1. Please note that when the author discusses words in the original biblical languages, this series uses the general rather than the scholarly method of transliteration.
1. Manlio Simonetti, ed., Matthew 1–13 (ACCSNT; Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 2001), 1A:xxxvii.
2. For a brief historical survey, see Simonetti, Matthew 1–13, 1A:xxxvii–xli. A study that is still valuable for establishing this thesis is Édouard Massaux, The Influence of the Gospel of Saint Matthew on Christian Literature before Saint Irenaeus, Book 1: The First Ecclesiastical Writers, trans. Norman J. Belval and Suzanne Hecht, ed. Arthur J. Bellinzoni (New Gospel Studies 5/1; 1950; Macon, Ga.: Mercer Univ. Press, 1990).
3. E.g., Ulrich Luz, Matthew 1–7: A Commentary, trans. Wilhelm C. Linss (1985; Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1989), 81.
4. Suetonius, Claudius 25.4.
5. Cf. F. F. Bruce, The Acts of the Apostles: Greek Text with Introduction and Commentary, 3d ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990), 391.
6. The slab is said to have been found in Nazareth in 1878, but dated to the first century B.C. through the Greek script-type. It is in the possession of the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris (see the photo in E. M. Blaiklock, “Nazareth Decree,” ZPEB, 4:391–92).
7. Simonetti, Matthew 1–13, xxxvii.
8. John and his Gospel likewise, but we treat here only the Synoptics, which deal with similar issues.
9. For the complete collection of apocryphal gospels, see Wilhelm Schneemelcher, ed., New Testament Apocrypha, rev. ed. vol. 1 (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1990).
10. For example, D. A. Carson leans toward “Matthew Levi” being a double name given to him from birth (“Matthew,” EBC [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984], 8:224), while Donald Hagner suggests that the name “Matthew” was given to Levi after his conversion (Matthew 1–13 [WBC 33A; Dallas: Word, 1993], 237–38).
11. For a treatment of the evidence equating Matthew and Levi as one person, see R. T. France, Matthew: Evangelist and Teacher (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1989), 66–70.
12. W. F. Albright and C. S. Mann, Matthew (AB 26; Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1971), clxxvii–clxxviii, clxxxiii–clxxxiv.
13. Cf. France, Matthew, 70–74.
14. For a more complete defense of the early dating of Matthew prior to A.D. 70, perhaps as early as the late 50s to early 60s, see Craig L. Blomberg, Matthew (NAC 22; Nashville: Broadman, 1992), 41–42; or perhaps in response to Neronian persecution in A.D. 65–67, see Robert H. Gundry, Matthew: A Commentary on His Handbook for a Mixed Church Under Persecution, 2d ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994), 599–609; or more generally in the 60s, see Carson, “Matthew,” 19–21.
15. See 1:1; 9:27; 12:23; 15:22; 20:30–31; 21:9, 15; 22:42, 45.
16. See 7:21; 10:32–33; 11:25–27; 12:50; 15:13; 18:35; 20:23; 24:36; 25:34; 26:39, 42; 26:53; 28:19.
17. E.g., 1:23—“The virgin . . . will give birth to a son . . . Immanuel . . . God with us.”
18. In the rich associations connected with “Son of God,” it is important to understand the intended contextual force. Carson notes, “As it is wrong to see ontological Sonship in every use, so is it wrong to exclude it prematurely” (“Matthew,” 109).
19. Leslie C. Allen, Ezekiel 1–19 (WBC 29; Dallas: Word, 1994), 38.
20. No one else uses the expression to refer to Jesus, and in the rest of the New Testament the title is used of Jesus only once (Acts 7:56), except for three Old Testament references or quotations (Heb. 2:6 = Ps. 8:5; Rev. 1:13 and 14:14 = Dan. 7:13). In every instance except two the title is found only on the lips of Jesus, but even in these it should be noted that the audience used this title because Jesus had previously used it as a self-designation (John 12:23), and the angel is simply repeating Jesus’ own words (Luke 24:7).
21. See 9:38; 21:3; 22:43–45; 23:38; 24:42; 25:37, 44. France, Matthew, 287–88.
22. See Michael J. Wilkins, The Concept of Disciple in Matthew’s Gospel: As Reflected in the Use of the Term Μαθητής (NovTSup 29; Leiden: Brill, 1988).
23. J. R. C. Cousland, The Crowds in the Gospel of Matthew (NovTSup 102; Leiden: Brill, 2002).
24. For Matthew’s portrait of Peter and his developing leadership role, see Michael J. Wilkins, Discipleship in the Ancient World and Matthew’s Gospel, 2d ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1995), 173–216, 264.
25. Donald Guthrie, New Testament Introduction, 3d ed. (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1970), 21.
26. Esp. relevant here are chs. 9; 12; 15; 17; 19; 20–22; culminating in ch. 23.
27. E.g., Sidney Greidanus, The Modern Preacher and the Ancient Text: Interpreting and Preaching Biblical Literature (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988), 300–306. Greidanus emphasizes two horizons, but also includes the reader’s own horizon, to which I refer as the third horizon.
28. Ralph P. Martin, New Testament Foundations: A Guide for Christian Students. Volume 1: The Four Gospels (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975), 43.
1. Cornelius Tacitus, The Annals of Imperial Rome 1.4; trans. Michael Grant (rev. ed.; New York: Penguin, 1976).
2. According to BDAG, 192, this word means “origin, source, productive cause, beginning,” which in this context indicates “an account of someone’s life.”
3. Gundry, Matthew, 13.
4. Carson, “Matthew,” EBC, 8:61, emphasizes that the recurrence of the noun genesis in 1:18 indicates that with the phrase Matthew focuses not just on the genealogy but on the more expansive “origin of Jesus Christ” in chs. 1–2.
5. W. D. Davies and Dale C. Allison Jr., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to Saint Matthew, Vol. 1: Introduction and Commentary on Matthew I-VII (ICC; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1988), 149–54, argue convincingly that the expression biblos geneseos is a title for the entire book. See also Leon Morris, The Gospel According to Matthew (PNTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992), 19.
6. The expressions “son of David” and “son of Abraham” stand in apposition to “Jesus Christ,” indicating that the titles are a further explanation of Jesus’ identity.
7. Cf. Birger Gerhardsson, “The Christology of Matthew,” in Who Do You Say That I Am? Essays on Christology in Honor of Jack Dean Kingsbury, ed. Mark Allan Powell and David R. Bauer (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1999), 16–17.
8. See, e.g., M. Daniel Carroll R., “Blessing the Nations: Toward a Biblical Theology of Mission from Genesis,” BBR 10 (2000): 17–34; Richard J. Erickson, “Joseph and the Birth of Isaac in Matthew 1,” BBR 10 (2000): 35–51.
9. Cf. Marshall D. Johnson, The Purpose of Biblical Genealogies with Special Reference to the Setting of the Genealogies of Jesus, 2d ed. (SNTSMS 8; Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1988).
10. E.g., Gen. 4:17–18; 5:3–32; 10:1–32; 46:8–27; 1 Chron. 1:34; 2:1–15; 3:1–24; Ruth 4:12–22. See John Nolland, “Genealogical Annotation in Genesis as Background for the Matthean Genealogy of Jesus,” TynBul 47 (May 1996): 115–22, who suggests that Matthew studied the Genesis genealogies and patterned his own after them.
11. E.g., Josephus, Life 6; Contra Apion 1.28–56.
12. Genesis Rabbah 98:8; j. Taʿanit 4:2; see Anthony J. Saldarini, Pharisees, Scribes and Sadducees in Palestinian Society: A Sociological Approach (Wilmington, Del.: Michael Glazier, 1988), 204–6.
13. For discussion, see Raymond E. Brown, The Birth of the Messiah: A Commentary on the Infancy Narratives in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, rev. ed. (ABRL; New York: Doubleday, 1993), 84–95.
14. Cf. 22:41–46; 2 Sam. 7:12–16; Ps. 89:19–29, 35–37; 110:1–7; 132:11–12.
15. Matthew’s emphases, when seen as a whole, give important clues to Jesus’ identity and future ministry.
16. Cf. Gen. 15:13; Ex. 12:40, approximately 1898–1445 B.C.
17. Cf. Num. 2:3; 7:12; 2 Sam. 5:4, approximately 1445–1040 B.C. For extended discussion of the chronologies see J. Barton Payne, “Chronology of the Old Testament,” ZPEB, 1:834–36.
18. For discussion, see Johnson, The Purpose of Biblical Genealogies, 152–79; Hagner, Matthew 1–13, 10; Beverly Roberts Gaventa, Mary: Glimpses of the Mother of Jesus (Columbia: Univ. of South Carolina, 1995), 33–39.
19. E.g., 1 Chron. 1:39; 2:3–4, 16, 18, 24, 26, 29, 48–49; 3:9.
20. E.g., Gordon Wenham, Genesis 16–50 (WBC 2; Waco, Tex.: Word, 1987), 366; Richard Bauckham, “Tamar’s Ancestry and Rahab’s Marriage: Two Problems in the Matthean Genealogy,” NovT 37 (1995): 313–329.
21. John Sailhamer, “Genesis,” EBC, 2:232.
22. See Johnson, The Purpose of Biblical Genealogies, 162–65.
23. See 2:2; 27:11, 29, 37, 42. This is likewise emphasized by the contrast with King Herod and his son Archelaus (2:1–23), the mention of the king in the parable (22:1–13), and the Son of Man seated as king on the throne on Judgment Day (25:31–46).
24. Carson, “Matthew,” 67.
25. See in the LXX 4 Kings 24:6, 8, 12, 15; 25:27; Jer. 52:31.
26. See John Nolland, “Jeconiah and His Brothers (Matthew 1:11),” BBR 7 (1997): 169–77. See also Hagner, Matthew 1–13, 5–6, for a similar conclusion using a somewhat different approach. The major difficulty with this view is that there is no conclusive evidence that the name Jeconiah, unlike the name Jehoiakim, evoked images of both persons.
27. There are complex textual critical problems behind the text of 1:16, but the best reading is that found in all major Greek texts today, which also lies behind the NIV; see John Nolland, “A Text-Critical Discussion of Matthew 1:16,” CBQ 58 (October 1996): 665–73.
28. BDF, 72 (§130.1); Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 437.
29. R. J. Werblowsky and G. Wigoder, eds., EJR (New York: Holt, Rhinehart, Winston, 1965), 154 (sub “Gematria”).
30. See, e.g., David E. Aune, The New Testament in Its Literary Environment, ed. Wayne A. Meeks (LEC; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1987), 59–63.
31. Although each Gospel most likely had an original audience to which it was addressed, the Gospels were not intended exclusively for any one particular community but were written with an eye on the broader audience that would be reached as each of the Gospels was circulated. See Richard Bauckham, ed., The Gospels for All Christians: Rethinking the Gospel Audiences (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), and generally, Martin Hengel, The Four Gospels and the One Gospel of Jesus Christ: An Investigation of the Collection and Origin of the Canonical Gospels (Harrisburg, Pa.: Trinity Press International, 2000).
32. Michael Green, The Message of Matthew: The Kingdom of Heaven (BST; Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 2000), 59.
33. For recent summaries with evaluations of the various views, see Johnson, The Purpose of Biblical Genealogies, 152–79; Brown, The Birth of the Messiah, 71–74; Davies and Allison, Matthew I-VII, 170–72; John C. Hutchison, “Women, Gentiles, and the Messianic Mission in Matthew’s Genealogy,” BibSac 158 (April–June 2001): 152–64.
34. Gaventa, Mary, 33–39; Wim J. Weren, “The Five Women in Matthew’s Genealogy,” CBQ 59 (April 1997): 288–305.
35. Morris, Matthew, 23.
36. The ethnicity of Bathsheba is uncertain because she is mentioned only by her first husband’s name, Uriah the Hittite; cf. John Nolland, “The Four (Five) Women and other Annotations in Matthew’s Genealogy,” NTS 43 (1997): 527–39.
37. Ulrich Luz, Matthew 1–7, 109–10; Bauckham, “Tamar’s Ancestry and Rahab’s Marriage,” 313; Craig S. Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 78–81.
38. Brown, The Birth of the Messiah, 71–74; Edwin D. Freed, “The Women in Matthew’s Genealogy,” JSNT 29 (1987): 3–19; Craig L. Blomberg, “The Liberation of Illegitimacy: Women and Rulers in Matthew 1–2,” BTB 21 (1991): 145–50; Hagner, Matthew 1–13, 10; Davies and Allison, Matthew I-VII, 170–72.
39. Hutchison, “Women, Gentiles, and the Messianic Mission in Matthew’s Genealogy,” 152–64. In this view the intention is not primarily to draw attention to the four women, but four Old Testament stories that illustrate how God remained faithful to his covenants, even though Israel was unfaithful. Cf. also John Paul Heil, “The Narrative Roles of the Women in Matthew’s Genealogy,” Bib 72 (1991): 538–45.
40. Alfred Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah (1899; repr.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1971), xix.
41. Ibid., 180–81.
42. N. T. Wright, The Challenge of Jesus: Rediscovering Who Jesus Was and Is (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1999), 31.
1. The conjunction de (not translated in the NIV) focuses the reader’s attention on the birth of Jesus as the culmination of the lineage; “the birth of Jesus comes into a class of its own” (Carson, “Matthew,” 81 n. 18).
2. The emphasis in this important pericope continues to be on Jesus’ genealogical links, but Matthew introduces also the Son of God motif, which will become explicit later in the narrative (e.g., 3:17); see Jack Dean Kingsbury, Matthew As Story, 2d ed. (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988), 49–58; Gerhardsson, “The Christology of Matthew,” 21–23.
3. The same word for “beginning” (genesis) that occurred in 1:1 reoccurs here (NIV, “birth”). This is not only the narrative of the birth of Jesus but the beginning of a new era.
4. See Joachim Jeremias, Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus: An Investigation into Economic and Social Conditions During the New Testament Period, trans. (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1969), 363–68; J. S. Wright and J. A. Thompson, “Marriage,” IBD, 2:955–56; Victor P. Hamilton, “Marriage (OT and ANE),” ABD, 4:559–69.
5. J. B. Pritchard, ed., Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, 3d. ed. (Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1969), no. 27.
6. Syngenis is a general term, which could refer to an aunt or a cousin.
7. Matthew uses the preposition ek in 1:18, echoing its use in 1:3, 5 (2x), 6, and 16 in the genealogical context (cf. 1:20). This preposition can be rendered “by the Holy Spirit, indicating agency or means (Hagner, Matthew 1–13, 17; R. T. France, The Gospel According to Matthew [TNTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985], 77; see Wallace, Greek Grammar, 125–27, 371, 741). On the other hand, in Koine Greek the preposition is used increasingly with the genitive to express the sense of source (Wallace, Greek Grammar, 77, 109 n.102). In that case, the child’s source of origin is “from the Holy Spirit.” However, that is not too far from saying agency, which is admirably reflected in the NIV “through the Holy Spirit” (but see comments on 1:20).
8. See Dale C. Allison Jr., “Divorce, Celibacy and Joseph (Matthew 1.18–25 and 19.1–12),” JSNT 49 (1993): 3–10.
9. Markus Bockmuehl, “Matthew 5.32; 19.9 in the Light of Pre-Rabbinic Halakah,” NTS 35 (1989): 291–95.
10. The clauses should be rendered, “being righteous, and yet not willing to stigmatize her” (Brown, Birth of the Messiah, 127–28).
11. The law did not require her to be stoned (see esp. Deut. 22:13–21, since the girl may have been raped).
12. Gen. 21:17; 22:15–18; Ex. 3:2–6; Judg. 6:11–24.
13. Cf. Zech. 1:8–17; Luke 1:26; 1 En. 6:7; 8:3–4; 69:1.
14. Lawrence Osborn, “Entertaining Angels: Their Place in Contemporary Theology,” TynBul 45 (1994): 273–96.
15. See Larry W. Hurtado, One God, One Lord: Early Christian Devotion and Ancient Jewish Monotheism (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988), 71–92; Carol A. Newsom, “Gabriel,” ABD, 2:863; Carol A. Newsom and Duane F. Watson, “Angel,” ABD, 1:248–55.
16. Ovid, Metamorphoses 9.685–701; Tacitus, Annals 2.14.
17. This is the same prepositional phrase with ek that was found in 1:18. Matthew seems to be indicating both agency and source, which may explain why the NIV renders the phrase “through the Holy Spirit” in 1:18, but “from the Holy Spirit” here in 1:20.
18. David R. Bauer, “The Kingship of Jesus in the Matthean Infancy Narrative: A Literary Analysis,” CBQ 57 (1995): 306–23.
19. Carson, “Matthew,” 76–77, emphasizes that the precise fulfillment formula used here with gegonen, “took place,” is found only three times in Matthew (1:22; 21:4; 26:56); the final one is most likely not an aside by Matthew but is Jesus’ interpretation.
20. Hagner, Matthew 1–13, 20; Davies and Allison, Matthew, 1:211. Most English versions, including the NIV, place a closed quotation mark with a period after 1:22, ending the angel’s direct quotation.
21. Matthew consistently uses hypo for God’s ultimate agency (“by the Lord,” cf. 2:15; 22:31) and dia for the prophet’s intermediate agency (“through the prophet,” e.g., 2:5, 15, 17, 23; 4:14; 8:17; 13:35; 24:15; 27:9).
22. See the variations and discussion in the introduction; see also Hagner, Matthew 1–13, liv–lvii.
23. The debated passage is Prov. 30:19; see Allen P. Ross, “Proverbs,” EBC, 5:1124.
24. The exception is Gen. 34:4, where the term parthenos is used of Dinah, even though she had already been violated (cf. 34:3).
25. For older studies, see J. G. Machen, The Virgin Birth of Christ (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1971), and Charles Lee Feinberg, Is the Virgin Birth in the Old Testament? (Whittier: Emeth, 1967). For more recent studies see Gerard Van Groningen, Messianic Revelation in the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1990), esp. 521–37; Daniel Schibler, “Messianism and Messianic Prophecy in Isaiah 1–12 and 28–33,” in The Lord’s Anointed: Interpretation of Old Testament Messianic Texts, ed. P. E. Satterthwaite, R. S. Hess, and G. J. Wenham (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1995), 87–104.
26. E.g., J. D. W. Watts, Isaiah 1–33 (WBC 24; (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1985), 98–104; Davies and Allison, Matthew, 1:213; Warren Carter, “Evoking Isaiah: Matthean Soteriology and an Intertextual Reading of Isaiah 7–9 and Matthew 1:23 and 4:15–16,” JBL 119 (Fall 2000): 503–20.
27. E.g., Carson, “Matthew,” 78–80, esp. citing an earlier work by J. A. Motyer, “Context and Content in the Interpretation of Isaiah 7:14,” TynBul 21 (1970): 118–25.
28. E.g., Geoffrey W. Grogan, “Isaiah,” EBC, 6:62–65; Hagner, Matthew 1–13, 20–21; Blomberg, Matthew, 58–59. For a significant study that emphasizes the importance of maintaining that a messianic New Testament interpretation of an Old Testament text is in fact the meaning intended by the Old Testament author, see John H. Sailhamer, “The Messiah and the Hebrew Bible,” JETS 44 (March 2001): 5–23.
29. The angel Gabriel used a similar expression when he said to Mary, “The Lord is with you” (Luke 1:28), indicating that God would be with her through the conception and birth of the Son of the Most High.
30. See Pseudo-Phocylides 186 (c. 100 B.C.–100 A.D.); Josephus, Against Apion 2:202–3.
31. Dale C. Allison Jr., “Divorce, Celibacy and Joseph (Matthew 1.18–25 and 19.1–12),” 6 n.16. See the interesting discussion of this passage by Roman Catholic scholar Raymond Brown in the light of the doctrine of the “perpetual virginity” of Mary, which he says is not Matthew’s emphasis in this passage (The Birth of the Messiah, 132).
32. For discussion of the “I am with you” theme in the Old Testament tradition, see David D. Kupp, Matthew’s Emmanuel: Divine Presence and God’s People in the First Gospel (SNTSMS 90; Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1996), 138–56.
33. For this Old Testament theme in relationship to the appearance of Jesus, see Michael J. Wilkins, Following the Master: A Biblical Theology of Discipleship (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992), 51–69, esp. 57 and 66. Also drawing this relationship in Matt. 1 with the birth of the “God-With-Us” Messiah, but more critically, is Kupp, Matthew’s Emmanuel, 157–75.
34. Greidanus, The Modern Preacher and the Ancient Text, 163–66. For helpful instruction to avoid this phenomenon and other improper ways of bridging the gap from the text to modern application, see pp. 157–87.
35. Aune, The New Testament in Its Literary Environment, 35–43.
36. Donald Guthrie, New Testament Theology (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1981), 374.
37. For discussion see Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994), 529–31.
38. For a more complete discussion, see Michael J. Wilkins, In His Image: Reflecting Christ in Everyday Life (Colorado Springs: NavPress, 1997), 111–24.
39. For an attempt to connect Joseph’s example with the development of discipleship later in Matthew’s Gospel, see Carolyn Thomas, “The Nativity Scene: A Challenge to Discipleship,” TBT 28 (1990): 26–33.
1. “In Judea” distinguishes this town from Bethlehem of Zebulun (Josh. 19:10, 15), located near Nazareth.
2. Henri Cazelles, “Bethlehem,” ABD, 1:712.
3. Matthew suggests that the couple performed the official wedding ceremony prior to the birth of Jesus (1:24–25), so Luke’s expression that the couple were still “betrothed” while on their way to Bethlehem indicates that the marriage was not yet sexually consummated, implying a virgin birth (cf. Darrell Bock, Luke 1:1–9:50 [Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994], 205–6).
4. E.g., A. T. Robertson, A Harmony of the Gospels for Students of the Life of Christ: Based on the Broadus Harmony in the Revised Version (New York: Harper & Row, 1922), 13; Robert H. Stein, Luke (NAC; Nashville: Broadman, 1992), 118. In this view, Luke 2:39a occurs before the events of Matthew 2:1–22, and Luke 2:39b occurs after these events and parallels Matt. 2:23, when the family returns from Egypt and goes to Nazareth to avoid Archelaus. This is possible, although Luke 2:39 seems to imply that the trip to Nazareth occurs immediately after the temple presentation.
5. Robert L. Thomas and Stanley N. Gundry, eds., The NIV Harmony of the Gospels (Harper & Row, 1978), 38 note o.
6. Josephus, Ant. 18:318–19, 340, 349–52.
7. b. Pesaḥ 6:1; cf. y. Pesaḥ. 6:1, 33a.
8. Tony T. Maalouf argues that the Magi came from the Arabian Desert communities, much closer to Jerusalem; see “Were the Magi from Persia or Arabia?” BibSac 156 (1999): 422–442.
9. Note that Ezra took four months with a group of four to five thousand people to go that route (Ezra 7:9). The Magi may have been able to travel more quickly, but still slowly compared to modern rates of travel.
10. The traditional names of the Magi—Balthasar, Melchior, and Gaspar (or Caspar)—first appear in a mosaic in a sixth-century church in Ravenna, Italy, but there is no historical support for these designations.
11. Suetonius, Vespasian 5.
12. Josephus (J.W. 3:399–408; 6:310–15) and Tacitus (History 5:13) both note this widespread expectation. They contend that the Jews were wrong and that the expectation was actually fulfilled with the ascension of Vespasian to the throne after his victories in Palestine. But the Jews themselves (obviously not Josephus, a Jew) certainly did not find the fulfillment of their Old Testament prophetic hope in Vespasian.
14. For brief discussion of the predominant views, see Brown, Birth of the Messiah, 170–74, and W. P. Armstrong and J. Finegan, “Chronology of the NT,” ISBE, 1:687–88. For more diverse views, see E. Jerry Vardaman and Edwin M. Yamauchi, eds., Chronos, Kairos, Christos: Nativity and Chronological Studies Presented to Jack Finegan (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1989). The varied hypotheses become more speculative in the second volume, E. Jerry Vardaman, ed., Chronos, Kairos, Christos II: Chronological, Nativity, and Religious Studies in Memory of Ray Summers (Macon, Ga: Mercer Univ. Press, 1998).
15. E.g., Halley’s Comet, visible in 12 and 11 B.C.
16. See the work of the astronomer David Hughes, The Star of Bethlehem: An Astronomer’s Confirmation (New York: Walker, 1979).
17. Mark Kidger, The Star of Bethlehem: An Astronomer’s View (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton Univ. Press, 1999), argues that the conjunction alerted the Magi to some special event and the supernova triggered their journey.
18. E.g., 1 En. 1:2 and passim; T. Levi 2–5; History of the Rechabites 1:3 and passim.
19. See Dale C. Allison, “What Was the Star That Guided the Magi?” BibRev 9 (November–December 1993): 24.
20. See David Peterson, Engaging with God: A Biblical Theology of Worship (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1992), 85; Albright and Mann, Matthew: Introduction, Translation, and Notes, 13–14.
21. See Josephus, Ant. 14:335–69; 17:23.
22. Macrobius, Saturnalia 2.f.11. The saying is given in Latin, but it depends on the Greek spelling and pronunciation for the pun; note too the Jewish antipathy for swine.
23. Peter W. L. Walker, Jesus and the Holy City: New Testament Perspectives on Jerusalem (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 33–34. For a helpful literary analysis that contrasts Herod and the religious leadership with Jesus as the rightful “king of the Jews,” see Bauer, “The Kingship of Jesus,” 306–23. Bauer suggests that the expression “all Jerusalem” is intended by Matthew to set the stage for the emphasis on the religious leaders of Israel being blamed for leading the people of Israel to reject Jesus and to take his blood on their heads (cf. 27:20, 25).
24. The shepherd motif associated with Jesus Messiah is pronounced in the New Testament: Jesus refers to himself as “the good shepherd” (John 10:11); the writer of the book of Hebrews calls Jesus “that great Shepherd of the sheep” (Heb. 13:20); the apostle Peter emphasizes that leaders in the church are to “shepherd” the flock (1 Peter 5:2; cf. John 21:16) for Jesus, “the Chief Shepherd” (1 Peter 5:4); and concerning the martyrs who come out of the great tribulation, “the Lamb at the center of the throne will be their shepherd” (Rev. 7:17).
25. Hagner, Matthew 1–13, 30.
26. John S. Holladay Jr., “House, Israelite,” ABD, 3:313; Rousseau and Arav, “House,” Jesus and His World, 128–31.
27. Luke uses the same term to refer to Jesus at his birth and presentation in the temple when he was only a few days old (Luke 2:17, 27).
28. The verb is proskyneo, “worship,” with the dative direct object auto, “him.” This dative is the case of personal interest, which normally lends itself to emphasize the worship of deity (cf. 14:33; Wallace, Greek Grammar, 172–73).
29. Peterson, Engaging with God, 85.
30. Josephus (Ant. 9:163; cf. 2 Kings 12:9–11) uses the term to designate the wooden chest that the high priest Jehoiada placed beside the altar to collect the people’s offerings for renovating the temple. Matthew uses the word for a personal “storehouse” (Matt. 13:52) as well as to indicate the things laid up in store: treasure in heaven (6:20; cf. treasures in Christ, Col. 2:3).
31. Cf. Ps. 72:10–11; Isa. 60:5–6, 11; 66:20; Zeph. 3:10; Hag. 2:7–8.
32. The tree is found in South Arabia, Ethiopia, Somalia, and India. During the summer the bark of the tree was peeled back and deep incisions were made in the tree. An amber gum secreted, which turned to a whitish color on the surface of the resin.
33. See W. E. Shewell-Cooper, “Frankincense,” ZPEB, 2:606–7.
34. See Kjeld Nielsen, “Incense,” ABD, 3:404–9; Victor H. Matthews, “Perfumes and Spices,” ABD, 5:226–28; Joel Green, “Burial of Jesus,” DJG, 88–92.
35. E.g., Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3.9.2; Origen, Contra Celsum 1:60.
36. Cf. also 2:13, “when they had gone”; 2:14, “left for Egypt”; 2:22–23; 4:12–18; 12:15–21; 14:12–14; 15:21–28; 27:5–10; see Deirdre Good, “The Verb ἀναχωρέω in Matthew’s Gospel,” NovT 32 (1990): 1–12.
37. The difficulty of comprehending the unexpectedness of Jesus’ messianic ministry continues even to this day. Jewish scholars often have the same difficulty with Jesus’ messianic ministry as did many in the Jewish establishment of the first century. They suggest that Jesus was a “failure” as the Messiah because he did not bring the final and complete redemption of the world in the sociopolitical realm; e.g., Byron L. Sherwin, “Who Do You Say That I Am?” in Jesus Through Jewish Eyes: Rabbis and Scholars Engage an Ancient Brother in a New Conversation, ed. Beatrice Bruteau (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 2001), 36–38. See comments below on 11:2–6.
38. O. Henry, “The Gift of the Magi,” The Complete Works of O. Henry (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, Doran, 1936), 10.
39. Steve Willis, “Matthew’s Birth Stories: Prophecy and the Magi,” ExpTim 105 (1993): 43–45.
40. I have developed this theme more fully in a popular article: Michael J. Wilkins, “Because God Is Generous,” Moody Magazine (March–April 2001), 15–17.
1. In the expression “Herod is going to search for the child to kill him,” Matthew uses the same word as in the passion narrative, where the chief priests and elders seek “to kill” Jesus (27:20; NIV: “to have Jesus executed”). This initial persecution of Jesus by Herod and the religious leadership parallels Jesus’ last days in Jerusalem, where the political and religious leadership seek to eliminate Jesus’ perceived threat to their power (cf. Hagner, Matthew 1–13, 35; Davies and Allison, Matthew, 1:260).
2. See Tracy L. Howard, “The Use of Hosea 11:1 in Matthew 2:15: An Alternative Solution,” BibSac 143 (October–December 1986): 311–25, who describes Matthew’s use of Hos. 11:1 as “analogical correspondence”; that is, Matthew saw an analogy between the events of the nation described in Hos. 11:1–2 and the events of Messiah in Matt. 2:13–15. Jesus is the One who actualizes and completes all that God intended for the nation (p. 322).
