The determination of the Gospel of Matthew’s composition date is a complex issue debated among biblical scholars. A range of possibilities exists, generally falling within the period of approximately 70 CE to 100 CE. The specific year is not definitively known, leading to diverse scholarly opinions based on internal textual clues and external historical considerations.
Establishing a timeline for this Gospel’s creation is critical for understanding its historical context and potential influences. Dates offered affect interpretations of the text’s relationship to events like the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE and the development of early Christian communities. The dating also impacts views regarding the author’s sources and intended audience.
Consequently, various approaches are employed to estimate the approximate timeframe of its writing. These include analyzing its use of sources like the Gospel of Mark and the hypothetical Q source, considering the theological perspectives reflected in the text, and examining its references to contemporary historical events and social conditions. The examination of these factors contributes to a broader understanding of its origins and significance.
1. Dating methodology
The dating methodology employed in determining the composition date for the Gospel of Matthew is crucial. Scholars utilize varied approaches, each contributing unique data points and potential limitations, impacting the conclusions reached.
-
Source Criticism
Source criticism involves analyzing the relationships between the Gospels. The common two-source hypothesis posits that Matthew and Luke used Mark and a hypothetical “Q” source. If Mark’s Gospel can be reliably dated, the dependence of Matthew provides a terminus post quem (earliest possible date). Furthermore, an examination of how Matthew modifies and expands upon Mark offers insights into its theological and social context, which can further refine dating estimations. The absence or presence of specific historical events as depicted in these sources also serves as a marker.
-
Textual Criticism and Manuscript Evidence
Textual criticism examines the earliest available manuscripts and fragments of Matthew. While these do not directly reveal the original date of composition, they do establish a terminus ante quem (latest possible date). The earlier the manuscripts, the sooner the Gospel must have been circulating. Furthermore, the variations and development of the text over time provide data points regarding the early reception and transmission of Matthew. Analysis of quotations and allusions to Matthew in early Church Fathers also provides external evidence.
-
Historical and Cultural Context Analysis
Dating methodologies consider the historical and cultural milieu reflected in the Gospel. If the text portrays a specific historical event, such as the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE, it offers clues. References to social customs, political structures, or religious practices can situate the Gospel within a specific time frame. The degree to which the text reflects the evolving relationship between Christianity and Judaism also offers insights. Determining if its portrayal of Jewish leaders is consistent with the pre- or post-70 CE period helps narrow the possible date range.
-
Theological Development
Theological themes prevalent in the Gospel are scrutinized. If Matthew reflects a more developed or nuanced understanding of certain theological concepts compared to earlier texts, it might suggest a later date. For instance, the level of Christological development or the understanding of salvation can indicate the evolution of early Christian thought. Analyzing the polemical arguments and apologetic strategies within the text may also point to the specific challenges and concerns faced by the Christian community at the time, thereby suggesting the era in which it was written.
The application of these methodologies contributes to the ongoing discussion. The relative weight assigned to each approach impacts the range of dates proposed for Matthew’s composition. Despite the efforts to pinpoint an exact year, the diverse range of opinions underscores the challenges inherent in dating ancient texts. The continued refinement of these methodologies promises to further enhance our understanding of the Gospel’s historical context.
2. Source criticism
Source criticism plays a vital role in the endeavor to determine the approximate time “when was the book of matthew written.” It involves a detailed examination of the literary relationships between the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke), aiming to identify and analyze the sources used by each Gospel writer. This analysis helps establish a relative chronology, suggesting which Gospels relied on earlier sources and which were written later.
-
The Priority of Mark
The dominant theory, known as Markan priority, posits that the Gospel of Mark was written first. Source criticism examines the extensive overlap between Matthew and Mark, concluding that Matthew likely used Mark as one of its primary sources. By identifying passages in Matthew that are directly derived from Mark, scholars can establish that Matthew was written after Mark. Thus, the estimated date of Mark sets a terminus post quem for Matthew. The degree and manner in which Matthew modifies Mark’s narrative and theological perspectives also offer clues about the specific circumstances and concerns of Matthew’s community, indirectly informing its dating.
