Could the Aramaic NT be the original autographs?

[Yeshua1]

I am going to say that no, the original NT could not have been Aramaic. Why? Because the NT in Greek quotes quite a fe3w times from Aramaic, then translates the Aramaic word or phrase. Thus, if we recognize those Aramaic quotations as Scripture (and we do, right?), then the NT was originally written in Greek.

The prime example is the statement of Jesus on the cross: "And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" (Matt. 27:46).

While in School, the only book and author that was stated in the books might have been written not in Koine greek was Matthew Gospel, as a few thought was originally in Hebrew!

 

[John of Japan]

While in School, the only book and author that was stated in the books might have been written not in Koine greek was Matthew Gospel, as a few thought was originally in Hebrew!

Never been proven. Very little evidence.

 

[Yeshua1]

Never been proven. Very little evidence.

Agreed, as think it was quoted by just a single ECF, papias maybe?

 

[John of Japan]

Agreed, as think it was quoted by just a single ECF, papias maybe?

I think so.

 

[rlvaughn]

It is Papias mediated through Eusebius, since whatever Papias originally wrote about this has not survived to the present. The translation at New Advent is given this way:

Eusebius, Church History, Book III, Chapter 38, Paragraph16. But concerning Matthew he [i.e., Papias, rlv] writes as follows: So then Matthew wrote the oracles in the Hebrew language, and every one interpreted them as he was able.

However, Irenaeus seems to say the same:

Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book III, Chapter 1. Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome, and laying the foundations of the Church.

Eusebius also claims Origen said the same:

Eusebius, Church History, Book VI, Chapter 25, Paragraph 4. Among the four Gospels, which are the only indisputable ones in the Church of God under heaven, I have learned by tradition that the first was written by Matthew, who was once a publican, but afterwards an apostle of Jesus Christ, and it was prepared for the converts from Judaism, and published in the Hebrew language.

So I searched Origen's writings and found the following:

Origen, Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew, Book I. Concerning the four Gospels which alone are uncontroverted in the Church of God under heaven, I have learned by tradition that the Gospel according to Matthew, who was at one time a publican and afterwards an Apostle of Jesus Christ, was written first; and that he composed it in the Hebrew tongue and published it for the converts from Judaism.

Notice, though, that Origen does not claim personal knowledge of Matthew's Gospel written in Hebrew, but that he learned it by tradition. Eusebius also seems to attribute the view to Clement:

Eusebius, Church History, Book III, Chapter 24, Paragraph 6. For Matthew, who had at first preached to the Hebrews, when he was about to go to other peoples, committed his Gospel to writing in his native tongue, and thus compensated those whom he was obliged to leave for the loss of his presence.

I did not yet find a writing online by Clement referencing the Gospel of Matthew in Hebrew. Jerome seems to claim a Hebrew version was in existence in his day:

Jerome, De Viris Illustribus (On Illustrious Men), Chapter 3. Matthew, also called Levi, apostle and aforetimes publican, composed a gospel of Christ at first published in Judea in Hebrew for the sake of those of the circumcision who believed, but this was afterwards translated into Greek, though by what author is uncertain. The Hebrew itself has been preserved until the present day in the library at Cæsarea which Pamphilus so diligently gathered. I have also had the opportunity of having the volume described to me by the Nazarenes of Berœa, a city of Syria, who use it. In this it is to be noted that wherever the Evangelist, whether on his own account or in the person of our Lord the Saviour quotes the testimony of the Old Testament he does not follow the authority of the translators of the Septuagint but the Hebrew. Wherefore these two forms exist "Out of Egypt have I called my son," and "for he shall be called a Nazarene."

I make no claim that it is true that Matthew's Gospel was written in Hebrew -- only that it is true that some early church fathers believed that it was. One can take the claims as historical records for whatever they might be worth.

 

[Yeshua1]

It is Papias mediated through Eusebius, since whatever Papias originally wrote about this has not survived to the present. The translation at New Advent is given this way: However, Irenaeus seems to say the same: Eusebius also claims Origen said the same: So I searched Origen's writings and found the following: Notice, though, that Origen does not claim personal knowledge of Matthew's Gospel written in Hebrew, but that he learned it by tradition. Eusebius also seems to attribute the view to Clement: I did not yet find a writing online by Clement referencing the Gospel of Matthew in Hebrew. Jerome seems to claim a Hebrew version was in existence in his day:
I make no claim that it is true that Matthew's Gospel was written in Hebrew -- only that it is true that some early church fathers believed that it was. One can take the claims as historical records for whatever they might be worth.

Would be the only NT books claimed to have been recorded down then originally in Koine Greek!

 

[rlvaughn]

If you are asking whether the Gospel of Matthew is the only book of the New Testament with a specific claim by any church fathers that it was not written in Greek -- yes, as far as I am aware.

 

[Yeshua1]

If you are asking whether the Gospel of Matthew is the only book of the New Testament with a specific claim by any church fathers that it was not written in Greek -- yes, as far as I am aware.

Thanks for your input, as did not remember all that you had posted regarding the claims made for him to have written in Hebrew!

 

[37818]

A number of things I believe about Matthew's gospel account.

1) It was the earliest gospel written (yes, before Mark).
2) It was by the Apostle Matthew.
3) It was orignally written in Greek.
4) It is based on the spoken Hebrew language.
Matthew 5:18, "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."
The alternate translation of "kingdom of God" with "kingdom of heaven." Rather than "kingdom of the LORD."
Matthew 4:4, "of the LORD" is translated as "of God." Compare LXX.