Systematic Theology (Volume 1 of 3)Strong, Augustus Hopkins
Religion
Systematic Theology (Volume 1 of 3)
Strong, Augustus Hopkins
Baptists -- Doctrines; Theology, Doctrinal
(_c_) Papias (80-164), whom Irenæus calls a “hearer of John,” testifies
that Matthew “wrote in the Hebrew dialect the sacred oracles (τὰ λόγια),”
and that “Mark, the interpreter of Peter, wrote after Peter, (ὕστερον
Πέτρῳ) [or under Peter’s direction], an unsystematic account (οὐ τάξει)”
of the same events and discourses.
To this testimony it is objected: (1) That Papias could not have
had our gospel of Matthew, for the reason that this is Greek. We
reply, either with Bleek, that Papias erroneously supposed a
Hebrew translation of Matthew, which he possessed, to be the
original; or with Weiss, that the original Matthew was in Hebrew,
while our present Matthew is an enlarged version of the same.
Palestine, like modern Wales, was bilingual; Matthew, like James,
might write both Hebrew and Greek. While B. W. Bacon gives to the
writing of Papias a date so late as 145-160 A. D., Lightfoot gives
that of 130 A. D. At this latter date Papias could easily remember
stories told him so far back as 80 A. D., by men who were youths
at the time when our Lord lived, died, rose and ascended. The work
of Papias had for its title Λογίων κυριακῶν ἐξήγησις—“Exposition
of Oracles relating to the Lord” = Commentaries on the Gospels.
Two of these gospels were Matthew and Mark. The view of Weiss
mentioned above has been criticized upon the ground that the
quotations from the O. T. in Jesus’ discourses in Matthew are all
taken from the Septuagint and not from the Hebrew. Westcott
answers this criticism by suggesting that, in translating his
Hebrew gospel into Greek, Matthew substituted for his own oral
version of Christ’s discourses the version of these already
existing in the oral common gospel. There was a common oral basis
of true teaching, the “deposit”—τὴν παραθήκην—committed to Timothy
(_1 Tim. 6:20_; _2 Tim. 1:12, 14_), the same story told many times
and getting to be told in the same way. The narratives of Matthew,
Mark and Luke are independent versions of this apostolic
testimony. First came belief; secondly, oral teaching; thirdly,
written gospels. That the original gospel was in Aramaic seems
probable from the fact that the Oriental name for “tares,”
_zawān_, (_Mat. 13:25_) has been transliterated into Greek,
ζιζάνια. Morison, Com. on Mat., thinks that Matthew originally
wrote in Hebrew a collection of Sayings of Jesus Christ, which the
Nazarenes and Ebionites added to, partly from tradition, and
partly from translating his full gospel, till the result was the
so-called Gospel of the Hebrews; but that Matthew wrote his own
gospel in Greek after he had written the Sayings in Hebrew.
Professor W. A. Stevens thinks that Papias probably alluded to the
original autograph which Matthew wrote in Aramaic, but which he
afterwards enlarged and translated into Greek. See Hemphill,
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account