ILLusTRATIONS.—Hebrew and Talmudic parallels are collected chiefly in the Horm Heb. et Talm. of Lightfoot and Schéttgen, and in Gerh, Meuschen, ΔΓ7' ew Talmude et antiquit. Ebrao- rum illustr. 1736; Weber's Jéid. Theologieand Dalman’s Worte Jesu also contribute thereto. In the enormous accumulation of Greek parallels to word or phrase, the following have done good service; Price, Comm. in Varios NT Libros (1660); Raphel, Annot, Philolog. in NT ex Xenophonte, Polybio, Arriano et Herodoto (1709-31) ; Elsner, Observ. sacr@ in NT libros (1720) ; J. Alberti, Observ. Philolog. in Sacros NT Libros (1725), Palairet (French pastor in London, 1752); Kypke (1755) ; Krebs (esp. from Josephus, 1755), and Loesner (esp. from Philo, 1777); Campbell, Dissertations, 1788; Grinfield, Scholia Hellenistica in NT (ASKS); and Field, Otiwm Norvicense, Pars iii.* (1899).
Discussions oN Specrat Secrions.—Lutteroth, Essai d’inter-
rétation de quelques parties de UV Evangile selon 8. Matt., ζ 0:0. Nativity: Resch, Kindheitserangelium, TU x. 5 (where farther references will be found). Sermon on the Mount: Trénch (1844), Tholuck (translation, 18692), H. Weiss (Freiburg, 1893). The Lord’s Prayer: Chase, Lord’s Prayer in the Early Church (Camb. Texts and Studies, i. 3, 1891), Parables: Trench, Arnot, Bruce Parabolic Teaching of Christ (18898), and Jitlicher Gleichnisreden Jesu (1888, 18992, review in Mepos, Times, Sept. 1899, and in J7S, Jan. 1900). Exchatological Discourse: ἈΣΤῊΝ Bihbelstudien (Leipzig, 1560), 129-156; ef. Weiffenbach, Der Wiederkunftsgedanke Jesu (Leipzig, 1873); Schwartzkopff, Die Weissagungen Jesu Christi (1896, Eng. tr. 1897).
Onterx, Cuanaorenistios, Synoptic ReLations.—Hilgenfeld, ZWTh ix. 303 π΄ 366 1%; Scholten, Das dlteste Evangelium (Ἐ}- berfeld, 1869), valuable for data; Renan, Les Hvangiles (1877); Schanz,*Matt, a. Lukas,’ 77Q,1882, pp. 517-560; Massebieau, Mra men deacitationsde’ ancien Test.dans lEvang. selon. Matt, Paris, 1885; Th, Naville, ssai sur Vévang. selon S. Matt., Lau- sanne, 1893; A. Réville, Jésus de Nazareth, 1897: Roehrich, La Composition des Evangiles, Paris, 1897; Bruce, With Open Face (1596), pp. 1-24; F. P. Badham, St. Mark's Indebtedness to St. Matt, (1597) ;Sir J.C, Hawkins, Hora Synoptica (1899) ;Dalman, Die Worte Jesu (1898); P. Wernle, Die Synopt. Frage (1899). Also the Introductions of Hilgenfeld, Davidson, Bleek-Mangold, Westcott, Salmon, Weiss (also Life of Christ, trans., i. 251f., 55), Holtzmann, Jilicher, Godet (part on Matt., 1898), Zahn; as well as articles in Bible Dictionaries and Encyclopmdias,
Surrosep Souroces,—Weiffenbach, Die Papiasfragmente, 1878; also Jacobsen and Lipsius in JP 7h for 1885, pp. 167-176 ; see, further, ap. Zahn, Hinleitung, Ba. 11. τ Resch, Agrapha (1889), and Aussercanonische Parallelterte (1893-04), in TU v.4, x. 1,2: and Ropes, Die Spritche Jesu (a critical sifting of Resch's material), 7 17 xiv, 2 (1596). J. V. BARTLET,
VOL. INI.—20
MATTHIAS
MATTHIAS (Ματθίας [Tisch. Treg. WH Maéélas], abbreviated from Marvaélas, the Gr. form of 7.752 ‘gift of J” ; cf. the name Theodorus).—The disciple selected along with Barsabbas, after the Ascension, from those followers of Christ who were deemed qualified for appointment to the apostleship vacant through the death of Judas (Ac 118). The pro- cedure was adopted on the initiative of St. Peter, who applied Ps 1098 to the circumstances ; and the selection appears to have been made by the assembled Christian brotherhood.* The general qualification required was to have ‘companied with us (the apostles) all the time that the Lox? Jesus went in and out among us.’ Barsabbas and Matthias had also, presumably, special graces of character and gifts of teaching and administration. After prayer, addressed probably to Christ,} and a solemn appeal to the lot,t Matthias was elected.
This is the sole instance of the lot being em- ployed in the history of the Apostolic Church, and it occurs significantly between the Ascension and Pentecost, when the disciples were ‘orphans’ (Jn 1418), Stier (Words of the Apostles, in loc.) regards this election as premature and unwarranted, the outcome of St. Peter’s officious impetuosity. ‘The lot fell: not the Lord chose.’ He holds that St. Paul was the true successor of Judas, chosen, like the other apostles, by the Lord Himself. It may be granted that the appointment of Matthias stands on a somewhat lower level than that of the original Twelve and of St. Paul; but, in the absence of any direction to the contrary, the pro- cedure was a legitimate exercise of human wisdom in dependence upon divine guidance; and St. Luke, the ‘beloved’ friend of St. Paul, appears to endorse the election (representing, doubtless, the general opinion of the Apostolic Church) ; for after speaking of the eleven apostles (Ac 1) he refers (Ac 62) to the ‘ Twelve.’ §
The historical character of Matthias’ election has been impugned by Zeller (Acts of Apost., Eng. tr. i. 168) on account of (1) the assumption that the apostles remained in Jerusalem ; (2) the close connexion of the narrative with Pentecost. But the departure of the apostles to Galilee after the Resurrection did not preclude their early return to Jerusalem; and the second objection can have weight only with those who reject entirely the supernatural in primitive Church history.
According to Eus. (H# i. 12, ii. 1) and Epiphan. (Her. i. 22), Matthias was one of the ‘Seventy’ (Lk 101).1 Hilgenfeld identifies him with Natha-
*So Beng., Stier, Mey., Alf., Baumg., ete. on the ground that the subj. in v.23 must be the same as in vv.2% 26, Some (Mosh. Ham. Jacobson, ete.), assign the selection to the apostles, taking the subj. from v.17,
+So Beng., Ols., Baumg., Alf., Words., Hows., and most com- mentators, on the ground that the choice of apostles is always referred to Christ (Lk 615, Jn 67° 1516, Ac 14), the same Greek word being used. Meyer, Holtz., Zick. refer 14 to God (Ac 429 158),