3. Matthew gives both the ultimate origin and agency of the prophecy expressed by hypo (“by the Lord”) and the immediate agent of prophecy expressed by dia (“through the prophet”), as in 1:22.
4. Kaiser, The Messiah in the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995), 35.
5. E.g., Ps. 78; 81; 105–6; Jer. 2:6; 7:22–25; Ezek. 20:1–20; Mic. 6:1–4.
6. Blomberg, Matthew, 67; see also Hagner, Matthew 1–13, 36; John H. Sailhamer, “Hosea 11:1 and Matthew 2:15,” WTJ 63 (2001): 83–92.
7. Only 123 men had returned to Bethlehem from the Babylonian exile (Ezra 2:21), and it appears not to have grown beyond a small village of perhaps 1,000 people at the birth of Jesus.
8. Since Matthew gives only the immediate agent of prophecy (“through the prophet”) and not also the ultimate agency (“by the Lord”), as in 1:22 and 2:15, perhaps he is attempting to avoid any misunderstanding by his readers that God is responsible for this great evil; rather, the blame for the horrific deed is directly Herod’s; see Michael Knowles, Jeremiah in Matthew’s Gospel: The Rejected-Prophet Motif in Matthean Redaction (JSNTSup 68; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993), 15, 33–52.
9. Gen. 35:19; 48:7; cf. 1 Sam. 10:2. Later tradition confused these references to imply that Bethlehem was the site of Rachel’s tomb; see Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 16–50, 327.
10. Bob Becking, “ ‘A Voice Was Heard in Ramah.’ Some Remarks on Structure and Meaning of Jeremiah 31,15–17,” BZ 38 (1994): 242.
11. See ibid., 229–42; also see Willis, “Matthew’s Birth Stories,” 43–45.
12. For extensive discussion on the date of Herod’s death, see Harold W. Hoehner, Chronological Aspects of the Life of Christ (Grand Rapids: Zondervan 1977), 11–27.
13. See Josephus, Ant. 17:174–79, 193.
14. See ibid., 17:188–89.
15. Ibid., 17:213–18; idem, J.W. 2.6.2 §§88–90.
16. Walker, Jesus and the Holy City, 33–34. Wallace (Greek Grammar, 403–5) and Turner (Syntax, 25–26; BDF, par. 141) resolve the difficulty grammatically by suggesting that this is an example of a “categorical plural,” in which the plural is used to draw attention away from the particular actor (here, Herod) and onto the action (here, that the child’s life is no longer in danger and therefore can return safely to Israel).
17. James F. Strange, “Nazareth (Place),” ABD, 4:1050–51.
18. See also Mark 1:24; 10:47; Luke 4:34; 18:37; John 18:5, 7; 19:19; Acts 2:22; 3:6; 4:10; 6:14; 22:8; 26:9). Jesus’ followers were later identified as the “sect of the Nazarenes” (Acts 24:5) to specify them as followers of the Jesus who came from the town Nazareth. See H. H. Schaeder, “Ναζαρηνός, Ναζωραῖος,” TDNT, 4:874–79.
19. See Brown, Birth of the Messiah, 210–13; Davies and Allison, Matthew, 1:276–77.
20. See Hagner, Matthew 1–13, 41.
21. Richard Bauckham, “The Messianic Interpretation of Isa. 10:34 in the Dead Sea Scrolls, 2 Baruch and the Preaching of John the Baptist,” DSD 2 (1995): 202–16. Bauckham claims this is “the most popular” text (p. 202).
22. For a plausible reconstruction, see Adrian M. Leske, “Isaiah and Matthew: The Prophetic Influence in the First Gospel,” in Jesus and the Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 and Christian Origins, ed. W. H. Bellinger Jr. and W R. Farmer (Harrisburg, Pa.: Trinity Press International, 1998), 162–63, and Rainer Riesner, “Archeology and Geography,” DJG, 36.
23. Note, for example, the Eighteen Benedictions recited in the synagogue: “Cause the Branch of David thy servant speedily to sprout, and let his horn be exalted by thy salvation” (Ben. 15 [14]).
24. E.g., 4QWar Scrollg 5:3–4: “the Branch of David. Then [all forces of Belial] shall be judged,” and “the prince of the congregation, the Bran[ch of David,] will put him to death.” See also 4QIsaiah Peshera 3:18 (4Q161 [4QpIsaa]): “The interpretation of the word concerns the shoot of David which will sprout in the final days.”
25. “This refers to the ‘branch of David’, who will arise with the Interpreter of the law who will rise up in Zion in the last days” (4QFlorilegium [4Q174] 10–12).
26. 4QGenesis Pesher 5:1–5 (4Q252[4QpGena]).
27. Allusions to a shoot or branch describing a messianic age are found in 1QHa 14:15; 15:19; 16:5–10 [= 1QHa 6:15; 7:19; 8:5–10] and 4QIsaiah Peshera 3:15–26 (4Q161[4QpIsaa]. For overviews of messianism in the Qumran literature, see Marinus de Jonge, “Messiah,” ABD, 4:777–88; Craig A. Evans, “Messianism,” DNTB, 700–703; and Lawrence H. Schiffman, “Messianic Figures and Ideas in the Qumran Scrolls,” The Messiah: Developments in Earliest Judaism and Christianity, ed. James H. Charlesworth (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992), 116–29. Qumran texts cited are from Florentino García Martínez, The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated: The Qumran Texts in English, 2d ed., trans. Wilfred G. E. Watson (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992).
28. See discussion in Brown, Birth of the Messiah, 211–13, 217–19; Hagner, Matthew 1–13, 41; Davies and Allison, Matthew, 1:277–79.
29. Carson, “Matthew,” 97.
30. Mary and Jesus’ siblings are mentioned during his ministry (e.g., 12:46–50; 13:55–58; cf. Acts 1:14), but there is no mention of Joseph, suggesting that he is no longer alive. With Matthew’s focus on Joseph’s role throughout chs. 1–2, we would esp. expect to hear of him in Matthew’s Gospel if he were still alive.
31. E.g., rhaka (“fool”; Matt. 5:22), Kephas (“rock,” John 1:42; cf. Matt. 16:18), Talitha koum (“little girl, get up!”; Mark 5:41), Abba (“father”; Mark 14:36), Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani (“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” Matt 27:46; cf. Mark 15:34).
32. For a good overview supporting Jesus’ potential multilingual capacity, see Michael O. Wise, “Languages of Palestine,” DJG, 434–44; F. F. Bruce, “Latin,” ABD, 4:220–22; Stanley E. Porter, “Jesus and the Use of Greek in Galilee,” in Studying the Historical Jesus: Evaluations of the State of Current Research, ed. Bruce Chilton and Craig A. Evans (NTTS 19; Leiden: Brill, 1994), 123–54.
33. Luke too accentuates this element by an event during Jesus’ boyhood that displayed an early awareness of his unique relationship with God as “my Father” (Luke 2:39–50).
34. E.g., John Dominic Crossan, Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1994), 15–21.
35. For a rebuttal of the scholarly charge that Matthew was a creative midrashic interpreter, see R. T. France, “Scripture, Tradition and History in the Infancy Narratives of Matthew,” Gospel Perspectives, Volume II: Studies of History and Tradition in the Four Gospels, ed. R. T. France and David Wenham (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1981), 239–66; Charles L. Quarles, “Midrash as Creative Historiography: Portrait of a Misnomer,” JETS 39 (1996): 457–64; idem, “The Protoevangelium of James as an Alleged Parallel to Creative Historiography in the Synoptic Birth Narratives,” BBR 8 (1998): 139–49; Craig Blomberg, The Historical Reliability of the Gospels (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1987), 43–53. For an overview of Old Testament prophecies and their fulfillment in Jesus, see Kaiser, The Messiah in the Old Testament, 13–35, 231–35, passim. For a popular overview, see the interview with Louis S. Lapides, “The Fingerprint Evidence: Did Jesus—and Jesus Alone—Match the Identity of the Messiah?” in Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998), 171–87.
36. Josephus, Ant. 17:168–71 (cf. Nikos Kokkinos, “Herod’s Horrid Death,” BAR 28/2 [March–April 2002]: 28–35, 62).
37. Some, out of sensitivity to other religious traditions, are now using the designations C.E. (“Common Era”) and B.C.E. (“Before Common Era”).
38. Agrippa spoke derisively to Paul when he said, “Do you think that in such a short time you can persuade me to be a Christian?”
39. See Pliny the Younger, Letters 10.96.
40. Michael J. Wilkins, “Christian,” ABD, 1:925–26.
41. For Mark and Lara’s safety, I have kept their identity, location, and newspaper interview anonymous.
42. Walter Wangerin Jr., “A Stranger in Joseph’s House,” Christianity Today 39 (Dec. 11, 1995): 16–20 (quote on p. 20). Wangerin recounts in the article the heart-wrenching but heart-warming process of allowing their adoptive daughter to find her birth parents.
1. Jesus was “about thirty years old when he began his ministry” (Luke 3:23).
2. For a discussion of the structure of Matthew’s Gospel that stresses the appearance of John the Baptist, see Gerd Häfner, “ ‘Jene Tage’ (Mt 3,1) und der Umfang des matthäischen ‘Prologs’: Ein Beitrag zur Frage nach der Struktur des Mt-Ev,” BZ 37 (1993): 43–59.
3. The Greek word for “relative” is syngenis, which could refer to an aunt or a cousin but is often rendered simply “kinswoman.”
4. See Joseph Patrich, “Hideouts in the Judean Wilderness,” BAR 15/5 (September–October 1989): 32–42. For an overview of these groups, see Richard A. Horsley and John S. Hanson, Bandits, Prophets, and Messiahs: Popular Movements at the Time of Jesus (Minneapolis: Winston, 1985).
5. See Ben Witherington Jr., “John the Baptist,” DJG, 384; John P. Meier, A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus (ABRL 2; New York: Doubleday, 1994), 49–52; Bock, Luke 1:1–9:50, 198; Rousseau and Arav, Jesus and His World, 80–82, 262; Todd S. Beall, Josephus’ Description of the Essenes Illustrated by the Dead Sea Scrolls (SNTSMS 58; Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1988); John C. Hutchison, “Was John the Baptist an Essene From Qumran?” BibSac 159 (April–June 2002): 187–200.
6. The present imperative “Repeat!” gives a moral regulation; cf. Buist M. Fanning, Verbal Aspect in New Testament Greek (Oxford: Clarendon, 1990), 355–64.
7. The nuance of the Greek perfect in engiken is that the kingdom of heaven has come near to people in the soon-arriving person of the Messiah, and in his person it actually confronts them permanently (see comments on 4:17). The way in which the kingdom “is near” is somewhat different for the message of Jesus (cf. 4:17) and for the Twelve (cf. 10:7). John is looking ahead to the arrival of the kingdom with the Coming One, while Jesus and the Twelve announce entrance to the kingdom because of its presence in the ministry of Jesus Messiah (cf. also 12:28).
8. The term “heaven” in the expression “kingdom of heaven” is actually plural, a typical Jewish conception of the world above that includes the air one breathes, the starry world, and the realm of spirits, but also the throne of God. The plural occurs esp. in Matthew; cf. Helmut Traub, Gerhard von Rad, “οὐρανός, κ.τ.λ.,” TDNT, 5:497–53; Hans Bietenhard, “Heaven, Ascend, Above,” NIDNTT, 2:184–96.
9. Most commentators concur that the expressions are interchangeable, although some have suggested that Matthew intends two different aspects of the kingdom in the use of the two phrases; e.g., the kingdom of God is a present reality that prepares individuals for the eschatological kingdom of heaven, a wholly future phenomenon in Matthew: Willoughby C. Allen, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to S. Matthew, 3d ed. (ICC; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1912), lxvii–lxviii, 232; Margaret Pamment, “The Kingdom of Heaven According to the First Gospel,” NTS 27 (1981): 211–32. A distinction was also drawn between the two expressions by earlier dispensational writers, but this has been largely abandoned; see Robert L. Saucy, The Case for Progressive Dispensationalism: The Interface Between Dispensational and Non-Dispensational Theology (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1993), 19.
10. Heb. 11:37; cf. Gen. 37:34; 2 Sam. 3:31; 2 Kings 6:30.
11. As evident in the Damascus Document of Qumran (CD-A 12:13–15).
12. See the interesting presentations by G. S. Cansdale, “Locust,” ZPEB, 3:948–50, and Edwin Firmage, “Zoology (Animal Profiles): Locusts; Bees,” ABD, 6:1150.
13. See Meier, A Marginal Jew, 2:49.
14. For further background, see Wilkins, “Matthew,” 24.
15. The dating of “proselyte” baptism is debated, some suggesting that it did not occur until around the Christian era, when Judaism admitted Gentile proselytes with baptism, circumcision, and sacrifice; e.g., Meier, A Marginal Jew, 2:52; Scot McKnight, A Light Among the Gentiles (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991). Others contend, however, that proselyte baptism for ritually impure Gentiles seems likely at the time of John; e.g., Craig S. Keener, The Spirit in the Gospels and Acts (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1997), 63–64, 146–49.
16. For further background, see Wilkins, “Matthew,” 25.
17. Matthew will note two other occasions when the Pharisees and Sadducees are listed together—in their opposition to Jesus (16:1–4, 5–12).
18. This interpretation makes the best sense of the preposition epi in the clause erchomenous epi to baptisma autou (NIV “coming to where he was baptizing,” instead of implying that they were “coming for baptism,” NASB); cf. Gary Yamasaki, John the Baptist in Life and Death: Audience-Oriented Criticism of Matthew’s Narrative (JSNTSup 167; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998), 86.
19. For a thorough analysis of the messianic implications, see Bauckham, “The Messianic Interpretation of Isa. 10:34 in the Dead Sea Scrolls,” 202–16.
20. Cf. Ps. 118:26 with Matt. 11:3; 21:9; 23:39; Heb. 10:37.
21. For further discussion, see J. D. G. Dunn, Baptism in the Holy Spirit (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1970), 10–11, 13–14; R. Alastair Campbell, “Jesus and His Baptism,” TynBul 47 (1996): 191–214; Hagner, Matthew 1–13, 51–52; Robert A. Guelich, Mark 1–8:26 (WBC 34A; Dallas: Word, 1989), 27–28.
22. For a discussion of the religious and social dynamic addressed to the general audience, see Robert L. Webb, John the Baptizer and Prophet: A Socio-Historical Study (JSNTSup 62; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991), 289–300.
23. Such is the speculative conclusion of the skeptical account of Jesus’ life by Donald Spoto, The Hidden Jesus: A New Life (New York: St. Martin’s, 1998), 45–46.
24. Especially see Benno Przybylski, Righteousness in Matthew and His World of Thought (SNTSMS 41; Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1980).
25. Donald A. Hagner, “Righteousness in Matthew’s Theology,” in Worship, Theology and Ministry in the Early Church: Essays in Honor of Ralph P. Martin, ed. Michael J. Wilkins and Terence Paige (JSNTSup 87; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1992), 116–17.
26. Keener, Matthew (1999), 132.
27. George R. Beasley-Murray, Baptism in the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1962), 45–67.
28. Morris, Matthew, 65.
29. Meier concludes that the form of the baptism is most likely immersion, implied by the statement that after Jesus’ baptism he “came up out of the water” (3:16; Mark 1:10). He supports this conclusion by two factors outside of Matthew: (1) John baptized at the Jordan River and at Aenon near Salim, “because there was plenty of water” (John 3:23); (2) Josephus states that John baptized not to cleanse souls but to purify bodies (Ant. 118; see Meier, Marginal Jew, 2:93 n.152).
30. That “heaven was opened” is an example of the fairly common passive voice used without the agent expressed, but the context is clear that God is the obvious agent of the action; see Wallace, Greek Grammar, 435–38.
31. For an intertextual analysis that draws upon the themes of judgment, deliverance, and suffering in the Jewish tradition images of the dove (e.g., Gen. 8; Ps. 74:19; 2 Esd. 5:21–6:34), see David B. Capes, “Intertextual Echoes in the Matthean Baptismal Narrative,” BBR 9 (1999): 37–49; cf. N. T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God: Christian Origins and the Question of God (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996), 2:536–37.
32. For background and discussion, see Davies and Allison, Matthew, 1:335–36.
33. See Ben Witherington III, The Christology of Jesus (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990), 148–55.
34. In the rich associations connected with “Son of God,” it is important to understand the intended contextual force. Carson notes, “As it is wrong to see ontological sonship in every use, so is it wrong to exclude it prematurely” (“Matthew,” 109).
35. Chaim Potok, Wanderings: Chaim Potok’s History of the Jews (New York: Fawcett Crest, 1978), 11.
36. Ibid., 13.
37. Among others, Jacob Neusner refers to the phenomenon of diverse expectations as “Judaisms and their Messiahs.” He explains: “A Messiah in a Judaism is a man who at the end of history, at the eschaton, will bring salvation to the Israel conceived by the social group addressed by the way of life and world view of that Judaism. Judaisms and their Messiahs at the beginning of Christianity therefore encompass a group of religious systems that form a distinct family, all characterized by two traits: (1) address to ‘Israel’ and (2) reference to diverse passages of the single common holy writing (‘Old Testament,’ ‘written Torah’).” See his “Introduction” to Judaisms and Their Messiahs at the Turn of the Christian Era, ed. Jacob Neusner, William S. Green, and Ernest Frerichs (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1987), ix.
38. For a detailed analysis of the genre “gospel” in the light of ancient “biographies,” see Richard A. Burridge, What Are the Gospels? A Comparison with Greco-Roman Biography (SNTSMS 70; Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1992).
39. See comments on 4:23.
40. Malcolm Muggeridge, Jesus: The Man Who Lives (New York: Harper & Row, 1975), 1.
41. Morris, Matthew, 68.
42. See Kaiser, The Messiah in the Old Testament, for a discussion of the chronological unveiling of the messianic prophecies of the Old Testament.
43. For an overview of the historical New Testament Christological development, see Martin Hengel, “Christological Titles in Early Christianity,” in The Messiah, 425–48. For a theological overview, see Grudem, Systematic Theology, esp. 547–53.
1. Clinton E. Arnold, Three Crucial Questions about Spiritual Warfare (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1997), 35.
2. See Job 1–2 [esp. 1:6–12]; Zech. 3:1–12; 1 Chron. 21:1; Luke 10:18; Rev. 20.
3. BDAG, 646. This is true as well for the noun peirasmos, which can mean either “temptation” or “test.”
4. E.g., Birger Gerhardsson, The Testing of God’s Son (Matt 4:1–11 and Par.) (ConBNT 2.1; Lund: Gleerup, 1966); Don B. Garlington, “Jesus, The Unique Son of God: Tested and Faithful,” BibSac 151 (July–September 1994): 284–308.
5. The same term, peirazo, is used of the religious leaders coming to query Jesus later in his ministry (16:1; 19:3; 22:34–35). The context determines their motives, whether for good or bad.
6. Cf. Morris, Matthew, 71ff.
7. Jesus’ forty-day vigil of fasting was preparing him for the redemptive ministry he would undertake, which does not imply that he was fasting to make himself intentionally vulnerable to Satan. We must be careful in drawing implications for spiritual life today. The temptation accounts have been used as models for ascetic practices that may be unwarranted, such as entering into extreme periods of fasting, almost to the point of death, in order to experience intimacy with Jesus’ experiences.
8. Many have noted the parallels to Adam, beginning already with the early fathers such as Irenaeus (see D. Jeffrey Bingham, Irenaeus’ Use of Matthew’s Gospel: In Adversus Haereses [Traditio exegetica graeca 7; Louvain, Belgium: Peeters Leuven, 1998], 274–81). The parallels to Adam are more pronounced in Luke and Mark (see Davies and Allison, Matthew, 1:356–57).
9. The number “forty” (and multiples, such as 80 and 120) is often used for a typical round number, whether to designate the years of a generation, maturity (e.g., of a person’s life), or a symbolic period of time (e.g., cf. Ex. 24:18). The period of “forty days” takes on special significance in Scripture, and it was often associated with hardship, affliction, or punishment, but was also a time of preparation for a particularly significant involvement in God’s activities (see Ex. 24:18; Deut. 9:25; 1 Kings 19:8; Ezek. 4:6).
10. Donald Guthrie, A Shorter Life of Christ (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1970), 81–82.
11. This pattern is important to observe and establish in our own spiritual development, in spite of modern attempts to deny the existence of a real satanic being, and hence, real personal temptation. For a historical survey of popular literature and the persistence of seeing a pattern for spirituality, albeit somewhat removed from Jesus’ example, see Christian Davis, “Where Are We Going, Where Have We Been? The Temporality of Spirituality in Satanic Temptation Narratives,” Christian Scholars Review 29 (Spring 2000): 455–69.
12. This is a first-class condition, “If you are the Son of God,” which reflects Satan’s attempt to manipulate Jesus. For point of argument he assumes the identification to be true and then uses it as a w pay of attempting to manipulate Jesus. See Richard A. Young, Intermediate New Testament Greek: A Linguistic and Exegetical Approach (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1994), 229–30.
13. Matthew and Luke reverse the order of the second and third temptations. This is a good example illustrating how each evangelist narrates incidents for his particular purpose. Matthew is intent on narrating chronological sequence, while Luke has a more theological purpose in placing the temple temptation last (Luke 4:3–12; cf. I. Howard Marshall, Commentary on Luke [NIGTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978], 166–67; Nolland, Luke 1–9:20, 180–81). Matthew’s chronological intention is revealed by his use of the sequential adverb “then” (tote, 4:5), which he elsewhere uses regularly to note chronological progression (e.g., 3:13; 4:1, 17), and “again” (palin, 4:8), which continues the thought of chronological progression.
14. Christoph Kähler, “Satanischer Schriftgebrauch: Zur Hermeneutik von Mt 4,1–11/Lk 4, 1–13,” TLZ 119 (1994): 857–68. This incident of the temptation of Jesus is unique in that it uses citations of Scripture and understands misuse of Scripture.
15. This may indicate that at least this temptation came through some type of visionary experience, since no known mountain could make visible all of the kingdoms on the earth’s sphere. Satan used whatever forces are at his disposal for very real temptations. Some supernatural powers were surely at work here to tempt the Son of God.
16. The one called “the devil” throughout (e.g., 4:1, 5, 8) is now called “Satan” (4:10), “the Adversary.”
17. Bock, Luke 1:1–9:50, 376.
18. “Jesus’ insistence on worshiping God alone makes the characteristic Matthean theme of worshiping Jesus (e.g., 2:2; 8:2; 9:18; 14:33; 15:25; 20:20; 28:17) all the more significant as evidence for his divinity” (Blomberg, Matthew, 85–86).
19. An overview of the theological issues can be found in any standard systematic theology, such as Grudem, Systematic Theology, esp. 547–53. Some theologians emphasize that Jesus operated exclusively in his humanity during his stay on the earth and that displays of supernatural activity are accounted for through the Spirit’s power (cf. Acts 2:22–23; 10:38). Others emphasize that on occasion Jesus operated in his divine nature while on earth. All agree, however, that Jesus lived a fully human life in the power of the Spirit.
20. I have developed this more fully in my In His Image.
21. The centuries-long debate of whether or not Jesus could have sinned is beyond our discussion here, but I agree with those theologians who believe that Jesus could not have sinned. How then was it a real temptation? The possibility of not sinning does not make the temptation any less severe. For more on this, see Grudem, Systematic Theology, 537–39, but also M. Erickson, Christian Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1983), 2:718–20.
22. Henri Nouwen, In the Name of Jesus: Reflections on Christian Leadership (New York: Crossroad, 1989).
23. Ibid., 16–17, 38–39, 58–59.
24. Ibid., 73.
25. Clinton Arnold discusses nine convictions and actions that contribute to successful resistance of the devil; see Arnold, Three Crucial Questions about Spiritual Warfare, 30–41, 116–29.
1. For a brief overview of the chronological issues, see Robert Stein, Jesus the Messiah (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1996), 51–60. For a more technical discussion, see Hoehner, Chronological Aspects of the Life of Christ, 45–63.
2. Josephus, Ant. 18.116–19.
3. See 2:12, 13, 14, 22; 4:12; cf. 14:13; 15:21; 27:5.
4. Good, “The Verb ΑΝΑΧΩΡΕΩ in Matthew’s Gospel,” 1–12.
5. See Floyd V. Filson, A Commentary on the Gospel According to St. Matthew, 2d ed. (Black’s New Testament Commentaries; London: Adam & Charles Black, 1971), 72.
6. The NIV’s “But instead of going to Nazareth” obscures the normal rendering of kataleipo, which carries the sense of “leaving behind” (cf. BDAG, 520–21).
7. Bargil Pixner, With Jesus Through Galilee According to the Fifth Gospel (Israel: Corazin, 1992), 33–35.
8. For an archeological overview of the history of Capernaum, see John C. H. Laughlin, “Capernaum: From Jesus’ Time and After,” BAR 19/5 (1993): 55–61, 70; Pixner, With Jesus Through Galilee, 35.
9. The term “people” (laos) in Matthew regularly refers to Israel (cf. comments on 1:21; 27:24–25).
10. The phrase will recur at 16:21 at another decisive turning point, where Jesus begins to tell in the first of his passion predictions of his forthcoming crucifixion. This phrase has been seen as a key to the structure of Matthew’s Gospel, suggesting that Matthew uses it to divide the Gospel into three primary sections: 1:1–4:16; 4:17–16:20; and 16:21–28:20. See, e.g., Jack Dean Kingsbury, Matthew: Structure, Christology, Kingdom (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1975). While its appearance obviously marks a crucial transition in the narrative, it is doubtful that it would have held much significance for an aural audience, separated as far apart as are the two occurrences.
11. See comments on 3:2 for the expression “kingdom of heaven/God” in John’s preaching.
12. The definitional silence assumes that Jesus and his forerunner, John the Baptist, would be understood by those who heard them preach, and that certain associations with the announcement of the kingdom would be called to mind. See Dale Patrick, “The Kingdom of God in the Old Testament,” The Kingdom of God in Twentieth Century Interpretation, ed. Wendell Willis (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1987), 71.
13. Donald E. Gowan, Eschatology in the Old Testament (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986), 2.
14. As Cranfield states, “The kingdom of God has come close to men in the person of Jesus, and in his person it actually confronts them” (C. E. B. Cranfield, The Gospel According to St Mark [CGTC; Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1972], 68).
15. While there is diversity of opinion as to what was fulfilled in Jesus’ first advent and what awaits his second, the “already-not yet” general position is a large consensus. For the most complete survey of recent positions, see Mark Saucy, The Kingdom of God in the Teaching of Jesus: In Twentieth Century Theology (Dallas: Word, 1997). For a brief overview of widely held evangelical perspectives, see the March 1992 issue of JETS, in which is an article by George R. Beasley-Murray, “The Kingdom of God in the Teaching of Jesus,” JETS 35 (1992): 19–30, a response by Craig Blomberg (31–36), a rejoinder by Beasley-Murray (37–38), and a separate article by Carl F. H. Henry, “Reflections on the Kingdom of God,” 39–49.
16. The connection of Jesus’ message with the immediate ministry context in Matthew’s narrative is highlighted by Warren Carter, “Narrative/Literary Approaches to Matthean Theology: The ‘Reign of the Heavens’ As an Example (Mt. 4:17–5:12),” JSNT 67 (September 1997): 3–27.
17. Num. 34:11; Deut. 3:17; Josh. 12:3; 13:27.
18. “Lake Gennesaret” is a Hellenized version of the Hebrew “Lake of Kinnereth.”
19. Strabo, Geography 16.2; Pliny, Natural History 5.15, 71; Josephus, J.W. 3.506.
20. See Seán Freyne, Galilee from Alexander the Great to Hadrian: A Study of Second Temple Judaism (Wilmington: Michael Glazier, 1980); idem, “Galilee, Sea of,” ABD, 2:900; Rainer Riesner, “Archeology and Geography,” DJG, 37.
21. For full description and illustrations, see Mendel Nun, The Sea of Galilee and Its Fishermen in the New Testament (Kibbutz Ein Gev: Kinneret Sailing Co., 1989), 23–37; idem, “Cast Your Net Upon the Waters: Fish and Fishermen in Jesus’ Time,” BAR 19/6 (1993): 52–53.
22. Nun, The Sea of Galilee and its Fishermen, 16–44.
23. For the fascinating story of the discovery and excavation of the boat by the lead excavator, see Shelley Wachsmann, The Sea of Galilee Boat: An Extraordinary 2000 Year Old Discovery (New York: Plenum, 1995).
24. Jack Dean Kingsbury, “On Following Jesus: The ‘Eager’ Scribe and the ‘Reluctant’ Disciple (Matthew 8.18–22),” NTS 34 (1988): 49, states of the calling scene: “It serves to accentuate the great authority with which Jesus calls persons to become His disciples and the absolute obedience and commitment with which those summoned answer His call.”
25. David Hill, The Gospel of Matthew (NCB; London: Oliphants, 1972), 106.
26. See Warren Carter, “Matthew 4:18–22 and Matthean Discipleship: An Audience-Oriented Perspective,” CBQ 59 (1997): 58–75.
27. Scot McKnight, Turning to Jesus: The Sociology of Conversion in the Gospels (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2002), 40–42. I discuss the developing relationship of the disciples to Jesus more fully in Wilkins, Following the Master, ch. 6.
28. By remaining unnamed, the author of the Gospel of John gives a subtle signature that he is that unnamed disciple (cf. also “the disciple whom Jesus loved”). See D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991), 154.
29. See Leon Morris, “Disciples of Jesus,” in Jesus of Nazareth: Lord and Christ—Essays on the Historical Jesus and New Testament Christology, ed. Joel B. Green and Max Turner (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994), 116; Eduard Schweizer, Lordship and Discipleship, rev. ed. (SBT 28; Naperville, Illinois: Allenson, 1960), 20.
