The New Testament opens with the Gospel of Matthew. Does this suggest that the Apostle Matthew wrote his account before the other evangelists? Or is his Gospel placed first simply due to its significance?
The exact order in which the four Gospels were written may never be fully known. Biblical scholars have debated this question since the 18th century, yet there remains no definitive answer. Nevertheless, many indicators suggest that the Gospel of Matthew may indeed have been written before the other three. Let us take a closer look at these factors.
How Do We Know That Matthew Wrote the Gospel of Matthew?
This is an important question, as the history of literature, including Christian literature, contains numerous pseudepigrapha—works falsely attributed to incorrect or even fictional authors. The Gospel itself does not explicitly state that it was written by the Apostle Matthew. Matthew is only briefly mentioned in a passage recounting his calling: “As Jesus passed on from there [Capernaum – Ed.], He saw a man named Matthew sitting at the tax office. And He said to him, ‘Follow Me.’ So he arose and followed Him” (Matthew 9:9). Interestingly, other Gospels identify this tax collector by a different name, calling him Levi the son of Alphaeus (Mark 2:14) or simply Levi (Luke 5:27-29).
Before addressing the authorship further, it is essential to understand that the notion of “authorship” in relation to the Gospels is somewhat fluid. The renowned Russian theologian and Church historian Nikolai Glubokovsky noted that the Gospels, as accounts of humanity’s deliverance from sin and the offer of salvation, were first given by the God-Man Himself and ultimately belong to Him. Thus, Christ alone is the true Author of the Gospels. The Greek word “κατὰ,” often translated as “of” (e.g., Gospel of Matthew, Gospel of Mark), is more accurately rendered as “according to”: the Gospel according to Matthew, according to Mark. The Evangelists, therefore, are less “authors” in the modern sense and more like compilers or editors of accounts of Christ’s life.
Nonetheless, there are reliable testimonies from early sources—contemporaries of Matthew—attesting to his direct role in composing this Gospel.
What Are These Testimonies?
The first known testimony about Matthew as the author of his Gospel comes from Bishop Papias of Hierapolis (c. 70–163). While it’s unclear whether he met the apostles directly, he was certainly connected with their closest followers. Papias had interactions with figures like the daughters of the Apostle Philip, who lived in Hierapolis, a certain “elder John,” whom some consider the Apostle John, and St. Polycarp of Smyrna, who himself knew “John and others who had seen the Lord firsthand.”
Papias authored a work titled The Exposition of the Sayings of the Lord, preserved only in quotations within Eusebius of Caesarea’s Ecclesiastical History. Papias states that the Apostle Mark conveyed the life and teachings of Christ, accurately rendering the sermons of Peter into Greek. Matthew, Papias recounts, “compiled the logia (λόγια in Greek, meaning sayings or perhaps conversations. – Ed.) of Christ in Hebrew, which everyone translated to the best of their ability.”
St. Irenaeus of Lyon (c. 130–202) also confidently names Matthew as the author of this Gospel. Irenaeus, a disciple of the holy martyr Polycarp, relied on Polycarp’s direct interactions with the apostles. Other early Church fathers—Clement of Alexandria (c. 150–215), Tertullian (c. 155–240), and Tatian (c. 120–185), the first to attempt a harmonized account of the Gospels—never doubted Matthew’s authorship. Later, Blessed Jerome of Stridon confirmed Matthew’s authorship near the turn of the 5th century, adding weight to this tradition. Jerome’s testimony holds particular value because he spent years studying in Palestine, learning the language and local customs as he translated the Scriptures into Latin.
It wasn’t until the 19th century that Western scholars began questioning whether Matthew truly wrote the first Gospel. Renowned biblical scholar Bruce Metzger, for instance, expressed puzzlement over Matthew’s Gospel’s “faithful” alignment with Mark’s Gospel, since Mark wasn’t an eyewitness to most of the events he recounts, unlike Matthew. Another scholar, Richard Bauckham, has cast doubt on the author’s name, noting that both “Matthew” and “Levi” were common names in Judea at that time and suggesting it was unlikely for one man to go by both.
Many of these concerns are based on assumptions that the Gospel of Matthew was not, in fact, the first written account and may have been modelled on Mark’s. However, while the question of priority remains open, early Church tradition dating back to the first and second centuries continues to point convincingly to Matthew as the author of his Gospel.
Could Matthew Have Only Written Down the “Logia” – Sayings of the Saviour?
This hypothesis is indeed popular in certain scholarly circles. Bruce Metzger suggests one version, proposing that Matthew may have initially compiled a collection of Jesus’ sayings (likely in Aramaic). Over time, this collection would have been translated into Greek and became a source of Jesus’ sayings that scholars now call “Q.” The Gospel we know today, according to this theory, would be a later work of an unknown Christian who combined Mark’s Gospel with Matthew’s collection and additional sources, thus transferring Matthew’s name from the sayings collection to the full Gospel.
