Godlike Productions - Discussion Forum
Users Online Now: 1,546 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 274,483
Pageviews Today: 436,887Threads Today: 138Posts Today: 2,229
05:33 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?

 
Defender
User ID: 246619
United Kingdom
06/03/2008 01:45 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?
Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?

Source: [link to shatteredparadigm.blogspot.com]

Traditionally, the universities of the western world have taught that the Gospel of Matthew was not the first gospel written, that it was written in Greek, and that it was authored after 70 A.D.

However, as more and more discoveries have been made, those assumptions have been shown to be stone cold wrong.

As researchers are looking into the writings of the early church leaders, they are finding that not only was the gospel of Matthew most definitely the first gospel written (almost certainly before 50 A.D.), but that it was originally written in Hebrew!

Just check out what some of the early church writers from the first few centuries of the church have to say on this matter:

Origen (Eusebius, H.E. 6.25.4)"As having learnt by tradition concerning the four Gospels, which alone are unquestionable in the Church 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."

Papias (Eusebius, H.E. 3.39.16)"Matthew collected the oracles (ta logia) in the Hebrew language, and each interpreted them as best he could."

Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. 3.1.1"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, 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 harmonized account of the canonical Gospels.

And did you know that one of the 12 disciples of Jesus named Bartholomew actually carried a Hebrew copy of the book of Matthew into India?

Check out this astounding excerpt from an excellent article I found today:

----

[link to www.onlinetruth.org]

This newly uncovered information further confirms that Matthew, an eyewitness to the miracles and events of Jesus' ministry, was indeed the author of the first Gospel and verifies both the Jewishness and early date of the first Gospel.

Now, we have a clear mention that the Gospel of Matthew was written in Hebrew - not Greek or Aramaic, as widely thought - and was carried out of Israel by one of the original apostles to the Far East. Two of the earliest Church Fathers and historians, Eusebius and Origen, wrote that a second, long-overlooked apostle, Bartholomew, also went to India and took a Gospel text with him, aacording to Princeton scholar and author Samuel Moffett.

In his ground-breaking book, "A History of Christianity in Asia," Moffett reveals that Pantaenus, a church historian and missionary who traveled to India in 180 A.D., discovered the copy of the Gospel of Matthew in Hebrew that Bartholomew had taken with him.

"It is reported," wrote Eusebius, a fourth century bishop and church historian, "that among person there who knew Christ, (Pantaenus) found the Gospel according to St. Matthew (which had arrived ahead of Pantaenus by more than a century). For Bartholomew, one of the apostles, had preached to them, and left them (in India) the writing of Matthew in the Hebrew language which they had preserved."

"There is a shock hidden in that matter-of-fact statement. ...The surprise, of course, is the mention of Bartholomew as the pioneer to the East," Moffett says.
Many scholars are unaware of an apostle other than Thomas ever going to India, and some even doubt that Thomas himself went.

Moffett ponders, "What was Bartholomew...doing in India with a Hebrew Gospel of Matthew?"

--You can read the rest of this excellent article at the link at the top of the excerpt
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 365474
United States
06/03/2008 02:19 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?
who cares?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 445107
United States
06/03/2008 02:23 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?
who cares?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward

fuck off I think its interesting OP
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 445054
United States
06/03/2008 02:29 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?
yeah its interesting.the dead sea scrolls are too.also i read that Amos in the old testament was one of the first prophets to actually write down what God told him.Amos means burdon,or burdon bearer.his book is awesome.he was a farmer and a gatherer of sycamore trees or something and God spoke to him and told him to go tell the king of israel that God was going to destroy him an his kingdom.some people say he was beaten nearly to death for speaking the word God gave him,but it did come to pass.i researched him a few years ago.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 246619
United Kingdom
06/03/2008 02:31 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?
who cares?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 365474



I have found that a ton of people on GLP are interested in this stuff.
SeminaryGraduate
User ID: 445117
United States
06/03/2008 02:39 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?
Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?
 Quoting: Defender 246619


Uh, no. Mark was the first "gospel" that was written and its main source was a document known to Greek scholars as "Q."

Both Matthew and Luke contain all of Mark, but in different orders and with different additions and changes. The Greek used in Mark is more basic; that is the reason that those learning Koine Greek start with Mark. Matthew's usage of Greek is more complex and advanced.

I'd be interested to see how this new theory reconciles the fact that Mark is much simpler than Matthew. Biblical literary criticism views documents with less information as being earlier in creation; later revisions of the same text always add more content and comments. Basically, textual passages lengthen with age. Short texts precede longer, fuller accounts.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 246619
United Kingdom
06/04/2008 12:11 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?
Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?

Uh, no. Mark was the first "gospel" that was written and its main source was a document known to Greek scholars as "Q."

Both Matthew and Luke contain all of Mark, but in different orders and with different additions and changes. The Greek used in Mark is more basic; that is the reason that those learning Koine Greek start with Mark. Matthew's usage of Greek is more complex and advanced.