30. For a critical analysis of Gospel perspectives on Peter’s call, see S. O. Abogunrin, “The Three Variant Accounts of Peter’s Call: A Critical and Theological Examination of the Texts,” NTS 31 (1985): 587–602.
31. Joshua b. Perahyah said, “Provide thyself with a teacher and get thee a fellow disciple” (ʾAbot 1.6), which Rabban Gamaliel echoed, “Provide thyself with a teacher and remove thyself from doubt” (ʾAbot 1.16).
32. Jacob Neusner, Invitation to the Talmud: A Teaching Book (New York: Harper & Row, 1973), 70.
33. Martin Hengel, The Charismatic Leader and His Followers (New York: Crossroad, 1981), 42–57.
34. Wilkins, Following the Master, 100–109, 124–25.
35. For an overview of recent discussion of these two words, see J. I. H. McDonald, Kerygma and Didache: The Articulation and Structure of the Earliest Christian Message (SNTSMS 37; Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1980).
36. See 4:23; 9:35; 24:14. Many translations render the phrase in Luke 16:16 as “good news of the kingdom” (NIV) or “gospel of the kingdom” (NASB), but this is actually different from Matthew’s expression. Luke uses the verb euangelizo, not the noun euangelion.
37. Morris, Matthew, 86.
38. Matthew uses the term for “heal” (therapeuo) sixteen times, more than in any other New Testament book (Hagner, Matthew 1–13, 81).
39. See Wilkins, The Concept of Disciple in Matthew’s Gospel, 148–50, 170–71; Jack Dean Kingsbury, “The Verb AKOLOUTHEIN (‘To Follow’) as an Index of Matthew’s View of His Community,” JBL 97 (1978): 56–73.
40. See Bastiaan Van Elderen, “Early Christianity in Transjordan,” TynBul 45 (1994): 97–117. Van Elderen suggests that this indicates the area of northern Transjordan, which would comport with the summary reference to “all of Syria” in 4:24.
41. This is a basic principle for reading any of the Gospels, which Robert Stein illustrates from Mark: “The Gospel of Mark is a Gospel about Jesus. From Mark 1:1 to 16:8 Jesus is the focus of attention. There is no narrative in the book that does not in some way center on him. He is the main content, the focus, and the object of the entire Gospel” (Playing by The Rules: A Basic Guide to Interpreting the Bible [Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994], 159).
42. Warren Carter, “The Crowds in Matthew’s Gospel,” CBQ 55 (1993): 54–67.
43. Cf. Luke 16:8; John 3:19ff.; 12:36; 2 Cor. 6:14; Col. 1:12–13; 1 Thess. 5:5; 1 Peter 2:9. Michael J. Wilkins, “Darkness,” “Light,” Baker Theological Dictionary of the Bible, ed. Walter A. Elwell (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1996), 142–43, 486–87.
44. John Calvin, A Harmony of the Gospels Matthew, Mark and Luke (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972), 1:572.
45. Richard Todd, “Let’s Pray Together,” Civilization: The Magazine of the Library of Congress (February–March 1999), 48.
46. Testimony given about Al Green from his personal website at www.algreen.com.
47. Quote from Todd, “Let’s Pray Together,” 48.
1. Pixner, With Jesus Through Galilee, 34. Pixner also equates the place with Magadan (see comments on 15:39).
2. Ibid., 36.
3. E.g., the mountain of temptation (4:8); this mountain (5:1–2); the mountain of transfiguration (17:1); the mountain of olives (24:3); the mountain of resurrection appearance and commission (28:16).
4. The most complete recent study is Terence L. Donaldson, Jesus on the Mountain: A Study in Matthean Theology (JSNTSup 8; Sheffield: JSOT, 1985).
5. So also Hagner, Matthew 1–13, 86. For a cautious exploration of the Mosaic theme, see Davies and Allison, Matthew, 1:422–24.
6. Wilkins, The Concept of Disciple in Matthew’s Gospel, esp. 163–72; idem, Following the Master, 179–83. For a similar perspective, see Cousland, The Crowds in the Gospel of Matthew.
7. Matthew also speaks of disciples other than the Twelve (8:21) and indicates a wider circle of disciples who receive his teaching and obey his radical summons to follow him (10:24–42). He also acknowledges through a related verb the existence of a named disciple other than the Twelve, Joseph of Arimathea (27:57). Moreover, the women who attend Jesus’ crucifixion are described with discipleship terms (see comments on 12:46–50; 27:55–56, 61; 28:1–8). For discussion see Michael J. Wilkins, “Named and Unnamed Disciples in Matthew: A Literary/Theological Study,” SBLSP 30 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1991); idem, “Women in the Teaching and Example of Jesus,” in Women and Men in Ministry: A Complementary Perspective, ed. Robert L. Saucy and Judith K. TenElshof (Chicago: Moody Press, 2001), 91–112; Przybylski, Righteousness in Matthew, 108–10.
8. E.g., Carson, “Matthew,” 125–26; Bock, Luke 1:1–9:50, 553; Thomas and Gundry, The NIV Harmony of the Gospels, 70–71 note c.
9. E.g., Morris, Matthew, 93; Blomberg, Matthew, 96.
10. E.g., Hagner, Matthew 1–13, 69; Robert A. Guelich, The Sermon on the Mount: A Foundation for Understanding (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1982), 35; Hans Dieter Betz, The Sermon on the Mount: A Commentary on the Sermon on the Mount, Including the Sermon on the Plain (Matthew 5:3–7:27 and Luke 6:20–49), ed. Adela Yarbro Collins (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995), 44–45.
11. E.g., cf. Matt. 5:13 in Luke 14:34–35; Matt. 5:14 in Luke 11:33, etc. See Hagner, Matthew 1–13, 83 for a complete listing.
12. Some contend for one sermon shared by Matthew and Luke by appealing to the existence of the Sermon in the Q source. But since the hypothetical Q may only be the places where Matthew and Luke share material not found in Mark, this begs the question.
13. For brief, helpful overviews of the history of interpretation, see Guelich, The Sermon on the Mount, 14–22, and David Crump, “Applying the Sermon on the Mount: Once You Have Read It What Do You Do with It?” Criswell Theological Review 6/1 (1992): 3–14. A more extensive survey is found in Warren S. Kissinger, The Sermon on the Mount: A History of Interpretation and Bibliography (Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow, 1975).
14. Some of the more helpful summaries are found in Carson, “Matthew,” 126–28; W. D. Davies and Dale C. Allison Jr., “Reflections on the Sermon on the Mount,” SJT 44 (1991): 283–309; and Blomberg, Matthew, 94–95. An extensive listing of interpretations is found in Clarence Bauman, The Sermon on the Mount: The Modern Quest for Its Meaning (Macon, Ga.: Mercer Univ. Press, 1985).
15. For an overview of these traditions, see Michael J. Wilkins, “Eliminating Elitism from Our Traditions Through the Biblical Reunification of Spiritual Formation and Discipleship,” in Spiritual Formation: An Evangelical Perspective, ed. Richard E. Averbeck and Michael P. Green (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, forthcoming).
16. David Crump, “Applying the Sermon on the Mount,” 4, states: “Prior to the medieval period it is clear that the Sermon on the Mount was viewed as a straightforward presentation of Christian ethics.”
17. See Randall Buth, “Singular and Plural Forms of Address in the Sermon on the Mount,” BT 44 (1993): 446–47.
18. Ibid.
1. Betz, The Sermon on the Mount, 92: “As a musical masterpiece begins with an introitus, the SM opens with an extraordinary sequence of statements, the so-called Beatitudes.”
2. Richard B. Hays, The Moral Vision of the New Testament—Community, Cross, New Community: A Contemporary Introduction to New Testament Ethics (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1996), 321.
3. The sacramental aspect of conferring a blessing is not emphasized in Jesus’ ministry, and we will see below that the Beatitudes are not imperatives. See Guelich, The Sermon on the Mount, 63–66. For a similar discussion of whether a conferral or acknowledgment of blessing is made on Peter in 16:17, see Wilkins, Discipleship in the Ancient World and Matthew’s Gospel, 187. The latter is more likely in 16:17.
4. The initial makarios without the verb “to be,” which is the fixed pattern of each beatitude, occurs also in LXX Ps. 1:1 and frequently elsewhere in the LXX (cf. Gen. 30:13; Ps. 2:12; Isa. 30:18; Dan. 12:12). For an exhaustive though critical recent analysis of the poetic nature of the Beatitudes, see H. Benedict Green, Matthew, Poet of the Beatitudes (JSNTSup 203; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001).
5. The structure of the eight first statements of blessing are virtually identical. Since the theme of persecution continues on into the ninth statement of blessing but its structure differs significantly (a switch from the third person to the second person “you,” the copula “are” appears for the first time, and the regular two-clause structure disappears), it is generally accepted that the ninth statement is an extension of the eighth beatitude.
6. See W. G. E. Watson, Classical Hebrew Poetry (JSOTSup 26; Sheffield: JSOT, 1984), 282–87. The inclusio is also found in narrative (see comments on 4:23; 9:35).
8. The dative of sphere “in spirit” should be understood to be practically equivalent to an adverb, indicating “the spiritually poor” (cf. Wallace, Greek Grammar, 155).
9. For discussion see Donald A. Hagner, “Righteousness in Matthew’s Gospel,” in Worship, Theology and Ministry in the Early Church, 116–17.
10. See Morris, Matthew, 99–100.
11. The perfect passive participle forms a substantive, “those who have been persecuted.” The use of the perfect tense here is difficult to explain. From Jesus’ perspective, none of his disciples has been persecuted for righteousness up to this point. Who then would qualify to say that his is the kingdom of heaven? It cannot refer to Old Testament prophets (to whom Jesus will allude in the next verse), because they were like John the Baptist, prior to the inauguration of the kingdom, and thus the kingdom did not belong to them. Others avoid the historical situation by saying that Matthew is making a statement by selecting the perfect tense, in order to tell something to his readers. The perspective of “pronouncement” seems to offer the best explanation.
12. Gundry, Matthew, 72.
13. See comments on the literary inclusio that this forms and the attendant implications for the meaning.
14. This is a central New Testament theme (cf. 10:24–25; John 11:16; 15:18–25; 2 Tim. 3:12; 1 Peter 4:13–14).
15. The English word “salary” is derived from salarium, the Latin term referring to the salt allotment issued to soldiers serving in the Roman army. See Robert P. Multhauf, Neptune’s Gift: A History of Common Salt (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1978); John Challinor, A Dictionary of Geology, 6th ed. (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1986).
16. E.g., Carson, “Matthew,” 138.
17. E.g., Luz, Matthew 1–7, 250.
18. E.g., Gundry, Matthew, 75. See the interesting discussion of this view by a professor of agriculture, Eugene P. Deatrick, “Salt, Soil, Savior,” BA 25 (1962): 41–48.
19. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 31.102.
20. E.g., Hagner, Matthew 1–13, 99; Davies and Allison, Matthew, 1:473.
21. E.g., Hagner, Matthew 1–13, 99, who cites F. Hauck, “ἅλας,” TDNT, 1:229.
22. This may be similar to Jesus’ saying about the impossibility of a camel going through the eye of a needle (19:24).
23. One possible such city is Hippos, a Greek city of the Decapolis situated on a rounded hill above the southeastern shore. It was clearly visible from the Capernaum area, esp. when it was lit up at night (see Rousseau and Arav, “Hippos/Susita,” Jesus and His World, 127–28).
24. See Wilkins, “Matthew,” 36, and John Rea, “Lamp,” ZPEB, 3:865–66, for pictures of excavated lamps from patriarchal times to the New Testament era; cf. Carol Meyers, “Lampstand,” ABD, 4:141–43.
25. The use of the expression “Father” has metaphorical significance (e.g., Aída Besançon Spencer, “Father-Ruler: The Meaning of the Metaphor ‘Father’ for God in the Bible,” JETS 39 [1996]: 433–442), but here it is laden with theological significance to underscore the relationship between the Father and Son, and even between God and believers.
26. The text of the Preamble was taken from the website of the United States House of Representatives: http://www.house.gov/house/Educat.html.
27. http://www.house.gov/house/Constitution/Foreword.html.
28. For discussion see Guelich, “The Beatitudes: ‘Entrance Requirements’ or ‘Eschatological Blessings’?” in Sermon on the Mount, 109–11.
29. In 5:20, Jesus identifies the teachers of the law and the Pharisees as those on whom he pronounces condemnation. Without actually naming them in the rest of the SM, they are the obvious objects of his criticism.
30. Lawrence O. Richards, The Teacher’s Commentary (Wheaton, Ill.: Victor, 1987), 541.
31. Dallas Willard, The Divine Conspiracy: Rediscovering Our Hidden Life in God (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1998), 99. Awarded book of the year by Christianity Today in 1998, The Divine Conspiracy is a helpful application of the Sermon on the Mount, and Matthew’s Gospel generally, to spiritual development. The exposition that Willard offers of the Beatitudes is an attempt to avoid extremes, and caricatures, of the characteristics of the Beatitudes. He rightly rejects the extremes, but his alternative explanation is problematic because he sees the individual characteristics as negative conditions. This overlooks the consistent positive use of these themes in the Old Testament as well as in the rest of the New Testament.
32. Hays, The Moral Vision of the New Testament, 321: “The community’s vocation to be ‘salt’ and ‘light’ for the world (5:13–16) is to be fulfilled precisely as Jesus’ followers embody God’s alternative reality through the character qualities marked by the Beatitudes.”
33. Matt Crenson, The Associated Press, “Poll: Manners Lost in America,” Orange County Register (April 3, 2002), Nation and World, 1.
34. Donald McCullough, Say Please, Say Thank You: The Respect We Owe One Another (New York: Perigee, 1998).
35. Ibid., 8.
1. The polemic of the SM (cf. 5:20; 6:1–18; 7:28–29) indicates that the antagonism between Jesus and the religious leaders is already well underway (cf. Hagner, Matthew 1–13, 104–5; contra Robert Banks, Jesus and the Law in the Synoptic Tradition [SNTSMS 28; Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1975], 65ff.; Carson, “Matthew,” 141–42).
2. Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 176 n. 46.
3. In the coming pages, we will attempt to use uppercase “Law” if it refers to the Pentateuch or the entire Old Testament, but lowercase “law” if it refers to the legal sections of the Old Testament.
4. Warren Carter, “Jesus’ ‘I have come’ Statements in Matthew’s Gospel,” CBQ 60 (1998): 44–62.
5. Deut. 18:15–19; Matt. 21:11; Acts 3:22.
6. Lev. 16:11–19; Isa. 56:7; Matt. 21:13; Heb. 2:17–18; 4:14–16; 5:1–10; 7:24–25; 9:11–14.
7. Isa. 62:11; Zech. 9:9; Matt. 2:2; 21:5; Luke 2:11; 1 Tim. 6:15; Rev. 17:14; 19:16.
8. For helpful overviews and guides to the literature, see Guelich, Sermon on the Mount, 138–42, and J. Daryl Charles, “The Greatest or the Least in the Kingdom? The Disciple’s Relationship to the Law (Matt 5:17–20),” TrinJ 13 n.s. (1992): 139–62.
9. See Matt. 11:13 where the Law and Prophets prophesy until the new age arrives with John.
10. For a discussion of the contrast to the contemporary religious establishment, see J. Daryl Charles, “Garnishing with the ‘Greater Righteousness’: The Disciple’s Relationship to the Law (Matthew 5:17–20),” BBR 12 (2002): 1–15.
11. David A. Dorsey, “The Law of Moses and the Christian: A Compromise,” JETS 34 (1991): 321–34. Dorsey’s article attempts, commendably, to clarify the continuity and discontinuity of the law for the Christian.
12. For overviews, see John W. Wenham, “Christ’s View of Scripture,” in Inerrancy, ed. Norman L. Geisler (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1980), 1–36; Grudem, Systematic Theology, esp. 73–104.
13. Charles, “Greatest or Least in the Kingdom,” 154–56.
14. “Abolish” is the verb katalyo, and “break” is the root verb lyo without the prepositional prefix kata.
15. The number 613 is the traditional number of combined commandments and prohibitions reckoned by the rabbis.
16. Hagner, “Righteousness in Matthew’s Theology,” 116–17. Hagner sees primarily the element of ethical righteousness in 5:20, but his argument for God’s salvific deliverance in 3:15 and 5:6 could also be applied here, which he does more directly in his commentary (Hagner, Matthew 1–13, 109).
17. E.g., F. W. Beare, The Gospel According to Matthew: Translation Introduction and Commentary (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1981), 141.
18. Scott J. Hafemann, The God of Promise and the Life of Faith: Understanding the Heart of the Bible (Wheaton: Crossway, 2001), 202. All of Matt. 9 is a helpful overview of Jesus’ relation to the Law and the implications for his disciple’s obedience.
19. D. A. Carson, The Sermon on the Mount: An Evangelical Exposition of Matthew 5–7 (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1978), 39.
20. Blomberg, Matthew, 103–4.
21. Dorsey, “The Law of Moses and the Christian, 331: “If on the one hand the evidence strongly suggests that the corpus is no longer legally binding upon Christians, there is equally strong evidence in the NT that all 613 laws are profoundly binding upon Christians in a revelatory and pedagogical sense.” For a helpful discussion of “principlism” in applying the Old Testament, see William W. Klein, Craig L. Blomberg, and Robert L. Hubbard Jr., Introduction to Biblical Interpretation (Dallas: Word, 1993), 278–83; and J. Daniel Hays, “Applying the Old Testament Law Today,” BibSac 158 (January–March 2001): 21–35.
1. E.g., Luz, Matthew, 1:277–79. Several have attempted to show both continuity and discontinuity but tend to emphasize discontinuity between the Mosaic law and Jesus’ teaching; e.g., Banks, Jesus and the Law, 203–26; Frank Thielman, The Law and the New Testament: The Question of Continuity (New York: Crossroad, 1999), 49–58.
2. Carson, Sermon on the Mount, 40: “Jesus appears to be concerned with two things: 1) overthrowing erroneous traditions, and 2) indicating authoritatively the real direction toward which the OT Scriptures point.”
3. Walter C. Kaiser Jr., “Exodus,” EBC, 2:424–25.
4. See 2 Kings 16:3; 21:6; Jer. 32:35; cf. 7:31–32; 19:1–13.
6. For a helpful discussion and numerous illustrations of various coinage see D. H. Wheaton, “Money,” IBD, 2:1018–23; also John W. Betlyon, “Coinage,” ABD, 1:1076–89; Rousseau and Arav, “Coins and Money,” Jesus and His World, 55–61.
7. Note that here no explicit interpretation is countered, although this antithesis goes with the next, which enunciates interpretations common in Jesus’ day.
8. See the powerful allegory on marital faithfulness in Prov. 5:15–23.
9. Davies and Allison, Matthew, 1:524–26. Jesus gives similar warnings in 18:8–9 in the context of maintaining the oneness of the community.
10. For a thought-provoking call to sexual purity, see John R. W. Stott, The Message of the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5–7): Christian Counter-Culture (BST; Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1978), 86–91.
11. Markus Bockmuehl, “Matthew 5.32; 19.9 in the Light of Pre-Rabbinic Halakah,” NTS 35 (1989): 291–95; D. C. Allison Jr., “Divorce, Celibacy, and Joseph,” JSNT 49 (1993): 3–10.
12. See Ex. 20:7; Lev. 19:12; Num. 30:2; Deut. 23:21–23.
13. Josephus, J.W. 2:135; see also Sir. 23:9, 11; Philo, On the Decalogue 84–95.
14. See John E. Hartley, Leviticus (WBC 4; Dallas: Word, 1992), 412–14. The Mishnah speaks of financial recompense for a variety of offenses but speaks of literal life for life for murder (cf. m. B. Qam. 8:1–6).
15. Ibid., 412; Earl S. Kalland, “Deuteronomy,” EBC, 3:126.
16. Saul Lieberman, Greek in Jewish Palestine: Studies in the Life and Manners of Jewish Palestine in the II-IV Centuries C.E. (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1942), 179–83.
17. For background, see Horsley and Hanson, Bandits, Prophets, and Messiahs, 30–43.
18. BDAG, 80. Only occurring here in Matthew, the term connotes taking justice into one’s own hands.
19. Hays, The Moral Vision of the New Testament, 326.
20. Douglas R. Edwards, “Dress and Ornamentation,” ABD, 2:232–38.
21. John distinguishes between Jesus’ outer garment (himation), which the soldiers divided, and the “undergarment” (chiton), which was seamless (John 19:23–24). He uses the same two words as Matthew.
22. This word means “a thousand paces” (BDAG, 651) or approximately one mile. For a helpful chart showing equivalent distances, see H. Wayne House, Chronological and Background Charts of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1981), 26.
23. The verb apostrepho has the basic meaning “to turn away, turn back,” though it can also be used to mean “to defraud” (BDAG, 122–23). The former is more likely here.
24. E.g., Acts 22:29; 1 Thess. 3:10. See below for discussion.
25. Using the translation of Geza Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls in English, 2d ed. (New York: Penguin, 1975), 72. See also Hill, Matthew, 129; Ito, “Matthew and the Community of the Dead Sea Scrolls,” 27–28.
26. Spencer, “Father-Ruler,” 440–41.
27. Morris, Matthew, 133.
28. E.g., 1 Cor. 14:20; Eph. 4:13; Heb. 5:14; 6:1. This is the meaning adopted by William Hendriksen, Exposition of the Gospel According to Matthew (NTC; Grand Rapids: Baker, 1973), 317–19.
29. See Keener (A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew, 181–82) for discussion of Jesus’ teaching method in relationship to parallels within Judaism.
30. Kingsbury, Matthew As Story, 66.
31. See the introduction as well as comments on 28:20.
32. See the United States National Archives and Records Administration website: http://www.nara.gov/exhall/charters/billrights/billmain.html.
33. Ellis Bush Jr., Did Jesus Use a Modem at the Sermon on the Mount? Inspirational Thoughts for the Information Age (Mukilteo, Wa.: Winepress, 1997), 7.
34. C. S. Lewis, The Weight of Glory and Other Addresses, repr. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965), 14–15.
35. For a helpful overview, see David Instone-Brewer, Divorce and Remarriage in the 1st and 21st Century (Grove Biblical Series 19; Cambridge: Grove, 2001), and his longer treatment, Divorce and Remarriage in the Bible: The Social and Literary Context (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002).
36. A just war is noted to have seven distinctives: (1) just cause; (2) just intention; (3) last resort; (4) formal declaration; (5) limited objectives; (6) proportionate means; (7) noncombatant immunity; see Arthur F. Holmes, “The Just War,” in War: Four Christian Views, ed. Robert G. Clouse (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1981), 120–21.
37. For a popular treatment, see Michael J. Wilkins, “What Jesus Loved,” Moody Magazine 100.3 (January–February 2000): 25–27.
38. Tasker (Matthew, 70) is uneasy about using “perfect” to render Matt. 5:48, calling it a “misleading translation of teleios, and is largely responsible for the erroneous doctrine of ‘perfectionism.’ ”
39. Guthrie, New Testament Theology, 663: “The pursuit of the ideal will never be understood unless some element of the impossible is recognized in Jesus’ demands. No man who considers himself to have attained perfection already has a right understanding of perfection.”
1. BDAG, 653; Louw-Nida, “μισθός—38.14, 57.173,” 491, 577; it can be used also to indicate recompense for evil deeds.
2. The reward for walking in obedience to the covenant would be rewarded with a profound visitation of God’s blessing: “And the visitation of those who walk in it will be for healing, plentiful peace in a long life, fruitful offspring with all everlasting blessings, eternal enjoyment with endless life, and a crown of glory with majestic raiment in eternal light” (1QS 4:6–8).
3. “Simeon the Just,” DJBP, 586.
4. See Acts 9:36; 10:2; 24:17; cf. Tob. 1:3, 16; 4:7–8; Sir. 7:10.
5. The term occurs thirteen times in Matthew, but elsewhere in the New Testament only four times.
6. See I. Howard Marshall, “Who Is a Hypocrite?” Part 2, “Four ‘Bad’ Words in the New Testament,” BibSac 159 (April–June 2002): 131–50 (see esp. 137, 149–50).
7. For a historical overview of the practice within Judaism, see Lee I. Levine, The Ancient Synagogue: The First Thousand Years (New Haven, Conn.: Yale Univ. Press, 2000), 510–23.
8. Josephus, Ant. 14.65.
9. I. Howard Marshall, “Jesus—Example and Teacher of Prayer in the Synoptic Gospels,” Into God’s Presence: Prayer in the New Testament, ed. Richard N. Longenecker (McMaster New Testament Studies; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001), 126.
11. M. M. B. Turner, “Prayer in the Gospels and Acts,” Teach Us to Pray: Prayer in the Bible and the World, ed. D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1990), 64. The actual text of one of Jesus’ prayers is found in John 17, which is the Lord’s own intercessory prayer.
12. N. T. Wright, “The Lord’s Prayer as a Paradigm of Christian Prayer,” Into God’s Presence, 132.
13. See Michael J. Wilkins, “Prayer,” DLNTD, 947.
14. Hendriksen, Matthew, 325.
15. See Geza Vermes, The Religion of Jesus the Jew (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993), 152–83.
16. E.g., Jub. 1:24, 28; 19:29; Jos. Asen. 12:14; Sir. 23:1, 4; Wisd. Sol. 2:16–20; 14:3; Tob. 13:4; 4Q372; 1QH 9:35. See “Father, God As,” DJBP, 224.
17. For examples, see James H. Charlesworth, “A Caveat on Textual Transmission and the Meaning of Abba: A Study of the Lord’s Prayer,” in The Lord’s Prayer and Other Prayer Texts from the Greco-Roman Era, ed. James H. Charlesworth with Mark Harding and Mark Kiley (Valley Forge, Pa.: Trinity Press International, 1994), 7.
18. This image is prevalent throughout the SM (cf. 5:16, 45, 48; 6:26, 33; 7:11).
19. B. T. Viviano, “Hillel and Jesus on Prayer,” Hillel and Jesus: Comparisons of Two Major Religious Leaders, ed. James H. Charlesworth and Loren L. Johns (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1997), 449–50. See also James D. G. Dunn, “Prayer,” DJG, 617.
21. Viviano, “Hillel and Jesus on Prayer,” 449.
22. Wright, “The Lord’s Prayer,” 135.
23. See 1 Cor. 16:22; Did. 10.6; cf. Rev. 22:20.
24. Wilkins, “Prayer,” 947; Ralph P. Martin, Worship in the Early Church, rev. ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974), 32–33.
25. Turner, “Prayer in the Gospels and Acts,” 65.
26. See Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral, 100–101, 108.
27. For overviews of this word, see Betz, Sermon on the Mount, 396–99; Davies and Allison, Matthew, 1:607–10; Hagner, Matthew 1:149–50; Morris, Matthew, 146 n.43.
28. This is the view of Betz, The Sermon on the Mount.
29. A reference to a prayer one gives at the very beginning of a day or before one retires for the night, asking for provision for the next day. “Give us bread for the day that is beginning.” Davies and Allison, Matthew, 1:609 adopt this view.
30. “Bread for the coming day,” with reference to the eschatological day of the Lord and the eschatological banquet. The disciples are to pray for the experience of that blessing today. This eschatological reading is taken by Hagner, Matthew 1:149–50.
31. BDF, 123[1]: this is “conceptually and grammatically the most plausible explanation.” The difficulty is that this seems redundant with semeron, “today,” = “give to us today our bread for the present day.” But see discussion.
32. Paul will later help the church achieve a rightful balance (e.g., 2 Thess. 3:6–15; 1 Tim. 5–6).
33. See P. S. Cameron, “Lead Us Not into Temptation,” ExpTim 101 (1990): 299–301.
34. b. Ber. 60b, cited in Joachim Jeremias, New Testament Theology: The Proclamation of Jesus (New York: Scribner’s, 1971), 202.
35. Morris, Matthew, 148–49, takes it in the latter sense. Others have suggested that this is a “litotes,” a figure of speech that expresses one thing by negating the opposite; e.g., the expression “not a few” means “many.” Disciples are to pray that God will lead them, not into temptation, but away from it, into righteousness, into situations where, far from being tempted, they will be protected and kept righteous; Carson, Sermon on the Mount, 70.
36. Bruce Chilton, Jesus’ Prayer and Jesus’ Eucharist: His Personal Practice of Spirituality (Valley Forge, Pa.: Trinity Press International, 1997), 46–47.
37. For discussion, see TCGNT, 13–14; Betz, Sermon on the Mount, 414–15.
38. BDB, 776, 847; see Hartley, Leviticus, 242; R. Laird Harris, “Leviticus,” EBC, 2:591.
39. For a clearly developed overview, see Herbert L. Petri, “Motivation,” Encyclopedia Britannica <http://www.britannica.com/eb/article?eu=115599> [Accessed April 27, 2002].
40. Ronald C. Doll, “Motives and Motivation,” Baker’s Dictionary of Christian Ethics, ed. Carl F. H. Henry (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1973), 437–38.
41. Harold H. Hoehner, “Rewards,” NDBT, 740.
42. Cf. ibid.: “A soldier’s primary motivation should be to serve his country, though he may receive medals as a reward for his service. In the same way, true servants of God should not be centred on themselves but on the Lord whom they love and serve.”
43. Doll, “Motives and Motivation,” 438.
44. Richard J. Foster, Celebration of Discipline: The Path to Spiritual Growth, rev. ed. (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1988).
45. Dallas Willard, The Spirit of the Disciplines: Understanding How God Changes Lives (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1988), 156–75.
46. Donald S. Whitney, Spiritual Disciplines for the Christian Life (Colorado Springs: NavPress, 1991), 21.
47. Alexander Balmain Bruce, “The Synoptic Gospels,” The Expositor’s Greek Testament (1897; repr.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976), 1:116.
