BALDERDASH: “Original Hebrew Gospel Discovered!” by Brian J.

Tebbitt

Ancient Hebrew manuscripts of the Gospels which were secreted away for centuries have recently been unearthed! One of
the greatest of these treasures is the ancient Hebrew text of the book of Matthew. Unknown to the Christian world, the
Hebrew text of Matthew's Gospel was preserved by Jewish scholars who kept it safely hidden in covert archives.
Surviving centuries of exile, it is only now being brought to light. Scholars are calling it the "Dead Sea Scrolls of the
New Testament"!
Sounds exciting doesn’t it! Too bad its balderdash.
Nehemia Gordon, a self-proclaimed karaite Jew, has recently published a popular new booklet on the Gospels entitled The
Hebrew Yeshua Vs. The Greek Jesus. The book has been well received in the Hebrew Roots movement and received
accolades from a wide spectrum of people: from evangelical Christians to the very fringes of the Messianic movement. In
the book, Gordon proposes that a 14 th century Hebrew version of Matthew may represent the original, authentic version of
the Gospel of Matthew. In addition, he suggests that this Hebrew version proves that Yeshua was a karaite—a sect of
Judaism that rejects Jewish tradition and Pharisaic authority.
The assertion that “Yeshua is a Karaite” is based squarely upon his variant reading of Matthew 23:1-3:

Then [Yeshua] spoke to the crowds and to his disciples, saying: “The scribes and the Pharisees have seated
themselves in the chair of Moses; therefore all that they tell you, do and observe, but do not do according to their
deeds; for they say things and do not do them…”

This teaching of the Master has confounded Christians throughout the centuries. It is a ringing endorsement of
Torah-Judaism and Jewish tradition. Traditional Christian bible teachers usually jump through interpretive hoops to get
around the plain meaning of the verse. Others ignore it or gloss it over. But in his new book, Nehemiah Gordon opts to
simply change the text. He has proposed an alternative version of the passage that reads:

The Pharisees and sages sit upon the seat of Moses. Therefore, all that he tells you shall guard and do, but according
to their reforms and their legal precedents do not do, for they talk and do not.i

Gordon believes that this is the original reading of the verse. He bases his conclusions on a 14 th century, Hebrew
translation of Matthew by the medieval anti-missionary Shem Tob Ibn Yitzchak Ibn Shaprut. The Hebrew version of
Matthew was included in his polemical book Even Bohan (“Stone of Testing”) as an appendix. Nine fragmentary copies of
this work, all dating to the 15th century, remain to this day. This Hebrew translation of Matthew was been largely ignored
by Bible scholars because of its dubious nature. Then in the 1980’s George Howard theorized that the Shem Tob
translation could be a surviving version of the original Hebrew Matthew which is mentioned by the Church Fathers. The
conclusions of George Howard concerning Shem Tob (ShTb), which are now being espoused by Gordon, are almost
unanimously rejected by the academic community. Gordon, however, claims to have discovered several linguistic proofs
which authenticate the SHTb as the original version of the Gospel of Matthew.
One of the evidences Gordon espouses is the use of “word puns” in the Hebrew text, ii which are instances of two or more
similar-sounding words in close proximity to one another. In Rabbinic literature, Hebrew word puns are often intentional
and are meant to convey a subtle point to the listener/reader. At other times, they are simply employed as stylistic
flourishes in Hebrew. Contrary to Gordon’s theory though, the discovery of Hebrew word puns do not attest to ShTb’s
authenticity. Any able translator would be capable of introducing word play. In other words, any translator who is adept in
Hebrew would perceive wordplay from simply reading the Greek (or, perhaps Latin) text of Matthew and render it
accordingly.
Ironically, it one of the “word puns” Gordon cites undermines his thesis. Gordon brings up the account of the Master’s
naming of Simon Peter in an attempt to make what he sees as a strong point proving his premise. He quotes the Greek,
saying,

“…You are Peter (Petros ), and upon this rock (petra ) I will build my church…” (Matthew 16:18).
This word pun is based on the Greek word petra meaning “rock” from which Peter’s name (Petros) is derived.iii

