Matthew
The Gospel According to Matthew (Greek: κατὰ Ματθαῖον
εὐαγγέλιον, kata Matthaion euangelion, τὸ εὐαγγέλιον κατὰ
Ματθαῖον, to euangelion kata Matthaion), commonly shortened
to the Gospel of Matthew, is one of the four Canonical
gospels and is the first book of the New Testament. This
synoptic gospel is an account of the life, ministry, death,
and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth. It details his story
from his genealogy to his Great Commission.[1][2]
The Gospel of Matthew is closely aligned with first-century
Judaism, and has been linked to the Jewish-Christian
Gospels. It stresses how Jesus fulfilled Jewish
prophecies.[3] Certain details of Jesus' life, of his
infancy in particular, are related only in Matthew. His is
also the only gospel to mention the Church or ecclesia.[3]
Matthew emphasizes obedience to and preservation of biblical
law.[4] Since this gospel has rhythmical and often poetical
prose,[5] it is well suited for public reading, making it a
popular liturgical choice.[6]
Most scholars believe the Gospel of Matthew was composed in
the latter part of the first century by a Jewish
Christian.[7] Christian tradition holds the author was the
apostle named Matthew. Early Christian writings state that
Matthew the Apostle also wrote the Hebrew Gospel...
Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Ma...
LITERATURE
1. Name of Gospel--Unity and Integrity:
The "Gospel according to Matthew," i.e. the Gospel according
to the account of Matthew, stands, according to traditional,
but not entirely universal, arrangement, first among the
canonical Gospels. The Gospel, as will be seen below, was
unanimously ascribed by the testimony of the ancient church
to the apostle Matthew, though the title does not of itself
necessarily imply immediate authorship. The unity and
integrity of the Gospel were never in ancient times called
in question. Matthew 1; 2, particularly--the story of the
virgin birth and childhood of Jesus--are proved by the
consentient testimony of manuscripts, VSS, and patristic
references, to have been an integral part of the Gospel from
the beginning (see VIRGIN BIRTH). The omission of this
section from the heretical Gospel of the Ebionites, which
appears to have had some relation to our Gospel, is without
significance.
The theory of successive redactions of Mt, starting with an
Aramaic Gospel, elaborated by Eichhorn and Marsh (1801), and
the related theories of successive editions of the Gospel
put forth by the Tubingen school (Baur, Hilgenfeld, Kostlin,
etc.), and by Ewald (Bleek supposes a primitive Greek
Gospel), lack historical foundation, and are refuted by the
fact that manuscripts and versions know only the ultimate
redaction. Is it credible that the churches should quietly
accept redaction after redaction, and not a word be said, or
a vestige remain, of any of them?...
Link: https://bible-history.com/isbe/M/MATTHEW...
math'-u: Matthew the apostle and evangelist is mentioned in
the 4 catalogues of the apostles in Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk
6:15; Acts 1:13, though his place is not constant in this
list, varying between the 7th and the 8th places and thus
exchanging positions with Thomas. The name occurring in the
two forms Matthaios, and Maththaios, is a Greek reproduction
of the Aramaic Mattathyah, i.e. "gift of Yahweh," and
equivalent to Theodore. Before his call to the apostolic
office, according to Mt 9:9, his name was Levi. The identity
of Matthew and Levi is practically beyond all doubt, as is
evident from the predicate in Mt 10:3; and from a comparison
of Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27 with Mt 9:9. Mark calls him "the son of
Alpheus" (Mk 2:14), although this cannot have been the
Alpheus who was the father of James the Less; for if this
James and Matthew had been brothers this fact would
doubtless have been mentioned, as is the case with Peter and
Andrew, and also with the sons of Zebedee. Whether Jesus, as
He did in the case of several others of His disciples, gave
him the additional name of Matthew is a matter of which we
are not informed. As he was a customs officer (ho telones,
Mt 10:3) in Capernaum, in the territory of Herod Antipas,
Matthew was not exactly a Roman official, but was in the
service of the tetrarch of Galilee, or possibly a
subordinate officer, belonging to the class called
portitores, serving under the publicani, or superior
officials who farmed the Roman taxes. As such he must have
had some education, and doubtless in addition to the native
Aramaic must have been acquainted with the Greek His ready
acceptance of the call of Jesus shows that he must have
belonged to that group of publicans and sinners, who in
Galilee and elsewhere looked longingly to Jesus (Mt 11:19;
Lk 7:34; 15:1). Just at what period of Christ's ministry he
was called does not appear with certainty, but evidently not
at once, as on the day when he was called (Mt 9:11,14,18; Mk
5:37), Peter, James and John are already trustworthy
disciples of Jesus. Unlike the first six among the apostles,
Matthew did not enter the group from among the pupils of
John the Baptist. These are practically all the data
furnished by the New Testament on the person of Matthew, and
what is found in post-Biblical and extra-Biblical sources is
chiefly the product of imagination and in part based on
mistaking the name of Matthew for Matthias (compare Zahn,
Introduction to the New Testament, chapter liv, note 3).
