>> The titles of the Gospels don’t mean what you think. The Matthew you have in mind didn’t write it. <<
The gospel titles are not part of the gospels themselves. That doesn’t mean that they are wrongly attributed. Even if St. Matthew were not the author, there is no serious doubt that those who attributed it to St. Matthew meant the apostle. There are many strong, valid reasons for assigning the name of St. Matthew the Apostle to the gospel of St. Matthew. Those who did so in the first century were not fools. They knew who wrote it. The arguments against that authorship, have been demonstrated false. Turns out more recent archaeology confirms that 2nd-century Palestinians knew more about 1st-century Hebrews than did 19th-century German and the rest of the Q school know-it-alls, like Raymond Brown. In fact, in light of recent scholarship, I would say it is completely laughable to refer to the Q school and the Jesus Seminar folks; they have been so thoroughly and embarrassingly debunked. There is a plain and simple reason why Mark and Matthew use identical language: Matthew quotes Mark directly. The next most likely reason is that Mark quotes Matthew directly. The completely absurd one is that they are both based on some hypothetical “sayings” gospel completely lost to history.