D'autres articles de cet numéro | En anglais | En français
Torah, Jesus and discipleship in the Gospel of Matthew
Celia Deutsch
Introduction
The Gospel of Matthew presents fascinating material for anyone interested in studying the history of the relationship between Jews and Christians. It was written at the end of the first century by a Jewish member of the Jesus movement for a community which was largely Jewish but which included a certain number of gentiles. The author, or more correctly, the editor displays a knowledge of Jewish sources, biblical texts and variants, and hermeneutical techniques which suggests that he is himself a scholar.
Moreover, while the community includes gentiles and, indeed, proselytizes actively, there is no evidence that it has been excluded, or has left voluntarily, the broader parent community. To be sure, there is evidence of fierce debate. Matthew and his community stand over against the parent group. There can be little doubt that they understand themselves to be the "true believers", the
"true Israel", in much the same way as other Jewish groups in the Second Temple and early tannaitic periods: Qumran, the communities reflected in I Enoch and the Psalms of Solomon (1).
Matthew and Torah
But, if all this is true, then how does Matthew understand Torah? Before addresing this question, we must clarify how it is that we understand Torah. We use this word in two narrow meanings to indicate the five books of Moses in the canon of the Hebrew Bible, as well as the Word of God revealed in the whole of the Tenach. And we use "Torah" in the broad sense to mean the revelation of God in Scripture and in ongoing tradition.
We return to our earlier question. How does Matthew understand Torah? What is the relationship of Torah to Jesus? And how does he view the relationship between discipleship and Torah?
Matthew uses nomos ("law", the inadequately construed LXX equivalent to torah) specifically to refer to the first five books of the Bible. This is readily apparent in his use of the phrase "law and the prophets", an expression Matthew uses to connote the whole Hebrew Bible (2). In other instances Matthew simply uses "the law" (12:5; 22:36). It is usually clear that Matthew is using "the law" to refer to the five books of Moses —he uses the word with "commandment" ("entole) in 5:17 and 22:36. In 12:5 the editor refers to Num 28:9-10 regarding the priests' Sabbath observance and interprets both the legal text and justifies the behavior of Jesus and his disciples in light of Hos. 6:6. Matthew, then, uses "law" in its narrower sense.
Matthew's use of "law" is almost always editorial. Only in 5:18 and 11:13 does he take "law" or "the law and the prophets" from a prior source — in both cases, the Sayings Source (3). The expression of "the law and the prophets" is already present in the prologue of Sirach (v. 1), and therefore we can presume that Matthew's usage was not only derived from a messianic Jewish source but had a broader support in the usage of the parent group. In any event, Matthew's redactional use of "law" and "the law and the prophets" suggests a particular theological interest.
Matt 5:17-20 gives us a perspective from which we can understand the significance of "law" and "the law and the prophets" for the evangelist:
Do not think that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets: I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others thus, shall be called least in the kingdom of Heaven. For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of Heaven.
Law and prophets endure until the "passing away" of heaven and earth — that is, until the final apocalypsis, the parousia, the moment when all "these things" are accomplished (4). Certainly, the apocalyptic age has begun — Matthew suggests this in his redaction of the death and resurrection narratives (5). Heaven and earth, however, have not passed away (6).
Jesus and Torah
But what does it mean that Jesus has come to fulfill (plerrisal) the law and the prophets? The verb "fulfill" has slightly different meanings for the two objects. With regard to "the prophets", Matthew — as does the Sayings Source — means that the prophets find their object and meaning in Jesus. This is clear in the fulfillments citations in Matthew's gospel (7).
Matthew uses prophetic texts to reflect on Jesus' identity, his ministry, and the nature of his teaching (8). As does the exegesis of Qumran, Matthew collapses past, prophetic word and contemporary event. However, the Qumran texts begin with the biblical text and move to the event. But Matthew, because of the nature of the gospel form, moves from event to text (9). Jesus fulfills the prophetic word; i.e., that word is about Jesus — his origin, identity and birth, his ministry as healer, his parabolic teaching of the apocalyptic secrets, his passion and death. The prophets thus continue to disclose to the Matthean community the nature of the risen Jesus who fulfills them and is their object or end.
In what way is Matthew using "fulfill" vis-a-vis Torah? Does he mean that Jesus is the end or object of the Law and that, therefore, one no longer need observe Torah? It appears that some in Matthew's community think precisely in that fashion — these are the ones whom Matthew addresses in 5:17: "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets (10). These people believe that Jesus has indeed come to abolish the law. Matthew accuses them of "lawlessness" (anomie) (11) and he places Jesus' teaching over against their speculation.