Tradition states that he preached for 15 years in Israel and
that after this he went to foreign nations, the Ethiopians,
Macedonians, Syrians, Persians, Parthians and Medea being
mentioned. He is said to have died a natural death either in
Ethiopia or in Macedonia. The stories of the Roman Catholic
church that he died the death of a martyr on September 21
and of the Greek church that this occurred on November 10
are without any historical basis. Clement of Alexandria
(Strom., iv.9) gives the explicit denial of Heracleon that
Matthew suffered martyrdom.
Link: https://bible-history.com/isbe/M/MATTHEW...
1. Its authorship. --That this Gospel was written by the
apostle Matthew there is no reason to doubt. Seventeen
independent witnesses of the first four centuries attest its
genuineness.
2. Its original language. --The testimony of the
early Church is unanimous that Matthew wrote originally in
the Hebrew language. On the otherhand doubt is thrown over
this opinion, both statements of by an examination of the
fathers and by a consideration of peculiar forms of language
employed in the Gospel itself. The question is unsettled,
the best scholars not agreeing in their Judgment concerning
it. If there was a Hebrew original, it disappeared at a very
early age. The Greek Gospel which we now possess was it is
almost certain, written in Matthew's lifetime; and it is not
at all improbable that he wrote the Gospel in both the Greek
and Hebrew languages. --Lyman Abbolt. It is almost certain
that our Lord spoke in Greek with foreigners, but with his
disciples and the Jewish people in Aramaic (a form of
language closely allied to the Hebrew). --Schaff. The Jewish
historian Josephus furnishes an illustration of the fate of
the Hebrew original of Matthew. Josephus himself informs us
that he, wrote his great work "The History of the Jewish
Wars," originally in Hebrew, his native tongue, for the
benefit of his own nation, and he afterward translated it
into Greek. No notices of the Hebrew original now survive. -
-Professor D.S. Gregory.
3. The date.-- The testimony of the early Church is
unanimous that Matthew wrote first of the early Church is
among the evangelists. Irenieus relates that Matthew wrote
his Gospel while Peter and Paul were preaching, and founding
the Church at Rome, after A.D. 61. It was published before
the destruction of Jerusalem, A.D. 50.--Alford. We would
place our present Gospel between A.D. 60 and 66. If there
was an original Hebrew Gospel, an earlier date belongs to it
--Ellicott.
4. Its object.-- This Gospel was probably written in
Israel for Jewish Christians. It is an historical proof that
Jesus is the Messiah. Matthew is the Gospel for the Jew. It
is the Gospel of Jesus, the Messiah of the prophets. This
Gospel takes the life of Jesus as it was lived on earth, and
his character as it actually appeared, and places them
alongside the life and character of the Messiah as sketched
in the prophets, the historic by the side of the Prophetic,
that the two may appear in their marvellous unity and in
their perfect identity. --Professor Gregory.
Link: https://bible-history.com/smiths/M/Matth...
(gift of Jehovah). (A contraction, as is also Matthias, of
Mattathias. His original name was Levi, and his name Matthew
was probably adopted as his new apostolic name was a Jew.
