Talk:Gospel of Matthew

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Gospel of Matthew article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12: 31 days

Christianity: Jesus Top‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is within the scope of the Jesus work group, a task force which is currently considered to be inactive.

Religious texts (defunct)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religious texts, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Religious textsWikipedia:WikiProject Religious textsTemplate:WikiProject Religious textsReligious texts

Religion High‑importance

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Bible Top‑importance

	Bible portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bible, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Bible on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BibleWikipedia:WikiProject BibleTemplate:WikiProject BibleBible
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ancient Near East Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Near East, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of ancient Near East–related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ancient Near EastWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Near EastTemplate:WikiProject Ancient Near EastAncient Near East
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook

Explain Q

@Remsense I am confused why you keep reverting my edits. I explained what the Gospel Q is as simple as possible. How should it be explained? The wiki page for the Q source calls it “part of the common material found in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke but not in the Gospels of Mark”. I called it “hypothetical sayings Gospel Q (which consists of the material Matthew shares in common with Luke)”, which is pretty similar. This is very understandable, and if you have a problem you should WP: FIXFIRST by making it understandable. 2607:B400:A00:12:F5D9:701E:F6A4:8031 (talk) 07:33, 16 December 2024 (UTC)2607:B400:A00:12:F5D9:701E:F6A4:8031[reply]

I've reverted Remsense's edit - the material on Q is reliably sourced and essential to an account of current understanding of Matthew. Please note, thought, the Q is not a gospel.Achar Sva (talk) 10:28, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How can a statement that is literally wrong and deeply misleading be reliably sourced? Good grief. Remsense ‥ 论 10:31, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If I understand our article correctly, it's saying that Matthew uses Mark and Q as it's sources (plus M of course). If you think this is wrong, what's your reason?Achar Sva (talk) 10:33, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As you yourself said, calling it a gospel is wrong, ergo not what the source says, ergo not verified. To make my position clear, a version of this addition that correctly explains Q and its hypothetical relationship to Matthew would be welcomed by me.Remsense ‥ 论 10:43, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The further I go in the is article, the more repetition I find (of points rather than wording, mostly). It needs some heavy and careful editing. Achar Sva (talk) 10:58, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weight of Church Fathers' Testimony

"Church Fathers like Saint Jerome and Saint Eusebius, Father of Church History, the "Scholars" of the 4th Century, held that Saint Matthew the Apostle wrote first, wrote in Hebrew (Greek translations were made afterward), and this Tradition was handed down by the Apostles to the Church.

Moreover, Theophilus in Acts 1 is likely still in Office when Luke originally wrote to him, so Luke was probably written quite early, before 50s AD for sure. Since Matthew and Mark were written before Luke, as the Church Fathers unanimously testify, then Matthew and Mark would have been written in 40 ADs. Thoughts. God Bless." NishantXavier (talk) 02:13, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]