 

Both Judaism as well as Christian/Messianic faith are based upon Abraham.

I truly think it is how various Judaic sects viewed the covenant promises made to Abraham that differs here.

Gentiles do not have a part in the first covenant promises made to Abram, in Genesis 15.

We do however have a share in the covenant of Genesis 17.

The best way I can think of to show you my way of viewing this is to give you scripture for certain things I believe to be centerpieces.

First, Abram is told he would die in the first covenant

Further more the covenant promises concerned the fourth Generation of his seed.

Which excludes the first three Generations. So this covenant is not established in Isaac, or Jacob, or Joseph.

De 5:2  The LORD our God made a covenant with us in Horeb.
De 5:3  The LORD made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day.
The Sinai covenant was not made with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Nor was the covenant promised in Genesis 15 concerning them, but the fourth generation

Abraham will die, the covenant is of force in the fourth generation

Gen 15:15  And thou shalt go to thy fathers in peace; thou shalt be buried in a good old age.
16  But in the fourth generation they shall come hither again: for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full.
 

But we have the covenant promises made to Abraham in Genesis 17. Who's sign is Circumcision.

This covenant is in force in Isaac. the first generation of his seed. This is where Abraham is promised the land of Canaan, and makes promise to be a God to him and his seed after him..

Ge 17:8  And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.
 

Since Abraham is told he is going to die in the first covenant, his faith to personally inherit the land of Canaan, as well as Isaac and Jacob (also going to be dead) by the time the 4th generation inherits. Abraham believed he would inherit the land after he had died. Therefore faith in the resurrection was tested in Isaac.

Here are the new covenant teachings of these things.

The first covenant made in Genesis 15.......

2  And he said, Men, brethren, and fathers, hearken; The God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran,
3  And said unto him, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and come into the land which I shall shew thee.
4  Then came he out of the land of the Chaldaeans, and dwelt in Charran: and from thence, when his father was dead, he removed him into this land, wherein ye now dwell.
5  And he gave him none inheritance in it, no, not so much as to set his foot on: yet he promised that he would give it to him for a possession, and to his seed after him, when as yet he had no child.
6  And God spake on this wise, That his seed should sojourn in a strange land; and that they should bring them into bondage, and entreat them evil four hundred years.
7  And the nation to whom they shall be in bondage will I judge, said God: and after that shall they come forth, and serve me in this place.
 

Hebrews also speaks of this.....

Heb 11:13  These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.

As well as here

Heb 11:17  By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,
18  Of whom it was said, That in Isaac shall thy seed be called:
19  Accounting that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead; from whence also he received him in a figure.
20  By faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau concerning things to come.
21  By faith Jacob, when he was a dying, blessed both the sons of Joseph; and worshipped, leaning upon the top of his staff.
22  By faith Joseph, when he died, made mention of the departing of the children of Israel; and gave commandment concerning his bones.
 

In short the things of the next world and the next life belong to the Abrahamic promises. The nations are included in these promises.

Heb 11:14  For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country.
15  And truly, if they had been mindful of that country from whence they came out, they might have had opportunity to have returned.
16  But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.
 

Our hope in Christ is the heavenly inheritance promised to many nations in promise to Abraham.

Ro 4:9  Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness.
Ro 4:10  How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision.