Uncategorized Archives - Page 16 of 63

Do the Old Syriac and Peshitta NT use a Greek Word for “Covenant”?

Do the Old Syriac and Peshitta NT use a Greek Word for “Covenant”?
By
James Scott Trimm

Recently I wrote a blog titled Do the Old Syriac and Peshitta NT use a Greek Word for “Torah”? Today I want to address a similar concern about a word used for “Covenant” in the Old Syriac and Peshitta versions of the NT books.

It has been suggested to me that the Old Syriac and Peshitta Aramaic versions of “New Testament” books had to be translations from a Greek source, because in some places they use the Greek word דיתיקא (diyatiki) for “covenant/testament”.

Diyatiki is an Aramaic Word

While “diyatiki” is a Greek word, it is also an Aramaic word, just as “ballet” is a French word, but it is also an English word. Diyatiki is what is called a “loan word”, a word that originated in one language, but was fully adopted into another language. In fact the word “diyatiki” even appears in the Aramaic Rabbinic literature. For example in the Talmud we read:

WILLS, DEEDS OF GIFT, etc. Our Rabbis taught: What is meant by WILLS (דייתיקי) (diyatiki)? — [Documents which contain the words:] ‘This shall be established and executed,’ so that when [the author of the document] dies, his property becomes the possession of the person named [in the document!.
(b.Babba Metzia 19a)

Many more examples could be cited from the Aramaic Rabbinic literature.

Diyatiki also appears in the Peshitta Tanak (“Old Testament”), which we know to have been translated from Hebrew. For example in Jeremiah 31:31:

Behold, the days come, says Marya, that I will make with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah, a new covenant (דיאתיקי):
(Jer. 31:31)

Certainly the Talmud and Peshitta Tanak were not translated from Greek source texts.

The fact is that the Peshitta Syriac Aramaic version is a revision of the Old Syriac version (towards greater agreement with the later Byzantine tyope text) and that the Old Syriac is a Syriac version of prior Western Aramaic and/or Hebrew versions of the books of the “New Testament” and as such they are important sources for restoring the original Hebrew and Aramaic of the books of the “New Testament”.

I have recently been given (by Dr. Al Garza) a thumb drive containing literally thousands of pages of Hebrew manuscripts of “New Testament” books, and their relationships to the Old Syriac Aramaic will be important clues, as I sort out those that are merely medieval Hebrew translations from Greek or Latin, from those that may actually play an important part on Hebrew and Aramaic NT origins.

Emergency Alert! Several bills are hitting our account, and we do not have the funds in our account to cover them. We have even had to delay paying our electric bill, which is now past due, because the funds were not there! This is a serious emergency! Medical bills have zapped our funds! Rent will be due in two weeks, and we do not even have the funds to cover bills today, much less the rent! We are in serious danger of a cascade of bouncing returned items! We need your help today!

As I have said to you many times, I look on this work as a co-operative one with me, and all of you combining our resources together in order to get the job done of helping to teach this great truth to all in the world who will listen. Thank you so much from the bottom of my heart for your continued support, you are the ones who make it all possible by your contributions and your prayers for our work. I truly appreciate your help in every way.

If you can make a one time donation of $500 or $1,000 dollars to support this work.

Donations can be sent by Paypal to donations@wnae.org

Or click HERE to donate

Barabbas and the Original Hebrew Gospels

Barabbas and the Original Hebrew Gospels
By
James Scott Trimm

There is an account, found in all four gospels, that there was a prevailing Passover custom in Jerusalem that allowed Pilate, the governor of Judea, to commute one prisoner’s death sentence by popular acclaim. According to all four Gospels (Matt. 27:15-26; Mk. 15:6-15; Lk. 23:13-25 and Jn. 18:38b-40) . According to all four accounts, Pilate put forward to individuals, and let the crowd choose between the two: Yeshua and Barabbas. As the accounts go, the crowd chose Barabbas.

However in the Commentary to Matthew by the Fourth Century Church Father Jerome, he makes an interesting comment, speaking about Barabbas in his commentary to Matthew 27:16 he writes “… is interpreted in the so-called Gospel according to the Hebrews as ‘son of their teacher’ (Latin: filius magistri eorum). (Jerome on Matthew 27:16)

I have written in depth about the Gospel according to the Hebrews elsewhere. It is the original source text behind the synoptic gospels (and to a lesser extent John) and our Gospel of Matthew is essentially an abridgement of it.

It has been proposed by some authors that Jerome is saying that Barabbas (Bar Abba) was not really names “Bar Abba” (son of a father) but “Bar Rabbon” (Son of their master”). The problem is that when Jerome says “their” here, is is almost certainly doing so to distinguish himself from the Jews. It is very unlikely that anyone would be given the name or title “son of their master”. It is much more likely that the word “their” is Jerome’s, and that the term that appeared in the original Hebrew Gospel source was “Son of the Master” or “Son of a Master” not “Son of their Master.” Thus we would expect the original Hebrew to read Bar Rabbah (בר רבה) rather than Bar Abba (בר אבא).

It has been proposed (by Dr. Miles Jones) that a manuscript known as the “Catalan” Gospels may express Jerome’s proposed original reading here. (The Catalan Gospels are Hebrew Gospels which are a Hebrew translation of a version in the Catalan language. Dr. Miles Jones has proposed that this Catalan version was translated from the original Hebrew (Hebrew>Catalan>Hebrew) and that this Catalan version thus holds as an important witness to Gospel origins).

Unfortunately the Catalan version has here בראבן or בר אבן in it’s text. Which might be “son of their father” but not “son of their master” and since the word “their” is almost certainly Jerome’s and not part of the original name, the Catalan Gospels do not really testify in this passage to this original reading at all.

However, both the DuTillet Hebrew Matthew and the Munster Hebrew text of Matthew, have in their accounts, not “Barabbas”, or “Bar Abba” but “Bar Rabbah” (בר רבה) just exactly as we would expect to find in the original Hebrew of the Gospels!

I have recently been given (by Dr. Al Garza) a thumb drive containing literally thousands of pages of Hebrew manuscripts of “New Testament” books, and their relationships to the Gospel according to the Hebrews and well as Du Tillet and Munster Matthew will be important clues, as I sort out those that are merely medieval Hebrew translations from Greek or Latin, from those that may actually play an important part on Hebrew and Aramaic NT origins.

Emergency Alert! Several bills are hitting our account tonight (4/14/25), and we do not have the funds in our account to cover them. We must raise at least $332 by the end of the day today or we will have cascade of bouncing returned items tonight! We need your help today!

If you can make a one time donation of $500 or $1,000 dollars to support this work.

Donations can be sent by Paypal to donations@wnae.orgor by Zelle or GoFundMe.

Click HERE to donate

Do the Old Syriac and Peshitta NT use a Greek Word for “Torah”?

Do the Old Syriac and Peshitta NT use a Greek Word for “Torah”?
By
James Scott Trimm

Recently it was suggested to me that the Old Syriac and Peshitta Aramaic versions of “New Testament” books had to be translations from a Greek source, because they use the Greek word נמוסא for “law/Torah” rather than the Aramaic word אוריתא ‘Uraita, which comes from the same root as the Hebrew word “Torah”, and which is used in the Targums and Talmuds.

