Comments On This Page:|
Hebrew Gospel of Matthew posted by Steven Jones
on 07/14/2005 at 21:41:57 from IP# 213.40.3.65 In these last days it is very pressing to spread the word as recorded by the true disciple Matthew in his original Hebrew version of the gospel. This witness, has been divinely preserved for our benefit by our almighty heavenly Father, YeHVaH Elohiym (God), hallowed be His name, in the form of about five remaining copies. Free from the lies, hypocrisies and sheer blasphemies of the Sauline inspired "Christian" scribes and popes who have tried to conceal the original (by burning many copies) and leave the world with a mere Greek imitation that is purely counterfeit, this genuine Hebrew translation harmonises with the Tanakh, and ultimately truly represents an accurate account of Yeshuwa’ HaMeshiyach (the Messiah), who came into the world not to do away with the old law, but to fulfil it (Matthew 5:18).But, perhaps most remarkable is that this original Hebrew version of Matthew’s gospel clearly identifies the evil-one, as already come, who with prayerful reading the reader may understand and know that it is none other than Saul of Tarsus who was a murderer from the beginning (John 8:44). Saul did indeed have many of the Saints (Jews) and followers of Yeshuwa’ HaMeshiyach shut up in prison or condemned to death.The "New Testament" almost entirely consists of writings of Saul (who also called his name Paul). Saul taught a different gospel to that of Yeshuwa’ HaMeshiyach, and that undoubtedly makes him the anti-Messiah, who comes only to kill and destroy (John 10:10). And even now, in these last days he is still destroying with 28,000+ "Christian Churches" that have all been inspired by his teaching.Yeshuwa’ HaMeshiyach spoke a parable concerning the wheat and the tares as recorded in Mat 13:24-30. This parable was explained to his disciples by Yeshuwa in Mat 13:36-43. All believers (the wheat) in the only true almighty heavenly Father, YeVHaH Elohiym, hallowed be His name, and in his only begotten son Yeshuwa’ HaMeshiyach, are living right amongst the ungodly blasphemers and Pharisaic hypocrites (the tares) who are willingly blind. The harvest (the end of the world) is near, and therefore the reader should come out from greater Babylon and heed the warning. It was Saul who sowed the bad seed whilst the Master was sleeping, exactly a time, times and half a time (three and a half years) after Yeshuwa’ had sowed the good seed, as prophesied by Daniel (Dan 12:7).You will have noticed that I have not used so-called English "proper names", but the original names which are written in a form of transliteration.What is important to note is that both the names "Jesus" and "Christ" are in fact a Sauline corruption that are some of the names of blasphemy mentioned in Revelation by John (Rev 17:3). "Jesus" actually means "son of Zeus". Of importance also is that the divine name: YHVH, which first appears in Exodus (Exo 3:14) and is also known as the tetragrammaton, appears in this original Hebrew gospel of Matthew, but not in the fraudulent Greek version. Excellent research by a translator of the Hebrew version of the gospel of Matthew, Patrick Geaney, a brother in Yeshuwa’ HaMeshiyach, has concluded that YHVH is to be pronounced YeHVaH.Steven Jones.
|
|
Note to Cojen Reckart posted by Linda Howard
on 06/07/2005 at 18:35:31 from IP# 4.253.116.47 The Greeks called the Messiah Iesous NOT Jesus. See 'Alphabet' tables in a Webster's Dictionary to see that neither the Hebrew nor the Greek languages contained a ' j ' letter nor a ' j ' sound. Therefore, it is impossible that the Greek version of Matthew called him Jesus - that is an English translation. Even the recently republished 1611 KJV Bible uses Iesous for the Messiah's name, as well as for the English names Joshua and Jeshua. God is the only Saviour (Isa. 45:21 plus many others). As God incarnate, the Messiah revealed his name to be the same as God's name i.e. he came in His father's name, which name he came to glorify and reveal. The Old Testament contains many complaints from God that they had forgotten his name. He incarnated to remind us God's name always was and is Yeshuwa`. Yeshuwa` is the Messiah, Lord and King of Israel.
