The following is a quote from Jerome,
Against the Pelagians, Book III, located here:
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-06/Npnf2-06-17.htm#P7757_2507136">http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-06/N ... 57_2507136</a><!-- m -->
2. In the Gospel according to the Hebrews, which is written in the Chaldee and Syrian language, but in Hebrew characters, and is used by the Nazarenes to this day (I mean the Gospel according to the Apostles, or, as is generally maintained, the Gospel according to Matthew, a copy of which is in the library at Caesarea), we find, "Behold, the mother of our Lord and His brethren said to Him, John Baptist baptizes for the remission of sins; let us go and be baptized by him. But He said to them, what sin have I committed that I should go and be baptized by him? Unless, haply, the very words which I have said are only ignorance." And in the same volume, "If thy brother sin against thee in word, and make amends to thee, receive him seven times in a day." Simon, His disciple, said to Him, "Seven times in a day?" The Lord answered and said to him, "I say unto thee until seventy times seven."
Looking at the underlined portion, I have been unable to locate the source for this quote in the Peshitta or in any of the Hebrew versions of Matthew. From which source is Jerome quoting? Is this from the Diatesseron?
In Messiah,
Wayne
The above quote is included in Bart Ehrman's book _The New Testament and other Early Christian Writings_ under the title "The Gospel of the Nazareans," which survives only in fragments.
Bart D. Ehrman Wrote:Written in Aramaic, possibly near the end of the first century or at the beginning of the second, the Gospel of the Nazareans was popular among Jewish Christians (sometimes called "Nazoreans") living in and around Palestine. ... According to some of the church fathers, this Gospel was in fact nothing other than an Aramaic revision of Matthew's Gospel. ... Scholars debate, however, whether the church fathers were right in their assesment of the book: its author may simply have known traditions about Jesus similar to those also available to Matthew. The fragments of the Gospel that do survive, in any event, share with Matthew a concern for the Jewish Law and the question of whether the Jewish people are able to keep it.
Ehrman includes about two pages of fragments from Pseudo-Origen, Eusebius, Jerome, and "corrections" made by various scribes to several Greek manuscripts of Matthew.
Hope this helps!
Zechariah14 Wrote:Looking at the underlined portion, I have been unable to locate the source for this quote in the Peshitta or in any of the Hebrew versions of Matthew. From which source is Jerome quoting? Is this from the Diatesseron?
In Messiah,
Wayne
Hiya, one clue here may be found in Jerome "Lives of Illustrious men Book 3 chapt 2.
One translation reads.
Quote:Matthew, who is also Levi, and from a tax collector came to be
an emissary first of all evangelists composed a Gospel of
Messiah in Judea in the Hebrew language and letters, for the
benefit of those of the circumcision who had believed, who
translated it into Greek is not sufficiently ascertained.
Furthermore, the Hebrew itself is preserved to this day in the
library at Caesarea, which the martyr Pamphilus so diligently
collected. I also was allowed by the Nazarenes who use this
volume in the Syrian city of Borea to copy it. In which is to be
remarked that, wherever the evangelist... makes use of the
testimonies of the Old Scripture, he does not follow the
authority of the seventy translators , but that of the Hebrew
Whilst another translation reads.
Quote:Matthew, also called Levi, apostle and aforetimes publican, composed a gospel of Christ at first published in Judea in Hebrew for the sake of those of the circumcision who believed, but this was afterwards translated into Greek though by what author is uncertain. The Hebrew itself has been preserved until the present day in the library. at Caesarea which Pamphilus so diligently gathered. I have also had the opportunity of having the volume described to me by the Nazarenes of Beroea, a city of Syria,who use it. In this it is to be noted that wherever the Evangelist, whether on his own account or in the person of our Lord the Saviour quotes the testimony of the Old Testament he does not follow the authority of the translators of the Septuagint but the Hebrew. Wherefore these two forms exist "Out of Egypt have I called my son," and "for he shall be called a Nazarene."
Did he have it described to him or did he copy it?
If he had it described to him then it would be easy to see how error crept in.
If he copied it error could still have crept in depending how good Jeromes Hebrew/Aramaic was.
Just some ideas.
Added in edit:
I found another translation as well.
Quote:Matthew -- who was also (called) Levi -- was an apostle and former tax-collector. He first composed the gospel of Christ in Hebrew letters and words in Judea for those from the circumcision who had believed. Who later translated (his gospel) into Greek, is not quite certain. Moreover, the Hebrew itself is still held today in the library at Caesarea (Maritima), which the martyr Pamphilus carefully put together. I also was able to make a copy from the Nazarenes, who use this volume in Beroea, a city in Syria. In it, it is to be noted that whenever the evangelist made full use of testimonies from the ancient scriptures -- either on his own or from the Lord Savior -- he did not follow the authority of Seventy translators [i.e., the Greek Septuagint], but of the Hebrew. These are two (examples) of this: "Out of Egypt I have called my Son" (Matt 2:15) and_ "For he shall be called a Nazarene"
Curiously Jerome seems familiar with a different Hebrew version than we have today I believe.
