ST. MATTHEW, APOSTLE and EVANGELIST

ST. MATTHEW, APOSTLE and EVANGELIST

The Inspiration of St. Matthew, Caravaggio
Image courtesy of ChristusRex

First Century

Few people love the tax-collector. Even in these days when the relation between taxer and taxed is, no doubt, scrupulously correct, his name strikes cold. Much more was this so in the Palestine of the first century, when it was in his interests to bully and harry and falsify. But even the mild and honest tax-collector was not acceptable to official Judaism: he did business with the gentile and handled his money; he was legally impure, socially outcast. A Jewish Rabbi would be bold indeed to invite him to join his inner circle of disciples: it would be a gesture of defiance to the established prejudice. And so the formula 'publicans and sinners' slipped even into the phrase-book of the evangelists and, quaintly enough, into the Gospel of Matthew the publican. This term 'publican,' by the way, does not accurately describe Matthew's profession but flatters it. The Roman publicanus was a wealthy farmer of State taxes, not a humble collector (portitor). On the other hand, we should not picture Matthew going from door to door. He had his office in Capharnaum, Peter's home town and the headquarters of our Lord's Galilean ministry. The place naturally had its custom house, since it lay on the road that leads from Damascus just where, at the northwest corner of Lake Galilee, that road passed from the territory of Herod Philip to the domains of his brother, Herod Antipas. Not customs only but road-tolls would be calculated and exacted here, according to a vague tariff that would leave a certain lucrative freedom to the customs officer himself. The Pharisees might despise it, but the trade was a profitable one and much sought after: whether it was to be pursued honestly or dishonestly would depend on the character of the officer.

'And as Jesus passed further on, he saw Levi, the son of Alphaeus, sitting at work in the customs-house and said to him, "Follow me"; and he rose up and followed him' (Mark 2:14). That this was a call to the apostolate there is no doubt-its terms too closely match those of the call of Simon and Andrew to be otherwise (cf. Mark 1:16ff.). Yet 'Levi' does not appear in any list of the Twelve (Mark 3:16ff.; Matthew 10:3ff.; Luke 6:14ff.; Acts 1 :13). Now the vocation of the tax-collector is reported in the first Gospel too, but there he is called 'Matthew' (Matthew 9:9ff.), thus identifying him with the Matthew who appears in all the apostolic lists. The widely accepted and most natural explanation is that Matthew and Levi are one person with two Semitic names (not unprecedented; cf. e.g. the Machabee brothers in 1 Machabee 2:2-5). It may be that our Lord himself gave him the name Matthew (Mattai, 'gift of God,' in Aramaic) as he gave Kepha to Simon.

This Matthew, then, got up from his registers and henceforth--at our Lord's suggestion--took a lesson from the lilies and the birds who never did a day's calculation in their lives (Matthew 6:25ff.). His master was no longer Antipas, the shrewd 'fox' (Luke 13:32), but one who, unlike the foxes, had not even a home (Matthew 8:20). The change destroyed all Matthew's worldly prospects: Simon and Andrew might return to their fish, waiting for them in the lake, but Matthew had thrown over a coveted business and could never recover it. He left it gladly, it seems, and completely--at least it was not he but Judas who kept the accounts for the apostolic group (John 13: 29).

Matthew's new style of life (he would have called it 'improvident' once) must have wrenched his careful temperament sorely, but this temperament was to have its almost humorous revenge as we shall shortly discover. After the incident of his call Matthew disappears from the New Testament except as a name in the apostolic lists. What became of him? We have a sentence from a book by Bishop Papias of Hierapolis who was born about 70 A.D., and who published his Explanation of the Oracles of the Lord about 125. 'Matthew wrote an ordered account of the oracles (of our Lord )and each interpreted these oracles according to his ability' (Eusebius, Historia Ecclesiastica, iii.39). That Matthew wrote in Aramaic for converted Jews appears from other authorities of the second and third centuries. Time had had its revenge. When the need for a written gospel record began to be felt, upon which of the Apostles would the choice fall? Upon one who was used to the pen, no doubt. Poor Matthew was back where he started, but this time with an eager will and a high purpose. In Palestine, some time between the years 40 and 50, this ex-civil servant produced not the lively and artless Gospel of a St Mark but the orderly, almost ledger-like, treatise which we know as 'The Gospel according to St Matthew.' For if we are to judge from our surviving Greek edition of it, whose substantial identity with its Aramaic original there is no reason to doubt, Matthew's mathematical temperament has reasserted itself with a certain arithmetical neatness. Hence the seven parables of the Kingdom, the seven woes for the Pharisees, seven invocations of the Lord's Prayer, the probable number of seven Beatitudes. So, too, with the number five: five disputes with the Pharisees, the five loaves, five talents and above all the five books into which the body of his Gospel is clearly divided. And then, as we might expect, a sign of special knowledge on the financial side. Thus the 'denarius' of Mark and Luke becomes 'the coin of the tribute'--a customs officer has his own way of looking at these things. So also, though Mark and Luke omit it, we find the incident of the Temple tax in the first Gospel complete with its little technicalities of indirect tax and poll tax, its 'didrachmas' and its 'staler.'

