| Revision as of 22:14, 4 August 2005 editRussBot (talk | contribs)Bots1,407,647 editsm Robot-assisted disambiguation: Caesarea← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:10, 4 August 2005 edit undoDoc glasgow (talk | contribs)26,084 editsm redirecting Being bold - enough is enoughNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ⚫ | #REDIRECT] | ||
| {{totallydisputed}} | |||
| ==Jerome's "Authentic" Gospel of Matthew== | |||
| One account of a life and teachings ascribed to Jesus was written by a person whom the church fathers identified as the ] Matthew. The earliest known ] is written in Greek, and no copy survives indicating an earlier version. ], a ], says that there was an early version of Matthew called the ''Gospel of the Hebrews'' which Jerome says most people refer to as the '''Authentic Gospel of Matthew''' (]'s ''Commentary on Matthew'' ch. 2). Jerome states it was written in ], and he believed it to be apostolic and authoritative, writing about it extensively, thus preserving much of the text. | |||
| However, an overwhelming majority of modern scholars think that Jerome was simply mistaken, conflating three quite distinct but closely related works - the ], ], and ]. Jerome states that these three are the same, even though he saw them at different times, as they were held at the library at ], the '']'' community in ], and the '']'' community, respectively, relying only on his memory and prior quotes to make the claim. Other Church Fathers quote from something called the 'Gospel of the Hebrews' (in Greek) but do not identify it with the gospel of Matthew, agreeing with the vast majority of modern academia. | |||
| ==Matthew and Aramaic== | |||
| Eusebius (EH3.39.14-16), writing much later, cites an earlier writer, Papius, who claims that Matthew originally wrote 'in the Hebrew style/dialect'. Eusebius then goes on to say that Papius was 'a man of exceedingly small intelligence' (Hist. Eccl. 3.39.13). Even if Papius was correct, it could merely mean that Papius is claiming that Matthew wrote in ] or (more plausibly) ], or it could simply be a reference to the Jewish style of Matthew. Other scholars agree with Eusebius' assessment of Papius. ] was also quoted by ], making the same claim as ], that the Apostle Matthew wrote his gospel in a Hebrew script, Epiphanius adding that none of the other parts of the New Testament originated in Hebrew. | |||
| ==Modern theory of the origin of the canonical Gospel of Matthew== | |||
| According to the modern theory to solve the ], known as the ], the canonical Gospel of Matthew was based on the ], the ], together with elements in neither of those, collectively known as the ]. Although it is possible that the M Source is connected to the Gospel of the Hebrews, Gospel of the Ebionites, and Gospel of the Nazarenes, which Jerome conflates into one ''Authentic Gospel of Matthew'', the vast majority of scholars consider this highly unlikely, as the quotes from these texts indicate that they are heavily reliant on the gospel of Mark (see ]) and the Q document. | |||
| ==References== | |||
| *Burnett Hillman Streeter, ''The Four Gospels : A Study of Origins'' | |||
| *P. Parker, ''The Gospel Before Mark'' | |||
| *R. Brown, ''The Birth of the Messiah'' | |||
| ==External links== | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| * {{biblegateway||Matthew}} | |||
| * (KJV) | |||
| * : texts and introductions | |||
| * | |||
| ] | |||
Revision as of 23:10, 4 August 2005
Redirect to: