I. THE SYNOPTIC PROBLEM (MATTHEW, MARK, & LUKE)
 A. The term "synoptic" comes from the Greek adjective,
 "sunoptikov"" which is made up of two terms, "sun" and
 "oyeivw" meaning "to see" "with" or "together". In
 this discussion the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke
 are looked at beside one another
 B. The Problem concerns the relationship of the three
 Gospels since there are agreements and disagreements
 (similarities and differences) between them
 1. There are many similarities between the gospel
 accounts:
 a. Similarity of arrangement: baptism,
 temptation, public ministry in Galilee,
 Peter's confession as turning point, last
 journey to Jerusalem, trial, crucifixion,
 resurrection
 b. Similarity of style and wording exists
 between many parallel accounts (e.g., the
 healing of the leper (Mt. 8:1ff; Mk. 1:40ff;
 Lk. 5:12ff)
 c. Similarities in two gospels only:
 1) Some accounts in all three Gospels are
 more similar in two gospel accounts than
 with a third account
 2) Matthew and Luke contain a considerable
 amount of material common to both but
 omitted from Mark (especially in the
 teaching of Jesus) [e.g., Matt. 3:7-10;
 Lk. 3:7-9]
 2. There are many differences between the gospel
 accounts:
 a. Many points of detail have differences of
 arrangement and vocabulary between the gospel
 accounts
 1) Little verbal similarity
 2) Different historical settings
 b. Each of the three gospel accounts has certain
 sections peculiar to it--especially in
 Matthew and Luke (e.g., the birth narratives)
 C. Possible Solutions to the Synoptic Problem:
 1. One solution is the two source theory: the
 similarities lie in the theory that Mark was the
 first Gospel which Luke and Matthew used as a
 source, and that there was also a common source
 called "Q" which accounts for non-Marcan
 similarities between Matthew and Luke (documentary
 hypothesis/Mark-Q)
 a. Central to this solution is Marcan priority,
 and its use by Matthew and Luke. If Mark was
 not first, then another solution must be
 sought
 b. "Q" is an abbreviation for the German term
 for "source" (Quelle)
 c. "Q" is most often understood to be the non-
 Marcan material which is common in Matthew
 and Luke
 d. Others understand "Q" to be a stream of
 tradition including both written and oral
 accounts to which Matthew and Luke had access
 (Bock)
 e. There is considerable disagreement concerning
 the actual contents of "Q" (see article by
 Stewart Petrie, "'Q' Is Only What You Make
 It"1
 2. Another solution is the "four source hypothesis"
 by Streeter. This supplies two more sources to
 the two source theory: "M" and "L"
 a. Again Marcan priority is central to this
 solution, because Mark is use by Matthew and
 Luke. If Mark was not first, then another
 solution must be sought
 b. is the material used by Matthew and Luke, but
 not by Mark
 c. In addition to Mark-Q, "M" is Matthew's
 special sayings material, and "L" is Luke's
 special sayings material
 d. This means that Matthew used Mark, Q, and M
 as his main sources
 e. This means that Luke used Mark, Q, and L as
 his main sources
 f. Each source is also considered to originate
 from a specific locality (to guarantee their
 authority)
 1) Mark was the Roman Gospel
 2) Q was probably based on Antioch
 3) M represented Jerusalem sayings-document
 4) L represented Caesarean tradition
 3. Another solution allows for sources, but also
 emphasizes Peter's preaching, the Gospel's
 audience and the writer's theology as significant
 factors in the relationship of the synoptics
 a. The similarities in all of the Gospels may be
 due to Peter's preaching in the first century
 which became definitive for the order of
 events (Westcott, Guthrie). There also was a
 common tradition of materials/sources (oral
 and written) to which synoptic writers had
 access. This solution does not require
 Marcan priority
 b. Dissimilarities may be due to sources, but
 this is not a fully sufficient explanation.
