Theological themes in Matthew’s Gospel
Introduction
The Gospel of Matthew was not written to provide readers with merely biographical data concerning Jesus. It also sought to expound the theological significance of those events in history so that readers would make a personal commitment to follow Him. Recurring theological themes throughout the Gospel call our attention to the author’s overriding concerns in his community’s life settings. The Messianic king, who fulfilled Scripture and commissioned the Church to preach the rule of God, bid readers to follow Him. By looking at these themes afresh, we may see how they address contemporary challenges of the Church in the 21st century.
How Jesus fulfills the Old Testament story
The Gospel of Matthew is steeped in the Old Testament allusions, narratives and symbols. Different aspects of Israel’s history, institution and religion are seen as finding their eschatological ‘fulfillment’ in His person and ministry, not only futuristic predictions. It’s as if the author was casting Jesus into the protagonist roles of its script. Such New Testament typology springs “from the conviction, that in the coming and work of Jesus, the principles of God’s working, already imperfectly embodied in the Old Testament were more perfectly re-embodied and thus brought to completion .”
Evidently, Mathew viewed Israel as in exile until the ‘seventh seven’ generation in his schematic arrangement of Jesus’ genealogy. Eschatological restoration was central to their national hope. Not surprisingly, this motif permeated the Gospel. For example, the massacre in Bethlehem preceded Jesus’ restoration from Egypt was linked to Jeremiah’s passage about “loss as the prelude to a joyful return and restoration of the people of God from exile” . Similarly, Jesus’ return from Egypt was linked to Hosea 11:1, which in its original context, referred to Israel’s exodus from Egypt. This historic national event was taken up as a type of God’s future act of deliverance in the Son of God. Just as Jesus was tested in the wilderness before ministry (Matt. 4:1-11), so was Israel disciplined before entering the Promised Land. Even his third-day resurrection motif may allude to national resurrection of Israel in Hosea 6:2.
Different titles used for Israel have been applied to the Messiah. For example, Servant of Yahweh (Isaiah) and Son of Man (Daniel 7) were originally a representation of the nation. Now Jesus is not only the founder of the new Israel. He is also what Dodd called its “inclusive representative” . Jesus shows corporate solidarity in obeying where Israel has failed in her calling. The Rejected Stone (Psalm 118:22), another figure of the vindication of Israel is understood as having reached its culmination in Jesus himself.
Lastly, Matthew also saw discontinuity as Jesus was understood as greater than critical features of Israel’s life and institutions i.e. temple, kings and prophets. In this individual Jesus, Israel as a corporate entity of the people of God has found its fulfillment. Through instituting the ‘Lord’s Supper’, He enacted a different Passover meal, renewed the covenant and the new Exodus from exile . He is the goal, the convergence-point, of God’s covenant-promise for Israel.
The kingdom of heaven
The kingdom of heaven refers to the eschatological reign of God which has been inaugurated with the coming of the Messianic King . The concept itself was replete with Old Testament motifs of God’s suzerainty-vassal relation to Israel and apocalyptic judgment of human kingdoms via the agency of ‘the Son of Man’ in the book of Daniel. Matthew clearly had an interest to demonstrate Jesus’ legitimacy to the throne by tracing his genealogy back to the lineage of Davidic dynasty. While his kingdom is not advanced by military force, it has profound political implications (Matt 26:52). If Jesus is the King, then Caesar and Herod are not. He would ‘save his people from their sins’ (Matt 1:21), restore Israel from exile and usher in the new age but in a way none could have imagined.
Jesus’ ministry marked the “turning-point in history, the great restoration... as being at hand” (Matt 4:17). As the Messianic king, he set forth the counterculture ethical praxis that marked out those who live under that reign in the Beatitudes (Matt 5:1-12). His works of miracles did more than meeting physical needs of the sick, ostracized and the poor. N.T. Wright reminded us that Jesus’ praxis had the effect to “reconstitute those healed as members of the people of Israel’s god” . The kingdom is not guaranteed by virtue of physical descent from Abraham (Matt 3:9), but one must consciously enter with dependent humility of a child (Matt 18:3-4).
