Of course I do.
But why should I care? Neither you nor he produced any actual Hebrew manuscript of Matthew, and he provides no evidence either.
I’ve provided TEXTUAL evidence of early Matthew in Koine. http://www.codexsinaiticus.org/en/manuscript.aspx?book=33 You’ve provided hot air, insults, and a single sentence by someone who lived 70 years after Jesus that’s not even a manuscript OR a quotation. (By the way, that’s another ad hominem from your insults. So SEVEN times you fail logic forever so far.)
And, for that matter, even IF you were right. Even IF, that still proves absolutely nothing. Since you don’t HAVE any copies at all of Matthew in Hebrew that weren’t 300-1200 years out of date, you have no idea what this mythical source even says, and so therefore anything you say using it as a source is utterly baseless.
And you have also not shown me anything about A: the rest of the books of the New Testament, B: Paul’s language, and C: The fact that you cited a passage in Acts to prove your point only to claim that EXACT SAME passage was corrupted and so should be thrown out. Shall I just assume you concede all my points then?
Answer my points, buddy. Debate. Disprove me. Provide your evidence. But until you do, that’s eight times you lose the argument today. Care for nine?
.
So far 29 Hebrew manuscripts of the true Gospel of Matthew have been produced.
Truth would be your friend.
Your hip-shots have missed every time, but you just keep trying, just like the chihuahua.
.