The authorship and dating of the Gospel of Matthew have been topics of scholarly debate for centuries. The uncertainty surrounding these questions stems from the lack of direct evidence within the text itself and the reliance on historical and textual analysis to form conclusions. However, by examining the available evidence from various sources, including early Christian tradition, historical context, linguistic analysis, and textual criticism, scholars have proposed several theories regarding the authorship and dating of the Gospel of Matthew.
Dating the Gospel of Matthew
Determining the precise date of the composition of the Gospel of Matthew is challenging due to the absence of explicit chronological markers within the text. However, scholars have used internal and external evidence to propose a range of possible dates.
One approach to dating the Gospel of Matthew involves analyzing its relationship with other New Testament writings. Many scholars argue that Matthew was composed after the Gospel of Mark and before the Gospel of Luke, based on the literary dependence of Matthew on Mark and the shared material between Matthew and Luke, known as the “synoptic problem.” According to this view, Matthew was likely written in the latter part of the first century CE.
Additionally, clues within the Gospel itself provide hints about its historical context and potential date of composition. For example, Matthew’s references to the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple (Matthew 24:1-2) suggest that the Gospel was written after the events of 70 CE, when the Temple was destroyed by the Romans during the Jewish-Roman War. Therefore, most scholars place the composition of Matthew sometime between 70 and 100 CE.
However, some scholars propose earlier dates for the Gospel of Matthew based on different interpretations of the evidence. For instance, a minority of scholars argue for a date in the 50s or 60s CE, suggesting that Matthew’s portrayal of Jesus’ teachings reflects an earlier stage of Christian theology and community development. Nevertheless, the majority consensus places the Gospel of Matthew in the last decades of the first century.
Authorship of the Gospel of Matthew
The traditional attribution of the Gospel of Matthew to the apostle Matthew, also known as Levi, has been widely accepted within Christian tradition. According to this view, Matthew, one of the twelve disciples of Jesus, wrote the Gospel bearing his name. This attribution is based primarily on the testimony of early church fathers and the inclusion of Matthew among the four Gospels in the New Testament canon.
The attribution of authorship to Matthew is explicitly mentioned by several early Christian writers. For example, Papias, a second-century bishop and historian, attributed the Gospel of Matthew to the apostle Matthew, stating that Matthew “composed the sayings in the Hebrew dialect” and that “everyone interpreted them as best he could” (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 3.39.16).
Furthermore, the Gospel itself provides evidence that its author was intimately familiar with Jewish customs, traditions, and scripture, which aligns with what one would expect from a Jewish disciple of Jesus like Matthew. The Gospel of Matthew contains numerous references to the Old Testament and emphasizes Jesus’ role as the fulfillment of Jewish prophecy.
However, despite the traditional ascription of authorship to Matthew, modern scholarship has raised questions about the direct involvement of the apostle in writing the Gospel that bears his name. One significant challenge to the traditional authorship attribution is the Gospel’s use of the Gospel of Mark as a source. The vast majority of scholars agree that Matthew used Mark as one of his primary sources, adapting and expanding upon Mark’s narrative and teachings. This raises doubts about whether the apostle Matthew would have relied on another Gospel writer’s work in composing his own account.
Additionally, the Gospel of Matthew was originally composed in Greek, rather than Hebrew or Aramaic, as suggested by Papias. While it is possible that Matthew may have written an earlier version of the Gospel in Aramaic or Hebrew, no extant manuscripts of such a text have been discovered, leaving scholars to rely on speculation.
In light of these considerations, many scholars propose that the traditional attribution of authorship to Matthew should be understood as a later attribution made within the Christian community rather than a direct claim by the apostle himself. Instead, they suggest that the Gospel of Matthew was written anonymously by an author or group of authors who sought to emphasize its apostolic authority by attributing it to one of Jesus’ disciples.
Conclusion
The dating and authorship of the Gospel of Matthew remain subjects of scholarly debate, with no consensus reached among researchers. The majority of scholars place the composition of Matthew in the latter part of the first century CE, between 70 and 100 CE, based on internal and external evidence. While the Gospel bears the traditional attribution to the apostle Matthew, modern scholarship questions the direct involvement of the apostle in its composition, citing the Gospel’s dependence on Mark and other factors.
Ultimately, the authorship and dating of the Gospel of Matthew are complex issues that require careful examination of historical, textual, and linguistic evidence. While the traditional attribution to the apostle Matthew remains influential within Christian tradition, scholars continue to explore alternative theories and interpretations to deepen our understanding of this foundational text in the New Testament.