The “Jewish” side of Christianity is all the buzz nowadays, and rightfully so, but some books seems to be sent to print more as a bandwagon addition than an actual contribution. This book is more of a personal narrative; a devotional of sorts.

The first half of the book is dedicated to telling the story of Gordon and Johnson’s trip through Israel, in search of the location where Yeshua gave the Sermon on the Mount and originally spoke the Lord’s Prayer. They visit the six most-likely locations, evaluating each possibility by referencing descriptions in various religious documents. The research is thorough, and the authors use it well to make a strong case for their choice. They eventually decide on the Horns of Hattin, which provides the best acoustics and easiest access, and it most closely matches descriptions in the Bible and other religious texts.

The second half explores the prayer in detail, explaining the differences between the original Hebrew and the later Greek and English translations. The authors provide explanations of the original Hebrew words when the English translations of those words differ greatly from translations from Greek or when the Hebrew words have ambiguous meanings. They also take time to explain what these words would have meant to the Jews listening to the prayer when it was first spoken. These cultural references provide the reader with new insight and a different perspective on the Lord’s Prayer. It is fascinating to compare the two versions to see where the similarities and differences lie.

“A Prayer to Our Father” offers the reader a chance to explore what is likely to be a familiar prayer in a new way. The authors have clearly devoted much of their time to the study and understanding of the prayer, and their enthusiasm and eagerness to share the research and discoveries shines through the text. The authors’ academic approach to the subject makes the book an interesting read for readers of many different beliefs.

More in Romanian version on
http://www.blog.punctul.com

The authors intend for this book to be very exciting. They are excited people. They are Hebrew nerds, and they go on a dramatically and suspensefully told quest to plumb the depths of time and manuscripts to flush out the Hebrew underpinnings of the Lord’s Prayer, or in Hebrew, the Avinu Prayer.

Gordon and Johnson do not publish anything radical, controversial, or suspect. They back up their suspicions and hunches with adequate scholarship. The book proves to be part theological book and part travelogue as the pair criss-cross continents and the Holy Land in search for the authentic roots of the Lord’s Prayer.

Their quest is admirable, and achieved, but its not one I really wanted to go on. If you are a language nerd or think of reading a Hebrew dictionary or studying Hebrew as a fun and enjoyable activity, I suggest you buy this book. You’ll enjoy it.

Myself on the other hand, the book started boring me about half way through. I just am not interested in the peculiarities of Hebrew to Greek to English translations, and most of their insights I had read in N.T. Wright’s book The Lord and His Prayer.

The book does try to be exciting, and it deserves much credit on that point. It just didn’t click with me. There are many books I read (and review) that people would find boring as well, so this book is in the eye of the beholder, and at $19.95 for a paperback (a high price in my opinion) I would suggest that unless you are a Hebrew nerd or transfixed by the Holy Land buy Wright’s The Lord and His Prayer instead (it’s $8 on Amazon).

I just finished this book, and I was more enthusiastic about the idea of the book than actually reading the book. It’s not that the content was bad, in fact it was very good, but the authors weren’t very compelling. When I think back on the story, it was a good story that tied in a lot of really good insights into the Lord’s Prayer. I think one of the most impacting insights for me was in the line “Do not lead us into temptation,” which they translated as “Do not bring us into the hands of a test” from Matthew in Hebrew. They said that the word in Greek versions of Matthew could be translated as either temptation or test, but that in the Hebrew, it translates as test. It is actually the same word used when the Pharisees ‘test’ Jesus. They quoted a prayer from a little-known Isrealite sage named Agur that is actually recorded in Proverbs:

“Two things I ask of you, O Lord;
do not refuse me before I die:

Keep falsehood and lies far from me;
give me neither poverty nor riches,
but give me only my daily bread.
Otherwise, I may have too much and disown you
and say, ‘Who is the Lord?’
Or I may become poor and steal,
and so dishonor the name of my God.