Its secrets were now disclosed in parables and explained to the hand-picked disciples (Matt 13:11). Employing lively imagery, Jesus depicted the nature of the kingdom. Like a mustard seed, its small beginnings will grow into a great tree (Matt 13:31-32). It would culminate in eschatological judgment of the wicked like a net that captured both good and bad fish (Matt 13:47-48). It was likened to a wedding banquet for which the invitation was offered to many, but ‘few were chosen’ (Matt 22:1-14) . The inauguration of the kingdom came to a climax, however, in the passion and resurrection events. As the Danielic Son of Man, he would ‘give his life as a ransom for many’ (Matt 20:28). Having been vindicated in His resurrection, ‘all authority in heaven and on earth’ was given to Christ as the start of a new epoch where the kingdom’s subjects would be reconstituted around Him and His teachings (Matt 28:18).
The life of discipleship
It is not uncommon among the Jews to follow certain teachers like John the Baptist, Shammai, Hillel and the Essenes’ Teacher of Righteousness. Jesus and his relationship to the disciples bear close resemblance in the sense that they were characterized by distinctive praxis based on reinterpretation of being Israel. To hear and obey Jesus’ teachings is the hallmark of true discipleship (7:23-27).
The Gospel of Matthew was likened to a ‘resource on discipleship’ because major discourses are addressed to the disciples, highlighting on their positive understanding and training them to carry out the Great Commission (28:19). Simon Peter, as an individual, served in the narrative as both a positive and negative example of ‘what it means to be a disciple’. Through this human portrait, other disciples could relate to his experiences that reach heights of faith (16:16) and valleys of failure (26:69-75).
The Great Commission portrayed disciples as people who have ‘a relationship of allegiance to the triune God’ and taken up Jesus’ teaching as basis for their distinctive lifestyle . Following Jesus was also closely paired up with the cost of ‘taking up the cross’ (16:24). Discipleship demands nothing less than surrendering all that we are to find true ‘life’. Loyal commitment to the Master and his teachings must supercede attachment to wealth (6:24) and other social relationships (10:37-39). It involved being members in Jesus’ “surrogate family” (12:46-50), in which all are brothers (23:8).
Within this reconstituted community, the disciples were expected to be different in their humble, servant-leadership patterns. There is no place for “hierarchical (23:8-10) and tyrannical (20:25) patterns of leadership .” Love for God and neighbors (22:34-40) would characterize their interaction while strong warning was issued against stumbling the ‘little ones’ (18:5-6). Even as procedure exists for disciplinary action, forgiveness is a frequent teaching for the community (18:15-18). As salt and light of the world, their visible good works would attract others to glorify God (5:16). At the same time, the disciples were commissioned to actively reach out to others in mission (28:19). If they encounter opposition, persecution is a real possibility and love is shown even to the enemies (5:10-12, 10:16-36).
Matthew’s vision of discipleship as a ‘community project’ is a needed counterbalance to the evangelical emphasis on existential encounter with Christ as well as the ‘do-it-yourself’ individualistic religiosity prevalent today. Instead of being preoccupied with expansion and programs, we need to be ‘prepared to commit themselves to meaningful long-term life-sharing relationships with others’ .
The church
Among the Synoptic gospels, only Matthew used the term ‘ekklesia’ or the church in two passages, namely Matthew 16:18 and 18:17. Even as Israel’s vocation and hopes have been fulfilled in Jesus, a new people of God are redefined around His person and teachings. Perhaps an allusion to Moses and the formation of the Israelite nation, the Twelve who followed Him would sit on thrones in judgment of ‘the twelve tribes of Israel’ (19:28). As the narrative develops, we see an emerging pattern that “old Israel is coming under judgment... The implication is that there will be what we may call a new Israel. ”
In the latter passage, Jesus laid out some principles on ‘church discipline’ for those who gather in His name (Matt 18:20). Although it’s relatively informal and unstructured compared to modern churches, the teachings presuppose some degree of organization amongst the disciples. This is not alien to the Jewish context in view of what we know about the Essenes. Even as forgiveness is a hallmark of true disciples, Jesus also preserves the purity of the community by delegating His authority on the church to treat members who persist in sin as they would ‘tax collectors and sinners’.
