Posted on 06/18/2013 2:17:31 AM PDT by dr.proctor
Or a Catholic Concordance that has ALL the books referenced.
What is the evidence? Who says so and what is their reasoning and evidence? Or is just someone touting a book on their blog?
If it's simply a matter of you offering your opinion, fine but when you post this as fact you should be challenged.
The best evidence is the mistranslated Hebrew coloquialisms, and puns found in the Greek text, for those of you that have not the spirit. For the gospel of Matthew, the original writings have been found well preserved in a significant number of MS, the best known being the Shem Tov.
The research has been going on for almost two decades, beginning when the documents in the Lenningrad library were opened to outsiders to view their collection.
You seem to deliberately miss the words of Yeshua, describing these things to his disciples. The Greek translators glossed over what they didn’t understand, and in so doing failed to erase the evidence against their agenda.
This is true......many instances of this have been found.
See post #23, #25, and #28 for prime examples!
According to Daniel Wallace some 43% of all NT verses are found in Greek mss from the first and second centuries.
The translation of Shem Tov is not an “original writing” as no autograph mss are known to exist.
“The best evidence is the mistranslated Hebrew coloquialisms, and puns found in the Greek text, for those of you that have not the spirit”.
And what might those be? Not all, just give us a few since you say that's “The best evidence....”
Well.....I'm certainly no expert in this area....but what about these statements?
Origen (Eusebius, H.E. 6.25.4)
"As having learnt by tradition concerning the four Gospels, which alone are unquestionable in the Assembly of God under heaven, that first was written according to Matthew, who was once a tax collector but afterwards an apostle of Jesus Christ, who published it for those who from Judaism came to believe, composed as it was in the Hebrew language."
Eusebius, (H.E. 3.24.6)
Matthew had first preached to Hebrews, and when he was on the point of going to others he transmitted in writing in his native language the Gospel according to himself, and thus supplied by writing the lack of his own presence to those from whom he was sent."
Epiphanius (ca. 315-403)
Bishop of Salamis, refers to a gospel used by the Ebionites (Panarion 30. 13.1-30.22.4). He says it is Matthew, called "According to the Hebrews" by them, but says it is corrupt and mutilated. He says Matthew issued his Gospel in Hebrew letters. He quotes from this Ebionite Gospel seven times. These quotations appear to come not from Matthew but from some harmonised account of the canonical Gospels.
Jerome
Also asserts that Matthew wrote in the Hebrew language (Epist. 20.5), and he refers to a Hebrew Matthew and a Gospel of the Hebrews-unclear if they are the same. He also quotes from the Gospel used by the Nazoreans and the Ebionites, which he says he has recently translated from Hebrew to Greek (in Matth. 12.13). We have quotations from such a source from Cyril of Jerusalem, Jerome, Origen, Didymus, Clement of Alexandria.
“...mistranslated Hebrew coloquialisms, and puns”.
Is that what you are suggesting? That Matt. couldn't properly translate his own text?
I'm suggesting nothing! I first stated my non expertise in this area.....and then asked a question.
Why do you have a chip on your shoulder regarding this subject?
Chip? No chip, I just try to be clear and unvarnished in what I write. I dare say that you'll not find anywhere that I take comments personally (well...maybe a very few times).
Shem Tov was a copy of an older Hebrew MS.
That has been proven by Israel’s best Hebrew scholars.
Tell Yahova to check with Daniel Wallace?
Go for it!
“Shem Tov was a copy of an older Hebrew MS.”
Would you care to narrow that “older” down a bit since Shem Tov lived in the 14th. Cen.?
Okay........my apologies. I misconstrued your tone.
Did Matthew mistranslate his text when going from Hebrew to Greek?
I'm not sure that it was Matthew who translated his own gospel into Greek. What is certain is that some early church historians all agree that the book of Matthew was originally written in Hebrew. What....or who after that did anything else.....I assume is anyone's guess.
Does it follow that all of the NT was first in Hebrew? No. The oldest Greek mss are from the first and second cen.
And please, no apologies needed, I really take no offence.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.