eNews

Together the four Gospels describe the ministry, death, and resurrection of Jesus – the most important historical events of all time. Each Gospel has something unique to offer; the Gospel of Matthew is filled with the discourses of Jesus, and presents an exceptionally Jewish view of Jesus' life and his fulfillment of Scripture. Because of its tremendous power and importance, Matthew, like the other Gospels, has been under constant attack from modern scholars. Despite arguments to the contrary, there is rich evidence that Matthew’s Gospel was written prior to the destruction of the Temple in AD 70, and that Matthew actually took down Jesus' words verbatim.

Early Origin
As quoted by Eusebius in Hist. Eccl. 3.39, Papias states: "Matthew put together the oracles of the Lord in the Hebrew language, and each one interpreted them as best he could."

Many scholars now believe that the Gospels were written before Paul's first imprisonment of AD 57-60, and Risto Santala argues in The Messiah in the New Testament, p.47-48, that virtually all of the New Testament books were written before Jerusalem's destruction. There is no hint in the New Testament of Nero's persecutions after AD 64, nor of the execution of James, the Lord's brother, in AD 62. There is not the slightest mention of the Jewish revolt against the Romans which began in AD 66. These historic events would have been irresistible in making many of the arguments in the New Testament documents.

Textual evidence suggests that Matthew was originally written in Hebrew. In hundreds of places the Greek sentence structure betrays a Semitic influence and implies a translation from the Hebrew. Jesus' teachings in Matthew contain significant numbers of Hebrew/Aramaic puns, alliterations, and word connections. What’s more, Matthew is the most specifically Jewish Gospel, clearly written for a Jewish audience with a focus on Jesus as the Messiah in fulfillment of the Hebrew Scriptures.

Papyrus Discovery
In 1994, a segment of the Greek text of Matthew's Gospel appears to now have been dated before AD 66. Known as the Magdalen Papyrus, P64, it contains segments of Matthew 26:23, 31 on both sides of three fragments. 

Carsten Peter Thiede, then Director of the Institute for Basic Epistemological Research in Paderborn, did the research on the Magdalen Papyrus. According to The Times of London, December 24 1994, he determined, "that the Gospel according to Matthew is an eyewitness account written by contemporaries of Christ."

It appears that within five years after the death and resurrection of Christ, most of His words and deeds had been committed to a simple written Hebrew form and Matthew is, of course, assumed to be part of this compilation. Within a decade, this corpus would have been translated into a Greek version for church requirements. This body of information is often called the "Q-document" (for German, quelle, source). Around the year AD 50 the original material was developed into written Greek form and the "synoptic" Gospels were composed, probably since the persecutions were imminent. The key point is that eyewitnesses were still around to verify the details.

While some argue that Matthew, as an eye-witness, would not have depended on other sources for his Gospel, it can also be argued that he didn’t need to reinvent the wheel regarding the narrative of Jesus' life. It had been sufficiently written down, and Matthew verified it by accepting much of it. Rather, the information unique to Matthew’s Gospel demonstrates that Matthew was indeed with Jesus – and with his pen in hand.

Stenographic Skill
There is, in fact, reason to believe that Matthew had the skills of a tachygrapher, or shorthand writer. As a former customs official, he would have had a working knowledge of tachygraphy, and thus may have been able to transcribe the Sermon on the Mount verbatim, just as Tertius and others were able to transcribe Paul's more verbose utterances. (The reason Matthew's Gospel is so much longer than Mark's is that he includes these extensive discourses.) For more information on this skill, see our article, "The Bible in Shorthand."

Your Challenge
Matthew's thoroughness and precision lends many special insights as one delves into his detailed presentations. His rendering of the Seven Kingdom Parables in Chapter 13 are remarkably parallel to the Letters to the Seven Churches in Revelation Chapters 2 and 3. His presentation of Jesus' confidential briefing to His disciples about His Second Coming in Chapter 24 is an essential foundation in any eschatological (end-time) study. He also focuses specifically on Jesus' fulfillment of Old Testament Scriptures.

This very basic book of the Bible is a most rewarding study to both novice and experienced Bible students who are willing to diligently dig in.

As American troops accelerate their withdrawal from Iraq in anticipation of President Obama's September 1st target date, it is fitting that we pause to overview the men seeking to lead the fledgling democracy that was once Saddam Hussein's domain.

Iraqi held elections in March, and thousands of candidates ran for placement in the Iraqi parliament's 325 seats. It was a close race for a parliamentary majority. According to the Independent High Electoral Commission of Iraq (IHEC), US-backed former interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi just barely eked out the win, garnering 91 seats in the Iraqi parliament - two more than incumbent Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's 89 seats. Since 163 seats are required to constitute a majority and, in turn, a ruling government, Iraqis are holding their collective breath while potentially explosive ethnicity- and religion-based political blocs compete and coalesce to form a majority Iraq can live with.

Al-Maliki:
Prime Minister Al-Maliki, after his ever-tightening and imposing grip on Iraqi civil liberties, will not release his hand easily. He contested the March elections results, demanding a vote recount that first delayed the announcement of a de facto leader for Iraq, and may further delay the nation's independence from American military by weeks, or even months. While Maliki is upset, top UN Representative in Iraq Ad Melkert, the IHEC, United States Ambassador Christopher R. Hill and Gen. Ray Odierno, the top American military commander in Iraq, all attest that the election was notably free of pervasive fraud or error, according to The New York Times.