I'd be interested to see how this new theory reconciles the fact that Mark is much simpler than Matthew. Biblical literary criticism views documents with less information as being earlier in creation; later revisions of the same text always add more content and comments. Basically, textual passages lengthen with age. Short texts precede longer, fuller accounts.
 Quoting: SeminaryGraduate 445117



No, you are DEAD wrong

I have sat in those courses on "Biblical criticism" as well

And I KNOW that you have ZERO historical sources for Mark being the first gospel written

And you have ZERO historical sources for a "Q" document ever having existed

Can you show me "Q"?

Can you show me where anyone ever referred to it?

No, you cant.

You just took the garbage forced down your throat by your dead seminary (cemetary) and you gobbled it up like a sheep

Start thinking for yourself

And Matthew was originally written in Hebrew

The Greek we now have is a translation of the original Hebrew

Didn't you even read the original post?
Reality is BS

User ID: 445119
United States
06/04/2008 12:14 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?
At this point the bible has become so irrelevant that its like arguing the origan of nursery rhymes.
It's all fantasy and BS written for superstitous ignorant people.
BLACKOUT DRIVE
User ID: 410846
India
06/04/2008 12:32 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?
Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?

Uh, no. Mark was the first "gospel" that was written and its main source was a document known to Greek scholars as "Q."

Both Matthew and Luke contain all of Mark, but in different orders and with different additions and changes. The Greek used in Mark is more basic; that is the reason that those learning Koine Greek start with Mark. Matthew's usage of Greek is more complex and advanced.

I'd be interested to see how this new theory reconciles the fact that Mark is much simpler than Matthew. Biblical literary criticism views documents with less information as being earlier in creation; later revisions of the same text always add more content and comments. Basically, textual passages lengthen with age. Short texts precede longer, fuller accounts.
 Quoting: SeminaryGraduate 445117



Seminary,

I agree the Gospel of Mark was found in the Qumran Caves, fragments stylistic to litho existing between 50 BCE and 50CE. Although another full extant version was found around the same caves, that version has not been made available to the public in its translated form. I cannot find the book online to reference, and I am not at home so my point is subject to be GLPerlized.



____________________________________________________________


Modern Timeline

for Qumran, Israel, and Jordan
This Timeline and the included historical information are indebted to numerous sources. The primary digital source is the on-line exhibit of the Dead Sea Scrolls sponsored by the Library of Congress. Check out both the Sunsite Dead Sea Scroll Exhibit and the UNC Dead Sea Scroll Exhibit. For a criticique of this exhibition by a well respected scroll scholar with no connection to the Israel Antiquities Authority or the current International Team of Editors, see Norman Golb's Letter, dated January 14, 1994, to Ms. Melissa Leventon, the Curator of the Exhibit, and Mr. Harry S. Parker III, the Director of the de Young Museum in San Francisco, the third stop on the Exhibit's United States tour. The letter was reprinted in The Aspin Institute Quarterly, v6#2 (Spring 1994) pp 79-98.]
The published sources include:


Geza Vermes, "The Dead Sea Scrolls in English" (Revised and Extended Fourth Edition) (Penguin, London 1995).
Norman Golb, Who Wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls? The Search for the Secret of Qumran (Touchstone, New York 1996).

F. García Martínez, The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated - The Qumran Texts in English, 2nd ed., trans. W. G. E. Watson, (E. J. Brill, Leiden 1995).

Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh, "The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception" (Summit Books, New York 1991).

Note: BC is equivalent to B.C.E. and may be used interchangeably. AD is equivalent to C.E and may be used interchangeably. These abbreviations, when used here, always appear following the year. If not included, AD or C.E. should be assumed.


Modern Timeline for Qumran, Israel and Jordan
See also the Ancient Timeline for Qumran, Palestine, Syria and Rome.

1946-47
Dead Sea Scrolls rediscovered, in what became known as Qumran Cave 1 (1Q), on the western shore of the Dead Sea in Transjordan by a Bedouin of the Tacâmireh tribe named Mohammed ed-Dhib. There is general disagreement among all the parties as to what happened when. Late 1946 throught the early Spring of 1947, seems certain. Three manuscripts may have been removed in the first instance.
1947, April
Bedouin offer manuscripts to Ibrahim 'Ijha, an antiquities dealer in Bethlehem. He does not buy them. Scrolls taken to Kando (aka Khalil Iskander Shahin).
1947, May/June
Bedouin secure more scrolls from Cave 1.
1947, July 5(?)
Four scrolls taken to Syrian Orthodox Monastery of St. Mark in Jerusalem by Kando, George Isaiah (aka Faidi Salahi), and several Bedouin. They approach the Archimandrite of Saint Mark, Athanasius Yeshua Samuel, attempting to sell him the scrolls. The meeting does not immediately take place. In fact, when they show up for their meeting no one seems to know anything about their appointment and they are turned away at the gate. They return with their scrolls to Kando's shop.
Kando managed to sell (or leaves) this first batch of scrolls to Faidi Salahi who eventually sold some scrolls to Sukenek. Three of the scrolls are reportedly sold by the discouraged Bedouin partners to a Muslim sheik of Bethlehem. (This may be two versions of the same story, or there may have been more recovered scrolls than anyone has ever acknowledged. Or some scrolls were counted more than once because they were in pieces by the time they were recovered and moved to Jerusalem.)