The material which follows vv. 17-20 suggests what Matthew intends when he has Jesus speak of himself as fulfilling the Law. In vv. 21-48, we have the antitheses — statements about murder, adultery, divorce, oaths, talion, and love of enemies. Much of this material is traditional; the teaching about divorce, talion and love of enemies already existed in the Sayings Source (12).
Matthew has taken this material, added it to his own teaching on murder, adultery, and oaths, and unified the whole with the antithesis form "You have heard that it was said... but I say" (13). In all cases, a citation or paraphrase from the five books of Moses follows the first clause. After the citation or paraphrase there follows the second clause of the antithesis "But I say unto you" (14).
Some scholars consider that the antitheses on divorce, oaths and talion actually revoke the prohibition or permission given in Torah (15). The other antitheses would be seen as a radicalization of Torah. But a revoking of Torah would be inconsistent with 5:17-20, which speaks of Jesus as fulfilling it.
The meaning of the antitheses — and of Jesus' fulfilling the law — becomes clear when one considers that in tannaitic exegesis "to hear" (shama) signifies "to understand literally". The exegete counters the literal understanding with a broader interpretation sometimes based on another part of Scripture. An example occurs in Mek. ba-Hodesh 8:1-3 (on Ex 20:12). This text interprets the command "Honor thy father and thy mother":
I might understand it (shomea' ana to mean only with words, but Scripture says, "Honor the Lord with thy substance" (Prov 3.9). Hence it must mean with food and drink and with clean garments (16).
There is another form, this one similar to the last half of the antithesis, "but I say to you". In this form prior opinions are cited and then countered by another. The new opinion begins with "but he says" (ye hayah Omer) or "I say" (ani Omer) (17).
Now, these materials do not present an exact parallel to Matthew's antitheses. What they do offer us is evidence of the practice of countering prior opinion, including material about the Decalogue itself, with a sage's new interpretation expressed emphatically in the first or third person singular. The antitheses thus exist within the ambient of tannaitic Judaism (18). However, they present Jesus as authoritative interpreter of Torah.
Matthew's Sermon on the Mount concludes with the words: "And when Jesus finished these sayings, the crowds were astonished at his teaching, for he taught them as one who had authority and not as their scribes" (7:28-29). Two features of this concluding statement are of particular interest for our purposes: the word "authority" (eksousia) and the fact that Matthew places Jesus' teaching over against that of "their" scribes. This is surely a reflection of the conflict between the teachers of Matthew's community and those of the broader parent community.
Matthew uses the word "authority" redaction-ally in 28:18 (19). There the risen Jesus says "all authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me". He then tells his disciples to go out and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them and "teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you" (vv. 19-20). Now, the reference to the granting of all authority in heaven and on earth to the risen Jesus echoes Dan 7:14, which describes the universal dominion (eksousia) given to the Son of Man. Thus, we might say that, in light of 28:18, Jesus teaches with authority, as the exalted and risen Son of Man (20). And, while the antitheses certainly resemble tannaitic discussions, for Matthew there is a difference: Jesus is not simply another apocalyptic scribe, but the apocalyptic Son of Man himself. He interprets Torah as the one who will be the center of apocalyptic event (21).
That use of apocalyptic disignation to legitimize Jesus' interpretation appears again in 12:1-8. There, in a pericope taken from Mark (Mk 2:23-28), we see Jesus challenged by the Pharisees, justifying his disciples' plucking grain on the Sabbath. Matthew retains and edits the Marcan conclusion to read "for the Son of Man is lord of the sabbath" (Matt 12:8) (22).
In the Marcan version, Jesus uses the example of David to legitimize his apparent violation of the Sabbath (23). Matthew retains this, and adds to it a reference to a reading from Torah (Num 28:9-10), (Hos 6:6) (24). Thus, Matthew's redaction emphasizes Jesus' reinterpretation of Torah as justification of his practice as well as retaining the Mar-can reference to Jesus' identity as Son of Man.
We have another Sabbath controversy in the pericope which follows immediately (12:9-14//Mk 3:1-6). There, Matthew makes of the discussion a specifically halachic controversy. He redacts the Marcan indirect discourse ("And they watched him to see whether he would heal him on the Sabbath", Mk 3:2). Matthew has, instead, the direct question, "Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath?" (12:10). Matthew then adds a gal va-homer argument based on the rescue of a sheep on the Sabbath (12:11-12) (25).
Matthew thus portrays, in these two pericopae, Jesus as interpreter of Torah, over against opposing teachers, i.e., the Pharisees (26). Jesus' defends his observance and that of his disciples not only in his capacity as Son of Man, but also by his skilled interpretation.
Matt 12: / -8, 9-14 leads us yet further in our inquiry into the evangelist's understanding of Jesus' relationship to Torah. For, in the preceding passage, 11:25-30, we read Jesus' thanksgiving prayer and invitation. There Jesus thanks God for having hidden "these things" from the "wise and understanding" and revealing them to "infants" (11:25). This is followed by a saying about revelation (v. 27) and the invitation to come to Jesus and take up his yoke (vv. 28-30).