His father's name was Alphaeus. His home was at Capernaum
His business was the collection of dues and customs from
persons and goods crossing the Sea of Galilee, or passing
along the great Damascus road which ran along the shore
between Bethsaida, Julius and Capernaum. Christ called him
from this work to he his disciple. He appears to have been a
man of wealth, for he made a great feast in his own house,
perhaps in order to introduce his former companions and
friends to Jesus. His business would tend to give him a
knowledge of human nature, and accurate business habits, and
of how to make a way to the hearts of many publicans and
sinners not otherwise easily reached. He is mentioned by
name, after the resurrection of Christ, only in Ac 1:15 but
he must have lived many years as an apostle, since he was
the author of the Gospel of Matthew which was written at
least twenty years later. There is reason to believe that he
remained for fifteen years at Jerusalem, after which he went
as missionary to the Persians, Parthians and Medes. There is
a legend that he died a martyr in Ethiopia. --ED.)
Link: https://bible-history.com/smiths/M/Matth...
The author of this book was beyond a doubt the Matthew, an
apostle of our Lord, whose name it bears. He wrote
the Gospel of
Christ according to his own plans and aims, and from
his own
point of view, as did also the other "evangelists."
As to the time of its composition, there is little
in the
Gospel itself to indicate. It was evidently written
before the
destruction of Jerusalem (Matt. 24), and some time
after the
events it records. The probability is that it was
written
between the years A.D. 60 and 65.
The cast of thought and the forms of expression
employed by
the writer show that this Gospel was written for
Jewish
Christians of Israel. His great object is to prove
that Jesus
of Nazareth was the promised Messiah, and that in
him the
ancient prophecies had their fulfilment. The Gospel
is full of
allusions to those passages of the Old Testament in
which Christ
is predicted and foreshadowed. The one aim prevading
the whole
book is to show that Jesus is he "of whom Moses in
the law and
the prophets did write." This Gospel contains no
fewer than
sixty-five references to the Old Testament, forty-
three of these
being direct verbal citations, thus greatly
outnumbering those
found in the other Gospels. The main feature of this
Gospel may
be expressed in the motto, "I am not come to
destroy, but to
fulfil."
As to the language in which this Gospel was written
there is
much controversy. Many hold, in accordance with old
tradition,
that it was originally written in Hebrew (i.e., the
Aramaic or
Syro-Chaldee dialect, then the vernacular of the
inhabitants of
Israel), and afterwards translated into Greek,
either by
Matthew himself or by some person unknown. This
theory, though
earnestly maintained by able critics, we cannot see
any ground
for adopting. From the first this Gospel in Greek
was received
as of authority in the Church. There is nothing in
it to show
that it is a translation. Though Matthew wrote
mainly for the
Jews, yet they were everywhere familiar with the
Greek language.
The same reasons which would have suggested the
necessity of a
translation into Greek would have led the evangelist
to write in
Greek at first. It is confessed that this Gospel has
never been
found in any other form than that in which we now
possess it.
The leading characteristic of this Gospel is that it
sets
forth the kingly glory of Christ, and shows him to
be the true
heir to David's throne. It is the Gospel of the
kingdom. Matthew
uses the expression "kingdom of heaven" (thirty-two
times),
while Luke uses the expression "kingdom of God"
(thirty-three
times). Some Latinized forms occur in this Gospel,
as kodrantes
(Matt. 5:26), for the Latin quadrans, and phragello
(27:26), for
the Latin flagello. It must be remembered that
Matthew was a
tax-gatherer for the Roman government, and hence in
contact with
those using the Latin language.
As to the relation of the Gospels to each other, we
must
maintain that each writer of the synoptics (the
first three)
wrote independently of the other two, Matthew being
probably
first in point of time.
"Out of a total of 1071 verses, Matthew has 387 in
common with
Mark and Luke, 130 with Mark, 184 with Luke; only
387 being
peculiar to itself." (See MARK -T0002419; LUKE
-T0002331;
GOSPELS -T0001532.)
The book is fitly divided into these four parts:
(1.)
Containing the genealogy, the birth, and the infancy
of Jesus
(1; 2).
(2.) The discourses and actions of John the Baptist
preparatory to Christ's public ministry (3; 4:11).
(3.) The discourses and actions of Christ in Galilee
(4:12-20:16).
(4.) The sufferings, death and resurrection of our
Lord
(20:17-28).