1947, July 19(?)
Kando purchases additional scrolls from George Isaiah and the Bedouin, which he subsequently sells to the Mar Athanasius for £24 (24 Palestinian pounds).

1947, August
Mar Athanasius sends a priest with George Isaiah to the known cave at Qumran. This pair worked at night and found an additional jar and some fragments. They also do more excavating. No other finds from this mission have been reported. Rumors that unreported scrolls were found at that time remain unconfirmed.
1947, August
The American CIA representative to Damascus, Miles Copeland, was approached by an Egyptian merchant with an ancient looking and disintegrating scroll. Copeland agreed to photograph it and see if he could find someone to identify it. The scroll was unrolled on the roof of the American legation and photographed in a wind that peeled off large chucks of the scroll which were lost forever. Thirty frames were taken, which was not enough to cover the entire scroll. One unidentified American Embassy official in Beirut who saw the photographs is said to have identified it as part of the Old Testament book of Daniel. Part was in Aramaic and part in Hebrew. The merchant never returned to claim his scroll, the photographs have been lost along with the scroll. Fragments of the Daniel scroll were eventually found at Qumran five years after the reported incident.
1947, September
Mar Athanasius Yeshua Samuel and Anton Kiraz take all the scrolls in their possession to the Afram Barsoum, Patriarch of the Syrian Jacobite Church, in Homs, North of Damascus, Syria. Their discussions were never reported. Mar Athanasius Yeshua Samuel returns with the scrolls and a second expedition is dispatched to Qumran.
1947, October 1-3
Metropolitan Samuel and Kiraz agree to become partners to the scrolls in return for Kiraz's financial assistance.
1947, November 29
Professor Eleazer Sukenik, Department of Archaeology, Hebrew University made a trip to Bethlehem with an unidentified Armenian antique dealer to inspect scrolls available for sale there; presumably these are the ones that were not sold to the Mar Athanasius Yeshua Samuel by Kando or the Bedouin or both.
1947, December
Prof. Sukenik agrees to purchase several scrolls. Sukenik first learns of the existence of the scrolls held by Mar Athanasius Yeshua Samuel at about this same time. His son, Yigael Yadin, will be fated to play an important future role in modern scroll history as a result of this discovery and Sukenik's determination to eventually buy the scrolls.
1948, January
By this time Prof. Sukenik had been contacted by Mar Athanasius Yeshua Samuel and agreed to a clandestine meeting to view the scrolls in his possession. He was allowed to borrow the scrolls for evaluation purposes, but had to return them on February 6, unable to raise sufficient funds for their purchase. It could also be that having contacted the American School of Oriental Research, Samuel was eager to get a bidding competition going between Sukenik and the American School. To do that he had to get the scrolls back from Sukenik and into the hands of the American School officials who could evaluate their scientific merit. What could, possibly, have been purchased for a few thousand dollars at this point in time, eventually, cost a reported $250,000 when finally acquired for Israel by Sukenik's son, Yigael Yadin, in 1954.
1948, February
Scrolls were brought to the American School of Oriental Research. Their antiquity was recognized by John C. Trever, who with William Brownlee began the first studies and systematically photographed them. They sent prints to W. F. Albright. Professor Millar Burrows, Director of the American School, returned from Iraq and also confirmed the importance and antiquity of the scrolls over the next month or so.
1948, March 15
Professor William F. Fullbright of Johns Hopkins University, having reviewed photographs of Mar Athanasius' scrolls confirms their authenticity and ascribes a preferred date to them of around 100 BC. Professor Albright had been contacted by the Albright institute (the American School of Oriental Research) in February and a complete set of prints had been sent by the Institute to him at that time.
1948, March 18
The first press release is drawn up and the scrolls in the possession of Mar Athanasius are placed in a bank vault in Beirut.
1948, Spring
Arab-Israeli fighting began to disturb all of Palestine making trips to remote sites difficult and dangerous.
1948, April 11
The first press release appears in the April 12, 1948 edition of The Times, issued by Professor Millar Burrows, Head of the Department of Near Eastern Languages, Yale University, and Director of the Albright Institute. The discovery was ascribed to a library of the Syrian Monastery of St Mark in Jerusalem, the home of Mar Athanasius Yeshua Samuel.
1948, April 26
Professor Sukenik announces the existence of the Hebrew University collection. He had been studying the scrolls since at least November 1947, when he was first shown some fragments in a Jerusalem antiquities shop. Sukenik no doubt delayed announcing his acquisitions in order to avoid driving up the price on future purchases. Once the American School let the news out, there was no point in hidding the Hebrew University holdings.
1948, May 14
The Jewish People's Council declares its own independent state of Israel, one day before the British Mandate is scheduled to expire. This completely severes all communications between scholars working on opposite sides of the border, or even opposites sides of Jerusalem. For decades, American scholars trying to work both in both East Jerusalem (Jordanian control) and West Jerusalem (Istaeli control) had to have two passports because they could not enter Jordon on a passport that contained an Israeli entrance stamp.
1948, November
Because the war disrupted communications so thoroughly, Mr. G. Lankester Harding, Director of the Department of Antiquities of Jordon, finally learns of the scroll discoveries at this late date when he finally receives the April 1948 issue of the Bulletin of the ASOR in Amman. Hence, the belated attempts to prevent further pillage by the desert tribes were delayed by over half a year. 1949 Jan 29 - Metropolitan arrives in US with 4 scrolls.
1949, January
Mar Athanasius Yeshua Samuel removes his scrolls from the bank in Beirut and moves (smuggles) them to New York (arriving on January 29) where they are placed in another bank vault.
1949, January 7
The "final" cease fire takes effect between Israel and the Arab states of the Middle East whereby central Palestine, including Qumran, will remain Arab. This territory is occupied and then annexed to Transjordan, which henceforward calls itself simply Jordan. Jordan also retains control of East Jerusalem.
1949, January 28
The first Jordanian expedition sponsored by Gerald Lankester Harding, initiated by Captain Philippe Lippens, and lead by Captain (later Colonel) Akkash el-Zebn reaches the cave at Qumran and discovers linen in which scrolls had been wrapped and numerous pieces of pottery. Whitish debris cascading down a ravine in the cliffside revealed the location of the cave, about 1 kilometer north of Wâdi Qumrân, low on the cliffs and about 1 mile from the shoreline.
1949, February 15 - March 5
Father Roland de Vaux and Harding make their first joint visit to the cave at Qumran. They discover the fragments and remains of many, perhaps 30, identifiable texts as well as many more that are not identifiable, plus enough shards for forty storage jars. This excavation confirms the provenience of the scrolls already acquired. Searches for additional caves was apparently not considered. Nothing much happens for about two years.
1951, October
Bedouins from the Tacâmireh tribe discovered scroll fragments at a new site.
1951, November
Because de Vaux and Harding were both working at Qumran at the time, the Bedouin first took their new scrolls to Joseph Saad, Director of the Rockefeller Museum in Jerusalem. When they refused to take him to the site he kidnapped one of them until he agreed to cooperate. This lead to the discovery of four caves in the Wâdi Murabbacat, it turns out are located about 12 miles southwest of Qumran and about 12 miles southeast of Bethleham.

