The Book of Matthew

Overview

The Book of Matthew in the UPDV is a reconstructed text. It draws primarily on existing material from Matthew, supplemented and corrected where necessary with parallel text from Mark and Luke. The chapters and verses have been renumbered.

This reconstruction was undertaken because Matthew appears to have undergone significant modification since the original was composed — modifications that have largely gone unnoticed because they seem to have occurred before the time of any currently surviving Greek manuscripts.

The Hebrew Original

By most accounts, Matthew was originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic. Although no copies from a direct line to the Hebrew version survive, several indirect witnesses preserve traces of it. Some of the Church fathers reference a gospel written in Hebrew, at times noting where it differs from the Greek. They also mention different Hebrew versions, different communities using them, and various concerns about these texts and groups. This provides important information about the shape of the original.

Witnesses to a Substantially Different Text

Multiple lines of evidence converge to show that the Greek Matthew we have today differs substantially from what the original author wrote.

The missing opening chapters. Epiphanius knew of Hebrew versions that did not contain the first two chapters. He also indicates that some versions may have retained at least the genealogy section, suggesting the birth narrative was a later addition to an existing text.¹

The Jewish Christian tradition. In 1966, Shlomo Pines described the contents of a text reflecting the views and traditions of a Jewish Christian community. The text, which may have been written down in the fifth century or later, appears to represent an independent and otherwise unknown tradition concerning events in the earliest Christian community. Though distorted through transmission, this tradition could conceivably reach back in parts to the first period of Christianity. Critically, these Jewish Christian texts imply that the "true" Hebrew Gospel did not contain an account of the birth and life of Jesus.²

Matthew 1:16 and the virgin birth. New witnesses to Matthew 1:16 have been identified, including Manuscripts R and O at 17.3ab of The Dialogue of Timothy and Aquila, the Old Syriac (Sinaiticus), some Palestinian Syriac, some Greek manuscripts, and Von Soden's critical text. These texts appear to show that this verse was modified very early to support the concept of a virgin birth.³

Greek literary style in the birth narrative. Beginning with Matthew 1:18 (old numbering), the text displays a very unusual syntax for a work translated from Hebrew to Greek. Instead of any resemblance to Hebrew style, we find an almost exact match to a narrative from ancient Greek literature — specifically the scholia on Pindar.⁴ This tends to show that the passage was introduced later into the text when it was already in Greek, not translated from a Hebrew original.

Dream narratives and Greco-Roman parallels. The dream stories in Matthew's infancy narrative share formal features with Greco-Roman literature, particularly the ancient novels. Derek Dodson observes:

No doubt the dream narratives in Matthew lack the flourish and color that we find in the dream reports of the Greek novels. ... Yet the formal features of the dream narratives in Matthew correspond to those found in other Greco-Roman literature, including the romance novels. — Derek S. Dodson⁵

Chariton 2.9.6 offers a particularly interesting parallel to Matthew 1:18b-24 (old numbering). Just as Callirhoe comes to a decision about her unborn child by means of a dream, Joseph also comes to a decision about Mary's unborn child by means of a dream. The dream in Matthew 27:19 (old numbering) — Pilate's wife — uses terminology consistent with the infancy narrative, suggesting that these portions of Matthew, both at the beginning and the end, may be the work of a later writer familiar with the literary conventions of his culture rather than the original work of a Hebrew author.⁵

Patterns of Modification

Although the evidence above focuses on the first two chapters, the modifications extend throughout the book. The opening chapters turn out to be a symptom of a much more widespread problem. When the text is reviewed systematically, patterns emerge wherever Matthew contains material not paralleled in John, Mark, or Luke. In general, these unparalleled materials tend to:

• Sensationalize or exaggerate events beyond what the parallel accounts report
• Support a misunderstood Scripture by shaping narrative details to fit a particular reading of prophecy
• Prematurely insert extra prophecies into contexts where the original does not warrant them
• Over-emphasize certain phrases and topics beyond what the other Gospels attest

Additionally, many passages were found to be removed from their proper context. By presenting material in a setting not originally intended when the words were spoken, the text invites misinterpretation. There are also cases where multiple sayings from different times and circumstances were collected together as if they occurred in a single event.

The Reconstruction

The UPDV has used the existing material in Matthew as a basis for reconstructing a replacement text that:

• Removes material lacking attestation from other witnesses
• Places events in a more chronological order
• Restores text to its proper context
• Covers the same general subjects and events

The existing Matthew was used as the primary source wherever possible. Where Matthew's text appeared unreliable, parallel accounts from Mark and Luke were drawn upon. In some cases, different readings from Matthew, Mark, and Luke were combined in whole or in part. Passages lacking any confirming witness — whether to the reading itself or its context — were not included in any form. Some texts that appear genuine are included even where their original location is uncertain; footnotes generally indicate this. Slight modification of narrative material was occasionally required to transition the reconstructed text with its surrounding context.

Renumbering

The chapter and verse numbering in Matthew has been changed. When it is necessary to refer to both numbering systems, the old system is indicated by "(old)" or "(old numbering)" and the new system by "(new)" or "(new numbering)." Where neither is specified, the new system should be assumed.

Additional reference material related to the reconstruction — including a conversion chart from the old numbering to the new, a parallel comparison of the old text to the new, and a guide showing the general references from which the new text was derived — may be found at www.updated.org.

---

Notes

---