But then he goes on to say,

But in the Hebrew there is a different word pun not found in the Greek! In Hebrew [as found in ShTb] Matthew
16:18 Yeshua says, “…You are a stone (even ) and I will build (evneh ) my house of prayer upon you.” In
Hebrew, the word pun is between even  “stone” and the verb evneh  “I will build.”iv
 Here Gordon betrays his unfamiliarity with real New Testament scholarship. Shimon bar Yonah was given a
nickname by the Master that is expressed historically and textually in two versions: Peter, from the Greek Petros, and
Kepha (or the Latinized “Cephas”), from the Aramaic, both meaning “rock.” In the New Testament, he is referred to as
“Cephas” 9 times, and “Peter” 155 times, but never as “Evan.” The Semitic form of the name is Kepha, not Evan. Even
the fact that Yeshua spoke Palestinian Aramaic/Hebrew (not Koine Greek) does not preclude the possibility of the apostle
actually being named “Petros,” since there is evidence that the word Petros had been brought into Hebrew as a loan
word.v In other words, though speaking Aramaic/Hebrew, the Master still may have made a Greek word pun between
petros and petra!
There are other things which reveal the dubious nature of the ShTb which are unmistakable in the text. It
intentionally avoids referring to Yeshua as Messiah. In fact, where the Greek and Aramaic textual traditions contain the
word christos or meshiah, it is omitted in the Hebrew of the ShTb. What is worse, a pejorative corruption of the Master’s
name, Yeshu, is used throughout. Yeshu () is an intentional misspelling of the Hebrew, popular among Medieval,
Jewish, anti-Gospel literature, which omits the final ayin ( to create an acronym: yimach sh’mo v’zichro ( 
) which means “May his name and his memory be blotted out.” The use of that name dates the ShTb as a contrived,
anti-church, polemical work, not a First Century original. One which is kindred to other such works that came out of the
Middle Ages, the most famous of them being the blasphemous Toledot Yeshu.
It is true that the Church Fathers attest to the existence of a Hebrew original of Matthew. But the same Church
Fathers prove that ShTb cannot be that original. The ShTb contains no variants from surviving fragments of the ancient
Matthew as quoted by the Church Fathers. vi The works known as the “Gospel of the Ebionites” and the “Gospel of the
Nazarenes” are both ancient Hebrew versions of Matthew. vii The most extensive collection of such surviving quotes comes
from Jerome’s comparison (early 5 th century) between the Hebrew Matthew and the Greek version, wherein he notes
several variant readings.viii No variants from these extant quotes are found in the ShTb. If it is indeed a version of the
ancient original and not a mere translation, then why does affinity with the particulars of the historical Hebrew Matthew
completely escape it?
The very crux of Gordon’s arguments is the ShTb’s reading of Matthew 23:2-3:

The Pharisees and sages sit upon the seat of Moses. Therefore, all that he tells you shall guard and do, but according
to their reforms and their legal precedents do not do, for they talk and do not.ix

Instead of Yeshua saying, “…all that they (pl.) tell you…” (the “Pharisees” which sit in Moses’ chair), the ShTb has it that
he says, “…all that he (sing.) tells you…,” supposedly in reference to “Moses,” on whose chair the former are seated. In
his book, Gordon assumes that this must be the authentic, original reading of 23:2-3. He even goes so far as to correct the
Greek and what it “should have read.”x
What Gordon does not tell the reader is that nine copies of ShTb Matthew are extant, all of them fragmentary. Six
out of the surviving nine contain the plural reading of “…all that they tell you…”! Thus, his variant reading is not even
supported by the manuscript collection he is quoting. In addition, all extant Greek manuscripts, from both Eastern and
Western textual traditions contain the plural reading, along with all extant Syriac and Aramaic (Peshitta) manuscripts.
There are no variants in this phrase in any known manuscript. All of our manuscripts agree that the Master taught his
disciples to obey the rulings of the Pharisees while abstaining from their hypocrisy, something for which he repeatedly
rebukes the Pharisees in the passages which follow. xi Yeshua is not a Sadduceexii who rejected all rabbinic authority,
custom and tradition and attempted to only obey the literal words of Moses, but is a Pharisaic Rabbi who desired reform
within the Pharisaic religious construct of his day. Reform is a far and distant cry from all-out denunciation and rejection.
For Gordon, who is not a believer, his book is an avenue to further the “World Karaite Movement” of which he is the co-
founder.xiii Is Yeshua a Karaite? Most certainly not. But even if he had been, the text of Shem Tob’s Hebrew Matthew
certainly wouldn’t be able to prove it.
i
Translated by author, ibid., from the ShTb text.
ii
Gordon, pp.39-42
iii
Gordon, p.42
iv
ibid.
v
In the Talmud and Midrash Rabbah, the well known Amora, Joshua b. Levi has a father-in-named “Yose ben Petros”, eg.
Genesis Rabbah 94:5. In the Midrash collection Yalkut Shimoni I:766, there is a story where Abraham is named “rock”
because in him God found “petra” (bedrock).
vi
cf. Epiphanius’ Panarion, Jerome: Against the Pelagians, De Viris Inlustribus, Commentary on Matthew, Origen:
Commentary on Matthew, Eusebius: Theophania
vii
cf. Epiphanius’ Panarion 30 and Jerome, Commentary on Matthew 2 [concerning Matthew 12:13]
viii
cf. Jerome, Commentary on Matthew
ix
Translated by author, ibid., from the ShTb text.
x
Gordon, p.88
xi
cf. Matthew 23:13-33
xii
According to Gordon’s own defintion, the Sadducees were the “Karaites” of the Second Temple period. Cf., www.karaite-
korner.org, “History of Karaism” by Nehemia Gordon
xiii
cf. www.karaite-korner.org to view anti-Yeshua articles via links to “Light of Israel” and “Meir Rekhavi”