Namosa is an Aramaic Word

The fact is that נמוסא (Namosa) is an Aramaic word, though it is a loan word from Greek. “Namosa” is as much an Aramaic word, as “ballet” is an English word, though it is a loan word from French. No one would argue that an English book which used the word “ballet” must have been translated from French. Likewise, the use of the Aramaic word “Namosa” in no way implies that the Old Syriac and Peshitta versions were translated from Greek.

In fact, Hebrew and Aramaic words are built upon a system of three letter root verbs. And both languages have incorporated the root verb נמס into their vocabulary systems as a root meaning “to civilize”.

The Aramaic word נימוסא is used in the Targums and the Jerusalem Talmud. For example where Psalm 1:2 says:

But his delight is in the Law of YHWH;
and in His Law does he meditate day and night.
(Psalm 1:2)

The Aramaic Targum has נימוסא nimosa for “Law [of YHWH]:

אֱלָהֵן בְּנִימוּסָא דַייָ רְעוּתֵיהּ וּבְאוֹרַיְתֵיהּ מְרַנֵן יֵמָם וְלֵילֵי

And where 1Samuel 2:13 reads:

And the priests’ custom with the people was, that, when any man offered sacrifice, the priest’s servant came, while the flesh was in seething, with a fleshhook of three teeth in his hand;
(1Sam. 2:13)

וְנִימוּסָא דְכַהֲנַיָא מִן עַמָא כָּל גְבַר דְנָכֵיס נִכְסְתָא וְאָתֵי עוּלֵימָא דְכַהֲנָא כִּמְבַשֵׁל בִּסְרָא וּמַשִׁילְיָא דִי לֵיהּ תְּלַת שְׁנִין בִּידֵיהּ:

The word for “custom” in the Targum is נימוסא nimosa.

In the Jerusalem Talmud we read the phrase “he is engaged in studying the laws of his Creator” (y.Ber. V, 9a) and again the Aramaic word is נימוסא nimosa.

Many more examples could be cited from the Rabbinic literature, both Hebrew and Aramaic. In fact in modern Hebrew in Israel today, a mother could be heard scolding her child, saying “Nimosa!” meaning to be polite, “behave yourself”.

So it is clear that this word may be of Greek origin, but it has become a loan word in Hebrew and Aramaic, and even incorporated into their system as a three letter verb root. This word is as much a Hebrew and Aramaic word as it is a Greek word, just as “ballet” is as much an English word as it is a French word.

It is very clear that the Targums and Talmuds were not translated from Greek sources, but were (in the case of the Targums) Aramaic translations of Hebrew, and (in the case of the Talmuds) composed in Aramaic.

Nomosa in the Syriac Dialect

So now let us deal with the question of the regular usage of this word in the Aramaic Old Syriac and Peshitta versions.

Syriac is a dialect of Aramaic, one of many such dialects over the centuries. Aramaic dialects of this period are classed as Eastern and Western. The Western dialects were used in Galilee and Judea, while in Syria and “Babylon” (the area of the old Babylonian captivity) Eastern dialects were used.

The Targums and Jerusalem Talmud were written in Western Aramaic, while the Peshitta and Babylonian Talmud were written in Eastern dialects of Aramaic.

The books of the “New Testament” were originally written in Hebrew or Western Aramaic. Certainly a Western Aramaic version was needed and existed from a very early time. But a Syriac Aramaic version was also soon needed for the Gentile believers at Antioch (in Syria), and so a Syriac version was probably made from the Western Aramaic version. This was primarily a revision of dialect.

So we have two Aramaic words for “Law”: אוריתא (‘Uraita) and נמוסא (Namosa). In fact the word אוריתא (‘Uraita) does appear in both the Old Syriac and the Peshitta in Matthew 11:13; 12:5 and 22:40. However the word normally used for “Torah” in the Old Syriac and Peshitta is נמוסא (Namosa).

In the Western dialects (and in the Babylonian Talmud) אוריתא (‘Uraita) is the normal word used for “Torah” (although נימוסא can be used, as in the Targum to Psalm 1:2). And in the Syriac dialect of Aramaic נמוסא (Namosa) is the normal word for “Torah” and the use of אוריתא (‘Uraita) is like using a foreign word, which the Syriac reader probably understands, but as a commonly understood word from another dialect.

In fact the word נמוסא (Namosa) is the word used for “Torah” throughout the Peshitta Tanak (“Old Testament”). For example:

Then said YHWH unto Moses, Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law (בנמוסי), or not.
(Ex. 16:4 KJV)

This is just one of literally over a hundered examples. I have previously written on the Jewish origin of the Peshitta Tanak, it is well established the the Peshitta Aramaic Tanak was translated directly from the Hebrew Tanak.

If the use of namosa for “Torah” in the Old Syriac and Peshitta “New Testament” books, proves that they were translated from Greek, then the use of the same word for “Torah” throughout the Peshitta Aramaic Tanak would also prove that Peshitta Tanak is a translation from Greek. And a proposition that would also “prove” things we know are not true, proves nothing at all.

Emergency Alert! Several bills are hitting our account on Monday night, and we do not have the funds in our account to cover them. We have even had to delay paying our electric bill, which is now past due, because the funds were not there! This is a serious emergency! Medical bills have zapped our funds! Rent will be due in two weeks, and we do not even have the funds to cover bills today, much less the rent! We are in serious danger of a cascade of bouncing returned items Monday night! We need your help today!

If you can make a one time donation of $500 or $1,000 dollars to support this work.

Donations can be sent by Paypal to donations@wnae.org

Or click HERE to donate

Did Luke Originally Begin at Luke 1:5?

Did Luke Originally Begin at Luke 1:5?
By
James Scott Trimm

In a recent blog, I wrote titled Prophecy, the Restoration and the Original Hebrew of Luke, I wrote about my analysis of a Hebrew version of Luke saying:

One interesting feature of this Hebrew manuscript of Luke, is that it has Luke 1:1-4 as a preface, and then has the “Chapter 1” heading immediately above Luke 1:5.

As I made my comparisons, I found that Luke 1:1-4 in this version, did *not* follow the general sentence structure of the Aramaic Old Syriac text of Luke 1:1-4, but that beginning in verse 5, the Hebrew and Aramaic follow very similar vocabulary, grammar and sentence structure. (I have thus far made detailed comparisons of 1:1-7). In fact the transition is striking as suddenly beginning in verse 5 the two texts become parallel.

I got a lot of response to this article, from people claiming that the “Church Father” Epiphanius claimed that the original Hebrew of Luke began with Luke 1:5.

The source of this claim was a source that quoted Epiphanius as saying that the original Hebrew Gospel of Luke began with the words “It came to pass in the days of Herod…” and referencing this to Luke 1:5.