-
The Hypothetical Q Source
Beyond Mark, source criticism suggests the existence of another source, commonly called “Q,” that Matthew and Luke shared but is not found in Mark. Q supposedly contained primarily sayings and teachings of Jesus. The content and theological emphasis found in the Q material present in Matthew provide further insight into its perspective. Comparing Q material in Matthew with similar material in Luke highlights editorial choices made by Matthew, possibly reflecting distinct theological concerns or historical contexts that further nuance its dating.
-
M Source and Unique Material
Matthew also contains material unique to its Gospel, often referred to as “M” source. This includes narratives like the visit of the Magi, the massacre of the infants, and certain parables. Source criticism analyzes this unique material to determine its origins and purpose. The theological and social concerns reflected in M material, such as the emphasis on Jesus’s Jewish identity and the importance of observing Jewish law, provides clues about the author’s background, intended audience, and the historical situation that influenced their writing, aiding in dating estimations.
-
Redaction Criticism and Authorial Intent
A closely related method, redaction criticism, builds upon source criticism by focusing on how each Gospel writer edited and shaped their sources to convey specific theological messages. By analyzing Matthew’s redaction of Mark and Q, scholars can understand the author’s distinctive theological agenda and the particular needs of their community. This understanding indirectly informs the dating process, as the specific theological concerns and historical circumstances addressed in Matthew provide clues about the time and place in which it was written. For example, if Matthew emphasizes the importance of missionary work to the Gentiles, this might suggest a later date when the Christian movement had expanded beyond its Jewish origins.
In essence, source criticism provides crucial information for dating by establishing relative chronological relationships between the Gospels and by revealing the unique theological and historical perspectives reflected in Matthew’s use and adaptation of its sources. By carefully analyzing the sources and redactional choices, scholars can gain a more nuanced understanding of the context in which the Gospel was written, contributing to the ongoing debate about the “when was the book of matthew written.”
3. Theological themes
The prominent theological themes evident within the Gospel of Matthew offer significant clues for approximating its date of composition. These themes, reflecting the specific concerns and perspectives of the author and their intended audience, provide insight into the historical and social context surrounding the Gospel’s creation. Shifts or developments in these theological perspectives, compared to other New Testament texts, can suggest a relative chronological placement. For instance, the level of Christological development, the understanding of the relationship between Christianity and Judaism, and the emphasis on particular ethical teachings contribute to the overall picture.
An instance highlighting this connection is the Gospel’s presentation of Jesus as the fulfillment of Jewish prophecy. This emphasis suggests a context where establishing the continuity between the Old Testament and the Christian message was crucial. If the Gospel was written in a period characterized by growing tension between Jewish and Christian communities, this theme might have served to legitimize Christian claims within a predominantly Jewish environment. Conversely, if the Gospel was written later, when the Christian community was more distinct from Judaism, the emphasis on prophetic fulfillment might have served a different purpose, such as solidifying the faith of Gentile converts. Therefore, the precise manner in which this theme is presented can provide data points for dating.
In conclusion, the analysis of theological themes provides a valuable, although indirect, means of estimating the period of its writing. These themes serve as a window into the author’s world, revealing the concerns, challenges, and theological developments prevalent during its composition. The interplay between theology and historical context underscores the complexity of pinpointing an exact date, but it contributes significantly to the ongoing scholarly discourse. Further study incorporating historical context and audience considerations helps construct a more complete picture of its origin and significance.
4. Historical context
The historical context surrounding the Gospel of Matthew is inextricably linked to discussions concerning its date of composition. Understanding the political, social, and religious circumstances provides essential reference points for interpreting the text and establishing a plausible timeframe for its writing.
-
The Destruction of the Second Temple (70 CE)
The destruction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem by Roman forces in 70 CE is a pivotal event. The degree to which Matthew references or alludes to this event has implications for dating. If the Gospel demonstrates awareness of the Temple’s destruction, it would suggest a composition date after 70 CE. Conversely, a complete absence of any clear references does not necessarily imply an earlier date, but it factors into the overall assessment. The interpretation hinges on whether the author would have considered the destruction a significant event to address or incorporate into the narrative.
