(11-24-2020, 10:55 PM)Completed in Israel Wrote: These 28 I was speaking of, it's impossible for them to be a translation, they're age isn't as important, bc they are "Witnesses" to the Hebrew original. Filled full of Hebraic word puns, more accurate than all the other text, with father being plainly stated in Yeshua's genealogy from Mirriam as the Greek all inaccurately say husband, leaving a missing generation in every manuscript. They actually have more proof these days that, Greek was a translation from Aramaic, and the Aramaic was from the Hebrew, and everyone just did "best they could" in the translations.
Check out Nehemiah Gordon, him from a scholar point of view, proves the Hebrew original over n over, I say from a scholar POV, as He does not accept Yeshua as Messiah yet either. But he is a extremely honest scholar.
Frankly, Nehemia Gordon is not much of a scholar. He has a master's degree, but his assumptions are sometimes poorly formulated and other times simply false, sometimes comically so. For example, he assumes the principle of Greek primacy is inerrancy, which is complete nonsense. He confuses Greek and Aramaic words. More importantly, he completely misunderstands the work of George Howard on the medieval Hebrew text of Matthew, which he believes is so important. Read Howard yourself and you will see what I mean and see where your assertions are specifically not supported by his work. To their credit, neither Howard nor Gordan agree with your assertion that the dating of these manuscripts isn't that important. Beware of YouTube 'scholars'.