The fact is that this quote from Epiphanius says no such thing. The relevant statement from Epiphanius in his description of the Ebionites:

And the beginning of their Gospel runs: It came to pass in the days of Herod the king of Judaea, when Caiaphas was high priest, that there came one, John by name, and baptized with the baptism of repentance in the river Jordan. It was said of him that he was of the lineage of Aaron the priest, a son of Zacharias and Elisabeth : and all went out to him.
(Epiphanius, Panarion 30.13.6)

What did Epiphanius mean by “their” Gospel? We find that a few lines earlier when he writes:

In the Gospel that is in general use among them [the Ebionites] which is called “according to Matthew”, which however is not whole and complete but forged and mutilated – they call it the Hebrews Gospel-it is reported:… (Epiphanius, Panarion 30.13.2-3)

The reference here is not to the Gospel of Luke at all, but to the Ebionite version of the Gospel of Matthew (really the Ebionite version of the Gospel according to the Hebrews, of which our Matthew is an abridgement).

Moreover, the reference is also not to material parallel to Luke 1:5 at all, but to material parallel to Luke 3:1-2 and the beginning of their parallel to Matthew 3:1.

It is easy to see when we compare the passages:

There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth.
(Luke 1:5 KJV)

[1] Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judaea, and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip tetrarch of Ituraea and of the region of Trachonitis, and Lysanias the tetrarch of Abilene,
[2] Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests, the word of God came unto John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness.
[3] And he came into all the country about Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins;
(Luke 3:1-3 KJV)

It is absolutely clear to anyone looking at these passages that Epiphanius is saying that the Ebionite version of Matthew opened with material parallel to Luke 3:1-3 and than only by quoting the phrase out of context, is it made to appear to refer to material parallel to Luke 1:5.

The fact is that this quote is not talking about an original Hebrew version of Luke, or even the book of Luke at all, but the Ebionite version of Matthew.

Here is the point Ephiphanius was trying to make. Earlier, in his analysis of the Nazarenes, he wrote:

They [The Nazarenes] have the Gospel according to Matthew quite complete, in Hebrew: for this Gospel is certainly still preserved among them as it was first written in Hebrew letters. I do not know if they have even removed the genealogy from Abraham to Christ.
(Epiphanius, Panarion 29:9:4)

But in regards to the Ebionites he writes that it ” however is not whole and complete but forged and mutilated” (Epiphanius, Panarion 30.13.2-3) He then makes the point that the Ebionites, who rejected the virgin birth, had removed the first two chapters of their version of Matthew, so that their Matthew started with material parallel to Luke 3:1-3 and with the account of Yochanan immersing in the wilderness (i.e. parallel to our Matthew chapter 3).

Anyone who actually looks at what Epiphanius is saying. can clearly see that he is not even talking about the book of Luke, and he certainly is not saying that an original Hebrew version of Luke omitted Luke 1:1-4 beginning with Luke 1:5.

I was recently provided with a thumb drive containing thousands of pages of Hebrew manuscripts of “New Testament” books in Hebrew, including every book of the “New Testament” in Hebrew! Of course the hard work is sorting thru this material, and determining what is a translation from Greek or Latin sources, and what may actually play a part in NT origins.

We need your financial support now more than ever!

As you know we have been digging ourselves out of a budget shortfall. As I have said to you many times, I look on this work as a co-operative one with me, and all of you combining our resources together in order to get the job done of helping to teach this great truth to all in the world who will listen. Thank you so much from the bottom of my heart for your continued support, you are the ones who make it all possible by your contributions and your prayers for our work. I truly appreciate your help in every way.

If you can make a one time donation of $500 or $1,000 dollars to support this work.

Donations can be sent by Paypal to donations@wnae.org

Or click HERE to donate

Cache of 4,000 Pages of Hebrew Manuscripts of NT Books!

Shalom Chaverim,

I cannot over state this. We are in a new era of Hebrew and Aramaic NT studies. In the 20th Century, with the resources that existed at that time (before the internet as we know it), I tracked down a great many resources for the time. I obtained a copy of the DuTillet Hebrew manuscript of Matthew from the Biblioteque Nationale in Paris France (this was a whole process in the 1980’s that took several months). I tracked down and obtained copies to Munster’s 1537 edition of Hebrew Matthew from a manuscript which he obtained “from the Jews”. I tracked down and obtained a facsimile of the 1551 Paris edition of Hebrew Matthew with marginal notes, published by Munster’s student Iohannes Quinquaboreus Aurilascensis. I obtained a facsimile of the Hebrew version of Hebrew which Munster had obtained from the Jews, published after his death as an appendix to a 1557 reprinting of his Hebrew Matthew. I obtained the actual Greek of the marginal notes to certain Greek manuscripts of Matthew, giving alternate readings from the “Judaikon” (Jewish version). And I also tracked down all of the citations from the “Gospel according to the Hebrews” as quoted in the Church Fathers, in the original Syriac, Greek and Latin in which they were quoted. Meanwhile my old friend Dr. George Howard had obtained and published the Hebrew text of Shem Tob’s Hebrew Matthew. And of course, I obtained copies of Aramaic NT manuscripts that were readily accessible.) All of this was a monumental task in the late twentieth century.

But as the internet has grown, libraries around the world have digitized and cataloged materials online! And over the last couple of years researchers, (not myself) as online sleuths, have tracked down and recovered dozens of previously unknown Hebrew manuscripts of New Testament books. An individual who has acted as a hub for collecting this material into one place, is Dr Albert Garza. Dr. Garza recently mailed me a thumb drive containing dozens of such manuscripts consisting of literally thousands of pages of manuscripts from libraries all over the world! I have to say, it is a bit overwhelming.

That is why I need your help today. Can you donate to support this important last days Scripture restoration by clicking here?

Of course locating and obtaining facsimiles of such manuscripts is only the first part of the job. The manuscript pages are often written in a “messy” hand and often in obscure scripts. And the job of sorting out of this massive amount of material, that which may be related to an original Hebrew and Aramaic “New Testament” and that which is merely a medieval Hebrew translation made from a Greek or Latin source, is a monumental task which has only just begun, and will take countless hours of time with “my nose in the scrolls”. Fortunately, my life experience up until now was designed to give me talents required to work at this monumental task! But it will take a lot of time and effort.

That’s why I need your help today! Can you donate to support this important last days Scripture restoration by clicking here?

That said, I need your help. As you know, my wife is chronically ill, disabled and suffering from chronic pain. And now, I too am suffering from a nervous system disorder, which has so far only been diagnosed as “polyneuropathy,” but we are pretty sure that is only a stand in, until an actual cause can be found. I am having partial paralysis and pain in my legs, as well as some other neurological symptoms. I am undergoing a lot of tests and am seeing two specialists, one of which is a neurologist. We don’t yet know what is causing my symptoms, but some of the possibilities are pretty dark. This last week I had an MRI of my brain done, I have not heard back on the results.

We are facing a lot of added medical expenses. The co-pay on my MRI alone was nearly $100, and I just picked up prescriptions for my wife and I that totaled $150 after insurance! We really need your financial support today.

We need your financial support now more than ever! We must raise at least $516 to cover bills clearing our account tonight!

If you can make a one time donation of $500 or $1,000 dollars to support this work.