And so Matthew's old trade entered a new service: the accountant became an evangelist; the ledger turned into a Gospel. It is not surprising that he alone records his Master's words: 'Every scholar whose learning is of the kingdom of heaven . . . knows how to bring both new and old things out of his treasure-house' (13:52). For there is no poor tool of ours that God's service will not perfect and dignify.

The first Gospel, the church's favorite, is Matthew's memorial: the rest of his apostolic work is lost in the mists of contradiction. That he preached the gospel to the Jews in Palestine for perhaps fifteen years after the crucifixion is fairly sure (Eusebius, Historia Ecclesiastica, iii.24.265), but confusion of his name with that of Matthias (Acts 1:26) has left us with a varying tradition: Ethiopia, Parthia, Macedonia are all mentioned and even an apostolate among the cannibals. It is commonly but not unanimously affirmed he died a martyr's death; but we know for certain that he lived a martyr's life-and that is enough. And for us he will always be the man who knew what money was and what it was not.

September 21st

Saint Matthew the Apostle

Saint Matthew the Apostle
Feast Day
September 21st

Collect:
God of mercy,
you chose a tax collector, Saint Matthew,
to share the dignity of the apostles.
By his example and prayers
help us to follow Christ
and remain faithful in your service.
We ask this through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son,
who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit,
one God, for ever and ever. Amen.

First Reading: Ephesians 4:1-7,11-13
I therefore, a prisoner for the Lord, beg you to lead a life worthy of the calling to which you have been called, with all lowliness and meekness, with patience, forbearing one another in love, eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of us all, who is above all and through all and in all. But grace was given to each of us according to the measure of Christ's gift.

And his gifts were that some should be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ.

Gospel Reading: Matthew 9:9-13
As Jesus passed on from there, he saw a man called Matthew sitting at the tax office; and he said to him, "Follow me." And he rose and followed him.

And as he sat at table in the house, behold, many tax collectors and sinners came and sat down with Jesus and his disciples. And when the Pharisees saw this, they said to his disciples, "Why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?" But when he heard it, he said, "Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. Go and learn what this means, 'I desire mercy, and not sacrifice.' For I came not to call the righteous, but sinners."

FYI- The book of Matthew is filled with errors and basically proves the false testimony of the NT.

MATTHEW’S ERRORS, DISTORTIONS & MISQUOTATIONS

by Hugh Fogelman

Over twenty times in the gospel of Matthew, goes out of his way to tell of prophecy fulfillment. By doing so, the author of Matthew had to misquote, misinterpret verses in his favor, take verses out of context, or simply make them up to reach his goal. Comparing what the author of Matthew wrote to the Old Testament―the Hebrew Bible; we find the following:

CONTRADICTS OLD TESTAMENT

Matthew 1:2―15 – His list of generations does not agree with l Chronicles Ch. 1―3 Matt. 1:16 – Trying so hard to make Jesus appear to come from David's lineage that he ignored Jewish law. The Hebrew bible states that a Hebrew's genealogy and tribal membership is transmitted exclusively through one’s PHYSICAL father (Numbers 1:18 Jeremiah 33:17) Matt.5:43 – had Jesus say, “thou shalt love thy neighbor and hate thine enemy.” Leviticus 19:18 does not mention any enemy, only “…love thy neighbour as thyself.” Matt. 15:11 – “Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.” Contradicted by all the dietary laws in the Hebrew bible.

