05 — The Hebrew-Matthew Question
The source-critical centerpiece of the collection. The earliest notice we have on the origin of the First Gospel — Papias of Hierapolis, as quoted by Eusebius (HE 3.39.16): “Matthew compiled the logia in the Hebrew dialect, and each interpreted them as he was able” — is also one of the most contested sentences in early-Christian scholarship. These files set out the testimony and the long debate over what it means: a lost Hebrew Gospel, a sayings-collection, a notebook of Old Testament testimonia, or the canonical Greek Matthew itself.
Tradition: Pan-Orthodox (Apostle and Evangelist)
The whole later tradition that Matthew “wrote in Hebrew” rests, in the first instance, on a single sentence of Papias preserved at second hand, every word of which has been disputed: the verb (synetaxato — “compiled,” “composed,” “arranged”?), the object (ta logia — “the sayings,” “the oracles,” a whole Gospel, or testimonia?), the phrase “in the Hebrew dialect” (Hebrew? Aramaic? a Semitic style?), and the closing clause about each “interpreting” or “translating” as he could. This section presents the testimony in its context — Papias, then Irenaeus (AH 3.1.1), Origen, Eusebius, Epiphanius, and Jerome, who claimed to have seen a Hebrew Gospel among the Nazoraeans — and lays out the major positions and their proponents without resolving by assertion what the sources leave open. It is the part of the guide where the discipline of [Disputed: ...] notation does the most work.
Files in This Section
| File | Description |
|---|---|
| Papias and the Logia | The Papias notice in Eusebius (HE 3.39.16): its text and translation; the ambiguity of logia, Hebraïdi dialektō, and “interpreted”; Papias’s date and reliability; and the parallel notice on Mark; the foundation on which all later “Hebrew Matthew” testimony stands. |
| The Semitic Origin Question | The long debate: a lost Hebrew/Aramaic Gospel; a sayings-source; a testimonia collection; or canonical Greek Matthew. The later witnesses (Irenaeus, Origen, Eusebius, Epiphanius, Jerome, the Nazoraean and “Hebrew” gospels); Shem-Tob; and the dominant modern judgment that canonical Matthew was composed in Greek. |
See Also
- The Gospel of Matthew — the Gospel whose origin is in question
- The Synoptic Problem — the related literary question
- Authorship and Dating — how the Papias notice bears on authorship
- The Church Fathers — Papias, Irenaeus, Origen, and Jerome as witnesses
References
- Eusebius of Caesarea. The Ecclesiastical History 3.39.15–16 (Papias on Mark and Matthew). Trans. McGiffert. NPNF II/1.
- Irenaeus of Lyons. Against Heresies 3.1.1. ANF 1.
- Jerome. De viris illustribus 3; Commentary on Matthew, prologue. Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series II, Vol. 3.
- Kürzinger, Josef. Papias von Hierapolis und die Evangelien des Neuen Testaments. Regensburg: Pustet, 1983.
- Davies, W. D., and Dale C. Allison. Matthew (ICC), Vol. 1, Introduction. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1988.