Donations can be sent by Paypal to donations@wnae.org.

Or click HERE to donate

A Manuscript of the Entire “New Testament” in Hebrew!

Shalom Chaverim,

We live in a time that is truly amazing. Enoch the Prophet prophesied that the restoration would include a bonus, a restoration of lost books:

But when they write down truthfully all my words in their languages, and do not change or diminish ought from my words but write them all down truthfully –all that I first testified concerning them. Then, I know another mystery, that books will be given to the righteous and the wise to become a cause of joy and uprightness and much wisdom. And to them shall the books be given, and they shall believe in them and rejoice over them, and then shall all the righteous who have learnt therefore all the paths of uprightness be recompensed.’
(1Enoch 104:10-13)

Enoch was speaking of this generation. I have been given several projects that will put more of the Word of YHWH into the hands of the people. There is much work to be done, and less time than ever in which to get it done.

The time is near at hand in which “the deaf shall hear the words of the book, and the eyes of the blind shall see out of obscurity, and out of darkness.” (Isaiah 29:18)

The purpose of the Scripture Restoration Project is the prophetic fulfillment of 1Enoch 104:10-13 and Isaiah 29:18!

Recently I was sent a thumb drive containing approximately thirty Hebrew manuscripts of books of the “New Testament”, to add to the manuscripts of Hebrew Matthew, Hebrew Hebrews, and Aramaic manuscripts of the book of the “New Testament” books, that I already have in my library.

I have only scratched the surface in examining the material on this thumb drive. I understand it contains a total of about 4,000 pages of manuscripts!

Today I opened the third of about thirty manuscripts, and discovered a handwritten Hebrew manuscript from 1536 preserved in the Freiburg University Library, (Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany Ms. 314.) This is a handwritten codex in Hebrew, over 500 pages of text. The first few pages are missing, but the text begins in the middle of Matthew 3:2 and continues thru the end of the book of Revelation! I have only just begun to examine the first page of this manuscript, so it is far too early to say anything about it’s possible relationship to an original Hebrew NT text. None the less, this new cache of manuscripts is very exciting! And I will, as always, keep you updated on what I find!

Analyzing these thousands of pages of manuscripts takes a lot of time and effort. You are the ones fueling this restoration with your donations. I could never afford to dedicate so many hours to this work without you.

We need your financial support now more than ever!

As you know we have been digging ourselves out of a budget shortfall. As I have said to you many times, I look on this work as aco-operative one with me, and all of you combining our resources together in order to get the job done of helping to teach this great truth to all in the world who will listen. Thank you so much from the bottom of my heart for your continued support, you are the ones who make it all possible by your contributions and your prayers for our work. I truly appreciate your help in every way.

If you can make a one time donation of $500 or $1,000 dollars to support this work.

Donations can be sent by Paypal to donations@wnae.org.

Or click HERE to donate

Ms. Pococke 280 – 2Peter-1John in Hebrew?

Shalom Chaverim,

This afternoon, having completed my analysis of the Harley Hebrew manuscript of Matthew, I opened the next file folder on the thumb drive (A thumb drive recently sent to me containing about 30 Hebrew NT manuscripts with which I was not previously familiar.

The next file folder was Bodleian Libraries, University of Oxford, MS. Pococke 280. Fragments of the Hebrew New Testament (ff. 92v-101v 2Peter/1st John). Date 1301–1500. This folder contained twelve jpg files labeled pages 1-12.

I printed out page 1 to make it easier to examine. As I looked at the text, I immediately realized that someone had been misled. This was not Hebrew at all, it was clearly Aramaic. And it was not very promising for NT origins, because the second word was פטרוס a transliteration of the Greek name Petros. As I examined it further, I recognized the text. I pulled a standard edition of the Syriac New Testament from its shelf and quickly confirmed that this was a transliteration of the standard Syriac of 2Peter into Hebrew letters. Of course 2Peter was not actually part of the Peshitta (which is why I used the term “Syriac New Testament), however standard editions insert the extra Peshitta epistles of 2 Peter, 2nd and 3rd John and Jude from the Philoxenian version so as to have a complete 27 book cannon.

At any rate, this manuscript is in Aramaic, not Hebrew, and is only a copying of the standard Syriac text into Hebrew rather than Syriac letters. Nothing new here.

I still have several more manuscripts on the thumb drive to analyze. Hopefully some of the rest offer something new.

In regards to my health issues, I am having a lot of tests run, and I have referrals to two different specialists, all of these have co-pays. The day before yesterday I got MRI of my brain. They asked if I had any metal in my body. “Yes, I said, Iron, magnesium and zinc.” They asked if I had any head imaging done before? “Yes” I said, “In fact we had portraits done in school every year.”

In all seriousness though, we definitely do need your financial support now more than ever.

We need your financial support now more than ever!

If you can make a one time donation of $500 or $1,000 dollars to support this work.

Donations can be sent by Paypal to donations@wnae.org.

Or click HERE to donate

The Harley MS 7637 Hebrew Matthew

Shalom Chaverim,

These last few days I have had my head buried in the scrolls. As you may know, last week I received in the mail, a thumb drive containing about thirty Hebrew manuscripts of “New Testament” books, which I had not previously examined. The first of these is The Harley Hebrew manuscript of Matthew (British Library; Harley 7637) an 18th Century Hebrew manuscript of Matthew . As I opened this PDF facsimile of the manuscript, I immediately recognized the title page, which is virtually identical to that of the Iohannes Quinquarboreus Aurilacensis printed edition published in Paris in 1551, a facsimile of which is in my personal library. The formatting, line breaks, relative sizes of letters, etc. of the two title pages are virtually identical in the two documents.

My English translation of the title pages “The Torah of the Messiah, the Renewed Torah of Elohim and Goodnews of our Lord Yeshua the Messiah according to Matti the Evangelist.”

The Aurilecensis 1551 Paris edition, is a reprinting, with very slight variations, of the text of the 1537 Munster edition of Hebrew text of Matthew, published by Sebastian Munster. However, unlike the Munster edition, this 1551 edition, includes many marginal notes offering “corrections” (חסר) and alternate readings.

The text of Harley is almost identical to the text of the this 1551 edition, following it, rather than the 1537 edition, where they (the 1537 and 1551 editions) differ.

in 2020 Joseph Gebhardt-Klein Published a paper titled A New Intermediate Text of Rabinical-Hebrew Matthew: The Harley Manuscript. Gebhardt-Klein came to the conclusion that the Harley manuscript was an independent version of Hebrew Matthew (not dependent on Munster) intermediate between Munster and the texts of DuTillet and Shem Tob. Unfortunately he does not seem to have consulted the 1551 edition, skewing the results of his study.

When the Harley manuscript departs from the text of the 1551 edition, it is almost always to incorporate variant readings and corrections offered in the margin of the 1551 edition. Another class of differences is that Harley often spells words which appear “defectively” in the 1537 and 1551 editions with a vav or yud, and in doing so tends to agree with the DuTillet Hebrew Text (this more likely a tendency of the scribe, not any dependence an a manuscript agreeing with DuTillet). Also, wherever the 1537 and 1551 editions contain the sacred name of YHWH the Harley manuscript has either three yuds arranged in a triangle, similar to that of the DuTillet text, or two yuds, as common in traditional Rabbinic texts (the vowel pointing makes it difficult to me certain).