In the former passage, Peter confessed that Jesus is the Messiah by the revelation of the Father (16:17). Jesus promised to build His church on ‘this rock’, which probably meant Peter as its representative in confessing Christ. Authority in terms of ‘binding and loosing’ was delegated to him, which would be repeated to the community as a whole later. These terms probably refer to the rabbinic sense of ‘declaring what is required or forbidden by law’ (halakhic pronouncements) in a teaching capacity. However, Matthew does not idealize Peter as an infallible saint as indicated by Jesus’ following rebuke for being a ‘stumbling block’ (16:23).
The discourses in Matthew’s Gospel have a pastoral focus on the “relationship and mutual responsibility of all members in the community .” The necessary condition for membership in the kingdom is to assume the status of a child, where everyone is responsible for the ‘little ones’. Matthew’s vision of the church appears to be a mixed body of ‘wheat and weeds,’ which would only be separated ‘at the end of the age’ (13:40-42). There would be false disciples who profess faith and even perform miracles in Jesus’ name but do not obey ‘the will of the Father in heaven’ (7:21). Like Israel, the church cannot be complacent as the parable of the wedding banquet envisions that ‘many are invited, but few are chosen’ (22:14).
The end of the world
Matthew’s treatment of eschatology was concentrated in the Olivet Discourse (24:1-25:46), a hermeneutical minefield occasioned by the question, “What will be the sign of your coming and of the close of the age? (24:3)” After surveying early apocalyptic literature in Judaism, N. T. Wright made a bold statement that ‘there is virtually no evidence that Jews were expecting the end of the space-time universe… They believed that the present world order would come to an end – the world in which pagans held power, and Jews, the covenant people of the creator god did not .” We need to keep this in mind in view of Schweitzer’s portrait of an eschatological prophet who miscalculated the end-times.
However, it would be more helpful to see Matthew’s vision of eschatological kingdom as already inaugurated in Jesus’ first advent but not yet consummated until His second advent at the end of the age. He had in view the judgment which would befall the Temple and religious establishment in the near future as well as His return at an unspecified date. Describing the siege and fall of Jerusalem, Michael Green wrote, “More than a million Jews died in the operation, and Josephus, who was there, tells us that more than 97,000 Jews were taken captive .” The abomination that causes desolation draws on the poignant imagery in Daniel 11:31, which was fulfilled when Antiochus Epiphanes set up his own image and desecrated the temple in 163 BC. History would seem to repeat itself. By employing apocalyptic symbols like ‘the sun is darkened, the moon fails to give its light and the stars fall from heaven’ (24:29), attention is drawn to the ‘earth-shaking’ nature of these events.
The Olivet Discourse served as a warning against false prophets, disasters, complacency and preparation for the impending persecution (24:13). They should flee in haste from the judgment that would fall, presumably in the form of Titus’ army. These events are signs before the coming of the Son of Man. Eschatology is also a reminder of hope as the church is ‘citizens of the coming age’ whose ‘identity was determined by what Jesus had done and what they would be, not by what they had been or by their status in the world’ . A note of hope and responsibility was given in the promise that the end will not come until the gospel has been preached as a testimony to all nations (24: 14).
The universality of the gospel
Even before the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, Matthew’s narrative hinted at a universal scope of His gospel in mentioning four Gentile women in the genealogy and by narration of the homage paid by men from the East (Matt 2:1-12). John the Baptist’s rebuke to the Jews’ idea of election pointed out that having Abraham as their forefather does not guarantee salvation (Matt 3:8-10). As Jesus’ mission was directed to the Jews first, He initially restricted the gospel proclamation to the nation (Matt. 10:5-6, 15:24).