 Many dissimilarities may better be explained
 in view of the author's audience and thus by
 the author's theological emphasis2
II. AUTHOR:Although the discussion is complex and compound,
 Matthew remains as the best candidate for the author of the
 gospel by his name
 A. External evidence:
 1. Matthew was either cited or named as authentic
 during the first four centuries by the following:3
 a. Pseudo-Barnabas (c. 70-130)
 b. Clement of Rome (c. 95-97)
 c. Polycarp (c. 110-150)
 d. Hermas (c. 115-140)
 e. Didache (c. 120-150)
 f. Irenaeus (c. 130-202)
 g. Justin Martyr (c. 185-255)
 h. Clement of Alexandria (c. 150-215)
 i. Tertullian (c. 150-220)
 j. Origen (c. 185-254)
 k. Cyril of Jerusalem (c. 315-386)
 l. Eusebius (c. 325-340)
 m. Jerome (c. 340-420)
 n. Augustine (c. 400)
 2. The Title: In the book's earliest description it
 was ascribed to Matthew (c. A.D. 125)4
 a. Papias' testimony in Eusebius, HE (The
 Ecclesiastical History), iii.39.16 (first
 half of the second century). He speaks of a
 logia (words, oracles) which Matthew
 collected in the Hebrew language
 1) Because early Greek fathers (Ignatius,
 the Didache, and the Shepherd of Hermas
 -- see above) refer to a Greek Matthew,
 it is unlikely that the Hebrew logia
 were later translated into Greek
 2) Many consider it unlikely that the Greek
 Matthew was translated from a Hebrew
 text (Guthrie, p. 46)
 3) It is possible (but not probable) that
 "dialektos" is a literary description of
 form rather than the Hebrew language (J.
 Kzinger)
 4) It is possible that Matthew not only
 authored a Greek gospel, but a Hebrew
 gospel. The Hebrew was uninspired and
 lost.5 The Greek account is the Gospel
 According to Matthew
 b. Iranaeus Adv. Haer. (Against Heresies)
 iii.I.I cited by Eusebius, HE, v. 8.2 (A.D.
 155)
 c. Pantaenus cited by Eusebius, HE, v. 10
 d. Origen, Apud Eusebius, HE, vi. 25
 B. Internal Evidence:
 1. The writer of Matthew was probably a Palestinian
 Jew like the apostle Matthew (Toussaint, p. 331):
 a. He is well acquainted with the geography of
 Palestine (Matthew 2:1,23; 3:1,5,13;
 4:12,13,23-25; 8:5,23,28; 14:34; 15:32,39;
 16:13; 17:1; 19:1; 20:29; 21:1,17; 26:6)
 b. He is familiar with Jewish history, customs,
 ideas, and classes of people (Matthew 1:18-
 19; 2:1,4,22; 14:1; 26:3,57,59; 27:2,11,13)
 c. He is familiar with the Old Testament
 Scriptures (Matthew 1:2-16,22-23; 2:6,15,17-
 18,23; 4:14-16; 8:17; 12:17-21; 13:35; 21:4-
 5; 27:9)
 d. He terminology is Jewish (Matthew 2:20,21;
 4:5; 5:35,47; 6:7,32; 10:6; 15:24; 17:24-27;
 18:17; 27:53)
 e. His use of the term tote ("then") reflects
 Aramaic thinking
 2. The Apostle called Matthew in the gospels was a
 publican (a Jew hired by Rome to impose Roman
 taxes upon his own people) Matthew 10:3
 3. The terminology in Matthew's gospel reflects that
 of a publican with respect to money:
 a. He speaks of money a great deal
 b. He uses three terms for money which occur
 nowhere else (the two-drachma tax [17:24] a
 four-drachma coin [17:27], and "talents"
 [18:24])
 c. He alone refers to Silver, Gold, and Brass
 d. His version of the Gospel attributes an
 enormous amount of money in the parable of
 the Talent (Matt. 25:15)
 e. He also refers to "debt" (opheile) account-
 taking or reckoning (sunario, with logos),
 and money-changers (trapezites) in unique
 ways
 4. The call of Matthew in both Mark and Luke is under
 the name of Levi (Mk. 2:14; Lk.5:27ff), but in
 Matthew it is by the name "Matthew" (Matt. 9:9).
