Most evangelicals identify the author of Matthew 2:4–6 as the apostle Matthew (also called Levi), the tax collector Jesus called to follow him. Here are key points about that view and how it relates to the passage.

Who Matthew was
– One of the twelve apostles (see Matthew 9:9; Mark 2:14; Luke 5:27–29).
– A Jewish tax collector by trade — literate, familiar with official records and commerce, and able to move between Jewish and Gentile settings.
– An eyewitness and apostolic source for Jesus’ life and teaching, which gives his Gospel authority in the early church.

Early testimony and language
– Early church writers (Papias as reported by Eusebius/Origen, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria) attribute the Gospel to Matthew. Papias famously says Matthew “compiled the sayings” in a Semitic tongue (often understood as Hebrew or Aramaic) though the Gospel we have is in Greek.
– Many evangelicals hold that Matthew either wrote in Greek with Semitic influence or made use of Hebrew/Aramaic sources—either way his Jewish background shaped the Gospel.

Date, audience, and purpose
– Typical evangelical dating: mid- to late-1st century (commonly ca. AD 50–70).
– Primary audience: Jewish Christians or Jews generally. Matthew emphasizes Jesus as the promised Messiah and interpreter/fulfiller of Israel’s Scriptures.
– Purpose: present Jesus as Messiah and “new Moses,” to show fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy, and to teach the nature of the kingdom.

How Matthew 2:4–6 fits
– Matthew 2:4–6 narrates Herod summoning chief priests and scribes to ask where the Messiah would be born; they cite the prophecy about Bethlehem (cf. Micah 5:2).
– This passage illustrates Matthew’s characteristic concern for fulfillment: linking Jesus’ birth to Old Testament prophecy to prove his messianic identity.
– The scene’s interest in Jewish leaders, Scripture, and messianic expectation suits a Jewish Christian author who wants to persuade a Jewish audience that Jesus fulfills Scripture.

Why evangelicals accept Matthew’s authorship
– Apostolic authorship gives the Gospel historical reliability and authority.
– Matthew’s Jewish perspective explains the Gospel’s heavy use of OT citation and concern with law, prophecy, and Jewish custom.
– Early and consistent patristic attribution supports the traditional ascription.

A brief note on alternatives
– Critical scholarship sometimes argues for anonymous authorship or later community composition; evangelicals generally accept such critiques only to the extent they don’t undermine the apostolic origin and overall historic reliability of the Gospel.

For further evangelical reading
– R. T. France, “The Gospel of Matthew” (Tyndale/ NICNT)
– D. A. Carson, introductions and commentaries on the Gospels
– Craig Blomberg, “Matthew” (New American Commentary)

If you’d like, I can summarize Matthew 2:4–6 itself and show how it quotes Micah 5:2, or give short excerpts from evangelical commentators on this passage.