Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Nah...sorry. Eusebius and Jerome are not authoritative "Church Fathers" of mine. They lived hundreds of years later.
Why would you believe that over the actually Greek texts that have been found from as early as 125 AD? And why do you believe they wrote it in Hebrew when Koine Greek was the universal language of the day?
So exactly who is "authoritative" earlier than 260-340AD, (Eusebius), in your opinion? They must have actually lived around the same time as Yeshua, (), or maybe even before that time if they lived several hundred years earlier than Eusebius, (lol). And can you please provide at least some reference for your assertion of the apparent existence of "Greek texts that have been found from as early as 125 AD"?? No doubt you must know that the dating of manuscripts, papyri, fragments, etc., does not work that way, (lol).
Here is another statement from Eusebius on Wiki, (Papias is merely cited by Eusebius, while Eusebius is the witness, yet clearly both therefore claimed that Matthew was originally written in Hebrew because, ehem, Eusebius is citing Papias, (100-140AD)).
So exactly who is "authoritative" earlier than 260-340AD, (Eusebius), in your opinion? They must have actually lived around the same time as Yeshua, (), or maybe even before that time if they lived several hundred years earlier than Eusebius, (lol). And can you please provide at least some reference for your assertion of the apparent existence of "Greek texts that have been found from as early as 125 AD"?? No doubt you must know that the dating of manuscripts, papyri, fragments, etc., does not work that way, (lol).
Here is another statement from Eusebius on Wiki, (Papias is merely cited by Eusebius, while Eusebius is the witness, yet clearly both therefore claimed that Matthew was originally written in Hebrew because, ehem, Eusebius is citing Papias, (100-140AD)).
Also, if I remember correctly, Papias was a disciple of John, or at least heard him speak when he was a child...
So exactly who is "authoritative" earlier than 260-340AD, (Eusebius), in your opinion?
The apostles.
Quote:
They must have actually lived around the same time as Yeshua, (), or maybe even before that time if they lived several hundred years earlier than Eusebius, (lol). And can you please provide at least some reference for your assertion of the apparent existence of "Greek texts that have been found from as early as 125 AD"?? No doubt you must know that the dating of manuscripts, papyri, fragments, etc., does not work that way, (lol).
Here is another statement from Eusebius on Wiki, (Papias is merely cited by Eusebius, while Eusebius is the witness, yet clearly both therefore claimed that Matthew was originally written in Hebrew because, ehem, Eusebius is citing Papias, (100-140AD)).
Also, if I remember correctly, Papias was a disciple of John, or at least heard him speak when he was a child...
That is what they say but the problem is Yakob, (James), wasn't even beheaded as they also claim. So how can Papias know one of the sons of thunder and not the other? Especially when he supposedly knew the one who is the spirit-twin brother of Yakob? Yohanan is to Yakob what Andreas is to Petros.
Acts 12:2 W/H
2 ανειλεν δε ιακωβον τον αδελφον ιωαννου μαχαιρη
I think I know pretty much what you will say on the above but you have to remember that the authors of the apostolic writings believed all of the Testimony of Yeshua and lived by it. To understand their writings and words they must be interpreted through the lenses of the Testimony of Yeshua:
Matthew 10:34
34 Think not that I came to send peace upon the land: I came not to send peace, but a sword (μαχαιραν).
The μαχαιρα sword therefore concerns a sword of spiritual warfare as it is used in the passage above, (Matthew 10:34-39), which passage context also has companion passages in other Gospel accounts that add more information. Herod is also an allegory for "kings" but these kings are not intended as literal physical people. Herod is rather used along the same lines of typology as Nebuchadnezzar is used in Daniel. The same is true for the Pharisees, Sadducees, scribes, and so on, (though they were literal sects and groups they are used in symbolism; it's not a condemnation of a group or groups but certain portions of their doctrines).
Mark 8:15
15 And he charged them, saying, Take heed, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and the leaven of Herod.
What Acts 12:2 is telling the reader imo is not about physical death because according to the Testimony of Yeshua his own disciples are not even allowed to recognize physical death in their doctrine. This means they would not write about physical death because all who are faithfully trusting into Messiah are passed from death into life, (they shall not "see" death; not even in what they read or write). So we see that very subtly the word for "taking away" or taking up like as in adoption, (ανειλεν), is used in Acts 12:2, which can be understood as to kill or slay but only by the carnal minds who render it that way in the apostolic writings; for it can also mean that Herod, (a figurehead in typology), "adopted" or "took up" Yakob the brother of Yohanan with the machaira-sword of spiritual warfare, (supernal in meaning: beware the anthropon-manfaced, that is Herod in this case, the first of seven prophetic rulers or "kings"). Anyway, in this sense, there is no way that Papias could have known Yohanan if he did not know Yakob because Yohanan is the spirit-twin brother of the man Yakob, (the sons of thunder). I know this sounds way out there but indeed the truth is stranger than fiction if one is not familiar with such thinking, (and it is all right there in the texts but must be read with a non-physical mentality and mindset).
