27.  In considering the problem presented by these facts, it is well to remember that no one of these gospels contains within itself any statement concerning the identity of its author.  We are indebted to tradition for the names by which we know them, and no one of them makes any claim to apostolic origin.  The earliest reference in Christian literature which may be applied to our gospels comes from Papias, a Christian of Asia Minor in the second century.  He reports that an earlier teacher had said, “Mark, having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately, though not, indeed, in order, whatsoever he remembered of the things said or done by Christ, for he neither heard the Lord nor followed him, but afterward, as I said, he followed Peter, who adapted his teachings to the needs of his hearers, but with no intention of giving a connected account of the Lord’s discourses.  So that Mark committed no error when he thus wrote some things as he remembered them, for he was careful of one thing, not to omit any of the things which he had heard and not to state any of them falsely....  Matthew wrote the oracles [of the Lord] in the Hebrew language [Aramaic], and every one interpreted them as he was able” (Euseb.  Ch.  Hist. iii. 39).  The result of many years’ study by scholars of all shades of opinion is the very general conclusion that the writing which Papias attributed to Mark was essentially what we have in our second gospel.

28.  It is almost as universally acknowledged that the work ascribed by the second century elder to the apostle Matthew cannot be our first gospel; for its language has not the characteristics which other translations from Hebrew or Aramaic lead us to expect, while the completeness of its narrative exceeds what is suggested by the words of Papias.  If, however, the matter which Matthew and Luke have in such rich measure in addition to Mark’s narrative be considered, the likeness between this and the writing attributed by Papias to the apostle Matthew is noteworthy.  The conclusion is now very general, that that apostolic writing is in large measure preserved in the discourses in our first and third gospels.  The relation of our gospels to the two books mentioned by Papias may be conceived, then, somewhat as follows:  The earliest gospel writing of which we know anything was a collection of the teachings of Jesus made by the apostle Matthew, in which he collected with simple narrative introductions, those sayings of the Lord which from the beginning had passed from mouth to mouth in the circle of the disciples.  At a later time Mark wrote down the account of the ministry of Jesus which Peter had been accustomed to relate in his apostolic preaching.  The work of the apostle Matthew, while much richer in the sayings of Jesus, lacked the completeness that characterizes a narrative; hence it occurred to some early disciple to blend together these two primitive gospel records, adding such other items of knowledge as came to his hand from oral tradition or written memoranda.  As his aim was practical rather than historical, he added such editorial comments as would make of the new gospel an argument for the Messiahship of Jesus, as we have seen.  Since the most precious element in this new gospel was the apostolic record of the teachings of the Lord, the name of Matthew and not of his literary successor, was given to the book.