Dating gospel of matthew

Dating gospel of matthew

It's true that every book in the Bible is equally important, since every book of the Bible comes from God. Still, there are some Bible books that have a special significance because of their location in the Scriptures. Genesis and Revelation are key examples, since they serve as the bookends of God's Word -- they reveal both the beginning and the end of His story. The Gospel of Matthew is another structurally significant book in the Bible because it helps readers transition from the Old Testament to the New Testament. In fact, Matthew is especially key because it helps us understand how the entire Old Testament leads up to the promise and the Person of Jesus Christ.

Introduction to the Book of Matthew

Jump to navigation. Dating the gospels is very important. If it can be established that the gospels were written early, say before the year A. If they were written by the disciples, then their reliability, authenticity, and accuracy are better substantiated. Also, if they were written early, this would mean that there would not have been enough time for myth to creep into the gospel accounts since it was the eyewitnesses to Christ's life that wrote them.

Furthermore, those who were alive at the time of the events could have countered the gospel accounts; and since we have no contradictory writings to the gospels, their early authorship as well as apostolic authorship becomes even more critical. None of the gospels mention the destruction of the Jewish temple in A.

This is significant because Jesus had prophesied concerning the temple when He said "As for these things which you are looking at, the days will come in which there will not be left one stone upon another which will not be torn down. This prophecy was fulfilled in A. The gold in the temple melted down between the stone walls; and the Romans took the walls apart, stone by stone, to get the gold.

Such an obvious fulfillment of Jesus' prophecy most likely would have been recorded as such by the gospel writers who were fond of mentioning fulfillment of prophecy if they had been written after A. Also, if the gospels were fabrications of mythical events, then anything to bolster the Messianic claims--such as the destruction of the temple as Jesus said--would surely have been included.

But, it was not included suggesting that the gospels at least Matthew, Mark, and Luke were written before A. Similarly, this argument is important when we consider the dating of the book of Acts which was written after the gospel of Luke and by Luke himself. Acts is a history of the Christian church right after Jesus' ascension. Acts also fails to mention the incredibly significant events of A. Remember, Acts is a book of history concerning the Christians and the Jews. The fact that the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple is not recorded is very strong evidence that Acts was written before A.

We add to this the fact that Acts does not include the accounts of "Nero's persecution of the Christians in A. If we look at Acts 1: For clarity, Q is supposedly one of the source documents used by both Matthew and Luke in writing their gospels. If Q actually existed, then that would push the first writings of Christ's words and deeds back even further lessening the available time for myth to creep in and adding to the validity and accuracy of the gospel accounts.

If what is said of Acts is true, this would mean that Luke was written at least before A. This means that the gospel of Luke was written within 30 years of Jesus' death. The early church unanimously held that the gospel of Matthew was the first written gospel and was penned by the apostle of the same name Matt. Lately, the priority of Matthew as the first written gospel has come under suspicion with Mark being considered by many to be the first written gospel.

The debate is far from over. The historian Papias mentions that the gospel of Matthew was originally in Aramaic or Hebrew and attributes the gospel to Matthew the apostle. This would mean that if Matthew did write in Aramaic originally, that he may have used Mark as a map, adding and clarifying certain events as he remembered them. But, this is not known for sure. The earliest quotation of Matthew is found in Ignatius who died around A.

Therefore, Matthew was in circulation well before Ignatius came on the scene. The various dates most widely held as possible writing dates of the Gospel are between A. But Ignatius died around A. Therefore Matthew had to be written before he died. Nevertheless, it is generally believed that Matthew was written before A. Mark was not an eyewitness to the events of Jesus' life. He was a disciple of Peter and undoubtedly it was Peter who informed Mark of the life of Christ and guided him in writing the Gospel known by his name.

Luke was not an eyewitness of the life of Christ. He was a companion of Paul who also was not an eyewitness of Christ's life. But, both had ample opportunity to meet the disciples who knew Christ and learn the facts not only from them but from others in the area. Some might consider this damaging to the validity of the gospel but quite the contrary. Luke was a gentile convert to Christianity who was interested in the facts.