On the other hand a different version of this story has de Vaux outsmarting the Bedouin by getting them to brag about how difficult their task of recovery has been and then, accidently as it were, inviting him to come see for himself if he was so skeptical. The Bedouin then lead him to the sight so that he can see for himself and the Bedouin are out of a job.

The first set of these new scrolls was eventually presented for sale at the École Biblique at the end of November. At that point it became obvious that Cave 1 was not a one off fluke in the desert. Since he was already out in the desert, it is not too fanciful to believe that de Vaux conducted his own negotiations with the Bedouin on the spot and obtained their cooperation in locating the new site.
1951, November and December
de Vaux made the first soundings at the site of Khirbet Qumran south of Cave 1. They cleared five rooms within the largest of the buildings, uncovered an aqueduct and a system of pools and cisterns. At the time the outer wall was described as consisting of "...large, undressed stones" and the perceived rough-hewn look was taken, initially, to be consistent with architecture appropriate of a communal, desert dwelling group of sectarians.
1952
Five new caves are discovered at Qumran this year, including the famous Cave 4, containing thousands of fragments from hundreds of manuscripts. The contents of all five caves were moved to the École Biblique in East Jerusalem for storage and study.
1952-1956
de Vaux, Harding, and Reed begin their excavations in and around Qumran shortly after Saad's discovery of the caves farther south in Wâdi Murabbacat. They conduct seasonal digs for three more years.
This is the work that led them to conclude that Qumran was the site of the Essene community spoken of by Pliny in his History, which deals with the topography and certain events which took place in Judaea prior to his death in 79 CE. Pliny reports that the Essenes lived north of Masada. He says that lying below the Essenes was formerly the town of En Gedi. This could mean south of the Essenes or literally below them as down hill from the Essenes. Qumran is a long way from En Gedi today. Both Ain Feshkha and Ain el Ghuweir lie between Qumran and En Gedi today and the hills above En Gedi may yet hold other sites worth exploring.

