The trustworthiness of the Gospels rests not only on claims of inspiration, but also on eyewitness testimony. And our confidence in that testimony is directly related, Daniel Moore contends, to when the first Gospel was published. Therefore, it is incumbent upon Christians to consider whether an effective case can be made for asserting that the first Gospel was published within several years or perhaps a decade of the resurrection. To this end, this book offers a series of arguments demonstrating that an early publication of Matthew is reasonable, defensible, and preferable over the popular view that several decades passed before Gospels were published. These arguments include a reasonableness argument that the early church had the means, motive, and opportunity to produce a Gospel; an argument from the church fathers, which also resolves supposed conflicts; exegetical arguments from Galatians; apologetic-motivational arguments from Christian scholars over the last several centuries; arguments based on ancient perspectives on aging memory and on the obligation of orators to write, concerns which would have motivated the apostles to publish early; and an explanatory power argument. Ultimately, the author will encourage the reader to view Matthew as the Messiah's royal chronicler.