Below is the ChatGPT summary from the transcript (in his directory in Dropbox) of Dr. James Tabor’s lecture 8 from his course titled Christianity Before Paul: Rediscovering the Jewish Movement of Jesus on MVP in January 2026.
Tabor says that Howard’s revised edition responds well to his critics in a large appendix.
Overview and focus of Lecture 8
Dr. James Tabor’s Lecture 8 examines what is commonly called Hebrew Matthew, focusing especially on the version preserved within the 14th-century Jewish polemical work Eban Bohan by the Spanish rabbi Shem-Tov ben Isaac ben Shaprut (also known as Shem Tob). Tabor stresses that this is not the same idea as the patristic tradition (Papias, Irenaeus, etc.) that Matthew was originally written in Hebrew, nor the “Recovered Gospel” hypotheses discussed earlier. Instead, the lecture centers on a specific Hebrew text embedded in a Jewish anti-Christian work, preserved in multiple medieval manuscripts, and critically analyzed by George Howard in The Hebrew Gospel of Matthew.
George Howard and the Shem Tov Hebrew Matthew
Tabor highlights George Howard as a respected scholar of Jewish Christianity who argued that this Hebrew Matthew is not a translation from the Greek Gospel of Matthew. Howard based his case on linguistic features (such as the use of the vav-consecutive), stylistic characteristics of Mishnaic Hebrew, and numerous textual divergences that do not make sense as retro-translations from Greek or Latin. Although Howard’s first edition was sharply criticized in major academic journals, Tabor emphasizes that Howard answered these objections extensively in a second edition, and that the debate has largely been sidelined rather than resolved.
Manuscripts and historical setting
The Hebrew Matthew discussed in the lecture survives in roughly a dozen manuscripts dating from the 15th to the 17th centuries, with a key copy housed in the British Library. The text appears within Evan Bohan, where Ibn Shaprut quotes the Gospel in Hebrew and then refutes it point by point as part of a forced medieval disputation context between Jews and Christians in Spain . Tabor explains that this context explains why the Gospel text was preserved at all, much like how lost works are sometimes known only through their opponents’ quotations.
Distinctive textual and theological features
Tabor surveys a range of readings that sharply diverge from canonical Greek Matthew. These include:
- The absence of the Trinitarian baptismal formula in Matthew 28, which instead simply commands teaching and obedience to Jesus’ instructions, a feature Tabor links to broader scholarly doubts about later Trinitarian interpolations.
- A strongly pro–John the Baptist orientation, including readings where John appears greater than Jesus, or where all the prophets speak “concerning John” rather than “until John,” suggesting an early or alternative trajectory of Jesus-movement theology.
- Statements in which Elijah (identified with John the Baptist) is said to “save all the world,” intensifying the Baptist’s role beyond what is found in Greek Matthew.
- A negative view of preaching to the Gentiles, which is associated with “Antichrist” activity, aligning this text with non-Pauline, Torah-centered Jewish Christian groups.
Relationships to other early traditions
A major theme of the lecture is that Shem Tov’s Hebrew Matthew sometimes aligns unexpectedly with other early sources. Tabor notes parallels with Luke’s version of Q material, with sayings in the Gospel of Thomas (discovered only in the 20th century), and possibly with the Pseudo-Clementine literature, raising the question of access to very old Jesus traditions transmitted through non-canonical channels. He also argues that the Gospel of John may polemicize against views reflected in this Hebrew Matthew, repeatedly subordinating John the Baptist in ways that make sense only if such exalted Baptist traditions were circulating.
Linguistic and interpretive details
Tabor draws attention to Hebrew wordplays and puns that have no counterpart in Greek Matthew, suggesting composition in Hebrew rather than translation. He also highlights passages where Hebrew Matthew resolves theological tensions found in Greek Matthew, such as Jesus’ relationship to Pharisaic authority: obedience is directed to Moses and Torah, not to Pharisaic rulings themselves. *
Recommended readings and course trajectory
Toward the end of the lecture, Tabor assigns two readings: a general article on whether Matthew was originally written in Hebrew, followed by a more technical 1998 journal article on Shem Tov’s Hebrew Matthew and early Jewish Christianity. He frames Hebrew Matthew as a “treasure hunt” that opens a window onto early Jewish Christianity, non-Pauline Jesus movements, and the continuing influence of John the Baptist traditions—setting the stage for the next lecture on the Pseudo-Clementines.
From ChatGPT.
*The passage Dr. Tabor was referring to is Matthew 23:2–3.
In Greek Matthew, Jesus says that the scribes and Pharisees have authoritative teaching status because they “sit on Moses’ seat,” and therefore their instruction is to be followed, even though their behavior is criticized.
The text reads (NRSV):
“The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat; therefore, do whatever they teach you and follow it; but do not do as they do, for they do not practice what they teach.” (Matthew 23:2–3)
This is the passage that creates the tension Tabor highlighted in Lecture 8: on its face, Greek Matthew appears to affirm Pharisaic interpretive authority over Torah (“do whatever they teach you”), while simultaneously condemning their hypocrisy. Tabor contrasts this with the Shem Tov Hebrew Matthew, where obedience is redirected to Moses/Torah itself, not to Pharisaic rulings, which removes the implication that Jesus endorses Pharisaic halakhic authority.
Shem Tob’s Hebrew Gospel of Matthew is the oldest extant Hebrew version of the Gospel of Matthew. It was included in the 14th-century work Eben Boḥan (The Touchstone)[1] by the Spanish Jewish Rabbi Shem-Tov ben Isaac ben Shaprut. George Howard[2] has argued that Shem Tov’s Matthew comes from a much earlier Hebrew text that was later translated into Greek and other languages. A characteristic feature of this Hebrew gospel is the appearance in 20 places of השם (HaShem, “the Name”), in the abbreviated form ה״, where the Gospel of Matthew has Κύριος (“the Lord”).
Shem-Tob ben Isaac Ibn Shaprut was the author of an anti-Christian religious treatise, The Touchstone, completed in 1380 and revised in 1385 and 1400. Often referred to as “The Logic of Shem Tob”, it argues against the belief that Jesus is God. It also argues against attributing the role of Messiah to Jesus.
In 1987, George Howard said (pp. vii, 234) that the translation of the Gospel of Matthew in Shem Tob’s work long predates the 14th century and may better represent the original text. His view was rejected by W.L. Petersen and Petri Luomanen.[3] A refutation of the theory that Shem Tob’s Hebrew version of Matthew represents the original Hebrew source behind the Gospel of Matthew, using Matt. 5:18 as a test case, is presented on Jerusalem Perspective in David Bivin’s, “Has a Hebrew Gospel Been Found?”
Extant manuscripts
28 manuscripts containing the Gospel of Matthew of Shem Tob are known to have survived until the present time. These manuscripts are dated between the fifteenth and seventeenth centuries. The most significant manuscripts are:
- Ms. British Museum Library Add. No. 26964, London
- Ms. Heb. 28, Rijksuniveriteit Library, Leiden, Netherlands
- Ms. Mich. 119. Bodleian Library, Oxford
- Ms. Oppenheim Add. 4° 72, Bodleian Library, Oxford
- Ms. Oppenheim Add. 4° 111, Bodleian Library, Oxford
- Ms. 2209 (Marx 19), Library of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, New York
- Ms. 2234 (Marx 15), Library of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, New York
- Ms. 2279 (Marx 18), Library of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, New York
- Ms. 2426 (Marx 16), Library of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, New York
- Ms Vat.ebr.101, Vatican Library
The above paragraphs are from Wikipedia
