Support BFA

Leave a Reply

  • Shalom, I just listened listened to Live From Quarantine #7. Just for clarification, are the questions regarding Hebrew Matthew on this page still going to be answered, or do we have to re-ask them somewhere else? Thank you.

  • Question for Nehemia’s interview on “Live from Quarantine”:
    Hypothetically speaking, if Nehemia was a first century Karaite (and that was the only world he grew up in and knew), and if Nehemia happen-chanced to be there that day that Yeshua taught the Sermon on the Mount, how would Nehemia react to Yeshua not only affirming the Torah but actually taking it one step higher: “You have heard that it was said long ago do not murder…but I tell you anyone who is angry with his brother or sister…will be subject to judgment. …You have heard that it was said do not commit adultery, but I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” — As a first century Karaite, would Nehemia say this Yeshua fellow is adding to the Torah unlawfully, or would Nehemia say this Yeshua fellow is actually explaining the Torah in a way that Yehovah really wanted, namely, that it would be “written on our hearts” rather than just keeping commandments without our hearts being truly devoted? This question goes even beyond Phariseeism and Karaism. Even though a first century Nehemia as a Karaite would keep only the commandments (not the manmade rabbinical hoops), would a first century Nehemia think this Yeshua fellow is saying I want more than you keeping the commandments…I want your heart and this is the way how? I want to know how a first century Nehemia would react standing there that day Yeshua got up and proclaimed the sermon on the mount (follower or dissenter?).

  • Shalom Nehemia and Keith. In Nehemia’s book The Hebrew Yeshua Vs. The Greek Jesus (in chapter 6) you discuss the Hebraisms in the Greek Matthew and compare them to the Septuagint. You specifically focus on the Hebrew word “vayehi (‘and it was’)” and show that the Greek Septuagint and Matthew translate this word literally as “kai egento (‘and it was’).” “And it was? And what was?! In Greek it’s gibberish!” (p.34) Later you state that this can only be a Hebraism and NOT Aramaism (p.35). However, in your live teaching of the book you state that based on verses like Mat. 27:46 (where Yeshua says in Aramaic,” Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani.”[ Hebrew Matthew makes it clear that Yeshua said this in Hebrew “the holy language”]) that our Greek Matthew may actually be a second hand translation of Aramaic which was a translation of the Hebrew. So my question is: If the Greek Matthew is a translation of an Aramaic translation then why are there Hebraisms? Where portions of Greek Matthew translated from the original Hebrew and other portions translated from an Aramaic translation?
    Thank you.

  • Dear Nehemia,

    Is there any way that you can supply the manuscript numbers for the two Shem Tov Hebrew Matthew manuscripts that you located which correctly identify Joseph as the father of Miriyam instead of her husband in Matthew 1:16? I would like to include reference to them in a book that I am writing. If you will read my notes below and see if I have adequately paraphrased what you said concerning these two manuscripts.

    Also, would it be at all possible that you would use one of these manuscripts when you have the Hebrew Shem Tov pointed by a professional pointer as I heard you recently say? It would be awesome, since this has caused such confusion for two millenia!!


    (Notes taken and PARAPHRASED from Lost Treasures in the Vatican [as seen on Shabbat Night Live with Michael Rood], 5 disc DVD set from A Rood Awakening! International, Disc 1, copyright 2018, all rights reserved. This is from approximately 35 minutes in. – Nehemia Gordon is being interviewed by Michael Rood., P. O. Box 1559, Fort Mill, SC 29716, 1-888-766-3610)

    By searching by the digitized Hebrew manuscripts in the National Library of Israel in Jerusalem, Nehemia Gordon found two Hebrew Matthew Shem Tov manuscripts, (after finding 26 manuscripts prior, making the total 28 that he found), the lineage of Yeshua in Matthew 1:16 to say “Yoseph aviy Miriyam” . “Joseph father of Miriyam.” This is the fruit of continuing to search all available documents without giving up. This is in contrast to all the Greek manuscripts and 26 of the Hebrew Matthew Shem Tov manuscripts that say “Joseph husband of Mary” . However, if Joseph is Miriyam’s father, the fourteen generations that are noted in Matthew 1 are correct, but if Joseph is Miriyam’s husband, there would only be thirteen generations, confirming the “father” to be the only way the rest of the document would be correct!

    The first manuscript Nehemia found is located in the Oxford University Bodleian Library. It is on Matthew 1:1 through 12:2. It is online now in high resolution. (University of Oxford, main library – Bodleian Library, Broad St., Oxford OX1 3BG, United Kingdom phone number: +44 1865 277162, opens 8:30 a.m. – 5:00 p.m Mon-Friday, 9:00 a.m.- 5:00 p.m. Shabbat, 11:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m. Sunday)

    The second manuscript (the second witness) is located in the Jewish Theological Seminary in New York City, NY. It is online now and in high resolution.

    Obviously the reason that Michael Rood did not give the manuscript #’s with locations in The Chronological Gospels is that they were not online at the time. However, he did use pictures of them in The Chronological Gospels: The Life and Seventy Week Ministry of the Messiah, c. 2013.