|
|
Hebrew Matthew posted by Patrick Geaney
on 07/14/2004 at 10:37:51 from IP# 62.77.190.241 I have closely and prayerfully studied the Matthew Howard Shem Tov version of the Gospel of Matthew, since my contribution to this discussion on 01/31/2003; in which I pointed out that there is no reference to the trinitarian formula in Matthew 28:19,20. In my humble opinion, I am convinced that Shem Tob's version (STV) of The Gospel of Matthew is very much a blessing from Almighty God, in these last days. We have been fed the lie that the the KJV (King James version) is infallible. The STV shows up the glaring and, more seriously, the deliberate errors enshrined in the KJV. Here are just a few examples: MATTHEW 23:35: "ZECHARIAH THE SON OF YEHOIDAI" (Shem Tob version); whereas the KJV promotes the lie "Zechariah son of Barachias". See 2 Chronicles 24:20,21. Here the KJV seeks to put a lie into the mouth of Yeshuwa' Maschaich. MATTHEW 27:8,910: "SPOKEN BY THE PROPHET ZECHARIAH" (STV); whereas the KJV promotes the lie "spoken by Jeremy the prophet". MATTHEW 1:21: "HE (YESHUWA') WILL SAVE MY (YeHVaH) PEOPLE FROM THEIR SINS" (STV); whereas the KJV promotes the lie "he shall save his people from their sins". See Isaiah 53:8; "FOR THE TRANSGRESSION OF MY (YeHVaH) PEOPLE". MATTHEW 3:11: "HE WILL BAPTISE YOU WITH THE FIRE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT" (STV); whereas the KJV promotes the lie "he shall baptise you with the holy ghost and with fire". MATTHEW 27:18: "DUE TO HATRED WITHOUT CAUSE" (STV) ; whereas the KJV promotes the lie; "for envy they had delivered him". The STV Original Hebrew version is further confirmed by the words spoken by YESHUWA' MASCHIACH in John 15:25: "But they have done this to fulfill the word that is written in their Law, 'THEY HATED ME WITHOUT A CAUSE.' (See also Psalm 69:4, 109:3). MATTHEW 16:16, 17, 18, 19 (STV) : In answer to Yeshuwa's question "but who do you say that I am" (verse 15) "Shimon answered 'You are Maschiach, the son of the living God, who has come into the world" (Matthew 16:16 STV). The following are the blessed words of response which were addressed by Yeshuwa' to Shimon: "And you are blessed Shimon BarJonah; because no human being revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven" (verse 17 STV) "And I also say to you, that you are 'eben' (Hebrew word for "a stone") and upon you I will build my house of prayer and the gates of hell will not overpower you" (verse 18 STV) "And I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth will be have been bound also in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth will have been loosed also in heaven" (Verse 19 STV). Here we are clearly shown that "Shimon" was the "FIRST STONE" the "JASPER STONE" (Rev 21:19) of "THE TWELVE FOUNDATION STONES...ON WHICH ARE WRITTEN THE TWELVE NAMES OF THE TWELVE APOSTLES OF THE LAMB" "upon" whom Yeshuwa' built his "house of prayer" "THE NEW JERUSALEM" (Revelation 21:14,19). Is it any surprise that "false apostle" 'Paul' (Rev 2:2) "opposed Shimon to his face" (Galations 2:11). Patrick Geaney Unworthy servant and disciple of "my Lord" (Psalm 110:1) Yeshuwa' Maschaich (Yeshuah the Messiah)
|
|
Change of Mind/Partially posted by Cohen G. Reckart
on 07/17/2003 at 18:12:29 from IP# 4.35.129.6 The following was sent in an email to Ronald Stearns who ask if I had a change of mind about the Shem Tob Hebrew Matthew. About a year later I do have a change of mind. Here is what I wrote to Mr. Stearns:
"Ronald:
Yes, after an in-depth review of the Shem Tob (STV) I have come to see as
did Dr. Howard that it is indeed a Hebrew version. Now notice I said
"version".
My first examination was not complete and I did have some problems with some
of the wording in the text. It was the wording in these text that was used
by antichrist to say Jesus could not have been the Messieh that caused my
first alarm. I read the arguments against Jesus being the Messieh and then
the (STV) text. I felt as I still do that a new babe in Christ should not turn to
this version and throw away the KJV. This is what many Jews and Yahwist
would like. It is a way to help in the blotting out of the name of Jesus
from the world. So, my first response was to denounce the version outright.