48. See D. A. Carson, “When Is Spirituality Spiritual?” JETS 37 (September 1994): 381–94.
49. See a more complete development of this theme in Wilkins, “Eliminating Elitism” (forthcoming).
50. Marshall, “Jesus—Example and Teacher of Prayer in the Synoptic Gospels,” 126.
51. For a listing of references to fasting in the Bible and their classification as individual or corporate, see Kent D. Berghuis, “A Biblical Perspective on Fasting,” BibSac 158 (January–March 2001): 86–103, esp. 97–101.
1. Cf. 1QS 10.18–19; Sir. 31:8–11.
2. Job 4:19; Isa. 50:9; 51:8.
3. E.g., Mal. 3:11. See BDAG, 184–85. Greek has another word for rust that destroys metal—ios (see James 5:3).
4. The saying is personalized to the individual disciple by the switch from the second person plural “you” in 6:19–20 to the second person singular in 6:21.
5. See D. C. Allison Jr., “The Eye Is the Lamp of the Body (Matthew 6.22–23 = Luke 11.34–36),” NTS 33 (1987): 61–83.
6. See T. Iss. 3:4; 4:1–2, 5–6; 5:1.
7. Susan Eastman, “The Evil Eye and the Curse of the Law: Galatians 3.1 Revisited,” JSNT 83 (September 2001): 69–87, esp. 77.
8. See BDAG, 104 for this sense of haplous: “motivated by singleness of purpose so as to be open and above board.”
9. See Davies and Allison (Matthew, 1:639–41) for discussion of the background.
10. G. Harder, “πονηρός,” TDNT, 6:555–56. See also T. Benj. 4:2–3; cf. 6:5–7.
11. Hagner, Matthew, 1:159: “Metaphorically speaking, a generous eye or the single eye of discipleship is the source of light; an evil, covetous eye is the source of darkness.”
13. Marvin A. Powell, “Weights and Measures,” ABD, 4:899.
14. Irene and Walter Jacob, “Flora,” ABD, 2:813; Pixner, With Jesus Through Galilee According to the Fifth Gospel, 37.
15. Ps. 37:2; 102:4, 11; 129:6; Isa. 40:6–8; quoted in 1 Peter 1:24–25; James 1:10; see “Grass,” DBI, 348–49.
16. See 6:30; 8:26; 16:8; 14:31, 17:20; Luke 12:28; cf. also oligopistia in Matt. 17:20.
17. Craig Blomberg, “On Wealth and Worry,” Criswell Theological Review 6 (1992): 72–89, esp. 82.
18. Morris, Matthew, 157.
19. Thomas E. Schmidt, “Burden, Barrier, Blasphemy: Wealth in Matt. 6:33, Luke 14:33, and Luke 16:15,” TrinJ n.s. 9 (1988): 171–89, esp. 174–75.
20. But for similar sayings, see Prov. 27:1; b. Sanh. 100b; b. Ber. 9a; Hagner, Matthew, 1:166.
21. Rodney Stark, “Antioch as the Social Situation for Matthew’s Gospel,” Social History of the Matthean Community: Cross Disciplinary Approaches, ed. David L. Balch (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991), 194.
22. Horsley and Hanson, Bandits, Prophets, and Messiahs, 53–54.
23. See Seán Freyne, “Economic Realities and Social Stratification” and “How Revolutionary Was Galilee,” Galilee from Alexander the Great to Hadrian, 155–255.
24. See, e.g., 1 En. 108:8–9: “Those who love God have loved neither gold nor silver, nor all the good things which are in the world, but have given over their bodies to suffering—who from the time of their very being have not longed after earthly food, and who regarded themselves as a (mere) passing breath.”
25. Christine Gorman, “The Science of Anxiety,” Time 159 (June 10, 2002): 46–54.
26. Ibid., 46.
27. Chapel message for the Doctor of Ministry students and faculty at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, November 9, 1998.
28. Max Lucado, Traveling Light for Mothers (Nashville: W Publishing Group, 2002), 65.
29. Ibid., 74–75.
30. Henry Smith, “Give Thanks with A Grateful Heart,” words and music: © 1978 Integrity’s Hosanna! Music, Glyndley Manor, Stone Cross, Pevensey, East Sussez BN24 5BS.
1. Bruner interestingly calls the first four pericopes in ch. 7 “the Sums,” because they sum up much of the earlier teaching of the SM; Frederick Dale Bruner, Matthew 1–12, The Christbook: A Historical/Theological Commentary (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1987), 272.
2. Morris, Matthew, 167: “Jesus is drawing attention to a curious feature of the human race in which a profound ignorance of oneself is so often combined with an arrogant presumption of knowledge about others, especially about their faults.”
3. William F. Warren, “Focuses on Spirituality in the Sermon on the Mount,” Theological Educator 46 (1992): 121.
4. See also comments on 7:16–20; 10:11–15; 16:6, 12; 18:17–18; cf. 1 Cor. 5:5; 1 John 4:1.
5. See 1 Sam. 17:43; Ps. 22:16; Prov. 26:11. For further background, see comments on Matt. 15:26–28; see also the sidebar on “Dogs and Pigs in the Ancient World,” in Wilkins, “Matthew,” 51.
6. Hagner, Matthew, 171–72.
7. See “Dog,” “Pork,” DJBP, 172; “Animals,” “Dogs,” “Swine,” DBI, 29, 213–14, 834–35; Edwin Firmage, “Zoology,” ABD, 6:1130–35, 1143–44.
8. Wilkins, “Prayer,” DLNTD, 941–48.
9. John Broadus, Matthew: An American Commentary (Valley Forge, Pa.: Judson, 1886), 158.
10. France, Matthew (1985), 144.
11. Hendricksen, Matthew, 361–62.
12. For extensive examples see Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 247 n. 231.
13. France, Matthew (1985), 145.
14. Guelich, Sermon on the Mount, 361–62; France, Matthew (1985), 145; Carson, “Matthew,” 188; Morris, Matthew, 172; Davies and Allison, Matthew, 1:688–89.
15. See P. S. Alexander, “Jesus and the Golden Rule,” in Hillel and Jesus, 363–88.
16. For other examples, see Betz, The Sermon on the Mount, 509–16.
17. These definitions are from Webster’s Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language (Avenel, N. J.: Gramercy, 1989).
18. Bruce, “The Synoptic Gospels,” 116.
19. I developed this fully in Michael J. Wilkins, “Balance as a Key to Discipleship,” Ratio: Essays in Christian Thought 1/1 (Spring 1993): 45–64.
1. Cf. Hagner, Matthew, 1:179.
2. The verb used here is a form of thlibo, which is a cognate with the common word for “tribulation” (thlipsis), normally indicating persecution.
3. E.g., Tasker, Matthew, 82; Richard B. Gardner, Matthew (Scottdale, Pa.: Herald, 1991), 136.
4. E.g., Betz, Sermon on the Mount, 524–26, Carson, “Matthew,” 189–90; Davies and Allison, Matthew 1:697–99; France, Matthew, 146–47.
5. Josephus, J.W. 2.259. Among the more popular of these leaders of movements were Theudas (c. A.D. 45; see Ant. 20.97–98), the prophet from Egypt (c. A.D. 56; see Ant. 20.169–71; J.W. 2.261–63), and Jesus son of Hananiah (c. A.D. 62–69; see J.W. 6.300–309). For an overview of these groups, see Horsley and Hanson, Bandits, Prophets, and Messiahs, 160–89.
6. See also 2 Cor. 11:11–15; 2 Peter 2:1–3, 17–22.
7. Günther Bornkamm, “End-Expectation and Church in Matthew’s Gospel,” Tradition and Interpretation in Matthew, ed. Günther Bornkamm, Gerhard Barth, and Heinz Joachim Held, trans. Percy Scott (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1963), 41–43.
8. See 9:38; 21:3; 22:43–45; 23:38; 24:42; 25:37, 44. France, Matthew: Evangelist and Teacher, 287–88.
9. See also 10:32, 33; 11:27; 12:50; 16:17; 18:10, 19; 20:23; 25:34; 26:39, 42, 53.
10. For a scholarly discussion of fiery judgment in Matthew’s Gospel, see David C. Sim, Apocalyptic Eschatology in the Gospel of Matthew (SNTSMS 88; Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1996), esp. 130–39.
11. Guelich, Sermon on the Mount, 419–21.
12. Attributed to Elisha ben Abuyah in Abot de-Rabbi Nathan, A 24 (p. 77); cited in Vermes, The Religion of Jesus the Jew, 102.
13. Gordon Franz, “The Parable of the Two Builders,” Archaeology in Biblical World 3 (1995): 6–11.
14. Wilkins, Discipleship in the Ancient World and Matthew’s Gospel, 150–52.
15. Kingsbury, “The Verb AKOLOUTHEIN,” 61.
16. Wilkins, Discipleship in the Ancient World and Matthew’s Gospel, 229–30; Guelich, Sermon on the Mount, 419–21; T.W. Manson, The Teaching of Jesus, 2d ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1935), 19.
17. Augustine, Sermon on the Mount 2.24.79. All citations of the early church fathers in this section are from the collection by Simonetti, Matthew 1–13, 152–58. Later authors are all cited directly.
18. A recent example is the ongoing Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture series, Thomas C. Oden, gen. ed.
19. Bruner, Matthew, 1:283.
20. Calvin, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, 1:233.
21. Bruner, Matthew, 1:283.
22. Chrysostom, The Gospel of Matthew, Homily 23.5.
23. Augustine, Sermon on the Mount 2.24.79.
24. Simonetti, Matthew 1–13, 155 n.19.
25. Chrysostom, The Gospel of Matthew, Homily 23.7.
26. Keener, Matthew (IVPNTC; Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity, 1997), 164: “We who should be challenging unjust reasoning in the world instead often find ourselves fighting a defensive battle within our own ranks.”
27. William Barclay, The Gospel of Matthew, rev. ed. (DSB; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1975), 1:284.
28. Ibid., 1:284–85.
29. Cyril of Alexandria, Fragment 88.
30. Blomberg, Matthew, 133.
31. Stott, Sermon on the Mount, 208.
32. Cyril of Alexandria, Fragment 88.
33. Chrysostom, The Gospel of Matthew 157.
34. James Montgomery Boice, The Sermon on the Mount: An Exposition (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1972), 310–11.
35. William B. Bradbury, “My Hope Is Built on Nothing Less” (1863).
1. The miracles in chs. 8–9 are not in the chronological order followed by standard harmonies of Jesus’ life. See, e.g., the placement of the miracles in Thomas and Gundry, The NIV Harmony of the Gospels, 22–26. Matthew has theological purposes in mind as he gathers these miracle stories together in one place.
2. E.g., 8:2, 5; 9:28; 15:22, 25; 17:15; 20:30, 31, 33; see Bornkamm, “End-Expectation and Church in Matthew’s Gospel,” 41–43.
3. This is a popular interpretation among some critical commentators, beginning in 1901 with William Wrede, The Messianic Secret, trans. J. C. G. Greig (Cambridge: James Clarke, 1971) and revisited in a variety of forms to the present; e.g., C. M. Tuckett, ed., The Messianic Secret (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983).
4. A. N. Sherwin-White, Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament (Oxford: Clarendon, 1963), 123–24.
5. In Luke’s version (Luke 7:1–10), which gives greater detail, the actual request for healing of the servant is brought by some Jewish elders and then other Jewish friends. They approach Jesus out of gratitude to the centurion because he had built a synagogue for them. The centurion sensitively recognizes his own unworthiness as a Gentile to approach Jesus (7:7).
6. Gene R. Smillie, “ ‘Even the Dogs’: Gentiles in the Gospel of Matthew,” JETS 45 (March 2002): 73–97, esp. 91–97.
7. See Scot McKnight, A New Vision for Israel: The Teachings of Jesus in National Context (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 150–55.
8. E.g., Luke 16:8 refers to “sons of light,” and 1QM 17.8 refers to “sons of his truth” and “sons of his covenant.”
9. McKnight, A New Vision for Israel, 150–51.
10. Charles H. H. Scobie, “Israel and the Nations: An Essay in Biblical Theology,” TynBul 43 (1992): 283–305, esp. 293–94; Carson, “Matthew,” 203.
11. See Wilkins, “Matthew,” 55, for a recounting of the rabbi’s prayer for healing.
12. See Wilkins, “Matthew,” 56.
13. For popular discussions of the excavation of both Peter’s house and the synagogue, see Charlesworth, Jesus Within Judaism, 109–15; James F. Strange and Hershel Shanks, “Synagogue Where Jesus Preached Found at Capernaum,” Archaeology and the Bible: The Best of BAR, Volume II: Archaeology in the World of Herod, Jesus and Paul (Washington, D.C.: Biblical Archaeological Society, 1990), 200–207; Rousseau and Arav, “Capernaum (Capharnaum),” Jesus and His World, 39–47.
14. See 2:23, the “Branch” of Isa. 53:2; cf. also Matt. 12:17–21; 26:28; 27:12; 27:38.
15. Millard Erickson, Christian Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984), 836–41.
16. Carson, “Matthew,” 206.
17. E.g., Hooker, “Did the Use of Isaiah 53 to Interpret His Mission Begin with Jesus?” 88–103.
18. Hill, The Gospel of Matthew, 161; e.g., b. Sanh. 98a-b: “Surely he hath borne our griefs and carried our sins, yet we did esteem him stricken with leprosy, and smitten of God and afflicted.”
19. For an extended discussion of the identification of the prophesied Davidic messianic King with the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 52:13–53:12, see Van Groningen, Messianic Revelation in the Old Testament, 619–50.
20. See Martin Hengel, The Charismatic Leader and His Followers, trans. James Greig (New York: Crossroad, 1981), 3–15; passim.
21. Jack Dean Kingsbury, “On Following Jesus: The ‘Eager’ Scribe and the ‘Reluctant’ Disciple (Matthew 8.18–22),” NTS 34 (1988): 47–52, esp. 49.
22. Allen, Ezekiel 1–19, 38.
23. Although the dating of this portion of Enoch is debated, current scholarly opinion dates it at around the time of Herod the Great; cf. E. Isaac, “1 (Ethiopic Apocalypse of) Enoch,” The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, ed. James H. Charlesworth (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1983), 1.7.
24. In every instance in the Gospels except two, the title is found only on the lips of Jesus, but even in these (1) the audience uses this title because Jesus previously used it as a self-designation (John 12:23), and (2) the angel is simply repeating Jesus’ own words (Luke 24:7). In the rest of the New Testament the title is used of Jesus only once (Acts 7:56), except for three Old Testament allusions or quotations (Heb. 2:6 = Ps. 8:5; Rev. 1:13 and 14:14 = Dan. 7:13).
25. For a helpful overview by an evangelical scholar, see Robert H. Stein, The Method and Message of Jesus’ Teaching, rev. ed. (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1994), 135–51. For an interesting discussion by a Jewish scholar, see David Flusser, Jesus, in collaboration with R. Steven Notley, rev. ed. (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1998), 124–33.
26. E.g., Gerhardsson, “The Christology of Matthew,” in Who Do You Say That I Am? 20–21: “In the Gospel of Matthew, the status of Jesus—both in his humiliation and in his exaltation—and his entire work are covered by Son of Man sayings.”
27. E.g., Kingsbury, “On Following Jesus,” 47–52.
28. See Wilkins, Following the Master, ch. 6.
29. See Hagner, Matthew, 1:218.
30. For discussion of the social setting, see Joseph H. Hellerman, The Ancient Church As Family (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2001), 72–73.
31. Strabo, Geography 16.2; Pliny, Natural History 5.15, 71; Josephus, J.W. 3.506.
32. Freyne, “Galilee, Sea of,” ABD, 2:900; Rainer Riesner, “Archeology and Geography,” DJG, 37.
33. Nun, The Sea of Galilee, 16–44.
34. Wachsmann, The Sea of Galilee Boat, 326–28.
35. The verb indicates being extraordinarily impressed or disturbed by something and so to “wonder, marvel, be astonished.” Context determines whether this is a good or bad sense; see 8:10; 15:31; 22:22; 27:14 (cf. BDAG, 445–46).
36. Van Elderen, “Early Christianity in Transjordan,” 100–102. This is the best accounting for the variant readings in the Synoptics.
37. Hagner, Matthew, 1:225; cf. Deut. 17:6; 19:15.
38. Carson, “Matthew,” 217.
39. Num. 19:11, 14, 16; Ezek. 39:11–15.
40. Cf. Jude 6; Rev. 20:10; Jub. 10:8–9; T. Levi 18:12; 1QS 3:24–24; 4:18–20; the “Watchers” is a reference to the fallen angels (see Metzger, 1 Enoch, 13 n. 1).
41. Paul P. Levertoff, cited in Tasker, Matthew, 94.
42. For an overview of Matthew’s perspective of Jesus’ miracles, with special reference to Matthew 8–9, see Graham H. Twelftree, Jesus the Miracle Worker: A Historical and Theological Study (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1999), 102–24.
43. The other uses of exousia are 21:23, 24, 27; 28:18; a related verb, katexousiazo, “exercise authority over,” occurs in 20:25.
44. For a similar understanding see Blomberg, Matthew, 136–37.
45. For a scholarly perspective on Matthew’s view of the conflict, see Evert-Jan Vledder, Conflict in the Miracle Stories: A Socio-Exegetical Study of Matthew 8 and 9 (JSNTSup 152; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997), 243–53.
46. Sebastian Junger, The Perfect Storm: A True Story of Men Against the Sea (New York: Norton, 1997), 127–29.
47. Gary Thomas, “Wise Christians Clip Obituaries,” Knowing and Doing (Spring 2002): 12–15, 23.
1. Pixner, With Jesus Through Galilee, 35.
2. Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 291–93.
3. Thomas Long, Matthew (Westminster Bible Companion; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1997), 103–4.
4. McKnight, Turning to Jesus, 40–43.
5. “Follow me” versus “Come after me.”
6. For the evidence equating Matthew and Levi as one person, see France, Matthew: Evangelist and Teacher, 66–70.
7. Hagner, Matthew, 1:237–38.
8. Carson, “Matthew,” 224.
9. Albright and Mann, Matthew, clxxvii–clxxviii, clxxxiii–clxxxiv.
10. Cf. France, Matthew: Evangelist and Teacher, 70–74; Gundry, Matthew, 609–22.
11. Eusebius, History 3.24.6.
12. Wilkins, Following the Master, 161–62.
13. See, e.g., Philo, Vita. Cont. 40–89; 1Qsa 2.
14. Dennis E. Smith, “Table Fellowship,” ABD, 6:302–4; Neusner and Green, “Table Fellowship,” DJBP, 613.
15. J. H. Harrop, “Tax Collector,” IBD, 3:1520–21.
16. For background to the various uses of “sinner” in the Gospels, see Michael J. Wilkins, “Sinner,” DJG, 757–60; Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 294–96.
17. I. Howard Marshall, “ ‘Sins’ and ‘Sin’,” BibSac 159 (January–March 2002): 3–20.
18. E. P. Sanders, Jesus and Judaism (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985), 174.
19. See Warren Carter, “Jesus’ ‘I have come’ Statements in Matthew’s Gospel,” CBQ 60 (1998): 44–62.
20. Wilkins, “Sinner,” DJG, 760.
21. France, Matthew: Evangelist and Teacher, 169.
22. Levine, The Ancient Synagogue, 402–3.
23. D. H. Trapnell, “Health, Disease and Healing,” IBD, 2:619.
24. Twelftree, Jesus the Miracle Worker, 83–84 (see also b. Ned. 64b).
25. Wilkins, Discipleship in the Ancient World and Matthew’s Gospel, 137–41.
26. In the Apocrypha, Tobit is cured of blindness with the gall of a fish by his son Tobias (Tobit 11:7–15).
27. The “scales” that fell from Saul’s eyes when Ananias laid hands on him could be an exception, although this seems different, because Ananias did not pray for healing but rather arrived as the conduit for the giving of the Holy Spirit (Acts 9:17–19).
28. They reiterate that charge in 12:24, where they identify the prince of demons as Beelzebul and where Jesus responds to that charge.
30. “Sheep, Shepherd,” DBI, 782–85.
1. Eduard Schweizer, The Good News According to Matthew, trans. David E. Green (Atlanta: John Knox, 1975), 235–36; Filson, The Gospel According to St. Matthew, 125.
2. For discussions of the historicity of the Twelve within Jesus’ ministry, see Scot McKnight, “Jesus and the Twelve,” BBR 11 (2001): 203–31; John P. Meier, “The Circle of the Twelve: Did It Exist During Jesus’ Public Ministry?” JBL 116 (1997): 635–72; idem, A Marginal Jew: Volume III: Companions and Competitors (New York: Doubleday, 2001), 3:125–63; contra the minority opinion in Robert W. Funk and the Jesus Seminar, The Acts of Jesus: The Search for the Authentic Deeds of Jesus (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco: 1998), 71.
3. E.g., 26:14, 20; Mark 4:10; 6:7; Luke 8:1; 9:1; John 6:67, 70; Acts 6:2; etc.
4. Cf. McKnight, “Jesus and the Twelve,” 220–31; Karl H. Rengstorf, “δώδεκα,” TDNT, 2:326.
5. Cf. Seán Freyne, The Twelve: Disciples and Apostles. A Study in the Theology of the First Three Gospels (London: Sheed & Ward, 1968), 23–48; A. B. Bruce, The Training of the Twelve (repr.; Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1971), 32–33.
6. Hagner, Matthew, 1:265.
7. Cf. Gal. 1:17, 19; 1 Cor. 9:1–5; 15:7; Eph. 2:19–22.
8. Barnabas in Acts 14:4, 14; Titus in 2 Cor. 8:23; Epaphroditus in Phil. 2:25; probably Timothy and Silas also in 1 Thess. 1:1; 2:6; cf. Andronicus and Junias in Rom. 16:7. James the brother of Jesus seems to be included among the apostles in Jerusalem as a “pillar of the church” (Gal. 1:17; 2:9).
9. See the discussion in Wilkins, Following the Master, ch. 8; idem, “Disciples,” DJG, 179–81. See also Meier, A Marginal Jew, vol. 3, ch. 27. For discussions of the apocryphal traditions about the Twelve, see Hennecke, New Testament Apocrypha, 2 vols.
10. Pairs of two names are set off from each other and connected with the simple conjunction “and” (kai): e.g., “Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew”; see Carson, “Matthew,” 237.
11. Meier, A Marginal Jew, 3:130–31; Bruce, The Training of the Twelve, 36–40.
12. Matt. 14:28; 15:15; 18:21; 26:35, 40; Mark 8:29; 9:5; 10:28; John 6:68.
13. Matt. 16:17–19; cf. Acts 1:8; 2:14; 8:14; 10:34.
14. See Wilkins, Disciples in the Ancient World and Matthew’s Gospel, 174–75; also, Oscar Cullmann, Peter: Disciple—Apostle—Martyr. A Historical and Theological Essay, trans. Floyd V. Filson, 2d ed. (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1962), 19; Joseph Fitzmyer, To Advance the Gospel (New York: Crossroad, 1981), 112–13.
15. Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 311.
16. Hill, Matthew, 184–45; Morna D. Hooker, “Uncomfortable Words X: ‘The Prohibition of Foreign Missions (Mt. 10:5–6),’ ” ExpTim 82 (1971): 364.
17. E.g., Gen. 12:2–3; 22:18.
18. Douglas J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 69, 139; Wayne A. Brindle, “ ‘To the Jew First’: Rhetoric, Strategy, History, or Theology,” BibSac 159 (April–June 2002): 221–33. See also J. Julius Scott, “Gentiles and the Ministry of Jesus: Further Observations on Matt. 10:5–6; 15:21–28,” JETS 33 (1990): 161–69.
19. Kingsbury, Matthew: Structure, Christology, Kingdom, 22–23; Broadus, Matthew, 219.
20. Alfred Plummer, Matthew: An Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to Matthew (London: Stock, 1909), 149. The apostle Paul later calls upon this principle as a rationale for the support of full-time Christian workers (1 Cor. 9:14; 1 Tim. 5:18; cf. Did. 13:1–2).
21. Albright and Mann, Matthew, 212.
22. G. E. Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament, 2d ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993), 88.
23. Köstenberger and O’Brien, Salvation to the Ends of the Earth, 92–93.
24. Schweizer, Matthew, 240.
25. For more on flogging, see Wilkins, “Matthew,” 69.
26. See D. Neale, “Was Jesus a Mesith? Public Response to Jesus and His Ministry,” TynBul 44 (1993): 89–101, esp. 94–98.
27. Ben Witherington III, Jesus, Paul, and the End of the World: A Comparative Study in New Testament Eschatology (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1992), 39–42.
28. For discussion of these and other views, see Carson, “Matthew,” 250–53, who holds to the latter.
29. Blomberg, Matthew, 176; Davies and Allison, Matthew, 2:189–90. So also Gundry, Matthew, 194, though he doubts the authenticity of the saying.
30. Baal Zebub, meaning “lord of the flies” in Heb.; cf. also 12:24, 27.
31. Neusner and Green, “Beelzebul,” DJBP, 84.
32. Carter, “Jesus’ ‘I have come’ Statements in Matthew’s Gospel,” 44–62.
33. Hellerman, The Ancient Church As Family, 20–21.
34. Cf. Köstenberger and O’Brien, Salvation to the Ends of the Earth, 87–109; Donald Senior and Carroll Stuhlmueller, The Biblical Foundations for Mission (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1983), 250–51.
35. John P. Meier, “Salvation-History in Matthew: In Search of a Starting Point,” CBQ 37 (1975): 203–15.
36. Tom Brokaw, The Greatest Generation (New York: Random House, 1998).
37. Ted Olsen, “Special Report,” Christianity Today 46/8 (July 8, 2002): 18–22. The New Tribes Mission website (www.ntm.org/connect/burnham/update.shtml) gives further information and background.
38. I. Howard Marshall, The Epistles of John (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978), 86.
39. Kim A. Lawton, “The Suffering Church,” Christianity Today 40 (July 15, 1996): 54–61, 64. See also Susan Bergman, ed., Martyrs: Contemporary Writers on Modern Lives of Faith (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1996).
40. Pastor Magdangal’s story is given by Jeff M. Sellers, “How to Confront a Theocracy,” Christianity Today 46 (July 8, 2002): 34–40. The website for Christians in Crisis (www.christiansincrisis.org) gives further details and describes the organization’s mission: “CIC exists to help spread the Gospel and serves as an advocate and a voice for God’s people who are faced with crisis and persecuted due to their faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.”
41. For further discussion, see Wilkins, In His Image, 192–93.
42. See Wilkins, In His Image, 179–80.
1. See Josephus, Ant. 18.112, 119.
2. Witherington, The Christology of Jesus, 43.
3. There is a close parallel from Qumran in 4QMessianic Apocalypse (4Q521) 1, 6–8, 11–13, which lists these activities as characteristic of the coming Messiah’s ministry; see John J. Collins, “The Works of the Messiah,” DSD 1 (1994): 71–97; Flusser, Jesus, 260.
4. Edward Meadors, “The ‘Messianic’ Implications of the Q Material,” JBL 118 (1999): 259.
5. Yamasaki, John the Baptist in Life and Death, 106–10; Robert L. Webb, “Jesus’ Baptism: Its Historicity and Implications,” BBR 10 (2000): 305–7.
6. Gundry, Matthew, 214; Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 338. By substituting “you/your” for the first person (“me/[the]) in his quotation of Malachi, Jesus makes it clear that he personifies the coming of Yahweh and the eschatological Day of Yahweh.
7. The majority of interpreters follow this reasoning, including Blomberg, Matthew, 187; Carson, “Matthew,” 264–65; France, Matthew, 194–95; Hagner, Matthew, 1:305–6; Morris, Matthew, 280–81. A minority view is represented by Witherington, The Christology of Jesus, 46–47, who attempts to include John in the kingdom of heaven by suggesting that the comparison is between two ways of evaluating the human condition. But this misses the intended comparison of the stages of redemptive history; cf. Flusser, Jesus, 261–64.
8. Davies and Allison, Matthew, 2:254–55, list no fewer than seven different interpretations. For the history of interpretation, see P. S. Cameron, Violence and the Kingdom: The Interpretation of Matthew 11:12 (Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 1984).
9. The rendering of the NIV suggests this view; also Hendriksen, Matthew, 489–90; Brad H. Young, Jesus the Jewish Theologian (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1995), ch. 6.
10. Blomberg, Matthew, 187–88; Davies and Allison, Matthew, 2:256; France, Matthew, 195–96; Hagner, Matthew, 1:306–7, Morris, Matthew, 281–82; Witherington, The Christology of Jesus, 46–49.
11. Carson, “Matthew,” 266–68.
12. Cf. 11:10; France, Matthew, 194, 196; idem, Jesus and the Old Testament (Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press, 1971), 91–92, 155.
13. Cf. 12:39, 41–42, 45; 16:4; 17:17; 23:36; 24:34.
14. See M. Jack Suggs, Wisdom, Christology, and Law in Matthew’s Gospel (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Press, 1970), 36–58; followed by Boring, “Matthew,” NIB, 8:269; Davies and Allison, Matthew, 2:264–65; Hagner, Matthew, 1:311; Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 343.
15. For a brief discussion of the wisdom motif, see Eckhard J. Schnabel, “Wisdom,” NDBT, 843–48.
16. Cf. Carson, “Matthew,” 270–71; France, Matthew, 197.
17. For more on these cities, see Wilkins, “Matthew,” 74.
18. E.g., Isa. 23:1–17; Jer. 25:22; 27:3–7; Ezek. 26:2–9; Joel 3:4–8; Zech. 9:2–4.
19. Gen. 18:16–19:29; Ezek. 16:48; cf. m. Sanh. 10.3.
20. Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament, 164.