Link: https://bible-history.com/eastons/M/Matt...
gift of God, a common Jewish name after the Exile. He was
the
son of Alphaeus, and was a publican or tax-gatherer
at
Capernaum. On one occasion Jesus, coming up from the
side of the
lake, passed the custom-house where Matthew was
seated, and said
to him, "Follow me." Matthew arose and followed him,
and became
his disciple (Matt. 9:9). Formerly the name by which
he was
known was Levi (Mark 2:14; Luke 5:27); he now
changed it,
possibly in grateful memory of his call, to Matthew.
The same
day on which Jesus called him he made a "great
feast" (Luke
5:29), a farewell feast, to which he invited Jesus
and his
disciples, and probably also many of old associates.
He was
afterwards selected as one of the twelve (6:15). His
name does
not occur again in the Gospel history except in the
lists of the
apostles. The last notice of him is in Acts 1:13.
The time and
manner of his death are unknown.
Link: https://bible-history.com/eastons/M/Matt...
("the gift of Jehovah"), contracted from Mattathias. The
evangelist and apostle. Son of Alphaeus (not the father of
James the Less, for Matthew and James are never coupled as
brothers). Mark (Mark 2:14, compare Mark 3:18) and Luke
(Luke 5:27, compare with Luke 6:15) veil his former less
honorable occupation of a publican under his original name
Levi; but Matthew himself gives it, and humbly puts himself
after Thomas, an undesigned mark of genuineness; whereas
Mark (Mark 3:18) and Luke (Luke 6:15) put Matthew before
Thomas in the list of apostles. (See PUBLICAN.) As
subordinate to the head farmers of the Roman revenues he
collected dues at Capernaum on the sea of Galilee, the route
by which traffic passed between Damascus and the Phoenician
seaports. But Matthew is not ashamed to own his identity
with "the publican" in order to magnify Christ's grace
(Matthew 9:9), and in his catalogue of the apostles (Matthew
10:3).
Christ called him at "the receipt of custom," and he
immediately obeyed the call. Desiring to draw others of his
occupation with him to the Savior he made in His honor a
great feast (Matthew 9:9-13; Luke 5:29; Mark 2:14). "Many
publicans and sinners" thus had the opportunity of hearing
the word; and the murmuring of the Pharisee, and the reply
of our Lord "they that be whole need not a physician but
they that are sick ... I am not come to call the righteous
but sinners to repentance," imply that his effort was
crowned with success. With the undesigned propriety which
marks genuineness Matthew talks of Jesus' sitting down in
"the house" without telling whose house it was, whereas Mark
mentions it as Levi's. He was among those who met in the
upper room at Jerusalem after our Lord's ascension (Acts
1:13). Eustathius (H. E. iii. 24) says that after our Lord's
ascension Matthew preached in Judaea and then in foreign
nations (Ethiopia, according to Socrates Scholasticus, H. E.
i. 19).
Link: https://bible-history.com/faussets/M/Mat...
frontGOSPELS for its aspect of Christ compared with the
other evangelists.)
Time of writing. As our Lord's words divide Acts
(Acts 1:8) into its three parts, "ye shall be witnesses unto
Me in Jerusalem, and all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the
uttermost part of the earth":
(1) the period in which the church was Jewish, Acts
1-11;
(2) the period when it was Gentile with strong
Jewish admixture;
(3) the period when the Gentiles preponderated,
Matthew's Gospel answers to the first or Jewish period,
ending about A.D. 41, and was written probably in and for
Jerusalem and Judea.
The expression (Matthew 27:7-8; Matthew 28:15) "unto
this day" implies some interval after Christ's crucifixion.
Language. Ancient testimony is unanimous that Matthew wrote
in Hebrew Papias, a disciple of John (the Presbyter) and
companion of Polycarp (Eusebius, H. E. 3:3), says, "Matthew
wrote his oracles (logia) in Hebrew, and each interpreted
them in Greek as he could." Perhaps the Greek for "oracles,"
logia, expresses that the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew was a
collection of discourses (as logoi means) rather than a full
narrative. Matthew's Gospel is the one of the four which
gives most fully the discourses of our Lord. Papias' use of
the past tense (aorist) implies that "each interpreting"
Matthew's Hebrew was in Papias' time a thing of the past, so
that as early as the end of the first century or the
beginning of the second the need for each to translate the
Hebrew had ceased, for an authoritative Greek translation
existed...
Link: https://bible-history.com/faussets/M/Mat...