He obviously had interviewed the eyewitnesses and written the Gospel account as well as Acts. Notice how Luke speaks of "them," of those who had personal encounters with Christ. Luke is simply recounting the events from the disciples. Since Luke agrees with Matthew, Mark, and John and since there is no contradictory information coming from any of the disciples stating that Luke was inaccurate and since Luke has proven to be a very accurate historian, we can conclude that Luke's account is very accurate.

As far as dating the gospel goes, Luke was written before the book of Acts and Acts does not mention "Nero's persecution of the Christians in A. The date of Acts is still in dispute, but the early date about A. The writer of the gospel of John was obviously an eyewitness of the events of Christ's life since he speaks from a perspective of having been there during many of the events of Jesus' ministry and displays a good knowledge of Israeli geography and customs.

The John Rylands papyrus fragment 52 of John's gospel dated in the year contains portions of John 18, verses , This fragment was found in Egypt, and a considerable amount of time is needed for the circulation of the gospel before it reached Egypt. It is the last of the gospels and appears to have been written in the 80's to 90's. Of important note is the lack of mention of the destruction of the Jewish temple in A. But this is understandable since John was not focusing on historical events.

Instead, he focused on the theological aspect of the person of Christ and listed His miracles and words that affirmed Christ's deity. Though there is still some debate on the dates of when the gospels were written, they were most assuredly completed before the close of the first century and written by eyewitnesses or under the direction of eyewitnesses.

This article is also available in: When were the gospels written and by whom? Destruction of the temple in A. Luke's Gospel comes Acts 1: Matthew The early church unanimously held that the gospel of Matthew was the first written gospel and was penned by the apostle of the same name Matt. By the time of Irenaeus, Acts was also linked with Luke, the companion of Paul. Mark Mark was not an eyewitness to the events of Jesus' life. Luke Luke was not an eyewitness of the life of Christ. To these He also presented Himself alive, after His suffering, by many convincing proofs, appearing to them over a period of forty days, and speaking of the things concerning the kingdom of God.

The James spoken of here is not James the brother of John who was recorded as being executed in Acts Rather, it is the James spoken of in Acts Walvoord, John F. Scripture Press Publications, Inc. Mays, James Luther, Ph. Harper and Row, Publishers, Inc. Robertson, A. Douglas, J. Tyndale House Publishers, Inc. Achtemeier, Paul J. McDowell, Robertson, Dictionary of Bible Terms. How to Interpret the Bible. Is the Bible inspired? Bible Chronology of the Old Testament. Bible Chronology of the New Testament.

Old Testament Books. New Testament Books. What is the Canon? Other books mentioned in the Bible. Home What's New and

The Gospel According to Matthew is the first book of the New Testament and one of the three synoptic gospels. It tells how the. Matthew is the first book in the New Testament, and according to ancient when we endeavour to date the time of writing of the New Testament books, we.

Please help support the mission of New Advent and get the full contents of this website as an instant download. The earliest Christian communities looked upon the books of the Old Testament as Sacred Scripture , and read them at their religious assemblies. A book was acknowledged as canonical when the Church regarded it as Apostolic, and had it read at her assemblies. Hence, to establish the canonicity of the Gospel according to St.

It is the near-universal position of scholarship that the Gospel of Matthew is dependent upon the Gospel of Mark. This position is accepted whether one subscribes to the dominant Two-Source Hypothesis or instead prefers the Farrer-Goulder hypothesis.

Introduction to Christianity. Course Pages:

Don Stewart :: When Were the Four Gospels Written?

There are options set in 'Advanced Options'. Search verses, phrases, and topics e. John 3: Other Searches. Blue Letter Bible offers several daily devotional readings in order to help you refocus on Christ and the Gospel of His peace and righteousness. The evidence shows that the four Gospels were written in a relatively short time after the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

When were the gospels written and by whom?

Jump to navigation. Dating the gospels is very important. If it can be established that the gospels were written early, say before the year A. If they were written by the disciples, then their reliability, authenticity, and accuracy are better substantiated. Also, if they were written early, this would mean that there would not have been enough time for myth to creep into the gospel accounts since it was the eyewitnesses to Christ's life that wrote them. Furthermore, those who were alive at the time of the events could have countered the gospel accounts; and since we have no contradictory writings to the gospels, their early authorship as well as apostolic authorship becomes even more critical. None of the gospels mention the destruction of the Jewish temple in A. This is significant because Jesus had prophesied concerning the temple when He said "As for these things which you are looking at, the days will come in which there will not be left one stone upon another which will not be torn down.

