The Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown (53 page)

The promised Branch is also mentioned in texts (see Isa 4:2; Jer 23:5; 33:15).
⁷⁵
An examination of these texts shows that the Branch would be a descendent of David (or of David's father, Jesse) who would reign with wisdom and justice forever, who would judge the earth for sins, and who would save God's people. Matthew observed that the consonants of Jesus' hometown matched the consonants of the Hebrew word for Branch and used this to point to Jesus as the long-awaited Branch, Israel's Messiah.

Matthew confirmed Jesus' identity as the Messiah in many other ways and many other texts. Material that Matthew shares with Mark and Luke also clearly expresses Jesus' messianic identity. However, the texts discussed above are especially important for an understanding of Matthew's theological emphases since they are unique to Matthew's Gospel. These and numerous other texts in Matthew demonstrate that one of his major theological
purposes was to demonstrate that Jesus is the Messiah. Matthew wanted his readers to recognize that Jesus was the one whom the Father appointed to reign over his eternal kingdom. He wanted those same readers to bow in homage before Jesus and surrender to his authority as King.

Jesus as the “Son of Man”
The exact meaning of the title “Son of Man” is debated today in biblical scholarship. Jesus was especially fond of this designation and frequently used it as a self-reference. Each of the four Gospels contains references to Jesus as the “Son of Man.” (It occurs more often in the Synoptics than in John; even Mark's short Gospel contains more references than John does.) Interestingly, Jesus preferred this term to others that ostensibly would have shed more light on his messianic status and mission. The abundance of Jesus' self-references as the “Son of Man” indicates that this was not only how Jesus viewed himself but also how he wanted others to view him. The question remains, What meaning is the term “Son of Man” supposed to convey?

The OT contains a notable reference to “One like a son of man” in Dan 7:13. In this passage Daniel has a vision of four beasts, the last of which is blasphemous and boastful. In the midst of the fourth beast's boasting, thrones appear, and the Ancient of Days takes his seat (Dan 7:9). The four beasts are judged, and the “One like a son of man” enters the scene. As he stands before the Ancient of Days, this “son of man” is given authority to rule over everything with an everlasting dominion.

When Jesus used “Son of Man,” it is generally in the context of his impending suffering or of his Second Coming. While the OT backdrop is apparent in the context of the Second Coming, it is less apparent in the context of Jesus' sufferings. I. H. Marshall argued that Jesus conflates several OT motifs such as the rejected stone (Pss 22; 69 ; 118), the Suffering Servant (Isa 52:13–53:12), the Son of Man (Dan 7:9–14), and others, and subsumes them all under the title “Son of Man.”
⁷⁶
Even in his earthly ministry, Jesus acted with authority over various areas (Sabbath, sickness, weather, death), which may be an earthly manifestation of the authority with which he will rule after the kingdoms of the beasts are defeated (cf. Daniel 7). In the case of Jesus' suffering, resurrection, and return, he emphasized both his humanity and divinity. With this in mind, Marshall warned modern-day readers of the “grave danger of using ‘Son of man’ as a means of referring to the humanity of Jesus, as opposed to his divinity (expressed by ‘Son of God).”
⁷⁷
It is not primarily a term of humiliation but of glorification.

Jesus' Atoning Death
Matthew affirmed the presentation of temple sacrifices by Jewish Christian disciples in accordance with Jesus' own teaching (5:23–24). However, he insisted on referring to sacrifices as “gifts”
(dōron;
5:23–24; 8:4 ; 15:5; 23:18–19) except in cases in which he is directly quoting the OT (9:13; 12:7) or criticizing Jewish ritualism that devalued devotion to God and love for other people (12:33). Although a wide range of vocabulary was used in the Septuagint to refer to specific types of offerings, common
terms for sacrifice in general were “sacrifice”
(thysia)
and “off ering”
(dōron)
. However, the term “sacrifice” was far more common than “off ering” or “gift.” In the Pentateuch the term
thusia
was used to describe sacrifices 179 times, but the term
dōron
was used in that sense only 85 times. Against this background Matthew's consistent use of
dōron
for sacrifices seems significant.

