Tag Archives: Gospel of Matthew

Matthew 11: 1-15 Jesus and John the Baptist: Identity, Time and Authority

9 Replies

Saint John the Baptist in Prison Visited by Salome, Guercino (1591-1666)

Matthew 11: 1-15

Parallel Luke 7: 18-28

1 Now when Jesus had finished instructing his twelve disciples, he went on from there to teach and proclaim his message in their cities.

2 When John heard in prison what the Messiah was doing, he sent word by his disciples 3 and said to him, “Are you the one who is to come, or are we to wait for another?” 4 Jesus answered them, “Go and tell John what you hear and see: 5 the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the poor have good news brought to them. 6 And blessed is anyone who takes no offense at me.”

7 As they went away, Jesus began to speak to the crowds about John: “What did you go out into the wilderness to look at? A reed shaken by the wind? 8 What then did you go out to see? Someone dressed in soft robes? Look, those who wear soft robes are in royal palaces. 9 What then did you go out to see? A prophet? Yes, I tell you, and more than a prophet. 10 This is the one about whom it is written,

‘See, I am sending my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way before you.’

11 Truly I tell you, among those born of women no one has arisen greater than John the Baptist; yet the least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he. 12 From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven has suffered violence, and the violent take it by force. 13 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John came; 14 and if you are willing to accept it, he is Elijah who is to come. 15 Let anyone with ears listen!

Jesus concludes the instructions for his disciples, and we return to narrative where we are again confronted with the question of Jesus’ identity and authority. In chapters eight and nine we were drawn in a rhythm of stories of acts of power which disclosed Jesus’ identity and authority combined with stories interjected which point to the character of discipleship under Jesus. After Jesus completes his instructions for his disciples his encounter with a group of John’s disciples returns us to the reflections upon Jesus’ identity in chapter eleven which will use language strikingly similar to some other New Testament authors and link into themes in Paul (in this section), John (in the next section) and again Paul (in the final section). While Matthew may not develop these themes in the same what that Paul or John will it does at least allude to some common language and understandings about Jesus’ identity already being present in the time of the compilation of Matthew’s gospel and continues to point to Jesus’ identity being greater than even a title like Messiah (or Christ) can encompass.

The opening verse of chapter eleven transitions us from the instruction to narrative in a pattern commonly used in Matthew’s gospel (see also 7:27; 13:53; 19:1 and 26:1). The language of this transition is also similar to the language that Deuteronomy narrates Moses using at the end of each of his teaching of the twelve tribes of Israel (Deuteronomy 31:1, 31:24 and 32:45) and further heightens the connection between the twelve tribes of Israel and the twelve disciples.  The translation of the Greek teleo here as ‘finished’ is appropriate and contrasts to the normal translation of the same term in Matthew 5:48 as ‘perfect’ which I address at length in that section. The word translated ‘instruction’ (Greek diatasso) has a firmer sense of commanding, ordering or directing and it reinforces the position of Jesus as one to give orders and to send out these followers into the prepared fields for harvest. Jesus may have completed giving instructions to his disciples, but he now moves towards the continued proclamation of the kingdom of heaven and teaching about how to live as a community under that kingdom to the cities on his journey.

Jesus has sent forth his disciples but in the presence of the crowds he receives the disciples of John who come to him and question his identity. John has heard in prison of what Jesus is doing, and the words behind the ‘what the Messiah is doing’ is literally the work of Christ (Greek erga tou Christou). Christ and Messiah are the same word (Messiah is the transliterated Hebrew and Christ is the transliterated Greek) and it refers to one who is anointed to rule. While Christ or Messiah or the Latin Rex all refer to kingship and John the Baptist’s reference to the work of the Christ probably indicates an understand Jesus in terms of the awaited king to reestablish the Davidic line and bring about the renewal of Israel. Yet, the works that Jesus is doing is not the work of a warrior king, like David, (at least not against the armies of Rome) but rather there is a different quality to the work of Jesus. John’s query through his disciples asking, “are you the one?” provides another query into the identity of Jesus and its meaning.

Jesus’ answer refers to the works narrated in chapters eight and nine, but their form also points back to language of Isaiah, particularly 35: 5-6:

Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf unstopped; then the lame shall leap like a deer, and the tongues of the speechless sing for joy.  Isaiah 35: 5-6a

Being the Messiah or the Son of David is redefined in terms of healing rather than military conflict. In fact, the opposition to the kingdom of heaven’s approach will be by those who use violence to bring about peace. The kingdom of heaven is not the violently maintained Pax Romana which is enforced (often brutally) by the legions of the empire or the kings and rulers of the various provinces of the empire. The Christ as embodied by Jesus embodies both the characteristics of a prophet like Elijah or Elisha (who would heal and even raise the dead), a Moses who can give instructions to the nation of Israel but also a king with authority.

