You really are a bum for posting ANYTHING for this idiot, lol:
The true story of James Lloyd doing business as Christian Media Network
(I)t needs to be said there is a mountain of scholarship showing Matthean authorship of the Greek manuscript we call the book of Matthew. Indeed, the Grecian book of Matthew shows unmistakable internal evidence of its authenticity by the disciple of Jesus.
In an attempt to make the scholarly data more accessible, we note the fact there are numerous statements within the Greek text itself where the narrative tells us the meaning of a Hebrew term. If the writing originated in Hebrew, an ongoing occasional translation would not be necessary. In other words, if Matthew (or the larger body of the New Testament) originated in Aramaic or Hebrew, it would be unnecessary to tell the reader what a particular Hebrew word or phrase means.
It is only because the writing did originate in Greek that an occasional explanation is needed, and such interpretive statements are provided in the Scripture itself. Thus, we see several examples of these ongoing translation notes. For instance, in Matthew's first chapter, the disciple cites the prophecy from Isaiah concerning how a virgin will conceive, and a male child will come forth who is to be called Immanuel. Isaiah wrote:
When Matthew quotes this prophecy, he writes:
In the Shem Tov version of Matthew, which was supposedly composed in Hebrew, the verse also tells us the name Immanuel, means God with us in Hebrew. Once again, if the book was actually written in Hebrew, there would be no reason to tell the reader the meaning of the name, for the name Immanuel is Hebrew.
It should also be noted that this type of internal evidence also discredits the supposed Aramaic version of the entire New Testament called the Peshitta, as well as other pseudo-Matthews forged by Antichrist Jews in the middle ages. Thus, it's significant that Shem Tov's supposed Hebrew Matthew follows the Aramaic Peshitta, in its ongoing interpretation of certain Hebrew words.
In short, these writings were drawn from the Greek originals, and it never occurred to the forgers who claimed their abomination as the originals, to edit out the ongoing translation notes. This is the wooden stake in the heart of these wicked counterfeits. Indeed, we see the same interpretive notes occur in the writings of all four Gospel writers, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and even John. For instance, in the book of John we see the following:
In the supposedly "original" Aramaic New Testament known as the Peshitta, we see the text follows a similar phrasing:
This ongoing translation is also found in the Greek manuscripts of Luke's work, The Acts Of The Apostles, and once again, the counterfeit Aramaic "original" is exposed as a fraud. Luke writes:
Since the supposed Semitic original also translates the name within the text itself, it's clear the Aramaic is actually a corrupted translation of the Greek original:
This means that, regarding the Shem Tov abomination, the claim that Matthew's Gospel would not conform to the Greek linguistic culture of his time, and would, therefore, be written in Hebrew, is fallacious.
Literally hundreds of experts have written commentaries on the book of Matthew, and there is no doubt whatsoever that Matthew's Gospel was written in Greek. Indeed, some scholars have deciphered errors in the Eusebian notation of the "tradition" that Matthew ever "published" a version of his Gospel in Hebrew.
You really are a bum for posting ANYTHING for this idiot, lol:
The true story of James Lloyd doing business as Christian Media Network
That seems to be the logical argument. I agree.