They point out that many versions of the Lord’s Prayer say temptation, and many say test, but if you look elsewhere, it says that God doesn’t tempt. So for us to ask God to not lead us into temptation is like saying, “God, can you please refrain from doing what you don’t do.” But God does test. He tested Abraham. He tested Job. Psalm 138:23 says “test me and know my anxious thoughts.” So for us to ask God not to test us, is saying that we are recognizing that we are depraved. Agur knew this and asked God not to make him rich or poor. This is new to me, and something that I am looking forward to praying for the rest of my days.

I thought I had a good general knowledge of historical matters related to the Bible. However, this book introduced me to the theory that Matthew first wrote his gospel in Hebrew. I hate to admit that I had never heard that previously, but I hadn’t. My point in confessing this is that even though the concept was new to me, the authors quickly helped me understand the validity of their point of view.

The real strengths of the book include:

1. The authors’ journey together in writing this book encourages the reader that unity can be found in the teachings of Jesus.

2. The authors’ use of personal story make the book a compelling read and help the reader experience what it would have been like to hear Jesus teach the “our Father” prayer.

3. The authors demonstrate clear rationale for their point of view regarding the Hebrew origin of the Book of Matthew and the historical location of the Sermon on the Mount. This really encourages the reader to venture more deeply into Hebrew culture.

The one weakness of the book results from one of the book’s key strengths. Although it is wonderful to see a Jewish scholar and an evangelical Christian explore the words of Jesus together, the applications they draw lack strength because they wrote to the lowest common denominator – the points upon which they could both agree. There still are great applications and conclusions drawn, but I would love to see others write further about the Avinu prayer and its applications to followers of Jesus.

This review will also be posted at http://charisshalom.fjministries.com in the near future.

What an amazing little book!

As a Christian with Jewish ancestry, it always warms my heart when members of these two traditions are willing to set aside their prejudice and discover their common roots.
In this book, a Jewish scholar and a African-American Christian pastor become friends and begin a quest to understand the Jewish roots of what is commonly referred to as “The Lord’s Prayer.”

The book has three primary strengths.

First, those who thirst for knowledge about Lord’s prayer will find this book helpful. Especially, I believe, those Christians who look to the words of this prayer as a model for their own Christian devotion.

Second, the story of how the two authors met and developed their friendship can be a model for developing more interfaith dialogue. It has certainly challenged me to seek more opportunities to connect to those of other faiths and traditions in my own community.

Finally, the book put a hunger in this reviewer’s heart to rediscover the joy of studying scripture in its original language. I honestly believe I have forgotten more Hebrew and Greek in the last twenty years since seminary then I had originally been taught. As a result, I have less to offer in preaching and teaching than I should.

Just went and purchased a software program to help start refreshing my knowledge of Greek. Hebrew will be next. Maybe one of the Rabbis in my community might become my tutor.

This review is also posted at http://nieporte.name/?p=409

Review: A Prayer to Our Father – Hebrew Origins of the Lord’s Prayer

A Prayer to Our Father by Nehemia Gordon and Keith Johnson is the latest book that I have received as an Ooze Viral Blogger. While I was awaiting the arrival of the book I began to question my choice. Am I really interested in a book that does what so many others have done (that is, commented on the Lord’s Prayer)? After having read the book, I am glad to say that I enjoyed my time with the book, especially since it had so much in it that I did not expect.
A Prayer to Our Father is short (170 page), easy to read, moderately insightful, and quite entertaining. The premise of the book is that a devout, intellectual Jew named Nehemia Gordon and Keith Johnson and an African American Elder in the United Methodist Church (miraculously?) meet and team up to deliver a book that Chronicles their adventure to better understand the Lord’s Prayer, or the “Our Father”/ “Pater Noster”.
Due to the complex nature of Gordon and Johnson’s meeting, their journey, and the meaning of the Hebrew version of the Lord’s Prayer, the book can be divided into four major sections. The first section comes after the introduction and chronicles how the two very different authors, from two quite different backgrounds were able to come together. In the second section, the authors tell the very interesting story of how they came to be friends, and their discovery that the Lord’s Prayer, and the whole of the Gospel of Matthew was originally written in Hebrew (though this was new to them, this is not new to biblical scholars, though it is often undervalued).
The third section of the book was one of the most exciting parts for me, because it involves the two authors trying to find the actual place where Jesus spoke the Sermon on the Mount, which contains the Lord’s Prayer. The description of the place where Jesus probably preached the famous sermon will stick with me and be an incredible mental picture that will enliven that text for me.
In the fourth part, the authors explain and comment on the Lord’s Prayer using insights gained from the Hebrew text, which often brings clarity and insight to the passage. Though this part of the book was good, it was not great. However, I still believe that the gems that can be gathered from this section make this part of the book worth a glance.
Another major component of the book is that it involves a Jew and a Christian getting together and meeting on common ground. This provided insights that could not have been gleaned otherwise.
All in all, the book was mostly a pleasure to read (though there were moments where it got bogged down and the insight was almost anti-insightful to me). I would recommend this book, especially for the storyline and the discovery of the spot where the Sermon on the Mount was probably preached.