1952, January 21 - March 3
The first scientific excavations were conducted at Wâdi Murabbacat. Excavations and important discoveries continued in these caves until at least early 1955.
1952, early to mid-February
Having been forced away from their new finds at Wâdi Murabbacat, the Bedouin returned to Qumran to reinvestigate the caves there while all the scientists were occupied elsewhere. They found a new cave, Cave 2, just a few hundred yards south of Cave 1 at Qumran. This brought de Vaux et al scampering back from Wâdi Murabbacat just to keep up with the frantic pace of new discoveries. It must have been both frustrating and exhilerating.
1952, late February and March
A systematic search of all the caves in the vicinity of Qumran is conducted with the assistance of the Tacâmireh tribesmen. More than 200 caves are investigated. In twenty-five caves the pottery recovered matched that found at Khirbet Qumran and in Cave 1. Pottery of other types is never mentioned, though the way this is worded invites questions about non-matching pottery from, at least some of, the other caves.
1952, March 14
Cave 3 is discovered during the search. The orginal doorway of this cave had collapsed in antiquity and it takes nearly a week of digging before the Copper Scrolls are discovered. [The first announcement about this discovery was not made until June 1, 1956.]
The two halves of a rolled copper scroll, the "Copper Scroll", turned out to be an inventory of (fabulous, fantastic, imaginary, etc.) treasures, possibly taken from the Temple in Jerusalem and hidden prior to the fall of Jerusalem in 70 CE.

1952, September
The official team left at the end of March, as a result of the heat, Malaria, simple fatigue and dwindling funds. With the aid of the Bedouin it managed to investigate most of the natural caves of the limestone cliffs. They had ignored the man-made caves in the marl terrace at the foot of the cliffs, however, imagining, we can only suppose, that they were too insecure for the ancients to have used for storing their valuable scrolls; or some such drivel.
1952, Summer
Continuing on after the close of the official expedition, the Bedouin discovered inside the cave known as Cave 4, within 200 yards of the actual ruins of Qumran itself, the largest cache of scrolls. How these were missed on the first attempt is not clear. Eventually, tens of thousands of fragments making up more than 575 separate manuscripts were recovered. This mass of material was all moved to the Rockefeller Museum; to a room subsequently known as the 'Scrollery' where it resides to this day. The work of organizing the fragments took until about 1959, but the delays since then have been the subject of some contention.
1952, Sepetmber 22-29
Controlled excavation by de Vaux replaced the digging by the Bedouin before the contents of Cave 4 were exhausted. The Bedouin got the lions share, for which they were eventually paid by the government of Jordan. Nevertheless, de Vaux and his crew were able to recover fragments belonging to over 100 manuscripts. These were again important in establishing the provenience of the fragments eventually purchased from the Bedouin over the next five years. The pausity of sherds indicates that the vast majority of these scrolls were not stored in jars when last abandoned in this cave.
Cave 6 were discovered by the Bedouin in conjunction with their efforts this summer. It is located near the waterfall of Wâdi Qumrân.

Cave 5 was discovered by de Vaux in conjuction with his teams excavation of Cave 4. Cave 5 is located immediately north of Cave 4.

1954, June 1
The following ad appeared in the Wall Street Journal
THE FOUR DEAD SEA SCROLLS

Biblical Manuscripts dating back to at least
200 BC are for sale. This would be an ideal
gift to an educational or religious institution
by an individual or group. Box F 206

1954, July 2
The four scrolls stored in a bank vault in New York and under the control of Mar Athanasius Yeshua Samuel were purchased with donated funds ($250,000) by an agent of Y. Yadin and transferred to Israel in July, 1954. Avraham Harman took the scrolls from the States to Israel by boat. These four scrolls along with the three scrolls originally purchased by Sukenik, Y. Yadin's father, are now held in the Shrine of the Book.
1955, spring
During the fourth campaign at Qumran, four additional productive caves were located and excavated; Cave 7, Cave 8, Cave 9 and Cave 10. Like Cave 5 and Cave 6, there were found in the marl terrace adjacent to Khirbet Qumran. All four had collapsed in ancient times as a result of erosion along the ravines. Only a handful of fragments were discovered, perhaps only enough to show that manuscripts, in who knows what quantity, were stored in these caves, too, at the time they were last abandoned. [One has to wonder if fragments might not still be resting in the anaerobic mud offshore; washed by winter torrents into the Dead Sea.]
1956, January
Date of the most recent find by the relentless waves of Bedouin excavators - Cave 11, located not far from Cave 3 and more than a mile north of Khirbet Qumran. Because of the manuscripts recovered from this cave, Cave 11 rivals Cave 1 and Cave 4 in importance.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 443362
United States
06/04/2008 12:46 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?
None of the bible was written that long ago.
None of it can be archeologicly verified.
All of it was written between 1000AD & 1500AD
The NT was written before the old.
The whole thing is a concoction of the Roman church.

"History: Fiction or Science" by Anatoly Fomenko
This is a scholarly work of 7 volumes of about 500 pages each. Its references are very detailed.
It will at first blow your mind, but then you get adjusted as you begin to understand just how history chroniclers got so confused, and the part the church played to its advantage by pushing history backwards.


[link to www.atlasbooks.com]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 404866
United Kingdom
06/04/2008 12:47 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?
I will defiantly read the links, thanks .
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 209736
United Kingdom
06/04/2008 03:06 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?
None of the bible was written that long ago.
None of it can be archeologicly verified.
All of it was written between 1000AD & 1500AD
The NT was written before the old.
The whole thing is a concoction of the Roman church.