Matthew's preference for the term is especially striking in 8 :4. In the parallel in Mark 1:44, Jesus commanded the leper whom he had healed to offer “what Moses prescribed for your cleansing, as a testimony to them,” which could be taken to imply that the offering actually accomplished ritual cleansing. However, Matthew preferred to describe the sacrifice for lepers required by Lev 14:10–20 as “the
gift
Moses prescribed” and removed the reference to cleansing. The OT clearly presented this offering as an atoning sacrifice. Although Lev 14:10–20 is rich with sacrificial terminology, the term “gift” was not used to speak of this particular sacrifice. But apparently Matthew departed from the precedent in Leviticus and Mark in order to describe the offering as a gift, more an expression of gratitude than a ritual that secures atonement.
⁷⁸

This tendency in Matthew's Gospel suggests that he was determined to make his readers rethink the significance of sacrifice. Although they were encouraged to continue participation in the temple rituals, they were to view sacrifices as gifts that expressed thanksgiving for forgiveness and cleansing already received rather than as offerings that accomplished forgiveness. This Matthean tendency is likely related to Matthew's view of Jesus' sacrificial death as the means of atonement for sin. Matthew's quotation of Isa 53:4 in 8:17 shows that Matthew recognized Jesus as the fulfillment of Isaiah 53, the one whose sacrifice would remove the guilt of God's people. Echoes of Isaiah 53 also abound in Matthew: he seems to have alluded to Isa 53:2 (Matt 2:23), 53:5 (Matt 26:67), 53:7 (Matt 26:63; 27:12, 14), 53:9 (Matt 26:24), and 53:12 (Matt 27 :38).
⁷⁹
There are more quotations and allusions to Isaiah 53 in Matthew than in any other NT book.
⁸⁰

Matthew's sacrificial theology recognized Jesus as the one true and effective sacrifice. Consequently, all other sacrifices that sought atonement were now passé. sacrifices were appropriate only when they expressed gratitude for forgiveness and cleansing for Jesus' atoning work, not when they sought atonement through performing rituals. This sacrificial theology also surfaced in 20:28 where Jesus said that “the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life—a ransom for many.” It climaxed with Jesus' statement during the Last Supper, “This is My blood that establishes the covenant; it is shed for many for the forgiveness of sins” (26: 28).

Thus the Gospel of Matthew emphasizes that Jesus was the Savior of sinners who secured their atonement through his sacrificial death. Like the writer of Hebrews, Matthew stressed that the animal sacrifices offered in the temple could not effect atonement. Matthew also shared the conviction that “it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.…We have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once and for all” (Heb 10:4, 10).

The Great Commission and the Inclusion of the Gentiles
Matthew was a Jewish Christian who originally wrote for a predominantly Jewish Christian audience. One of his purposes in writing the Gospel was to demonstrate that Israel's Messiah did not come for the benefit of Israel alone. Rather, he came to offer salvation to all the peoples of the earth.
⁸¹
This theological theme surfaces at a number of points in Matthew's Gospel, beginning in his genealogy of Jesus. Although scholars have suggested a variety of motives for Matthew's inclusion of the names of four women in his genealogy of Jesus, one possible reason is that all four of the women were Gentiles. Ancient Jewish texts describe Tamar as a “foreigner” (Philo,
Virt
. 220–22) and particularly as an Aramean (
Jub.
41:1–2;
Test. Jud.
10:1–2). Rahab was a Canaanite from Jericho (Josh 2:8–24). Ruth was a Moabite (Ruth 1:4). Bathsheba was probably a Hittite, like her husband Uriah (2 Sam 11:3). The mention of these four women thus may have signaled God's intention to include Gentiles in his redemptive plan.

This theme surfaced again in Matthew's account of the summons of the wise men to worship Jesus in Bethlehem (Matt 2:1–12). First-century Eastern wise men mixed together the false religion of Zoroastrianism with astrology, the interpretation of dreams and visions, and black magic. Eastern wise men are described in some detail in the book of Daniel (2:2,4,5,10), where the magi are associated with “diviner-priests,” “mediums,” and “sorcerers” in the court of the king of Babylon. The wise men thus represented the leaders of the false religions of the Gentile world (see Acts 13:6–10). The wise men's humble and reverent worship of Jesus stands in stark contrast to the apparent apathy of the Jewish leaders and their refusal to investigate the possibility that the Messiah had been born. This foreshadows Jesus' rejection by the Jewish leaders and his acceptance by Gentiles later in the Gospel.

In Matt 3:6, John's warning that God could raise up children for Abraham from the stones hints that God may form a new Israel that is not necessarily composed of Abraham's physical descendants. Matthew 4:12–16 describes Jesus' decision to establish his ministry headquarters in Capernaum as a fulfillment of God's promise in Isa 9:1–2 to bring light to “Galilee of the nations.” In Matt 4:24, people from Syria, probably including Gentiles, began to bring sick and diseased friends and family members to Jesus for healing. The crowds from the Decapolis that followed Jesus (4:25) were probably largely composed of Gentiles.

