Matthew – a revisionary gospel:
first lecture
"When therefore a teacher of the law
has become a learner in the kingdom of
Heaven, he is like a householder who
can produce from his store both the
new and the old.“ Matthew 13: 51-52.
Matthew and Mark
• Was Matthew dissatisfied with Mark?
• He swallows up Mark almost whole – much
more faithful in assimilating Mark than Luke is.
• And he includes a lot of material not in Mark (Q,
infancy narrative, other narrative pericopes,
parables, teachings, prophecies – see handout).
• But also some ideological differences.
• Different portrayal of disciples.
• Different sense of “intertexuality” in relation to
the Hebrew Scriptures.
• And a different attitude toward his readers.
• Significant disagreement with Mark at certain
points.
“Matthew” -- authorship
• Again Papias (c. 140 A.D.): "Matthew compiled
sayings in the Aramaic language [literally "in the
Hebrew dialect"] and everyone translated them
as best they could."
• But not a very good description of this gospel –
“ta logia”?
• Not written in Aramaic, but Greek from the start.
• May have been associated with the name
because it’s substituted for the figure called
“Levi” in other gospels (9:9).
• But the gospel no where gives this name for
authorship.
• So again, a mystery – and an anonymous
gospel.
The author’s self-characterization?
• "When therefore a teacher of the law has
become a learner in the kingdom of Heaven, he
is like a householder who can produce from his
store both the new and the old.“ Matthew 13:
51-52.
• The writer brings forth the old, which is his
knowledge of the Hebrew scriptures.
• And puts it into the service of the new, Jesus’
teachings and the “kingdom of heaven” (not “of
God.”)
• A rabbi teaching the fulfillment of law, not its
overturning (significant difference from Paul).
When and where?
• Dated in the early to middle 80s C.E., about 10
or 15 years after Mark.
• A more “developed” sense of Christian
community in Matthew.
• It required access to a considerable library of the
Hebrew scriptures, probably in a city.
• Texts: Mark, Q, Septuagint translation of H.S.,
other written material for parables, infancy
narrative, etc.
• Written for a community of Greek-speaking
Jewish Christians. But Gentiles as well.
• Very likely Antioch, earliest church outside
Palestine, where Acts says Jesus people were
first called “Christians.”
Differences from Mark
• Matthew's is the only one of the gospels to
mention the Church.
• Which seems why it was given pride of place in
4th century CE when the canon was formed.
• Matthew’s version of "Peter's confession," ch.
16: 13-20.
• Amplified from Mark.
• Similarly in “Transfiguration,” 17: 1-8; subtly
softens picture of disciples.
• Jesus comes and touches them, reassuring
them.
• Wherever in Mark the disciples are unaware and
blind to the meaning of Jesus, in Matthew they
understand.
Difference from Mark 2
• “Intertextual” relationship to Hebrew
Scriptures.
• Matthew quotes the Hebrew Bible at least
60 times in an explicit way.
• A dozen or so of those times he introduces
the quotation with "This was done in order
to fulfill the words of Scripture.“
• Uses Hebrew Scriptures in an essentialist,
ahistorical way, which is way it was read at
time.
• A lawyer making his case.
Matthew’s beginning
• A genealogy! Why?
• Like one of those priestly genealogies from
Pentateuch (or Torah)?
• Links Jesus directly with David.
• David = 14 in numerical equivalent of the letters
in Hebrew.
• 14 generations from Abraham to David.
• 14 from David to Babylonian captivity.
• 14 from Babylonian captivity to Jesus.
• “David, David, David!”
• Descending to Joseph, Jesus’ legal father.
• Joseph wasn’t mentioned in Mark, though Mary
was.
• Davidic significance of birth in Bethlehem: 2: 5-6.
Matthew’s infancy narrative
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Entirely different from Luke’s.
They share only four things:
Names of parents;
Virgin birth (but described differently);
Birth in Bethlehem (but explained differently).
Nazareth and Galilee (but explained differently
in each.)
All other details completely different.
In both Bethlehem has symbolic rather than
literal significance.
Mark and Paul say nothing of a miraculous
conception for Jesus.
Modern scholarship sees infancy stories as
essentially mythic or legendary accounts.
Character of Matthew’s infancy
narrative
• Darker than Luke’s?
• Joseph’s desire to dismiss Mary.
• Story of Herod and magi, slaughter of
children.
• Passages of Hebrew Scriptures seem to
motivate and structure the account:
Hosea, Jeremiah.
• Matthew’s story neither historical nor
fictional, rather symbolic and theological.
• The point being what the symbolic means,
not what literally occurred.
Matthew and the Law
• “Do not suppose that I have come to abolish the law or
the prophets . . .” 5:17.
• “. . . until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not
one stroke of a letter, will pass away until all is
accomplished.”
• And “whoever breaks one of the least commandments
and teaches others to do so . . .”
• Will be called least in the kingdom.
• Which must mean Paul!
• And everywhere Matthew ties his gospel to passages of
Hebrew Scriptures.
• “Golden rule” at 7: 12: “This is the law and the prophets.”
• Which was also the teaching of Rabbi Hillel, one of the
two leading Pharisaic teachers contemporary with Jesus:
"do not unto another what you would abhor to have done
to yourself.“
• See also J’s commission to disciples at 10: 5-6.
Jesus and Pharisees in Matthew
• While being the most “Jewish” of the gospels, M. is also
the most anti-Pharisaic.
• John attacks Pharisees and Saducees right at beginning:
3: 7-10.
• Various other attacks on “hypocrites” in ch. 6.
• And implied in ch. 10: 17-23.
• Chapter 23 the harshest attack in the NT on the
Pharisees.
• In fact the historical Jesus probably agreed with much of
the Pharisaic program.
• Agreed with them, against the Saducees, about the
“resurrection of the dead” and judgment after death.
• Why the hostility in Matthew?
• The historical circumstances after 85 CE.