Is there no continuous chain of authority for the Gospel according to Matthew?

In his epistle of AD 107, Ignatius quoted from this Gospel account seven times. He mentioned Christ's conception in the Virgin Mary and the appearance of the natal star that guided the wiseman to Bethlehem. This same Ignatius was a contemporary of the apostles, outliving the Apostle John by seven years.

Polycarp, a disciple of John the Apostle, quotes this Gospel account five times in his epistles. Also, many renowned Christian scholars of the first century testified that the Gospel of Christ according to Matthew indeed came from Matthew.

In the second century, Tatian wrote The Diatesseron or "The Harmony of the Four Gospels." This work was quoted by Hegesippus, a scholar who wrote profusely. He authored a Church history in which we find an account of Herod similar to what appears in Matthew's account of the Gospel. Justin Martyr (AD 140) often quotes from the Gospel according to Matthew and in his works he mentions verses from the prophecies of Isaiah, Micah and Jeremiah, just as Matthew does. Ireanues, Athenagoras, Theophilus of Antioch, Clement of Alexandria and others also quote from this Gospel account.

In the third century, the Gospel according to Matthew was mentioned by Tertullian, Julius, Origen and Amonius, author of The Harmony of the Two Gospels.

In the fourth century, Festus questioned the authorship of the Gospel according to Matthew, owing to chapter nine, verse nine: "Then as Jesus passed on from there, He saw a man named Matthew sitting at the tax office. And He said to him, 'Fool Me.' And he arose and followed Him." Festus believed that if Matthew had really written the Gospel account attributed to him, he would have written of himself in the first person, saying "I," and not in the third person, say "he." However, writing about oneself in the third person was a custom among ancient authors. Julius Caesar, Josephus, Moses and Xenophon all referred to themselves in this way in their writings.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNQ-Byu8klI

Muslims needs to believe in Jonah 94.

John 1:2, He was with God in the beginning.

When some contemporary Muslim interpreters heard that Christ is the Word of God, they objected saying: "Christ is a word among other words of God." They said, "here means a command: ie., Christ was born 'by God's command." This interpretation is a gross and intentional misleading and is clearly wrong in form and in essence, which is something that confirms the wisdom of the Qur'an verse that urges their prophet, saying: "If thou art in doubt... ask those who recited the Book before you (I.E., the Christians)." (Jonah 94). Oh, that the Muslims follow the Qur'an's advice, instead of attacking the Bible and the people of the Bible and they should learn from them the real meaning of the spiritual issues. When you read (The Women 171), you will find that Jesus is "His Word", and you will understand that the statement in House of Imran 45 did not come to contradict the principles of the verse in Women 171. Moreover, the statement in that verse did not focus on a process of "commanding the birth" but rather, it focused on the very identity of the person of Christ. The Qur'an must have expressed it in that fashion in order to stress the fact that Christ is God's Word. Christ is distinguished in the Qur'an above all the prophets, not only by His great and mighty works, which no other man could even come close to accomplishing, but also by the sublime distinctives that were given exclusively to Him. Some of those attributes were, "The Word of God" and "the Spirit of God" (Women 171, House of Imran 45). If Christ is The Word of God and His spirit, therefore, He is divine and eternal, for the Spirit of God and His Word are integral parts of God  and cannot be separated from Him. The Spirit of God and His Word are of His very Self; therefore, Christ is by necessity of the Godhead, from the beginning.

Great YouTube Video, Click here!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEmJfuTAvFo&t=907s