Matthew's gospel first written in Hebrew?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
John2
Posts: 3308
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Matthew's gospel first written in Hebrew?

Post by John2 » Mon Apr 06, 2020 11:36 am

Bernard Muller wrote:
Sun Apr 05, 2020 6:16 pm
to John2
Ben C. Smith wrote:
Sat Apr 04, 2020 7:26 pm
John2 wrote:
Sat Apr 04, 2020 6:33 pm
I don't know how to make a fancy chart but I see things this way.
How does this look?
...
With Q, there is no need for Hebrew Matthew, and multiple translations, and Greek Matthew.
What evidence do you have for multiple translations in the make up of Greek Mathew? That's what I asked in my OP (by the way, I have two examples in Q). What happened to Ben's proto-Luke, Marcion's gospel?

Cordially, Bernard

In my view the multiple translations of the Hebrew Matthew would essentially be "Q," if not quite in the sense it is commonly thought (i.e., they would not have been collections of "sayings" only).

As for the NT Matthew using multiple translations of the Hebrew Matthew, I think (and have been saying) that it could have incorporated "one or more" of them, with one being the "double tradition," which I gather has more "semitisms" than other parts of the NT Matthew, and thus these "semitisms" could be evidence that at least those parts of the NT Matthew were derived from a translation of the Hebrew Matthew.

And this would tie in with my understanding (as per Bauckham) that Papias is saying that the Hebrew "logia" (which I view as being a gospel) were "translated" rather than "interpreted."

As for Luke, I think it may have incorporated the same "double tradition" source that is in the NT Matthew along with perhaps the parts of Luke that resemble the Ebionite Matthew.

As for "proto-Luke," I think there could have been one or more drafts of Luke in circulation by c. 95 CE (made by the same author, who in my view could have been Epaphroditus) and that Marcion used one of them, but that all drafts were written after Mark and the Hebrew Matthew and its translations (and possibly also after the NT Matthew).
Look at the sky, look at the river, isn't it good? Winding, finding places to go.

User avatar
Blood
Posts: 899
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2013 8:03 am

Re: Matthew's gospel first written in Hebrew?

Post by Blood » Mon Apr 06, 2020 2:53 pm

Stuart wrote:
Thu Apr 02, 2020 3:22 pm
There is a simpler solution. Those citing Papias had no clue about the original language, and frankly didn't care. Their objective was to justify the binding order of the four gospels with Matthew first, before Mark. By saying he wrote in Hebrew helped give priority to Matthew, since it dovetailed into the orthodox factions claim of Jewish origin (fought by some of the heterodox). Hebrew was a badge of authenticity, and we see it in the Aramaic phrases in the Gospels, which usually are followed by a "which translated means", showing they were added for effect.

Matthew was the preferred Gospel since it best fit the theology of the orthodoxy. Mark lacked infancy and resurrection stories. John was the other competitor, but even in the Western order it came 2nd, not first.

There is no evidence that Matthew wrote in Hebrew. quite the contrary, the evidence is pretty strong for an underlying Greek source. Otherwise how does one explain the misunderstanding of Psalms 110:1 in Matthew 22:44. Surely a Hebrew speaker would have been scandalized by that.
Bingo. The "church fathers" thought Matthew was the best gospel, and were already on the defensive about the languages used (an obvious sign of fraud), so they invented the myth of "Hebrew Matthew" -- the same way today's theologians invent myths about "Q," and all the rest of their malarkey.

Matthew copied Mark. Mark was composed in Greek. There never was a "Hebrew Matthew" except in the imagination of insecure "church fathers."
“The only sensible response to fragmented, slowly but randomly accruing evidence is radical open-mindedness. A single, simple explanation for a historical event is generally a failure of imagination, not a triumph of induction.” William H.C. Propp

Bernard Muller
Posts: 3320
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Matthew's gospel first written in Hebrew?

Post by Bernard Muller » Mon Apr 06, 2020 5:36 pm

to Blood,
Yes, I accept that. But Papias did not invent a Hebrew gospel of Matthew. It was from Papias dealing with logia allegedly collected by Matthew. Later, in Irenaeus' time, the logia from Matthew became the Hebrew gospel of Matthew. Irenaeus took his clues from Papias. Still later, gospels according to Matthew got fabricated in Hebrew from the Greek Matthew for reasons you expressed.

Cordially, Bernard
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed

Bernard Muller
Posts: 3320
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Matthew's gospel first written in Hebrew?