As I have demonstrated elsewhere, "these things" in the Matthean context, refers to the Father and Jesus' identity as Son of the Father and apocalyptic Son of Man, to the nature of his preaching and deeds (27).
And against the backdrop of Second Temple and tannaitic Judaism, the invitation, with the reference to the yoke and promise of rest, discloses Jesus, not only as Teacher but as Wisdom incarnate. In that same light, "yoke" refers both to wisdom and to Torah, which are identified with each other in Jewish sources of this period (28).
Matt 11:25-30 thus implies that the revelation of "these things", the apocalyptic mysteries (cf. 13:11), occurs precisely in discipleship to Jesus who is incarnate Wisdom. And discipleship means taking up Jesus' yoke, his interpretation of Torah, a teaching which provides rest to the heavily burdened. This is in contrast to the opponents — the Pharisees of 12:1-8, 9-14, or the scribes and Pharisees of chapter 23.
Jesus the Teacher of Torah appears in chapter 23, of course, in contrast to the opposing teachers, i.e., the scribes and Pharisees. There, however, he does not proffer a different interpretation of Torah. On the contrary, Matthew has Jesus attribute teaching authority to them, and instruct both crowds and disciples to "do and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do" (23:3). The scribes and Pharisees do not stand in solidarity with their community — they lay on burdens they themselves are unwilling to bear (v. 4).
Matthew's Jesus lays a series of charges against the scribes and Pharisees: discrepancy between teaching and practice (v. 3), lack of solidarity with their community (v. 4), ostentatious behavior (vv. 5-7). With regard to their teaching, itself, Matthew's Jesus criticizes the scribes and Pharisees for not attending to the inner meaning of things. They are, in other words, hypocrites while first cleansing the inside of the "vessel" (vv. 25-26).
Matthew thus describes Jesus, not as abrogating the teaching of the scribes and Pharisees but as challenging them to go yet further in interpretation as well as practice. Moreover, as in chapters 11-12, Matthew legitimates the authoritative nature of Jesus' challenge by portraying him as Wisdom incarnate. In v. 34, the evangelist alters the logion taken from the Sayings Source to read: "Therefore I send you prophets and wise men and scribes..." (30). As we will see, this saying is an important one with respect to Matthew's understanding of the relationship of Jesus, discipleship and Torah. For the moment, however, we note that it is Jesus, Teacher of Torah and Wisdom incarnate who stands over against scribes and Pharisees.
A discussion of Matthew's understanding of Jesus, Torah and discipleship requires that we look more closely at the apocalyptic nature of Jesus' role as teacher of Torah — here understood in the broadest sense of the term. Matthew does not portray Jesus as an apocalyptic seer, as other contemporary texts portray significant teachers. He does, however, show Jesus to be teacher of the apocalyptic mysteries or secrets (13:11). This is explicit in 13:11, where Jesus is described as explaining his parabolic teaching to the disciples: "To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of Heaven...". The theological passive and the context of the unit (vv. 10-17) indicate that such knowledge is given by God. And 13:34-35 suggests that Jesus' parables actually disclose as well as conceal the apocalyptic mysteries.
In the broader context of the gospel, the confession of Peter with Jesus' response shows that recognition of Jesus' identity is due to apocalypses and is the foundation of authority in the community (16:16-19). Moreover, the entire parabolic discourse in chapter 13 indicates the apocalyptic nature of Jesus' instruction. The same can be said of the discourse of 24:1-25:48. Both of these discourses form part of the broader literary units which include materials which present Jesus as Wisdom incarnate and Teacher of Torah.
Examination of the gospel discloses why Jesus is not described as seer, although he is teacher of the mysteries. Jesus is not described as seer because he is himself at the center of apocalyptic revelation. His identity as Messiah and Son is revealed to the disciples (11:25-27; 16:16-17). Matthew heightens the apocalyptic ambient of the Transfiguration narrative in his editing of the Mar-can version. Thus, he adds "and his face shone like the sun" (v. 17:2a). And he abbreviates the description of Jesus' garments: "and his garments became white as light" (17:2b). Thus, Matthew parallels the two clauses and thereby emphasizes the apocalyptic effect (31).
Matthew also inserts an apocalyptic note into his description of Jesus' death, with his description of the earthquake, the opening of tombs and raising of the saints (27:51-52). And he continues the apocalyptic motif in the resurrection narrative. There too an earthquake occurs, and Mark's white-clad young man is transformed into an angel with an appearance "like lightening" and clothing "white as snow" (28:3), who delivers the greeting so familiar in apocalyptic texts, "Do not be afraid" (28:5) (32). And finally, as we have shown elsewhere, the parallels between Dan 7:14 and 28:18b-19a suggest that it is the risen Jesus as apocalyptic Son of Man who sends out his disciples to make disciples, to baptize and to teach.