Check out the book’s website here.
Listen to an interview with the authors here.

A Prayer to Our Father. Hebrew Origins of the Lord’s Prayer by Nehemia Gordon and Keith Johnson is a 171 page large print narrative adventure about an African American pastor and Jewish academic combining to investigate the Hebrew origins of the Lord’s Prayer.

What I enjoyed about this book was the concept of investigating the ‘original’ text of Matthew which is purported to be a Hebrew text, not Greek. The con of the book is the fact only 1/2 of the pages were devoted to the investigation of the actual prayer component. The other issue I have is the lack of corroborating evidence for the conclusions they make. It is dangerous to make claims implicitly or explicitly and passing them on to t he masses as fact (or not framing them as mere ideas so that people won’t treat them by default as ‘fact’ because they show up in a printed book).

The book opens with the introduction of the union between to the two unlikely characters. I thought it would have made a great blog post to follow…. Perhaps I don’t resonate with the racial and religious distinctions, to fully appreciate the combination of African American Christian w/ Jewish academic/scholar, but for me that’s not a compelling enough reason to make me read the book.

The introductory components, or half the book, dealt with their travels and anticipation discovering the Hebraic origins of the Matthean account and how it might impact our interpretations today. That is, as I suggested earlier, is an interesting premise. But half the book doesn’t deal with the question it poses.

The first half is introduction and then six chapters searching for the physical location where Jesus may have spoken the Beatitudes. How this was relevant to the question escaped me, and spending time in Israel for three weeks taught me one thing–everyone claims to have something, but the original never exists. They pretty much concluded the same thing, and at the end of the day, it was six chapters wasted (although would have made a nice blog series )

I also didn’t appreciate the pro-Israeli stance of the book, albeit I should have expected it.

Half-way through I met the discussion about the actual prayer broken down into each section. This was interesting to dive into some of the Jewish traditions that impact how we interpret the Lord’s Prayer (Prayer to Our Father) today.

What I did not jive with, however, was the lack of scholarship. Mind you, this wasn’t an exegesis of Matthew 5, (although perhaps it should have been thus giving the academy a chance to respond). More work to substantiate claims would have propelled the book to the level of ‘resource’ rather than a simple recollection of two men’s journey of discovery.

One particular issue I had in the investigation was the treatment of the name of God. Johnson seems to ignore the fact that the consensus on the origins of the term Jehovah is a result of a mistranslation by English scholars unfamiliar with Jewish traditions. Do a Google search on it.

I could not find any corroborating evidence in my quick search, not suggesting there isn’t any, to substantiate his claim that the English variant of the proper name of God–Jehovah–is merely a translation from the guess of what the proper name of God may have sounded like 2000+ years ago: Yehovah and not Yahweh.

Again, to me this is a startling claim, and I’m surprised a reference to the issue was never made. IT makes me wonder to what extent I can trust their conclusions on this particular topic. More insight and scholarship is needed (post some links or resources if you know of any.)

All in all, half of the book was interesting, the other half unnecessary. Of the half that was interesting, there were more questions raised than answers. I appreciate exposure to the initial question, but thought they could have done a much better job laying out the historical/textual evidence.