Post by Bernard Muller » Mon Apr 06, 2020 6:18 pm

to John2,
In my view the multiple translations of the Hebrew Matthew would essentially be "Q," if not quite in the sense it is commonly thought (i.e., they would not have been collections of "sayings" only).
Q also contains narrative elements.
As for the NT Matthew using multiple translations of the Hebrew Matthew, I think (and have been saying) that it could have incorporated "one or more" of them, with one being the "double tradition," which I gather has more "semitisms" than other parts of the NT Matthew, and thus these "semitisms" could be evidence that at least those parts of the NT Matthew were derived from a translation of the Hebrew Matthew.

And this would tie in with my understanding (as per Bauckham) that Papias is saying that the Hebrew "logia" (which I view as being a gospel) were "translated" rather than "interpreted."
Sayings can also be translated.
As for Luke, I think it may have incorporated the same "double tradition" source that is in the NT Matthew along with perhaps the parts of Luke that resemble the Ebionite Matthew.
If you mean Q by Ebionite gospel, I agree.
As for "proto-Luke," I think there could have been one or more drafts of Luke in circulation by c. 95 CE (made by the same author, who in my view could have been Epaphroditus) and that Marcion used one of them, but that all drafts were written after Mark and the Hebrew Matthew and its translations (and possibly also after the NT Matthew).
Opinions, opinions. Marcion's gospel was drawn from Luke. There is evidence pointing to that, such as exposed here: http://historical-jesus.info/53.html

Cordially, Bernard
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed

Bernard Muller
Posts: 3320
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Matthew's gospel first written in Hebrew?

Post by Bernard Muller » Wed Apr 08, 2020 10:16 am

My diagram:

Image

Cordially, Bernard
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed

Stuart
Posts: 578
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 12:24 am
Location: Sunnyvale, CA

Re: Matthew's gospel first written in Hebrew?

Post by Stuart » Wed Apr 08, 2020 12:33 pm

Bernard,

The problem with anyone accepting the veracity of the Church Fathers, especially Tertullian, with respect to the concept of his sect cutting Luke is vocabulary.

You have to explain why almost all the Lukan favorite words are missing, and why even mundane words with zero theological value like "τε" are missing entirely from the attested Marcionite text. This appears 10 places in Paul, 2 in Luke, but 26 times in Acts and 9 in Hebrews -- it's a Lukan favorite word. (It only appears elsewhere in one verse of Matthew and one of Revelation ... it's rare outside of Luke). There is no theological value at all. Stylistically it's an improvement, especially "τε καὶ" form for the "καὶ .. καὶ" for 'both'. There are as many as 50 Lukan favorite words missing in Marcion, many mundane. It is beyond reasonable to expect a redactor to purge every last one of them (try changing your daughter's 8000 English lit word essay and cleaning up every favorite word and phrase of hers and replacing it with a more archaic form ... without using a word processor, doing it by hand).

This is the challenge that has not been met by anyone claiming Marcion abbreviated Luke and Paul.

Also explain the arrow from Mark to Q. I don't understand how Q incorporates Mark. The basic definition is sayings common to Luke and Matthew not found in Mark. You obviously have something else in mind.

- Stuart
“’That was excellently observed’, say I, when I read a passage in an author, where his opinion agrees with mine. When we differ, there I pronounce him to be mistaken.” - Jonathan Swift

John2
Posts: 3308
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Matthew's gospel first written in Hebrew?

Post by John2 » Wed Apr 08, 2020 1:01 pm

Bernard Muller wrote:
Mon Apr 06, 2020 6:18 pm
to John2,
In my view the multiple translations of the Hebrew Matthew would essentially be "Q," if not quite in the sense it is commonly thought (i.e., they would not have been collections of "sayings" only).
Q also contains narrative elements.

I meant that I think the translations of the Hebrew Matthew were just that, translations of the Hebrew Matthew, i.e., they were gospels.

Sayings can also be translated.


Of course.

If you mean Q by Ebionite gospel, I agree.

What I mean by the Ebionite Matthew is the Greek gospel used and called Matthew by Ebionites that Epiphanius cites and which resembles parts of Luke. To account for this similarity, I think Luke and the Ebionite Matthew incorporated one of the translations that had been made of the Hebrew Matthew.

Marcion's gospel was drawn from Luke. There is evidence pointing to that ...