Matthew's editorial heightening of the apocalyptic motif tells us that he believes that, while the completion of the age is yet to come, the apocalyptic time has begun with Jesus. Jesus, the teacher who discloses the secrets of God's reign, is himself at the center of the apocalyptic mysteries. As such, he is also Wisdom incarnate and Teacher of Torah, the object and fulfillment of prophetic revelation.
Jesus, Torah and Discipleship
But what does all of this have to do with discipleship? There are two ways in which we must speak of the relationship between Jesus, Torah and discipleship. The first is that of community membership at large, for that is the most frequent meaning of Matthew's use of the term "disciple".
And the second is that of community leadership. Once again, we begin at the end of Matthew's
gospel. There Jesus' disciples, who represent teachers in Matthew's community as well as the close followers of the earthly Jesus, are instructed to make disciples of all nations, baptizing them, and teaching them "to observe all that I have commanded you" (28:18b-19a). The instruction to teach observance is concomitant with discipleship and baptism; and, coming as it does, at the end of the gospel, it refers back to Jesus' teaching contained therein, a teaching which Matthew represents as authoritative interpretation of Torah.
Matthew then, understands discipleship in reference to a body of teaching, revelation, tradition that is taught by Jesus. This is quite evident in the Sermon on the Mount. There Jesus, described in such a way as to recall the figure of Moses, teaches his disciples on a mountain (33). The content of that teaching and the fact that Matthew places the disciples over against the crowds, rather than the scribes and/or Pharisees (5:1) suggests that the disciples here represent the Matthean community rather than a specific group of leaders (34).
In Matt 11:25-30 revelation of "these things" is given to the "infants" or, literally, "suckling children" (nepiof). The invitation to take up Jesus' yoke with its concomitant promise of rest is proferred to those who are burdened (11:28-30). Jesus is the meek and humble of heart. Matthew 11:25-30 then, is characterized by the anawim language so frequent in Second Temple literature, where it frequently was used as boundary language to mark off distinctions between particular goups and the community at large. This is, of course, particularly clear in the Dead Sea Scrolls (35).
Anawim language also characterized school settings in the early rabbinic period. Tinuqot, the Hebrew equivalent of nepioi, appears to have referred to students of Mishnah (Sifre Deut 3:7), as well as the entire people of Israel (Sifre Deut 321) in relationship to dibrei torah. In the latter case, the language of study and discipleship extends to all Israel (36). Thus, the description of Jesus as "meek" (pants), "humble" (tapeinos) resembles the ideal of the sage (37). Both Jesus and the disciples are described in school vocabulary, a language of deprivation already used in the Sayings Source (38).
There is, in 11:25-30, yet another instance of the use of school categories to describe Jesus' disciples, both actual and potential. That is the "chain of tradition", the vehicle of transmission of teaching which established the legitimacy, the authenticity of that teaching (39). According to Matthew (and the Sayings Source), the chain of tradition begins, not at Sinai or with a human teacher, but with God — the Father has delivered (paradidOmt) all things to the Son who in turn is source of revelation to the community (vv. 25-27). In the M saying (11:28-30), the weary come to Jesus, and take up the yoke of his interpretation or paradosis. That chain of tradition then continues in Matthew's community as the leaders make disciples and hand on Jesus' teaching (cf. 28:18-20), both apocalyptic secrets and interpretation of Torah.
As we have seen earlier in this paper, in chapter 13 Matthew again represents the disciples as the recipients of revelation. The disciples represent Matthew's community — they stand in contrast to "the whole crowd" (13:2). To them is given to know the "secrets" or "mysteries" of God's reign (13:11). They hear, see, understand, in contrast to the crowd (vv. 13-15). They are able to perceive (40).
But the "disciples" appear, in chapter 13, to represent not only the Matthean community in general, but a more specific group as well. In 13:51 Jesus asks the disciples, "Have you understood all this"? At their positive response, Jesus tells them — not the crowd — the brief parable:
Therefore every scribe who has been trained for the kingdom of Heaven is like a householder who brings out of his treasure what is new and what is old (13:52).
Matthew's disciples here represent the "scribes trained for the kingdom of Heaven". We will speak at greater length of the scribes' role at a later point. Here, however, it is important to note that revelation of the apocalyptic secrets, understanding and perception of mysteries characterize not only the Matthean community at large, but the scribes —i.e., those specifically entrusted with the recording, interpretation and transmission of Jesus' teaching (41).