MISQUOTING, TAKING OUT OF CONTEXT AND ALTERING ISAIAH

Matt. 1:23 – Mistakenly uses the Septuagint word for virgin instead of Hebrew “Alma” Matt. 1:23 – Misquotes Isaiah 7:14, “they” will call Jesus Immanuel, whereas Isaiah wrote “his mother” would call him Immanuel – not “they.” Matt. 3:3 – Misinterprets and alters Isaiah 40:3 – “Prepare the way of the Lord.” Not so. Matt. 4:15 – Added “Galilee of the Gentiles” to Isaiah 9:1―2. Not in the Hebrew Tanakh. Matt. 8:17 – Took Isaiah 53:4 out of context – Isaiah was relating to a leper (nagua). Matt. 12:17―21 – Taking Isaiah 42:1―4 out of context – the Servant was Israel four times. And then changes verse 21 to read: "and in his name shall the gentiles trust" (Isaiah 42.1―4).

Matt. 13.14―15 – Took out of context Isaiah 6:9―10 of people being “blind” MISQUOTING AND DISTORTING JEWISH PROPHETS

Matt. 2:5―6 – Misinterprets Micah 5:2 ― the Messiah coming from Bethlehem. It was David a Bethlemite, born in Bethlehem and from his seed would come the messiah. Matt. 2:15 –Taking Hosea 11:1 out of context, Jesus being called out of Egypt Matt. 2:17―18 – Distorts meaning of Jeremiah 31:1―17 of Rachel weeping. Matt. 11.10 – By changing the pronoun in Malachi 3.1 “before ME” or “before YOU”? Matt. 13:35 – The Christ will speak in parables – distorting Psalm 78:2 Matt. 21:1―7 – Jesus riding on two donkeys at the same time – good trick ― (Zechariah 9:9) Matt. 22:43―44 – Capitalizes the second lord – altering the meaning of Psalm 110:1 Matt. 23:35 Mistakenly gave Zechariah’s father the wrong son. Zechariah was the son of Jehoiada, not Barachiah. II Chronicles 24:20――21 Matt. 27:9 – Quoted the wrong prophet ― was not Jeremiah but Zechariah Matt. 27:9 – Book of Zechariah was never about any “potter’s field”

CONTRADICTS OTHER GOSPELS

Matt 2.12 – Contradicts Luke about going to Egypt after Jesus’ birth. Matt 9:9 – Becoming one of the 12 conflicts with Luke and John. Matt 27:57-66 ― Disagrees with Mark, Luke and John at the “burial scene”

MAKING UP STORIES

Matt Chapter 2 not verified by any other writer and not logical Matt 2:16 – Got mixed up about Pharaoh & Herod’s Killing of the innocent babies (read the infanticide in Exodus 1:15―22 regarding Pharaoh being told of the Messiah) Matt 2:23 – Jesus dwelt in a city called Nazareth that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, he shall be called a Nazarene”. No prophet ever said this. Matt 23:37 ― [thou] that killest the prophets. Which prophets did the Jewish people kill? Matt 27:51 ― And behold the veil of the temple was rent in twain – event never happened Matt 27:52 ― The graves were opened and the dead went to Jerusalem – never happened Matthew 9:9 ―The author wrote in the third person. This was unusual as no other author wrote that way. Makes one wonder if Matthew himself wrote this book.

Christians should clearly see that the author of Matthew was not inspired by the Christian god, would the Holy Spirit, as Christians claim, make such gross mistakes ― that is, if the Spirit were guiding the writing of such a document? Why would the Holy Spirit use such an ignorant man to write a so-called “inspired” document ― a man who does not even know the only bible of the time ― the Hebrew bible.

Two things are known:

(1) Matthew, IF he was Jewish, knew very little Hebrew and did not understand the Hebrew Bible, and

(2) He knew very little about Jewish law, since he relied so much on the Greek Septuagint.

The author of Matthew was using the Septuagint 'LXX'―the Greek version of the Hebrew bible compiled in the 2nd century BCE for the Greek―speaking Jews of the Diaspora.

The Jewish Scribes and rabbis only translated the first five books of Moses in the LXX Septuagint. There is no record who wrote the rest of the Hebrew bible, presumably they were not Jews. That means that the Greeks translated Isaiah and the prophets and are responsible for the changing of the word “young woman” in the Hebrew to “virgin” in the Greek ― a blatant mistranslation.

Mathew wrote; “…from the blood of righteous Abel unto Zacharias, son of Barachias, whom you slew between the temple and the altar” (23:35). According to Tanakh, it was Zechariah (Zacharias) son of Jehoiada who was killed by the Temple (ll Chronicles 24:20―21). There is no evidence in the Hebrew bible or in any other writings that Zechariah the Prophet was murdered, let alone killed in the Temple. The First Temple had already been destroyed in Zechariah's time.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.