Author
Although
strictly anonymous, the first Gospel has always been known as
“according to Matthew,” and no evidence exists that it
ever circulated without this name. The author is traditionally the
apostle Matthew, a former tax collector (9:9). Mark (2:14) and Luke
(5:27) identify him as “Levi,” probably his earlier name.
This may be further established by the noticeable references to money
in the first Gospel: the parables of the unmerciful servant (18:23)
and of the daily pay of workers (20:1), the bribe paid to the guards
at the tomb to get them to lie (28:12), and Judas’s return of
the thirty silver coins (27:5). These stories, unique to Matthew,
relate the morality of money in an unequivocal way, indicating
Matthew’s own interests from his former life.
Matthew’s
Gospel appears first in almost every extant witness to the NT, and it
was considered the preeminent Gospel by the early church. It is the
Gospel most quoted by the early church fathers. Of the four Gospels,
Matthew’s is most oriented toward a Jewish audience.
Sources
A
cursory reading of the Gospels reveals that the first three, Matthew,
Mark, and Luke (the Synoptic Gospels), share much of the same
material. Yet each has its own collection and order of events,
reflecting its own theological emphasis. This is quite to our
benefit: by examining the differences between the three Gospels, not
only do we see different facets of Jesus, but also we can discern and
filter the idiosyncrasies of each writer. If Matthew records an event
later in his Gospel, there must be a reason consistent with his
purposes.
Most
current research holds that Mark was written first and provided
material for both Matthew and Luke. Matthew tends to smooth out the
“rough” Greek of Mark; he also compresses many of the
stories, and in a few places he “fixes” passages in Mark
that might have seemed unclear or offensive. Material from Mark used
by Matthew is generally narrative of Jesus’ life.
Matthew
and Luke also contain similar material not found in Mark, the
so-called Q material (“Q” is from the German Quelle,
which means “source”). No Q document is extant. If it
ever existed, it may represent an oral tradition. The Q material in
Matthew has strong ethical content, such as the Sermon on the Mount,
many of the parables, and the Olivet Discourse. Additionally, Matthew
and Luke contain material unique to their own Gospels: M in Matthew,
L in Luke. The M material includes the birth and infancy narratives,
some of the stories surrounding Jesus’ death and resurrection,
and a few of the parables.
The
use of Mark (not an apostle) by the apostle Matthew is not as
surprising as it may seem. Papias reported that Mark wrote the
reminiscences of Peter, a member of Jesus’ inner circle and the
leader of the apostolic group. Surely Matthew would have no problem
using Mark’s Gospel as a starting point for his own.
Date
Dating
the Gospels is difficult. If Matthew borrowed from Mark, then the
date of Mark and how long it would have taken to circulate to Matthew
are important in the discussion. The first convincing use of Matthew
by an external author is Ignatius, early in the second century. This
places Matthew in the period between the early 60s to the early 90s.
Internal
evidence includes, as in most NT literature dating, Matthew’s
relationship to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. If Matthew
wrote after this date, we might expect to see this reflected in some
passages, especially in the Olivet Discourse, Jesus’ prophecy
of the Jewish war. The mention of a city being burned in retribution
in 22:7 is casual enough to suggest that Matthew did not know of this
happening to Jerusalem. There also are many references to the temple
that might have merited a mention of its subsequent loss.
The
mention of the temple tax in 17:24 is important. Before AD 70, paying
the tax supported the Jewish temple and showed solidarity with
Israel. After AD 70, the revenue was diverted to the temple of
Jupiter in Rome. Jews were required to continue paying under duress
and considered it support of idolatry. Had this been Matthew’s
world, he likely would have explained this critical point to his
readers.
Arguments
for a late date include references to the church (Matthew alone among
the Gospel writers uses the term ekklēsia), possibly indicating
an interest in church order
that developed later; historical tensions between the church and the
Jews, which only peaked in AD 85; and thoughts of a later date for
Mark. For some, Matthew’s account of Jesus’ predictions
of the destruction of Jerusalem is so vivid that it would have to
have been written afterward. Many consider the theology of Matthew so
sophisticated that it would require a later date.