However, two closely-paralleled accounts of healing stressed that the faith of a Gentile centurion (Matt. 8:5-13) and Syro-Phoenician woman (Matt 15:21-28) were met with God’s favor. Both cases showed how Jesus’ apparent reluctance tested their attitudes and highlighted the racial barriers which their faith finally overcame. In the latter, Jesus seemed to limit His ministry only to ‘the lost sheep of the house of Israel’ (Matt 15:24). However, it should be understood within the narration as the dialogue exchange drew out the woman’s response of faith. Jesus commended her for though she conceded the priority of the Jews, “only the smallest fraction of his power is necessary to heal her daughter.”
In the former, Jesus expressed astonishment that ‘with no one in Israel” had responded with such faith. The pericope ended with a discussion on membership in the kingdom, in which Gentiles “will come from east and west” and share the messianic banquet with the patriarchs. It was subversive teaching that broke down racial barriers because “for a Jew to sit at table with Gentiles meant ritual defilement ”. If that was not enough, the ‘sons of the kingdom’ were to be excluded and assigned to the ‘outer darkness’. Jesus opened up the membership in God’s covenant community to those who would come by faith, not by natural descent.
Anticipation for the universal scope of the gospel and even its inevitability were hinted at various passages in Matthew 24:14 and 26:13. The climax was reached at the ending when Jesus issued the Great Commission to inclusively make disciples of all people groups (Matt 28:18-20). It was a mission ‘spelled out not in terms of the rites and duties of Israel… but in terms related specifically to Jesus himself’ . The disciples would indicate their repentance through baptism and taught to obey His countercultural commands. While membership in the covenant is not restricted by ethnicity, obedience is not an optional add-on to preserve the “delicate balance between being distinctively different and winsomely welcoming” .
Conclusion
As we study these themes, their relevance emerges in how we are to be a faith community of the risen Christ, living in the already-not yet tension of the inaugurated Kingdom. Heralding His reign would involve a critique of competing ideologies, dehumanizing lifestyles and oppressive dictators. Positively, our praxis and ethics should provide an alternative way of being human under God. At the same time, we do not become disillusioned if our efforts fail for we look ahead for its consummation. Our gospel proclamation should consciously seek to make disciples from diverse ethnic and linguistic groups that reflect the universal nature of Jesus’ commission.
Bibliography
1. Dowsett, R., The Thinking Clearly Series: The Great Commission, Monarch: London, 2001.
2. France, R.T., Matthew: Evangelist and Teacher. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1989.
3. France, R.T., Jesus and the Old Testament. London: Tyndale, 1971.
4. Green, M. The Bible Speaks Today: The Message of Matthew, Leicester: InterVarsity Press, 2000.
5. I. H. Marshall (ed.), New Testament Interpretation. Exeter: Paternoster, 1977.
6. J.B. Green, S. McKnight, & I. H. Marshall, Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, InterVarsity Press: Downers Grove, 1992.
7. Keener, C. S. A Commentary on the gospel of Matthew, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing, 1999.
8. Keener, C.S., The IVP Bible background commentary: New Testament, InterVarsity Press: Downers Grove, 1993.
9. Ladd, G.E., A Theology of the New Testament, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974.
10. Ryken, L., et al, Dictionary of biblical imagery (electronic ed.), InterVarsity Press: Downers Grove, 2000.
11. R. N. Longenecker ed., Patterns of Discipleship in the New Testament, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996.