The crowds and disciples are present in chapter 23, where the exhortation to humility, and to inwardness of halachic observance are addressed to both groups. But there are specific references to the teachers of Matthew's community. The critique of the scribes' and Pharisees' lack of solidarity with the community, their ostentatious behavior implies an injunction that the teachers in Matthew's community are, on the contrary, to stand as one with the community even while interpreting Torah. Their behavior is to be that of exemplary sages characterized by humility. And they are to eschew honorific titles (23:4-12) (42).
As we observed earlier, Matthew precedes the woes with the material about proper teachers, and follows them with the saying about Wisdom's envoys — those the evangelist calls "prophets, wise men and scribes". At this point it would be well to comment on the roles of the latter for neither the Wisdom saying nor the parable of the scribe trained for the kingdom of Heaven actually tell us about those roles.
Now "wise man" (hakton)was a tannaitic synonym for a sage and "scribe" (sOfer) a tannaitic term for the pre-tannaitic sages. The scribes of Second Temple and tannaitic Judaism were not only copyists, but scholars and sometimes apocalyptic seers who transmitted the tradition (43). Furthermore, the literature often describes the learned as endowed with prophetic qualities, thus sometimes standing over against the establishment, foretelling the future, and interpreting Torah by inspiration of the Holy Spirit (44). And so, it is in that manner that Matthew presents in chapter 23, those teachers who are Wisdom's envoys as prophets, sages and scribes (23:34), whose authority is legitimated by the fact that they are indeed sent by Wisdom incarnate.
Chapters 24 and 25 show the disciples receiving instruction about apocalyptic matters — the time of the final cataclysm which will inaugurate the full realization of the kingdom of Heaven. Matthew's teachers receive — as does the entire community — the revelation which allows them to perceive, understand the mysteries.
But one must go further in describing the esoteric nature of Matthew's sages. They understand, as indeed does the entire community, but also in that capacity which allows them, as scribes trained for the kingdom of Heaven to draw forth new and old (13:52) (45). This is true on two levels. The Matthean scribes' understanding allows them to transmit and interpret, on the first level, the Hebrew Scriptures and Jewish tradition (46). On the second level, they transmit and interpret the original Jesus tradition (47).
Matthew's redaction of the transfiguration account suggests that he considers the disciples' leaders — i.e., Peter, James and John — to be apocalyptic seers. Their fear and prostration in reaction to Jesus' appearance, his corresponding reassurance "fear not" and command to rise echo apocalyptic visionary narratives in Second Temple literature (48).
The relationship of teaching office and revelatory experience is quite clear in the account of Peter's commission (16:17-19). Jesus signals Peter's acknowledgment of his identity as due to revelation. Jesus then gives a title and the "keys of the kingdom of heaven" with the authority to bind and loose. Matthew 23:13 suggests that the "keys of the kingdom of heaven" refers specifically to teaching authority (49).
The power to bind and loose has something to do with Torah instruction and interpretation. Matt 5:19 speaks of relaxing (lyse) "one of the least of these commandments", and in Matt 18:18 binding and loosing refers to the ban of excommunication (50). Now, Josephus uses binding and loosing to refer to the imposition of the ban of excommunication, and he tells us that under Queen Salome Alexandra, the authority to bind and loose belonged to the Pharisees (Wars, 1.3). Moreover, tannaitic literature uses the corresponding Aramaic and Hebrew terms to signify "permit" and "forbid" especially regarding halachic decisions (51).
Thus we may say that, in Matt 16:19 Jesus confers upon Peter a sage's task as guarantor of halakhah (52), and he does so precisely in function of Peter's quality as one who has access to apocalyptic secrets. And, because Peter is always within the circle of the disciples, we may say that he receives the sage's commission on behalf of the teaching office exercised within the community (53).
Conclusions
For Matthew, then, Torah as prophecy findsits object and end in Jesus. Torah as the five books and in its broadest extension as God's revelation in the ongoing tradition, likewise finds fulfillment in Jesus, Matthew believes. This happened through the teaching of the historical Jesus who disclosed the true meaning of Torah, whether halachic observance, prophecy or apocalyptic secrets. And it continues in the teachers among whom Jesus is present until the end of the age (28:20).
All — teachers and community alike — are the "infants", "meek", "humble", as befits the community of true believers. All are bound to Torah. All share the apocalyptic knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of Heaven. And that apocalyptic experience legitimates teachers' authority and community's adherence over against the parent group.
For Matthew, then, the Christ experience has not replaced Torah. Indeed, he understands Torah to continue to be essential to the life of the community. But there has been a hermeneutical shift, and Torah is now itself interpreted in light of the experience of Jesus' continued presence and teaching.
Notes* Dr. Celia Deutsch is a Sister pillion. She teaches New Testament at Barnard College, Columbia University, New York.