21. Stein, The Method and Message of Jesus’ Teachings, 131–35.
22. Not “the Father”; cf. also, 7:21; 10:32, 33; 12:50; 16:17; 18:10, 19; 20:23; 25:34; 26:39, 42, 53.
23. Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament, 165–66.
24. Ibid., 166.
25. Guthrie, New Testament Theology, 307.
26. m. ʾAbot 3:5; cf. m. Ber. 2:2.
27. Suggs, Wisdom, Christology and Law in Matthew’s Gospel, 107; Celia Deutsch, Hidden Wisdom and the Easy Yoke (JSNT 18; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1987), 130.
28. The New Testament elsewhere refers to the yoke of legalism (Acts 15:10; Gal. 5:1).
29. B. Charette, “’To Proclaim Liberty to the Captives’: Matthew 11.28–30 in the Light of OT Prophetic Expectation,” NTS 38 (1992): 290–97.
30. Hagner, Matthew, 1:324.
31. Hafemann, The God of Promise and the Life of Faith, 203.
32. See further on the fulfillment of this theme in Wilkins, Following the Master, 51–69.
33. Doug Webster, The Easy Yoke (Colorado Springs: NavPress, 1995), 8, 14.
34. Robert W. Funk, Honest to Jesus: Jesus for a New Millennium (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1999), 12. Much of his journey is recounted in ch. 1 (pp. 1–14) and is articulated in the chapter “Jesus for a New Age,” 297–314.
35. Bruner, Christbook: Matthew 1–12, 425, 28.
36. Webster, The Easy Yoke, 201.
1. For theological significance see Yong-Eui Yang, Jesus and the Sabbath in Matthew’s Gospel (JSNTSup 139; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997), 305–6.
2. The Qumran community restricted travel to less than a quarter of a mile (CD 10.21), the rabbis to a little over half a mile (m. Soṭah 5:3). The only New Testament reference to this travel restriction is in Acts 1:12.
3. M. Casey, “Culture and Historicity: The Plucking of the Grain (Mark 2.23–28),” NTS 34 (1988): 1–23, esp. 4–5.
4. Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 351–54.
5. Davies and Allison (Matthew, 2:310–11) list eight different interpretations. The most influential interpretations propose that Jesus indicates (1) that human necessities take precedence over legal technicalities, (2) that Jesus attacks the oral tradition, not the written Torah, (3) that doing good may condone breaking a commandment, or (4) that David as the anointed representative illustrates Jesus’ messianic authority. The interpretation offered here combines some of the truth of each of these perspectives.
6. Gundry, Matthew, 223; Davies and Allison, Matthew, 2:314.
7. Cf. Yang, Jesus and the Sabbath in Matthew’s Gospel, 187–88.
8. A classic statement of this appeal to mercy is found in David’s psalm of contrition (Ps. 51:16–17).
9. Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 357.
10. E.g., “If a man has a pain in his throat they may drop medicine into his mouth on the Sabbath, since there is doubt whether life is in danger, and whenever there is doubt whether life is in danger this overrides the Sabbath” (m. Yoma 8:6).
11. Yang, Jesus and the Sabbath in Matthew’s Gospel, 209.
12. For brief overviews of this complex subject, see Kaiser, The Messiah in the Old Testament, 173–81; Van Groningen, Messianic Revelation in the Old Testament, 575–618.
13. Richard Beaton, “Messiah and Justice: A Key to Matthew’s Use of Isaiah 42.1–4?” JSNT 75 (September 1999): 5–23.
14. See also 9:27–31; 15:30–31; 20:30–34; 21:14–15; Twelftree, Jesus the Miracle Worker, 127.
15. For a brief background see Mark Strauss, “Demonization and Exorcism in the First Century,” in “Luke,” ZIBBC (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2002), 397. See Hans Dieter Betz, ed., The Greek Magical Papyri in Translation (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1986). The closest Hellenistic parallel to Jesus’ form of exorcism appears in Philostratus, Life of Apollonius of Tyana, 4:20 (LCL), a third century A.D. document.
16. Later Judaism continued this charge into the early centuries of the church era, branding him a sorcerer (e.g., b. Sanh. 43b: “He [Yeshu] is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy”).
17. John P. Meier, Matthew (New Testament Message 3; Wilmington, Del.: Michael Glazier, 1980), 135.
18. C. E. B. Cranfield, The Gospel According to Saint Mark, 2d ed. (CGTC; Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1972), 83.
19. Meier, Matthew, 135.
20. Ralph P. Martin, “Blasphemy of the Spirit,” IBD, 1:201.
21. Cranfield, Mark, 142.
22. James D. G. Dunn, “Sign,” IBD 3:1450.
23. Note that “the sign of . . . Jonah” is not some kind of sign that Jonah brings. Rather, Jonah is the sign.
24. Hans F. Bayer, Jesus’ Predictions of Vindication and Resurrection: The Provenance, Meaning and Correlation of the Synoptic Predictions (WUNT 2/20; Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1986), 141–45, 182.
25. Cf. Gen. 42:17–18; 1 Sam. 30:12–13; 1 Kings 20:29; 2 Chron. 10:5, 12; Est. 4:16; 5:1.
26. See y. Šabb., 12a, 15, 17 (cf. b. Naz. 5b; b. Pesaḥ 4.2); cited in Gerhard Delling, “ἡμέρα,” TDNT, 2:949–50.
27. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God, 535.
28. Hagner, Matthew, 1:355.
29. From earliest times seven also had sacred associations; Gen 2:2; 4:24; 21:28; Ex. 20:10; Lev. 25:2–8.
30. See R. T. France, The Gospel of Mark (NIGTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002), 164–65; Guelich, Mark 1–8, 172–73; George Aichele, “Jesus’s Uncanny ‘Family Scene,’ ” JSNT 74 (June 1999): 29–49.
31. Carson, “Matthew,” 299.
32. Leading Roman Catholic Matthean scholars today acknowledge the difficulty of reading “brothers” as anything other than Mary’s children; e.g., Harrington comments, “It is doubtful that Matthew knew the tradition about the perpetual virginity of Mary”; Daniel J. Harrington, S.J., The Gospel of Matthew (Sacra pagina 1; Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical, 1991), 191. For an overview of this entire issue, see Richard J. Bauckham, “Relatives of Jesus,” DLNTD, 1004–6.
33. Senior, Matthew, 145.
34. Hagner, Matthew, 1:360.
35. See Wilkins, “Women in the Teaching and Example of Jesus,” 91–112.
36. Wilkins, Following the Master, 66–68; Hellerman, The Ancient Church As Family, 64–70.
37. See Wilkins, Following the Master, ch. 13.
38. For principles of applying the Old Testament today, see Contemporary Significance section of 5:17–20.
39. dc Talk and The Voice of the Martyrs, Jesus Freaks: Stories of Those Who Stood For Jesus, the Ultimate Jesus Freaks (Tulsa: Albury, 1999), 8.
40. Ibid., 135.
41. Ibid., 40.
42. Evelyn Nievese, “Judges Ban Pledge of Allegiance from Schools, Citing ‘Under God,’ ” New York Times (June 27, 2002), National Desk, 1.
43. “The Global Persecution of the Faithful,” World & I (December 2000), 18.
44. See on the Contemporary Significance section of 5:43–47.
1. Charles R. Page II, Jesus and the Land (Nashville: Abingdon, 1995), 85; Pixner, With Jesus Through Galilee According to the Fifth Gospel, 40.
2. The term ochlos in 13:2b is best rendered “crowd,” not “people” as in NIV (cf. 4:16; 26:24–25).
3. E.g., 5:14–15; 7:24–27; 9:16, 17; 11:16–19; 12:27–29, 43–45.
4. Including byword, proverb, wisdom sayings, story, and allegory. For an overview of the relationship to Jewish usage, see Vermes, The Religion of Jesus the Jew, 90–97. For an extensive discussion of parables within Jewish rabbinic literature, see David Stern, Parables in Midrash: Narrative and Exegesis in Rabbinic Literature (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Press, 1991).
5. Robert H. Stein, “The Genre of the Parables,” The Challenge of Jesus’ Parables, ed. Richard N. Longenecker (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000), 30–50.
6. Mark L. Bailey, “Guidelines for Interpreting Jesus’ Parables,” BibSac 155 (January–March 1998): 29–38.
7. John W. Sider, Interpreting the Parables: A Hermeneutical Guide to Their Meaning (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995), 88–89.
8. E.g., Joachim Jeremias, The Parables of Jesus, rev. ed. (New York: Scribner’s, 1972). A recent literary approach that tends to this view is Warren Carter and John Paul Heil, Matthew’s Parables: Audience-Oriented Perspectives (CBQMS 30; Washington, D.C.: Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1998), 1–22.
9. Cf. Klyne R. Snodgrass, “From Allegorizing to Allegorizing: A History of the Interpretation of the Parables of Jesus,” The Challenge of Jesus’ Parables, ed. Richard N. Longenecker (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000), 3–29. One who has swung back the farthest to suggest that the parables are allegories is Craig L. Blomberg, Interpreting the Parables (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1990), 29–69.
10. E.g., David Wenham, The Parables of Jesus (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1989), 41–48.
11. Ibid.
12. Blomberg, Interpreting the Parables, 226–29; cf. Guelich, Mark 1–8:26, 192.
13. Oded Borowski, “Agriculture,” ABD, 1:97–98; idem, Agriculture in Ancient Israel (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1987).
14. Joachim Jeremias, The Parables of Jesus, 149–51; Rousseau and Arav, “Agriculture, Cereals,” Jesus and His World, 8–12; Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 377–78.
15. Philip Barton Payne, “The Authenticity of the Parable of the Sower and Its Interpretation,” Gospel Perspectives, ed. R. T. France and D. Wenham (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1980), 1:181–86; Carson, “Matthew,” 305; Bailey, “The Parable of the Sower and the Soils,” 183–84.
16. Jesus begins his answer to the disciples’ question with a causal conjunction “because” (hoti; not reflected in NIV), indicating the reason why he speaks to the crowd in parables.
17. Ladd, Theology of the New Testament, 92.
18. For further discussion, see Carson, “Matthew,” 308–10.
20. Bailey, “The Parable of the Sower and the Soils,” 179.
21. Donald A. Hagner, “Matthew’s Parables of the Kingdom (Matthew 13:1–52),” The Challenge of Jesus’ Parables, 106.
22. Brad H. Young, The Parables: Jewish Tradition and Christian Interpretation (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrikson, 1998), 251–76.
23. The two phrases “worry of this life” and “deceitfulness of wealth” are the double subject of the verb “choke,” indicating a combined thorny threat to kingdom life.
24. Payne, “The Authenticity of the Parable of the Sower and Its Interpretation,” 181–86; Bailey, “The Parable of the Sower and the Soils,” 183–84.
25. E.g., see comments on 3:2; 4:17; 5:3–20; 10:7; 11:11–15; 13:11.
26. Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 387.
27. Hagner, “Matthew’s Parables of the Kingdom,” 110; Vermes, The Religion of Jesus the Jew, 100.
28. Ladd, Theology of the New Testament, 96.
29. Blomberg, Matthew, 220.
30. Morris, Matthew, 354–55.
31. Ito, “Matthew and the Community of the Dead Sea Scrolls,” 29–30.
32. Wilkins, Following the Master, 176–93.
33. Ladd, Theology of the New Testament, 94–95.
34. Carson, “Matthew,” 317; Morris, Matthew, 350. See below at 13:36.
35. The intriguing Copper Scroll found at Qumran lists sixty-four places in Palestine where treasures were apparently hidden.
36. The Mishnah required a contractual statement specifying that the sale of land included its contents (m. B. Bat. 4.9); cf. Vermes, The Religion of Jesus the Jew, 107.
37. Hagner, “Matthew’s Parables of the Kingdom,” 117.
38. See Young, The Parables, 199–221.
39. See Wenham, The Parables of Jesus, 206–7.
40. Young, The Parables, 199–221.
41. Hagner, “Matthew’s Parables of the Kingdom,” 118.
42. Nun, Sea of Galilee and its Fishermen, 16–44.
43. Blomberg, Interpreting the Parables, 202.
44. Hagner, Matthew, 1:401–2; see Wilkins, Discipleship in the Ancient World and Matthew’s Gospel, 160–63.
46. Carson, “Matthew,” 332.
47. David E. Orton, The Understanding Scribe: Matthew and the Apocalyptic Ideal (JSNTSup 25; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1989), esp. 140–53.
48. France, Matthew, 231.
49. See the Contemporary Significance section of 7:1–12.
50. For a more complete discussion, see Wilkins, “Balance as a Key to Discipleship,” 45–64.
51. Hagner, Matthew, 1:373.
52. Alan Cole, The Gospel According to St. Mark: An Introduction and Commentary (TNTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1961), 91.
53. Ibid.
54. Willard, Renovation of the Heart, 58; his emphases.
55. Gordon D. Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), 566.
56. Willard, Renovation of the Heart, 60; his emphases.
57. “Resistance,” Encyclopædia Britannica, http://www.britannica.com/eb/article?eu=64876[Accessed August 12, 2002].
58. Sidney Greidanus, The Modern Preacher and the Ancient Text: Interpreting and Preaching Biblical Literature (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988), 340–41.
59. Cf., e.g., Bailey, “Guidelines for Interpreting Jesus’ Parables,” 29–38; Blomberg, Interpreting the Parables, 29–69; Sider, Interpreting the Parables, 13–26, 171–246; Klyne R. Snodgrass, “Parable,” DJG, 591–601; idem, “From Allegorizing to Allegorizing,” 3–29; Robert H. Stein, An Introduction to the Parables of Jesus (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1981), 15–41; Wenham, The Parables of Jesus, 11–25, 225–38.
60. Cf. Snodgrass, “From Allegorizing to Allegorizing,” 3–29; Blomberg, Interpreting the Parables, 29–69.
61. Wenham, The Parables of Jesus, 237–38.
62. Cf. Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 393.
1. E.g., Blomberg, Matthew, 227; Davies and Allison, Matthew, 2:452–54; France, Matthew, 232.
2. E.g., Carson, “Matthew,” 335; Morris, Matthew, 364.
3. Mark 6:3 calls Jesus a carpenter.
4. Morris, Matthew, 366.
5. E.g., the Gadarene demoniacs (8:28–34) and the lame man in John 5.
6. Herodias was the daughter of Aristobulus (son of Herod the Great) and Bernice (daughter of Herod the Great’s sister, Salome), which made her the half-niece of her husband Herod Philip I and Herod Antipas.
7. Josephus, Ant. 18.5.1 §§109–15.
8. For a brief overview, see Harold W. Hoehner, “Herodian Dynasty, DJG, 322–25. For the most extensive treatment of the era, see idem, Herod Antipas: A Contemporary of Jesus (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1980).
9. See “John the Baptist’s Execution by Herod Antipas as Recorded by Josephus,” in Wilkins, “Matthew,” 90.
10. On John’s imprisonment at Machaerus, see Josephus, Ant. 18.112, 119.
11. Wilkins, Following the Master, 86–88, 253–56.
12. France, Matthew, 236; Hagner, Matthew, 2:417.
13. Carson, “Matthew,” 340–41; Morris, Matthew, 417.
14. See Mark 6:32–44; Luke 9:10–17; John 6:1–15.
15. There are harmonization difficulties in connection with Mark’s reference to Bethsaida as the location the disciples head toward after this miracle (Mark 6:45) and Luke’s reference to the feeding miracles as occurring at Bethsaida (Luke 9:10); it is beyond the scope of this commentary to solve them.
16. Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 403–4.
17. Hagner, Matthew, 2:418.
18. Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 405.
19. R. Bultmann/D. Lührmann, “φάντασμα,” TDNT, 9:6. The term occurs only here and in Mark 6:49.
20. Peterson, Engaging with God, 85–86.
21. Douglas R. Edwards, “Gennesaret,” ABD, 2:963.
22. Cf. Wilkins, Discipleship in the Ancient World, 163–72.
23. See 14:28–31; 15:15; 16:17–19; 17:24–27; 18:21.
24. Myron S. Augsburger, Matthew (The Communicator’s Commentary; Waco, Tex.: Word, 1982), 182.
25. Hagner, Matthew, 1:406: “The primary mistake of the people of Nazareth was their automatic limitation of Jesus to the familiar framework in which they had previously known him. This made them unable to evaluate Jesus in terms of his message and deeds.”
26. Pheme Perkins, Peter: Apostle for the Whole Church (Studies on Personalities of the New Testament, gen. ed. D. Moody Smith; Columbia, S.C.: Univ. of South Carolina Press, 1994), 18–21.
27. See the graph in the introduction that plots Peter’s actions in Matthew’s Gospel, dramatically illustrating his vacillation of faith.
28. For Matthew’s portrait of Peter and his developing leadership role, see Wilkins, Discipleship in the Ancient World and Matthew’s Gospel, 173–216, 264.
29. John Ortberg, “If You Want to Walk on Water, You’ve Got to Get Out of the Boat,” Pathways 1/1 (Fall–Winter 2001), 11. This is an excerpt from the book of the same name (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001).
30. I recount this story more fully in Wilkins, In His Image, 157–59.
31. Peterson, Engaging with God, 283–85.
32. Lucado, In the Eye of the Storm, 182.
1. On Pharisees and teachers of the law, see 3:7; 5:20; 8:19. See also D. R. de Lacey, “In Search of a Pharisee,” TynBul 43.2 (1992): 353–72.
2. Samuel Sandmel, Judaism and Christian Beginnings (New York: Oxford, 1978), 103.
3. Comparing the Sadducees and the Pharisees, Josephus said that they had significant differences, among them, “the Sadducees having the confidence of the wealthy alone but no following among the populace, while the Pharisees have the support of the masses” (Josephus, Ant. 13.10.6, §298).
4. Cf. Rousseau and Arav, “Tyre and Sidon,” Jesus and His World, 327–28.
5. See “Dog,” DJBP, 172; “Animals,” “Dogs,” DBI, 29, 213–14.
6. See F. Gerald Downing, “The Woman from Syrophoenicia, and Her Doggedness: Mark 7:24–31 (Matthew 15:21–28),” Women in the Biblical Tradition, ed. George J. Brooke (Studies in Women and Religion 31; Lewiston N. Y.: Edwin Mellen, 1992), 129–49.
7. Smillie, “ ‘Even the Dogs’: Gentiles in the Gospel of Matthew,” 73–97; esp. 93–95; T. W. Manson, “Only to the House of Israel?” in Facet Books Biblical Series 9 (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1964), 22–23.
8. Scott, “Gentiles and the Ministry of Jesus,” 161–69.
9. Carson, “Matthew,” 356–57.
10. For further discussion, see the feeding of the five thousand in 14:13–21.
11. Cf. Hagner, Matthew, 451–52; less convinced is Carson, “Matthew,” 359.
12. Gundry, Matthew, 322; Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 420; Rousseau and Arav, “Magdala,” Jesus and His World, 189–90.
13. Some conjecture that removing the first syllable of Migdal Nunya could give rise to a form Dalnunya, similar to Dalmanutha (Mark 8:10); cf. Gundry, Matthew, 322; Blomberg, Matthew, 247 n.87.
14. James F. Strange, “Magdala,” ABD, 4:463–64.
15. Dodo Joseph Shenhav, “Loaves and Fishes Mosaic Near Sea of Galilee Restored,” BAR 10 (1984): 22–31. Only a mile from here the famous first-century fishing boat was found (see comments on 4:21).
16. This is different from Mark, who gives an extended description of the Pharisaic practices, explaining for his audience what lies behind this controversy (Mark 7:3–4).
17. Note that after the permanent destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in A.D. 70 and the scattering of the Jews, the need for relevant and authoritative application of the Old Testament to daily life became even more pronounced, and ultimately the binding traditions of the elders were codified and written to produce the Mishnah.
18. An evil motive would be like a son who intentionally wanted to avoid the obligation of giving something useful to his needy parents. He then would dedicate it to God for a future offering, so that giving it to anyone else was prohibited. In the meantime the son retained possession and use of the item for himself, and he intentionally dishonored the obligation to his parents.
19. For example, a group within the Presbyterian Church (USA) has tried for several years to have an amendment adopted that would remove from the PC (USA)’s constitution a provision requiring that candidates for ordination “live either in fidelity within the covenant of marriage between a man and a woman, or chastity in singleness.” Proponents of the amendment hoped to clear the way for the ordination of gay and lesbian Presbyterians. This has been voted down consistently by the presbyteries, but appears to continue to be an inflammatory issue within the denomination. For a recent report on this controversy, see http://www.pcusa.org/pcnews/02389.htm.
20. Catechism of the Catholic Church (Mahwah, N.J.: Paulist, 1994), par. 81.
21. E.g., Timothy Ware, The Orthodox Church (London: Penguin, 1993), 202.
22. For a helpful overview of these issues, see Robert L. Saucy, Scripture: Its Power, Authority, and Relevance (Nashville: Word, 2001), 230–40.
23. Martin Luther, “The Freedom of a Christian,” Luther’s Works, 31:349; cited in Saucy, Scripture, 248.
24. John Piper, Desiring God: Meditations of a Christian Hedonist, expanded ed. (Sisters, Ore.: Multnomah, 1996), 83–84.
25. Ibid., 83.
26. E.g., Beare, Matthew, 341–42.
27. Frederick W. Schmidt, “Jesus and the Salvation of the Gentiles,” in Through No Fault of Their Own? The Fate of Those Who Have Never Heard, ed. William V. Crockett and James G. Sigountos (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1991), 97–105.
1. James D. G. Dunn, “Sign,” IBD, 3:1450.
2. Bayer, Jesus’ Predictions of Vindication and Resurrection, 141–45, 182.
3. I have explored this perspective more fully in Wilkins, The Concept of Disciple in Matthew’s Gospel, 134, 165–66, 230–31.
4. See Wilkins, “Matthew,” 102.
5. Cf. John 6:14; 7:40, 52; Acts 3:17–22; 7:37.
6. Flusser, “Son of Man,” Jesus, 124–25.
7. The prophet Jeremiah is named three times in Matthew and nowhere else in the New Testament; see comments on 2:17 and 27:9.
8. Knowles, Jeremiah in Matthew’s Gospel, 81–94.
9. Since Jesus posed the question to the group of disciples (the “you” is pl. in 16:15), Peter functions at least in part as spokesman for the Twelve. This is the third of five incidents unique to Matthew in which Peter figures prominently (14:28–31; 15:15; 16:17–19; 17:24–27; 18:21).
10. For overviews of the prophecies in Samuel, see Ronald F. Youngblood, “1, 2 Samuel,” EBC, 3:879–96. Somewhat differently, see Philip E. Satterthwaite, “David in the Books of Samuel: A Messianic Hope?” in The Lord’s Anointed, 41–65.
11. See, e.g., Lawrence H. Schiffman, The Eschatological Community of the Dead Sea Scrolls: A Study of the Rule of the Congregation (SBLMS 38; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989).
12. See 7:21; 10:32–33; 11:25–27; 12:50; 15:13; 18:35; 20:23; 24:36; 25:34; 26:39, 42; 26:53; 28:19.
13. For an overview, see Marinus de Jonge, “Messiah,” ABD, 4:777–88; for an evaluation of the concept, as well as explicit terminology, see Edward Meadors, “The ‘Messianic’ Implications of the Q Material,” JBL 118 (1999): 253–77.
14. See the additional perspective that John’s Gospel gives in John 1:41; 3:28; 4:25–26, 29.
15. Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 424–25, n. 72.
16. See Wilkins, The Concept of Disciple in Matthew’s Gospel, 186–87.
17. Cf. P. Bonnard, L’Evangile selon Saint Matthieu, 2d ed. (CNT; Neuchâtel: Delachaux et Niestlé, 1970), 244.
18. Most commentators agree that the significant feature of the Christological statement concerned the confession of Jesus as “Son of God,” which is the similar confession of 14:33; cf. Jack Dean Kingsbury, “The Figure of Peter in Matthew’s Gospel as a Theological Problem,” JBL 98 (1979): 74 n. 25; idem, Matthew, 78–83; Carson, “Matthew,” 367; Gundry, Matthew, 330; Schweizer, Matthew, 340; Hill, Matthew, 260; Tasker, Matthew, 159.
19. M. D. Goulder, Midrash and Lection in Matthew (London: SPCK, 1974), 387.
20. Contra Beare, Matthew, 354; T. W. Manson, The Sayings of Jesus, 2d ed. (London: SCM, 1999), 204.
21. E.g., Schweizer (Matthew, 341) calls this the Matthean bestowal of the name.
22. Cf. W. Mundle, “πέτρα,” NIDNTT, 3:383; Josef Blank, “The Person and Office of Peter in the New Testament,” trans. Erika Young, in Truth and Certainty, ed. Edward Schillebeeckx and Bas van Iersel (Concilium 83; New York: Herder & Herder, 1973), 50.
23. For an overview of the history of this discussion see Oscar Cullmann, Peter: Disciple—Apostle—Martyr. A Historical and Theological Essay, 2d ed. (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1962), 155–70; J. A. Burgess, A History of the Exegesis of Matthew 16:17–19 from 1781 to 1965 (Ann Arbor: Edwards Brothers, 1976); and Raymond E. Brown, Karl P. Donfried, and John Reumann, eds., Peter in the New Testament (Minneapolis/New York: Augsburg/Paulist, 1973).
24. Fitzmyer, “Aramaic Kephaʾ and Peter’s Name in the New Testament,” in To Advance the Gospel, 115.
25. Cullmann, Peter, 18–19; Mundle, “πέτρα,” 3:383.
26. Colin Brown, “πέτρα,” NIDNTT, 3:386.
27. This was the interpretation of most of the early church fathers, although very early many fought against its use for establishing any kind of papacy (e.g., Ignatius, Justin, Origen, Tertullian, Cyprian, Firmilian; see Cullmann, Peter, 159–62). This became the view of the Roman Catholic Church and is held today by scholars such as those represented in Brown, Donfried, and Reumann, Peter, 92–93. However, it is the dominant view held of those of a broader confessional background, such as Albright and Mann, Matthew, 197; Carson, “Matthew,” 367–69; France, Matthew, 254–55; Morris, Matthew, 422–24; Stendahl, “Matthew,” 787.
28. This view was held early in church history by John Chrysostom and attested to by Origen, Eusebius, Ambrose, and Theodore of Mopsuestia (cf. Cullmann, Peter, 162; Brown, Donfried, and Reumann, Peter, 93). More recently this has been proposed by Allen, Matthew, 176; Alan McNeile, The Gospel According to St. Matthew (London: Macmillan, 1915), 241; Mundle, “πέτρα,” 384–85, and Chrys C. Caragounis, Peter and the Rock 58 (BZNW 58; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1990).
29. Caragounis, Peter and the Rock, esp. 88–119.
30. This is a view held by Luther (cited in Cullmann, Peter, 162), and early this century by A. B. Bruce, “The Gospel According to Matthew,” The Expositor’s Greek Testament, vol. 1 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, repr. 1976), 224; cf. also Tasker, Matthew, 162.
31. E.g., 21:42, though the term used is lithos; 1 Cor. 10:4, where petra occurs.
32. E.g., 1 Cor. 3:11; 1 Peter 2:4–8.
33. This view was held as early as Origen and Augustine (cf. Cullmann, Peter, 162; Brown, Donfried, and Reumann, Peter, 93 n. 216). This was also the major view of Luther, Calvin, and many of the Reformers (cf. Cullmann, Peter, 162–63).
34. See Carson, “Matthew,” 367–69, for other valuable support.
35. Cf. Oscar Cullmann, “πέτρος,” TDNT, 6:108.
36. Some refer to this as a prime example of biblical exegesis losing to theological eisegesis; cf. Cullmann, Peter, 214ff.; Colin Brown, “The Teaching Office of the Church,” Churchman 83 (1969), 187ff.
37. Carson, “Matthew,” 368.
38. Isa. 38:10; Wisd. Sol. 16:13; 3 Macc. 5:51; Pss. Sol. 16.2.
39. Job 38:17; Ps. 9:13; 107:18; cf. 1QH 6:24–26.
40. McNeile, Matthew, 242.
41. For an historical overview of this saying, see Jack P. Lewis, “ ‘The Gates of Hell Shall Not Prevail Against It’ (Matt 16:18): A Study of the History of Interpretation,” JETS 38.3 (1995): 349–67.
42. Brown, Donfried, and Reumann, Peter, 96, 100–101.
43. Blank, “Peter,” 51; Manson, Sayings, 205; Stendahl, “Matthew,” 787.
44. Bonnard, Matthieu, p. 246; Kingsbury, “Peter,” 76 n. 27.
45. Cf. a similar saying in Luke 11:52, where Jesus charges the scribes and Pharisees with taking away the “keys of knowledge.” See Dietrich Müller, Colin Brown, “κλείς,” NIDNTT, 2:732; Donald Guthrie, New Testament Theology (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1981), 714.
46. Müller, Brown, “κλείς,” 732.
47. Guthrie, Theology, 714.
48. Müller, Brown, “κλείς,” 732; Guthrie, Theology, 714.
49. See Friedrich Buchsel, “δέω (λύω),” TDNT, 2:60; who cites Str.-B., 1:739, b. Moʾed Qat. 16a; b. Menaḥ 34b.
50. E.g., Stendahl, “Matthew,” 787; Beare, Matthew, 355.
51. The saying in 16:18–19 draws a distinction between the “church” (16:18) and the “kingdom of heaven” (16:19), but with the inclusion of the parallel saying on binding and loosing occurring in a church discipline passage (18:16–18), the requirement for entrance is the same for both: forgiveness of sins.
52. Brown, Donfried, and Reumann (Peter, p. 96 n. 220) cite C. H. Dodd, Historical Tradition in the Fourth Gospel (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1963), 347–49. Note that John too has divine passives in John 20:23.
53. Gundry, Matthew, 335; see the excellent discussion in Carson, “Matthew,” 370–74.
54. Cf. Bonnard, Matthieu, 246; Carson, “Matthew,” 370–74; Cullmann, Peter, 205; Müller, Brown, “κλείς,” 733; Nickelsburg, “Enoch, Levi and Peter,” JBL 100 (1981): 594–95. Guthrie (Theology, 714) points out that Peter is the first historically to proclaim a loosing from sins (Acts 2:38) and a binding (5:3).
