The Authorship of Matthew's Gospel
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ISBN 9798650163336 The Authorship of Matthew’s Gospel: A Re-assessment Oladotun Paul Kolawole Abstract In the recent time, scholarship has grown beyond the way it use to be; in reinstating and re-examining ancient held traditions. This does not exempt several approaches dedicated to Biblical studies. There are several books in the Bible, some of which the authorships have been widely and diversely disputed. As a result, the New Testament, especially the Synoptics (Matthew, Mark and Luke) have received keen attention. Therefore, the focus of this research is the authorship of Matthew with an explicit exploration of evidences in maintaining a viable position Keywords: Gospel, Matthew, Synoptics Introduction As one of the Synoptics; the gospel of Matthew is expedient about the birth, life, ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Arguably, the writer of the gospel did not identify himself by name just like other biblical books, yet the early church believed that this book was written by one of the disciples –the Tax collector Levi – also called Matthew (Matt 9:9-13). This informs the appearance of this gospel as the first among other synoptics. Matthew recorded certain events from the life of Christ to share his personal belief in Jesus Christ. The gospel made use of several quotes from the Old Testament revealing 132 Light in a Once-Dark World Volume 2. June, 2020 Christ as the promised Messiah. In fact, more recent studies have argued that the writing shows whoever wrote it was more interested in things that worry the church around in the first century, not during the life time of Jesus; so, most like Matthew copied Mark, not the other way round. Therefore, this research explores a discourse on the authorship of the gospel of Matthew in view of patristic comments. The statement of problem The research observes that the basic crux of this re-think stands on the fact that the “gospel of Matthew” did not come with ‘about the author’226 (anonymity) just like the other synoptics.227 Unfortunately, this gospel does not name its author and this has given room for several assertions.228 However, this premise forms the framework of this discourse. Since the time of the early church, Apostle Matthew has always been credited with the authorship of the gospel of Matthew not until recently.229 Since apostolicity is one of the criteria 226 About the author is a section in modern literatures where information is given about the author of the writing, sometimes authors. This exclusively gives credence, direction and ownership of the work without further argument and controversy. This section of the writing (about the author) settles the score of who owns the work. But this is not the case with the gospel of Matthew; therefore, delineating the author of Matthew is a serious struggle. 227 Keith F. Nickle, The Synoptic Gospels (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1993), 121. In fact, Strass opines that the authorship here is perhaps the most disputed historical question related to this Matthew’s gospel. Mark L. Strauss, Four Portraits, One Jesus: an Introduction to Jesus and the Gospels. Grand Rapids, Mich: Zondervan Publishing Company, 2007), 252. 228 Since the author did not identify himself, he probably thought that it was not essential for his readers to know his name. The research notes that working through the human author was the primary Author, the Holy Spirit. W. F. Albright, and C. S. Mann, (eds) Matthew, Anchor Bible (New-York: Doublkeday Press, 1973), 182-186. 229 Bernard Orchard and Harold Riley, The Order of the Synoptics, Why Three Synoptic Gospels? (Macon, GA.: Mercer University, 1987), 111. See C. Steward Petrie, The Authorship of The Gospel According to Matthew: A Reconsideration of the External Evidence,” New Testament Studies 14 (1967- 1968), 5. This stand is canonical in nature. Can one trust the judgment of the early church tradition? Could Apostle Matthew be the actual author, or it was just attributed to him? In view of this premises, this research explores various views and arguments raised within and without the church; in other to reach a 133 ISBN 9798650163336 for canonicity;230 maybe that is why the early church attributed this book to an Apostle? Could any evidence beyond the text actually speak for itself as it relates to Apostle Matthew as the author of this gospel? Or is it a mere calculated arrangement? Here, the research explores Matthew’s authorship in view of the book title and external evidences.231 The Book Title The point of this first phase seems unimportant, but it has been a vital point of argument as it concerns the discourse here. Several scholars viable conclusion on the authorship of this gospel. Meanwhile, Wansburough opined that until recently, it was a tendency to regard the four written gospels as shortened biographies of Jesus which when conflated with one another give a detailed account of his life and ministry as it actually was. Howevert, his version of what establishes a gospel does little justice to the writers or their intentions. It seems the need to write a biography of Jesus in a modern sense was not of importance to the evangelist neither was it thought of. H. Wansbrough , Scripture Discussion Commentary 7: Mark and Matthew. London and Sydney: Sheed and Ward Ltd, 1971). 