It appears that the Harley manuscript, is simply the work of an unknown scribe, copying from the 1551 edition, but following his preference of spelling words with a vav or yud rather than defectively, replacing the Sacred Name of YHWH with two or three yuds, and frequently incorporating corrections and alternate readings from the margins of the 1551 edition.

Of course one might take the Harley ms as a copy made from one of the sources for the 1551 edition, but this seems unlikely because of the near exact match of the formatting of the title page. Moreover, the Harley ms. even copies some of the marginal notes from the 1552 edition. If Harley was truly independent of the 1551 edition, we would expect to see some evidence of that.

That said, the study done by Gebhardt-Klein for his paper is still of great value, it must simply be applied to the 1552 edition source, rather than the Harley edition. This study shows sixty places where the Harley manuscript departs from the 1537 text in agreement with either the DuTillet or Shem Tob Hebrew versions. In 46 of the 60 cases, these are actually readings drawn from the alternate readings offered in the margin of the 1552 edition. In seven of the 60, the variance if a variance between the 1551 edition and the 1537 edition. In at least on case (Matthew 24:12) Gebhardt-Klein appears to have misread the 1537 text.

When we apply Gebhardt-Klein’s research to the 1551 edition, we find evidence that the marginal notes offering alternate readings and corrections in the 1551 edition, are actually offering alternate readings form other Hebrew manuscripts of Matthew which were in the possession of Aurilecensis in 1551. This makes these marginal notes a much more important resource.

This finding is further supported by the marginal note to Matthew 1:13 which suggests “Av’ner” (אבנר) as an alternate reading to the name “Avichud” (אביהוד)

There is a well known mistake in the Greek text of this passage. While the text itself claims to give three lists of fourteen names (Mt. 1:17), the Greek text contains only 13 names in the last list:

14 names from Abraham to David:

1. Abraham
2. Isaac
3. Jacob
4. Judas
5. Phares
6. Esrom
7. Aram
8. Aminadab
9. Naasson
10. Salmon
11. Boaz
12. Obed
13. Jesse
14. David

14 names from David to the carrying away to Babylon

1. Solomon
2. Roboam
3. Abia
4. Asa
5. Jehosaphat
6. Joram
7. Ozias
8. Joatham
9. Achaz
10. Ezekias
11. Manases
12 Amon
13. Josias
14. Jehonias (carrying away to Babylon)

13 names from carrying away to Babylon to Messiah

1. Salathiel
2. Zorobabel
3. Abiud
4. Eliakim
5. Azur
6. Sadoc
7. Achim
8. Eliud
9. Eleazar
10. Matthan
11. Jacob
12. Joseph
13. Yeshua/Jesus

Now the DuTillet Hebrew manuscript of Matthew contains the missing Name “Abner” which occurs between Abiud and Eliakim in the DuTillet Hebrew text of Mt. 1:13. In Hebrew and Aramaic “d” (ד) and “r” (ר) look very much alike and are often misread for each other. In this case a scribe must have looked back up to his source manuscript and picked back up with the wrong name, thus omitting “Abner” from the list. The Greek text must have come from a Hebrew or Aramaic copy which lacked the name “Abner.” There is amazingly clear evidence for this. The Old Syriac Aramaic version of Matthew was lost from the fourth century until its rediscovery in the 19th century. This ancient Aramaic text has “Aviur” where the Greek has “Aviud” thus catching the error in a sort of “freeze frame” and demonstrating the reliability of the reading in the Hebrew.

The Hebrew versions of Matthew that have come down to us may be categorized into two basic text versions. The readings we find in the DuTillet, Munster texts exhibit a great deal of agreement with each other, with only minor variations from text to text. We will call this the “Traditional” Hebrew text. On the other hand, the Shem Tob text, while having a direct relationship with the Traditional Hebrew text, is a very different Hebrew text with many layers of corruption.

Some time back I noticed that this 1551 edition gives a marginal note to אביהוד (Abihud) which reads נא אבנר. נא is a Hebrew abbreviation meaning “in another version” and אבנר is the name “Abner”. This reading also makes it clear that these are alternate readings from other Hebrew manuscripts of Matthew. This is because this reading is a key variance in the DuTillet Hebrew version of Matthew.

So while the Harley manuscripts is just a late 18th century copying of material from the 1551 edition, the study by Joseph Gebhardt-Klein solidifies the fact that the marginal notes in the 1551 edition do testify of authentic alternate readings from other copies of Hebrew Matthew, then in the possession Iohannes Quinquarboreus Aurilacensis .

I still have about 29 more “new” manuscripts on the thumb drive to analyze.

We need your financial support now more than ever!

In all seriousness though, we definitely do need your financial support now more than ever.

If you can make a one time donation of $500 or $1,000 dollars to support this work.

Donations can be sent by Paypal to donations@wnae.org.

Or click HERE to donate

When is the Biblical Year Extended by a Month?

When is the Biblical Year Extended by a Month?
By
James Scott Trimm

There has been some debate in the movement in recent years, over just how the Hebrew calendar works, and particularly when a additional month is added to the year.

A solar year is 365.2425 days and a lunar year (twelve lunar months) is 354.37 days. As a result the lunar year will fall behind the solar year by 10.8725 days each year. As you can imagine, without some system of correction, the Hebrew lunar calendar would fall behind by more than a month over a period of three year, and in a short time, the seasons will totally fall out of place, the Spring months will soon be taking place in winter. There has been much controversy in the movement about how to resolve this problem.

The Karaite System

The Karaites determine the beginning of their month of Aviv by looking for green ears of the barley. When they find the barley they then declare that next New Moon the month of Aviv. This means that if they do not spot barley before the New Moon immediately following the month of Adar, they enter a limbo period, until a New Moon after barley is spotted. Normally this would be the next New Moon, but if there is a famine and no crop at all that year, it could last twelve or thirteen months.

The First New Moon After the Equinox?

Some have argued based on Calendrical evidence found among the Elaphantine Papyri, that the first new moon after the Spring Equinox is always the beginning of the new year (i.e. the first of Nisan), and that Adar II is added to the year whenever calculations show that the first of Nisan would otherwise occur before the Spring Equinox.

This system comes from the Elephantine papyri, however these papyri are from an apostate community in Elephantine Egypt. This apostate group had their own Temple in Egypt which functioned alongside that of the local ram-headed deity, Khnum. They worshiped YHWH as a god within the Egyptian pantheon.

The Elephantine papyri show that the Jewish community of Elephantine used the Egyptian and Babylonian calendars. (see Sacha Stern, “The Babylonian Calendar at Elephantine”, Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 130, 159–171(2000).)

So these Elephantine papyri are not the best source for YHWH’s true calendar.

