It is said that Matthew's Gospel is
the church's Gospel. If that be the case it is worth spending a moment to
reflect on the sort of church that Matthew is writing to:
- It faces opposition from Jewish sources
5:11-12; 10:17,23; 23:34 and from Gentiles 10:18; 24:9
- The mention of false prophets
7:15,22; 24:11 indicates conflict within the community of a religious
nature
- Division and betrayal are realities
in the community 10:21; 24:10
- The threat posed by hypocrisy and
status seeking needs to be addressed
6:2,5,16; 7:5; 23:8-12
- There is the danger of love going
cold 24:12, and members are challenged to see in those who suffer the
presence of Christ 25:31-46.
- Material goods are not in short
supply 10:9 ( cf. Mark 6:8, Luke 9:3 ) 27:57-61 ( cf. Mark 15:43 ) The beatitudes
about the poor and hungry (Luke
6:20-21) are modified to speak of
the poor in spirit, and those hungering for righteousness ( Matt 5:3, 6).
Matthew adds that Joseph of Arimathea was a wealthy man ( Matt 27:57).
- Structures for church discipline are
already in place 18:15-17.
- It needs to be reminded that all who
labour in the vineyard will get the same wage 19:30-20:16 ( cf. 22:1-14 ).
- Where Mark refers to cities eight
times and villages seven times Matthew will refer to cities twenty six
times and villages only four times. This could well indiccate an urban
setting for the Gospel.
Jewish or Gentile Redactor?
Discussion continues as to whether
Matthew was Jewish or Gentile. This is but part of the larger debate about
where the Matthean community can be situated in the complicated and painful
process which gave rise to the Christian movement – a movement indebted to, but
independent from, the Jewish environment in which it was formed. The process of
the formation a distinctly Christian identity was one that took place over a
considrable period of time. It was in Antioch that believers in Jesus were
first called Christians (Acts 11:26) but what this meant with regard to Jewish
practices, Messianic hopes, Torah observance and openness to Gentiles would be
the subject of debate for more than a century.
The majority position would be that Matthew
was a Christian Jew. Arguments brought forward to support this position would
include:
- Jewish portrait of Jesus ( Son of
Abraham, Son of David 1:1, cf.
9:27; 12:23; 20:30 Messiah 1:1,17,18; 2:4 , Wisdom imagery
in Matt 11 and 23:34-36; 24:3-31)
- Frequent use of Old Testament texts (
13 formula citations, 21 others )
- No explanation is given of Jewish
customs or words ( washing before meals 15:2 cf. Mark 7:2-4, phylacteries 23:5, calling a
brother fool 5:22 )
- Appreciation of the status of the Mosaic
law 5:17-18, and the teaching of the scribes and Pharisees 23:3,23.
- Limitation of Jesus' ministry to
Israel Matt 10:5; Matt 15:24
- The inclusion of material which
presumes and affirms Jewish values
and religious practice (in
the Sermon on the Mount e.g oaths,
almsgiving, prayer, fasting , 17:24-27 Payment of Temple Tax,
the Sabbath is still valued
24:20)
- Matthew’s Greek has been influenced
by the Septuagint throughout
- Extensive use of Q materials (from
Jewish Christian circles)
In favour of a
Gentile redactor would be :
- Matthew speaks of ‘their’ synagogues
Matt 4:23; 9:35; 10:17; 12:9; 13:54
- Matthew's misunderstanding of Hebrew
parallelism in Matt 21: 1-7 cf. Zech 9:9
- The unexpected combination of the
teaching of the Pharisees and the Sadducees Matt 16:11-12 (regarding the Sadducees cf.
Matt 22:23/ Mark 12:18)
- The strident tone of the woes against
the scribes and the Pharisees cf. Matt 23.
- Omission of talitha qumi Mark 5:41, Boanhrgeß Mark 3:17
- The kingdom will be given to another
nation Matt 21:43 cf. 27:25 )
- The statement about the people of
Israel accepting the guilt for the death of Jesus upon their own heads Matt 27:25.
- The command to go out and baptise all
nations Matt 28:18-20
How is one to make sense of a Gospel
which provides such conflicting views and inconsistencies? If the redactor is
Jewish they have come to terms with the Gentile mission, if the redactor is a
Gentile it is a Gentile at home with the Old Testament and one who is at pains
to present Jesus in a Jewish light. Some argue that inconsistencies are due to
the redactor making use of various sources. That phenomenon itself may be one
of the most powerful indications as to the method and purpose of the redactor.
What was Matthew
to do with materials which had differing attitudes towards the Jewish law? (
e.g. where Mark and Q differ on the questions of the status of the Jewish law
and the Gentile mission )
The general
consensus is that Matthew was a non-Palestinian Jewish Christian; albeit one
comfortable with the growth of the Christian movement into a largely Gentile
one.
The question as to whether Matthew
was writing from within Judaism or without needs to be carefully nuanced. The
bonding together of materials which stand in tension to one another may be
partly explained as being due to their diverse origins. Another dimension of
the solution lies in the diversity within Judaism itself at the time of the
formation of Matthew’s Gospel. Matthew and the community to whom the Gospel was
originally addressed found themselves in a context of considerable flux after
the destruction of the Temple ( Matt 22:7; 21:41; 27:25 ). In a situation in
which Judaism was defining itself, a situation made more complex by the very
existence of groups such as the early Christians, Matthew’s community may well have been torn as to how to define
itself. The clear tensions which emerge between Jesus and the Jewish
authorities within the narrative need not imply that the community was outside
Judaism though the inclusion of Gentiles within the community was bound to set
the community on a collision course with the emerging Jewish authorities after
Jerusalem’s destruction.