(1) I discuss the above matters at greater length in Hidden Wisdom and the Easy Yoke: Wisdom, Torah and Discipleship in Mt 11:25-30 (JSNTSS 18, Sheffield, 1987), pp. 13-20. See also J.A. Overman, Matthew's Gospel and Formative Judaism; the Social World of the Matthean. (Minneapolis, MN, 1990). While 1 agree with Overman that the Matthean community is primarily Jewish, 1 believe one must be more attentive to the significance of texts such as 28:18-20; cf. Overman, p. 157.
(2) The phrase is taken from the Sayings Source in 11:13 (cf. Lk 16:16). It is redactional in 7:13; 22:40, and possibly in 5;17. (The "Sayings Source" represents a hypothetical source used by Matthew and Luke).
(3) Cf. Lk 16:17, 16.
(4) Cf. 24:34 where "all these things take place" (panto Meta genetai) occurs in a saying about the second coming of the Son of Man.
(5) Matt 27:51-53; 28:2-4.
(6) Contra R.G. Hamerton-Delly, "Attitudes to the Law in Matthew's Gospel: a Discussion of Matthew 5:18"; BR 17 (1972), p. 30; J. Meier, Law and History in Matthew's Gospel (AnBib 71, 1976), p. 65.
(7) Matt 1:22-23; 2:5b-6; 2:15b; 2:17-18; 1:236; 3:3; 4:14-16; 8:17; 12:17-21; 13:14-15; 13:35; 21:4-5; 26:56; 27:9-10. It is not completely certain that 2:5b; 3:3; 13:14-15; 26:56 should be regarded as fulfillment citations because they lack the usual fulfillment formula. Cf. R.E. Brown, The Birth of the Messiah (Garden City, N.Y., 1979), pp. 96-99; Stendahl however, considers 2:6 to be a fulfillment citation; cf. School of St. Matthew and Its Use of the Old Testament (Philadelphia, 1968).
(8) Matt 13:35 actually cites Ps 78:2 but mistakenly attributes it to Isaiah.
(9) On the gospel form, see D.E. Aune, The New Testament in Its Literary Environment (Philadelphia, 1987), pp. 46-74; H. Koester, Ancient Christian Gospels; Their History and Development (London, 1990), pp. 26-29.
(10) Cf. G. Barth, "Matthew's Understanding of the Law", in Tradition and Interpretation in Matthew, by G. Bornkamm, G. Barth, and H.J. Held, trans. by P. Scott (London, 1963), p. 67.
(II) Matt 7:23; 13:41; 23:28; 24:12. A nomia is translated by the NRSV as "evildoing" in 7:23 and 13:41, and "lawlessness" in 23:28 and 24:12. Davison believes that anomia does not indicate "lawlessness", but rather a more generalized "wickedness"; cf. "A nomia and the Question of an An, tinomian Polemic in Matthew", JBL 104 (1985), p. 617-35. Overman believes that 5:17 may represent an accusation from outside the Matthean community; cf. Overman, op. cit., pp. 16-19, 158. Davison does not account for the fact that context suggests that anomia signifies "lawlessness" in 23:28 and, most likely, 24:12. Overman does not make clear exactly why accusation of lawlessness in 5:17 comes from outside the community.
(12) Cf. Lk 1618; 6:29-30; 627-28, 32-36.
(13) Cf. Meier, Law and History. pp. 126-28. We see various forms of the antithesis: "You have heard that it was said (vv. 27, 38, 43); "You have heard that it was said to men of old" (vv. 21, 33), and "indeed it was said" (v. 31).
(14) Vv., 22, 28, 32, 34, 39, 44.
(15) G. Bornkamm, "End-Expectation and Church in Matthew, in Tradition and Interpretation, p. 25; Meier, Law and History, pp. 140-61.
(16) Cf. D. Daube, The New Testament and Rabbinic Judaism (London, 1956), p. 56f.
(17) TBek 615; Bik 12 Mik 34. Cf. M. Smith, Tannaitic Parallels to the Gospels (SBLMS 6, Philadelphia, 1968), pp. 27-30.
(18) Cf. N.J. McEleney, "The Principles of the Sermon on the Mount", CBQ 411979), p. 559.
(19) Matthew usually retains this word from his source (7:29; 8:9; 9:6; 21:23, 24, 27). He uses it redactionally only in 9:8 and 28:18.
(20) Orton draws the parallel between the designation of Jesus as "given all authority in heaven and on earth" and apocalyptic scribes (e.g., Enoch the "teacher of heaven and earth" (TAbr 113). However, he fails to account for the startling verbal similarities between Matt 28:18 and Dan 7:14 (LXX). Cf. D.E. Orton, The Understanding Scribe; Matthew and the Apocalyptic Ideal. (JSNTSS 25, Sheffield, 1989).