The Modern Rabbinic System

Modern Rabbinic Judaism has another system. Since the discrepancy between the solar and lunar years amounts to about 207 days every 19 years, the “leap month” of Adar Sheni (Adar II) is added to the third, sixth, eight, eleventh, fourteenth, seventeenth and nineteenth year of every nineteen year period, that is, seven times in a 19-year lunar cycle.

The Modern Rabbinic system is a fixed arithmetic mathematical system intended to replace to ancient observational Hebrew system (which we will cover below). The observed calendar required the Sanhedrin to review the facts and make a decree. As we read in the Talmud:
A. Cases involving flogging, [are judged] By three [judges];
B. in the name of R. Ishmael it is said, By twenty-three.
C. The intercalation of the month is effected by a court of three;
D. the intercalation of the year, By three: so R. Meir.
E. But R. Simeon b. Gamaliel says the matter is initiated by three, discussed by five and determined by seven.
F. If however, it be determined only by three, the intercalation holds good.
(m.Sanhedrin 1:2)

And in the Gemara to this Mishna we read:

Our Rabbis taught:
A year cannot be extended
unless the Nasi sanctions it.
(b.Sanhedrin 11a)

The fixed system was established on the authority of Hillel II, Nasi of the Rabbinic Sanhedrin in 358 CE. At this time Rome had outlawed the meetings of the Sanhedrin. Constantius II, following the precedents of Hadrian, prohibited the holding of such meetings as well as the vending of articles for distinctly Jewish purposes. In shutting down the Rabbinic Sanhedrin, Hillel II set the fixed calendar in motion, so that the feasts could continue to be observed in Rabbinic Judaism without a Sanhedrin to regulate the calendar and declare when a year should be extended.

The Original Observed Year

So how does the original Hebrew observational calendar regulate the year?

Perhaps we should begin at the beginning. In Genesis 1:14-16 we read:

“And Elohim said:
Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven
to divide the day from the night.
And let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years.
And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven,
to give light upon the earth. And it was so.
And Elohim made the two great lights:
the greater light to rule the day,
and the lesser light to rule the night,
and the stars.”
(Gen. 1:14-16 HRV)

The word for “seasons” above is MOEDIM (set times) the same Hebrew word used to describe the feasts.

Notice that there is no mention of barley here, only reference to the Sun, Moon and stars.

It is clear that the Sun regulates the beginning and end of the day and the moon regulates the beginning and end of the month, and that leaves the stars to regulate the beginning and end of the year.

The Karaite system uses barley to regulate the beginning and end of the year, though no barley is mentioned in Gen. 1:14-16. Moreover the Karaite calendar makes no use of the stars at all. Thus the Karaite system is not compatible with Gen. 1:14-16.

Now the Hebrew year was a cycle bisected across the middle, with two beginnings/endings marking the former and latter rains at the Spring Equinox and Fall Equinox.

Every year at the Feast of Trumpets I hear well meaning people insist (based on Ex. 12:1-2) that the Feast of Trumpets should not be called Rosh HaShanna (The New Year).

The truth is that there are two primary “new years” on the Hebrew calendar.

Nissan is the Religious new year:

And YHWH spoke unto Moshe and Aharon in the land of Egypt, saying:
This month shall be unto you the beginning of months:
it shall be the first month of the year to you.
(Ex. 12:1-2 HRV)

But there is another civil “New Year” Six months later at the month of Tishre.

This is evidenced in the Torah as the Sabbath years are counted from Sukkot to Sukkot:

10 And Moshe commanded them saying, At the end of every seven years, in the set time of the year of release, in the feast of Sukkot,
11 When all Yisra’el is come to appear before YHWH your Elohim, in the place which He shall choose, you shall read this Torah before all Yisra’el in their hearing.
12 Assemble the people–the men and the women and the little ones, and your stranger that is within your gates–that they may hear, and that they may learn, and fear YHWH your Elohim, and observe to do all the words of this Torah.
13 And that their children who have not known, may hear: and learn to fear YHWH your Elohim, as long as you live in the land, where you go over the Yarden to possess it.
(Deuteronomy 31:10-13 HRV)

And the Jubilee year cycle begins with Yom Kippur each 50’th year:

1 And YHWH spoke unto Moshe in mount Sinai, saying:
2 Speak unto the children of Yisra’el, and say unto them, When you come into the land which I give you, then shall the land keep a Sabbath unto YHWH.
3 Six years you shall sow your field, and six years you shall prune your vineyard, and gather in the produce thereof.
4 But in the seventh year, shall be a Sabbath of solemn rest for the land–a Sabbath unto
YHWH–you shall neither sow your field, nor prune your vineyard.
5 That which grows of itself of your harvest, you shall not reap, and the grapes of your undressed vine, you shall not gather: it shall be a year of solemn rest for the land.
6 And the Sabbath produce of the land, shall be for food for you: for you, and for your servant, and for your maid, and for your hired servant, and for the settler by your side that sojourns with you,
7 And for your cattle, and for the beasts that are in your land, shall all the increase thereof be for food.
8 And you shall number seven Sabbaths of years unto you, seven times seven years: and there shall be unto you, the days of seven Sabbaths of years, even forty and nine years.
9 Then shall you make proclamation with the blast of the shofar, on the tenth day of the seventh month. In the Yom Kippur, shall you make proclamation with the shofar throughout all your land.
(Lev. 25:1-9 HRV)

Moreover Sukkot (also known as the feast of the ingathering) occurs at the “turn of the year” (KJV has “end of the year”):

And you shall observe the feast of weeks:
even of the first fruits of wheat harvest,
and the feast of ingathering at the turn of the year.
(Ex. 34:22 HRV)

For this reason the first day of the month of Tishri (the month in which Yom Kippur and Sukkot occur) is not only the Feast of Trumpets, it is also called “Rosh HaShanna” (the Head of the Year).

Now the word for “turn” in the phrase “turn of the year” in the Hebrew is “Tekufa”.

This word TEKUFA is a key word in understanding the regulation of the year in the Hebrew calendar. The word TEKUFA literally means “cycle” or “circuit”. This word is also used to refer to the two solar equinoxes and the two solar solstices, and by extension, to the four seasons of the year. An equinox or solstice is called a TEKUFA and the Season that each TEKUFA begins is named in connection with the month in which the TEKUFA typically occurs.

Fall/Autumn is called TEKUFAT Tishri.

(The Season of Tishri)

Winter is called TEKUFAT Tevet.

(The Season of Tevet)

Spring is called TEKUFAT Nisan or TEKUFAT Abib.

(The Season of Nisan; or the Season of Abib)

Summer is called TEKUFAT Tammuz.

(The Season of Tammuz)

Sometimes the Season is named without using the word TEKUFAH (season) just as we in English do not always say “The Season of Spring”. As a result the names of these months may refer to their lunar months, or to the season that also bears their name.