Jesus’ answer to John’s disciples ends in another beatitude, like the beginning of the Sermon on the Mount, where “blessed (happy) is anyone who takes no offense at me.” As I mentioned when discussing the beatitudes in Matthew 5, this takes us into the rhythm of wisdom literature where one is ‘blessed’ to be like the saying illustrates. Wisdom is going to be introduced in our next section, but here we are also by the Greek skandalizo which is the verbal form of skandalon used by Paul, for example in 1 Corinthians 1: 23:

but we proclaim Christ crucified, a stumbling block (skandalon-scandal) to the Jews and foolishness to the Greeks.

Paul will in 1 Corinthians allude to the wisdom of God, which is Christ crucified, and as we will see as the conversation continues between Jesus and the crowd we will also be brought into an identification with Jesus and the character of wisdom. Here it is worth having one’s ear open to the identity being alluded to as Jesus redefines the expectations of Messiah initially in terms of healing and then highlighting the ‘offense’ that will cause many to choose the path of foolishness rather than wisdom.

As John’s disciples depart Jesus returns to the crowd to talk about the identity of John by extension his own identity. Jesus rhetorically negative responses about what the people went into the wilderness to encounter John the Baptist is a pretty direct jab at Herod Antipas. A reed shaken by the wind probably alludes to the coinage Herod Antipas issued which uses reeds on them. Reeds are common in Israel and while they are blown about by the wind because they are unreliable for strength. Jesus may be referring to the way Herod Antipas was ‘battered’ by John’s prophetic condemnation of his relationship with Herodias. This is sharpened by the ‘soft robes’ description. The word ‘soft’ can also be translated ‘effeminate’ which would be a strong criticism indeed in the ancient world. Herod is subtly accused of being weak, unreliable and non-masculine. John the Baptist is the contrast to Herod Antipas (even though he is imprisoned by him) and his role is that of a prophet and specifically the prophet sent to prepare the way.

Matthew uses scripture to point us to the identity of Jesus in surprising ways. Here he uses the same passage Mark quotes in relation to John the Baptist (see Mark 1:2 where Mark misquotes this as Isaiah). The reference is to Malachi 3: 1:

See I am sending my messenger to prepare the way before me, and the Lord whom you seek will suddenly come to his temple.

The use of Malachi is important because it is the end of Malachi where the hope for a return of Elijah comes:

Lo, I will send you the prophet Elijah before the great and terrible day of the LORD comes. He will turn the hearts of parents to their children and the hearts of children to their parents, so that I will not come and strike the land with a curse. Malachi 4: 5-6

John the Baptist’s identity is linked to Elijah who prepares the way for the coming of the LORD, the God of Israel, and by at least allusion Jesus is linked to the LORD. Messiah as a title is insufficient for who Jesus is in Matthew’s gospel. It, like the Son of David, Son of God, and Son of Man it points to a portion of Jesus’ identity but ultimately needs to be redefined in the terms of the ‘works of the Messiah.’ John the Baptist may be greater than any who came before him, but in the dawning kingdom of heaven even the least of its citizens are now greater than John for they are a part of a new thing. The crowd hearing the proclamation of Jesus stand at a critical time for they are seeing what the prophets and the law and John the Baptist all prepared the way for. What they are seeing and hearing is the fulfillment of the prophetic and covenantal hope of Israel.

Verse twelve and thirteen can be read multiple ways. The NRSV renders ‘the kingdom of heaven has suffered violence, and the violent take it by force. For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John came.’ In translating this there are two significant issues: first in the kingdom of heaven’s ‘suffering violence and being taken by force’ and secondly in the sense the prophets and the law ‘prophesied until John came.’ The first passage the Greek biazetai kai biastai arpazoousin auten is behind this phrase. Biazetai and biastai are a related verb and noun. While the NRSV’s translation of third person singular passive biazaetai as ‘has suffered violence’ is the traditional rendering of a verb that indicates entering by force it can also mean that the kingdom of heaven has entered forcefully or entered in power and in resistance to that power violent men have tried to force their way into the kingdom. The kingdom of heaven does come in power as illustrated by the healings and Jesus’ authority of sin, the demonic, creation and even death demonstrated in the previous chapters, but it will not be established by violence. There are conflicting visions between those who are looking to Jesus in terms of a traditional king or emperor whose peace is maintained by military force. Jesus himself will be seized by violent men and they will attempt to maintain their power through their violence. There is a conflict between the kingdom of heaven and those violent men who maintain the kingdoms of the earth, and the kingdom of heaven is not powerless, but it will not respond like a king or emperor. The second translational issue is whether the law and prophets have ceased their function after John came and that prophesy is at an end. I would keep the Greek word order and render the phrase ‘the law and the prophets up to John prophesied.’ There is a temporal aspect to this Greek phrase but the way the English rearranges the words in the NRSV can be read as John the Baptist bringing an end to prophecy where the Greek simply states that those who came before John and including John prophesied.