This isn’t, btw, the next ‘shack’, or at least I hope not.

http://www.pomotheo.com/2009/qod/many-questions-on-a-prayer-to-our-father-book-review/

To read more of my review go to my blog at:

http://edan0889.blogspot.com/2009/10/prayer-to-our-father.html

But why did they spend nearly half the book chronicling their expedition? It played an essential inspirational role to discover the meaning behind the words.

What also made this book unique was that they relied heavily on Hebrew Matthew, not the Greek or Latin versions that were derived afterward. Things that are ambiguous in Greek were crystal clear in Hebrew.

I was happy to see that in the chapter titled, “May Your Kingdom Be Blessed” they recognized the fact that God’s kingdom is both present and future. It’s not just a future event, but a present reality. Very good kingdom theology.

I also loved how they used so much Hebrew scripture to shed light on the Lord’s prayer. Very Hebraic! I will pass along this book to my Messianic Jewish friends. I know they’ll love it.

Shalom,
Brian

The Gospel of Matthew as we read it today in English is based on Greek manuscripts, often hundreds of years removed from original authorship. The Gospel texts were passed around under various names for several hundred years, in varying formats, until they settled into standardized texts under the currently assumed names we read today. By the time we have fully standardized Greek manuscripts of a Gospel, it has been redacted unknowable numbers of times and is at the very least changed by translation. Any linguist will attest that translating is always tinged by agenda, even if unknowingly, and no translation will perfectly match it’s original source in meaning. Because of this confusion (as well as the early Church references to Matthew originally being written in Hebrew, not Greek or Aramaic), Keith and Nehemia sought the oldest manuscripts of the Hebrew Matthew, and produced this book specifically on the Avinue prayer from Matthew chapter 5.

This is the Avinue, the Lord’s Prayer, as they translate it to English from Hebrew Matthew. Notice the differences with the standard English versions translated from Greek:

Our Father in Heaven
May your name be sanctified
May your kingdom be blessed
Your will shall be done in heaven and on earth
Give us our bread continually/daily
Forigive us the debt of our sins as we forgive the debt of those who sin against us
Do not bring us into the hands of a test
And protect us from all evil
Amen

Pros
They consistently took pop-shots at common Chrisitan myths, such as the idea that it was revolutionary for a Jew to refer to God as “Abba/Father.” That was an eye opener for me. It was embarrassing, really, to see how many places the Scriptures reffered to God as “Avi,” the Hebrew equivalent of the Aramaic abba. Even Genesis, a book put together five hundred years before Christ, names the forth person of all time as Avi’el (lit. “Father, god” or Abel in English).
The Hebrew refresher was much appriated throughout, as I have not studied Hebrew in a year. It was good to feel the linguistic geek in me resurface.

Oh, and they decide on the age old debate of how the name of God, YHWY, is supposed to be pronounced (in case you ask, they settle on “Yehovah”), although I’m not sure if such a debatable claim being settled with such immediate certainty is a good thing or not for credibility.

But seriously, the book could serve as a great introduction to basic Biblical linguistics and criticism. And Biblical criticism is something that I think more Christians ought to be exposed to, with all the usurping questions that scholarship can create to question, twist, do violence to, and recreate a faith.

Cons
Even while only coming to a grand total of 172 pages, the book felt stretched. The duo’s search for the place where Christ most likely gave the sermon on the mount took up nearly a third of the book. And they came to a conclusion all right (at the expected last of 8 failed treks described in detail, I might add), but when you are on detailed-trek 3 of 8 and you know which one they will decide is the right one, do you really want to keep reading? There was lots of this stretching of the material, and I’m pretty sure I could have gotten half the book’s content with Google search (although the Jew-sight was appreciated).

The duo also consistently refer to a gospel that a disciple named Matthew wrote, and that irritated me in a way. There was not even a hint of doubt cast on Matthew’s authorship, the fact that a semi-stable and consistent version of Matthew didn’t exist for a couple hundred years after supposed authorship, or the fact that we cannot verify original authorship’s language anyways aside from a few references from 3rd century church fathers who could be notoriously sloppy with their side references to history. For a book on the Hebrew Matthew, I was expecting at least a little scholarship on the authorship of Matthew, a solid reasoning to believe the original source was Hebrew, or even a defense of the idea that a disciple named “Matthew” wrote the piece. Alas, given the surprising lack of scholarly evidence that Jesus himself existed, maybe we can let Matthew slide. Still, if you are going to write a biblical examination, at least prove to me that what you are writing on is legit if you claim the establishment has it wrong on the source.