As we read in the Talmud:

Samuel stated: The vernal equinox occurs only at the beginning of one of the four quarters of the day viz., either at the beginning of the day or at the beginning of the night or at midday or at midnight. The summer solstice only occurs either at the end of one and a half, or at the end of seven and a half hours of the day or the night. The autumnal equinox only occurs at the end of three, or nine hours of the day or the night, and the winter solstice only occurs at the end of four and a half, or ten and a half hours of the day or the night. The duration of a season of the year is no longer than ninety-one days and seven and a half hours; and the beginning of one season is removed from that of the other by no more than one half of a planetary hour.
(b.Eruvin 56a)

The original Observed Hebrew Year in the Talmud

Now we read in the Torah:

Observe the month (chodesh) of Aviv,
and keep the Pesach unto YHWH your Elohim:
for in the month (chodesh) of Aviv,
YHWH your Elohim brought you forth out of Egypt, by night.
(Deut. 16:1 HRV)

Now the Hebrew word CHODESH can refer either to a month, or to the beginning of something. Rav Hunna understood this verse as referring not to the “month of Aviv” but to the beginning of the SEASON (TEKUFA) of Aviv. As we read in the Talmud:

Rabbi Huna bar Avin sent an instruction to Raba:
When you see that the cycle [TEKUFAT] of Tevet [i.e. Winter]
extends to the sixteenth of Nisan, declare that year a leap year
and be not trobuled, since it is written:
“Observe the month [hodesh] of Aviv”,
i.e. Observe the Aviv of the TEKUFA [the Spring Equinox]
in the earlier portion [hodesh] of Nisan.
(b.Rosh HaShanna 21a)

In other words Rav Huna understood this passage to mean that the TEKUFA of AVIV (the Spring Equinox) must occur in the first half of the month of Nisan.

As we read also in Targum Jonathan:

Be mindful to keep the times of the festivals,
with the intercalations of the year,
and to observe the TEKUFA thereof in the month of Aviv
to perform the Passover before YHWH your Elohim,
because in the month of Aviv
YHWH your Elohim brought you out of Egypt;
you shall eat thereof by night.
(Targum Jonathan on Deut. 16:1)

The next text of Torah we must examine is the following:

And you shall observe the feast of weeks:
even of the first fruits of wheat harvest,
and the feast of ingathering (i.e. Sukkot)
at the turn [TEKUFA] of the year.
(Ex. 34:22 HRV)

Rabbi Judah understood this verse as meaning that at least part of the Feast of Sukkot should be kept in the TEKUFA Tishri [Autumn/Fall]. As we read in the Talmud:

Rab Judah said in Samuel’s name: A year is not to be intercalated [extended] unless the [spring] Tekufah is short of completion by the greater part of the month. And how much is that? — Sixteen days: so holds R. Judah.

R. Jose said: Twenty-one days. Now, both deduce it from the same verse: “And the Feast of Ingathering at the Tekufah [season] of the year.” (Ex. 34:22). One Master holds that the whole Feast [of ingathering] is required to be included [in the new Tishri Tekufa]; the other, that only a part of the Festival [of ingathering] must [be included].
(b.Sanhedrin 12b)

Now the first day of Sukkot will generally occur 177 days after the first day of Passover. While the Autumn Equinox (Tekufa of Tishri) is about 183 days after the Spring Equinox (Tekufa of Aviv/Nisan). There is generally a six day difference.

If the 15^th of Nisan falls on the Spring Equinox, then the first day of Sukkot will fall about six days before the Autumn Equinox. And since Sukkot is seven days long (the eighth day generally thought of as another festival), at least one day of Sukkot would fall after the Autumn Equinox, thus fulfilling the requirement of Ex. 34:22 as understood by Rabbi Judah.

This leads to the rule stated by Rabbi Judah:

“A year is not to be intercalated [extended]
unless the [spring] Tekufah is short of completion
by the greater part of the month [i.e Sixteen days].”

This means that at least 16 days of Nisan must occur after the Spring Equinox, meaning that the 14^th of Nisan must occur after the Spring Equinox. If calculations how that the 14^th of Nisan will occur before the Spring Equinox, the additional month of Adar II is added, thus pushing the 14^th of Nisan (and all of Passover) beyond the Equinox and at least part of Sukkot beyond the Automn Equinox.

You may have noticed that Rav Huna instructed Raba:

When you see that the cycle [TEKUFAT] of Tevet [i.e. Winter]
extends to the sixteenth of Nisan, declare that year a leap year
and be not troubled,…
(b.Rosh HaShanna 21a)

This is not stating the rule, it is stating that in this hypothetical situation, it is not even a close call, and one can “be not troubled” in adding the additional month. Huna’s rule is stated in the words which follow these: “Observe the Aviv of the TEKUFA in the earlier portion [hodesh] of Nisan.” Meaning that the Spring Equinox must occur in the first half (before the 14^th) of Nisan.

The Spring Equinox was determined by the Hebrews by tracking the path of the sun through the constellations. As Josephus writes:

In the month of Xanthicus, which is by us called Nisan, and is the beginning
of our year, on the fourteenth day of the lunar month, when the sun is in Aries, (for in this month it was that we were delivered from bondage under the Egyptians,) the law ordained that we should every year slay that sacrifice which I before told you we slew when we came out of Egypt, and which was called the Passover; and so we do celebrate this passover in companies, leaving nothing of what we sacrifice till the day following.
(Josephus, Antiquities, 3:10:5)

Thus this system involves use of the stars in establishing the set times, which the Karaite calendar does not.

The Original Observed Year Before Messiah

Now one might suggest that these rules and understandings laid out in the Talmud were late inventions, and not the true ancient tradition of the Hebrew Calendar.

However we have an even more ancient sources, which verify the antiquity and authenticity of this rule.

Philo writes (who wrote about the same time as Paul) wrote:

(161) But to the seventh day of the week he has assigned the greatest festivals, those of the longest duration, at the periods of the equinox both vernal and autumnal in each year; appointing two festivals for these two epochs, each lasting seven days; the one which takes place in the spring being for the perfection of what is being sown, and the one which falls in autumn being a feast of thanksgiving for the bringing home of all the fruits which the trees have produced. And seven days have very appropriately been appointed to the seventh month of each equinox, so that each month might receive an especial honour of one sacred day of festival, for the purpose of refreshing and cheering the mind with its holiday.
(Philo; Decalogue 30, 161)
So according to Philo, Passover must occur “in the Spring” (after the Spring Equinox) and at least part of Sukkot must occur “in the Autumn” (after the Autumn Equinox).

Moreover we read in the Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius:

12. The church of Laodicea was honored by two such pastors in succession, who, in the providence of God, came after the aforesaid war from Alexandria to that city.

13. Anatolius did not write very many works; but in such as have come down to us we can discern his eloquence and erudition. In these he states particularly his opinions on the passover. It seems important to give here the following extracts from them.

14. From the Paschal Canons of Anatolius. “There is then in the first year the new moon of the first month, which is the beginning of every cycle of nineteen years, on the twenty-sixth day of the Egyptian Phamenoth; but according to the months of the Macedonians, the twenty-second day of Dystrus, or, as the Romans would say, the eleventh before the Kalends of April.

