Print

Print


From: "Josu Lavin" <[log in to unmask]>
> Toto le Novo Testamento sta scripto in greco. In le caso de Mattheo on
> suppone un altero original, ma isto est una supposition.
>
There's a lot of evidence that Matthew's Gospel was
"originally written in Hebrew. External evidence to this
effect reaches as far back as Papias of Hierapolis,
of the second century C.E. Eusebius quoted Papias
as stating: "Matthew collected the oracles in the
Hebrew language."
(The Ecclesiastical History, III, XXXIX, 16)

Early in the third century, Origen made reference
to Matthew's account and, in discussing the four
Gospels, is quoted by Eusebius as saying that the
"first was written . . . according to Matthew,
who was once a tax-collector but afterwards
an apostle of Jesus Christ, . . . in the Hebrew
language."

(The Ecclesiastical History, VI, XXV, 3-6)

The scholar Jerome (of the fourth and
fifth centuries C.E.) wrote in his work
De viris inlustribus (Concerning Illustrious Men),
chapter III, that Matthew "composed a Gospel
of Christ in Judaea in the Hebrew language
and characters for the benefit of those of the
circumcision who had believed. . . . Moreover,
the Hebrew itself is preserved to this day in the
library at Caesarea, which the martyr Pamphilus
so diligently collected."-Translation from the
Latin text edited by E. C. Richardson and
published in the series "Texte und Untersuchungen
zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur,"
Leipzig, 1896, Vol. 14, pp. 8, 9."

But the important thing is the message of the
Gospel, whether this is in Hebrew, Greek or
Latin or one of the languages know spoken
throughout the world. The message is the
important thing. I believe,

Sincerely,
Jay B.