Suspending disbelief is great for a church service, but if you are writing a book on ancient Hebrew manuscripts, of which we have no originals, I would prefer you acknowledge the whole thing could easily be a fraud and give defense, if only for the sake of being intellectually honest.
—

A quick warning: if you believe the Bible as we have it today is exactly the same as some original manuscript actually written by a guy the book is named after, be forewarned that Nehemia and Keith will make light work of this view in a mere side note in the opening pages. You should probably stay away from this book (or any Jewish thought on Scripture… or scholarship in general for that matter)

In the end, it’s a quick and easy read. You pick up lots of Hebrew and the authors bring a skimmed scholarship to the highschool level. Though I would suggest this book to anyone familiar with the history of Jewish belief on the Bible, if you haven’t read any Jewish perspective, scholarship, language, or philosophy before, this could be a great place to start.

If I were sitting in my office or out doing research and stumbled upon a text such as this, I would be very hesitant to pick it up and read it. It’s not a book for an academic or any serious biblical literature/language scholar. This text would never be considered as “publication worthy” at even third tier academic presses. But this should not be seen as a harsch critique of the text. The book accomplishes exactly what it stated it would on the back cover. It tells of the authors exciting story and encourages the reader to “join them on this provocative exploration of the Hebrew origins of the Lord’s Prayer!”

The text shared a joyful story of two men of different faiths coming together in search of the meaning behind a world famous/influential prayer. I read much of A PRAYER with a smile on my face, no so much because of the text itself but for the story they told. It was encouraging.

Again, as for the quality of scholarship presented in the text itself, I would be hesitant to even mention the book to colleagues. But this is alright; the authors were not writing to appease academics.

Best regards to Gordon and Johnson. May you both be blessed.

But what was the real purpose and meaning of the most beloved prayer in the Christian world? I must be honest, I heard it so much growing up that I never asked myself that question. But that is exactly the question A Prayer to Our Father sets out to answer. Written by an unlikely pair of authors, a Jewish Bible scholar and a former chaplain for the Minnesota Vikings, this book is an adventure that begins in Jerusalem and takes them presumably to the very place in Galilee where Jesus first spoke this prayer. Along the way these two discover a Hebrew version of the “Lord’s Prayer” called the Avinu, which means “Our Father.” (Turns out we weren’t too far off when we called it an “Our Father.”) The second half of the book is an exploration of the Hebrew origins of this prayer. This book caused me to think of the “Lord’s Prayer” in ways that I never have before.

To see original post in its entirety go to: http://kevinstewart.wordpress.com/2009/10/12/a-prayer-to-our-father/

I did thoroughly enjoy the personal stories shared in the book. I found the authors journey fascinating from the moment that they met to their meetings in the Holy Land. I really found myself longing even more for a trip to the Middle East to see and experience the land where Jesus walked and where many of the stories of the Hebrew Scriptures take place.

Overall I would recommend this book to someone not looking for heavy academic information but maybe a new perspective on the Lord’s Prayer.

The first section of the book, focused on finding the location of Jesus’ delivery of the Sermon on the Mount shows a complete misunderstanding of how the Gospel’s are written and are to be read. The Gospel writers were focused on getting across theological points about a Man, not the latitude and longitude of a speech. It is doubtful that Matthew 5-7 was delivered all at one time and one place, if we understand 1st century historiography correctly.

The second half of the book gives a line-by-line analysis of the Hebrew version of the Lord’s prayer. The reason they are doing this to the Hebrew is based off of a largely uncritical acceptance of a late manuscript as the “original Matthew.” They reach this conclusion mostly by jumping and with the assistance of misquoting Papias (who stated that Matthew wrote down “logia,” not his Gospel in Aramaic/Hebrew).

This book should only be read as a reference to uncritical and unscholarly research on a Biblical text.