However, there is no strong basis for assuming that the logia of Christ mentioned by Papias of Hierapolis were a mere collection of sayings rather than a full narrative about Christ. The theologian Nikolai Glubokovsky supported the idea that Matthew composed a complete text, with Papias referring to it as logia to highlight its distinctive quality compared to Mark’s Gospel. Matthew’s Gospel indeed contains a notable amount of the Lord’s direct speech – the Sermon on the Mount alone spans three chapters (Matthew 5-7) and is sometimes viewed as a “book within a book.”
Who translated the Hebrew text into Greek remains unknown; Papias noted that “various translators” were involved. Some scholars have even speculated that it may have been the Apostle John himself. Glubokovsky, however, contends that there is no reason to doubt that the Greek text we have is Matthew’s own work. Notably, many of Papias’ contemporaries, including the Apostle Barnabas, Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch, the author of the Didache, Athenagoras of Athens, and Theophilus of Antioch, cited passages from Matthew’s Gospel that closely resemble the Greek text as it is known today. This has led Glubokovsky to surmise that the original Hebrew text was soon displaced and didn’t have a chance to spread widely.
Did This Hebrew Text Exist If It Has Not Survived to Our Time?
The idea that Matthew’s Gospel was originally written in Greek only emerged in the early 16th century, suggested by Erasmus of Rotterdam, a renowned scholar, and Cardinal Cajetan. However, substantial early testimonies indicate the existence of a Hebrew original text for Matthew’s Gospel, supported by Church writers from the 1st to the 5th centuries.
Among the earliest attestations are Papias of Hierapolis and Irenaeus of Lyon, as well as Eusebius of Caesarea, who authored Ecclesiastical History in the 4th century. Eusebius recounts how, near the end of the 2nd century, the theologian Pantaenus discovered a Hebrew version of Matthew’s Gospel in India, believed to have been brought there by the Apostle Bartholomew a century prior. The theologian Nikolai Glubokovsky notes that “this account is especially valuable as it stands independently from Papias’ earlier testimony, offering new, autonomous evidence of a Hebrew original for Matthew’s Gospel.”
Further evidence comes from Jerome of Stridon, who reported that a Hebrew text was preserved in the library of Caesarea, a text Jerome himself was able to copy from a group known as the Nazoreans in Beroea, Syria. Although it remains uncertain if this was Matthew’s original or a version adapted by Judeo-Christians, it nevertheless hints at an early Hebrew Gospel.
Additionally, there are features in the Greek Gospel of Matthew that point to a Hebrew origin. Consider the Archangel Gabriel’s message to Joseph: “You shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins” (Matthew 1:21). This line only reveals its full meaning in Hebrew, where “Jesus” (Yeshua) directly signifies “God saves.”
At the Crucifixion, Matthew records Jesus’ cry in Hebrew: “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?” which translates to “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?” (Matthew 27:46). Without this Hebrew phrase, it’s unclear why bystanders mockingly assume He was calling for Elijah (Matthew 27:47). While Mark’s Gospel also contains this exclamation, this could be expected given that Mark likely wrote after Matthew and drew from his account.
The Gospel of Matthew also uniquely draws on Old Testament prophecies about Christ, sometimes directly from the Hebrew text rather than the Greek Septuagint used by the other Evangelists. For instance, Matthew’s version of “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart” (Matthew 22:37) reflects the Hebrew phrasing rather than the Septuagint, and this is not the only example.
The Septuagint, a Greek translation of the Old Testament dating back to the 280s BC, was widely respected and in common use during Christ’s earthly life, especially in the Greek-speaking Roman Empire, even within Palestine. By that time, Hebrew was no longer widely understood among Jews, and synagogue services often included interpreters. The Jewish historian Josephus, for instance, frequently cited the Septuagint.
Linguistic features in Matthew’s Greek Gospel also hint at a Hebrew origin. One is his frequent use of the particle ἰδού (“behold”), which is uncommon in Greek yet parallels the Hebrew hinnê. Additionally, phrases like “answered and said” (Matthew 21:21) sound awkward in Greek but are direct translations of standard Hebrew expressions.
Alright, perhaps Matthew’s Gospel did have a Hebrew prototype, but does that mean it was written first?
Not conclusively, but it certainly points us in that direction.
Matthew likely addressed his Gospel to fellow Jews—this is evident not only in its language but also in its focus and structure.
