The Lords Prayer and the Talmud

Repeat the Lord's Prayer.

According to Matthew

Old Version.
"Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen" (vi, 9-13).

New Version.
"Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so on earth. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors. And bring us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one."

According to Luke.

Old Version.
"Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth. Give us day by day our daily bread. And forgive us our sins; for we also forgive every one that is indebted to us. And lead us not into temptation: but deliver us from evil" (xi, 2-4).

New Version.
"Father, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Give us day by day our daily bread. And forgive us our sins; for we ourselves also forgive every one that is indebted to us. And bring us not into temptation."

The commonly accepted version of the Lord's Prayer is the Authorized Version of Matthew. This version is admitted to be grossly inaccurate. It contains sixty-six words. The Revised Version of Matthew contains but fifty-five. Twenty-four words either do not belong to the prayer, or have been misplaced; while words which do belong to it have been omitted. If the custodians of the Christian Scriptures have permitted the prayer of their Lord to be corrupted to this extent, what reliance can be placed upon the genuineness of the remainder of these writings?
The Lord's Prayer, like so many more of the precepts and discourses ascribed to Jesus, is borrowed. Dr. Hardwicke, of England, says: "The so-called 'Lord's Prayer' was learned by the Messiah as the 'Kadish' from the Talmud." The Kadish, as translated by a Christian scholar, Rev. John Gregorie, is as follows:

"Our Father which art in heaven, be gracious to us, O Lord, our God; hallowed be thy name, and let the remembrance of thee be glorified in heaven above and in the earth here below. Let thy kingdom reign over us now and forever. The holy men of old said, Remit and forgive unto all men whatsoever they have done against me. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil thing. For thine is the kingdom, and thou shalt reign in glory for ever and for evermore."

The eminent Swiss theologian, Dr. Wetstein, says: "It is a curious fact that the Lord's Prayer may be constructed almost verbatim out of the Talmud."
The Sermon on the Mount is derived largely from the teachings of the Essenes, a Jewish sect to which Jesus is believed by many to have belonged.
-----------------------------
More than Likely the Essenes were related to the Judges of Isreal. What is important to consider is that ultimately this is a matter related to the Quabblah.

Futhermore Jesus suported and in fact promoted the actions of the Judges of Isreal. Ones who could heal as well as
unheal. As well as were they responsible for making contact (touching) with the Ark of the Covenant.

[Edited on 7-11-2002 by Toltec]

In between the Talmud and modern versions of the Lord's Prayer, there is the first versions of the early church. A literal transliteration from the original Greek follows:

Father of ours who's in the heaven,
hallowed be thy name of yours,
come thy kingdom of yours,
arise thy will of yours,
as in heaven, also on earth.
This bread of ours that 's for the coming day give us this day.
And free us from these debts of ours
as also we have freed those debtors of ours.
And do not lead us into trial,
but draw us to you, away from that which is grievous.

Documentation on the validity of this transliteration is given at pagenotes.com...

reply to post by Toltec


Wow, so Jesus was into Talmud. It says some pretty cruel things in there. If Jesus was into it then the bible is NOT to be trusted at all and it is a big deception.

reply to post by arpgme

No,
what the OP is saying is that if you went through the Talmud and took little bits of it here and there, the organized those bits, you could construct something that sounds like the lords prayer.
you could probably do the same thing with a phone book.

The Talmud is simply commentary on the Mishnah, which in Jewish circles is also known as the Oral Law. The written Torah - the first 5 books of the Bible - was written down by Moses during his meetings with G-d on the mountain.

The written Torah is like the notes taken from a lecture. The actual lecture itself is known as the Mishnah. It is comprised of about 42 volumes. The Babylonian Talmud is comprised of roughly 73 volumes, and includes the Mishnah and the rabbinical commentary on the Mishnah.

Yeshua ("Jesus") was a Jewish rabbi, and would have been intimately familiar with both the Torah and the Oral Law. It is not surprising that He would have taken His parables in form and substance from the Oral Law.

reply to post by CookieMonster09

Yeshua ("Jesus") was a Jewish rabbi . . .

Jesus (sometimes mistakenly called by a Syrian name) was not a rabbi.
For one, a rabbi had to be married, which Jesus was not (despite unfounded theories to the contrary).
Jesus according to one of the gospels was called a rabbi by someone who happened upon him and recognized him as being a teacher.
There are a lot of people who are for whatever reason, fan-boys for Jews and resent Christianity for "stealing" their god, so work to undermine it whenever the opportunity arises.

reply to post by jmdewey60


But that is not bits from "here" and "there". It is a whole prayer (The Kadish) that is copied almost verbatim.