230 Brooke Foss Westcott, A General History of the Canon of the New Testament (London: Macmillan and Co., 1875), 21. The first phase of canonization is called “apostolic authority” and is characterized by the use of the New Testament writings of the apostles by the earliest church fathers in the defense of the Christian faith (1st and 2nd centuries). Westcott, A General History of the Canon of the New Testament, 21. The second phase of canonization is called “church orthodoxy” and is characterized by the recognition of the apostolic writings into their distinctive groups (Gospels, Pauline Epistles, Catholic Epistles), as well as their use among the churches as the rules of the Christian faith (late 2nd century through 3rd century). The third phase of canonization is characterized by the “distribution and general acceptance” of the books of the New Testament by the Catholic Church at large, seen most distinctly in the lists of canonical books made during the early church councils (4th century). Gary H. Everett, The Gospel of Matthew (Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures Using a Theme-based Approach to Identify Literary Structures), 2018 Edition, 32. 231 Concerning this categorization, Wallace argued that the three categories bear the same weight. This includes the ‘internal evidence’, though not in the scope of this research work. Daniel B. Wallace, Matthew: Introduction, Argument and Outline https://bible.org/seriespage/matthew-introduction-argument-and-outline (Accessed on 19th April, 2019). 134 Light in a Once-Dark World Volume 2. June, 2020 have argued that the early church have assigned the titles232 and not the original writers.233 On a contrary, the title “according to Matthew” – “ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ” is found in the early manuscripts and was the most highly regard and quoted manuscript by the early church fathers. The simplest inscription is “κατα ματθαιον” (according to Matthew) found in Codex Sinaiticus (A) and Codex Vaticanus (B). As time progressed, this became more elaborate in the fifth century; the title was customarily “ευαγγελιον κατα ματθαιον” (the Gospel according to Matthew); but was later called “αγιον ευαγγελιον234 κατα 232 The title of writing in modern era is one of the most important parts of the text; it summarizes the content of the text and entices the reader to read the work. It is often used in a way that is mentally and visually memorable. http://www.hotype.co.uk/the-importance-of-title/ (Accessed on 14th April, 2019). In fact, the “title page” is one of the most important parts of the preliminaries of a book, as the data on it are used to establish the title proper and the data relating to publication; which informs the way people make reference to the writing. Michael Gorman, and Paul W. Winkler (eds.), Anglo- American cataloguing rules (London, Library Association, 1978), 571. Although, the modern understanding is similar with the ancient; there are seeming distinctions. The modern English name “The Gospel According to Matthew” arose from a variety of titles called ‘superscriptions’ placed above the beginning of the gospel text in ancient manuscripts; two of the most reliable manuscripts; Sinaiticus and Vaticanus have the simple superscription ‘ευαγγελιον κατα ματθαιον’. James D.G Dunn and John Williams Rogerson, Eerdmans Commentary on the Bible (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company, n.d), 1000. 233 Samuel Lamerson, Authorship; https://www.bibleodyssey.org/en/tools/ask-a- scholar/authorship (Accessed on 14th April, 2019). Meanwhile, there is no positive evidence that the book ever circulated without this title; the ascription has a very early date 125 A.D. J. H. Ropes, The Synoptic Gospels (Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University, 1960), 103 . 234 The word εὐανγγέλιον passed through three stages in the history of its use. In the older Greek authors it signified a reward for bringing good tidings; also, a thanks-offering for good tidings brought. In later Greek, it indicated the good news itself. And finally it was employed to denote the books in which the gospel of Jesus Christ is presented historic form. It is used very extensively in the New Testament, and always in the second sense. This meaning is also retained in the title of the gospels. The first trace of the word as indicating a written gospel is found in the didache, the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, discovered in 1873 and in all probability composed between the years 90 and 100 A.