Who is the author of the Book of Matthew? Overview of the Question The Book of Matthew stands as the first Gospel in many English New Testaments and has, throughout history, been attributed to Matthew, a former tax collector called by Jesus to follow Him. Yet questions occasionally arise regarding whether Matthew truly wrote this account. The following sections explore historical attestations, textual clues, and scriptural references related to the authorship of this Gospel and seek to present a thorough, cohesive answer. Historical Attributions among Early Christians From the earliest centuries of Church history, this Gospel has been attributed to Matthew: 1. Papias (early second century AD) Papias, an early Christian writer quoted by Eusebius in “Ecclesiastical History” (Book III, Chapter 39), mentioned that Matthew compiled the sayings of Jesus, originally referring to it in a Hebrew/Aramaic style or dialect. 2. Irenaeus of Lyons (late second century AD) In “Against Heresies” (Book III, Chapter 1), Irenaeus explicitly listed Matthew as the writer of this Gospel. Irenaeus’ testimony is particularly important because he learned under Polycarp, who was traditionally believed to have been acquainted with the Apostle John. 3. Origen (early third century AD) Origen, as cited by Eusebius (Ecclesiastical History, Book VI, Chapter 25), confirmed the church’s consensus that the first Gospel in order was written by Matthew. These early witnesses provide compelling historical evidence. Such consistent attribution across multiple regions (Asia Minor, Gaul, and Alexandria) strengthens the case for Matthew’s authorship. Internal Clues from the Gospel Text While the Gospel itself does not directly say, “written by Matthew,” it contains internal hints: 1. Name Among the Apostles The Gospel notes the specific calling of a tax collector: “As Jesus went on from there, He saw a man named Matthew sitting at the tax booth. ‘Follow Me,’ He told him, and Matthew got up and followed Him.” (Matthew 9:9) In Mark 2:14 and Luke 5:27, this individual is also referred to as “Levi.” Early tradition and the parallel accounts harmonize these references as one person—Matthew/Levi—demonstrating that the writer had firsthand awareness of the calling of a disciple who was once a tax collector. 2. Accounting Terms and Financial Details Throughout the Gospel, there are nuanced uses of terminology consistent with someone familiar with financial records (e.g., frequent references to money, coins, and the paying of taxes such as in Matthew 17:24–27 and 22:17–21). These subtle indications form an internal pattern suggesting a writer with a tax-collector background. 3. Jewish Context This Gospel uniquely emphasizes Jesus as the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies, repeatedly citing the Hebrew Scriptures (e.g., Matthew 1:22–23; 2:15). A disciple who had worked near or around local communities—and was likely proficient in Aramaic and Hebrew—would be positioned to weave these Old Testament prophecies seamlessly into the narrative. Manuscript Considerations and Reliability 1. Early Manuscript Fragments While specific surviving papyri (like P^45 or P^64) may not include complete openings with authorship statements, the continuous tradition in subsequent Greek manuscripts consistently labels the text as “According to Matthew.” The consistency in titles across these documents points to a sustained belief that the Apostle Matthew was the source. 2. Consistent Transmission Experts in textual criticism, comparing thousands of Greek manuscripts, see uniformity in attributing the first Gospel to Matthew. The strong consensus among scribes—who meticulously copied these texts over centuries—adds probability that the early Church’s ascription was no mere guesswork but grounded in a well-known tradition dating back to apostolic times. The Connection with Hebrew/Aramaic Origins 1. Possible Original Semitic Source Papias’ statement suggests Matthew might have compiled an early version of Jesus’ teachings in Hebrew or Aramaic. Over time, it is believed that this account was translated or structured into the Greek Gospel now known as Matthew. Its Jewish flavor, including genealogies and constant references to the Law and Prophets, resonates with a Semitic origin. 2. Alignment with the Audience The Gospel’s emphasis on fulfillment of prophecy (Matthew 5:17; 21:4–5) aligns with a Jewish readership eager to see how Jesus’ ministry connected to the Hebrew Scriptures. This focus corroborates the tradition that a disciple with firsthand knowledge of Jewish customs authored the work, further pointing to Matthew. Archaeological and Historical Corroboration 1. Capernaum and Tax Stations Archaeological research in the region around Capernaum has revealed details about tax routes and fishing-based commerce, consistent with the setting where Matthew might have worked as a tax collector. Though not a direct proof of authorship, this background demonstrates plausibility for someone like Matthew, providing a setting that matches the Gospel’s descriptions. 2. Use of Geographic Precision The Gospel accurately locates events in Judea, Galilee, and beyond (e.g., Matthew 4:12–13). Such familiarity with local geography suggests the final author or source material came from an eyewitness or close associate of eyewitnesses. Testimonies from the Early Church Fathers 1. Eusebius of Caesarea As mentioned, Eusebius quotes Papias and Origen, affirming that the Gospel circulating under the name “Matthew” was linked to the apostle held in high regard by the early communities. 2. Jerome (fourth century AD) Jerome, in his “Lives of Illustrious Men,” echoed prior church authorities, again pointing to Matthew as the author. This continuing chain of witness across generations supports the traditional authorship claim. Addressing Modern Questions Despite modern theories suggesting anonymous authorship or later redaction, multiple lines of evidence favor Matthew’s hand: 1. Uniform Title in Ancient Codices The earliest Greek manuscripts uniformly bear the superscription “According to Matthew.” Had the Gospel been truly anonymous, we might expect confusion or variation in titles. Instead, tradition is consistent. 2. No Alternative at the Time If Matthew did not write this Gospel, one would expect disputes in early centuries. However, while there were controversies over some New Testament writings, the authorship of Matthew has never faced serious, widespread opposition from early Christian sources. 3. Matching Internal Evidence The distinctive style, focusing on monetary details and fulfillment of prophecy, aligns with a Jewish Christian apostle familiar with financial terms—just what we would anticipate from Matthew. Conclusion on Authorship Based on the harmonious chorus of the early Church Fathers, the internal textual evidence, and the corroboration of manuscript tradition, the most reasonable conclusion is that the Book of Matthew was composed by the Apostle Matthew. Known as Levi in other Gospel accounts, he was called from his station as a tax collector to follow Jesus and became a direct witness to the ministry, miracles, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Citations from the witness of history (Papias, Irenaeus, Origen, Eusebius, Jerome) and the scriptural narrative (such as Matthew 9:9) consistently support this authorship. Moreover, the Gospel of Matthew’s emphasis on Old Testament fulfillments reveals an author deeply conversant with, and dedicated to, showing that Jesus fulfills the Scriptures. This unity of external attestation and internal congruence strongly supports Matthew as the author, providing believers and inquirers alike with confidence that the first Gospel presents an eyewitness testimony woven under inspiration and preserved through the centuries. “Now this happened so that what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet might be fulfilled...” (Matthew 1:22) Such a statement underscores the writer’s conviction that ancient Scripture testifies of Jesus as the Messiah. The author, traditionally held to be Matthew the Apostle, meticulously shows these prophetic connections. This careful presentation, combined with Church tradition, makes a robust case that the Book of Matthew indeed comes from the hand of the one who encountered Jesus at the tax booth and who ultimately penned the Good News with firsthand knowledge, precision, and spiritual conviction. |
    |