External
evidence includes the early church tradition that Matthew was written
early, though part of this thinking is that Matthew was written first
of the Synoptics. Still, an early date for Matthew seems the best,
though the evidence is far from conclusive.
Structure
Matthew’s
literary pointers do not necessarily align with his themes, making
for a rich, complex structure that is hard to outline. The following
are some of the structures that scholars have proposed.
By
discourse.
Matthew has five clear sections of Jesus’ discourses, set apart
by a concluding phrase along the lines of “when Jesus had
finished saying these things” (7:28; 11:1; 13:53; 19:1; 26:1).
The five discourses alternate with related narratives of Jesus’
deeds. These discourses should not be thought of as intact, recorded
sermons; they are compilations of Jesus’ teachings assembled by
Matthew. The parallels in the other Gospels of this material differ:
some of it is together as Matthew has it, but much of it is scattered
in the other accounts. Matthew organized his material into types of
stories and types of ministry by Jesus. Early on, Jesus is the
ethical teacher; later, he is the stern lecturer warning Israel of
impending judgment.
By
story line.
Another proposed structure concerns the story line of the Gospel.
Matthew twice uses the concluding phrase “from that time on
Jesus began to . . .” (4:17; 16:21). But these
two instances, particularly 16:21, are in the middle of the narrative
line and cannot be thought of as major literary structural markers.
It is likely that Matthew uses this phrase to notify his readers of a
new phase of the story, and possibly of a new approach in ministry by
Jesus.
By
geography.
This concept revolves around the geography and movement of Jesus from
his birth, through the ministry in Galilee, around Galilee, and to
Jerusalem.
Outline
The
following outline offers a thematic organization of Matthew’s
Gospel:
I.
The Miraculous Beginnings of Jesus (1:1–4:11)
II.
Ethical Teachings and Miracles (4:12–10:42)
III.
Confrontation and Reactions (11:1–16:20)
IV.
The Messiah Must Suffer (16:21–20:28)
V.
Jesus Claims Authority and Receives Praise (20:29–25:46)
VI.
The Death of Jesus (26:1–27:66)
VII.
The Resurrection of Jesus (28:1–28:20)
I.
The miraculous beginnings of Jesus (1:1–4:11).
Jesus’ genealogy and childhood show him to be the fulfillment
of OT prophecy. His baptism demonstrates this fulfillment; his forty
days of testing in the desert identify him with Israel.
II.
Ethical teachings and miracles (4:12–10:42).
This section begins with a geographical change, as Jesus returns to
Galilee. Having instructed his disciples, he sends them out as an
extension of his own mission.
III.
Confrontation and reactions (11:1–16:20).
This section also involves a change of geography. Jesus first is
questioned by John’s disciples, then by the Pharisees, and
finally by the people in his own town. The questions are resolved by
Peter’s confession.
IV.
The messiah must suffer (16:21–20:28).
This is the third section that begins “from that time on Jesus
began to. . . .” Jesus explains to his disciples
that he will die at the hands of the Jews but be raised on the third
day. This section includes the transfiguration and many parables
concerning judgment and reward. The climax is at the end, when Jesus
declares that he has come “to give his life as a ransom for
many.”
V.
Jesus claims authority and receives praise (20:29–25:46).
Another geographical shift occurs, as Jesus and his disciples leave
Jericho. Jesus acknowledges the title “Lord, Son of David,”
cleanses the temple, and argues with the Pharisees about the source
of his authority. The parables concern sonship and responses to
authority. The Pharisees try to entrap Jesus. Jesus teaches about
authority, then rebukes the Pharisees. Chapter 24 describes the
consequences of the ultimate rejection of authority. The climax is
the parable of the sheep and the goats.
VI.
The death of Jesus (26:1–27:66). Matthew’s
Gospel has built-in intensity up to the passion narrative. This
section builds again within itself, from the anointing of Jesus in
Bethany to the hush as the tomb is closed and sealed.