Moving back out of the translational reeds we do have in this exchange between the disciples of John, the crowds and Jesus a continued reflection on who John the Baptist is and by extension who Jesus is. John the Baptist, for those willing to hear is Elijah, and Jesus is the one for whom Elijah is preparing the way. Messiah or Christ as it is applied to Jesus needs to be understood in relations to the ‘works of the Messiah’ demonstrated by Jesus. The kingdom that Jesus proclaims and reigns over is not a kingdom created by violent men like the conquests by David or Caesar, but it is not without power. Its power may seem like foolishness to the Greeks and a stumbling block to the Jews in Paul’s language. Continuing in Paul’s language in 1 Corinthians and preparing us for the next section this ‘Christ Jesus, who became for us the wisdom of God’ is the Jesus who will be the one crucified by violent men is also the one in whom this paradoxical power of the kingdom of heaven resides. This power that allows, “the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the poor have good news brought to them.”

Matthew 10: 34-42 Conflict, Wages and Hospitality for the Followers of Jesus

5 Replies

James Tissot, The Exhortation to the Apostles (between 1886 and 1894)

Matthew 10: 34-42

Parallels Luke 22: 36; Luke 14: 25-27; 17:33; Luke 10: 16; Mark 9: 41

34 “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword.

35 For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law;

36 and one’s foes will be members of one’s own household. 37 Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; 38 and whoever does not take up the cross and follow me is not worthy of me. 39 Those who find their life will lose it, and those who lose their life for my sake will find it.

40 “Whoever welcomes you welcomes me, and whoever welcomes me welcomes the one who sent me. 41 Whoever welcomes a prophet in the name of a prophet will receive a prophet’s reward; and whoever welcomes a righteous person in the name of a righteous person will receive the reward of the righteous; 42 and whoever gives even a cup of cold water to one of these little ones in the name of a disciple — truly I tell you, none of these will lose their reward.”

As the followers of Jesus are sent out as herald of the approaching kingdom of heaven, they will meet resistance from those who have aligned themselves with the kingdom of the world. Although Jesus will practice non-violence his reception by others will not always be peaceful and for the disciples who will follow him they also must be prepared for the reality that their vocation could cost them their families, their security, their reputation and even their lives. For a community that is experiencing persecution for their faithfulness to Jesus’ call this, like the rest of this chapter, could be heard as a gracious affirmation of their faithfulness amid their struggle. It may help them link their suffering with the suffering of Jesus and may encourage them to hope, in Paul’s language, that if they have suffered the loss of all things, they may regard the things lost as rubbish so that they may gain Christ and be found in him. (Philippians 3: 8-9)

Although Matthew 21: 34 (and the similar command in Luke 22: 36) have sometimes been taken out of context for Christians who wanted an authorization for owning weapons or using violence to read the text in this way is to misunderstand who Jesus is and what Jesus represents. In the Lukan passage, which is set immediately before Jesus’ betrayal, Jesus’ response when the disciples take his words literally and point to the two swords that they have is probably ironic when he says, “It is enough.” I read this passage as one of the times where Jesus does become perplexed by his followers inability to understand he is not talking about using swords to impose one’s will (this is heightened in Luke 22: 49-51 when Jesus responds to the disciple’s use of a sword by rebuking him and saying “No more of this” and then healing the injured slave). Violence is not Jesus’ way, but neither will his message literally throw peace upon the earth. The sword here refers to the conflict which will occur between the disciples and those who they interact with. Even the foundational relationships of family are not exempt from rupture and betrayal over differing receptions of Jesus’ proclamation.