-
The Development of Christian-Jewish Relations
The evolving relationship between early Christians and the Jewish community is a critical aspect. The Gospel’s portrayal of Jewish leaders, its perspective on the Mosaic Law, and its overall attitude towards Judaism provide insights into the stage of this relationship at the time of writing. A Gospel reflecting a more amicable relationship may suggest an earlier date, while a Gospel exhibiting heightened tension or polemic could indicate a later period when the Christian community was increasingly distinct from Judaism. The internal evidence must be carefully weighed against other sources documenting this evolving dynamic.
-
The Expansion of the Christian Movement
The geographical spread and demographic composition of the early Christian movement provide context. If the Gospel of Matthew shows an awareness of missionary efforts beyond Palestine and a focus on reaching Gentile audiences, it could suggest a later date. The presence of specific cultural or linguistic elements tailored to a Gentile audience further supports this. The degree to which the Gospel addresses issues pertinent to a mixed Jewish and Gentile community also contributes to dating considerations.
-
The Formation of Early Christian Communities
The internal organization and theological development of early Christian communities influence dating discussions. The Gospel’s reflection on church leadership roles, its understanding of sacraments like baptism and the Eucharist, and its handling of internal disputes reveal the state of the Christian community at the time of writing. A Gospel demonstrating a more structured organization or a more refined theological understanding may suggest a later date, reflecting the ongoing development of early Christian institutions and doctrines.
In summary, the historical context provides a crucial backdrop for assessing “when was the book of matthew written.” Each historical element the Temple’s destruction, Christian-Jewish relations, missionary expansion, and the internal development of Christian communities offers valuable clues, but they must be interpreted cautiously and in conjunction with other evidence. The challenge lies in discerning the precise significance of these factors and their relative weight in the overall dating assessment.
5. Audience consideration
The intended audience of the Gospel of Matthew exerts a considerable influence on estimations regarding its composition date. The characteristics, concerns, and historical circumstances of the presumed readership shape the content, emphasis, and theological perspectives within the text. Consequently, identifying the intended audience provides critical clues for situating the Gospel within a specific historical context, indirectly impacting the determination of “when was the book of matthew written.” For example, if evidence suggests a predominantly Jewish-Christian audience grappling with issues of Jewish Law and the legitimacy of Jesus as the Messiah, this informs the period in which those concerns were most pressing.
An instance illustrating this dynamic is the prominent presentation of Jesus as the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies. This theme resonates strongly with a Jewish audience familiar with the Hebrew scriptures and attuned to messianic expectations. The authors meticulous citations of prophecies, tailored to persuade a Jewish readership that Jesus is the promised Messiah, suggests either a Jewish or Jewish-Christian audience. Should the Gospel address the inclusion of Gentiles within the Christian community, it implies a community experiencing a shift in its demographic makeup. The way in which Matthew navigates the integration of Gentiles, and any resultant tensions, offers further insight into the community’s context and timeline. The prominence of specific ethical teachings or social concerns also reflects the challenges and priorities of the intended readers, indirectly affecting estimations regarding the composition.
In conclusion, the task of determining the composition date of the Gospel necessitates a careful evaluation of the intended audience and their likely circumstances. The Gospels content, themes, and rhetorical strategies are molded by its intended readership, making audience consideration a key component in the overall dating process. The complexities inherent in audience identification highlight the challenges, but the connection between audience and text provides a valuable avenue for historical inquiry. Further exploration of this connection enriches comprehension of the Gospel’s origin and importance within early Christian history.
6. Relationship to Mark
The synoptic problem addresses the literary relationship between the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. The prevailing hypothesis, known as Markan priority, posits that the Gospel of Mark served as a source for both Matthew and Luke. Consequently, understanding Matthew’s reliance on Mark is central to determining the period when Matthew was written. This connection is not merely incidental; rather, the nature and extent of Matthew’s use of Mark serve as a crucial dating criterion. If Mark was indeed an earlier text, then Matthew must have been composed after Mark’s completion. The date assigned to Mark, therefore, establishes a terminus post quem (earliest possible date) for Matthew. For instance, if scholars date Mark to around 70 CE, then Matthew cannot have been written before this point.
