rlogan

Sorry if i did not make this clear enough. I was not challenging the Eccl Hist. 3:38:2-3.

I was referring to a set of threads that Vork referred us to. one of the posters made reference to Eusebius speaking about Matthew being in the original tongue of Matthew. He (or she) had cited it as Eccl. Hist. 3:29 (IIRC) when it shoud have been Eccl. Hist 3:24. I quoted the same passage above.

I offered this because this seems to be stronger evidence than the 3:38:2-3 passege, isn't it?

http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-0....htm#TopOfPage


Eusebius is a problem child and I'm wary of this Matthew reference. That is why I have put it out here for discussion.