This is the first of four quarterly specials in Giford's Bible Study Programme.

Each of the four cannonical gospels has its own unique character, being written in a different times and places by different authors with different views and different source materials.

The first gospel in the Bible is that attributed to Matthew the tax collector, one of the 12 disciples of Jesus. According to church tradition (and current Catholic dogma), this was the first of the gospels to be written. Modern scholars believe this to have been written sometime between 80 and 100 AD, in the region of Palestine or Syria. The author certainly had a copy of Mark, and probably a document called 'Q', of which Luke also had a copy. Finally, he had some other source material ('M') - probably also written.

One of the main features distinguishing Matthew from the other gospellers is his knowledge of and respect for Hebrew scripture. It is likely that the author was Jewish, and writing for other Jews. This is reflected in the number of times that he draws parallels between Jesus and Moses (for instance Matt 2:20: Saying, Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and go into the land of Israel: for they are dead which sought the young child's life. parallels Exodus 4:19: And the LORD said unto Moses in Midian, Go, return into Egypt: for all the men are dead which sought thy life.). The problem is that his understanding of the scriptures he quotes often seems poor - it is clear he was reading a Greek translation of the Hebrew originals¹, and was determined to find Messianic prophecies that could be read as references to Jesus. On several occasions, this toxic combination leads him to misinterpret his source material in important ways.

Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

- Matt 1:23

Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

- Isaiah 7:14

This is perhaps the most famous and important of Matthew's errors. This Hebrew verse uses the world almah, meaning 'young woman', which may or may not imply virginity². When translated into Greek, this became parthenos, which explicitely means virgin, and it is that word that Matthew uses here. Having seen in Week 14 that Luke does not seem to have originally claimed a virgin birth, here we seem to have the source - a mistranslation.

But that's not Matthew's fault, since it lies with the Greek translation he was using. Matthew's mistake is to see this verse as a Messianic prophecy. Reading this section of Isiaih, this child is a sign that King Ahaz's kingdom will survive the Asyrrian conquest - something that was done and dusted centuries before Jesus was born. In his eagerness to see a Messianic prophecy, Matthew engages in some serious quote-mining here.

Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently enquired of the wise men. Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying, in Rama was there a voice heard, lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not.

- Matt 2:16-18

Thus saith the LORD; A voice was heard in Ramah, lamentation, and bitter weeping; Rahel weeping for her children refused to be comforted for her children, because they were not.

- Jeremiah 31:15

Matthew does not appear to realise that Rachel is weeping for the Ephraimites and Manassites (her descendants) carried off to Babylon; Jeremiah continues: Thus saith the LORD; Refrain thy voice from weeping, and thine eyes from tears: for thy work shall be rewarded, saith the LORD; and they shall come again from the land of the enemy. And there is hope in thine end, saith the LORD, that thy children shall come again to their own border. What is less obvious is that the Judean Bethlehemites were descended from Leah, not Rachel. Indeed, this 'slaughter of the Innocents' is unlikely to have been real at all - Matthew is drawing parallels between Jesus and the Passover, writing theology not history.

And when they were departed, behold, the angel of the Lord appeareth to Joseph in a dream, saying, Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and be thou there until I bring thee word: for Herod will seek the young child to destroy him. When he arose, he took the young child and his mother by night, and departed into Egypt: and was there until the death of Herod: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son.

- Matt 2:13-15

When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt.

- Hosea 11:1

It should be clear that the 'child' is a metaphor for the nation of Israel, and Hosea is talking about the Exodus, not making a prophecy about Jesus. This is another of Matthew's parallels between Jesus and Moses. Drawing the parallel as a literary device is fine; but claiming this as a Messianic prophecy is incorrect.

And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene.

- Matt 2:23

Again, there is a small problem here - there is no such prophecy in any extant Jewish documents! Perhaps Matthew is thinking of Judges 13:5: For, lo, thou shalt conceive, and bear a son; and no razor shall come on his head: for the child shall be a Nazarite unto God from the womb: and he shall begin to deliver Israel out of the hand of the Philistines, where 'Nazarite' means 'monk'.

That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, The land of Zabulon, and the land of Nephthalim, by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles; the people which sat in darkness saw great light; and to them which sat in the region and shadow of death light is sprung up.

- Matt 4:14-16

Nevertheless the dimness shall not be such as was in her vexation, when at the first he lightly afflicted the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, and afterward did more grievously afflict her by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, in Galilee of the nations.

The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light: they that dwell in the land of the shadow of death, upon them hath the light shined.

- Isiaih 9:1-2

Matthew appears not to recognise that these are 2 separate verses - 9:1 is the conclusion of Chapter 8, and it's only with 9:2 that a new section in Isiaih starts. Since they have been lumped together into the same Chapter by later editors, Matthew wrongly assumes that they must be part of the same section.

And brought the ass, and the colt, and put on them their clothes, and they set him thereon.

- Matt 21:7

Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.

- Zechariah 9:9

In a famously over-literal reading, Matthew does not recognise the Hebrew technique of emphasis by repetition³, and instead thinks that the ass and the colt are two separate animals.

So there is our picture of Matthew; a Greek-speaking man who saw Jesus as a Jewish Messiah, come to fulfil the prophecies, yet lead by this belief to twist his scripture and find prophecies where none existed.