Yep, I knew I should have said something about a little four inch scrap but tried to move on to something more substantive, (instead of this meaningless rabbit trail into oblivion). I do hope everyone who reads this thread goes to your link and actually reads what it says. You picked the earliest date you saw and wallah! like majick, there it is, a four inch piece of scrap that can only be dated paleographically, and yet the earliest possible date is all you needed to see, and that settles everything in your mind. One thing I am thankful for though; at least now we know the "weight" of your evidence, (light as a feather).
There is a banner of Love.
Yet when someone mercilessly mocks or scorns someone giving gifts, it is quite apparent where their heart is.
Hopefully the message will be received with good soil.
Though so few find it.
You shall not sow your vineyard [together with] a mixed variety of species, lest the increase, even the seed that you sow and the yield of the vineyard [both] become forbidden.
"I am the true vine, and my Father is the gardener.
You shall not sow your vineyard [together with] a mixed variety of species, lest the increase, even the seed that you sow and the yield of the vineyard [both] become forbidden.
"I am the true vine, and my Father is the gardener.
If only it where known of a wealthy man what to do.
What was it said about those that should not be yoked?
Nah...sorry. Eusebius and Jerome are not authoritative "Church Fathers" of mine. They lived hundreds of years later.
Why would you believe that over the actually Greek texts that have been found from as early as 125 AD? And why do you believe they wrote it in Hebrew when Koine Greek was the universal language of the day?
I do recall something about the Isle,s..
Not only does the beast attempt to rend three ribs with its mouth.
It has hold of a man that would speak against the covenant.
Yeshua told them, “You will drink the cup that I’m going to drink. You will be baptized with the baptism that I’m going to receive. 40 But I don’t have the authority to grant you a seat at my right or left. Those positions have already been prepared for certain people.”
41 When the other ten apostles heard about it, they were irritated with James and John. 42 Yeshua called the apostles and said, “You know that the acknowledged rulers of nations have absolute power over people and their officials have absolute authority over people. 43 But that’s not the way it’s going to be among you. Whoever wants to become great among you will be your servant. 44 Whoever wants to be most important among you will be a slave for everyone. 45 It’s the same way with the Son of Man. He didn’t come so that others could serve him. He came to serve and to give his life as a ransom for many people.”
By the way: did you even happen to notice that is the Gospel of John and not Matthew? I never suggested John was originally written in Hebrew: this whole discussion has been about Matthew. In fact you are calling a four inch fragment a manuscript! LOL. Might as well post the first portions from your link at this point:
Quote:
The Rylands Library Papyrus P52, also known as the St. John's fragment and with an accession reference of Papyrus Rylands Greek 457, is a fragment from a papyruscodex, measuring only 3.5 by 2.5 inches (8.9 by 6 cm) at its widest; and conserved with the Rylands Papyri at the John Rylands University LibraryManchester, UK. The front (recto) contains parts of seven lines from the Gospel of John 18:31–33, in Greek, and the back (verso) contains parts of seven lines from verses 37–38.[3] Since 2007, the papyrus has been on permanent display in the library's Deansgate building.
Although Rylands P {\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}} 52 is generally accepted as the earliest extant record of a canonical New Testament text,[4] the dating of the papyrus is by no means the subject of consensus among scholars. The original editor proposed a date range of 100-150 CE;[5] while a recent exercise by Pasquale Orsini and Willy Clarysse, aiming to generate consistent revised date estimates for all New Testament papyri written before the mid-fourth century, has proposed a date for P {\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}} 52 of 125-175 CE.[1] But a few scholars say that considering the difficulty of fixing the date of a fragment based solely on paleographic evidence allows the possibility of dates outside these range estimates, such that "any serious consideration of the window of possible dates for P52 must include dates in the later second and early third centuries."[6]
Yes, of course, makes all the sense in the world now, "St. John's Fragment" becomes a manuscript which can be used as critical evidence that Matthew was originally written in Greek, and in 125AD no less! Ah yes, must be nice to live in Vizio-world, and if any other annoying little truth rears its ugly head just answer with, "Don't care."
Here is another statement from Eusebius on Wiki, (Papias is merely cited by Eusebius, while Eusebius is the witness, yet clearly both therefore claimed that Matthew was originally written in Hebrew because, ehem, Eusebius is citing Papias, (100-140AD))
The Gospel of Matthew is anonymous: the author is not named within the text, and the superscription "according to Matthew" was added some time in the 2nd century.[14][15] The tradition that the author was Matthew the Apostle begins with Papias of Hierapolis (c. AD 100–140), an early bishop and Apostolic Father, who is cited by the Church historian Eusebius (AD 260–340), as follows: "Matthew collected the oracles [logia: sayings of or about Jesus] in the Hebrew language [Hebraïdi dialektōi], and each one interpreted [hērmēneusen—perhaps 'translated'] them as best he could." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Matthew
Perhaps you don't get that Papias was saying that the author collected all the sayings in the Hebrew (or more likely the Aramaic) language and translated them into Greek for his gospel?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
), or maybe even before that time if they lived several hundred years earlier than Eusebius, (lol). And can you please provide at least some reference for your assertion of the apparent existence of "Greek texts that have been found from as early as 125 AD"?? No doubt you must know that the dating of manuscripts, papyri, fragments, etc., does not work that way, (lol).
52 is generally accepted as the earliest extant record of a canonical 