Family may be important for many modern people, but familial relationships were central to one’s identity in the ancient world. Throughout most of history one’s identity was handed on from one’s family, and this is one of the reasons Matthew spends the first seventeen verses of the gospel narrating Jesus’ family tree.  Yet, in this new community where one’s relationship comes from Christ and brothers and sisters and mothers are those who are in the presence of Jesus this displaces the central position of family in one’s identity. Relationships between parents and children and daughters and mothers-in-law may be places where disciples experience the heartbreak of betrayal and brokenness. Jesus is demanding the central place in his followers’ lives. The familial love (this is the Greek phileo type of love, where Philadelphia, the city of brotherly love gets its name) between parents, children and siblings is to come second to the commitment to Jesus.

Those who follow Jesus may have to suffer for that willingness to follow. Just as Jesus may be slandered by being associated with Beelzebul and those associated with him will also be slandered, so those who follow the one who goes to the cross may find their own crosses waiting for them. Most of the twelve disciples named at the beginning of this chapter are crucified in some manner. The famous paradox of those who find their life will lose it and those who lose their life for Christ’s sake will find it is a little more direct in the Greek. The word translated ‘life’ is the Greek psuche which is normally translated ‘soul.’ In Hebrew thought the ‘soul’ was not detachable from one’s life but was the center of who one is (it would not have the body/soul dichotomy of later Greek and even Christian thought). If one attempts to find one’s soul, one’s raison d’etre (reason for existing) one ironically destroys it (Greek apollumi-to destroy, ruin, kill) but if one’s original reason for existing is destroyed because of Christ they find their reason for life.  In Martin Luther King Jr.’s memorable quote from a speech in Detroit on June 23, 1963, “There are some things so dear, some things so precious, some things so eternally true, that they are worth dying for. And I submit to you that if a man has not discovered something that he will die for, he isn’t fit to live”

These sayings are placed in a narrative context where the disciples are being sent forth to be received into peoples’ homes, and in a culture where hospitality has a high value, what Jesus states that receiving an emissary of the kingdom of heaven is equivalent to receiving God. Whoever welcomes a disciple of Jesus welcomes Jesus, and whoever welcomes Jesus welcomes the God who sends Jesus. This is a theme that will come back in Matthew 25:31-46 where receiving one of the ‘least of these’ is equivalent to receiving Jesus. Jesus is found among the little ones who need to receive care and hospitality from the households and communities they encounter. In addition to the high honor of receiving God there is also a sharing in the wages (Greek misthos is better translated wages than reward here) of the prophet or righteous person. The wages of a prophet or righteous person may not be pleasant in terms of what they receive when they are acting as a prophet or acting righteously in a world that doesn’t practice Jesus’ understanding of righteousness. Those who shelter a prophet or a righteous person may also receive the ‘wages’ delivered by the society towards the prophet. But wages here has a primarily positive sense in the light of the approaching kingdom of God where God will ultimately be the one who rewards both those sending and those receiving the messengers.

Even though there is not the verbal linkage in the Greek between little one (Greek mikros) and the ‘little faith ones’ (Greek oligopistos) there is still a thematic parallel, especially when linking little ones and disciples.  Little ones here probably goes beyond just the scope of welcoming the messengers of Jesus and probably extends to the broader ideas of hospitality grounded in the vision of what Israel and now the community of the faithful is to be towards the rest of the world. The community of little faith ones gathered around Jesus are to be those who offer water as a sign of compassion to those who need water. Welcoming a disciple in hospitality means welcoming Jesus but as we will be reminded in Matthew 25: 31-46 the followers of Jesus will be those who welcome those who are hungry, thirsty, a stranger, naked, sick or in prison. Sometimes the ones in need will be disciples needing hospitality extended to them because they are strangers coming into towns they do not know. Other times the ones in need will be the poor in spirit, the mourning, the meek, those hungering and thirsting for righteousness, and those who are persecuted. The community which Jesus is sending the disciples out to find is the community that the people of Israel were set apart to embody. The disciples are to go looking among the lost sheep of Israel for the remnant still practicing the hospitality that the law expected them to practice.

Matthew 10: 24-33 Hope in the Midst of Resistance

6 Replies

James Tissot, The Exhortation to the Apostles (between 1886 and 1894)

Matthew 10: 24-34

Parallels Mark 13: 9-13; Luke 21: 12-19, Luke 12: 2-9

24 “A disciple is not above the teacher, nor a slave above the master; 25 it is enough for the disciple to be like the teacher, and the slave like the master. If they have called the master of the house Beelzebul, how much more will they malign those of his household!