"History: Fiction or Science" by Anatoly Fomenko
This is a scholarly work of 7 volumes of about 500 pages each. Its references are very detailed.
It will at first blow your mind, but then you get adjusted as you begin to understand just how history chroniclers got so confused, and the part the church played to its advantage by pushing history backwards.


[link to www.atlasbooks.com]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 443362



We have manuscripts of the N.T. which date from the first few centuries A.D., so I have NO IDEA what you are trying to pull.
Indian ELder
User ID: 411725
United States
06/04/2008 03:26 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?
At this point the bible has become so irrelevant that its like arguing the origan of nursery rhymes.
It's all fantasy and BS written for superstitous ignorant people.
 Quoting: Reality is BS

As a matter of fact when I lived in Germany there was a neat cluf that investigated the historical truth in some fairy tales,,,like the 7 drawfs was originally beyound the seven hills and so on. they found ruins of a miniature castle and it was a guild or union home for retired court jesters, all in scale etc. It was a fascinating group.
So if childrens tales are based in fact its a simple leap to know there is much more truth in the Bible.
I dont worry about how old or who wrote first...I just read it for its spiritual and literal beauty.
People dont believe our stories are real, but if you hang around enough traditionals, you know they are.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 209736
United Kingdom
06/05/2008 12:15 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?
The truth is available for those who wish to find it.
Taz
User ID: 293268
United States
06/05/2008 01:10 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?
The Talmud Jmmanuel could be the source document for Matthew. The TJ is an ancient document written in Aramaic and claimed to have been found buried in the actual tomb Jmmanuel (Jesus) had lain in.

The teachings are coherent and logical, unlike the Bible's, which can often times be contradictory.

Go to www.talmudjmmanuel.com for an overview on the TJ. There contains in the TJ many concepts that may be heretical to a fundamentalist's belief system, such as reincarnation and a connection between Jmmanuel (Jesus) and ET's.

I use the TJ as my guideline for accurate spiritual knowledge.

James Deardorff has done an extensive study on comparisons between the book of Matthew and the TJ and concludes that it is likely that the bibles' editors altered the TJ's teachings to fit their own agenda.

Here is Deardorff's website: www.tjresearch.com

Have fun!


Taz
mopar28m

User ID: 446306
United States
06/05/2008 03:08 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?
Yes, it was. There are MANY other books that were written in Hebrew also that many thought were written in Greek. This guy is an excellent source on this.

[link to www.hebrewyeshua.com]
vaccinefreehealth blogspot com

The risk far outweighs any benefit as the risk will vary from child to child.

facebook.com/graphixyourway
GraftedPromise U$ofA
User ID: 446430
United States
06/05/2008 03:16 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?
Eagerly waiting for Revelation Seal 6 to open.

Truly "revelations" with that event.

The nay-sayers will have to rethink their world-veiw.
Seneca

User ID: 446688
United States
06/05/2008 11:41 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?
Hebrew or Aramaic?

[link to www.newadvent.org]

Finally, were the Logia of Matthew and the Gospel to which ecclesiastical writers refer written in Hebrew or Aramaic? Both hypotheses are held. Papias says that Matthew wrote the Logia in the Hebrew (Hebraidi) language; St. Irenæus and Eusebius maintain that he wrote his gospel for the Hebrews in their national language, and the same assertion is found in several writers. Matthew would, therefore, seem to have written in modernized Hebrew, the language then used by the scribes for teaching. But, in the time of Christ, the national language of the Jews was Aramaic, and when, in the New Testament, there is mention of the Hebrew language (Hebrais dialektos), it is Aramaic that is implied. Hence, the aforesaid writers may allude to the Aramaic and not to the Hebrew. Besides, as they assert, the Apostle Matthew wrote his Gospel to help popular teaching. To be understood by his readers who spoke Aramaic, he would have had to reproduce the original catechesis in this language, and it cannot be imagined why, or for whom, he should have taken the trouble to write it in Hebrew, when it would have had to be translated thence into Aramaic for use in religious services. Moreover, Eusebius (Hist. eccl., III, xxiv, 6) tells us that the Gospel of Matthew was a reproduction of his preaching, and this we know, was in Aramaic. An investigation of the Semitic idioms observed in the Gospel does not permit us to conclude as to whether the original was in Hebrew or Aramaic, as the two languages are so closely related. Besides, it must be home in mind that the greater part of these Semitisms simply reproduce colloquial Greek and are not of Hebrew or Aramaic origin. However, we believe the second hypothesis to be the more probable, viz., that Matthew wrote his Gospel in Aramaic.
Seneca

User ID: 446688
United States
06/05/2008 11:46 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?
None of the bible was written that long ago.
None of it can be archeologicly verified.
All of it was written between 1000AD & 1500AD
The NT was written before the old.
The whole thing is a concoction of the Roman church.

