MATTHEW, ST ([Greek: Maththaios] or [Greek: Matthaios], probably a
shortened form of the Hebrew equivalent to Theodorus), one of the twelve
apostles, and the traditional author of the First Gospel, where he is
described as having been a tax-gatherer or customs-officer ([Greek:
telônês], x. 3), in the service of the tetrarch Herod. The circumstances
of his call to become a follower of Jesus, received as he sat in the
"customs house" in one of the towns by the Sea of Galilee--apparently
Capernaum (Mark ii. 1, 13), are briefly related in ix. 9. We should
gather from the parallel narrative in Mark ii. 14, Luke v. 27, that he
was at the time known as "Levi the son of Alphaeus" (compare Simon
Cephas, Joseph Barnabas): if so, "James the son of Alphaeus" may have
been his brother. Possibly "Matthew" (Yahweh's gift) was his Christian
surname, since two native names, neither being a patronymic, is contrary
to Jewish usage. It must be noted, however, that Matthew and Levi were
sometimes distinguished in early times, as by Heracleon (c. 170 A.D.),
and more dubiously by Origen (c. _Celsum_, i. 62), also apparently in
the Syriac _Didascalia_ (sec. iii.), V. xiv. 14. It has generally been
supposed, on the strength of Luke's account (v. 29), that Matthew gave a
feast in Jesus' honour (like Zacchaeus, Luke xix. 6 seq.). But Mark (ii.
15), followed by Matthew (ix. 10), may mean that the meal in question
was one in Jesus' own home at Capernaum (cf. v. 1). In the lists of the
Apostles given in the Synoptic Gospels and in Acts, Matthew ranks third
or fourth in the second group of four--a fair index of his relative
importance in the apostolic age. The only other facts related of Matthew
on good authority concern him as Evangelist. Eusebius (_H.E._ iii. 24)
says that he, like John, wrote only at the spur of necessity. "For
Matthew, after preaching to Hebrews, when about to go also to others,
committed to writing in his native tongue the Gospel that bears his
name; and so by his writing supplied, for those whom he was leaving, the
loss of his presence." The value of this tradition, which may be based
on Papias, who certainly reported that "Matthew compiled the Oracles (of
the Lord) in Hebrew," can be estimated only in connexion with the study
of the Gospel itself (see below). No historical use can be made of the
artificial story, in _Sanhedrin_ 43a, that Matthew was condemned to
death by a Jewish court (see Laihle, _Christ in the Talmud_, 71 seq.).
According to the Gnostic Heracleon, quoted by Clement of Alexandria
(_Strom._ iv. 9), Matthew died a natural death. The tradition as to his
ascetic diet (in Clem. Alex. _Paedag._ ii. 16) maybe due to confusion
with Matthias (cf. _Mart. Matthaei_, i.). The earliest legend as to his
later labours, one of Syrian origin, places them in the Parthian
kingdom, where it represents him as dying a natural death at Hierapolis
(= Mabog on the Euphrates). This agrees with his legend as known to
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account