    One of the manuscripts is on parchment and the other is on leather and the high resolution makes it very easy to see the originality of both.

    Nehemia notes that one of these is only a single page out of 90,000 Hebrew manuscripts that he was able to review at the National Library of Israel.

    He says that anyone can view these online if they know how to get to them.

    Thank you so much!

    Joy C. Lyle

  • Dear Keith and Nehemia,

    Thank you so much for this opportunity! I have been wanting to ask questions of Nehemia for years! I have been attempting to point the vowels in Professor Howard’s Hebrew Gospel of Matthew just for myself, to help me learn the Hebrew and check the English translation for myself. I have a few questions that I really need to understand the truth of, as I am trying to put them in a book I am writing.

    First, in Matthew 5:17 the word that is translated as “fulfilled” appears to be the Hebrew infinitive “l’hash’liym” of the hiphil binyan of the verb shin, lamed, mim.. In 501 Hebrew Verbs by Shmuel Bolozky (c. 1996) on page 798, it says this form of the verb means “complete,; accomplish,; supplement, add; accept”. It also uses some sample sentences on page 799 to illustrate the meanings of different forms of the verb:

    ” Azriel felt relieve when the preparation of the manuscript was completed (nish’l’mah). He will still have TO ADD (L’HASH’LIYM) a few things, but it is nice to finally see a whole (shalem) manuscript.”

    According to this, it seems that Yeshua was saying in Matthew 5;17 “Do not think I have come to annul the Torah but TO ADD TO IT TO BRING IT TO WHOLENESS .” Its like what Yeshua said, afterward in the rest of the chapter, was building on the foundation of the eternal Torah, but that He was going to bring it to a higher level – to perfection.

    Then in the next verse, Matthew 5:18, the ending clause is translated as “because all will be fulfilled”. This word “fulfilled” is again not the best translation to me and has been the cause of confusion for millenia!!! It seems to be “yit’kayyem” which I find to be the hitpael binyan of the verb kof, yod, mim, future (yik’tol), 3rd person, masc., singular. I was taught that hitpael is reflexive , so this could be better translated as “it will uphold itself.” The sentence could then be better understood, ” Truly I say to you that until heaven and earth (depart) not one letter (ot) or one dot (nikkudah) shall be abolished from the Torah and the Prophets, BECAUSE EVERY ONE WILL UPHOLD ITSELF. What do you think of this translation?

    Then, Matthew 5; 19 also has a few things I have questioned. The verb “alamed” seems to be in the Hebrew text, which I think is the verb lamed, mim, dalet, in the piel binyan, 1st person, singular, future (yik’tol). To me, that would translated, “I will teach” not “and (he) shall teach” because Professor Howard inserts it from another manuscript. It seems that this verse could be translated with Yeshua still speaking as “And he who will transgress one saying from these commandments which I will teach others, he will be called a son of worthlessness (ben hevel) in the Kingdom of Heaven, but he who upholds and teaches, he shall be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven.” What I don’t understand is if Yeshua is saying He will teach other (higher) commandments or is He saying He will teach the Torah commandments TO other people, such as us gentiles. What part of speech is the word “ach’riym – others” – is it a direct object or an adjective describing commandments?? In John 10:16 Yeshua says to His messianic Jewish disciples, “And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be ONE FOLD, and one shepherd.” What do you think is the best translation of the actual Hebrew text, not what Professor Howard inserted from another manuscript?

    By the way, I noticed that Professor Howard translated a form of kof, yod, mim in Matthew 5;19 (“ham’kayyem” as “whoever UPHOLDS” which confirms to me that “it will uphold itself” is a good translation for “yit’kayyem” in Matthew 5:18 above!

    Would you please comment on these? Thank you so much! I have been listening to your teachings for years and appreciate them so much!

    Joy C. Lyle

  • I would like to submit a “Live from Quarantine” question for Mr. Gordon:
    In your book, “The Naming of Jesus in Hebrew Matthew (2006-2013)” you went into fascinating detail about the scribal features found in section 2 of Hebrew Matthew from the British Library manuscript which corresponds to Matthew 1:18-25. Can you please reveal some additional scribal features seen throughout other Hebrew Matthew manuscripts and even some of the scribal practices found within the textual witnesses?


  • I would like to submit a “Live from Quarantine” question for Mr. Gordon:
    With all of the Hebrew Matthew manuscripts available, do you have sufficient textual witnesses to be able to group all of the manuscripts as a “Shem Tov-Group” and are there versions of Hebrew Matthew that you have found that closely resemble the Shem Tov textual tradition but deviate enough to where you could say some manuscripts evidence an analogous textual tradition? In other words, could you at this point specify some manuscripts as part of a “Shem Tov-Group” and specify other manuscripts as “Shem Tov-Like”?