"History: Fiction or Science" by Anatoly Fomenko
This is a scholarly work of 7 volumes of about 500 pages each. Its references are very detailed.
It will at first blow your mind, but then you get adjusted as you begin to understand just how history chroniclers got so confused, and the part the church played to its advantage by pushing history backwards.


[link to www.atlasbooks.com]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 443362



lol


St John fragment

[link to www.library.manchester.ac.uk]

This small fragment of St. John's Gospel, less than nine centimetres high and containing on the one side part of verses 31-33, on the other of verses 37-38 of chapter xviii is one of the collection of Greek papyri in the John Rylands Library, Manchester.

It was originally discovered in Egypt, and may come from the famous site of Oxyrhynchus (Behnesa), the ruined city in Upper Egypt where Grenfel and Hunt carried out some of the most startling and successful excavations in the history of archaeology; it may be remembered that among their finds of new fragments of Classical and Christian literature were the now familiar "Sayings of Jesus".

The importance of this fragment is quite out of proportion to its size, since it may with some confidence be dated in the first half of the second century A.D., and thus ranks as the earliest known fragment of the New Testament in any language.

It provides us with invaluable evidence of the spread of Christianity in areas distant from the land of its origin; it is particularly interesting to know that among the books read by the early Christians in Upper Egypt was St. John's Gospel, commonly regarded as one of the latest of the books of the New Testament.

Like other early Christian works which have been found in Egypt, this Gospel was written in the form of a codex, i.e. book, not of a roll, the common format for non-Christian literature of that time.
servant
User ID: 435072
United States
06/06/2008 01:58 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?
I do not contest this info..

But it was my understanding, that the entire region was a Greek speaking people, for about 290 years before the birth of JESUS. This because of a conquering war, thus everyone spoke and traded in Greek, as the rule.
Seneca

User ID: 447276
United States
06/06/2008 10:53 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?
The Talmud Jmmanuel could be the source document for Matthew. The TJ is an ancient document written in Aramaic and claimed to have been found buried in the actual tomb Jmmanuel (Jesus) had lain in.

The teachings are coherent and logical, unlike the Bible's, which can often times be contradictory.

Go to www.talmudjmmanuel.com for an overview on the TJ. There contains in the TJ many concepts that may be heretical to a fundamentalist's belief system, such as reincarnation and a connection between Jmmanuel (Jesus) and ET's.

I use the TJ as my guideline for accurate spiritual knowledge.

James Deardorff has done an extensive study on comparisons between the book of Matthew and the TJ and concludes that it is likely that the bibles' editors altered the TJ's teachings to fit their own agenda.

Here is Deardorff's website: www.tjresearch.com

Have fun!


Taz
 Quoting: Taz 293268



[link to www.tjresearch.info]

I find it difficult to believe that they supposedly had the manuscript in their possession for eleven years, yet no one ever made a copy of it before it was allegedly destroyed.

Thus, we are left with the testimony of only one witness that such a manuscript ever existed:

In 1976 Meier learned that Rashid and his family were assassinated in Baghdad, making him (Meier) the only known surviving witness to the TJ's discovery and historicity.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 400165
United Kingdom
01/31/2009 09:15 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?
At this point the bible has become so irrelevant that its like arguing the origan of nursery rhymes.
It's all fantasy and BS written for superstitous ignorant people.
 Quoting: Reality is BS

Maybe your world is fantasy lol
Mark First
User ID: 548625
United States
01/31/2009 09:28 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?
I agree that Mark was written first.

[link to www.savemenowjesus.com]

The gospel according to Mark is contained within Matthew. It appears the readers of Mark still had many questions about Jesus so Matthew took Mark's Gospel and expanded on it in several areas.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 49892024
United States
06/09/2016 04:31 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?
Why bother with all the commentaries, if you don't believe what The Bible actually says? Abraham had the scripture preach the gospel unto him, over 430 years before Moses wrote the law! And THE SCRIPTURE, forseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, PREACHED before THE GOSPEL UNTO ABRAHAM, saying in thee shall all nations be blessed. Ga. 3:16 And this I say, that the covenant that was confirmed before of God in Christ, THE LAW, WHICH WAS FOUR HUNDRED AND THIRTY YEARS AFTER, cannot disanul, that it should make the promise of none effect. Ga. 3:17 The gospel is EVERLASTING! Re. 14:6 Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; AND IN THY BOOK ALL MY MEMBERS WERE WRITTEN, WHICH IN CONTINUANCE WERE FASHIONED, WHEN AS YET THERE WAS NONE OF THEM. Psalm 139:16
anonymous 007
User ID: 61991770
United States
06/09/2016 09:05 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?
I repent. The scripture preached the gospel unto Abraham in Ga. 3:8, not Ga. 3:16. I was wrong when I wrote that scripture reference; but, if you believe what the Bible says, Ga. 3:8-17 it makes it clear, the original gospel was written, before Moses was born, and long before 70 A.D.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 69599243
United States
06/09/2016 09:18 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?
Very interesting. Thanks for posting OP.