After a year with this book in my hands and studying it intently, I have
come to see that the version has no more flaws or errors then the other
versions. I can see where as in the case of the KJ and other versions we
must resort to the Greek or Hebrew and check the meanings, sense, and
syntax. If we do this we are able to circumvent error as much as possible.
The only problem with the Shem Tob is that it is written in Aramaic and so
far as I know there is no Aramaic dictionary of words or a lexicon for the
Massoretic text. All we have is a mismatch of Chaldean (abbreviated in
Strongs as "Chal" and later rabbinical Hebrew. And the meanings are often
hard to extract out. I am in the process of comparing the text of the Dead
Sea Scrolls with the Massoretic text. Already I see a lot of differences
although many claim they are identical. When this is the case we try to
rely on context and intent to discover the meaning of what is being said
rather then trust what Strong or someone else says.
Here is an instance between the KJV and the STV:
(KJV) Mat 4:9--And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if
thou wilt fall down and worship me.
(STV) Mat 4:9--and said to him: All these things I will give to you if you
will bare your head to me.
At first glance there is a big difference. To fall down and worship is one
thing, to bare one's head is another.
Now what is meant by "bare your head"? Does it mean to cut off all one's
hair? Does it signify removing something from the head? Obviously the
latter is correct. But what was it the devil saw on the head of Jesus he
wanted removed and what would the removal be considered if it was done in
honor or respect of some other party? Why do men bare their head when they
enter into a Church or when they pray? Why do they remove their hat? What
is the purpose? What is shown to God from the heart. Just what was the
devil driving at? What was it on the head of Jesus that the devil wanted
removed? Was it something seen by all or seen only in the Spirit world.
Was it a yarmulke (Jewish skull cap like the Rabbis and the Pope wears).
What does the wearing of a yarmulke mean? Jews claim it is a reminder to
all men of the God who rules above and to whom the one wearing it owes total
obligation. The etymology of the word seems to mean fear or honor of the
king (mulke=melki). To remove this symbol of obligation to the true God in
the presence of a false god was considered respect or worship of the idol.
So, a Jew will not remove this symbolic head covering in the presence of
evil or an idol. It is at these very moments he must remind himself who his
King and God is.
Now if we read the KJV we cannot get this out of the text. All we get is
wording concerning falling down and worshiping. But in the STV we get a
more perfect picture of HOW THIS FALLING DOWN AND WORSHIP was to take place.
The devil wanted Jesus to remove his yarmulke in his presence of evil and
thus bare his head to this self-made angelic god. I also believe it may be
possible that Jesus having the throne of David his yarmulke meant more of an
identity as the Messieh King. This being true, the devil was asking Jesus
to bare his head in the sense of a denial he was the Messieh and needed the
devil's sanction to have this honor. I mean when the devil says he had all
the other kingdoms to give to whom he wanted, is this not a statement he was
the king-maker? And when Jesus promised he would give Jesus all these
kingdoms etc, if he bared his head, was this not the same as saying Jesus
was no King until the devil gave him this authority? Would not then Jesus
making his head bare relinquish over to the devil ALL POWER AND ALL GLORY
that was given unto him?
My point here is that I have come to see there is more merit in the STV then
I previously allowed. Part of this was due to my zeal to protect the name
of Jesus from blasphemers and also my desire not to have babes deceived by
antichrist use of the STV to denounce Jesus as the Messieh.
So, I will go back and edit my statements and make them more clear as to my
intent.
Thanks for bring this to my attention. I thought I had edited this already.
I think I did but did not upload the change in all places. I will go and
check for unedited pages.
BTW: The scholars now admit the trinitarian clause in Matthew was not in
the original. So even without the backup of the STV, the trinity baptism is
still false.