12. Wood, D. R. W. ed., New Bible Dictionary, InterVarsity Press: Downers Grove, 1996.
13. Wright, N. T., Jesus and the Victory of God. London: SPCK, 2001.
14. Wright, N.T., The New Testament and the People of God. London: SPCK, 1992.
Introduction
The Gospel of Matthew was not written to provide readers with merely biographical data concerning Jesus. It also sought to expound the theological significance of those events in history so that readers would make a personal commitment to follow Him. Recurring theological themes throughout the Gospel call our attention to the author’s overriding concerns in his community’s life settings. The Messianic king, who fulfilled Scripture and commissioned the Church to preach the rule of God, bid readers to follow Him. By looking at these themes afresh, we may see how they address contemporary challenges of the Church in the 21st century.
How Jesus fulfills the Old Testament story
The Gospel of Matthew is steeped in the Old Testament allusions, narratives and symbols. Different aspects of Israel’s history, institution and religion are seen as finding their eschatological ‘fulfillment’ in His person and ministry, not only futuristic predictions. It’s as if the author was casting Jesus into the protagonist roles of its script. Such New Testament typology springs “from the conviction, that in the coming and work of Jesus, the principles of God’s working, already imperfectly embodied in the Old Testament were more perfectly re-embodied and thus brought to completion .”
Evidently, Mathew viewed Israel as in exile until the ‘seventh seven’ generation in his schematic arrangement of Jesus’ genealogy. Eschatological restoration was central to their national hope. Not surprisingly, this motif permeated the Gospel. For example, the massacre in Bethlehem preceded Jesus’ restoration from Egypt was linked to Jeremiah’s passage about “loss as the prelude to a joyful return and restoration of the people of God from exile” . Similarly, Jesus’ return from Egypt was linked to Hosea 11:1, which in its original context, referred to Israel’s exodus from Egypt. This historic national event was taken up as a type of God’s future act of deliverance in the Son of God. Just as Jesus was tested in the wilderness before ministry (Matt. 4:1-11), so was Israel disciplined before entering the Promised Land. Even his third-day resurrection motif may allude to national resurrection of Israel in Hosea 6:2.
Different titles used for Israel have been applied to the Messiah. For example, Servant of Yahweh (Isaiah) and Son of Man (Daniel 7) were originally a representation of the nation. Now Jesus is not only the founder of the new Israel. He is also what Dodd called its “inclusive representative” . Jesus shows corporate solidarity in obeying where Israel has failed in her calling. The Rejected Stone (Psalm 118:22), another figure of the vindication of Israel is understood as having reached its culmination in Jesus himself.
Lastly, Matthew also saw discontinuity as Jesus was understood as greater than critical features of Israel’s life and institutions i.e. temple, kings and prophets. In this individual Jesus, Israel as a corporate entity of the people of God has found its fulfillment. Through instituting the ‘Lord’s Supper’, He enacted a different Passover meal, renewed the covenant and the new Exodus from exile . He is the goal, the convergence-point, of God’s covenant-promise for Israel.
The kingdom of heaven
The kingdom of heaven refers to the eschatological reign of God which has been inaugurated with the coming of the Messianic King . The concept itself was replete with Old Testament motifs of God’s suzerainty-vassal relation to Israel and apocalyptic judgment of human kingdoms via the agency of ‘the Son of Man’ in the book of Daniel. Matthew clearly had an interest to demonstrate Jesus’ legitimacy to the throne by tracing his genealogy back to the lineage of Davidic dynasty. While his kingdom is not advanced by military force, it has profound political implications (Matt 26:52). If Jesus is the King, then Caesar and Herod are not. He would ‘save his people from their sins’ (Matt 1:21), restore Israel from exile and usher in the new age but in a way none could have imagined.
Jesus’ ministry marked the “turning-point in history, the great restoration... as being at hand” (Matt 4:17). As the Messianic king, he set forth the counterculture ethical praxis that marked out those who live under that reign in the Beatitudes (Matt 5:1-12). His works of miracles did more than meeting physical needs of the sick, ostracized and the poor. N.T. Wright reminded us that Jesus’ praxis had the effect to “reconstitute those healed as members of the people of Israel’s god” . The kingdom is not guaranteed by virtue of physical descent from Abraham (Matt 3:9), but one must consciously enter with dependent humility of a child (Matt 18:3-4).
