As you probably know, a fragment from the work of Papias (c. 110 AD) states that Matthew was originally written in Aramaic or Hebrew, but we have no extant copies. Since this gospel was written by a Jew, Matthew the tax-collector, for a Jewish Christian audience, he would have spoken the same language as Jesus, Aramaic.
Because of its rich theological content, Matthew was used as the primary catechetical text in the early Church and was the gospel most quoted by the fathers. It presents a holistic and systematic perspective on Jesus, giving an account of his miracles and teachings while placing them in their historical and religious context.
And as you know, Jimminy Cricket wrote that Jesus was particularly fond of shushi, but there are no extant copies of that either...So take it for what it's worth...
Matthew the tax-collector, for a Jewish Christian audience, he would have spoken the same language as Jesus, Aramaic.
Is the non extant Papias the same source that claims Jesus' language was Aramaic??? I suspect Jesus' language was any language he wanted to use at any given time...
I didn't ask for hearsay. Nor do I base my beliefs on hearsay. Prove that Matthew was first written in either Hebrew or Aramaic. Surely you believe God would be able to have preserved what He promised. There is no proof even of what Papias remark meant. The entire supposition of an original Matthew written in Hebrew is just that, supposition based on an unclear comment by Papias. To promote it as fact is ridiculous.