chronological. The different sections and the individual incidents and
teachings each contribute to the great argument of the book, namely,
that Jesus was the true Messiah of the Jews; that the Jews, since they
rejected him, forfeited their birthright; and that his kingdom,
fulfilling and inheriting the Old Testament promises, has become a
universal kingdom, open to all races and freed from all Jewish bonds.
[Footnote: Cf. e.g., x. 5, 6; xv. 24; viii. 11, 12; xii. 38-45; xxi. 42,
43; xxii. 7; xxiii. 13, 36, 38; xxiv. 2; xxviii. 19] This suggests that
the First Gospel represents a more mature stage in the thought of the
early Church than Mark and Luke.

[Sidenote: _Origin of Matthew's Sayings of Jesus_]

Its title and the fact that the Church Fathers constantly connect it
with Matthew, the publican, and later apostle is explained by the
statement of Papias, quoted by Eusebius:

Matthew accordingly composed the oracles in the Hebrew dialect, and
each one interpreted them as he was able (H.E., iii. 39). These oracles
evidently consisted of a written collection of the sayings of Jesus.
Since they were largely if not entirely included in our First Gospel,
It was therefore known as The _Gospel of Matthew_. There is no evidence
that the original Matthew's _Sayings of Jesus_ contained definite
narrative material. The fact that the First Gospel draws so largely from
Mark for its historical data would indicate that this was not supplied
by its main source. The _Sayings of Jesus_ was probably the oldest
written record of the work of Jesus, for, while oral tradition, easily
remembers incidents, disconnected teachings are not so readily preserved
by the memory. Their transcendent importance would also furnish a
strong incentive to use the pen. It was natural also that, of all the