55. See James D. Tabor, “Martyr, Martyrdom,” ABD, 4:574–79; Arthur J. Droge and James D. Tabor, A Noble Death: Suicide and Martyrdom Among Greeks and Romans, Jews and Christians in the Ancient World (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1992).
56. Annas the high priest, whose daughter married Caiaphas, the head priest at the time of Jesus’ arrest and crucifixion (26:3), was the head of one of those powerful priestly families.
57. For an overview of these groups, see Brown, The Death of the Messiah, 1425–29.
58. Bayer, Jesus’ Predictions of Vindication and Resurrection, 182–88.
59. Wilkins, Discipleship in the Ancient World, 116–24.
60. In other words, Peter “the rock” becomes Peter “the stumbling stone.”
61. A. B. Bruce, “The Gospel According to Matthew,” 226.
62. E.g., 4QNahum Pesher, frag. 3–4, col. 1.6–8 and 11QTemple Scroll 64:7–13.
63. David W. Chapman, “Perceptions of Crucifixion Among Jews and Christians in the Ancient World” TynBul 51 (2000): 313–16.
65. Hagner, Matthew, 1:27.
66. Blomberg, Matthew, 261.
67. Davies and Allison, Matthew 2:679.
68. France, Matthew, 261; Carson, “Matthew,” 382; they somewhat combine this with an allusion to the resurrection.
69. Hagner, Matthew, 2:487.
70. Those who hold to this view either suggest that the prophecy was mistaken about coming in the lifetime of those with Jesus, or else this is a Matthean redaction; cf. Davies and Allison, Matthew 2:679–81.
71. E.g., Carson, “Matthew,” 380; Hagner, Matthew, 2:486.
72. Peter’s later comment brings congruency between Jesus’ prediction in Matthew and that in Mark, who records Jesus as saying that “some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God come with power” (Mark 9:1). Jesus’ transfiguration is a display of the authoritative establishment of the kingdom with God’s full power, which demands immediate obedience to his calling upon their lives (cf. France, Mark, 344–46).
73. See Gerhardsson, “The Christology of Matthew,” in Who Do You Say That I Am? 20.
74. Cf. Ladd, Theology of the New Testament, 104–6.
75. Ladd is representative of this view: “Jesus’ disciples are the recipients of the messianic salvation, the people of the Kingdom, the true Israel” (Theology of the New Testament, 106).
76. E.g., Scott Hafemann, “Eschatology and Ethics: The Future of Israel and the Nations in Romans 15:1–13,” TynBul 51 (2000): 161–92.
77. Cf. Ladd, Theology of the New Testament, 106–14.
78. E.g., Zech. 12:10–14.
79. For extended discussion, see Wilkins, The Concept of Disciple in Matthew’s Gospel, 208–16.
80. This aspect of discipleship is central to Matthew’s theological purposes and a foundation mark of Jesus’ entire earthly ministry; cf. Wilkins, Following the Master, 174–93.
81. Hagner, Matthew, 2:456.
82. Dallas Willard, Hearing God: Developing a Conversational Relationship with God (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1999), 70.
83. Ibid., 71.
84. Matthew hints at this in the construction of the saying. He switches from the aorist imperatives “deny himself” and “take up his cross” to the present imperative “follow me,” which suggests the ongoing life of following him (cf. Turner, Syntax, 76).
1. Alternatively, the reference to “after six days” (17:1) may signify the time it took to travel to the site where Jesus is transfigured.
2. For more discussion see Wilkins, “Matthew,” 106 (“The ‘High Mountain’ of Jesus’ Transfiguration”).
3. Lit., “And answering, Peter said”; this is a typical Matthean stylistic phraseology in his narrative (e.g., 3:15; 4:4; 8:8; 11:4; 16:16, 17); the NIV drops a reference to “answering.”
4. Randall E. Otto, “The Fear Motivation in Peter’s Offer to Build τρεῖς σκηνάς,” WTJ 59 (1997): 101–12 (esp. 105).
5. See, e.g., Ex. 19:16; 20:18; 34:30; Deut. 4:33; 5:5, 23–27; Hab. 3:2–6, 16.
6. Cf. Markus Öhler, “The Expectation of Elijah and the Presence of the Kingdom of God,” JBL 118 (1999): 461–76.
7. See James A. Penner, “Revelation and Discipleship in Matthew’s Transfiguration Account,” BibSac 152 (April–June 1995): 201–10.
8. Commenting on John’s vehement denial that he is Elijah, B. F. Westcott (The Gospel According to St. John, 2 vols. [London: John Murray, 1908], 18) comments: “The denial of the Baptist is directed to the Jewish expectation of the bodily return of Elijah.”
9. The “two witnesses” (Rev. 11:3) are sometimes identified with Moses and Elijah.
10. Cf. Wilkins, Discipleship in the Ancient World, 164–66.
11. A recent example of this fragmentation is an editorial article I read on the causes of schizophrenia in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine. The author acknowledged the complexities surrounding the causation of schizophrenia, but she focused almost exclusively on finding neurological causes, without mention of other possible causes, including spiritual or emotional. See Nancy C. Andreasen, “Understanding the Causes of Schizophrenia,” New England Journal of Medicine 340 (1999): 645–47.
12. Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 442.
13. For a table of equivalent weights and coinage at the time of Jesus, see Wilkins, “Matthew,” 116.
14. With annual variation, it occurs approximately in the middle of March.
15. See m. Šeqal. 1.3; 2.1; y. Šeqal. 6:1, 5; Josephus, War 5.5.2 §200; Ant. 18.9.1 §§312–13.
16. Cf. Josephus, Life 12 §§62–63. Powell, “Weights and Measures,” pp. 905–8; Rousseau and Arav, “Temple, Treasury,” Jesus and His World, 309–11; “Tax Collectors” and “Taxes,” DJBP, 618–19.
17. They call him didaskalos, a title used commonly in Matthew to address Jesus by nondisciples; cf. 9:11; 12:38; 19:16; 22:16, 24, 36.
18. Evidence for this debate is found at Qumran, where some contended that the census tax had to be paid only once in a person’s lifetime (4QOrdinances 1.6–7) and in m. Šeqal. 1.3–7. For overviews of the debate within Judaism, see W. Horbury, “The Temple Tax,” Jesus and the Politics of His Day, ed. E. Bammel and C. F. D. Moule (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1984), 265–86; David E. Garland, “Matthew’s Understanding of the Temple Tax (Matt. 17.24–7),” SBLSP 1987, ed. Kent H. Richards (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1987), 190–209.
19. For further discussion and a table of equivalent weights and coinage at the time of Jesus, see Wilkins, “Matthew,” 116.
20. Bruner, Matthew, 2:602.
21. Ibid.
22. As expressed in Ayn Rand’s The Fountainhead (1943), Atlas Shrugged (1957), and The Virtue of Selfishness (1965).
23. Christianity Today 47/1 (January 2003): 17. See also the website www.WhatWouldJesusDrive.org.
24. Morris, Matthew, 441.
25. Martin Luther, “Concerning Christian Liberty,” The Harvard Classics, trans. R. S. Grignon (New York: Collier & Son, 1910), 36:353.
1. As is typical in Matthew’s Gospel, the mention of “disciples” calls to mind the Twelve, but the wider circle of Jesus’ disciples is in view as well. This wider circle includes all who have responded to his invitation to kingdom life (cf. Wilkins, Concept of Disciple in Matthew’s Gospel, 163–72).
2. For a study that emphasizes the disciples’ consistent lack of understanding Jesus’ message and mission in Matthew, see Jeannine K. Brown, The Disciples in Narrative Perspective: The Portrayal and Function of the Matthean Disciples (SBL Academia Biblica 9; Atlanta: SBL, 2002), esp. 147–52.
3. Warren Carter, Households and Discipleship: A Study of Matthew 19–20 (JSNTSup 103; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1994), 96–97.
4. Bruner comments: “Matthew 18:1–4 calls us to humility, then v. 5 gives us a major way to practice humility” (Matthew, 2:637), which indicates that 18:1–4 are a call to enter the kingdom and 18:5 is the life of service in the kingdom.
5. “Cause to stumble” = “cause to sin” (NIV). The use of skandalizo links back to 17:27, but here the use of the term indicates cause to apostatize by losing faith and falling away from God rather than cause offense (Davies and Allison, Matthew, 2:761–62; Blomberg, Matthew, 274).
6. For discussion of the way that the valley of Hinnom became a metaphorical reference for the eternal fires of hell, see comments on 3:12; 5:22; 25:42.
7. Carson cites approvingly B. B. Warfield’s view that the “angels” of the “little ones” are the spirits of deceased believers after death who are always in the presence of the heavenly Father (“Matthew,” 401). But the majority of commentators rightly emphasize that the context speaks of disciples and their protection by angels in this present life (cf. Morris, Matthew, 464–65; Davies and Allison, Matthew, 2:768–72).
8. E.g., Tobit 12:13–22; 1 En. 100:5; Jub. 35:1; T. Levi 5.3; 2.5–6. For further literature, see Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 450–51; Davies and Allison, Matthew, 2:770.
9. Most commentators see a possible reference to guardian angels here, but the passage falls short of final proof for lack of evidence elsewhere in the New Testament; e.g., Blomberg, Matthew, 276; Davies and Allison, Matthew, 2:771–72; Hagner, Matthew, 2:527; Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 450–51; Morris, Matthew, 464–65.
10. Cf. 1 En. 14:21; 40:1–10.
11. Cf. 7:21; 10:32–33; 11:27; 12:50; 16:17; 18:19; 20:23; 25:34; 26:39, 42, 53.
12. Since the transition between Jesus’ statement about angelic care for the disciples and the parable of the sheep seems somewhat rough, several manuscripts have inserted an additional v. 11 (see NIV text note): “For the Son of Man came to save what was lost.” The phrase is lacking in the best manuscripts.
13. See Davies and Allison, Matthew, 2:773–74.
14. Edwin Firmage, “Zoology (Animal Profiles): Sheep,” ABD, 6:1126–27; Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 452.
15. Blomberg, Matthew, 275–76, seems to lean toward the former, while the latter is understood by Young, The Parables, 191–200.
16. The Lev. passage also stands behind a three-stage process of discipline found in the Qumran community: individual confrontation, witnesses, and, if necessary, final judgment by the community leaders (see 1QRule of the Community 5:24–6:1; cf. also CD 9:2–4).
17. The saying in 16:18–19 draws a distinction between the “church” (16:18) and the “kingdom of heaven” (16:19), but with the inclusion of the parallel saying on binding and loosing occurring in this church discipline passage (18:16–18), the requirement for entrance is the same for both: forgiveness of sins.
18. Gundry, Matthew, 335; Carson, “Matthew,” 370–74; see comments on 16:19.
19. For discussion see comments on 16:19.
20. See David McClister, “ ‘Where Two or Three Are Gathered Together’: Literary Structure As a Key to Meaning in Matt 17:22–20:19,” JETS 39 (1996): 556–57.
21. Cf. m. Sanh. 1:1; b. Ber. 6a; “Shekinah” means the divine presence.
22. Kupp, Matthew’s Emmanuel, 199.
23. See BDF §248(2), 130; the KJV and NASB have this.
24. See Wilkins, “Matthew,” 115, for a table of weights and measures and coinage at the time of Jesus.
25. For an overview of the parable within its Jewish context, see Young, The Parables: Jewish Tradition and Christian Interpretation, 127–44.
26. For a scholarly discussion of fiery judgment in Matthew’s Gospel, see Sim, Apocalyptic Eschatology in the Gospel of Matthew, esp. 130–39.
27. George Gallup Jr., The People’s Religion (New York: Macmillan, 1989), passim.
28. See the entry “Community” in Encyclopædia Britannica.
30. James C. Dobson, Dare to Discipline (Wheaton: Tyndale House, 1970).
31. Requests for the report may be sent through the ministerial website http://www.efca.org/freechurch.html.
32. For a practical application, see Ken Sande, The Peacemaker: A Biblical Guide to Resolving Personal Conflict (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1997).
33. John Perkins and Thomas A. Tarrants III, with David Wimbush, He’s My Brother: Former Racial Foes Offer Strategy for Reconciliation (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994).
34. Ibid., 228.
1. For a discussion of the dating, see comments on 21:21; 26:17.
2. Matthew’s wording in 19:1 seems to imply that Judea includes Transjordan. The parallel passage in Mark 10:1 has the word kai, meaning “and” (“into . . . Judea and across the Jordan”), though this kai is textually uncertain. For background, see Van Elderen, “Early Christianity in Transjordan,” 97–117; Diane I. Treacy-Cole, “Perea,” ABD, 5:224–25.
3. For a very fine overview of the passage that wrestles with contemporary application, see Craig L. Blomberg, “Marriage, Divorce, Remarriage, and Celibacy: An Exegesis of Mt 19:3–12,” TrinJ n.s. 11 (1990): 161–96. For what may be the best full-length treatment that concludes with pastoral implications, see Instone-Brewer, Divorce and Remarriage in the Bible.
4. G. D. Collier, “Rethinking Jesus on Divorce,” Restoration Quarterly 37 (1995): 80–96. Jesus is attacking the practice of searching for frivolous authorization for divorce and remarriage.
5. Instone-Brewer, Divorce and Remarriage in the Bible, 133–41.
6. Carson, “Matthew,” 413.
7. See Andrew Warren, “Did Moses Permit Divorce? Modal weqaṭal As Key to New Testament Readings of Deuteronomy 24:1–4,” TynBul 49 (1998): 39–56.
8. Allen R. Guenther, “The Exception Phrases: Except πορνει, Including πορνει or Excluding πορνει? (Matthew 5:32; 19:9),” TynBul 53 (2002): 83–96, takes up the question of the grammatical construction, which has been often debated as to whether Jesus meant it inclusively (“if a man divorces his wife even though she has not been unfaithful”), exceptively (“if a man divorces his wife, except if she has been unfaithful”), or exclusively (“if a man divorces his wife—porneia is a separate issue”). Guenther accepts the latter exclusive interpretation, but Instone-Brewer adequately demonstrates how the traditional exceptive interpretation is demanded here and in 5:32 (Instone-Brewer, Divorce and Remarriage, 155–56).
9. Blomberg, “Marriage, Divorce, Remarriage, and Celibacy,” 177; David Janzen, “The Meaning of Porneia in Matthew 5.32 and 19.9: An Approach from the Study of Ancient Near Eastern Culture,” JSNT 80 (2000): 66–80.
10. See Markus Bockmuehl, “Matthew 5.32; 19.9 in the Light of Pre-Rabbinic Halakah,” NTS 35 (1989): 291–95.
11. Cf. Philip H. Wiebe, “Jesus’ Divorce Exception,” JETS 32 (1989): 327–33.
12. Blomberg, “Marriage, Divorce, Remarriage, and Celibacy,” 185.
13. See Carter, Households and Discipleship, 113–14.
14. Hagner, Matthew, 2:553, notes that the practice of infant baptism is sometimes based on this passage, an unlikely association. There is no water in the passage, and the children are used as a metaphor, not as literal recipients of a conferral of kingdom life.
15. Saldarini, Pharisees, Scribes and Sadducees, 277–97.
16. On the surface it may appear as if the young man is attempting to entrap Jesus in a theological error, as other Pharisees did (e.g., 16:1; 19:3), but Matthew does not indicate that.
17. Larry W. Hurtado, “First-Century Jewish Monotheism,” JSNT 71 (1998): 3–26.
18. For a similar perspective that draws on the community pattern of the first-century model of the Mediterranean family and Jesus’ alternative spiritual pattern from Mark’s perspective, see Joseph H. Hellerman, “Wealth and Sacrifice in Early Christianity: Revisiting Mark’s Presentation of Jesus’ Encounter with the Rich Young Ruler,” TrinJ n.s. 21 (2000): 143–64.
19. Note that Jesus uses “kingdom of God” here (19:24). It is used in parallel with “kingdom of heaven” in the preceding verse (19:23), a reminder that the expressions were interchangeable (cf. 3:2; 4:17).
20. Some unimportant manuscripts read kamilon (“rope, ship’s cable”) here rather than kamelon (“camel”), suggesting a rope being pulled through a needle. A popular interpretation, dating from the Middle Ages, suggests that there was a small gate in Jerusalem called “eye of the needle” and that camels had to stoop to their knees to enter it with great difficulty. There is no historical or archaeological support for this gate. Both suggestions miss the point of the analogy, which emphasizes the impossibility of rich persons entering the kingdom of heaven.
21. Palingenesia (“renewal, regeneration”) occurs only here and in Titus 3:5 in the New Testament.
22. Cf. Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, 103. Contra David C. Sim, “The Meaning of palingenesia in Mt 19.28,” JSNT 50 (1993): 3–12.
23. Carson, “Matthew,” 426; cf. George Beasely-Murray, Jesus and the Kingdom of God, 275–76.
24. Cf. Saucy, The Case for Progressive Dispensationalism, 267–69.
25. Thomas E. Schmidt, “Mark 10.29–30; Matthew 19.29: ‘Leave Houses . . . and Region?’,” NTS 38 (1992): 617–20. Schmidt suggests that the Aramaic underlying agrous indicates that Jesus called disciples to leave house, family, and territory, which is a call to a new family and nation.
26. Randy Frazee, The Connecting Church: Beyond Small Groups to Authentic Community (Zondervan, 2001), 22.
27. Blomberg, “Marriage, Divorce, Remarriage, and Celibacy,” 177; Instone-Brewer, Divorce and Remarriage in the Bible, 278–79.
28. For a careful discussion, see Instone-Brewer, Divorce and Remarriage in the Bible, 189–212, 279–82; also Gordon Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, 267–70.
29. Blomberg, “Marriage, Divorce, Remarriage, and Celibacy,” 192.
30. For a helpful pastoral perspective on dealing with all kinds of scenarios related to divorce and remarriage, see Instone-Brewer, Divorce and Remarriage in the Bible, 300–314.
31. The Confessions of Saint Augustine, trans. Edward B. Pusey (New York: Macmillan, 1961), 8.12 (pp. 129–30; I have updated Pusey’s translation at points).
32. Will Durant, The Story of Civilization; vol. 4: The Age of Faith (New York: Simon Schuster, 1950), 66.
33. C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, new ed. (New York: Macmillan, 1960), 158.
1. “Vine and Vineyard,” DJBP, 657–58.
2. Young, The Parables: Jewish Tradition and Christian Interpretation, 74–80.
3. Blomberg, Matthew, 303.
4. So also B. Rod Doyle, “The Place of the Parable of the Labourers in the Vineyard in Matthew 20:1–16,” ABR 42 (1994): 39–58.
5. Emily Cheney, “The Mother of the Sons of Zebedee (Matthew 27.56),” JSNT 68 (December 1997): 13–21.
6. Contra Cheney, ibid., who suggests that her presence with the sons indicates their lack of commitment to the family of faith, because they have maintained their family relationship, contrary to what disciples should do (19:19).
7. The verb aganakteo, “I grieve,” is best rendered “indignant,” indicating their anger over an anticipated loss. It is used of the disciples in 26:8 and the chief priests and scribes in 21:15.
8. E.g., diakonos: 2 Cor. 3:6; Eph. 3:7; Col. 1:23; doulos: Rom. 1:1; Gal. 1:10.
9. E.g., diakonos: Phoebe, Rom. 16:1; Tychicus, Eph. 6:21; Epaphras, Col. 1:23; doulos: Epaphras, Col. 4:12;
10. The preposition anti virtually never means “on behalf of” but demands the use “in place of” (cf. Wallace, Greek Grammar, 365–67). The “many” (pollon) has been understood to have either an exclusive sense, “many, but not all,” restricting the application to the community of the elect (e.g., 1QS 6:1–23), or to have an inclusive sense, “many, the totality which embraces many individuals,” opening the application to all without limitation. The most convincing historical and linguistic argument affirms the latter; cf. Joachim Jeremias, “πολλοι,” TDNT, 6:536–45.
11. Cf. Sydney Page, “Ransom Saying,” DJG, 660–62; Scot McKnight, “Jesus and His Death: Some Recent Scholarship,” CurBS 9 (2001): 185–228.
12. For further background, see Wilkins, “Matthew,” 125.
13. T. A. Holland, “Jericho,” ABD, 3:737. It survived primarily because of the fresh water from the nearby spring, making it to this day perhaps “the oldest continually inhabited oasis in the world.”
14. See Morris, Matthew, 513–14. Others suggest that the miracle was performed as Jesus left the city (20:29; Mark 10:46), though Jesus first encountered the men as he approached the city (Luke 18:35).
15. Marshall, “Who Is a Hypocrite?” esp. 137, 149–50.
16. Cited in J. D. Douglas, “G. K. Chesterton, the Eccentric Prince of Paradox,” Christianity Today (May 24, 1974), http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2001/135/52.0.html.
17. Kierkegaard, The Journals, cited by Stuart B. Babbage, “Gratitude,” Baker’s Dictionary of Christian Ethics, ed. Carl F. H. Henry (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1973), 275.
18. Harold H. Hoehner, “Rewards,” NDBT, 740.
1. For an overview of the importance of Jerusalem to Israel, Christianity, and Islam, see Zitza Rosovsky, ed., City of the Great King: Jerusalem from David to the Present (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Press, 1996).
2. For a brief overview of the difficulties of ascertaining the actual dates of the Holy Week using Friday Nisan 15 as a linchpin, and a helpful resolution of the various possibilities, see the brief article “Problems in Dating the Crucifixion,” at the website of the Astronomical Applications Department of the U.S. Naval Observatory: http://aa.usno.navy.mil/faq/docs/crucifixion.html. They offer the dates of Jesus’ crucifixion as either Friday, April 7, A.D. 30, or Friday, April 3, A.D. 33. For similar dating after more extensive discussion, see Kenneth F. Doig, New Testament Chronology (Lewiston, N.Y.: Edwin Mellen, 1990), who contends for the A.D. 30 dating. If we follow the A.D. 30 dating, Jesus arrives in Bethany late Friday afternoon on March 31, spends the Sabbath with his disciples in Bethany, then has the celebratory meal in Bethany on Saturday evening, April 1. The climactic triumphal entry occurs on Sunday, April 2, with the crucifixion Friday, April 7, and the resurrection on Sunday, April 9.
3. See Scott T. Carroll, “Bethphage,” ABD, 1:715.
4. Cf. also, Carson, “Matthew,” 437; Gundry, Matthew, 593.
5. Carson, “Matthew,” 437.
6. Cf. Gundry, Matthew, 409–10; Hagner, Matthew, 2:594–95.
7. Hagner, Matthew, 2:595.
8. Same term, himatia, for the cloaks that the disciples placed on the two animals (21:7).
9. When Elisha announced that Jehu would be anointed king, his fellow officers “took their cloaks and spread them under him on the bare steps. Then they blew the trumpet and shouted, ‘Jehu is king!’ ” (2 Kings 9:13).
10. Cf. John 6:14; 7:40, 52; Acts 3:22; 7:37.
11. E.g., George Beasley-Murray, John, 2d ed. (WBC; Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1999), 38–42; Hagner, Matthew, 2:599–600.
12. E.g., Matthew’s thematic arrangement of Jesus’ miracles (chs. 8 and 9) and Luke’s thematic arrangement of the order of Jesus’ temptations (Luke 4:1–13; cf. Matt. 4:1–11).
13. Cf. Leon Morris, John, rev. ed. (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), 166–69; Carson, John, 176–78.
14. The absence of the first temple incident in the Synoptics is consistent with the overall absence of Jesus’ early Judean ministry in their narratives. The absence of the second incident in John’s narrative of Holy Week may belong to the difference of emphasis on Jesus’ trial. The Synoptics focus on the accusations of Jesus’ statements against the temple (Matt. 26:61; Mark 14:58) and on the related charge of blasphemy, while John records only a vague questioning by Annas (the former high priest) about Jesus’ teaching (John 18:19–23).
15. See Kathleen Ritmeyer, “A Pilgrim’s Journey,” BAR 15/6 (November–December 1989): 43–45, for an informative insight to a journey into the temple.
16. Cf. Wilkins, “Barabbas,” ABD, 1:607.
17. Carson, “Matthew,” 442; Hagner, Matthew, 2:601.
18. See Peterson, Engaging with God, 87–90.
19. France, Matthew, 300–303; Morris, Matthew, 525–26; Davies and Allison, Matthew, 3:133–37; Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, 61–69.
20. Peterson, Engaging with God, 87–90.
21. Schweizer, Matthew, 408.
22. Rudolf Schnackenburg, The Gospel of Matthew, trans. R. R. Barr (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002), 203.
23. France, Matthew, 302–3; Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 502–3.
24. Cf. Matthew’s topical arrangement of the miracles in chs. 8–9.
25. The fig tree also represents the new messianic age, when God’s reign is established fully (cf. Zech. 3:10; Micah 4:4). For a discussion of the symbolism of the fig tree and Israel, see “Fig, Fig Tree,” DBI, 283–84.
26. The apostle Paul will later emphasize that the normal product of a disciple in relationship to Jesus is found especially in the fruit of the Spirit produced in our lives (cf. Gal. 4:6–7; 5:13–26).
27. See Joseph H. Hellerman, “Challenging the Authority of Jesus: Mark 11:27–33 and Mediterranean Notions of Honor and Shame,” JETS 43 (June 2000): 213–28.
28. See Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 506, for background and literature.
29. For analysis, see Klyne R. Snodgrass, “Recent Research on the Parable of the Wicked Tenants: An Assessment,” IBR 8 (1998): 187–215.
30. See Rousseau and Arav, “Viticulture,” Jesus and His World, 328–32.
31. Kingsbury suggests that this is Jesus’ first public assertion of his divine Sonship; see Jack Dean Kingsbury, “The Parable of the Wicked Husbandmen and the Secret of Jesus’ Divine Sonship in Matthew: Some Literary-Critical Observations,” JBL 195 (1986): 643–55.
32. Carson, “Matthew,” 454.
33. E.g., Acts 2:23–36; 3:13–26; 7:51–53; 10:39–43; 13:26–31; 1 Cor 15:1–7.
34. For an overview of messianic expectation, see Craig A. Evans, “Messianism,” DJG, 698–707.
35. The document in question is 4QTestimonia.
36. 1QRule of the Community [1QS] 9:11. For discussion, see John J. Collins, The Scepter and the Star: The Messiahs of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Other Ancient Literature (ABRL; New York: Doubleday, 1995), 74–101.
37. Cf. John 6:14; 7:40, 52; Acts 3:22; 7:37.
38. These three aspects of Jesus’ work are found together in the book of Hebrews, where Jesus is the messianic king who is exalted to his throne (1:3, 13; 2:9; 4:16), the great High Priest who offered himself to God as a sacrifice for our sins (2:17; 4:14–5:10; chs. 7–10), and the messenger who is the ultimate revelation of God (1:1–14; 3:1).
39. J. I. Packer, Concise Theology (Wheaton, Ill.: Tyndale House, 1993), 133.
40. Ladd, Theology of the New Testament, 58.
41. Cf. Köstenberger and O’Brien, Salvation to the Ends of the Earth, 40–42.
42. For an overview of these issues, see Ladd, Theology of the New Testament, 104–6. I agree in large part with Ladd’s perspective, but differ where he emphasizes that the church now replaces and becomes Israel, seemingly permanently. See also Scot McKnight, “Gentiles,” DJG, 259–64.
43. Kostenberger and O’Brien, Salvation to the Ends of the Earth, 103–5, 135–37.
44. Cf. Hafemann, “Eschatology and Ethics,” 161–92.
45. For family-focused activities, see the excellent little booklet with selections from Charles Colson, Billy Graham, Max Lucado, and Joni Eareckson Tada, Christ in Easter: A Family Celebration of Holy Week (Colorado Springs: NavPress, 1990).
46. Compiled with reference to A. T. Robertson, A Harmony of the Gospels for Students of the Life of Christ: Based on the Broadus Harmony in the Revised Version (New York: Harper & Row, 1922), and Robert L. Thomas and Stanley N. Gundry, eds., The NIV Harmony of the Gospels (Harper & Row, 1978).
47. Hagner, Matthew, 2:601.
1. For details see Blomberg, Interpreting the Parables, 237–40; for an excellent recent article on this parable, see Noel Rabbinowitz, “Matthew 22:2–4: Does Jesus Recognize the Authority of the Pharisees and Does He Endorse Their Halakhah?” JETS 46 (2003): 423–47.
2. See Gundry, Matthew, 436–37.
3. E.g., Judg. 1:8; Isa. 5:24; 1 Macc. 5:28; T. Jud. 5:1–5.
4. Gundry, Matthew, 439; Davies and Allison, Matthew, 3:204 n.53; Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 522, n. 189.
5. See Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 523.
6. Joachim Jeremias, “πολλοι,” TDNT, 6:536–45.
7. The parable does not speak of the actual wedding feast of the Lamb in heaven (Rev. 19:5–8), but depicts responses to the invitation to the kingdom of heaven. Beyond that, it can illustrate responses of individuals in this life to the gospel message. Jesus points out the seriousness of one’s response to the opportunity of being called into the family of God.
8. For an overview of the evidence and research into this shadowy group, see Meier, A Marginal Jew, 3:560–65. The most extensive recent study is Kokkinos, The Herodian Dynasty.
9. For a chart of the Roman emperors called “Caesar” during New Testament times and later and the corresponding biblical references, see Wilkins, “Matthew,” 136.
10. Colin Brown, Norman Hillyer, “Tax, Tax Collector,” NIDNTT, 3:751–59.
11. See Rousseau and Arav, “Tax and Tax Collectors,” Jesus and His World, 278.
12. Cf. 12:15; 18:8; 26:10 for Jesus’ form of special knowledge.
13. Rousseau and Arav, “Coins and Money,” Jesus and His World, 55–61. For a picture of a coin that depicts Caesar Augustus, see Wilkins, “Matthew,” 135.