The analysis of Matthew’s usage of Mark extends beyond a simple identification of parallel passages. Redaction criticism examines how Matthew modifies, expands, and rearranges Markan material to suit its own theological and literary purposes. These editorial changes offer insights into the specific concerns and perspectives of Matthew’s community. For example, Matthew often clarifies or interprets Mark’s narratives, potentially reflecting a later audience requiring more explicit explanations. Furthermore, the addition of unique material in Matthew, absent in Mark, suggests that Matthew supplemented Mark’s account with other sources or traditions available to the author. The manner in which Matthew integrates these additions alongside Markan material provides clues about the compositional process and the intended message for its audience. Therefore, both the presence of Markan content and the alterations applied to that content contribute to a more nuanced understanding of its dating.
In conclusion, the relationship between Matthew and Mark is integral to discussions surrounding the period when the Gospel of Matthew was written. The dependence on Mark provides a foundational chronological marker, while the modifications and additions to Markan material offer further insights into the author’s purpose and the historical context in which it was composed. While this connection alone does not provide a definitive date, its analysis is crucial. The continued refinement of source and redaction criticism ensures a more thorough examination of Matthew’s engagement with Mark, contributing significantly to the ongoing scholarly discussion.
7. Q source theories
The hypothetical Q source, a collection of sayings and teachings attributed to Jesus, occupies a prominent position in discussions concerning the date of the Gospel of Matthew. The existence and characteristics of Q influence scholarly understanding of Matthew’s sources and, consequently, its chronological placement. The estimated date and nature of Q itself become factors in determining “when was the book of matthew written.”
-
Influence on Dating Matthew
If the Q source predates the Gospel of Matthew, as many scholars argue, its estimated date provides a terminus post quem for Matthew’s composition. The reasoning is that Matthew could not have been written before the Q source existed. Thus, the dating of Q is crucial for establishing the earliest possible date for Matthew. Proposed dates for Q generally range from the 50s to the 70s CE. A later dating of Q would push back the earliest possible date for Matthew’s composition, while an earlier dating would allow for an earlier composition date.
-
Content and Theological Emphasis in Matthew
Scholars analyze the Q material present in Matthew to infer its theological perspective and the circumstances of the community for whom it was written. If the Q sayings reflect a particular theological emphasis or address specific social issues, this provides clues about the historical context in which Matthew incorporated these sayings. For example, if Q reflects a concern for social justice and warnings against wealth, and Matthew retains and emphasizes those themes, it may suggest that Matthew was written in a context where these concerns were particularly relevant. Comparing Matthew’s use of Q with Luke’s version further clarifies Matthew’s theological agenda and its possible setting.
-
Reconstructing Q and its Evolution
Reconstructing the content and original form of Q is a complex endeavor. Scholars compare the Q sayings in Matthew and Luke, attempting to identify the most likely original wording and arrangement. This reconstruction informs the dating process because different reconstructions of Q may imply different historical contexts and theological perspectives. Furthermore, some scholars argue that Q itself underwent revisions or expansions over time. If Matthew used a later version of Q, it would suggest a later date for Matthew’s composition.
-
Alternative Theories
Not all scholars accept the existence of the Q source. Some propose alternative explanations for the similarities between Matthew and Luke, such as mutual dependence or reliance on other sources. These alternative theories have implications for dating Matthew because they eliminate the Q source as a chronological marker. If Matthew did not use Q, then the estimated date of Q is no longer relevant to dating Matthew. Instead, other criteria, such as the relationship to Mark and the historical context reflected in Matthew, become more important.
In conclusion, Q source theories play a significant role in discussions about “when was the book of matthew written.” The date and nature of Q influence estimations regarding Matthew’s sources and its place within early Christian history. While the existence and precise content of Q remain subjects of scholarly debate, its hypothetical influence on Matthew’s composition ensures its continued relevance in the dating process.
