Matthew: An Eyewitness Account

The Gospel of Matthew is believed to be too late to be a reliable account of Jesus. However, the evidence suggests the opposite is true. Matthew likely wrote his account by utilizing Mark's Gospel but that doesn't mean it could not have come from the disciple Matthew. A special thanks to Stephen Boyce and Charles Quarles for helping with this video.

Don't forget to help us create more videos! We need your support:

[JesusPerez-wdtq]

IP you probably wont see this but thank you for playing a huge part in my path to christianity may our lord and god jesus bless you! ☦️

[telleroftheone]

As an M.Div. graduate, this was honestly some of the best content I've seen on Gospel authorship. Clear and concise. Great job @inspiringphilosophy !

[sliglusamelius]

If there were one gospel, critics would call it Harry Potter or the Odyssey kind of fable. If there are four gospels, each with different details as would be expected with real accounts, they claim disparity as proof of falsehood. It's tails they win, heads Christians lose.

[Datroflshopper]

I have to say, I wasn't super convinced until you brought up the author's special interest in coinage. The fact he would be so specific (compared to the three other gospel examples) really does lend credence to Matthean authorship.

It actually sort of lines up with the academic literature in the field of critical organisational studies (which I do know about), which suggests that people tend to view organisations and their management of them through the lens of their own background (upper echelon theory). For example, a software engineer turned CEO will view most organisational problems as engineering problems, an accountant will do the same with accountancy and so on - even when the problems are unrelated to their background they are more likely to try and shoehorn it in somehow.

Lo and behold, ask a tax collector to write an account of something largely unrelated to tax collecting and we SHOULD EXPECT him to insert that special interest in there somewhere

Super compelling stuff

[collegepennsylvania]

"God can't give us peace and happiness apart from Himself because there is no such thing." -- CS Lewis

[hbs]

Just as good as the video on Mark. Great job!

[william]

Nice work. If the subject matter were any other than Jesus no one would question the attributed authorship of Matthew, especially as well supported by other known authorities of the time.

[vedinthorn]

But muh fallacious reasoning that demands that Mark was written first after 70 AD!

[MultiMobCast]

These visuals are so good man. Well done the hard work is showing.

[TrivialCoincidence]

Ah membership, it's like I've ascended two social classes

[DUDEBroHey]

I still don't get why people would forge the name Matthew onto a Gospel. Matthew was a tax collector. It's impossible to state how much the Jews hated tax collectors. If the gospel was written after 70 AD then they hated tax collectors even more and definitely wouldn't use the name Matthew.

[MassEffectedX]

Wikipedia says that “The four canonical gospels are anonymous and most researchers agree that none of them was written by eyewitnesses.”

Why such bold lies from Wikipedia?

[RollTide]

I'm just going to have to trust the early Church Fathers who were closer to Matthew in time than we are. Irenaeus of Lyons, a second century Christian, learned the faith from a man called Polycarp who himself was a disciple of the Apostle John - the traditional author of the Gospel of John. Irenaeus is among the earliest writers to attest the authorship of the four gospels. I'd like to think that a man one generation removed from the Apostolic Age would be able to impart accurate and reliable information considering he was schooled by men who knew the Apostles personally.

[therottingstench]

Thank you Michael for this video. We need people like you to put this data out there that all need to hear!

[elweycristiano]

Looking at the comments it is surprising how some affirm things without seeing the video and its objective, they say that "Matthew copied Mark/Q" but I don't see that they substantiate this idea, because first they should prove that this source Q exists and is a valid hypothesis of many that try to respond to the synoptic problem, it is incredible that some say that the video commits fallacies or is only false (when it uses not only quotes but also develops the idea it defends) when they affirm the idea of the Q source and the plagiarism of Matthew to Mark without foundation and only quotes from the consensus (without forgetting that it is nothing more than one hypothesis of the many that exist).
Great video IP!!

[NilceLima-sd]

Much time ago, when i was 12 years old(7 months ago), i've gained conciousness. I started doubting my indocrined christian/mormon faith, and i had considered to be atheist, muslim and jew, i almost prayed to Allah...
But i considered christianity to be true, and stopped being mormon without my mom knowing. Studying christian apologetics from the internet, Inspiring Philosophy played a big role in my faith
Sometimes i have no doubt that christ has risen and sometimes, like right now, i doubt even if God exists
But i have much more time to study and i hope i can save many lifes preaching the gospel
Thank you!

[EmilyTodicescu]

Amazing work, as always.

Side note: there’s actually a theologian named _Charles Quarles??_ My day is made. ❤

[freddurstedgebono]

5:55 This is easily the best explanation and makes the most sense

[pluckastring]

Thank you I love the knowledge and teachings

[dumbidols]

Im just starting the video now. Im gonna count how many times he says "In other words..." :) Love you Michael.