Identity of the Matthew behind St Matthew's Gospel

[Theopesta]

dear venerable members:
please I wish I could know more about G. of Matthew, as our tratition learn that it is written by st.matthew the tax collector, this is my strong blief but I find this opinion:

Although the document is anonymous, the authorship of this Gospel is traditionally ascribed to St. Matthew, a tax collector who became an apostle of Jesus. The early church fathers were unanimous in this view

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_matthew

I find that many make disputes about that st. matthew the disciple had written this disciple, I wish I know your opinions
many thanks, best regards, Theopesta

[Theopesta]

Matthew alone was suggested as the author of the first gospel


The earliest statement that Matthew wrote something is by Papias: “Instead [of writing in Greek], Matthew arranged the oracles in the Hebrew dialect, and each man interpreted them as he was able


The best option, in our view, is that Papias was referring to a sayings source which Matthew wrote.


After Papias, Irenaeus wrote: “Now Matthew published also a book of the Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching the gospel in Rome and founding the Church" It is obvious that Irenaeus got the gist of this information from Papias...On the other hand, since Peter and Paul were not in Rome together until the early 60s, this may well help us to fix a date for Matthew’s Gospel, provided that this tradition has other corroborative evidence.

this mean this Gospel not written after 70 C.A


he early external testimony is universal on two points: (1) Matthew wrote something related to the life of Jesus Christ; and (2) Matthew wrote in a Semitic tongue. Little, if any, independent testimony exists however for the supposition that Matthew wrote his Gospel in Hebrew/Aramaic. Nevertheless, the attachment of the name of Matthew to the first gospel may well indicate that it ultimately goes back to him, even if completed by a later compiler.

http://www.bible.org/page.asp?page_id=969

[Theopesta]

www.xenos.org/ministries/crossroads/OnlineJournal/issue3/mtmain.htm#WHAT


While Matthew cannot be construed as a pesher commentary, it could still be true that Matthew is using the pesher devise of OT contemporization. Matthew’s use of Hosea 11:1 seems so disinterested in its plain meaning that a cursory comparison of Hosea 11:1 with Matthew 2:15 certainly leaves the impression he is using this approach.

What is clear from this preliminary study is that Matthew was not using pesher-like eisegetical techniques, when he used the Old Testament in his gospel. He apparently often used his own translations of Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic sources rather than isolating extant translations that fit an interpretive agenda. Significantly, his putative interpretations are not self-serving but correspond to interpretations found in Septuigental, Masoretic, Syrian and rabbinical materials from the same era. Similarly, his applications of the Old Testament to New Testament events do not have the tortured appearance of those found in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Even in some of the more challenging ‘fulfillment’ materials Matthew’s use of the Old Testament does not correspond with pesher techniques used by the Qumran community