Its secrets were now disclosed in parables and explained to the hand-picked disciples (Matt 13:11). Employing lively imagery, Jesus depicted the nature of the kingdom. Like a mustard seed, its small beginnings will grow into a great tree (Matt 13:31-32). It would culminate in eschatological judgment of the wicked like a net that captured both good and bad fish (Matt 13:47-48). It was likened to a wedding banquet for which the invitation was offered to many, but ‘few were chosen’ (Matt 22:1-14) . The inauguration of the kingdom came to a climax, however, in the passion and resurrection events. As the Danielic Son of Man, he would ‘give his life as a ransom for many’ (Matt 20:28). Having been vindicated in His resurrection, ‘all authority in heaven and on earth’ was given to Christ as the start of a new epoch where the kingdom’s subjects would be reconstituted around Him and His teachings (Matt 28:18).
The life of discipleship
It is not uncommon among the Jews to follow certain teachers like John the Baptist, Shammai, Hillel and the Essenes’ Teacher of Righteousness. Jesus and his relationship to the disciples bear close resemblance in the sense that they were characterized by distinctive praxis based on reinterpretation of being Israel. To hear and obey Jesus’ teachings is the hallmark of true discipleship (7:23-27).
The Gospel of Matthew was likened to a ‘resource on discipleship’ because major discourses are addressed to the disciples, highlighting on their positive understanding and training them to carry out the Great Commission (28:19). Simon Peter, as an individual, served in the narrative as both a positive and negative example of ‘what it means to be a disciple’. Through this human portrait, other disciples could relate to his experiences that reach heights of faith (16:16) and valleys of failure (26:69-75).
The Great Commission portrayed disciples as people who have ‘a relationship of allegiance to the triune God’ and taken up Jesus’ teaching as basis for their distinctive lifestyle . Following Jesus was also closely paired up with the cost of ‘taking up the cross’ (16:24). Discipleship demands nothing less than surrendering all that we are to find true ‘life’. Loyal commitment to the Master and his teachings must supercede attachment to wealth (6:24) and other social relationships (10:37-39). It involved being members in Jesus’ “surrogate family” (12:46-50), in which all are brothers (23:8).
Within this reconstituted community, the disciples were expected to be different in their humble, servant-leadership patterns. There is no place for “hierarchical (23:8-10) and tyrannical (20:25) patterns of leadership .” Love for God and neighbors (22:34-40) would characterize their interaction while strong warning was issued against stumbling the ‘little ones’ (18:5-6). Even as procedure exists for disciplinary action, forgiveness is a frequent teaching for the community (18:15-18). As salt and light of the world, their visible good works would attract others to glorify God (5:16). At the same time, the disciples were commissioned to actively reach out to others in mission (28:19). If they encounter opposition, persecution is a real possibility and love is shown even to the enemies (5:10-12, 10:16-36).
Matthew’s vision of discipleship as a ‘community project’ is a needed counterbalance to the evangelical emphasis on existential encounter with Christ as well as the ‘do-it-yourself’ individualistic religiosity prevalent today. Instead of being preoccupied with expansion and programs, we need to be ‘prepared to commit themselves to meaningful long-term life-sharing relationships with others’ .
The church
Among the Synoptic gospels, only Matthew used the term ‘ekklesia’ or the church in two passages, namely Matthew 16:18 and 18:17. Even as Israel’s vocation and hopes have been fulfilled in Jesus, a new people of God are redefined around His person and teachings. Perhaps an allusion to Moses and the formation of the Israelite nation, the Twelve who followed Him would sit on thrones in judgment of ‘the twelve tribes of Israel’ (19:28). As the narrative develops, we see an emerging pattern that “old Israel is coming under judgment... The implication is that there will be what we may call a new Israel. ”
In the latter passage, Jesus laid out some principles on ‘church discipline’ for those who gather in His name (Matt 18:20). Although it’s relatively informal and unstructured compared to modern churches, the teachings presuppose some degree of organization amongst the disciples. This is not alien to the Jewish context in view of what we know about the Essenes. Even as forgiveness is a hallmark of true disciples, Jesus also preserves the purity of the community by delegating His authority on the church to treat members who persist in sin as they would ‘tax collectors and sinners’.