8. Patristic evidence
Patristic evidence, comprising the writings of early Church Fathers, represents a crucial element in the endeavor to determine a plausible timeframe for the Gospel of Matthew’s composition. These writings, produced in the centuries immediately following the apostolic era, offer external testimony regarding the existence, circulation, and acceptance of Matthew’s Gospel within early Christian communities. References, quotations, and allusions to Matthew in patristic literature provide a terminus ante quem, or latest possible date, for the Gospel’s origin. The absence of such references in earlier patristic works, conversely, may suggest that the Gospel was not yet widely known or accepted during that period.
The significance of patristic evidence lies in its independent confirmation of Matthew’s presence and influence. For instance, explicit quotations and attributions of passages to “the Gospel of Matthew” in the writings of early figures like Ignatius of Antioch (early 2nd century) or Polycarp of Smyrna (early-mid 2nd century) demonstrate the existence and recognition of Matthew’s Gospel by that time. Similarly, allusions to Matthew’s narrative or theological themes in these and other early Christian texts indicate familiarity with its content. The consistency and frequency of these references across diverse geographical regions and theological traditions strengthen the argument for its early circulation and widespread acceptance. A challenge arises, however, in accurately dating patristic texts themselves, as their chronology is often subject to scholarly debate. In addition, distinguishing between direct quotations, paraphrases, and general allusions necessitates careful textual analysis.
Despite these challenges, patristic evidence remains a vital component in the overall dating equation. It provides an independent check on dating inferences drawn from internal textual analysis and source criticism. While patristic evidence alone cannot pinpoint an exact year of composition, it establishes firm chronological boundaries, narrowing the range of plausible dates and strengthening the overall argument for the Gospel’s early origin and acceptance within the formative years of Christianity. The careful study of patristic sources, combined with other dating methodologies, enhances our understanding of the historical context in which the Gospel of Matthew emerged and the time “when was the book of matthew written.”
9. Internal evidence
Internal evidence within the Gospel of Matthew provides vital clues for estimating the approximate time of its composition. This form of evidence considers the text’s own content, theological perspectives, and socio-cultural reflections. It offers a direct, albeit nuanced, perspective, contributing to the broader scholarly discussion.
-
Theological Perspective
The theological framework of Matthew, particularly its Christology and its portrayal of the relationship between Judaism and Christianity, offers temporal markers. A highly developed Christology, emphasizing Jesus’s divine nature, may suggest a later composition date reflecting theological refinements within the early Church. Similarly, the Gospel’s attitude toward Jewish Law and its depiction of Jewish leaders can reflect the evolving relationship between Christian and Jewish communities, impacting the date range. The degree of polemic or reconciliation apparent within the text provides insights into the social context surrounding its writing.
-
Social and Cultural Reflections
The social and cultural realities mirrored in Matthew offer insights into the life and circumstances of its intended audience. Allusions to contemporary social customs, economic conditions, and political events can help situate the Gospel within a specific historical context. References to particular groups or social tensions within the community provide further clues. For instance, if the Gospel addresses issues of wealth and poverty or social inclusion and exclusion, it suggests that these issues were prevalent during the time of its composition. The portrayal of family life, social hierarchies, and cultural practices contributes to this dating process.
-
Use of Language and Literary Style
Analysis of the Gospel’s language and literary style can also inform the dating process. The use of specific vocabulary, grammatical structures, and rhetorical devices may align with particular periods. Comparison of Matthew’s Greek with that of other contemporary texts offers comparative data. Changes in language usage within early Christian literature provide a relative framework for dating. If Matthew exhibits characteristics of a later or more refined form of Greek, it may suggest a later date of composition.
-
References to Specific Events
While overt references to specific historical events are rare, subtle allusions or indirect reflections of such events can be telling. A matter of scholarly debate is the degree to which Matthew’s Gospel reflects the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE. Clear allusions to this event would strongly suggest a date post-70 CE. Furthermore, any references to persecution or social upheaval can provide clues about the historical context. The interpretation of these references, however, requires careful consideration, as it can be challenging to distinguish between prophetic pronouncements and historical reflections.