 This could be a conscious, personal touch by
 Matthew to emphasize his identity change due to
 following Jesus from his call6
 5. The writer refers to Capernaum (Matthew's home
 town) with a special emphasis:
 a. It is mentioned in a matter of fact manner in
 8:5; 17:24
 b. It is given an extended description and
 identified with the fulfillment of prophecy
 in Matthew 4:13ff
 c. It is called the "Lord's own city" in Matthew
 9:1
 d. It is spoken against in the Lord's
 denunciation of the cities which where he had
 ministered with no positive response 11:23
 6. It is possible that Matthew did not attach his
 name to the Gospel because he was a humble man
 a. He continually calls himself a tax collector
 unlike Mark and Luke (Matthew 9:9; 10:3; cf.
 Mk. 3:18; Lk. 6:15; Acts 1:13)
 b. He associates the publicans with sinners and
 tax collectors 9:11; 18:17; 21:31-32
 c. He does not record the stories which might
 exalt himself as Luke does (that of the
 Pharisee and the publican [Luke 18:9-14], or
 that of Zacchaeus [Luke 19:1-10])
III. MATTHIAN PRIORITY:In view of the historical identification
 of Matthew, a possible plurality of sources used by all of
 the synoptic writers, and the Jewish need for Matthew, it is
 possible that Matthew preceded the gospel of Mark
 A. Mark was considered to be an abstract of Matthew from
 Augustine until the early part of the nineteenth
 century7
 B. Even though the parallels of "Mark" in Matthew and Luke
 are striking, it is entirely possible that they are
 using a similar source which Mark used (Ur-Mark/pre-
 Marcan)
 C. Matthew was an Apostle, so one wonders why in his
 composition of a gospel account he would depend so
 heavily upon another's eyewitness account (e.g., the
 banquet held in his own house (Matthew 9:9-13; Mark
 2:13-17)8
 D. Since the first church was Jewish and Matthew's gospel
 is characteristically Jewish, it is reasonable to
 consider Matthew as the first gospel designed to
 address the early concerns of the Jews
IV. DATE:Although the problem is complex, it is plausible that
 Matthew was written sometime between A.D. 50-70.
 A. The usual discussion of date revolves around the
 synoptic problem, and especially Marcan priority (see
 above)
 B. Another central question in the dating of the Gospel is
 whether or not Jesus had predictive power
 C. When it is assumed that Jesus did not have predictive
 power, and that Matthew depends upon Mark, then it is
 argued that Mark could only have predicted the fall of
 Jerusalem (Mk. 13:14) a few years before A.D. 70,
 therefore, Matthew must follow later (around A.D. 80-
 100) [see Guthrie, pp. 45-46]
 D. However, Marcan priority is not without problems, and
 it is not at all unreasonable to assume that Jesus had
 predictive ability
 E. As Matthew presents the state of Jerusalem in his
 gospel, the city of Jerusalem is still standing:
 1. He calls it the "holy city" as though it was still
 in existence (4:5; 27:53)
 2. He does not mention the destruction of Jerusalem
 as having been accomplished (24:15ff; 27:8;
 28:15). This would have been especially
 significant to support Matthews thesis that the
 Lord had rejected Israel
 F. If Matthew wrote his Jewish gospel to address early
 concerns of the Jews, it might well have been written
 early (c. A.D. 50)
V. THE PURPOSES OF MATTHEW ARE MANY:
 A. He desires to show that the major events in the life of
 Jesus took place in fulfillment of prophecy--He is
 Messiah
 B. He desire to show the comprehensiveness of the message
 of salvation to include the Gentiles
 C. He desires to provide an apologetic for the many
 questions which would have been raised against Jesus--
 illegitimacy of birth, residence of Jesus in Nazareth
 rather then Bethlehem, stealing of the body of Jesus
 D. He desires to teach the commandments of Jesus by
 recording five major discourses throughout the book
 E. He desired to demonstrate the reason the message moved
 from the Jews to the Gentiles (their apathy and
 rejection of the King
 F. He desired to prove to the Jews that the kingdom
 program of God had not failed, and was still in effect
___________________________
 1 Novum Testamentum III, pp. 28-33.
 2 Guthrie,NTI, p. 128.
 3 Geisler, A General Introduction, p. 193.
 4 Guthrie, NTI, p. 33.
 5 Guthrie, NTI, p. 38; Toussaint, Behold the King, pp. 32-
33.
 6 Guthrie, NTI, p. 44.
 7 Guthrie, NTI, p. 133.
 8 See Toussaint, Behold the King, p. 330.