Synoptica XXXII - The Call of Matthew/Levi

 

The two images above are partial page-copies from GOSPEL PARALLELS A Synopsis of the First Three Gospels, Ed. by Burton H. Throckmorton, Jr., a publication in which I own no rights.

An examination of the three columns on these pages will show immediately that we have a lot to talk about. To give us even more to talk about, here is another partial page-copy:

This is from The Hebrew Gospel of Matthew, by George Howard, another publication in which I own no rights.

And, just to make things even more interesting, here is the Masoretic Hebrew text of the quotation from Hosea 6:6, with pointing left out to make it easier to see that it agrees perfectly with Shem-Tob's text in the Howard book (but differs in the tense of the verb from all texts that were in use by the Christians of Europe:

כי חסד חפצתי ולא־זבח

We should consider, first of all, similarities and discrepancies among the three synoptic gospels in their canonical texts. Here is a list to get us started:

1. The subject of the story is named "Matthew" in the Gospel of Matthew, but is called "Levi" in the other two Synoptics.
2. He is, in the Greek tradition, said to be a tax collector, but in the Hebrew tradition he is apparently a money changer.
3. Only Mk. calls him "the son of Alphaeus."
4. Only Lk. adds, at the end, "to repentance."

Only Mt. includes the quotation from Hosea 6:6.

Further considerations:

The version in Mt. is less detailed than the other two.

The name "Levi" does not appear in the lists of Apostles.

The quotation from Hosea is given in its correct Hebrew form in the Hebrew tradition represented by Shem Tob, which it never was in the Greek and Latin NT translations used by Christians.

First of all, let's consider the name change. It is evident that the person in the story underwent a name change from "Levi" to "Matthew" (and not the other way around) since his name has come down to us, including in the lists of Apostles, as "Matthew." In Shem-Tob's Hebrew Matthew, the form of the name is given as "Matatiah," which means "gift of God." Shem-Tob also glosses it, in Spanish, as "Mateo."

We don't know the reason for this name change, and perhaps never will, but we can be pretty sure that the direction of the change was from "Levi" to "Matthew," and not the other way around. One might, therefore, be tempted to think that either Mark or Luke was the source, and Matthew came later, But it is a guiding principle in textual criticism that the briefer of two texts is usually the earlier one and closer to the source, Matthew is, here, the briefer, sparser text.

This seeming conflict may not really be one at all. For several years now I've believed that my Layered Matthew Hypothesis is the correct solution to the so-called Synoptic Problem. According to this hypothesis, the Gospel of Matthew was the first to be written (such was the predominant belief in the Church for 1800 years, supported by early writers such as Papias), and it was published in several (at least three) "editions" or "layers." The first layer, which I have called Matthew I, was mainly Sayings material, and Luke borrowed from it extensively, but Mark did not. Much of Luke reflects the earliest layer of Matthew, as can be seen especially in the Beatitudes, This is confirmed by the existence of Shem-Tob's Hebrew Gospel of Matthew, which is a little more primitive than canonical, Greek Matthew, and I believe goes back in its roots to the level of Matthew II. Matthew III is, by definition, canonical, Greek Matthew, a translation from Matthew's original Hebrew.

The quote from Hosea 6:6 belongs to the level of Matthew II, and was not yet present when Luke and Mark did their borrowings. Interestingly, in Shem-Tob the quotation is given in its correct, Hebrew form ("I desired," or "I have desired," which it never is in the Greek tradition, which instead has "I desire."

(to be continued)

Text Copyright © 2022 by Donald C. Traxler aka Donald Jacobson Traxler.