(21) Matthew reinterprets the Marcan "what will be the sign when these things are all to be accomplished" (Mk 13:4) to read "what will be the sign of your coming and of the close of the age?" (Matt 24:3). Although Orton is correct in noting that the majority of Son of Man utterances are made solely to the disciples, his interpretation of the phrase as like meaning "anyone" in 12:8 and 12:21 does not account fot the explanatory "for" (gar) which explains the authority behind the practice and teaching in vv. 1-7; Cf. Orton, op. cit., p. 186, note 66.
(22) Mk has "therefore, the Son of Man is lord even of the Sabbath".
(23) Cf. 1 Sam 211-6; see R. Gundry, Matthew, a Commentary on His Literary and Theological Art (Grand Rapids, MI, 1982, p. 223.
(24) Cf. Mk has "therefore, the Son of Man is lord even of the Sabbath".
(25) Cf. T.W. Manson, The Sayings of Jesus (London, 1949), P. I88f.
(26) Cf. Overman, op. cit., pp. 78-80. Here, the Pharisees are already present in the Marcan version of these stories.
(27) Cf. Hidden Wisdom, pp. 27-30. See also my article "Wisdom in Matthew: Transformation of a Symbol", NovT 32 (1990), pp. 27f.
(29). The faithful are to keep all oaths (vv. 16-22). They are to attend to the weightier matters of justice, mercy and faith (v. 23), and they are to observe ritual purity
(28) E.g., Sir 24; Bar 3:9-4:4; 2 Apoc Bar 47:3f; 77:16; Sifre Dent 37, 48, 309, 317. Cf. Hidden Wisdom, pp. 134, 126-28.
(29) Matt 23:13, 14, 15; hypocrisis — 23:28. Al/ these instances are redactional.
(30) The logion likely appeared in the Sayings Source as: "Therefore also the Wisdom of God said, 'I will send them prophets and apostles..."'; Lk 11:49. See J. Kloppenborg, The Formation of Q; Trajectories in Ancient Wisdom Collections (Philadelphia, 1987), p. 143.
(31) Brilliance of countenance and/or clothing occurs elsewhere in apocalyptic literature; e.g., Dan; 7:9; 12:3; 4 Ezra 7:97; 2 Apoc Bar 51:3; 1 Enoch 14:2, 20; Rev 1:16; cf. J. Gnilka, Das Matthausevangelium, 11 (Freiburg, 1988), pp. 92-100; Meier, op. cit.
(32) Cf. Mk 16:1-8.
(33) Cf. W.D. Davies, Setting of the Sermon on the Mount (Cambridge, 1966), p. 85.
(34) However, Matt 6:1-4, 5-6 appears to be directed against scribes and/or Pharisees — elsewhere in Matthew "hypocrite" refers to either of those two groups.
(35) E.g., CD 6:16, 21; 1 Q M 14:7; 1 Q Sb 5:22; 1 Q II 5:16, 18.
(36) Cf. Hidden Wisdom, p. 99.
(37) Cf. tSot 133,4; mSot 9:15; Aboth 4:10; ARNIa 25, 26, 38; Sifre Deut 95.
(38) E.g., Lk 6:20b-23; 10:21-22.
(39) Cf. mEd 8:7; Yad 4:3; Peah 2:6; tHal 1:6; Josephus, Antiquities, 13.297, 408; Philo, Spec 4:149-150; Mk 7:13//Matt 15:6. Cf. E. Bickerman, "La chain de la tradition pharisienne", RB 59 (1952), pp. 524-32.
(40) Matthew uses "understand" (syniemi) redactionally in 13:13, 14, 15, 19, 23, 51; 16:12; 17:13.
(41) On the role of the scribes in Matthew's community see L. Cope, Matthew, a Scribe Trained for the Kingdom of Heaven (CBQMS 5, Washington, D.C., 1976); D. Orton, op. cit., pp. 137-163; Overman, op. cit., pp. 115-117.
(42) Cf. Overman, op. cit., pp. 122-24.
(43) Note that varioue texts are attributed to seers who are also called "scribes"; e.g., 1 Enoch, 2 Apoc Bar, Baruch, 4 Ezra, etc. On the scribe in the Second Temple and tannaitic periods, see Orton, op. cit., pp. 50-133.
(44) E.g., trot 13:3; mSot 9:15; tPes 1:27; cf. also ySot 9:13; blot 48b; bErub 64b; Lev R 21:8; ySot 1:4; yShey 9:1.; See E. Urbach, The Sages; Their Concepts and Beliefs, trans. by I. Abrahams (Jerusalem, 1975), 1:573-579; M. Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism; Studies in Their Encounter in Palestine during the Hellenistic Period, trans. by 1. Bowden (Philadelphia, 1974), I:135ff.