Or was he just mixed up?
I did have another look at Jerome's stuff on Matthew at infidels once.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.iidb.org/vbb/archive/index.php/t-72816.html">http://www.iidb.org/vbb/archive/index.php/t-72816.html</a><!-- m -->
If you wade through you will find some interesting discussion mainly from a poster named Amlodhi.
All the best
Zechariah14 Wrote:The following is a quote from Jerome, Against the Pelagians, Book III, located here:
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-06/Npnf2-06-17.htm#P7757_2507136">http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-06/N ... 57_2507136</a><!-- m -->
2. In the Gospel according to the Hebrews, which is written in the Chaldee and Syrian language, but in Hebrew characters, and is used by the Nazarenes to this day (I mean the Gospel according to the Apostles, or, as is generally maintained, the Gospel according to Matthew, a copy of which is in the library at Caesarea), we find, "Behold, the mother of our Lord and His brethren said to Him, John Baptist baptizes for the remission of sins; let us go and be baptized by him. But He said to them, what sin have I committed that I should go and be baptized by him? Unless, haply, the very words which I have said are only ignorance." And in the same volume, "If thy brother sin against thee in word, and make amends to thee, receive him seven times in a day." Simon, His disciple, said to Him, "Seven times in a day?" The Lord answered and said to him, "I say unto thee until seventy times seven."
Looking at the underlined portion, I have been unable to locate the source for this quote in the Peshitta or in any of the Hebrew versions of Matthew. From which source is Jerome quoting? Is this from the Diatesseron?
In Messiah,
Wayne
The underlined section makes sense to me. For John's baptism was one of repentance which means to turn and walk in the opposite direction. Jesus was already in the right direction and wasn't sinning. Jesus already has the Holy Spirit otherwise He could never have known God and like his cousin John both had it from birth. Jesus actually had it long before being born as a man. But Jesus had to be baptized not for forgiveness of sins or to receive the Holy Spirit but to set an example of instruction in righteousness. John's baptism was a type of the later Holy Spirit baptism.
Paul
Makes sense to me also. Does everything that makes sense to you qualify it as scripture ?
How about The Encyclopedia Brittanica ? Is that on a par with Matthew because it makes sense ?Perhaps it is superior to Matthew because it makes more sense and "up to date" ?
Just trying to understand your thinking.
Dave
judge Wrote:Curiously Jerome seems familiar with a different Hebrew version than we have today I believe.
Or was he just mixed up?
I did have another look at Jerome's stuff on Matthew at infidels once.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.iidb.org/vbb/archive/index.php/t-72816.html">http://www.iidb.org/vbb/archive/index.php/t-72816.html</a><!-- m -->
If you wade through you will find some interesting discussion mainly from a poster named Amlodhi.
All the best
Thanks for the information and the link. Perhaps it is at one point in time Jerome can only have a copy described for him, while later he can put his hands on a copy.
All in all, it seems that the copies that Jerome was using were quite a bit different than the Greek text, the Aramaic text, or any of the Hebrew versions out there.....from what I've researched so far.
Wayne
John Stephens Wrote:The above quote is included in Bart Ehrman's book _The New Testament and other Early Christian Writings_ under the title "The Gospel of the Nazareans," which survives only in fragments.
Bart D. Ehrman Wrote:Written in Aramaic, possibly near the end of the first century or at the beginning of the second, the Gospel of the Nazareans was popular among Jewish Christians (sometimes called "Nazoreans") living in and around Palestine. ... According to some of the church fathers, this Gospel was in fact nothing other than an Aramaic revision of Matthew's Gospel. ... Scholars debate, however, whether the church fathers were right in their assesment of the book: its author may simply have known traditions about Jesus similar to those also available to Matthew. The fragments of the Gospel that do survive, in any event, share with Matthew a concern for the Jewish Law and the question of whether the Jewish people are able to keep it.
Ehrman includes about two pages of fragments from Pseudo-Origen, Eusebius, Jerome, and "corrections" made by various scribes to several Greek manuscripts of Matthew.
Hope this helps!
Yes, thanks John.
I've checked the Jerome quotes against the Peshitta and they don't quite seem to match up. Do you know which church fathers to whom Ehrman refers -- the ones that say "the Nazorean gospel" was an Aramaic revision?
Again, thanks for the help!
Wayne