I agree. I think all drafts of Luke would have been written by the same author, just like the versions of Mark (the private and pubic editions) were written by Mark, and thus that Marcion's gospel could have been drawn from one of these drafts of Luke.
Last edited by John2 on Wed Apr 08, 2020 4:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Look at the sky, look at the river, isn't it good? Winding, finding places to go.

User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1045
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: Matthew's gospel first written in Hebrew?

Post by Joseph D. L. » Wed Apr 08, 2020 3:29 pm

Bernard Muller wrote:
Mon Apr 06, 2020 6:18 pm
Opinions, opinions. Marcion's gospel was drawn from Luke. There is evidence pointing to that, such as exposed here: http://historical-jesus.info/53.html
Marcion, active in the Christian world from around 130, had a gospel called 'gospel of the Lord'. For orthodox fathers of the Church, like Irenaeus of Lyons, Tertullian and Epiphanius of Salamis, this gospel was the product of a mutilation of gLuke.
Well damn boy, I guess you win.

Bernard Muller
Posts: 3320
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Matthew's gospel first written in Hebrew?

Post by Bernard Muller » Wed Apr 08, 2020 4:08 pm

to Stuart
Stuart wrote:
Wed Apr 08, 2020 12:33 pm
Bernard,

The problem with anyone accepting the veracity of the Church Fathers, especially Tertullian, with respect to the concept of his sect cutting Luke is vocabulary.
Did you read the second half of http://historical-jesus.info/53.html?
You have to explain why almost all the Lukan favorite words are missing, and why even mundane words with zero theological value like "τε" are missing entirely from the attested Marcionite text. This appears 10 places in Paul, 2 in Luke, but 26 times in Acts and 9 in Hebrews
"Luke" did not write the Pauline and Hebrew epistles. Marcion ignored Acts. Only 2 in Luke? What do you expect to see in the few bits we can be sure in Marcion's gospels? And for the 10 Pauline epistles, we have even less attested Marcionite text.
-- it's a Lukan favorite word.
2 occurrences in Luke does not make it a Lukan favorite word.
There are as many as 50 Lukan favorite words missing in Marcion, many mundane. It is beyond reasonable to expect a redactor to purge every last one of them
Can you educate me on that point? Are these words in passages of Luke attested in the Marcionite text?
This is the challenge that has not been met by anyone claiming Marcion abbreviated Luke and Paul.
I have shown that Marcion's gospel and his Pauline epistles were written after Luke and the canonical Pauline.
http://historical-jesus.info/53.html and http://historical-jesus.info/73.html

Also explain the arrow from Mark to Q. I don't understand how Q incorporates Mark. The basic definition is sayings common to Luke and Matthew not found in Mark. You obviously have something else in mind.
Q's authors knew about Mark. I made a thorough study on the matter: read it here http://historical-jesus.info/q.html

Cordially, Bernard
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed

Bernard Muller
Posts: 3320
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Matthew's gospel first written in Hebrew?

Post by Bernard Muller » Wed Apr 08, 2020 4:53 pm

to John2,
John2 wrote:
Wed Apr 08, 2020 1:01 pm
Bernard Muller wrote:
Mon Apr 06, 2020 6:18 pm
In my view the multiple translations of the Hebrew Matthew would essentially be "Q," if not quite in the sense it is commonly thought (i.e., they would not have been collections of "sayings" only).
Q also contains narrative elements.
I meant that I think the translations of the Hebrew Matthew were just that, translations of the Hebrew Matthew, i.e., they were gospels.
It is not Hebrew Matthew but logia in Hebrew attributed to Matthew by Papias' writings, when that Matthew was not attributed any gospel yet.
What I mean by the Ebionite Matthew is the Greek gospel used and called Matthew by Ebionites that Epiphanius cites and which resembles parts of Luke. To account for this similarity, I think Luke and the Ebionite Matthew incorporated one of the translations that had been made of the Hebrew Matthew.
This is matter of opinion based on very fragile & debatable clues.
Marcion's gospel was drawn from Luke. There is evidence pointing to that ...
I agree. I think all drafts of Luke would have been written by Luke, just like the versions of Mark (the private and pubic editions) were written by Mark, and thus that Marcion's gospel could have been drawn from one of these drafts of Luke.
How do you know Luke wrote multiple drafts of her gospel?

Cordially, Bernard
Last edited by Bernard Muller on Thu Apr 09, 2020 6:20 am, edited 1 time in total.
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed

Post Reply