Shem Tov or Shem Tob Matthew--The Hebrew Matthew

[Vic]

Carl, your contention was that those scholars on that list believed in an original Hebrew NT, not just a Hebrew Matthew. Further to that, most on the list are primarily aramaic primacists. IN other words the list that is supposed to support that original Hebrew concept is filled with people who rather push aramaic--not all, but most.

The fact the Matthew wrote a "version" of his epistle in Hebrew as well as Greek is still not a huge deal. Since we have proof of it in Greek and the majority manuscripts show a greek original--what is your problem? You are presenting a moot point. We have the greek and the speculation about how or what the Hebrew may have said is endless speculation, because quite frankly, you don't know which was written first---the Greek version or the Hebrew, because you discount the Greek as the original. So be it.

Bottom line--the Shem tov is neither an "original" Hebrew Matthew, nor a solid translation. It's a polemic against converted Jews. Therefore unuseable as a "Hebrew Matthew" despite what those within HR wish to claim about it.

Now if you would care to stay on topic that would great.