26 “So have no fear of them; for nothing is covered up that will not be uncovered, and nothing secret that will not become known. 27 What I say to you in the dark, tell in the light; and what you hear whispered, proclaim from the housetops. 28 Do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell. 29 Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from your Father. 30 And even the hairs of your head are all counted. 31 So do not be afraid; you are of more value than many sparrows.

32 “Everyone therefore who acknowledges me before others, I also will acknowledge before my Father in heaven; 33 but whoever denies me before others, I also will deny before my Father in heaven.

­The relation of the disciple to Jesus can’t be captured in a single image. There is the element where they are like the disciple/student who learns from the teacher: listening to what the teacher says, imitating what the teacher does, practicing what the teacher preaches, living like the teacher invites their students to live. But there is also the slave (and this is better than softening the term to servant) and lord relationship (the word translated master is the word often translated lord in relation to Jesus) where the relationship is not one of equals but of master and subordinate. Modern people who tend to think of themselves as free willed individuals may chafe at the lord/slave dynamic and it also has the additional baggage, particularly in the United States, of our standing in the continuing long shadow of centuries of brutal slavery in the new world. As uncomfortable as the term slave may be to our ears, I do think we need to accept that for Matthew this was an appropriate metaphor to understand the relationship of the disciple to Jesus. The yoke that Jesus may offer is lighter than the yoke offered by others, but it still involves submission to the way of the Christ. But finally, the image is also the image of a member of the household, a child of father and one whose identity is bound to this new household of God. One’s identity as a disciple involves learning, serving, submission, but also inclusion as a part of a family which imputes a new identity to the household of Christ.

Becoming a herald of the kingdom of heaven and being identified with Jesus will also bring on conflict with those who have set themselves up in opposition to the kingdom of heaven. Jesus mentions that they will call the lord of the house Beelzebul (which we encounter later in Matthew 12: 22-32) they will also encounter those who label them (mistakenly) as those serving demonic forces rather than divine. Much of the resistance will come from those who occupy some type of religious authority, whether Pharisees, Scribes, Sadducees, and eventually the priests in Jerusalem. Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom of heaven, his teaching, his practices and those he draws into his household will not fit within their understanding of what it means to be faithful. For Jesus, their judgment and punishment are not what ultimately matters. They may revile and persecute and they may even be able to order death of the followers of Jesus, but the followers of Jesus who hear these words after the resurrection trust that the one who speaks these words is stronger than the ones who can threaten death. I’ve written about the concept of Gehenna/Hell in the New Testament earlier when we first encountered Jesus using this language in chapter five. Matthew uses this language more than the other gospels and does have a concept of punishment beyond this life, but never dwells upon it. Gehenna is the place where those opposed to the kingdom of heaven find themselves. In a choice where the foolish end up in Gehenna and the wise in the kingdom of heaven the followers of Jesus are expected to know the wise path.

These followers of Jesus are never alone in this confrontation. One of the bookend themes of Matthew’s gospel is the presence of God (in Jesus) with us. Even sparrows, which can be acquired cheaply, are highlighted as being seen and valued by God. Earlier in the Matthew 6: 25-34 the birds of the air where used as an illustration of God’s providence for these humble creatures and now the theme is reinforced again by encouraging disciples not to be afraid for not only is every hair on their head known, but again that they are more valuable than many sparrows.

What the disciples have heard, they are now to bear witness to. What was spoken in secret they are to make known. Those being sent out are to be those who reveal the truth that has been unseen. While Matthew may not use Mark’s secrecy motif where what was covered up was covered up in order to be revealed, Matthew does see the necessity for the hearers of the words to Jesus’ followers being proclaimed. They were not formed to be merely private practitioners of Jesus’ ideas, but the process of discipleship is connected to the necessity of proclamation. They are the heralds sent forth to acknowledge their Lord. There is a need for these workers to go out into the mission field, to risk the danger of those who will oppose them and to confess faithfully before others what they have learned. There is a need for the message to go forth so that people may align themselves with the approaching kingdom of heaven, so that they may be ready to receive the Son of Man as he comes. For those who have been disciples, slaves and members of the household of God the wise choice is to turn towards the kingdom of the Father of their Lord. To deny this would be to risk finding oneself, with the others who opposed the kingdom of heaven dwelling in Gehenna.

