_A Theologico-Political Treatise_ by Benedict de Spinoza (1883), Chapter VII.--Of the Interpretation of Scripture
https://www.sacred-texts.com/phi/spinoza.../tpt11.htm
(25) Now all the writers both of the Old Testament and the New were Hebrews: therefore, a knowledge of the Hebrew language is before all things necessary, not only for the comprehension of the Old Testament, which was written in that tongue, but also of the New: for although the latter was published in other languages, yet its characteristics are Hebrew.
Latin original:
_Tractatus theologico-politicus_ by Benedictus de Spinoza, Caput VII De interpretatione Scripturae
http://spinozaetnous.org/wiki/Tractatus_.../Caput_VII
Et quia omnes tam Veteris, quam Novi Testamenti scriptores hebraei fuerunt, certum est, Historiam linguae hebraicae prae omnibus necessariam esse, non tantum ad intelligentiam librorum Veteris Testamenti, qui hac lingua scripti sunt, sed etiam Novi ; nam quamvis aliis linguis vulgati fuerint, hebraizant tamen.
============================================
"The 'Aramaic New Testament' texts, are maybe suppose to exist, but there is none to show"
Not even Khabouris? Not even the Crawford Revelation?
http://dukhrana.com
"the NT very frequently translate the meaning so that the Greek reader understand the Aramaic concept"
Indeed. The Greek mss. have several instances of such glosses, e.g. 'Messiah means Anointed,' and 'Rabbi means Teacher.' The original Aramaic lacks those glosses.
"the Dead Sea Scrolls, yes indeed, they coincide in great extent with the LXX"
Hence, whenever an NT quote has wording similar to the LXX, we can't conclude that the quote came from the LXX, because it might have instead come from the textual stream seen in Qumram Cave 4.
https://www.sacred-texts.com/phi/spinoza.../tpt11.htm
(25) Now all the writers both of the Old Testament and the New were Hebrews: therefore, a knowledge of the Hebrew language is before all things necessary, not only for the comprehension of the Old Testament, which was written in that tongue, but also of the New: for although the latter was published in other languages, yet its characteristics are Hebrew.
Latin original:
_Tractatus theologico-politicus_ by Benedictus de Spinoza, Caput VII De interpretatione Scripturae
http://spinozaetnous.org/wiki/Tractatus_.../Caput_VII
Et quia omnes tam Veteris, quam Novi Testamenti scriptores hebraei fuerunt, certum est, Historiam linguae hebraicae prae omnibus necessariam esse, non tantum ad intelligentiam librorum Veteris Testamenti, qui hac lingua scripti sunt, sed etiam Novi ; nam quamvis aliis linguis vulgati fuerint, hebraizant tamen.
============================================
"The 'Aramaic New Testament' texts, are maybe suppose to exist, but there is none to show"
Not even Khabouris? Not even the Crawford Revelation?
http://dukhrana.com
"the NT very frequently translate the meaning so that the Greek reader understand the Aramaic concept"
Indeed. The Greek mss. have several instances of such glosses, e.g. 'Messiah means Anointed,' and 'Rabbi means Teacher.' The original Aramaic lacks those glosses.
"the Dead Sea Scrolls, yes indeed, they coincide in great extent with the LXX"
Hence, whenever an NT quote has wording similar to the LXX, we can't conclude that the quote came from the LXX, because it might have instead come from the textual stream seen in Qumram Cave 4.