VII.
The resurrection of Jesus (28:1–28:20).
The accounts of the resurrection and postresurrection appearances are
brief but significant and contain several details not found in the
other Synoptics.
The
Unique Contributions of Matthew
Among
the unique contributions of Matthew are his genealogy of Jesus (which
differs significantly from Luke’s); the birth/infancy narrative
of 1:18–2:23, which includes the rec-ord of the angel appearing
to Joseph, the magi from the East, the slaughter of the innocents,
and the flight to Egypt; the Great Commission, where Jesus commands
his followers to “go and make disciples of all nations,
baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of
the Holy Spirit” (28:19); and the Sermon on the Mount (chaps.
5–7), the largest block of the teachings of Jesus in the NT
(Matthew contains large blocks of Jesus’ teaching in the other
discourses as well).
Use
of the Old Testament
Matthew’s
use of the OT is remarkable. Matthew is concerned with showing Jesus
as the fulfillment of the OT and God’s salvation history. This
can be seen in the so-called fulfillment quotations (1:22–23;
2:15, 17–18, 23; 4:14–16; 8:17; 12:17–21; 13:35;
21:4–5; 27:9–10; see also 2:5–6; 13:14; 26:54, 56,
and 3:3; 22:31–32) as well as in the narrative portions of the
book, particularly in the sweeping statement of 26:56: “This
has all taken place that the writings of the prophets might be
fulfilled.”
Matthew
immediately appeals to the OT in recounting the genealogy of Jesus.
He divides the history of Israel into three eras: the first
culminates in David, the second with the exile—clearly two of
the most significant turning points in Israel’s history—the
third in Jesus, the Christ.
The
quote “Out of Egypt I called my son” (2:15), from Hos.
11:1, is an excellent example of Matthew’s commitment to
fulfillment. The passage in Hosea clearly is not looking forward to
this verse, but Matthew employs this short sentence to identify Jesus
as the fulfillment of Israel and uses the return from Egypt of the
holy family to illustrate the parallels in Jesus’ life with the
experience of the Jews. Matthew’s use of the OT here, and in
general, follows ancient, particularly Jewish, interpretive
conventions.
Matthew
contains a number of OT quotations not found in the other Synoptics.
These appear generally as asides from Matthew himself—his own
reflections, as it were, not the words of Jesus. Matthew clearly sees
the relationship between Jesus and the OT in both directions: Jesus
is the total fulfillment of the OT, and the OT is deeply concerned
with pointing the way to Jesus.
Matthew
then applies OT passages to the life of Jesus: Jesus is the virgin’s
son in Isa. 7:14 (Matt. 1:22–23), the one coming from Bethlehem
to rule over Israel in Mic. 5:2 (Matt. 2:5–6), and the son
called out of Egypt in Hos. 11:1 (Matt. 2:15); the slaughter of
infants reflects the fall of Judah seen in Jer. 31:15 (Matt.
2:17–18); and Jesus is the great light on Zebulun and Naphtali
of Isa. 9:1–2 (Matt. 4:13–16).
Jesus’
Relationship to Jewish Leaders
Matthew’s
Gospel is almost universally negative toward the religious leaders,
even where parallel passages do not reflect this antagonism (compare
Matt. 23:37 with Luke 13:31). Matthew records many groups of leaders:
teachers of the law (scribes), Pharisees, Sadducees, chief priests,
and elders; he often combines terms, “scribes and Pharisees”
being his favorite combination. Matthew portrays the Pharisees as the
most hostile to Jesus, identifying them as a “brood of vipers”
(3:7).
Yet,
the Gospel of Matthew is far from being an anti-Jewish work. Jesus is
the fulfillment of the OT; he was sent “only to the lost sheep
of Israel” (15:24); people praise the God of Israel for his
healing demonstrations. Matthew’s point is that it is Israel’s
leaders and those who reject their Messiah who are bringing judgment
upon themselves.
