MATTER.—In Sir 28” ‘matter’ is used where we should now use ‘material’ instead, ‘As the (March 1895, p. 136 ff.) Budde argues that Mattanah is not a proper name at all, but that the song should end—
‘With the sceptre, with their staves, Out of the desert a gift’; and then v.19 resume ‘and from Beer (LXX ἀσὸ gpiares) to Nahaliel.’ See also Lxpos, Times, vi. (1895) p. 481 f.
matter of the fire is, so it burneth’ (κατὰ τὴν ὕλην τοῦ πυρός, RV “ΑΒ is the fuel of the fire’). Cf. Chaucer, Persones Tale, § 8, ‘But for your sinne ye been woxen thral and foul, and members of the feend, hate of aungels, sclaundre of holy chirche, and fode of the false serpent, perpetuel matere of the fyr of helle’; and Bacon’s Essays (Gold. Treas. ed. p. 57), ‘The surest way to prevent Seditions, (if the Times doe beare it,) is to take away the Matter of them. For if there be Fuell prepared, it is hard to tell, whence the Spark shall come, that shall set it on fire.’ In Ja 3° the same Gr. word (ὕλη) is tr? ‘matter,’ ‘Behold how great a matter a little fire kindleth,’ but it is clear from previous versions that the Eng. word means here ‘affair.’ Coverdale’s tr. is ‘Beholde how gret a thinge a lyttell fyre kyndleth’; the Gen. Bible has the same with ‘matter’ in the marg., and the Bishops place ‘matter’ in the text. RV renders ‘Behold, how much wood is kindled by how small a fire!’ marg. ‘how great a forest is kindled’ ; this is very near Wyclif’s ‘Lo! hou miche fijr kyndlith hou greete a wode,’ after Vulg. Ecce quantus ignis quam magnam sylvam incendit.
For the phrase ‘Make matter’ see under MAKE; and add this illustration from Tindale (Works, i. 169), ‘ Let this little flock be bold therefore: for if God be on our side, what matter maketh it who be against us?’ J. HASTINGS.
MATTHAN (Ma@@dv).—Grandfather of Joseph the husband of Mary, Mt 1", perhaps to 5 identified with Matthat, who occupies the same place in St. Luke’s genealogy of our Lord (Lk 3%).
MATTHANIAS.—4. (A Ματθανίας, B Mardy), 1 Es 927= MATTANIAH, Ezr 10%, 2. (A Ματθανίας, B Βεσ- κασπασμύς, AV Mathanias), 1 Es 9°!= MATTANIAH, Ezr 10%.
MATTHAT (Ma06dr).—1. Grandfather of Joseph the husband of Mary, Lk 3%, perhaps to be identi- fied with Matthan, who occupies the same place in St. Matthew’s genealogy of our Lord (Mt 1). 2. Another ancestor of Jesus, Lk 3”,
MATTHEW, APOSTLE (Μαθθαῖος, Lachm. Tisch. Treg. WH ; Ματθαῖος TR).—Matthew’s placein the Apostolic list is not quite constant, varying be- tween seventh and eighth, and so affecting the station assigned to Thomas (in the Syno tics; in Ac 18 Bartholomew). His position in Mk, Mt, and Lk, viz. seventh, must give his standing in the original apostolic circle, as reflected in St. Peter’s mind. He is called in Mt 105 ‘the customs-oflicer’ (ὁ τελώνης), and is thus identified with the Matthew of 9° (cf. Mk 24, Lk 5%), called while sitting ‘at the toll-office’ near Capernaum, on the Great West Road from Damascus to tle Mediterranean. St. Mark styles this servant of the tetrarch Herod, ‘Levi the son of Alpheus’; but that does not bar the identification. For there is analogy for even two Hebraic names, both outside (Jos. Ant. XVIII. li. 2, ᾿Ιωσὴφ ὁ καὶ Καϊάφας) and within the apostolic circle. And it is likely that, as with Simon Cephas, Matthew was the later name, given after hiscall. This fits its probable meaning, ‘ Jehovah’s gift.’ Matthew, then, was the name by which this apostle became known in Christian circles ; and by it even St. Mark indicates him in his official list, while giving his call with strict historic fidelity. So Thomas is ‘Judas Thomas’ in Acta Thome; and Bartholomew was perhaps Nathanael’s usual Christian name. On the forms and meaning of the name Matthew see, further, Dalman, p. 142.
Several things seem implied in this call of Matthew. He must already have been familiar with Jesus and His gospel as preached in Caper
200 MATTHEW, GOSPEL OF
naum (for there is no sign that he, like the first six apostles, had been an adherent of the Baptist) ; and the feast which he gave in honour of Jesus (Mk 244) probably marked the new relationship. Finally, while we cannot date his call with pre- cision, Pharisaic suspicion was already awake ; so that his call and consequent experience of his Master’s ministry can hardly go back to the very earliest days (this bears on the next art.).
The only other facts related of Matthew on good authority concern him as evangelist. Eusebius (HE iii. 24) says that he, like John, wrote only under the stress of necessity. ‘ For Matthew, after preaching to Hebrews, when about to go also to others, committed to writing in his native tongue the Gospel that bears his name; and so by his writing supplied, to those whom he was leaving, the loss of his presence.’ The value of this tradition can be decided only after considering the Gospel itself. No historical use can be made of the artificial story in Sanhedr. 43°, that Matthew was condemned to death by a Jewish court (see Laible, Christ in the Talmud, ed. Streane, 71 ff.); especially in face of Heracleon’s explicit denial of martyrdom in his case (Clem. Alex. Strom. iv. 9). Refer- ences to him in apocryphal sources are specially doubtful on account of the easy confusion between Matthew and Matthias, to whom gnostic Para- doseis were attributed (e.g. Clem. Pied. ii. 16). See, further, the following article.