The Matthean Posteriority Hypothesis: A Fresh Take on Gospel Origins

Imagine a world where the Gospel of Matthew wasn't the first to be written, but rather a later composition drawing from other sources! This intriguing idea is at the heart of the Matthean Posteriority hypothesis, a scholarly theory that suggests the Gospel of Matthew was composed after the Gospels of Mark and Luke. This hypothesis challenges the traditional view of the synoptic problem, which is the question of the literary relationship between the first three Gospels of the New Testament: Matthew, Mark, and Luke. The Matthean Posteriority hypothesis was developed by scholars who have been examining the textual evidence and historical context of these ancient writings, primarily in the late 20th and early 21st centuries, with a focus on understanding the intricate web of influences and sources that shaped the Gospels.

The "who" behind this hypothesis includes a range of biblical scholars and theologians who have been re-evaluating the traditional order of Gospel composition. The "what" is the proposition that Matthew used both Mark and Luke as sources, rather than being the first Gospel written. The "when" is a modern scholarly debate, gaining traction in recent decades as new methods of textual analysis and historical research have emerged. The "where" is primarily within academic circles and theological institutions that study the New Testament. The "why" is driven by a desire to better understand the origins and development of the Christian texts, providing a clearer picture of how early Christian communities might have shared and adapted their stories about Jesus.

The Matthean Posteriority hypothesis is part of a broader scholarly effort to solve the synoptic problem, which has puzzled theologians and historians for centuries. Traditionally, the Augustinian hypothesis suggested that Matthew was the first Gospel, followed by Mark and then Luke. However, the Two-Source Hypothesis, which posits that Mark and a hypothetical source called "Q" were used by both Matthew and Luke, has been more widely accepted in recent times. The Matthean Posteriority hypothesis offers an alternative by suggesting that Matthew was written after Mark and Luke, potentially using them as sources.

This hypothesis is supported by various textual analyses that highlight similarities and differences in the narrative structure, language, and theological themes across the Gospels. Proponents argue that certain passages in Matthew seem to be expansions or adaptations of stories found in Mark and Luke, suggesting a later composition. Additionally, the hypothesis considers the historical context of the early Christian communities, proposing that Matthew's Gospel reflects a more developed theological perspective that could have emerged after the other two Gospels.

While the Matthean Posteriority hypothesis is not universally accepted, it represents an exciting and dynamic area of biblical scholarship. It encourages us to think critically about the origins of these ancient texts and the complex processes through which they were composed and transmitted. By exploring these possibilities, we gain a deeper appreciation for the rich tapestry of early Christian literature and the diverse voices that contributed to its formation.