Like Mark and Luke , Matthew is a "synoptic" Gospel, in the sense that Luke and Mark both repeat similar, in some cases identical, material.

There are options set in 'Advanced Options'. Search verses, phrases, and topics e. John 3:

Gospel of St. Matthew

Apologia Pro Ortho Doxa. The consensus understanding of St. There is no evidence for this, but it is the consensus. Briefly, the arguments against Matthean authorship are:. There is no dispute in the ancient world as to the authorship of this Gospel. One would expect multiple traditions and some manuscripts without the title page if the authorship was once unknown. Many Jews spoke both Greek and Aramaic. Knowing two languages is very common, especially if one of them is the lingua franca and one of them is your local language. This is why people across Europe often speak their own national language and English. This would be even more true if Americans were everywhere and America ruled European countries as client states, as was true in ancient Palestine. Matthew was also a tax collector, employed by the Roman state. He had to know Greek, and be a capable speaker, if he were to fulfill his job.

Matthew: Date and Authorship

Bingham Jan 04, Category: These are some of the important questions to answer as you explore any book of the Bible. Subsequent tradition is unanimous that the disciple Matthew, also called Levi Matt. There are some problems with the tradition. It is also quite similar to Mark, which was certainly written in Greek. Since the author did not identify himself, he probably thought that it was not essential for his readers to know his name. The earliest reference to the Gospel of Matthew is probably in the Epistle to the Smyrnaeans by Ignatius of Antioch c.

Gospel of Matthew

Matthew is the first book in the New Testament, and according to ancient church tradition, it was the first of the four gospels to be written. However, when we endeavour to date the time of writing of the New Testament books, we believe the reader may be best served to first read the article on Luke and Acts. There we date Luke between A. Matthew, Mark and Luke together are called the synoptic "same eye" gospels. This is due to the close relationship between the three, as all three tell many of the same stories, often in the same way and with the same words. Of the verses in Mark, Matthew reproduces of them and Luke reproduces of them.

Most Christians only know of the four canonical gospels: Of these 4, the first 3 are known as the synoptic gospels - they say basically the same thing with different territorial twists thrown in - while John and the myriad Apocryphal gospels can read quite differently. Many Christians regard the four canonical gospels as a particularly important grouping among the books of New Testament section of the Christian Bible. Latin-speakers transmogrified the Greek word euangelion into the Latinised evangelion , from which we get the words " evangelical " and " evangelism "; the alleged authors of the canonical gospels have therefore become known in Christian folklore and in Christian theology as "the four evangelists ". There are no agreement on what is the earliest canonical gospel or how they came into being though there are four main schools of thought. All of the canonical gospels were originally written in Greek, even though Jesus spoke Aramaic. More over, other than what are claimed to be paraphrasing, no meaningful quoting of our canonical gospels occurred until Irenaeus' Against Heresies c. So the best that can be said is that the canonal Gospels existed in some form no later then CE.

If the Gospel of Matthew was written after 70 C. For example, in Matt Is there any evidence this parable was added to a pre C. Three pieces of evidence have usually been advanced to demonstrate that Matthew wrote after 70 C. First, Matthew is dependent upon the Gospel of Mark and Mark is normally dated to the late 60s or early 70s. Secondly, the Gospel of Matthew has a developed Christology, which suggests a late date towards the end of the first century.

It narrates an account of the life and ministry of Jesus of Nazareth. It describes his genealogy, his miraculous birth and childhood, his baptism and temptation, his ministry of healing and preaching, and finally his crucifixion and resurrection. The resurrected Jesus commissions his Apostles to "go and make disciples of all nations. The Christian community traditionally ascribes authorship to Matthew the Evangelist, one of Jesus' twelve disciples. Augustine of Hippo considered it to be the first gospel written see synoptic problem , and it appears as the first gospel in most Bibles. Secular scholarship generally agrees that it was written later, and authorship was ascribed to Matthew as was common in the ancient world. According to the commonly accepted two source hypothesis, the author used the Gospel of Mark as one source and the hypothetical Q document as another, possibly writing in Antioch, circa

The earliest handwritten copy of a Gospel
Related publications