14. Dale Bruner states: “As Caesar’s coin bears Caesar’s image and belongs to Caesar, so God’s humanity bears God’s image and belongs to God” (Matthew, 2:784).
15. Morris, Matthew, 558. For extended discussion of the implications for church-state relationships, see Bruner, Matthew, 2:784–87.
16. E.g., 2 Macc. 7; 1 En. 102; 2 Bar. 49–51; m. Sanh. 10:1; b. Roš Haš. 16b–17a.
17. See Wilkins, “Matthew,” 187, for comments on the resurrection of the dead in Judaism and in Jesus.
18. Bruner, Matthew, 2:790.
19. Cf. Blomberg, Matthew, 333; Carson, “Matthew,” 461–62.
20. Mark tells us that at the end of the interchange Jesus commends him (Mark 12:34), which may indicate that he approaches Jesus with more sincerity than the previous questioners.
21. Hagner, Matthew, 2:646.
22. Genesis Rabbah 24.7.
23. See Abraham Malamat, “Love Your Neighbor As Yourself,” BAR 16/4 (July–August 1990): 50–51.
24. See comments on 1:1; cf. 2 Sam. 7:12–14; Ps. 89:4; Isa. 11:1, 10; Jer. 23:5: cf. Pss. Sol. 17:21.
25. See comments on 1:20; 9:27; 12:23; 15:22; 20:30–31; 21:9, 15.
26. By extension, Jesus implies the Davidic authorship of the psalm as inspired Scripture. For a recent overview, see Barry C. Davis, “Is Psalm 110 a Messianic Psalm?” BibSac 157 (April–June 2000): 160–73.
27. See also Craig A. Evans, Mark 8:27–16:20 (WBC 34B; Nashville: Nelson, 2001), 272–75.
28. Only the Essenes do not appear, which is consistent with their largely historical, geographical absence from Jerusalem political life and their literary absence from the New Testament.
29. For a brief overview of the Pharisees, see Wilkins, “Matthew,” 25. For an extended treatment, see Meier, A Marginal Jew, 3:289–340.
30. Meier, A Marginal Jew, 3:560–65.
31. For a brief overview of the Sadducees, see Wilkins, “Matthew,” 25. For an extended treatment, see Meier, A Marginal Jew, 389–444.
32. Several related points surface from this latter interaction. (1) Note that Jesus here contends for verbal inspiration of the Scriptures, since his argumentation is based on the tense of a verb from the Old Testament (“I am”). (2) Since the material aspect of the persons to whom Jesus points has died, the immaterial aspect sufficiently implies the real existence of these people. (3) Jesus does not explain the mode of existence of those who have experienced physical death, but only that they still have a form of personal existence.
33. Davis, “Is Psalm 110 a Messianic Psalm?” 172.
34. Calvin, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, 3:27.
35. Passages that should be studied to help us maintain the right kind of balance are Matt. 5:38–42; Rom. 13:1–7; 1 Tim. 2:1–7; Titus 3:1–2.
36. Bruner, Matthew, 2:785. His treatment of the practical issues is very helpful.
37. See the Contemporary Significance section on 5:17–20.
38. Cited as the quote of the month for June 2002, at Golden Key, an “on-line resource for all things related to Victorian novelist, poet and Christian Fantasy writer George MacDonald (1824–1905)” (www.george-macdonald.com).
39. Michael J. Wilkins and J. P. Moreland, eds., Jesus Under Fire: Modern Scholarship Reinvents the Historical Jesus (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995).
1. See comments on 3:7; see also Wilkins, “Matthew,” 25.
2. For discussion, with the latest evidence, see Levine, “Cathedra of Moses,” The Ancient Synagogue, 323–27.
3. See t. Suk. 4:6, cited in ibid., 324.
4. For pictures, see Wilkins, “Matthew,” 140.
5. Levine, The Ancient Synagogue, 326.
6. Carson, “Matthew,” 473.
7. Hagner, Matthew, 2:654.
8. “Tefillin” and “Tefillin, Archaeology of,” DJBP, 621.
9. See Wilkins, “Matthew,” 141.
10. For various customs, see Gene Schramm, “Meal Customs (Jewish),” and Dennis E. Smith, “Meal Customs (Greco-Roman),” ABD, 4:648–53.
11. A later rabbinic passage is representative: “How did the elders sit? Facing the congregation and with their backs to the holy [i.e., Jerusalem and the temple] . . . the administrator of the synagogue faces the holy and the entire congregation faces the holy” (t. Meg. 3:21).
12. Levine, The Ancient Synagogue, 313–17.
13. “Rabbi,” DJBP, 516; Levine, The Ancient Synagogue, 440–70.
14. For discussion of this distinction, see Levine, The Ancient Synagogue, 449–51.
15. See Wilkins, Discipleship in the Ancient World, 116–24.
16. See Levine, The Ancient Synagogue, 404–6.
17. Cf. b. Ketub. 8a; t. Beṣah 1:7; see examples in DJBP, 2–3.
18. E.g., Jub. 1:24, 28; 19:29; Jos. Asen. 12:14; Sir. 23:1, 4; Wisd. Sol. 2:16–20; 14:3; Tob. 13:4; 4Q372; 1QH 9:35. See “Father, God as,” DJBP, 224.
19. See Bruce W. Winter, “The Messiah As the Tutor: The Meaning of καθηγητής in Matthew 23:10,” TynBul 42 (1991): 152–57.
20. E.g., Robertson, Grammar, 138.
21. See Norman Hillyer, “Woe (οὐαι),” NIDNTT, 3:1051–54.
22. E.g., six in Isa. 5:8–22; five in Hab. 2:6–20; cf. the two series of three in Rev. 8:13; 9:12; 11:14; 12:12; and 18:10, 16, 19.
23. Marshall, “Who Is a Hypocrite?,” esp. 139–42.
24. Some manuscripts add an additional verse here (see NIV text note): “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You devour widows’ houses and for a show make lengthy prayers. Therefore you will be punished more severely” (23:14). The best manuscripts do not have these verses.
25. See “Proselytes,” EJR, 312–13.
26. See, e.g., Josephus, J. W. 2.560–61[2.20.2]; Ant. 20.24–48 [2.1–4]. Tacitus in Hist. 5.5 criticizes the Jews for attempting to gain converts. On the issue of Jewish proselytizing (which is debated among scholars), see esp. McKnight, A Light Among the Gentiles, 106–8.
27. Senior, Matthew, 261; cf. McKnight, A Light Among the Gentiles, 107.
28. Hagner, Matthew, 2:668–69.
29. Morris, Matthew, 580.
30. A vow is distinct from the oath: The vow forbids a certain thing to be used, while an oath forbids the swearer to do a certain thing although that thing is not forbidden in itself.
31. Marshall, “Who Is a Hypocrite?” 140.
32. Ibid., 140–41.
33. Davies and Allison, Matthew, 3:295.
34. Colin J. Hemer, “Bury, Grave, Tomb,” NIDNTT, 1:265.
35. For a discussion of the problems, see Davies and Allison, Matthew, 3:301–2.
36. For pictures and discussion of the practice, see Wilkins, “Matthew,” 144, 160.
37. See Rachel Hachlili, “Burials,” ABD, 1:789–94
38. Marshall, “Who Is a Hypocrite?” 141–42.
39. See comments on 10:17; for background on flogging in the synagogue, see Wilkins, “Matthew,” 69.
40. The primary difficulty with this view is that Zechariah’s father is there named Jehoiada, and Jesus calls him the “son of Berekiah.” This latter reference fits with the prophet Zechariah, who is called the son of Berekiah, the son of Iddo (Zech. 1:1), which some then suggest is the identity of the Zechariah mentioned by Jesus, which would then make the time span from creation to the last recorded prophet (Blomberg, Matthew, 349). However, since the prophet Zechariah is not recorded to have had his life end in a violent death, others contend the Zechariah whose death in the temple courtyard was recorded in 2 Chronicles was either identified by a developing tradition as the prophet Zechariah (Hagner, Matthew, 2:677; Davies and Allison, Matthew, 3:319; Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew [1999], 556), or he was named in Chronicles from his grandfather rather than his father, a generally common practice (Morris, Matthew, 589 n.45).
41. John Fischer, 12 Steps for the Recovering Pharisee (Like Me) (Minneapolis: Bethany, 2000), 1.
42. In addition to the book, the steps are listed at his website: www.fischtank.com/book/12step.cfm.
1. For an overview, see Michael O. Wise, “Temple,” DJG, 811–17.
2. Cf. France, Matthew, 337; Gundry, Matthew, 476; Hagner, Matthew, 2:688; Ladd, New Testament Theology, 196–98; Stanley D. Toussaint, Behold the King: A Study of Matthew (Portland: Multnomah, 1981), 268–69.
3. For discussion of the “Granville Sharp Rule” as it concerns the “article-substantive-και-substantive” (TSKS) construction, see Wallace, Greek Grammar, 270–90. He lists Matthew 24:3 as an ambiguous impersonal TSKS construction that is exegetically and theologically significant (Wallace, Greek Grammar, 288 n.87).
4. Ladd, Theology of the New Testament, 198. Cf. also Hagner, Matthew, 2:688; Mounce, Matthew, 228–30. Cranfield suggests that in Jesus’ own view the historical and the eschatological are mingled, and that the final eschatological event is seen through the “transparency” of the immediate historical incident (Cranfield, Mark, 390–94). For an attempt to balance the two, see David L. Turner, “The Structure and Sequence of Matthew 24:1–41: Interaction with Evangelical Treatments,” GTJ 10/1 (Spring 1989): 3–27.
5. For further discussion see below in Bridging Contexts.
6. “Bar Kosiba, Simon,” DJBP, 77–78.
7. Conrad Gempf, “The Imagery of Birth Pangs in the New Testament,” TynBul 45 (1994): 119–35; esp. 132–34.
8. Some see a shift of increased persecution of the church signaled in 24:9 just prior to the Parousia; e.g., Robert H. Gundry, The Church and the Tribulation (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1973), 49; Brent Kinman, History, Design and the End of Time: God’s Plan for the World (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2000), 80.
9. E.g., Blomberg, Matthew, 354–55; Carson, “Matthew,” 498; Davies and Allison, Matthew, 3:341; Hagner, Matthew, 2:694.
10. France, Matthew, 338.
11. Hagner, Matthew, 1:278.
12. Cf. John 15:21; 2 Tim. 3:12; 1 Peter 4:13–14.
13. Blomberg, Matthew, 355; Hagner, Matthew, 2:695.
14. The articular ton pollon can indicate majority, as in the NIV rendering; cf. BDAG, 849; Davies and Allison, Matthew, 3:343 n.98; France, Matthew, 338.
15. Cf. Wayne A. Brindle, “ ‘To the Jew First’,” 221–33.
16. E.g., Blomberg, Matthew, 356–57.
17. E.g., Davies and Allison, Matthew, 3:344; Morris, Matthew, 602.
18. E.g., France, Matthew, 340–41; Blomberg, Matthew, 357–59.
19. E.g., Davies and Allison, Matthew, 3:344; Gundry, Matthew, 485; Ladd, Theology of the New Testament, 675–76.
20. Gundry, Matthew, 482.
21. See Josephus, Ant. 55–59; for discussion see Paul Barnett, Jesus and the Rise of Early Christianity: A History of New Testament Times (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1999), 144–48.
22. Cf. Philo, Legatio ad Gaium 200–203; Josephus, Ant. 257–309; see F. F. Bruce, New Testament History (New York: Doubleday, 1969), 253–57.
23. For discussion of related issues, see Gleason L. Archer Jr., “Daniel,” EBC (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1985), 7:111–21.
24. It is interesting to note that there is an active movement within Judaism in Israel to rebuild the temple, which would be the Third Temple (see, e.g., the following website: www.templeinstitute.org).
25. Eusebius, Eccl. Hist. 3.5.3.
26. See Josephus, J.W. 5–6,
27. Others try to account for this incredible statement of the build-up of horrors of 24:21–28 by positing that the percentage of Jews killed in Jerusalem at A.D. 70 was greater than any since then (e.g., Carson, “Matthew,” 501), or by suggesting that this describes the suffering of believers throughout the entire church age from A.D. 70 until Jesus returns (e.g., Blomberg, Matthew, 359–60). Neither really does justice to the language here.
28. See Patrich, “Hideouts in the Judean Wilderness,” 32–42. For an overview of these groups, see Horsley and Hanson, Bandits, Prophets, and Messiahs.
29. Morris, Matthew, 608. This seems to make sense of the metaphor by connecting it with negative connotations, but doesn’t really fit the context of Jesus’ statement about his return.
30. Blomberg, Matthew, 361. This seems to make more sense of Jesus’ statement in the context, but the metaphor doesn’t really make a parallel with Jesus’ coming; does the Parousia correspond to a carcass?
31. Hagner, Matthew, 2:707; though Hagner downplays the judgment aspect.
32. France, Matthew, 344.
33. Toussaint, Behold the King, 266.
34. Cf. Ezek 32:7; Joel 2:31; 3:15; Amos 8:9; 2 Esdras 5:4–5; 7:39; T. Mos. 10:5.
35. In terms of Greek grammar, the question involves whether the genitive in the expression “the sign of the Son of Man” is an objective genitive (“the sign which indicates the Son of Man”) or a genitive of apposition (“the sign which is the Son of Man”).
36. Cf. also the messianic expectation of a person as banner in Isa. 5:26–30; see Gordon D. Kirchhevel, “He That Cometh in Mark 1:7 and Matt 24:30,” BBR 4 (1994): 105–11.
37. The Jewish leaders had repeatedly asked for such a sign (12:38; 16:1; cf. John 2:18; 20:30–31).
38. So Blomberg, Matthew, 362.
39. Isa. 18:3; 27:13; Jer. 4:21; 6:1; 51:27; 1QM 3–4, 8, 16, 17–18.
40. Carson, “Matthew,” 506; Keener, Matthew (1997), 352; Morris, Matthew, 611.
41. Blomberg, Matthew, 363.
42. Pretribulationists contend that Jesus brings with him both the deceased and the “raptured” believers who are with him in heaven, while postribulationists contend that he brings with him only the former.
43. Flusser, “Jesus Weeps over Jerusalem,” Jesus, 240–43.
44. E.g., Davies and Allison, Matthew, 3:365–66; France, Matthew, 346.
45. E.g., Schweizer, Matthew, 458.
46. E.g., Gundry, Matthew, 491; Morris, Matthew, 612–13; Neil D. Nelson Jr., “ ‘This Generation’ in Matt 24:34: A Literary Critical Perspective,” JETS 38 (September 1995): 369–85.
47. Cf. Ladd, Theology of the New Testament, 196–205.
48. Daniel Doriani, “The Deity of Christ in the Synoptic Gospels,” JETS 37 (September 1994): 333–50, esp. 343.
49. For helpful overviews, see Turner, “The Structure and Sequence of Matthew 24:1–41,” 3–27; Ladd, Theology of the New Testament, 197–99; Carson, “Matthew,” 488–92.
50. This is often called the “preterist” (past perspective) position.
51. E.g., France, Matthew, 333–36.
52. Ibid., 336–46.
53. E.g., Christians fled to Pella nearly two years prior to the fall of Jerusalem, not after, and the description of Israel’s tragedy in these events as the greatest tribulation in history or in the future (24:19) does not square with later tragedies in Israel’s history; cf. Ladd, Theology of the New Testament, 197–99; Gundry, The Church and the Tribulation, 132–34.
54. See Louis Barbieri Jr., “Matthew,” in The Bible Knowledge Commentary, New Testament, ed. John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck (Wheaton: Victor, 1983), 76–78.
55. Whatever one concludes with reference to a “rapture” in the unfolding of these events (see Bridging Contexts of 24:36–25:46), the scantiness of exegetical material, esp. in this discourse (if not absence of material here), suggests that it should not be the primary determining factor as to how in interpreting this discourse.
56. Morris, Matthew, 593–94 n.4.
57. Ladd, Theology of the New Testament, 198.
58. Turner, “The Structure and Sequence of Matthew 24:1–41,” 9.
59. Anthony A. Hoekema, The Bible and the Future (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979), 130, suggests that the signs given by Jesus “had their initial fulfillment at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem; since this discourse exemplifies the principle of prophetic foreshortening, however, the signs mentioned in them will have a further fulfillment at the time of the Parousia.” See also Hendricksen, Matthew, 852–56.
60. Turner, “The Structure and Sequence of Matthew 24:1–41,” passim; Alva J. McClain, The Greatness of the Kingdom (Chicago: Moody, 1959), 136–39; see also Ed Glasscock, Matthew (Moody Gospel Commentary; Chicago: Moody Press, 1997), 468: “The nature of eschatological revelation allows for a typological fulfillment at one level with a more complete fulfillment at another.”
61. Robert Gundry indicates that (1) the events centering around the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 did not exhaust Jesus’ prophecy, with the result that a time of future tribulation immediately before the return of Christ is yet to be fulfilled; (2) the events centering around the destruction of Jerusalem did, however, constitute a fulfillment precursive to a larger and final fulfillment at the end of the age (The Church and the Tribulation, 129). See also Ladd, Theology of the New Testament, 198.
62. Carson (“Matthew,” 495) and David Wenham (The Rediscovery of Jesus’ Eschatological Discourse [Gospel Perspectives 4; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1984]) espouse a somewhat unique approach, which Turner calls a “revised preterist-futurist view” (“The Structure and Sequence of Matthew 24:1–41,” 9–10). They suggest that Jesus first gives a general discussion of this time period (24:4–28), with a brief discussion of the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 inserted as an example of God’s judgment (24:15–21), and then comes the Second Advent (24:29–31), with the warning in 24:32–35 describing the whole tribulation period that stretches from the Ascension to the Second Advent (cf. Carson, “Matthew,” 495). While somewhat unique, it falls generally within the broad sweep of mediating positions between the extremes of historical and futuristic interpretations, but avoids the significance of the temple and Israel in these tribulational scenes.
63. Hafemann, “Eschatology and Ethics,” 161–92.
64. Nancy Gibbs, cover story: “The Bible and the Apocalypse,” Time (July 1, 2002): 40–48.
65. Tim LaHaye and Jerry B. Jenkins, Left Behind: A Novel of the Earth’s Last Days (Wheaton: Tyndale, 1996).
66. Gibbs, “The Bible and the Apocalypse,” 44–45.
67. The authors of the series espouse a pretribulational, premillennial eschatology, in which they draw first on Paul’s teaching about a “rapture” (1 Thess. 4:16–17) to set the stage for the first novel, and from there draw primarily on scenes from Revelation for their novelistic recounting of end-time events.
1. For an overview, see Erickson, Christian Theology, 1:441.
2. An overview of the theological issues can be found in any standard systematic theology, such as Erickson, Christian Theology, 769–72; Grudem, Systematic Theology, esp. 547–53. Some theologians emphasize that Jesus operated exclusively in his humanity during his stay on the earth and that displays of supernatural activity are really the Spirit’s power working through him (cf. Acts 2:22–23; 10:38). Others, such as Erickson and Grudem, emphasize that Jesus operated frequently in his divine nature while on earth.
3. E.g., Gundry, Matthew, 494; Blomberg, Matthew, 366.
4. E.g., Morris, Matthew, 614–15; Hagner, Matthew, 2:720; Davies and Allison, Matthew, 3:383.
5. Davies and Allison, Matthew, 3:383.
6. For the idea of “breaking into a house,” see comments on 6:19–20.
7. Cf. 1 Thess. 5:1–2; 2 Peter 3:10; Rev. 3:3; 16:15.
8. See Scott, Hear Then the Parable, 211–12.
9. Carson, “Matthew,” 510.
10. See J. S. Wright and J. A. Thompson, “Marriage,” IBD, 2:955–56; Victor P. Hamilton, “Marriage (OT and ANE),” ABD, 4:559–69; Jeremias, The Parables of Jesus, 173–74.
11. For discussion of different types of lamps, see R. E. Nixon, “Lamp, Lampstand, Lantern,” IBD, 2:871–73.
12. Young, The Parables, 89–112. For a similar parable, probably given on a different occasion but with a similar emphasis, see Luke 19:11–27.
13. For discussion, see “Interest,” DJBP, 319.
14. See Carson, “Matthew,” 517.
15. For a scholarly discussion of judgment in Matthew’s Gospel, see Sim, Apocalyptic Eschatology in the Gospel of Matthew, esp. 130–39.
16. For a detailed history of interpretation at to the identity implied here, see S. W. Gray, The Least of My Brothers: Matthew 25:31–42—A History of Interpretation (SBLDS 114; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989), although Gray argues that the judgment of the church is described in 24:45–25:30, and judgment of those outside the church in 25:31–46 (358–59).
17. George S. Cansdale, “Goats,” ZPEB, 2:739–41.
18. See Gray, The Least of My Brothers; Eugene W. Pond, “Who are ‘The Least’ of Jesus’ Brothers in Matthew 25:40,” BibSac 159 (October–December 2002): 436–48.
19. This was a minority position for much of church history but has found many recent adherents. For a recent defense, see Davies and Allison, Matthew, 3:428–29; C. E. B. Cranfield, “Who are Christ’s Brothers,” Metanoia 4 (1994): 31–39.
20. See 5:47; 12:49–50; 18:15–17; 23:8; 28:10. Those who take this position: Hagner, Matthew, 2:744–45; Carson, “Matthew,” 519–21.
21. Blomberg, Matthew, 378.
22. E.g., Barbieri, “Matthew,” 81; Glasscock, Matthew, 491–92.
23. E.g., Pond, “Who are ‘The Least’ of Jesus’ Brothers in Matthew 25:40,” 443–48.
24. Morris, Matthew, 639.
25. Erickson, Christian Theology, 1200–1203; Hagner, Matthew, 2:742–43; Blomberg, Matthew, 376; Morris, Matthew, 634–35.
26. E.g., Eugene W. Pond, “The Background and Timing of the Judgment of the Sheep and Goats,” BibSac 159 (April–June 2002): 201–20; Saucy, Progressive Dispensationalism, 130.
27. Pond, “The Background and Timing of the Judgment of the Sheep and Goats,” 219–20; Saucy, Progressive Dispensationalism, 288 n. 67.
28. See Sim, Apocalyptic Eschatology in the Gospel of Matthew, 130–39.
29. Ladd, Theology of the New Testament, 206–7.
30. For a presentation of each view and interaction between adherents, see Gleason L. Archer Jr., Paul D. Feinberg, Douglas J. Moo, and Richard R. Reiter, The Rapture: Pre-, Mid-, or Post-Tribulational? (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984).
31. Personally, I hold that a pretribulational rapture best explains several theological issues (e.g., the reestablishment of Israel during the Millennium and the time required for developing a people who would populate the Millennium). But I also believe that taking the discourse in the context of Jesus’ instruction to his disciples best highlights principles of discipleship that inform any eschatological position.
32. Daniel J. Lewis, 3 Crucial Questions about the Last Days (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998), 135.
33. Lewis, 3 Crucial Questions about the Last Days, 135–36.
34. Blomberg, Parables, 193.
35. Hagner, Matthew, 2:716.
36. For an attempt to demonstrate how detailed study of prophecy has historically led to productive outcomes, see Larry D. Pettegrew, “The Rapture Debate at the Niagara Bible Conference,” BibSac 157 (July–September 2000): 331–47.
1. For an evangelical exposition of the meaning of the cross as it is anticipated in the Old Testament, narrated in the Gospels, and explained in the rest of the New Testament, see Derek Tidball, The Message of the Cross: Wisdom Unsearchable, Love Indestructible (BST; Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 2000). Matthew’s perspective is explored by Donald Senior, The Passion of Jesus in the Gospel of Matthew (Wilmington, Del.: Michael Glazier, 1985). For an extensive scholarly study of the passion activities commencing with Gethsemane, see Raymond E. Brown, The Death of the Messiah: From Gethsemane to the Grave. A Commentary on the Passion Narratives in the Four Gospels, 2 vols. (New York: Doubleday, 1994). For one other extensive scholarly bibliography, see David E. Garland, One Hundred Years of Study on the Passion Narratives (Macon, Ga.: Mercer Univ. Press, 1989).
2. Malcolm Muggeridge, “The Crucifixion,” Observer (March 26, 1967); cited in Tidball, The Message of the Cross, 117.
3. See comments on 26:59, and the helpful overview of the Sanhedrin in Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 614–16.
4. Josephus, Ant. 18.2.2 §35.
5. Ibid., 18.4.3 §95.
6. On the high priests, see Flusser, Jesus, 195–205; Bruce Chilton, “Annas,” ABD, 1:257–58; idem, “Caiaphas,” ABD, 1:803–6.
7. Josephus, Ant. 2:111.
8. This anointing is in the home of “Simon the Leper” (26:6), which is a similar, but quite different event than the anointing of Jesus by a woman in the home of Simon the Pharisee, which Luke recounts (Luke 7:36–50).
9. Some have suggested that Simon may have been the father of the brother and sisters, or the husband of Mary or Martha, though nothing in any context supports this hypothesis.
10. Notice Jesus’ comment at the other anointing scene: “You did not put oil on my head, but she has poured perfume on my feet” (Luke 7:46).
11. Rousseau and Arav, “Ointments, Perfumes,” Jesus and His World, 216–20.
12. For an overview, see Karl P. Donfried, “Chronology,” ABD, 1:1015–16. Some suggest that the Last Supper was not a Passover meal but a meal the night before the Passover (John 13:1, 20). However, the Synoptics explicitly state that the Last Supper was a Passover (Matt. 26:2, 17–19; Mark 14:1, 12, 14, 16; Luke 22:1, 7–8, 13, 15). Others suggest that Jesus and his disciples had a private Passover. However, the Passover lamb had to be slaughtered within the temple precincts and the priests would not have allowed the slaughter of the paschal lamb for a private Passover. Still others suggest that the Passover was celebrated on two consecutive days, because it would have been impossible to slay all the Passover lambs on one day, but there is not explicit evidence for such a practice.
13. Annie Jaubert, The Date of the Last Supper, trans. Isaac Rafferty (Staten Island, N.Y.: Alba, 1965). So also Morris, Matthew, 654.
14. Harold Hoehner, “Chronology,” DJG, 121; so also Thomas and Gundry, The NIV Harmony of the Gospels, 312–13.
15. This view is best presented by Carson, John, 455–58; so also Blomberg, Historical Reliability of the Gospels, 175–78.
16. For a brief overview of the difficulties and a helpful resolution of the various possibilities of the actual date in the first century, see the article “Problems in Dating the Crucifixion,” at the website of the Astronomical Applications Department of the U.S. Naval Observatory: http://aa.usno.navy.mil/faq/docs/crucifixion.html. They offer the dates of Jesus’ crucifixion as either Friday, April 7, A.D. 30, or Friday, April 3, A.D. 33. See also Doig, New Testament Chronology, who contends for the A.D. 30 dating.
17. Some conflate the predictions in Matthew and Luke, while others suggest that Jesus predicted Peter’s denials twice; see Thomas and Gundry, NIV Harmony of the Gospels, 202, note b.
18. For various customs, see Gene Schramm, “Meal Customs (Jewish),” and Dennis E. Smith, “Meal Customs (Greco-Roman),” ABD, 4:648–53.
19. Morris, Matthew, 656.
20. See Markus Bockmuehl, “A ‘Slain Messiah’ in 4Q Serekh Milhamah (4Q285)?” TynBul 43 (1992): 155–69. Bockmuehl finds little expectation of a slain messiah within first-century Jewish interpretation of Old Testament prophecies and probably none in the Dead Sea Scrolls, but posits it as likely within wider Jewish circles.
21. E.g., 8:12; 11:20–24; 13:42, 49–50; 25:46; cf. John 17:12 where Judas is called “the one headed for destruction” (lit., “the son of destruction”).
22. Senior, Matthew, 298.
23. Baruch M. Bokser, The Origins of the Seder: The Passover Rite and Early Rabbinic Judaism (Berkeley: Univ. of California Press, 1984). The expression “Haggadah of Passover” then came to be used for the entire Seder ritual as well as for the book containing the liturgy and ritual narration of the events of Deut. 26:5–9.
24. For an overview of Second Temple Jewish practices, see “Haggadah of Passover,” DJBP, 266–67; Robin Routledge, “Passover and Last Supper,” TynBul 53 (2002): 203–21; Joachim Jeremias, The Eucharistic Words of Jesus, trans. Norman Perrin (London: SCM, 1966), 84–88.
25. Routledge, “Passover and Last Supper,” 215–16.
26. Ibid., 219.
27. Cf. Clay Hamm, “The Last Supper in Matthew,” BBR 10 (2000): 53–69.
28. Routledge, “Passover and Last Supper,” 219–20.
29. See “Haggadah, Passover,” EJR, 166–67.
30. Eugene H. Merrill, “Remembering: A Central Theme in Biblical Worship,” JETS 43 (March 2000): 27–36.
31. H. Rusche, “Das letzte gemeinsame Gebet Jesu mit seinen Jungern: Der Psalm 136,” Wissenschaft und Weissheit 51 (1988): 210–12.
32. Kaiser, The Messiah in the Old Testament, 226–27.
33. Blomberg, Matthew, 393.
34. Joan E. Taylor, “The Garden of Gethsemane: NOT the Place of Jesus’ Arrest,” BAR 21.4 (July–August 1995): 26–35, 62. See also Rousseau and Arav, “Gethsemane,” Jesus and His World, 110–11.
35. Morris, Matthew, 668.
36. Cf. Wilkins, “Sinner,” DJG, 757–60.
37. Bruner, Matthew, 2:930.
38. E.g., Acts 2:23–36; 3:13–26; 7:51–53; 10:39–43; 13:26–31; 1 Cor. 15:1–7.
39. Tidball, The Message of the Cross, 134.
40. Cf. Wilkins, Discipleship in the Ancient World and Matthew’s Gospel, 169–70.
41. See comments on 4:18–20; 10:1–4.
42. Ricardo J. Quinones, “Dante,” Encyclopædia Britannica 2003, Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service, www.britannica.com/eb/article?eu=117772.
