Matthew's gospel first written in Hebrew?
Posted: Sun Mar 29, 2020 1:46 pm
I have been inquiring about the probability of Matthew's gospel first written in Hebrew, as thought by some according to Papias:
"Matthew put together the logia in the Hebrew language, and each one interpreted them as best he could."
I consulted these two websites (among others):
1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Matthew. Here is one extract:
"Most scholars believe the gospel was composed between AD 80 and 90, with a range of possibility between AD 70 to 110; a pre-70 date remains a minority view. The work does not identify its author, and the early tradition attributing it to the apostle Matthew is rejected by modern scholars. He was probably a male Jew, standing on the margin between traditional and non-traditional Jewish values, and familiar with technical legal aspects of scripture being debated in his time.Writing in a polished Semitic "synagogue Greek", he drew on the Gospel of Mark as a source, plus the hypothetical collection of sayings known as the Q source ..."
Of course it is my position as now, but I am opened to opposite views.
2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebrew_Gospel_hypothesis
I acknowledge Matthew and Q and Mark have Aramaisms into them, but is it enough to use that for an Hebrew/Aramaic origin of these texts (in particular for Matthew)?
And do some of the variants in the early copies of (Greek) Matthew indicate a translation from Hebrew/Aramaic, according to Papias, "... and each one interpreted them as best he could ..."?
Cordially, Bernard
"Matthew put together the logia in the Hebrew language, and each one interpreted them as best he could."
I consulted these two websites (among others):
1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Matthew. Here is one extract:
"Most scholars believe the gospel was composed between AD 80 and 90, with a range of possibility between AD 70 to 110; a pre-70 date remains a minority view. The work does not identify its author, and the early tradition attributing it to the apostle Matthew is rejected by modern scholars. He was probably a male Jew, standing on the margin between traditional and non-traditional Jewish values, and familiar with technical legal aspects of scripture being debated in his time.Writing in a polished Semitic "synagogue Greek", he drew on the Gospel of Mark as a source, plus the hypothetical collection of sayings known as the Q source ..."
Of course it is my position as now, but I am opened to opposite views.
2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebrew_Gospel_hypothesis
I acknowledge Matthew and Q and Mark have Aramaisms into them, but is it enough to use that for an Hebrew/Aramaic origin of these texts (in particular for Matthew)?
And do some of the variants in the early copies of (Greek) Matthew indicate a translation from Hebrew/Aramaic, according to Papias, "... and each one interpreted them as best he could ..."?
Cordially, Bernard