"Our Father which art in heaven, be gracious to us, O Lord, our God; hallowed be thy name, and let the remembrance of thee be glorified in heaven above and in the earth here below. Let thy kingdom reign over us now and forever. The holy men of old said, Remit and forgive unto all men whatsoever they have done against me. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil thing. For thine is the kingdom, and thou shalt reign in glory for ever and for evermore."

reply to post by arpgme


What you are quoting is what you copied from the OP.
There is no link to where he got that from.
I am familiar with the Kodesh from attending temple services and memorised it to recite it in Hebrew.
For one thing, it does not come from the Talmud, but was a product of European Judaism in the Middle Ages.
That is my understanding directly from the Rabbi who had a doctor's degree in the history of Judaism.

Jesus (sometimes mistakenly called by a Syrian name) was not a rabbi. For one, a rabbi had to be married, which Jesus was not (despite unfounded theories to the contrary).

Semantics. He is called repeatedly a rabbi and "teacher" in the New Testament. Whether Yeshua was married or not, and whether a rabbi is absolutely required to be married, are both debatable subjects. (In general, you are correct in that rabbis are and were highly recommended to be married.)

And, yes, Christ's real name was Yeshua, not Jesus. The earliest Jewish followers fled to Syria shortly after the destruction of the Second Temple. This is where the origins of the Aramaic New Testamant called the "Peshi-tta" originates. Yeshua was a common alternative name for Joshua. It was actually the Greeks that gave us the name "Iesous", which eventually became "Jesus".

reply to post by CookieMonster09

Semantics.

Right, but that does not mean it is not important.

He is called repeatedly a rabbi and "teacher" in the New Testament. Whether Yeshua was married or not, and whether a rabbi is absolutely required to be married, are both debatable subjects. (In general, you are correct in that rabbis are and were highly recommended to be married.)

In Jon 3:26 the disciples of John the Baptist call John rabbi. Apparently, according to the gospels, if you had disciples, they they called the person who they were the disciples of, rabbi. You don't see anyone other than those who intreated him calling him rabbi. You don't see anyone who did not believe in him calling him by that title.
My point earlier was that Jesus was not a rabbi in the modern sense of the word.

And, yes, Christ's real name was Yeshua, not Jesus. The earliest Jewish followers fled to Syria shortly after the destruction of the Second Temple. This is where the origins of the Aramaic New Testamant called the "Peshi-tta" originates. .

The New Testament was written in Greek and the Peshi-tta is a translation from the Greek, and was not somehow independently produced.

Yeshua was a common alternative name for Joshua. It was actually the Greeks that gave us the name "Iesous", which eventually became "Jesus".

Jesus never lived in Damascus or Antioch.

reply to post by Toltec


Correct accreditation is a must. Quoting Matthew or Jesus for what appears in the Hebrew bible is wrong and false. This is especially applicable in any religious writings as it borders on falsehood & denial - aka Un-Godly writ.

The most Un-Godly, Un-Abrahamic, Un-Jewish verse in all recorded history is the boasting of 'NOT A BRICK SHALL STAND'. This exposes the premise of love and truth totally for what it really is. Dancing in a passion when a holocaust occurred in the first century is hardly a Godly premise. This is especially applicable of a people who alone rejected Roman divine kings and sustained Monotheism.

My point earlier was that Jesus was not a rabbi in the modern sense of the word.

Of course not. Yeshua was a teacher, which is exactly what "modern day" rabbis are. Again, semantics.

The New Testament was written in Greek and the Peshi-tta is a translation from the Greek, and was not somehow independently produced.

The official Assyrian Church of the East traditionally considers the New Testament of the Peshi-tta to be the original New Testament, and Aramaic to be its original language.

There are whole books and even theological treatises written about this dispute, so we can agree to disagree.

Jesus never lived in Damascus or Antioch.

Now you are in left field. I never suggested that Christ lived in Damascus nor Antioch. Nice try.

What does this have to do with whether or not Jesus existed?

The fact is, the version in the Talmud came FIRST before the "lord's" prayer...

If Jesus was real and he really was in a synogogue like a Jew, then he stole it from Talmud.

If he wasn't real, then Christianity is just an offspring of the Jewish religion.

It's that simple.

reply to post by arpgme

The fact is, the version in the Talmud came FIRST before the "lord's" prayer...

Even if it was, a "version" of the Lord's Prayer, in the Talmud (which no one has yet substantiated), The Talmud was not written until well past the time that the New Testament gospels were written.

If he wasn't real, then Christianity is just an offspring of the Jewish religion.

Judaism is an offshoot of Christianity.
Before Christianity, what existed for the Jews was the temple cult.
After the temple was destroyed, the Jews had to look around for something else to base their religion on.
What they came up with was sayings of former rabbis, and then they started a cult of rabbinical opinion.
A lot of those opinions were based on Christian beliefs and as Christianity progressed in their theology, the rabbis followed along, until there isn't very much difference between the two religions.
The Jews had moved closer to Christians in how they interpret things.

reply to post by jmdewey60


Judaism is not an offshoot of Christianity. Judaism came first since the Tanakh (Torah) - Old Testament is from The Jews.

The Talmud is as old as Ancient Babylonian times from what I've researched.