"Jesus went out again beside the sea; the whole crowd

gathered around him, and he taught them. As he was

walking along, he saw Levi son of Alphaeus sitting at

the tax booth, and he said to him, "Follow me," And he

got up and followed him. And as he sat at dinner in his

house, many tax collectors and sinners were also

sitting with Jesus and his disciples - for there were

many who followed him. When the scribes of the

pharisees saw that he was eating with sinners and tax

collectors, they said to his disciples, "Why does he

eat with tax collectors and sinners?" When Jesus

heard this, he said to them, "Those who are well have

no need of a physician, but those who are sick; I have

come to call not the righteous but sinners." (Mk 2:13-17)

The calling of Levi

While Mark's gospel tells the story of the calling of Levi, Matthew’s gospel repeats the episode but

replaces the name "Levi" by the name "Matthew" (Matt.9:9-13). All three synoptic gospels tell us

that Matthew became one of the twelve disciples (Matt.10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15), and Matt.

10:3 states that he was a tax collector.

The most common explanation for the data is that Levi and Matthew were the same person and

this is very probable. But how did the same person come to hold these two names, and why does

Mark not explicitly equate Matthew with Levi?

I suggest that Levi was given the name "Matthew" to express his new identity as a follower of

Jesus and to distance himself from his tax collector past. By using this alias, Matthew would be

able to more easily hide his past. The writer of Mark's gospel, and Luke, respect this desire to

draw a vail over Matthew's controversial past by keeping silent about Levi's identity. The need to

protect Matthew would be all the greater if he was still alive when Mark's gospel was written, and

Matthew's longevity would also help to explain how it came to be believed (rightly or wrongly) that

his testimony lay behind the composition of the gospel of Matthew.

Matthew's gospel breaks the silence and makes it clear that Matthew was the tax collector in

question. Matthew's gospel makes another subtle change to Mark's text. He states that Jesus

reclined in the house with many tax collectors and sinners, whereas Mark makes it clear that it

was Levi's house. Mark, therefore, is open about Levi associating with sinners, but hides his

identity, whereas Matthew's gospel hides the fact that Levi associated with sinners, but is open

about his identity. Perhaps, then, the author of Matthew's gospel felt that he could give Matthew

sufficient protection by not revealing that it was his house.

Matthew's gospel was ascribed to Matthew and this is now explicable. The early church may have

reasoned that it would not have been proper for anyone except Matthew himself to reveal

Matthew's sinful past. It's an understandable conclusion, but probably incorrect since the passage

of time would reduce the need to afford Matthew this protection.

Why, then, was the name "Matthew" selected to be Levi's new name? It was a common name, so

it would not arouse suspicion, so would serve well as an alias. But why this name in particular?

Along with several other Hebrew names, Matthew means "gift of God". The following passages

suggest that Jesus considered his disciples to be gifts from God.

"ask the Lord of the harvest to send out laborers" (e.g. Matt. 9:38)

"Everything that the father gives me will come to me, and anyone who comes to me I will never

drive away; for I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent

me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me,

but raise it up on the last day. This is indeed the will of my Father, that all who see the Son and

believe in him may have eternal life; and I will raise them up on the last day." (John 6:37-40)

"Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son so that the Son may glorify you, since you have

given him authority over all people, to give eternal life to all whom you have given him," (John 17:1-2)

It is therefore possible that Jesus considered Levi to be a gift from God and re-named him

accordingly. There is evidence that James, son of Alphaeus, was Levi's brother and that Jesus

named him "Nathanael", which also means "Gift of God".

Alternatively, the name "Matthew" may have expressed Levi’s new dependence on God for his

needs, in contrast to his earlier dependence on tax-collecting. A close parallel to this is the case

of Aelius Aristides, who heard someone in a dream say, "Hail, Theodorus", and accepted the

name "since everything of mine was a gift of the God". (Aristides (Or, 50.53-54; ed. Keil), quoted

by Schoedel). Theodorus was the Greek equivalent of the name "Matthew", and was also a

common name.

In any case, the naming of John the Baptist shows that the meaning of a name could carry great

significance even when the name was common.

Secondly, the association of the name "Matthew" with the Maccabean revolt may explain why Levi

took it. Mattathias (Matthew) was the name of the man who initiated the Maccabean revolt, which

was led by his five sons and brought independence to Israel. It is widely agreed that the name

"Matthew", along with the names of his five sons, was seen as patriotic and that this explains the

popularity of all six names. Now, Levi was a tax collector and was therefore despised as a

collaborator. Therefore those who knew of Matthew's earlier life as a tax collector would see his

new name as representing his rejection of his previous way of life.

We cannot be sure which reason or combination of reasons caused Levi to be named "Matthew",

but it seems probable to me that he was.

In addition to the cases of Matthew and Nethanael, consider also the cases of Thaddaeus (who

may be equated with Judas son of James), and Theudas. All these have the same meaning, or

nearly the same meaning (Gift of God) though names with this meaning were common.

Back to index page