  • “Live from Quarantine” question for Mr. Gordon:
    Have you been able to determine the extent to which the Hebrew Matthew manuscripts display systematical or prevailing assimilation to the Greek versions as was displayed by the British Library Manuscript (Add. 26964) along with the initial 8 textual witnesses used by George Howard when he wrote “The Gospel of Matthew According to a Primitive Hebrew Text (1987)”? In other words, do some Hebrew Matthew manuscripts evidence less assimilation to the Greek versions than others?


  • “Live from Quarantine” question for Mr. Gordon:
    Have your discovered any Hebrew Matthew manuscripts that have nikkudim/vowel pointings or are all of the discovered manuscripts unpointed? If there are pointed Hebrew Matthew manuscripts, and assuming the Tetragrammaton is written out, do any manuscripts have the vowels of the Tetragrammaton supplied and if so, what vowels are supplied?


  • Thank you Mr. Johnson for providing the platform and opportunity for us to engage in this discussion.

    My question for Mr. Gordon:
    As of this “Live from Quarantine”, how many total manuscripts of Shem Tov’s Hebrew Matthew have been discovered and are you aware of more Hebrew Matthew Manuscripts that have yet to be accessed?


  • Shalom to both of you Keith and Nehemiah! I am not as learned as so many I see posted here, so my question then may be simple to answer, yet powerful to grasp – Matthew 1:23 quotes Isaiah 7:17: which states that ‘His name shall be Immanu’el…”El with us. ” Does that mean, in your opinion, that Yeshua was YHVH in the flesh?
    Thank you for considering my question. Continued blessings to you both!
    Elaine Wagman

  • Hello Keith and Nehemia. I have recently found both of you and thank you for what you are doing for us during this time of Yehovah’s Calling to all of us. I have started in preparation for phase 2 by studying phase 1. My question for Nehemia (and Keith) is –
    Q: Are you writing a better Hebrew Matthew that both of you can give us the best translation, without any leanings one way or the other but with added cultural and spiritual context.
    I Love both of you and together all of this is amazing and a huge blessing. I would love to see you collaborate on this if that is at all possible. I know you are both so busy and I appreciate all that you do. I have you both and your family’s in my prayers every day. May Yehovah bless you both.

  • Question for Nehemia:
    When you reference the Hebrew Matthew, are you referring only to versions of the appendix in Shem Tov’s Eben Boḥan? How many, if any, Hebrew Matthew manuscripts — independent of Shem Tov — are known to exist that do not appear to be translations of Greek manuscripts?

  • Hey Mark you found it! I will be sure to include your question for this weeks Live from Quarantine!

    • Thank you Keith & Nehemia For choosing not to do off-the-cuff answers to the many questions asked for the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew youtube live chat.

      Please see the corrections below that I made to my initial post for accuracy and clarity.

      Thank you both and your assistants for the work needed in the upcoming Pearls project.

      May Yehovah bless you and that He be glorified by your works.

      ~ Mark

  • Shalom Keith,

    Is this where you post questions to Nehemia for the livestream coming up this weekend?

    Thank you.

    Shalom Nehemia. Thank you for dedicating years of study & teaching to our Father and His Kingdom.

    In Hebrew Gospel of Matthew, (George Howard, 1995) you say that Matthew 28:9 reads: “Yehovah yoshia” when the text actually reads in the provided Hebrew example: “Hashem Yoshia / השם יושיעכן ”. Howard translates this faithfully and accurately as: “May the Name deliver you.”

    Presumably the then available majority manuscripts contain “ השם “. There is in the footnote a reference to a single instance in the then known manuscripts that reads in manuscript G: “ ’ה “

    When we read “ ’ה “ did the scribes mean it to be exclusively a stand-in that represents the first letter “ ה “ in HaShem?

    Or, did they understand it as an initial derived from the Tetragrammaton?

    Not so insignificant side note: manuscripts E & F read “ האל “. The Elohim.

    Since the time of Howard’s publication you have rediscovered more Ancient Hebrew Matthew manuscripts. Do they contribute anything to this particular verse?

    Thank you both.

    All glory And praise to Yehovah!

    • Amended comment:

      After re-reading my own comment I felt that I worded somethings in a way that could be considered inaccurate.

      I did not mean to imply that Nehemia Gordon said anything in George Howard’s book. I was referring to a teaching he made in a Michael Rood video about this verse found in Howard’s book.

      In my side note I erroneously translated “The Elohim” when I meant “The El”.

      • And to be clear, I too believe that Yeshua’s actual words were, “Yehovah yoshia.”

        I expect that eventually we will have Hebrew Matthew Gospels more ancient that contain the Tetragrammaton in this verse with or without the vowel pointings.

        Nehemia may be saving those for his upcoming book.

  • Hey Virginia phase two will launch on April 19th right here

  • I’m interested in Phase 2 of the Red Letter Study. Please provide the information. Thank you. Virginia Turner

  • Garvin and I are so very excited about this next Phase we are going back over all of part one and inviting as many of our friends as we can. Everyone can benefit no matter where they are in their walk.

  • I am so excited to hear that you are planning a second phase of the Red Letter series. I can’t wait to begin!