There is also a need to distinguish
between the manner in which the Matthean community may have defined itself, and
the manner in which it was perceived outside of the community. It also needs to
be remembered that Judaism in the later first century did not have one
expression, nor did nascent Christianity ( see the debates between Peter and
Paul in Galatians 1-2 or the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15 ).
The tensions within the narrative
have been interpreted in various ways. Barth ( 1963 ) maintained that Matthew
was fighting against ‘antinomian’ Hellenistic Christians on one hand, and the
rabbis of Pharisaic Judaism on the other. Others have seen the tensions as
representative of different attitudes within the community itself divided
between rigorous Jewish Christians and Hellenistic Christians.
Boring suggests
that Matthew’s church sees itself as a messianic community and as the
eschatological people of God. Their focus on Jesus as the messiah set them
apart from anyone, be they Jewish or Gentile, who did not accept that position.
This provides a context in which both Gentiles and non-believing Jews can be
treated as outsiders from the point of view of this community.
Suggestions as to the place of
writing of Matthew range from Jerusalem,
Caesaria, Phoenecia through to Syrian Antioch. Modern scholarship has tended to
see the Antiochene community as being a likely contender as the one for whom
the Gospel was written. Meier has strongly argued that Matthew's Gospel was written in Antioch. It
was a large Christian community which
had already been through:
1)
The
initial acceptance of a cirumcision free mission and objections
to it Acts 15:1,5
2) Restriction of the mission by the refusal to take
part in table
fellowship
Gal 2:11-14
3) Compromise allowing for table
fellowship Acts 15:20,29
4) Matthew introduces Syria into the
Gospel narrative Matt 4:24
5) Matt 2:23 calls Jesus a Nazorean.
This was a regular designation for
Christians in Syria.
6) The terminology for the Temple
Tax in Matt 17:24-27 (stater = two
didrachmas) is elsewhere only found in
Syria
On the other hand
suggestions such as Caesaria Maritima (Viviano) and Sepphoris (Overman) also
match the emerging profile of the community as urban, moderately prosperous,
and with sufficiently large and mixed populations. There is the added advantage
to these suggestions in that they open the discussion to consider Palestinian
settings for the Gospel.
A number of scholars have paid
attention to the social setting presumed within the Matthean narrative that
would argue for the Gospel being addressed to a community located within an
urban context. Kingsbury ( 1977 ), Smith
(1980 ), and Crosby ( 1988 ) have paid attention to materials that indicate the
wealth of the community and the justice issues that needed to be addressed by
these household churches.
Sources
The diversity of Matthew's community
is reflected in the sources which are drawn upon in constructing the Gospel. In
dealing with Matthew’s use of the available sources consideration needs to be
given to them as representing living traditions and groups within the
community.
- Mark's Gospel, written for gentile
Christians, provides the basic framework (Matt 3-4, 12-28 follow Mark's
order with @ 600 of Mark's 661 verses being incorporated.
- Like Luke Matthew draws on materials
which were preserved by itinerent Jewish-Christian preachers (normally
designated as 'Q' @ 235verses). Luz and Boring argue that Matthew's
Gospel is the end-result of combining the traditions of the Matthean
community which had been evangelised by such preachers with that
represented by Mark's Gospel which came north after the quelling of the
Jewish rebellion. In the Q materials the figure of the Son of man as a
figure of future judgement is emphasised, as is a certain polemic with
Israel.
- Luz and Boring (An Introduction to the New Testament p. 538) suggest that the Q tradition
provided the core for the Matthean community. They were radical Jewish
Christians whose religious and cultural home was Judaism. Their allegiance
to Jesus as Messiah already led to conflict with the synagogue.
- Special Matthean materials which may represent
or challenge the interests and views of different groups within the
community:
a)
Extreme
Judaizers 5:18; 10:5-6; 15:24
b) Devout Jewish Christians who
wished to follow Jesus'
interpretation of the Law 5:21-22,27-28,31-32,33-34; 23:2-3,23
( 6:2,5,16
)
c) Gentile Christians
Non Israelite women are highlighted in Jesus'
genealogy 1:3,5,6
Magi 2:1-12
Woes against the scribes and the Pharisees ch 23
Galilee of the Gentiles 4:15
Influx of Gentiles 8:11-12
Jesus hope of the Gentiles 12:21
The Kingdom will be given to others 21:43
Final commission of the Gospel 28:20
It has often been proposed that
Matthew's concerns are revealed in 9:17
(cf. Mark 2:22) and 13:52. Matthew
wants both the new and the old to be preserved (sunthrew
- to preserve, save, treasure,
hold together).
 |
| Sourced 2bp.blogspot.com |
Meier has suggested that Matthew
sets out to preserve both new and old by means of a particular view of
salvation history divided into three periods.
* The time of prophecy in the Old
Testament
* The time of fulfilment in Jesus'
earthly ministry
cf. 1:22-23; 2:6,15,17-18,23; 3:3; 4:14-16; 8:17;
12:17-21; 13:14-15,35;
21:4-5 (26:54,56); 27:9
(a ministry only to the
lost sheep of the house of Israel
10:6; 15:24 )
* Universal mission after Jesus'
resurrection 28:20.
This schema allows Matthew to
preserve strict Jewish materials, deal
with the problem posed by Jesus' mission to Israel, and move the
community towards a largely Gentile future where baptism rather than
circumcision is the means of initiation into the faith community.
For Meier the
major theological themes which Matthew’s Gospel addresses are:
 |
| Sourced marketingagency.com |