An increasingly dissatisfied Sunni Arab constituency has been viewing Al-Maliki's government appointments as divisive, favoring only his own Shiites, and excluding Sunnis from equal participation in their own government. Before the fall of Saddam, Al-Maliki was a religious dissident and political exile who fled Saddam's regime to live in Syria and Iran. Soon after the parliament selected him as leader of the country in 2006, his fierce campaign to purge the government of Ba'ath party members (real or perceived) with little regard for human rights – including demands for government control of media, civilian arrests, imprisonments and interrogations - painted a picture of a man building yet another Iraqi dictatorship. Plus, he has yet been unable to secure the nation against internal terror.

Allawi:
On the other hand, Al-Maliki's major competitor, Ayad Allawi, was once viewed as a rather un-Iraqi puppet leader placed by American forces into his role as interim prime minister. Allawi made a bid in the 2005 elections, but despite the support of a varied coalition known as the Iraqi National List, was unsuccessful. In this election, he did draw the votes of disenfranchised Sunnis who had boycotted the 2005 elections. Sunnis are highly unlikely, however, to come to any agreements to work alongside other groups that may be necessary for an Allawi victory, such as the Kurds, or the Iraqi National Alliance Members who support anti-American cleric al-Sadr.

Ayad Allawi was born in 1945 to a wealthy merchant family, a son of a doctor and Iraqi Parliament Member. He attended Baghdad College, an elite Jesuit Catholic High School. He and his first wife, a Catholic daughter to a high-ranking Iraqi military official, separated by mutual agreement. He has spent over half of his life in England as a political exile. Though he studied medicine in Baghdad, he received his MA in England and pursued a career in neurology there. He has survived several organized assassination attempts there and in the Middle East from Hussein operatives, al-Qaeda, and Iraqi militants. His current wife and their children still live in England for their own protection.

During his brief governance in 2004-2005, Allawi demonstrated the ability to make controversial and sometimes unpopular choices that shrewdly included, rather than ostracized, members of other sects and ethnic groups. For instance, when he shut down the Iraqi office of the Arab broadcaster, Al-Jazeera, he appointed a former Ba'athist and Iraqi Intelligence Officer to oversee media regulations. His General Security Directorate was an espionage agency comprised of former Hussein secret police officers assigned to combat Iraqi insurgents and terrorists from within. He also cooperated with American and their allied military operations entering Najaf and Fallujah, an unpopular move that angered the Shia community, many of whom were killed in the battles that ensued.

With this year's important elections all but over, the Iraqi people are hoping for a cessation in the violence from insurgents who want to create chaos and a vacuum for their opportunism - any weakening of a unified government. Bombings erupted even as the election drew to its conclusion, and much of the world is concerned that the terror will only increase without a firm leader in control. 

General Raymond Odierno, in a discussion with Jim Lehrer, reported that US forces are on pace to end combat operations in Iraq by September, but the post-election government transition there is still likely to take several months. He, for one, is hopeful that arrangements will pan out relatively peacefully: "We have worked very hard with the government of Iraq during this caretaker government to try to ensure that security will remain. We have worked very close relationships with all the security elements, the minister of defense, the minister of interior, in order to ensure that safeguards are in place in order to sustain security. And I believe we will be able to do that through this critical period."

A US District judge ruled the National Day of Prayer to be unconstitutional in mid-April, much to the consternation of large numbers of Americans. Since enforcement is suspended until the case goes through the appeals process, however, the National Day of Prayer is still officially on for Thursday, May 6th. President Obama signed a statement on Monday proclaiming May 6th the National Day of Prayer, following the tradition of presidents since 1952. Rather than holding a big prayer gathering in the East Room of the White House the way President Bush used to do, Obama has declined to pray in public, saying he will honor the day in private.

On April 17, 1952, President Truman signed into law the creation of a National Day of Prayer and designated it as a floating holiday.  In 1988 Congress set the first Thursday in May as the day for presidents to call Americans to pray. Yet, US District Judge Barbara Crabb has ruled the National Day of Prayer is unconstitutional. In a lawsuit brought against the Bush(43) administration in October 2008, the Freedom From Religion Foundation, a group of atheists and agnostics, successfully convinced Judge Crabb that the day violates the establishment clause of the US Constitution. Americans panicked and emails shot around the country crying that the National Day of Prayer had been cancelled. That, thankfully, is not the case, but even if it were, Americans would still be free to gather and pray for their country with or without the permission of a presidential proclamation.

A recent USA Today/Gallup poll found that the vast majority of Americans do believe in God and prayer. According to the poll of one thousand adults over the weekend, 92 percent expressed belief in a deity, and 82 percent agreed that God answers prayers.   Even with a few people against it, the majority of Americans support celebrating a National Day of Prayer. About 4.5 percent of 500 adults polled were against it, while another 38 percent didn't seem to care one way or the other. Nearly 60 percent said they favored celebrating the day.

Those few who oppose the national prayer day can make a lot of noise, though. In Colorado Springs, Colorado, the Freedom From Religion Foundation has been filling billboards with the slogan, "God & Government, A Dangerous Mix: Keep State and Church Separate."

Evangelist Franklin Graham, the chairman of this year's National Day of Prayer, is not bothered by the anti-prayer day ruling. He considers the publicity from the court case to be a good thing. With the media's focus, more people will be aware of this annual event that sometimes gets forgotten about. Judge Crabb's ruling has focused the nation, and especially focused America on the importance of praying. "If I ever see her I'm just going to give her a big hug and a kiss," Graham said.

This year's theme is "Prayer...For Such a Time as This." Thousands of prayer gatherings will be taking place around the country on Thursday. To find an event near you, please check the links below.   Please continue to pray for America's national and local leaders, communities, schools, and families. God does hear prayer, and He is faithful.