Decoding Matthew 5:18

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Decoding Matthew 5:18

Post by Secret Alias »

ἀμὴν γὰρ λέγω ὑμῖν, ἕως ἂν παρέλθῃ ὁ οὐρανὸς καὶ ἡ γῆ, ἰῶτα ἓν ἢ μία κεραία οὐ μὴ παρέλθῃ ἀπὸ τοῦ νόμου, ἕως ἂν πάντα γένηται.

Ever since Irenaeus we have been told that Matthew goes back to a Hebrew/Aramaic text. The standard explanation of keraia is it is the little bend or point which serves to distinguish certain Hebrew letters of similar appearance. But I am not so sure. I think it might be one of Hegesippus's muddle translations of something written in a Semitic language. The fact that the letter yod/iota is the companion of keraia is important. Usually one would expect the two things being contrasted against one another to be similar things - i.e. like 'apples and oranges' viz. fruit.

But what is keraia or 'horn'? I think it might be an allusion to the shape of the letter aleph

In Hebrew, the word for bull or ox is 'aleph as well, and the letter 'aleph is symbolized, not just by the head of a bull, but even more so by the horns on the bull's head.

Yes but it isn't keraiai but keraia. It is important to note that the Hebrew aleph (as opposed to the Phoenician alef) has only one horn:
It seems (from discoveries made in the last few years†) that
the alphabet was invented in Egypt, in imitation of Egyptian hieroglyphics, about 2000BC,
to write a Semitic language related to Hebrew. The symbols were pictures of animals or
everyday objects, and each one represented the first letter of the corresponding word, so
that a picture of a house stood for b, because that was the first sound of the word for
“house”. Also, a picture of a bull’s head stood for a glottal stop, being the first sound of
the word for “bull”‡§. This evolved into the symbol <| in the Phoenician alphabet, which
had the same value, and a name something like aleph. (The bull is facing to the left.)
The same alphabet was used to write Hebrew, and is found particularly in inscriptions.
A variety of it, better for writing fast when keeping records, evolved to write Aramaic,
and this later replaced the original Hebrew alphabet, and became the modern Hebrew
alphabet. (The old one is still used by the Samaritans.) In the modern Hebrew letter, the
nose of the bull has been compressed to a line, and one horn has disappeared.
I can't explain why Hegesippus (assuming he is the translator or someone with the same muddle sense of language) was the original translator of the saying. Maybe it is because he was a native Semitic speaker who spoke Phoenician or some language which had two horns for their alef. But I think the original meaning might be something akin to 'alpha and omega' only here 'alpha and iota' - an allusion to the ten commandments which follow in the antitheses that come afterward.

That Jews continue to refer to the commandments in terms of aleph to yod is only natural and evident in many depictions:

Image

As Idel notes the original 'ten sephirot' were identified with the first ten letters of the alphabet:
In the same work, we learn of the significance of the "clear crystal" (aspaqlarydh ha-menrah), which is identified with the 'Urim
and Tummim:
Comprehension of the Name by the Name; and it is a speculative examination into His Name, by means of the twenty-two letters of the Torah, alter knowledge of the matter of the ten Sefirot, from aleph to yod, which include all those which come after them, for they are fulfilled by them. And they, with their forms, are called the Clear Crystal, for all the forms having brightness and strong radiance are included in them. And one who gazes at them in their forms will discover their secrets and speak of them, and they will speak of him. And they are like an image in which a man sees all his forms standing opposite him, and then he will be able to see all the general and specific things.
But most important of all aleph-yod is a well attested acronym for the Ten Commandments - https://books.google.com/books?id=KR4EN ... 22&f=false

The reason the original aleph ... yod was replaced by 'keraia ... iota' was that the translator did not want the specificity of 'Torah' in the section to go back to only the ten commandments (and thus equating Christianity directly with the two powers' controversy and its implicit depreciation of Moses's Pentateuch. Look again at the context:
Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the iota, not the alpha, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
What do you think? I think it is pretty sound. Jesus is saying only the ten commandments are divine.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Ulan
Posts: 1505
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2014 3:58 am