PR
_________________________________________
|
|
shem tov posted by AntotiYah
on 06/19/2003 at 11:35:54 from IP# 152.163.253.66 Is there an online version of sham tov's matthew?
thanks
shalom u'bracha
|
|
The Hebrew Gospel of Matthew posted by Patrick Geaney
on 01/31/2003 at 10:09:34 from IP# 62.77.180.65 Interested in the comment on Shm Tov by a Baptist 'pastor'. It Reminded of a number of years ago when I enquired of another Baptist 'pastor' to explain the contradictions between the trinitarian formula of baptism (inserted by trinitarians into Greek and Latin texts of Matthew 28:19,20) and the baptism "IN THE NAME OF JESUS CHRIST" in Acts 2:38. My question was greeted by a stony silence as he obviously could not give any rational explanation. God be praised that the original Hebrew version of Matthew's gospel is now coming to light to show up the trinitarian formula as being a cruel insertion by unbelieving trinitarian scribes. Shem Tov and other faithful Jewish disciples of Yeshua translate Matthew 28:19,20 " YESHUA (JESUS)said...GO MAKE DISCIPLES OF ALL NATIONS IN MY NAME..." and not 'in the name of the father and of the son and of the holy spirit' as inserted by Trinitarians. The precious words of YESHUA "IN MY NAME" confirm " IN THE NAME OF JESUS CHRIST" of Acts 2:38. Truly " THERE IS NOTHING HIDDEN THAT WILL NOT BE BROUGHT TO LIGHT". Hallelujah Patrick Geaney
|
|
Hebrew Matthew posted by Cohen G. Reckart
on 09/21/2002 at 10:03:06 from IP# 65.185.25.222 Subject: Hebrew Matthew alleged to be the original ancient Gospel. Several facts: 1.) There is historical record a Gospel work written by the Apostle Matthew did exist. 2.) There is also historical record a Gospel work by the Apostle Matthew was written in Greek. 3.) There is historical record that the Pharisees, in opposition to Matthew's Hebrew Gospel, wrote and distributed among the Jews a false Gospel and altered a tremendous amount of the contents. 4.) The false Gospel was used by the Jews among themselves to attack Christian teachings. This false Gospel was handed down from century to century being edited several times and translated into different languages. 5.) At issue here are several factors:
(a.) What is meant by "Hebrew"? Was it ancient Paleo-Hebrew, Aramaic, or some other form of language called Hebrew?
(b.) If it was Aramaic then it is not a Hebrew language edition at all since this language came from Babylon where the Jews adopted it while in captivity.
(c.) If it was in Paleo-Hebrew, then where is the original? If there is no original are we to accept that the present so-called Hebrew Matthew was translated without human editing or re-construction of the text? How much faith do we place in a version of the original if there is evidence of re-construction and substantial editing? Conclusion: The present so-called Shem Tov Hebrew Version of the Gospel of Matthew is to be rejected as a re-construction. It is not written in Paleo-Hebrew and it does not qualify to be called an authentic Hebrew Matthew Gospel. The so-called Hebrew Matthew is obviously tainted with anti-Jesus editing to deny him being the Messiah. Other editing causes loss of faith in the present Greek Matthew, and in this manner both Matthews come to be rejected by many. The faith of the elect is over turned and this alone brings into question the purpose of the Hebrew Matthew. Its reconstruction and editing has the purpose to overthrow the faith of the elect in areas of many Apostolic doctrines and teachings. I recommend that the Hebrew Matthew be purchased by those who will not be persuaded to discard the Greek Matthew. If the purchase of the Shem Tov version causes anyone to throw away the Greek Matthew, then all sorts of new false doctrines will begin to blow around the world. Windmills (modern liberal preachers) will begin cranking out poison meal and deadly bread. We have this promise that the elect WILL NOT BE DECEIVED! Sheep will not eat what goats devour readily! I recommend that in comparing the Hebrew Matthew text with the Greek Text, where there is different wording, the Greek text be given the greater weight. I am not saying the Hebrew Text may not contain some germ of the original text, for obviously there would be nothing in the Hebrew Matthew at all of the Greek Matthew, if I allege this. I recommend that we subject the Hebrew Matthew to strict doctrinal inspection and if it is not in conformity to the other "eyewitnesses" then in those areas those portions are to be rejected as re-construction. Jesus is the Messiah, Lord and King of Israel, Cohen G. Reckart, Pastor
|
|
Listen
Add to Collection
Help