In Matt 8:5–13, Jesus offered to enter the house of a Roman centurion. This would have defied the Jewish taboo against entering the house of a Gentile (Acts 10:28). Jesus exclaimed that the faith of this Gentile exceeded any faith that he had encountered in Israel. He clearly implied the inclusion of the Gentiles in the kingdom of God by claiming that many from the east and the west would enter the kingdom and feast with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He also warned that many “sons of the kingdom,” Jews who rejected Jesus, would be excluded from the kingdom.

Matthew 12:15–21 identifies Jesus as the fulfillment of Isa 42:1–4, a prophecy that climaxes with the promise “the nations will put their hope in His name.” In Matt 12:41–42, Jesus reminded the scribes and Pharisees of the Ninevites and the queen of the South who had repented and sought true wisdom from the ends of the earth. He warned that these Gentiles would stand up on the day of judgment and condemn Jewish leaders who rejected Jesus. Matthew 15:21–28 describes Jesus' kindness to a Gentile woman, and she is specifically called a “Canaanite” (cf. Mark 7:26), probably in order to associate this woman with the most notorious pagan enemy of Israel. Jesus' kindness to the woman shows that the Gentiles, whom first-century Jews would have regarded as most despicable, may follow Christ and be blessed by him. In Matt 15:29–31, Jesus healed the sick on the northern shores of the Sea of Galilee in what was apparently Gentile territory. The people's praise “to the God of Israel” implies Gentiles were glorifying the God who was associated with the Israelites.

The theme of God's inclusion of the Gentiles climaxed at Jesus' crucifixion with the confession of the Roman centurion and his guards who exclaimed, “This man really was God's Son” (27:54). Their bold confession is in stark contrast to the refusal of the Jewish leaders to believe even after the soldiers reported Jesus' resurrection. Finally, the theme was clearly stated in the Great Commission in which Jesus urged his followers to make disciples of “all nations” (28:19–20).

Although it is Luke's Gospel that is commonly recognized as the Gospel that emphasizes that God has incorporated Gentile believers into the new Israel, this great theological theme is just as prominent in the Gospel penned by one of Jesus' own Jewish followers. If this theme had been fully appreciated by other Jewish Christians in the early church, the tensions between Jewish and Gentile Christians that Paul had to address so frequently in his letters might have never arisen. Although Paul is recognized as the great apostle to the Gentiles, Matthew's Gospel demonstrates that at least one of the Twelve was equally committed to Gentile outreach. The convictions that Paul expressed in Eph 2:11–22 were cherished by Matthew also. Though Gentiles had once been “without the Messiah, excluded from the citizenship of Israel, and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, with no hope and without God in the world,” now those who were far away had been “brought near by the blood of the Messiah.” Gentile disciples of Jesus were “no longer foreigners and strangers, but fellow citizens with the saints, and members of God's household.”

CONTRIBUTION TO THE CANON

• Genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of Abraham, the son of David (1:1–17)
  
• Account of the virgin birth of Christ (1:18–25)
  
• Fulfillment quotations showing that Jesus is the Messiah (1–4)
  
• Five major discourses or teaching sections of Jesus, including the Sermon on the Mount (5–7), the Commissioning of the Twelve (10), Jesus' parables of the kingdom (13;18), and his final teachings, including the Olivet Discourse on the end times (23–25)
  
• The Great Commission (28:16–20)
  

STUDY QUESTIONS

1. Why do the labels “authorship,” “compile,” “collector,” “editor,” and/or “redactor” fail to do justice in describing the authorship of Matthew?
   
2. Who does the earliest extant external evidence suggest wrote Matthew's Gospel?
   
3. Did Matthew write his Gospel in the Hebrew language?
   
4. When did Matthew most likely write his Gospel? Why is an early date signifi cant?
   
5. What are the two most likely locations where Matthew's Gospel may have been written?
   
6. To what geographical area did Matthew write? What demonstrates this?
   
7. What are the primary and secondary purposes of Matthew's Gospel?
   
8. Which is the most prominent feature of Matthew's structure?
   
9. Which phrase used by the evangelist enables the interpreter to identify the overall structure of Matthew's Gospel?
   
10. What are two instances where Matthew used numerical symbolism to make his theological point?
    
11. What are the chapters in Matthew that correspond to the Sermon on the Mount and the final eschatological discourse?
    
12. Which feature is particularly prominent in Matthew 1–4?