Synoptica XXXIV - The End of the Layered Matthew Hypothesis

 To pick up the thread of our thought, here is the end of Synoptica XXXIII:

"Again, we will have plenty to say, but I would like to start by taking a look at The Cleansing of the Temple (Mk 11:15-19 || Lk 19:45-48 || Mt 21:12-13).

The thing that stands out for me here is the phrase "for all the nations" in Mk 11:17 is ABSENT from both Luke and canonical Matthew. It is, however, present in Shem-Tob's Hebrew Matthew, where the original scriptural reference (Isaiah 56:7) is correctly completed as לכל העמים (for all peoples). This inclusion in Hebrew Matthew (and Mark), corresponding to an omission in Luke and Greek Mathew, is worth thinking about."

Yes, it is very much worth thinking about. I am increasingly uncomfortable with hypothetical documents as sources. The overall impression I got from Shem Tob's Hebrew Matthew (especially in, for example, the Beatitudes), was that Luke provides us with a text that is older than Greek Matthew. The evidence is also strong (consider the introductory phrases such as "At that time. . . " in the Hebrew version of the Sermon on the Mount, always coinciding to shifts or voids in the Lukan narrative, no longer necessary in Matthew's grouping of the sayings, and subsequently edited out of Greek Matthew) for primacy of Luke with regard to Matthew,

Historically, this latter view does not make sense, given that the first followers of Rabbi Yeshua were Jews, while it is clear that the Gospel of Matthew was written for the Jews, and that of Luke for the non-Jewish "Nations" (the goyim). If anyone doubts this, consider Luke's explanations of Jewish customs for his Gentile audience, which Matthew did not need to explain for his audience of Jews. Consider also Matthew's respectful phrase "Kingdom of Heaven," where Luke pretty much invariably has "Kingdom of God." Jew's do not bandy the divine name about unnecessarily.

This clear difference of intended audiences may have led to the impression that the Gospel of Matthew was older than the Gospel of Luke. Internal textual differences, even in the respective canonical (Greek) versions, however, do not bear this out.

Going back to the Cleansing of the Temple, with which we ended the last Synoptica entry and began this one, it does not make sense that Luke should have omitted "for all peoples" from the citation of Isaiah 56:7, given the Pauline vision of a worldwide ministry. If Luke had been copying from Mark (or Hebrew Matthew), he would have had the correct citation. Was the author of Luke unfamiliar with the Hebrew Bible? Not at all, on the contrary, as we can see from the scriptural references in the Magnificat.

The easiest way out of this mess is to assume that the Gospel of Luke was written before, not after, that of Matthew, and even before Hebrew Matthew. In this view of things, the Gospel of Matthew would have been written for the Jews, as a corrective to trends that the Jewish community of followers of Rabbi Yeshua saw developing in Pauline Christianity, trends with which they did not, and could not, agree. A parting of the ways for the two communities was inevitable.

(to be continued)

Copyright © 2023 by Donald C. Traxler.