43. Quinones, “Dante.”
44. Boring, “Matthew,” 472.
45. Boring (ibid., 472–73) discusses five of these six.
46. See Lloyd John Ogilvie, The Cup of Wonder: Communion Meditations (Wheaton: Tyndale, 1976), 10–11.
1. See 10:4; 26:25; 27:3; Mark 8:19; Luke 6:15–16.; John 6:71; 12:4; 13:2; 18:2, 5. See Wilkins, Following the Master, 164ff.
2. Rengstorf, “ἑταῖρος,” TDNT, 2:701.
3. France, Matthew, 375–76.
4. Hagner, Matthew, 2:790.
5. Horsley and Hanson, Bandits, Prophets, and Messiah, 48–87.
6. For discussion, see Brown, Death of the Messiah, 357–63; Carson, “Matthew,” 551–53; Garland, “Mark,” 291.
7. For a classic, vigorous defense of the historicity of the Gospels’ account of Jesus’ trials, see Sherwin-White, “The Trial of Christ in the Synoptic Gospels,” Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament, 24–47.
8. Hagner, Matthew, 2:797.
9. Brown, Death of the Messiah, 357–63; Morris, Matthew, 678–80.
10. For a recounting of the excavation of a huge palatial mansion in Jerusalem and the possible relationship to the Gospel accounts, see Arthur Rupprecht, “The House of Annas-Caiaphas,” Archaeology in the Biblical World 1/1 (Spring 1991): 4–17. See also Rousseau and Arav, “Jerusalem, Caiaphas’s House,” Jesus and His World, 136–39.
11. For a full discussion of the Sanhedrin and its changing nature, see Brown, Death of the Messiah, 340–57. Cf. Saldarini, Pharisees, Scribes, and Sadducees.
12. John clarified for his readers that Jesus did not mean the physical temple but was prophesying the future resurrection of his body (John 2:21).
13. France, Matthew, 300–303; Morris, Matthew, 525–26; Davies and Allison, Matthew, 3:133–37; Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, 61–69.
14. Hagner, Matthew, 2:799.
15. For helpful overviews of this concept, see Guthrie, New Testament Theology, 301–21; A. R. Millard and D. W. B. Robinson, “Sons (Children) of God,” IBD, 3:1474–75.
16. The phrase “you will see” is second person plural.
17. For a full discussion of the imagery, see Darrell L. Bock, Blasphemy and Exaltation in Judaism: The Charge Against Jesus in Mark 14:53–65 (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998).
18. Note m. Sanh. 7.5, that after confirming a charge of blasphemy, “the judges stand up on their feet and rend their garments, and they may not mend them again.” Note too how Barnabas and Paul tear their clothes in horror when the people at Lystra try to assign them divine status (Acts 14:14).
19. Cf. “Blaspheme,” DJBP, 97–98.
20. Brown, The Death of the Messiah, 523.
21. Flusser (“Who Is It That Struck You?” in Jesus, 187–94) connects the mockery directly with children’s games known then and today, but also with prisoner of war scenes, where Gentiles mock Jewish prisoners.
22. Morris, Matthew, 686.
23. Davies and Allison, Matthew, 3:549.
24. Keener, Matthew (1997), 380.
25. Morris, Matthew, 694–95.
26. Otto Michel, “μεταμέλομαι, ἁμεταμέλητος,” TDNT, 4:626.
27. E.g., Leen and Kathleen Ritmeyer, “Akeldama: Potter’s Field or High Priest’s Tomb?” BAR 20 (November–December 1994): 22–35, 76–78; esp. 25.
28. The majority of scholars concede that the location of the original potter’s field remains unknown today. See the discussion in Ritmeyer and Ritmeyer, “Akeldama,” 22–35, 76–78; also in the same issue, Gideon Avni and Zvi Greenhut, “Akeldama: Resting Place of the Rich and Famous,” BAR 20 (November–December 1994): 36–46.
29. For extended discussion of the difficulties, see Douglas M. Moo, “Tradition and Old Testament in Matt 27:3–10,” in Gospel Perspectives, 3:157–75; Knowles, Jeremiah in Matthew’s Gospel, 15, 52–81.
30. Knowles, Jeremiah in Matthew’s Gospel, 77–81; L. Nortjé, “Matthew’s Motive for the Composition of the Story of Judas’s Suicide in Matthew 27:3–10,” Neotestamentica 28 (1994): 41–51.
31. Recorded in Tacitus, Annals 15.44, where he explains the rise of the term “Christians.”
32. Luke 23:2 expands this into a threefold charge: we have found this man subverting our nation, he opposes payment of taxes to Caesar, and he claims to be Christ, a king.
33. See Flusser, Jesus, 164–66.
34. Robert L. Merritt, “Jesus Barabbas and the Paschal Pardon,” JBL 104 (1985): 53–68.
35. Horsley and Hanson, Bandits, Prophets, and Messiahs, 48–87.
37. W. F. Albright and C. S. Mann, Matthew (AB 26; Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1971), 343–44.
38. See Barnett, Jesus and the Rise of Early Christianity, 144–48; Anselm C. Hagedorn and Jerome H. Neyrey, “ ‘It Was Out of Envy That They Handed Jesus Over’ (Mark 15.10): The Anatomy of Envy and the Gospel of Mark,” JSNT 69 (March 1998): 15–56.
39. Josephus, J.W. 5.4.4 §177ff.
40. See Michael J. Wilkins, “Barabbas,” ABD, 1:607.
41. E.g., Archelaus overreacted to an uprising in the temple at Passover after the death of his father Herod the Great in 4 B.C., sending in troops and cavalry who killed about three thousand pilgrims (Josephus, Ant. 17.9.3 §§213–18; idem. J.W. 2.6.2 §§88–90).
42. E.g., Lev. 20:9; Josh. 2:19; 2 Sam. 1:16; Ezek. 18:13; Acts 5:28; 18:6.
43. Robert H. Smith, “Mt 27:25—The Hardest Verse in Matthew’s Gospel,” Currents in Theology and Missiology 17 (1990): 421.
44. See Wilkins, “Matthew,” 176, for a picture of a flogging instrument with a wooden handle and six leather straps.
45. See Wilkins, Following the Master, 164–67.
46. Morris, John, 578.
47. Ralph P. Martin, “Judas Iscariot,” IBD, 2:830.
48. Martin, “Judas Iscariot,” 831.
49. See further in Wilkins, In His Image, 28–30.
50. For further background, see Wilkins, “Matthew,” 25.
51. Paul Maier, Pontius Pilate (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1996), 349.
52. John Trent, “A Father’s Heart,” Christian Parenting Today 13/5 (May–June 2001): 56.
53. See John J. Johnson, “A New Testament Understanding of the Jewish Rejection of Jesus: Four Theologians on the Salvation of Israel,” JETS 43 (June 2000): 229–46.
54. As Jewish scholars themselves note, “Despite the Christian use of Matthew for anti-Semitic attacks, the harsh polemics in the gospel do not attack Jews as a group but the leaders of the Jews (scribes, Pharisees, Sadducees, chief priest, elders) and those people who have been misled into hostility toward Jesus” (“Matthew, Jews in the Gospel of,” DJBP, 416). For a similar perspective from a broadly Christian perspective, see Anthony Saldarini, “Reading Matthew without Anti-Semitism,” The Gospel of Matthew in Current Study, ed. David E. Aune (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001): 166–84; he gives six “concrete rules for preaching and teaching about Judaism and about Jews” that have relevance for practical application (cf. 182–83).
55. J. Glyn Owen, From Simon to Peter (Herts, England: Evangelical Press, 1985), 4.
56. I have developed these practically in Wilkins, In His Image, 27–30.
57. Cited by Bob Paulson and Scott D. Noble, “Captive in Afghanistan,” Decision 43/7 (July 2002): 8.
58. “Double Jeopardy,” interview of former Taliban hostages Dayna Curry and Heather Mercer by Stan Guthrie and Wendy Murray Zoba, Christianity Today (July 8, 2002): 26–32, esp. 30.
1. Of the seven cries of Jesus from the cross, three are recorded by Luke (#1, 2, 7) and three by John (#3, 5, 6). Matthew and Mark record only the fourth saying.
2. Page, Jesus and the Land, 147–48; Rousseau and Arav, “Jerusalem, Herod’s Palace,” 151–52.
3. Similar to a U.S. Army battalion.
4. BDAG. Similar to a U.S. Army company.
5. Josephus, J.W. 5.5.8 §244. This would support Antonia being Pilate’s residence.
6. For background to the Roman military contingents, see Everett Ferguson, Backgrounds of Early Christianity, 2d ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993), 46–52.
7. See Wilkins, “Matthew,” 177, for a picture of a Roman era pavement on the Via Dolorosa inscribed with images related to “the king’s game.” See also Page, Jesus and the Land, 149–51.
8. Flusser, Jesus, 169.
9. See Plutarch, Moralia 554A/B; cf. 554D; De sera numinis vindicta (On the Delays of Divine Vengeance) 9.
10. The Gospel of Mark makes a passing reference to “a certain man from Cyrene, Simon, the father of Alexander and Rufus” (Mark 15:21), which suggests that Alexander and Rufus were persons well known to Mark’s audience, which is most likely the church at Rome (cf. Ben Witherington III, The Gospel of Mark: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001], 393–94; for bibliography see Thomas R. Schreiner, Romans [BECNT; Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998], 791). Many suggest that Rufus in Mark is the same person named Rufus whom Paul addresses in his greetings to the church at Rome (Rom. 16:13; cf. Alexander in Acts 19:33).
11. For pictures of the Garden Tomb, see Wilkins, “Matthew,” 182. For further discussion see Gabriel Barkay, “The Garden Tomb: Was Jesus Buried Here?” BAR 12 (March–April 1986): 40–57; John McRay, “Tomb Typology and the Tomb of Jesus,” Archaeology in the Biblical World 2/2 (Spring 1994): 34–44.
12. For a picture of a chamber inside the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and an artist’s recreation of the levels of the original tomb and Constantine’s monuments in relation to later building, see Wilkins, “Matthew,” 184–85. For further discussion, see Dan Bahat, “Does the Holy Sepulchre Church Mark the Burial of Jesus?” BAR 12 (May–June 1986): 26–45; Joan E. Taylor, “Golgotha: A Reconsideration of the Evidence for the Sites of Jesus’ Crucifixion and Burial,” NTS 44 (1998): 180–203; Flusser, Jesus, 255–57.
13. E.g., Morris, Matthew, 715; Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 678.
14. Cf. Carson, “Matthew,” 575; Hagner, Matthew, 2:834–35.
15. The most important historical study is Martin Hengel, Crucifixion in the Ancient World and the Folly of the Message of the Cross (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977), 77.
16. See also 27:39, 42–43, 46.
17. The religious leaders apply the words of Psalm 22:8 to Jesus either in a way that they are consciously (Hagner, Matthew, 2:839) or unconsciously (Carson, “Matthew,” 577; Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew [1999], 681) aware of the connection. If consciously, they mock Jesus by making a parallel to a known messianic prophecy. If unconsciously, this is like the unconscious prophecy that Caiaphas voiced (John 11:51–52).
18. Wilkins, “Darkness,” BTDB, 142–43; Hans Conzelmann, “σκότος, κτλ.” TDNT, 7:423–45; H.-C. Hahn, “Darkness,” NIDNTT, 1:420–25.
19. Hendriksen, Matthew, 970.
20. E.g., Boring, “Matthew,” 492.
21. Hagner says of this cry of Jesus, “This is one of the most impenetrable mysteries of the entire Gospel narrative,” and “Perhaps it is best simply to let the words stand as they are—stark in their impenetrability to us mortals” (Hagner, Matthew, 2:845–46). Morris points out, “Pious and earnest Christians have always found these words very difficult” (Leon Morris, The Cross of Christ [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988], 67). For a discussion of how Jesus perceived his own death, see Scot McKnight, “Jesus and His Death: Some Recent Scholarship,” CurBS 9 (2001): 185–228.
22. Hendriksen, Matthew, 970.
23. For full discussion of the doctrine of the atonement, see Erickson, Christian Theology, 802–23; Grudem, Systematic Theology, 570–86.
24. See Hans W. Heidland, “ὄξος,” TDNT, 5:288–89.
25. See m. Šeqal. 8.5; Josephus gives a detailed description of the curtain in J.W. 5.5.4 §§212–13.
26. Cf. Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 687.
27. Davies and Allison, Matthew, 3:633.
28. See Blomberg, Matthew, 421.
29. Cf. John W. Wenham, “When Were the Saints Raised?” JTS 32 (1981): 150–52; Carson, “Matthew,” 581–82; Blomberg, Matthew, 421.
30. Darrell L. Bock, Jesus According to Scripture: Restoring the Portrait from the Gospels (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002), 391.
31. Tidball, The Message of the Cross, 133.
32. David C. Sim, “The ‘Confession’ of the Soldiers in Matthew 27:54,” Heythrop Journal 34 (1993): 401–24. Cf. Whitney T. Shiner, “The Ambiguous Pronouncement of the Centurion and the Shrouding of Meaning in Mark,” JSNT 78 (2000): 3–22.
33. For a technical discussion of Colwell’s Rule and Apollonius’ Corollary (to Apollonius’ Rule), which point in the direction of the construction being rendered “the Son of God,” see Wallace, Greek Grammar, 256–70.
34. Kingsbury, Matthew As Story, 90.
35. Cf. Mark 15:40–41; 16:1; Luke 23:49, 55–56; 24:1, 10–11; John 19:25–27; 20:1–18.
36. Cf. Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 691–94.
37. See esp. Jane Kopas, “Jesus and Women in Matthew,” TT 47 (1990), 20; G. Osborne, “Women in Jesus’ Ministry,” WTJ 51 (1989): 275; Witherington, Women in the Ministry of Jesus, 122–23.
38. Jack Kingsbury suggests that two factors—cost and commitment—is the key to understanding whether “following Jesus” should be taken literally or metaphorically in Matthew (Kingsbury, “The Verb AKOLOUTHEIN [‘To Follow’],” 58).
39. E.g., Witherington, Women in the Ministry of Jesus, 118; Hengel, “Maria Magdalena und die Frauen als Zeugen,” Abraham unser Vater, ed. Otto Betz and Martin Hengel (Leiden: Brill, 1963), 247–48. A critique against the assumption that the women only provided domestic help for the traveling ministry team is given by David C. Sim, “The Women Followers of Jesus: The Implications of Luke 8:1–3,” Heythrop Journal 30 (1989): 51–62. Sim does not speculate what their exact role is, beyond providing some economic support.
40. E.g., Joel Green, The Gospel of Luke (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1963), 317.
41. Cf. Beasley-Murray, John, 348–49; Carson, John, 616.
42. Josephus, Ant. 13.127.
43. For a refutation of recent attempts to discredit the historicity of Joseph of Arimathea, see Gerald O’Collins and Daniel Kendall, “Did Joseph of Arimathea Exist,” Bib 75 (1994): 235–41.
44. Matthew uses the verb “become a disciple” three times (cf. 13:52; 28:19).
45. Cf. Przybylski, Righteousness in Matthew and His World of Thought. The expression “adherents to Jesus” expresses the central meaning of the relationship in typical first-century usage; cf. Wilkins, The Concept of Disciple in Matthew’s Gospel, 41–42, 124–25.
46. Michael J. Wilkins, “Named and Unnamed Disciples in Matthew: A Literary/ Theological Study,” SBLSP 30 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1991), 418–39.
47. Cf. Keener, Matthew (1999), 691–94.
48. Cf. W. Boyd Barrick, “The Rich Man from Arimathea (Matt 27:57–60) and 1QIsaa,” JBL 96 (1977): 235–39.
49. Gundry, Matthew, 580; Kingsbury, Matthew As Story, 27.
50. See Kjeld Nielsen, “Incense,” ABD, 3:404–9; Victor H. Matthews, “Perfumes and Spices,” ABD, 5:226–28; Joel Green, “Burial of Jesus,” DJG, 88–92.
51. Cf. John Wenham, Easter Enigma: Are the Resurrection Accounts in Conflict? 2d ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1992), 60–67.
52. E.g., Brown, Death of the Messiah, 2:1310–13; Davies and Allison, Matthew, 3:652–53.
53. Cf. Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 696–97; Carson, “Matthew,” 585.
54. Ex. 16:29 set a standard for travel on the Sabbath, admonishing people not to go out so that they could observe the Sabbath rest. The rabbis allowed a total distance of two thousand cubits for travel on the Sabbath—approximately three thousand feet or a little over half a mile.
55. See citation of examples in “Burial Sites,” DJBP, 104.
56. France, Matthew, 38.
57. Charles H. Spurgeon, “The Lesson of the Cross,” Evening by Evening (Springdale: Whitaker House, 1984), 157; cited in Calvin Miller, ed., The Book of Jesus, rev. ed. (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1998), 368–69.
58. Grudem, Systematic Theology, 580–81. See here Grudem’s important caveat on using the “ransom” analogy.
59. Howell, Matthew’s Inclusive Story, 158.
60. See Kingsbury, Matthew As Story, 90.
61. Josephus, Against Apion 2:201.
63. This material is developed more fully in Wilkins, “Women in the Teaching and Example of Jesus,” Women and Men in Ministry, 91–112.
64. Lloyd John Ogilvie, The Cup of Wonder: Communion Meditations (Wheaton: Tyndale, 1976), 75.
65. Cf. W. Harold Mare, “1 Corinthians,” EBC, 10:198; Fee, 1 Corinthians, 92; William F. Orr, 1 Corinthians (AB 32; Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1976), 162–63.
66. Martin Luther, Luther’s Meditations on the Gospels (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1962), 135.
67. Ibid, 135–36.
68. E.g., Michael J. Gorman, Cruciformity: Paul’s Narrative Spirituality of the Cross (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001), 369.
69. Gordon Dillow, “Battle Transforms Fresh-Faced Troops,” Orange County Register (March 23, 2003), News: 1, 21.
70. Howard Hendricks, “Me, Myself, and My Tomorrows,” BibSac 157 (July–September 2000): 268.
71. Gerd Theissen, The Shadow of the Galilean: The Quest of the Historical Jesus in Narrative Form, trans. John Bowden (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1987), 177.
72. Lord John Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton, The History of Freedom, “Introduction,” by James C. Holland (Grand Rapids: Acton Institute, 1993).
73. Watts’s personal life was a model of consistent faithfulness as a minister of the gospel from 1674 to 1748. He not only carried out a significant ministry of preaching and writing, but wrote over 460 hymns.
1. Cf. Morris, Matthew, 733; Hagner, Matthew, 2:868.
2. N. T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God, vol. 3 of Christian Origins and the Question of God (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2003), 718.
3. The literature on the resurrection is massive, but the following will give the reader a start. For the most thorough study of the historical and exegetical issues, see Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God; see also Richard N. Longenecker, Life in the Face of Death: The Resurrection Message of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998). The historical reliability of the resurrection narratives is set forth by Blomberg, The Historical Reliability of the Gospels, 100–110; William Lane Craig, “Did Jesus Rise from the Dead?” in Jesus Under Fire, 142–76; and at a more scholarly level, William Lane Craig, Assessing the New Testament Evidence for the Historicity of the Resurrection of Jesus (Lewiston, N.Y.: Edwin Mellen, 1989). On a popular, apologetic level are Gary R. Habermas, The Resurrection of Jesus: An Apologetic (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1980) and George Eldon Ladd, I Believe in the Resurrection of Jesus (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975). The theological distinctives of each Gospel are explored by Grant R. Osborne, The Resurrection Narratives: A Redactional Study (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984). For a discussion of the philosophical issues, see Stephen T. Davis, Risen Indeed: Making Sense of the Resurrection (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993); at a more scholarly level, Peter Carnley, The Structure of Resurrection Belief (Oxford: Clarendon, 1987). For devotional meditations, see James Montgomery Boice, The Christ of the Empty Tomb (Chicago: Moody Press, 1985).
4. Morris, Matthew, 733; Hagner, Matthew, 2:868.
5. This reconstruction is suggested by John Wenham, Easter Enigma, 139 and passim. For a similar reconstruction see Craig L. Blomberg, Jesus and the Gospels: An Introduction and Survey (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1997), 354–55.
6. See comments on 27:57–61; cf. Wenham, Easter Enigma, 60–67.
7. This is the root of the later practice of Christians gathering on Sunday morning to worship the risen Jesus (e.g., 1 Cor. 16:2); cf. Carson, “Matthew,” 587; Davies and Allison, Matthew, 3:663; France, Matthew, 406; Hagner, Matthew, 2:868–69; Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 700; Morris, Matthew, 734 n.3.
8. Cf. Gen. 42:17–18; 1 Sam. 30:12–13; 1 Kings 20:29; 2 Chron. 10:5, 12; Est. 4:16; 5:1.
9. Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 700. See also the comments on 27:59–61.
10. Robertson, “Matthew,” Word Pictures in the New Testament, 1:240–41.
11. See Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God, 636.
12. See Hurtado, One God, One Lord, 71–92; Carol A. Newsom, “Gabriel,” ABD, 2:863; Carol A. Newsom and Duane F. Watson, “Angel,” ABD, 1:248–55.
13. Hagner, Matthew, 2:869.
14. This is the reverse of the earlier Matthean practice, such as when Matthew reports two demoniacs while Mark and Luke focus only on one (cf. Matt. 8:28; Mark 5:1–20; Luke 8:26–39).
15. Cf. Wallace, Greek Grammar, 437–38.
16. See 3:16–17; 17:5; cf. Blomberg, Matthew, 427.
17. See Carson, “Matthew,” 589–90; Hagner (Matthew, 2:874) doubts the wider association.
18. E.g., Grant R. Osborne, “Women in Jesus’ Ministry,” WTJ 51 (1989): 270.
19. E.g., Rabbi Akiba in m. Yeb. 16:7. See also m. Šeb. 4:1; Josephus, Ant. 4:219.
20. See Witherington, Women in the Ministry of Jesus, 9–10, for a discussion of the mixed rabbinic attitudes toward women’s ability to give witness.
21. For discussion of the broader issues, see Craig, “Did Jesus Rise From the Dead?” 151–55.
22. E.g., Beare, The Gospel According to Matthew, 543; George Wesley Buchanan, The Gospel of Matthew (The Mellen Biblical Commentary; Lewiston, N.Y.: Mellen Biblical Press, 1996), 2:1022–23; Hare, Matthew, 326–27.
23. There is a far-fetched recent theory that the body had only been placed in a shallow grave, barely covered by dirt, and then scavenging dogs ate the corpse (John Dominic Crossan, Who Killed Jesus [San Francisco: HarperCollins, 1995], 187–88). But this does not accord with the respect with which the Jews treated all bodies and with the grudging respect that the Romans accorded Jewish bodies because of their desire to keep the peace (see Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God, 638).
24. For a defense of the historicity of the events see William Lane Craig, “The Guard at the Tomb,” NTS 30 (1984): 273–81; Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God, 638–40; Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 713–15.
25. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God, 638–39.
26. Craig, “The Guard at the Tomb,” 273; citing also Paul Rohrbach, Die Berichte über die Auferstehung Jesu Christi (Berlin: Georg Reimer, 1898), 79.
27. This implies that the tomb was outside the city walls; for significance, see comments on 27:33, 60.
28. See his Dialogue with Trypho 108.2.
29. Cf. Blomberg, Matthew, 429; Hagner, Matthew, 2:881–83; Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 715–21.
30. Chrysostom, “The Gospel of Matthew, Homily 90.2,” cited in Simonetti, Matthew 14–28, 1b:314.
31. Cf. Paul Hertig, Matthew’s Narrative Use of Galilee in the Multicultural and Missiological Journeys of Jesus (Mellen Biblical Press Series 46; Lewiston: Edwin Mellen, 1998), 82–127.
32. Wright refers to this statement as having “the strongest mark of authenticity in this paragraph” (The Resurrection of the Son of God, 643). This ambiguous comment would not have occurred to someone telling the story as a pure fiction.
33. Cf. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God, 644; Davies and Allison, Matthew, 3:681–82; P. W. van der Horst, “Once More: The Translation of οἱ δε in Matthew 28.17,” JSNT 27 (1986): 105–9; McNeile, St. Matthew, 434.
34. For discussion of the article as a personal pronoun, see Wallace, Greek Grammar, 211–13.
35. Hagner, Matthew, 2:884, points to the following examples, although he grants some of them are ambiguous: 2:5; 4:20, 22; 14:17, 33; 15:34; 16:7, 14; 20:5, 31; 21:25; 22:19; 26:15; 26:67; 27:4, 21, 23; 28:15.
36. E.g., 17:17 apistos (“unbelievers”) or Luke 24:38 dialogismoi (“doubts”).
38. Hagner, Matthew, 2:884.
39. Carson, “Matthew,” 593.
40. See also Morris, Matthew, 745.
41. Otto Michel, “The Conclusion of Matthew’s Gospel: A Contribution to the History of the Easter Message,” The Interpretation of Matthew, ed. Graham N. Stanton, 2d ed. (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1995), 45.
42. Hagner, Matthew, 2:881.
43. For discussion, see Doyle, “Matthew’s Intention As Discerned by His Structure,” 34–54; David R. Bauer, The Structure of Matthew’s Gospel (Sheffield: Almond Press, 1988).
44. Cf. Blomberg, Matthew, 431.
45. Cf. Carson, “Matthew,” 595; Hagner, Matthew, 2:886.
46. Robertson, “Matthew,” 244–45.
47. For the way in which participles attendant to an imperative accrue imperatival force, see Wallace, Greek Grammar, 640–45; also Carson, “Matthew,” 597; Hagner, Matthew, 2:886–87.
48. Osborne, The Resurrection Narratives, 91; cf. the note in Moisés Silva, “New Lexical Semitisms?” ZNTW 69 (1978): 256 n. 9.
49. For a discussion of the similarities to, yet distinct differences of, discipleship after Pentecost, see Wilkins, Following the Master, chs. 13–16.
50. See comments on 13:52 and 27:57; also Davies and Allison, Matthew, 3:684; Hagner, Matthew, 1:401–2; Morris, Matthew, 746; Przybylski, Righteousness in Matthew, 109–10; Wilkins, Discipleship in the Ancient World and Matthew’s Gospel, 160–63.
51. See Wilkins, Following the Master, 188–89.
52. E.g., Stephen Hre Kio, “Understanding and Translating ‘Nations’ in Mt 28:19,” BT 41 (1990), 230–39; Douglas R. A. Hare, The Theme of Jewish Persecution of Christians in the Gospel According to St. Matthew (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1967).
53. E.g., see Davies and Allison, Matthew, 3:684; Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 719–20; Charles H. H. Scobie, “Israel and the Nations: An Essay in Biblical Theology,” TynBul 43 (1992): 283–305; esp. 297–98.
54. Likewise, this does not abolish the promises made to Israel nationally. We contended earlier that there remains a future role for Israel (cf. Matt. 21:42–43, see comments; Rom. 11:25–33).
55. Alfred Plummer, An Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to St. Matthew (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1982), 430.
56. E.g., Blomberg, Matthew, 431; Keener, A Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (1999), 718–19.
57. Richard DeRidder, Discipling the Nations (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1975), 190. For discussion of the meaning of baptism as “adherence,” see William B. Badke, “Was Jesus a Disciple of John?” EvQ 62 (1990): 195–204.
58. Cf. Clinton E. Arnold, “Acts,” ZIBBC, 2:236.
59. E.g., onoma in LXX (Ex. 3:13–15; Prov. 18:10; cf. Jub. 36:7).
60. Cf. Davies and Allison, Matthew, 3:685. For the use of eis with onoma in the sense of “in” employed here, not meaning into, see 18:20; cf. 10:41–42.
61. Various prepositions are used, such as epi, eis, and en, but without significant differences in nuance.
62. Cf. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God, 644–45.
63. This term is also important as a theme of discipleship in John’s Gospel (e.g., John 14:15, 23–24). See Melvyn R. Hillmer, “They Believed in Him: The Johannine Tradition,” in Patterns of Discipleship in the New Testament, ed. R. N. Longnecker (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 92.
64. Gottlob Schrenk, “ἐντέλλομαι, ἐντολη,” TDNT, 2:545: “In this context the word ἐντέλλεσθαι simply expresses the unconditional obligation to obedience which, grounded christologically, is the obedience of faith.”
65. Davies and Allison, Matthew, 3:686: “But more than verbal revelation is involved, for such revelation cannot be separated from Jesus’ life, which is itself a command. ἐνετειλάμην accordingly unifies word and deed and so recalls the entire book: everything is in view. The earthly ministry as a whole is an imperative.”
66. Carson, “Matthew,” 599: “Jesus’ words, like the words of Scripture, are more enduring than heaven and earth (24:35); and the peculiar expression “everything I have commanded you” is . . . reminiscent of the authority of Yahweh (Exod 29:35; Deut 1:3, 41; 7:11; 12:11, 14).”
67. H. N. Ridderbos, Matthew, trans. Ray Togtman (Bible Student’s Commentary’s; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1987), 555–56.
68. Green, Matthew, 322–23.
69. Longenecker, “Introduction,” Life in the Face of Death, 1.
70. Cited in Boice, The Christ of the Empty Tomb, 79–80.
71. C. S. Lewis, The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe (New York: Religious Book Club, 1973), 1:149.
72. Peter Kreeft and Ronald K. Tacelli, Handbook of Christian Apologetics (Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press, 1994), 177.
73. Daniel Defoe, The True Born Englishman (1701), pt. 1, 1.1.; cited in “Defoe, Daniel,” Encyclopædia Britannica (2003).
74. Bruner, Matthew, 2:1072.
75. Guthrie, New Testament Introduction, 21.