(45) Cf. J. Zumstein, La condition du croyant dans Pevangile selon Matthieu (OrBibOr 16, Fribourg, 1977), p. 161f.
(46) Cf. W. Michaelis, Das Evangelium nach Matthaus (Zurich 1949), 1:257; B. Viviano, Study as Worship; About and the New Testament (SRA 26, Leiden, 1978).
(47) Cf. W. Trilling, "Amt and Amtverstdndnis bei Matthaus", in Melanges bibliques en hommage au R.P. Beda Rigaux, ed. by A. Descamps and R.D.A. de Halleux (Gembloux, 1970), p. 34; Zumstein, op. cit., p. 161 f.; Orton, op. cit., pp. 151-153. Orton understands Matthew's scribes as inheritors of the Second Temple revelatory scribes' role. However, he makes too sharp a dichotomy between rabbinic and apocalyptic scribes; cf. pp. 166-169.
(48) Matt 17:1-8/ /Mk 9:1-7. In the Marcan account Jesus' clothes become dazzling white (stilbonta leuka, 9:3), while in Matthew they are "white as light" (leuka hos to phos, 17:2). Cf. Dan 8:17-18; 10:9-12; 1:Enoch 14:14-15:1; 4 Ezra 7:1; also h28; Rev 1:17. Cf. J. Gnilka, Das Mattheusevangelium (Freiburg, /988), 2:97. Contra R.H. Hiers ("Binding and Loosing: the Matthean Authorizations", JET 104 ([1985], 233-50). Hiers understands the reference to pertain to the disciples' power of exorcism. The Matthean context, which warns against the "teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees" (16:12) makes it likely that the evangelist is placing Peter's teaching authority over against theirs.
(49) Cf. E. Schweizer, Das Evangelium nach Mallhaus (NTD 2, Gottingen, 1973), p. 223; Gnilka, op. cit., p. 65; Orton, op. cit., p. 237.
(50) Cf. M. Wilcox, "Peter and the Rock: a Fresh Look at Matthew 16:17-19", NTS 22 (1975-76), p. 82. Josephus describes the Pharisees as passing civil, legal authority to enforce or waive punishment for crime; Cf. Orton, op. cit., p. 106.
(51) E.G., mPes 4:5; 6:2; Tor 5:4; lYeb 1: 1 1 ; 4:6.
(52) Cf. C. Uhler, "Zur Form-und Traditionsgeschichte von Matt xvi, 17-19", NTS 23 (1976), P. 40.
(53) Cf. J.D. Kingsbury, "The Composition and Christology of Matt 28:16-20", JBL 93 (1974), p. 80.
a summary of the discussion1. There was concern in this discussion to clarify the meaning of "teaching with authority and not as their scribes" (Mk. 1:22). According to E. Urbach The Sages, the distinction is a technical one. "As their scribes" means in the chain of transmission which goes from master to master. This goes back to Ezra and from Ezra to Moses on Sinai. (cf. Pirke Avoth 1:1). In matters of Halakhah teachers did not speak in their own name but did so in matters of Haggadah.
"Speaking with authority" is a rabbinical expression which means "speaking through the mouth of God" i.e. not depending on the channel of transmission but directly from God like Moses and the Prophets. On the other hand scribes and scholars did receive the Spirit; they are described as prophets in apocalyptic literature, by the Amoraim when they speak of the Tannaim and by scholars of later centuries. The end of Matthew's Gospel is not extraordinary; the author is simply making a statement coming from an earlier tradition.
2. Other points were concerned with the need to clarify the relationship of Matthew's community to the Jewish community.
3. An original suggestion was made about the book's purpose and function in the Community:
a) The opening link with Genesis was noted:cf. Mt. 1:1 The book of the Generation / the toledoth of Genesis.
b) The ending on a mountain in Galilee and the ending of the Pentateuch on a mountain in Moab (Dem. 34).
Mt. 28:18 recalls the last words of the Tenakh in 2 Chronicles 36:23:
God gives all power to Cyrus — All authority to Jesus
Go up to Jerusalem - Go to all nations
God be with - I am with you.
Is it conceivable that this Gospel was written as a complement, an accomplishment, to the Torah? It is not a question of rejecting Torah, Neviim, Ketubim but it is presented as a "closing part" to the Tenakh for the author's community — an interpreting key.
4. Discussing the meaning of "accomplishment" it was pointed out that with regard to Torah this means:
a) to discover the meaning through study, meditation„ discussion;
b) to carry out what it commands;
c) God does his part;
thus to "accomplish Torah" is not only a matter of Halakhah. For Matthew and other Apocalyptic writers Torah also comprises more than Halakhah (cf. Qumran, 4 Ezra 14), but according to Mt. 7:21-27 "Do" is the most important.