Re: Decoding Matthew 5:18

Post by Ulan »

While this sounds intriguing, you would have to postulate several intermediate steps for this to happen. At which point, the change of order to iota -> alpha would have happened?
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Decoding Matthew 5:18

Post by Secret Alias »

Obviously there are some massive chasms of explanation that I need to overcome to have this 'proved' or even taken seriously. But I do notice that Irenaeus for one has massive confidence in his abilities to translate from Hebrew or Aramaic when the reality is he has no real ability in the language. Any reference to what something means in Hebrew or Aramaic is laughable to say the least viz. 'A son in the beginning ...' Similarly his explanation of Hebrew letters at one point in Against Heresies is incomprehensible. Moreover sura ussur or some such term going back to the divine name. It might be related that Hegesippus has been rendered incomprehensible every time the text attempts to explain something said in Aramaic or Hebrew - viz. 'Bulwark of the people' and 'the door of Jesus.' If Irenaeus had something to do with the translation of his own report of an Aramaic or Hebrew origin to the gospel(s) it is curious the way Mark decides to translate mostly irrelevant piece of information in Aramaic (such as 'talitha kumi' - why that phrase in particular among the many other more worthy and theologically significant possibilities). You get the feeling - at least I do - that whatever indebtedness Mark has to an Aramaic gospel the translator is avoiding something in his selection of verses. He picked the deliberately least important things to translate. Similarly then if the purpose of the Greek text was to avoid controversies of the Hebrew/Aramaic original then identifying Christianity as a two powers sect was clearly one of them. I've noted that when the ur-author of Against Marcion criticizes Marcion for his 'antitheses' he is speaking about Matthew 5:17f quite clearly. It would note be surprising then that Matthew 5:18 would be improperly translated. On the one hand by incorporating these 'antitheses' into Matthew rather than Luke the editor of the canon neatly avoided making the 'antinomianism' of Marcion seem reasonable and respectable. After all Christians have forsaken the Pentateuch - without much in the way of explanation. Even Celsus questions how God could have given a law to Moses and later changed his mind about it. By identifying 'the (good) Law' or the heavenly Torah as only the ten commandments the position of the Marcionites becomes instantly more reasonable and likely to be true. I mean even Roy Moore put a statue of the ten commandments in front of his 'Christian' courthouse as opposed to a Pentateuch scroll. Perhaps what is needed is an example that Aramaic speaking people referred to Aleph as 'the horned' letter.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Decoding Matthew 5:18

Post by Secret Alias »

And the second argument in favor of my proposition is that 'jot' and 'tittle' is meaningless and implies that Jesus's audience (or the gospels audience) was literate. Not sure that is plausible. The equivalent would be 'every parenthesis ... every bit of syntax' being included in a speech to autoworkers.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Decoding Matthew 5:18

Post by Secret Alias »

Also it's work noting Minority "Caesarean" reading removes 'and the prophets' which clears the way for the discussion to be about the ten commandments:

S, Q, f13, 565, 1071, al, Sy-Pal, arm, arabMS, IrLat
Lacuna: C, 22
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Decoding Matthew 5:18

Post by Secret Alias »

Also two more 'mystical' arguments in favor of such a divinity.

