Act 1:19 And it was known unto all the dwellers at Jerusalem; insomuch as that field is called in their proper tongue, Aceldama, that is to say, The field of blood. Vincent’s Word Studies, available on many Bible software programs, tells us: “Akeldamach. The word is Aramaic, the language then spoken in Palestine.“ Robertson’s Word Pictures tells us: “Language (dialektōi). Not a dialect of the Greek, but a different language, the Aramaic.“ The position of the Assyrian Church of the East is that the Syriac Peshitta used in that church, is the original of the New Testament. For instance, the patriarch Shimun XXI Eshai declared: “With reference to… the originality of the Peshitta text, as the Patriarch and Head of the Holy Apostolic and Catholic Church of the East, we wish to state, that the Church of the East received the scriptures from the hands of the blessed Apostles themselves in the Aramaic original, the language spoken by our Lord Jesus Christ Himself, and that the Peshitta is the text of the Church of the East which has come down from the Biblical times without any change or revision.” (April 5, 1957) We find this fact in the Jerusalem Bible of 1966: “An anonymous editor, Matthew Greek, decided to rewrite the first Aramaic gospel, which was known to him in one of its Greek translations. This he filled out and made more detailed, using for his narrative parts of the work of Mark his predecessor, to which he added one thing of importance, i.e. the two chapters of the infancy narrative.“ We see here the Jerusalem Bible declaring Matthew was originally in Aramaic, that the two chapters of the infancy narrative are not original to the Aramaic, and that Matthew is but the ‘first’ of other Aramaic gospels. I could post a thousand more, but YOU DON'T CARE. You're stuck in your corruption, so enjoy.