15. On the said twenty-sixth of Phamenoth, the sun is found not only entered on the first segment, but already passing through the fourth day in it. They are accustomed to call this segment the first dodecatomorion, and the equinox, and the beginning of months, and the head of the cycle, and the starting-point of the planetary circuit. But they call the one preceding this the last of months, and the twelfth segment, and the final dodecatomorion, and the end of the planetary circuit. Wherefore we maintain that those who place the first month in it, and determine by it the fourteenth of the passover, commit no slight or common blunder.

16. And this is not an opinion of our own; but it was known to the Jews of old, even before Christ, and was carefully observed by them. This may be learned from what is said by Philo, Josephus, and Musæus; and not only by them, but also by those yet more ancient, the two Agathobuli, surnamed `Masters,’ and the famous Aristobulus, who was chosen among the seventy interpreters of the sacred and divine Hebrew Scriptures by Ptolemy Philadelphus and his father, and who also dedicated his exegetical books on the law of Moses to the same kings.

17. These writers, explaining questions in regard to the Exodus, say that all alike should sacrifice the passover offerings after the vernal equinox, in the middle of the first month. But this occurs while the sun is passing through the first segment of the solar, or as some of them have styled it, the zodiacal circle. Aristobulus adds that it is necessary for the feast of the passover, that not only the sun should pass through the equinoctial segment, but the moon also.

18. For as there are two equinoctial segments, the vernal and the autumnal, directly opposite each other, and as the day of the passover was appointed on the fourteenth of the month, beginning with the evening, the moon will hold a position diametrically opposite the sun, as may be seen in full moons; and the sun will be in the segment of the vernal equinox, and of necessity the moon in that of the autumnal.

19. I know that many other things have been said by them, some of them probable, and some approaching absolute demonstration, by which they endeavor to prove that it is altogether necessary to keep the passover and the feast of unleavened bread after the equinox. But I refrain from demanding this sort of demonstration for matters from which the veil of the Mosaic law has been removed, so that now at length with uncovered face we continually behold as in a glass Christ and the
teachings and sufferings of Christ. But that with the Hebrews the first month was near the equinox, the teachings also of the Book of Enoch show.”
(Eusebius; Eccl. History 7:32:13-19)

So according to Eusebius:

“…the Jews of old, even before Christ, …Philo, Josephus, and Musæus; and not only … them, but also by those yet more ancient, the two Agathobuli, surnamed `Masters,’ and the famous Aristobulus, who was chosen among the seventy interpreters of the sacred and divine Hebrew Scriptures by Ptolemy Philadelphus and his father, and who also dedicated his exegetical books on the law of Moses to the same kings.)”

Relayed the rule that:

“all alike should sacrifice the Passover offerings after the vernal equinox,”

And specifically Eusebius quotes Aristobulus as follows:

It is necessary for the feast of the passover, that not only the sun should pass through the equinoctial segment, but the moon also. For as there are two equinoctial segments, the vernal and the autumnal, directly opposite each other, and as the day of the passover was appointed on the fourteenth of the month, beginning with the evening, the moon will hold a position diametrically opposite the sun, as may be seen in full moons; and the sun will be in the segment of the vernal equinox, and of necessity the moon in that of the autumnal.

Aristobulus lived around 200 years before the time of Yeshua. So here we have our rule stated from a source much older than the time of Messiah.

Restoration of the Observed Hebrew Year

Now the Modern Rabbinic fixed system for determining the beginning of the year, was originally intended to produce the same result as the observational Hebrew calendar, however over the 1,600 years since it was enacted, the Spring Equinox has drifted, so that the fixed calendar does not always produce the same result as the observed calendar. In fact in 2008 the two diverged, the fixed calendar added the additional month of Adar II, but the original observed calendar would not call for the addition until 2009.

Some voices in Rabbinic Judaism have suggested that an equal authority (a modern Rabbinic Sanhedrin) can either amend it or reinstate the observational Hebrew calendar. F or example, the Temple Institute website site suggests:

“A new Sanhedrin sits today in Jerusalem. May [Yahweh] grant them the authority to accept testimony and proclaim the new month throughout the land. For the real battle in Israel is the battle over the calendar: for he who controls the calendar, controls the spiritual seasons of all living souls.”

Of course the ancient Nazarenes had their own Sanhedrin (as we see in Acts 15). A true and correct understanding of Col. 2:16-17 and Romans 13-14 also reveals to us that the Beit Din holds the authority to regulate the calendar. While the meetings of the ancient Nazarene Sanhedrin would also have been outlawed by the same decree in 358 CE, which had outlawed meetings of the Rabbinic Sanhedrin, a restored International Nazarene Beit Din was established in 1996 which can, and should assume its natural historical role in declaring when a year should be extended with the additional month of Adar II (and when it should not be extended) following the rule that was used by our forefathers since long before the time of Messiah. Part of the marvelous work and wonder of the restoration, is the restoration of the original observed Hebrew year.

Our electric bill will be due Tomorow! We need your help today!

In regards to my health issues, I am having a lot of tests run, and I have referrals to two different specialists, all of these have co-pays. And I will soon be getting an MRI of my brain. We definitely need your financial support now more than ever.

The time is short, and there is much work to be done. This is no time to pull back from the great work in front of us!

If you can make a one time donation of $500 or $1,000 dollars to support this work.

Now is time to step up to the plate!

Donations can be sent by Paypal to donations@wnae.org

Or click HERE to donate

A Bunch of New Hebrew Manuscripts!

Shalom Chaveriom,

This last week has been very interesting. Two different researchers reached out to me to share information on Hebrew NT origins. One of these individuals mailed me a thumb drive with about 30 recently uncovered Hebrew NT manuscripts, many of which I had never seen before.

I opened the first document on the thumb drive, a Hebrew manuscript of Matthew, and immediately recognized the text as very similar, but not identical, to one I have had for years. I have spent the weekend doing some initial comparisons of this manuscript with other Hebrew manuscripts of Matthew in my library, with some truly interesting results. I am going to have to do a full, line by line comparison of this Hebrew text of Matthew with other Hebrew and Aramaic texts in my library, in order to clarify some of the results. I really cannot say too much right now, other than to say that there are two possible relationships this text has to some others, and either one will result in an important discovery concerning Hebrew Matthew. One way or another, I will have an important new discovery to announce when this analysis is complete! Unfortunately this type of analysis takes hours and days. I have a big table with facsimiles of multiple Hebrew and Aramaic manuscripts laid out, as I compare the new manuscript to all of the others. It is very much “disappearing into the zone” kind of work. Fortunately I have a talent for this kind of thing, comparing data and seeing correlations and relationships. It is kind of like I go into another world, and it is just me and the manuscripts.

The exciting thing is that this is only one of about thirty manuscript facsimiles on this thumb drive!

These are very exciting times!

In the near future, I will giving reports on the results of this analysis.

Our electric bill will be due Tomorow! We need your help today!

In regards to my health issues, I am having a lot of tests run, and I have referrals to two different specialists, all of these have co-pays. And I will soon be getting an MRI of my brain. We definitely need your financial support now more than ever.

The time is short, and there is much work to be done. This is no time to pull back from the great work in front of us!

If you can make a one time donation of $500 or $1,000 dollars to support this work.

Now is time to step up to the plate!