In conclusion, internal evidence from the Gospel of Matthew offers essential insights into its possible timeframe. By examining the theological perspective, social and cultural reflections, language, and references to specific events, scholars can construct a more nuanced understanding. Despite the challenges of interpreting these clues, this methodology is a critical component in the ongoing attempt to determine “when was the book of matthew written,” necessitating careful and contextualized analysis.
Frequently Asked Questions
The following questions and answers address common inquiries and misconceptions surrounding the dating of the Gospel of Matthew. This section aims to provide clarity on the scholarly discussions and evidence used to estimate its approximate composition period.
Question 1: Is a precise year of composition known for the Gospel of Matthew?
No definitive year has been established for its creation. Scholarly estimates typically place its composition within a range, influenced by various factors.
Question 2: What are the primary methods used to estimate its creation?
Source criticism, textual analysis, historical context analysis, and theological theme examination are the primary methods.
Question 3: How does source criticism contribute to dating the Gospel?
By analyzing its reliance on earlier sources like Mark and the hypothetical Q source, source criticism helps establish a terminus post quem (earliest possible date).
Question 4: What role does the destruction of the Second Temple play in dating discussions?
The degree to which Matthew references or alludes to the Temple’s destruction in 70 CE influences estimations. Explicit references suggest a date after 70 CE.
Question 5: How does the intended audience factor into dating estimates?
Understanding the characteristics and concerns of the intended audience helps situate the Gospel within a specific historical and social context.
Question 6: Why is there no unanimous agreement among scholars regarding its precise dating?
The available evidence is open to interpretation, and the relative weight assigned to different factors varies among scholars, leading to differing conclusions.
Understanding the varied methodologies and the complexities inherent in dating ancient texts provides a more informed perspective on the ongoing scholarly discussion surrounding the Gospel of Matthew.
The subsequent sections of this article will delve into related topics, such as the author’s purpose and the Gospel’s influence on subsequent Christian thought.
Tips for Researching the Composition Date of Matthew
Approaching the question of dating the Gospel of Matthew requires a careful and systematic methodology. Considering the available evidence and scholarly viewpoints is crucial.
Tip 1: Prioritize source criticism. Examine the relationship between Matthew, Mark, and the hypothetical Q source. A clear understanding of these literary dependencies forms a chronological foundation.
Tip 2: Evaluate patristic evidence cautiously. Early Church Fathers’ writings offer external testimony, but their dating can be debated. Distinguish direct quotations from paraphrases.
Tip 3: Analyze the Gospel’s theological themes. Consider its Christology, its portrayal of Judaism, and any reflections of the early Church’s developing doctrines.
Tip 4: Consider the historical context. Assess how societal events like the Temple’s destruction and Christian-Jewish relations influence its perspective.
Tip 5: Scrutinize the internal evidence. Identify socio-cultural reflections, language choices, and references to known historical settings within the text itself.
Tip 6: Acknowledge different scholarly opinions. Recognize the range of dates proposed and the rationale for differing viewpoints. No definitive consensus exists.
Tip 7: Consult reputable sources. Refer to academic journals, commentaries, and scholarly monographs for a comprehensive understanding of the issue.
Adhering to these guidelines enables a more structured and informed investigation. Such a methodical approach allows for a broader comprehension of the complexities inherent in dating the Gospel of Matthew.
Moving to the concluding segment, the article presents the summary, the benefits of investigating its composition dating and additional resources for future study.
“when was the book of matthew written”
The investigation into the dating of the Gospel of Matthew reveals a complex endeavor, reliant on a variety of interrelated methodologies. Source criticism, patristic evidence, theological analysis, historical contextualization, and internal textual examination contribute to a multifaceted understanding. Scholarly opinions vary, typically placing the Gospel’s composition within the latter decades of the first century CE, influenced by factors such as its relationship to the Gospel of Mark, allusions to the destruction of the Second Temple, and the evolving relationship between Christianity and Judaism. A definitive year, however, remains elusive.
Continued exploration of the textual, historical, and theological dimensions remains essential. Further research promises to deepen our understanding of the Gospel’s origins and its profound influence on subsequent Christian thought and practice. Engaging with these complexities not only illuminates the past but also informs contemporary interpretations, fostering a more nuanced appreciation of its enduring significance.