Assuming the article accurately quotes from the sources, it doesn't follow that Matthew's was the first Gospel or that it was written in Hebrew. Why? Simply, because ancient authors are frequently wrong. If author A said X, then author B, 200 years later, might say X too, simply because he read it in A. But what if A got it wrong?

So it's very hard to verify this sort of thing. I know archaeologists and historians like to act as though they have definitive proof of something, but that's often simply because they want to get published, want to get a grant, or want tenure. Rational people have to be far more cautious and tentative.

So what this article does is collect some quotes and present very interesting evidence. But it's hardly conclusive. A rational person will take this information on board as data and take it into account going forward.
Dr VIP
User ID: 72360235
Israel
06/09/2016 09:28 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?
the church fathers always tried to claim the gospels are authentic and were written at the time of jesus.
its bullshit, it is even traditions that determine who wrote the gospels.

you are lying to the readers, this is no new information, we had always known what lies church fathers told themselves.

also for the poster who claimed some NT fragments were found in the DSS... this is a blatant lie, not a shred of NT was found in the DSS.


new discoveries... lol, no.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 69599243
United States
06/09/2016 09:32 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?
the church fathers always tried to claim the gospels are authentic and were written at the time of jesus.
its bullshit, it is even traditions that determine who wrote the gospels.

you are lying to the readers, this is no new information, we had always known what lies church fathers told themselves.

also for the poster who claimed some NT fragments were found in the DSS... this is a blatant lie, not a shred of NT was found in the DSS.


new discoveries... lol, no.
 Quoting: Dr VIP 72360235


Literally none of the fathers ever said the gospels were written at the time of Jesus.
Dr VIP
User ID: 72360235
Israel
06/09/2016 09:37 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?
the church fathers always tried to claim the gospels are authentic and were written at the time of jesus.
its bullshit, it is even traditions that determine who wrote the gospels.

you are lying to the readers, this is no new information, we had always known what lies church fathers told themselves.

also for the poster who claimed some NT fragments were found in the DSS... this is a blatant lie, not a shred of NT was found in the DSS.


new discoveries... lol, no.
 Quoting: Dr VIP 72360235


Literally none of the fathers ever said the gospels were written at the time of Jesus.
 Quoting: The_Original_Mind


read the OP.

if you are trying to say they were written just a couple of years after his death but not in his time... fine, that's petty.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 69599243
United States
06/09/2016 09:41 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?
the church fathers always tried to claim the gospels are authentic and were written at the time of jesus.
its bullshit, it is even traditions that determine who wrote the gospels.

you are lying to the readers, this is no new information, we had always known what lies church fathers told themselves.

also for the poster who claimed some NT fragments were found in the DSS... this is a blatant lie, not a shred of NT was found in the DSS.


new discoveries... lol, no.
 Quoting: Dr VIP 72360235


Literally none of the fathers ever said the gospels were written at the time of Jesus.
 Quoting: The_Original_Mind


read the OP.

if you are trying to say they were written just a couple of years after his death but not in his time... fine, that's petty.
 Quoting: Dr VIP 72360235


It's not petty at all. You are condemning the church fathers for saying they were written during the time of Jesus. When was the time of Jesus? If not when he was alive, when? The church fathers said precisely what modern theologians and atheists say: the texts of the NT were written within the first 100 years after his death. Your entire argument against the fathers is that they lied. The didn't lie, about that at least. They held precisely the same view that every single scholar in the field holds today.
Dr VIP
User ID: 72360235
Israel
06/09/2016 09:44 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was The Gospel Of Matthew The First Gospel Written, Composed Before 70 A.D., And Originally Written In Hebrew?
the church fathers always tried to claim the gospels are authentic and were written at the time of jesus.
its bullshit, it is even traditions that determine who wrote the gospels.

you are lying to the readers, this is no new information, we had always known what lies church fathers told themselves.

also for the poster who claimed some NT fragments were found in the DSS... this is a blatant lie, not a shred of NT was found in the DSS.


new discoveries... lol, no.
 Quoting: Dr VIP 72360235


Literally none of the fathers ever said the gospels were written at the time of Jesus.
 Quoting: The_Original_Mind


read the OP.

if you are trying to say they were written just a couple of years after his death but not in his time... fine, that's petty.
 Quoting: Dr VIP 72360235


It's not petty at all. You are condemning the church fathers for saying they were written during the time of Jesus. When was the time of Jesus? If not when he was alive, when? The church fathers said precisely what modern theologians and atheists say: the texts of the NT were written within the first 100 years after his death. Your entire argument against the fathers is that they lied. The didn't lie, about that at least. They held precisely the same view that every single scholar in the field holds today.
 Quoting: The_Original_Mind


ok... if that's what they truly say, then I concede.

OP is still wrong, the sayings of church fathers cant be accepted as evidence to some gospel in Hebrew written before what scholarship is showing us.

and the further claim that there is some NT in the DSS is a blatant lie.





GLP