In the former passage, Peter confessed that Jesus is the Messiah by the revelation of the Father (16:17). Jesus promised to build His church on ‘this rock’, which probably meant Peter as its representative in confessing Christ. Authority in terms of ‘binding and loosing’ was delegated to him, which would be repeated to the community as a whole later. These terms probably refer to the rabbinic sense of ‘declaring what is required or forbidden by law’ (halakhic pronouncements) in a teaching capacity. However, Matthew does not idealize Peter as an infallible saint as indicated by Jesus’ following rebuke for being a ‘stumbling block’ (16:23).
The discourses in Matthew’s Gospel have a pastoral focus on the “relationship and mutual responsibility of all members in the community .” The necessary condition for membership in the kingdom is to assume the status of a child, where everyone is responsible for the ‘little ones’. Matthew’s vision of the church appears to be a mixed body of ‘wheat and weeds,’ which would only be separated ‘at the end of the age’ (13:40-42). There would be false disciples who profess faith and even perform miracles in Jesus’ name but do not obey ‘the will of the Father in heaven’ (7:21). Like Israel, the church cannot be complacent as the parable of the wedding banquet envisions that ‘many are invited, but few are chosen’ (22:14).
The end of the world
Matthew’s treatment of eschatology was concentrated in the Olivet Discourse (24:1-25:46), a hermeneutical minefield occasioned by the question, “What will be the sign of your coming and of the close of the age? (24:3)” After surveying early apocalyptic literature in Judaism, N. T. Wright made a bold statement that ‘there is virtually no evidence that Jews were expecting the end of the space-time universe… They believed that the present world order would come to an end – the world in which pagans held power, and Jews, the covenant people of the creator god did not .” We need to keep this in mind in view of Schweitzer’s portrait of an eschatological prophet who miscalculated the end-times.
However, it would be more helpful to see Matthew’s vision of eschatological kingdom as already inaugurated in Jesus’ first advent but not yet consummated until His second advent at the end of the age. He had in view the judgment which would befall the Temple and religious establishment in the near future as well as His return at an unspecified date. Describing the siege and fall of Jerusalem, Michael Green wrote, “More than a million Jews died in the operation, and Josephus, who was there, tells us that more than 97,000 Jews were taken captive .” The abomination that causes desolation draws on the poignant imagery in Daniel 11:31, which was fulfilled when Antiochus Epiphanes set up his own image and desecrated the temple in 163 BC. History would seem to repeat itself. By employing apocalyptic symbols like ‘the sun is darkened, the moon fails to give its light and the stars fall from heaven’ (24:29), attention is drawn to the ‘earth-shaking’ nature of these events.
The Olivet Discourse served as a warning against false prophets, disasters, complacency and preparation for the impending persecution (24:13). They should flee in haste from the judgment that would fall, presumably in the form of Titus’ army. These events are signs before the coming of the Son of Man. Eschatology is also a reminder of hope as the church is ‘citizens of the coming age’ whose ‘identity was determined by what Jesus had done and what they would be, not by what they had been or by their status in the world’ . A note of hope and responsibility was given in the promise that the end will not come until the gospel has been preached as a testimony to all nations (24: 14).
The universality of the gospel
Even before the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, Matthew’s narrative hinted at a universal scope of His gospel in mentioning four Gentile women in the genealogy and by narration of the homage paid by men from the East (Matt 2:1-12). John the Baptist’s rebuke to the Jews’ idea of election pointed out that having Abraham as their forefather does not guarantee salvation (Matt 3:8-10). As Jesus’ mission was directed to the Jews first, He initially restricted the gospel proclamation to the nation (Matt. 10:5-6, 15:24).
