A study of the first chapters of the Acts of the Apostles shows that the witnesses of Jesus were confronted very early with the reality of persecution. This situation probably exerted a decisive influence on the birth of the first Christian writings. Although this cause-and-effect relationship is never explicitly stated in the New Testament, several historical and literary clues suggest that the apostles became aware very early of the need to preserve their testimony before it disappeared with them.
From the earliest days of the Church, the apostles show remarkable lucidity. The loss of Judas Iscariot does not lead them to adopt a fatalistic attitude. On the contrary, they consider it essential to keep the apostolic college intact and choose Matthias so that he may become, with them, “a witness to his resurrection” (Acts 1.22). This decision reveals a fundamental concern: to ensure the continuity and preservation of the testimony entrusted to the Twelve.
The events that followed could only reinforce this awareness. Peter and John are arrested a first time and brought before the (Acts 4.1-3). Shortly afterward, the Twelve as a whole are in turn imprisoned (Acts 5.17-18). The apostles are flogged and threatened with death (Acts 5.40). They then discover that their ministry directly exposes them to the violence of the religious authorities.
The death of Stephen marks a new stage. For the first time, a prominent member of the Church is executed (Acts 7.54-60). This tragedy is followed by a great persecution that scatters the believers outside Jerusalem (Acts 8.1-4). A few years later, James, son of Zebedee, becomes the first of the Twelve to suffer martyrdom on the orders of Herod Agrippa I (Acts 12.1-2). Peter himself narrowly escapes an execution that already seemed decided (Acts 12.3-11).
These events must certainly have had a profound effect on the apostles. They now understood that their disappearance was not a mere distant possibility but a very real threat. Jesus himself had warned them:
“If they persecuted me, they will persecute you also” (John 15.20).
The Lord had also announced to them that some of them would be put to death (Matthew 10.16-23; John 16.2). The disciples therefore knew that their oral testimony would not be .
Now, their essential mission was not to build an institution, but to be witnesses of the events they had seen and heard (Acts 1.8). They were the custodians of a unique memory, that of the words, the miracles, the death and the resurrection of Jesus Christ. If these witnesses were to disappear, there was a risk that their testimony would be altered or lost.
Under these circumstances, it seems difficult to imagine that the apostles waited several decades before thinking of setting down in writing what they were transmitting orally. Such an attitude would have been contrary to the pragmatism they had already shown when replacing Judas. Just as they had ensured the continuity of the apostolic testimony by appointing Matthias, they probably sought to preserve that testimony itself by entrusting it to writing.
Among the Twelve, Matthew appears as the most natural candidate for such a task. A former tax collector (Matthew 9.9), he presumably had administrative training and regular practice in writing. His profession involved keeping accounts, drafting documents and a certain command of the languages used in first-century Palestine. By contrast, several apostles came from the Galilean fishing community and were regarded by the authorities as “uneducated” men (Acts 4.13), which does not mean that they were illiterate, but that they had not received the training of scribes and rabbis.
It is therefore quite conceivable that Matthew played the role of writer or secretary of the apostolic group. From this perspective, the writing of an early testimony would not be the isolated work of one individual, but the fruit of a collective undertaking intended to preserve the memory of the eyewitnesses.
This hypothesis finds a remarkable echo in the testimonies of the early Christian authors. At the beginning of the second century, Papias reports:
“Matthew collected the sayings of the Lord in the Hebrew language, and each one interpreted them as best he could.”
This statement seems to refer to an ancient document written in a Semitic language and intended to preserve the teachings of Jesus. Later, Irenaeus of Lyon states that Matthew published his Gospel while Peter and Paul were still alive. The ancient tradition of the Church has thus consistently associated Matthew with a particularly early composition.
The prologue of Luke provides another important clue. Addressing Theophilus, the evangelist declares:
“Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us” (Luke 1.1).
This remark shows that even before the writing of his own work, several written accounts were already circulating in the churches. The existence of very early prior writings was thus known to Luke and regarded as perfectly natural.
The destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 is also an argument often invoked. Although Jesus announces the ruin of the Temple (Matthew 24.1-2), the Gospel of Matthew never explicitly alludes to the fulfillment of this prophecy. An author writing after such a momentous catastrophe would probably have been tempted to point out its fulfillment. This silence can be interpreted as a clue in favor of an earlier composition.
Thus, the repeated arrests of the apostles, the martyrdom of Stephen, the dispersion of the believers, the death of James and the threats constantly hanging over the witnesses of Jesus probably contributed to giving rise, very early, to the need to preserve their testimony. The appearance of the first Christian writings would therefore not be the result of a late development, but the natural consequence of a historical situation in which the disappearance of the witnesses was becoming an increasingly real possibility.
From this perspective, an appears not as a marginal hypothesis, but as a pragmatic response by the apostles to the dangers they faced. Aware of their frailty and of the brevity of their lives, they would have sought to ensure the faithful transmission of their testimony so that future generations could continue to know with certainty the events that had marked the history of salvation (Luke 1.1-4).