In the late first century BC and early first century AD, the Jewish people awaited the Messiah from the line of King David with particular intensity. They envisioned a Saviour who would liberate them from Roman rule, while in reality, He came to redeem all people from the bondage of sin and death. This is why Matthew opens his Gospel with a genealogy, tracing Jesus Christ’s ancestry to prove to Jewish readers that He is indeed the Messiah. By linking Jesus to Abraham, the father of the Jewish people, and to David, as prophesied in the Old Testament by Isaiah, Matthew makes a powerful case for Christ’s messianic credentials.
All four evangelists refer to Old Testament prophecies fulfilled by Christ, but Matthew includes nine additional prophecies, particularly meaningful for the Jewish audience. He shows that Jesus’s birth from a virgin (Isaiah 7:14), His temporary escape to Egypt (Hosea 11:1), the beginning of His ministry in Galilee (Isaiah 9:1-2), and even the details surrounding His betrayal for thirty pieces of silver (Zechariah 11:12-13) all align with the Hebrew prophecies.
It’s clear that Matthew’s message was intended for Jewish Christians. The Book of Acts suggests that soon after Christ’s Ascension, the Christian community in Jerusalem experienced intense persecution, scattering the believers throughout Judea and Samaria (Acts 8:1), while the Apostles remained in Jerusalem. Later, they too spread to distant regions, preaching Christ to the Gentiles. It’s reasonable to think that Matthew wrote his Gospel while the Jerusalem community was still thriving.
Is there other evidence that Matthew’s Gospel was the first?
Yes, we have supporting testimony from the early Church. Irenaeus of Lyons stated confidently that Matthew’s Gospel was written before the others. Clement of Alexandria held that the Gospels containing the genealogies of Jesus—Matthew and Luke—were likely the first to be written. Blessed Augustine of Hippo, writing in the early 5th century, summarised the Church’s traditional view: Matthew wrote his Gospel first, Mark and Luke relied on his work, and John later added details not covered by the earlier evangelists.
Is this view supported by scholarly evidence?
Evidence suggests that in the early Church, the Gospel of Matthew was both widely known and highly authoritative. Writers of the 1st-3rd centuries quote it significantly more often than the other Gospels. According to the Biblia Patristica (a collection cataloguing quotations in patristic writings), early Church authors referenced Matthew around 3,550 times, followed by Luke at 3,250, John at approximately 2,000, and Mark at only 1,460.
We see Matthew’s influence in the writings of Paul’s companion, Barnabas, who, near the end of the first century, exhorts Christians to live mindfully, citing, “many are called, but few are chosen” (Matthew 22:14). The martyr Ignatius the Theologian also reflects Matthew’s wording in his epistles. In his Epistle to the Smyrnians, he describes Christ’s baptism “that every righteousness might be fulfilled,” closely mirroring Matthew 3:15.
The Didache, a Christian text dating to the late first or early second century, includes the Lord’s Prayer in the same form as found in Matthew (6:9-13). It also quotes the saying, “Do not give what is holy to the dogs,” a phrase unique to Matthew (7:6).
In light of this, it seems quite reasonable to trust Augustine’s conclusion.
So, when was the Gospel of Matthew written? Are there any early manuscripts?
Irenaeus of Lyon (who lived in the latter half of the second century) wrote that “Matthew published his Gospel among the Jews in their own language while Peter and Paul preached the gospel in Rome.” Since Paul is believed to have reached Rome around 62 AD, this suggests that at least the Hebrew version of Matthew’s Gospel likely appeared around this time.
Nicholas Glubokovsky proposed an even earlier date. He pointed out that when Paul arrived in Jerusalem in 59 AD, he encountered only James and a few elders (Acts 21:18-19), suggesting that most of the other apostles, likely including Matthew, had already gone abroad to preach. By this reasoning, Matthew’s Gospel may well have been completed by then.
One of the oldest manuscripts containing fragments of the Gospel of Matthew is the papyrus known as P45, dated to the first half of the 3rd century. Originally comprising 220 bound sheets, it included all four Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles. Only 30 sheets survive today, with fragments of Acts (13), Mark (6), Luke (7), and a few portions from Matthew and John.
Translated by The Catalogue of Good Deeds
Source: https://foma.ru/zagadki-evangelija-ot-matfeja-ono-tochno-bylo-napisano-pervym.html
This is an excellent survey.
Irenaeus’s testimony that “Matthew published his gospel among the Jews in their own language while Peter and Paul preached the gospel in Rome” seems to be the biggest challenge to those of us who want to place Matthew both first and early. However, if we take “Rome” as referring not to the city, but to the empire, then Irenaeus and the other church fathers can be understood as affirming that Matthew published within a decade of the resurrection—coincident with the events of Acts 10–11—and just shortly before Mark.