However, two closely-paralleled accounts of healing stressed that the faith of a Gentile centurion (Matt. 8:5-13) and Syro-Phoenician woman (Matt 15:21-28) were met with God’s favor. Both cases showed how Jesus’ apparent reluctance tested their attitudes and highlighted the racial barriers which their faith finally overcame. In the latter, Jesus seemed to limit His ministry only to ‘the lost sheep of the house of Israel’ (Matt 15:24). However, it should be understood within the narration as the dialogue exchange drew out the woman’s response of faith. Jesus commended her for though she conceded the priority of the Jews, “only the smallest fraction of his power is necessary to heal her daughter.”
In the former, Jesus expressed astonishment that ‘with no one in Israel” had responded with such faith. The pericope ended with a discussion on membership in the kingdom, in which Gentiles “will come from east and west” and share the messianic banquet with the patriarchs. It was subversive teaching that broke down racial barriers because “for a Jew to sit at table with Gentiles meant ritual defilement ”. If that was not enough, the ‘sons of the kingdom’ were to be excluded and assigned to the ‘outer darkness’. Jesus opened up the membership in God’s covenant community to those who would come by faith, not by natural descent.
Anticipation for the universal scope of the gospel and even its inevitability were hinted at various passages in Matthew 24:14 and 26:13. The climax was reached at the ending when Jesus issued the Great Commission to inclusively make disciples of all people groups (Matt 28:18-20). It was a mission ‘spelled out not in terms of the rites and duties of Israel… but in terms related specifically to Jesus himself’ . The disciples would indicate their repentance through baptism and taught to obey His countercultural commands. While membership in the covenant is not restricted by ethnicity, obedience is not an optional add-on to preserve the “delicate balance between being distinctively different and winsomely welcoming” .
Conclusion
As we study these themes, their relevance emerges in how we are to be a faith community of the risen Christ, living in the already-not yet tension of the inaugurated Kingdom. Heralding His reign would involve a critique of competing ideologies, dehumanizing lifestyles and oppressive dictators. Positively, our praxis and ethics should provide an alternative way of being human under God. At the same time, we do not become disillusioned if our efforts fail for we look ahead for its consummation. Our gospel proclamation should consciously seek to make disciples from diverse ethnic and linguistic groups that reflect the universal nature of Jesus’ commission.
Bibliography
1. Dowsett, R., The Thinking Clearly Series: The Great Commission, Monarch: London, 2001.
2. France, R.T., Matthew: Evangelist and Teacher. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1989.
3. France, R.T., Jesus and the Old Testament. London: Tyndale, 1971.
4. Green, M. The Bible Speaks Today: The Message of Matthew, Leicester: InterVarsity Press, 2000.
5. I. H. Marshall (ed.), New Testament Interpretation. Exeter: Paternoster, 1977.
6. J.B. Green, S. McKnight, & I. H. Marshall, Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, InterVarsity Press: Downers Grove, 1992.
7. Keener, C. S. A Commentary on the gospel of Matthew, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing, 1999.
8. Keener, C.S., The IVP Bible background commentary: New Testament, InterVarsity Press: Downers Grove, 1993.
9. Ladd, G.E., A Theology of the New Testament, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974.
10. Ryken, L., et al, Dictionary of biblical imagery (electronic ed.), InterVarsity Press: Downers Grove, 2000.
11. R. N. Longenecker ed., Patterns of Discipleship in the New Testament, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996.
12. Wood, D. R. W. ed., New Bible Dictionary, InterVarsity Press: Downers Grove, 1996.
13. Wright, N. T., Jesus and the Victory of God. London: SPCK, 2001.
14. Wright, N.T., The New Testament and the People of God. London: SPCK, 1992.
Comments