LIVING WATERS THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY

“A Ministry of Apostolic Faith Mission in Zimbabwe”

Linking Academic Excellence with Spiritual Profundity
Address: No. 23C Maribou Close, Tynwald, Harare
Email: [email protected]
Website: www.livingwaters.ac.zw

CERTIFICATE IN LEADERSHIP
INDIVIDUAL ASSIGNMENT COVER PAGE

FULL NAME: ELIZABETH MACHINGAUTA

CANDIDATE NUMBER:
LECTURER: DR C GOMBA
COURSE: INTRODUCTION TO NEW TESTAMENT STUDIES
DUE DATE: 16 JULY 2022 SUBMISSION DATE: 16 JULY 2022

ASSIGNMENT TOPIC: Discuss the date, authorship and major themes of the book of
Matthew.

Key Assignment Areas Possible Mark Mark Brief Comment Area

Introduction & 3
Definition of Terms
Main Discussion, 15
Evidence of Research &
Conclusion
References 2
Total 20

MARKERS’ SIGNATURE: ………………….... DATE MARKED:………………...........

MARKERS’ COMMENTS: ………………………………………………….........................
…………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Introduction

This essay seeks to discuss on the authorship, date and themes found in the book of Matthew.
Firstly the writer will begin by defining key terms then further on dwell on the main purpose of
this assignment.

Definition of Key Terms

Authorship according to English Dictionary definition is the quality or state of being an author;
the function or dignity of an author. Authorship resembles the source, origin; origination of a
thing.

Theme according to linguistics refers to the topic, or what is generally being talked about as
opposed to rheme. It is a recurring idea or a motif.

Main Discussion

The date of Matthew’s Gospel is far from certain. Three pieces of evidence have usually been
advanced to demonstrate that Matthew wrote after 70 C.E. First, Matthew is dependent upon the
Gospel of Mark and Mark is normally dated to the late 60s or early 70s. Secondly, the Gospel of
Matthew has a developed Christology, which suggests a late date towards the end of the first
century. Thirdly, the reference to the destruction of a city in Matt 22:7 can and should be taken
as a direct reference to the Jewish War and to the destruction of Jerusalem in particular. None of
these arguments is entirely persuasive.

Many scholars think Matthew took this passage from a hypothetical sayings source called “Q”
and made major revisions; if so, Jesus did not speak the parable in precisely this form. But even
if we assume that this is a direct allusion to the destruction of Jerusalem, the question remains as
to why the evangelist referred to this calamitous event in such an indirect way and why there are
no further mentions of it in the Gospel.

In conclusion each gospel though broadly compatible with the others emphasizes something
different about the significance of the life and ministry of Jesus. For Matthew, that significance
clearly lies in Jesus’ status as the promised messianic son of David, the king of Israel. Several
features of the Gospel are related to this primary theme. Foremost is Matthew’s citation of Old
Testament prophecies fulfilled in the life of Jesus. Matthew is often faulted for taking these
“prophecies” out of context and misapplying them. However, his practice must be understood in
terms of the conventions of first-century citation generally, and the charge is less appropriate
than is often thought (Matthew 2:15). Other features related to the theme of Jesus as promised
King include long teaching discourses in which the word of Jesus becomes a new law for the
church, a confession of Jesus as the Son of God in divine (as opposed to merely messianic)
terms, and an extension of kingdom promises from the Jews to the Gentile nations in fulfillment
of the covenant with Abraham.

According to Jerome’s writings c. 392, preserves the following tradition about Matthew (Vir. ill.
3). Matthew, also called Levi, apostle and aforetimes publican, composed a gospel of Christ at
first published in Judea in Hebrew for the sake of those of the circumcision who believed, but
this was afterwards translated into Greek, though by what author is uncertain. The Hebrew itself
has been preserved until the present day in the library at Caesarea which Pamphilus so diligently
gathered. I have also had the opportunity of having the volume described to me by the Nazarenes
of Beraea, a city of Syria, who use it. In this it is to be noted that wherever the Evangelist,
whether on his own account or in the person of our Lord the Savior quotes the testimony of the
Old Testament he does not follow the authority of the translators of the Septuagint but the
Hebrew. Wherefore these two forms exist “Out of Egypt have I called my son,” and “for he shall
be called a Nazarene.”

Now moving onto the three major themes of the book of Matthew. Firstly Jesus is the fulfilment
of the Old Testament. Jesus is the fulfilment of prophecy. Matthew quotes prophet Isaiah (7:14)
to point out how Jesus fulfilled the prophecy through virgin birth (Matthew 1:23). Micah 5:2 is
fulfilled by being born in Bethlehem. The prophecies in Hosea 11:9, Micah 7:9 were also
affirming that Jesus is the fulfilment of the Old Testament prophecies. Isaiah 40:1,2; 52 Psalm
118:12, Zechariah 12:10, and the Suffering Servant in Isaiah 52, all these are testifying Jesus as
the Coming Messiah.

Secondly, God (the Father/King) is the God of both Grace and Judgment. This theme also plays
out throughout the book. The Parable of Weeds (13:24-42), the Parable of Talents (25:14-30),
and the Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard (20:1-16) show how gracious God is. At the
same time, the Parables of the Great Banquet (22:1-14), the passage of the Seven Woes to the
Scribes and Pharisees (22-25), and the signs of the end time and judgment day chapters show
how strictly judgmental he is.

Lastly, the Kingdom of God does not Belong to One Particular Ethnic Group. It is extended to all
people from all nations and tribes. Matthew 28:16-20 explicitly talks about people from the ends
of the earth; the book of Revelation (7:9) also gives us the heavenly glimpse that a great
multitude of people beyond our capacity to count come from every nation, and all tribes and
people and tongues and worship the Lamb.

Conclusion

The external evidence is early and unanimous in support of the first gospel being written by the
apostle Matthew. But the external evidence speaks of a gospel written in Aramaic or Hebrew and
later being translated into Greek while the canonical gospel seems to have been written in Greek
from the beginning. How to reconcile these two lines of evidence, if they can be reconciled at all,
is the difficult task this article undertakes.