We are told that 'I am the alpha and omega' is something ascribed to God/Jesus. Hmmm. 'I am the alef and yod' would make more sense from the POV of the mystical continuum as the ten sephirot are identified with the first ten letters. In the same way as the Marcosians see a connection between 801 (= the gematria for alpha and omega in Greek) and the dove the numerological equivalent of aleph yod is eleven. Aside from being a Spinal Tap joke the 'good' god in Aramaic = טב. Moreover the puzzling statement in Paul maran atha atha in Greek = 11.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Decoding Matthew 5:18

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Secret Alias wrote: Mon Oct 08, 2018 7:59 am And the second argument in favor of my proposition is that 'jot' and 'tittle' is meaningless and implies that Jesus's audience (or the gospels audience) was literate. Not sure that is plausible. The equivalent would be 'every parenthesis ... every bit of syntax' being included in a speech to autoworkers.
Well, more like "not one vowel, not one serif," but point taken.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Decoding Matthew 5:18

Post by Secret Alias »

It is strange that obscurity would accompany what is perhaps the most powerful and most tangible thing that Jesus says in the whole gospel - at least from a Jewish perspective. Jesus goes into a town and heals someone on the Sabbath. For a non-Jew that requires something of an explanation and even when it is explained it doesn't make much of an impact. My wife who is a Catholic would intellectually understand something about Jews not being able to do this or that but as she is married to a Jew who eats pork sausages and crab cakes (not together of course) on Saturday it still has limited impact. But when you say at the beginning of a section which deals with 'antitheses' with respect to the law - the law stands - that's a powerful statement. All that follows seems to offer a series of antitheses. But to begin the section with 'the law stands' calls to attention the reader to contextualize all that follows. People can understand that. We all have to abide by the law. But there is immediately following such an ambiguous reference to things only known to scribes. Very odd. It's as if the obscurity is picked up in transmission. Like Trump saying something completely brash and then veers off to speak about sub-atomic particles.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
perseusomega9
Posts: 1030
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 7:19 am

Re: Decoding Matthew 5:18

Post by perseusomega9 »

I am the aleph and the yod.

Kinda squares with the two powers theory with jesus a theophany of yahweh, son of the God most high
The metric to judge if one is a good exegete: the way he/she deals with Barabbas.

Who disagrees with me on this precise point is by definition an idiot.
-Giuseppe
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Decoding Matthew 5:18

Post by Secret Alias »

According to Monoimos, the ten commandments contain all the knowledge of the universe. Moreover, they reflect the decad within the son of man, who in turn reflects the higher entity that is the supreme divinity. A certain hierarchy seems inherent in Monoimos' passages: the highest level, the perfect man, apparently a term for God; then the son of God, who comprises in himself both the monadic and the decadic natures. I assume that the ontic move from the father to the son of man means the transition from a noncreative monad to a creative one, as the son is also the decad. The decad within the son constitutes the mysteries reflected in the Decalogue and, by parallel, in the ten plagues, which in turn reflect the process and the knowledge related to creation. All these decads are reflected also by two symbols: the tittle of the iota and Moses' rod. We may assume that both the other parts of the Bible (aside from the Decalogue) and the universe represent the greater plurality which is thought to emanate from the decad, in a manner reminiscent of the rabbinic view of the ten creative ma'amarot ...

In a late midrashic text, Midrash Tadsche, it is asserted that ''when the Holy One, blessed be He, spoke and delivered the ten commandments, He started with the first letter of the alphabet in order to talk with them, as it is said, 'anokhiy. The first letter of the commandment is aleph and the last is yod. From one He started until ten, the entire numeration, so that they shall know that the Holy One, blessed be He, fills the entire world, and He is the first and the last.'' The anonymous Jewish author of the late midrash is mentioning the mathematical speculation of the first and the last figure, one and ten, in order to describe the divine presence is the world, in a manner which seems quite reminiscent of the passage above where Monoimos resorted to quoting from the Epistle to the Corinthians. Later in this midrash the correspondences between the plagues and the commandments explicitly expounded: ''The world is maintained by the merit of those who study [the Torah] and perform the Decalogue; and the world was created by ten logoi [ma'amarot], and its Sefirot are [also] ten ... The world is maintained by the ten sefirot of Belimah https://books.google.com/books?id=2_Ors ... 22&f=false
Monomois is famously reported by the Philosophumena to have taken the letter iota to be a sefirotic power.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Post Reply