These passages may sound stark to our modern ears and that speaks to our distance from the early hearers of this message. This is intended as a message of comfort and just as the blessings at the beginning of the Sermon on the Mount speak to people who most individuals would not consider blessed, so these warnings of persecution reinforce that the resistance they encounter are signs of their faithfulness. These passages speak to people who may be experiencing persecution by those with religious or political authorities and it reminds them that the persecution they are experiencing does not negate the reality of their inclusion in the household of God. Their experience of scarcity and rejection is like what the prophets received, and yet they serve a God who provides for the sparrows and knows each hair on their heads and will provide them what they need. It speaks of judgment for those who are judging them currently, much like the language of the prophets or the psalms, and that may sound harsh to modern followers of Jesus who are not judged, excluded, persecuted or killed but would have been essential for those persecuted by an unjust world and crying out for God’s intervention. As the following passage will highlight, the approach of the kingdom of heaven is an unsettling thing for the established order. Aligning one’s faith and one’s life with the community of disciples sent out at Jesus’ command doesn’t promise an easy life, it promises that one will take up one’s own cross and follow their crucified Lord and yet in that call and in that community there is grace even in the midst of persecution, hope in the midst of rejection and God’s provision of enough in the experience of scarcity.

The Son of David, Son of God, and Son of Man Titles in Matthew’s Gospel

10 Replies

Stained Glass window at the Melkite Catholic Annunciation Cathedral in Roslindale, MA depicting Christ the King with the regalia of a Byzantine Emperor

The gospels use several titles when talking about Jesus. When looking at Matthew’s gospel the particular title that is used may give important clues about the disposition of characters in the story in relation to Jesus, but since so many of these titles are deployed in chapters eight and nine it may be helpful to examine each one in a little more detail.

The ‘Son of’ titles: Son of David, Son of God, Son of Man

Son of David or relation to David:

When your days are fulfilled and you lie down with your ancestors, I will raise up your offspring after you, who shall come forth from your body, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build a house for my name and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever…But I will not take my steadfast love from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away from before you. Your house and your kingdom shall be made sure forever before me; your throne shall be established forever. (2 Samuel 7: 12-13, 15-16)

A shoot shall come out from the stump of Jesse, and a branch shall grow out of his roots. (Isaiah 11: 1)

The land, the temple and the Davidic line of kings were significant pillars of Judaic identity for centuries. The destruction of Jerusalem by Babylon in the years around 586 BCE brings an end to the reign of Davidic kings over Judah, but one of the hopes is that in the post-exilic years there will be a reestablishment of the line of Davidic kings and with that reestablishment will be a return to the ‘golden era’ of the Hebrew people. After Babylon the land of Israel is, with the short exception of the time after the Maccabean revolt, ruled by a foreign empire either directly or through vassal kings. The Son of David title in relation to this existing hope is the desire for a King of the Jews that will be God’s anointed one that will bring the people back to their glory days when they were not ruled over by Rome or the Herodian kings. In this way the title is close to the Christ/Messiah title.

Matthew spends longer on the genealogy of Jesus than on narrating the birth of Jesus, and one of the primary linkages in the genealogy is to David. From the first verse we learn that Jesus is the Son of David, the Son of Abraham and David stands at the transition from one set of fourteen generations to the next. The lineage of David is also highlighted both at the end of the genealogy in verse 17 and in the address to Joseph, Son of David in the birth narrative in verse 20. While the continuity with the person and story of David in important to Matthew, the Son of David title is never used by Jesus to refer to himself and the only time Jesus mentions David he implies or states that we are seeing one who is greater than David. In Matthew 12: 3, when responding to the Pharisees complaint about Jesus’ disciples plucking grain on Sabbath, Jesus replies to the Pharisees complaint, “Have you not read what David did when he and his companions were hungry?” and he proceeds to imply that he is greater than David, greater than the temple and, using his chosen title states that, “the Son of Man is lord of the sabbath.” Additionally in conflict with the Pharisees in Matthew 22:41-45 when Jesus asks, “What do you think of the Messiah, whose Son is he?” the Pharisees’ response is “the Son of David” but then Jesus quotes Psalm 110:1 and again states that David calls the Messiah (and by implication himself) Lord.

Several of the uses of Son of David are related to requests for healing, which is surprising because David is not thought of as a healer (with the possible exception of playing the harp to calm the evil spirits in Saul). In the closely related stories of the two blind men in Matthew 9:27 and the two blind men in Matthew 20: 30 the request for healing comes in the identical form, “Have mercy on us, Son of David.” Similarly, the Canaanite woman asking for the demon to be cast out of her daughter in Matthew 15:22 asks, “Have mercy on me, Son of David.” The combined usage of this title with both the blind and an outsider paradoxically imply that the blind and the outsider perceive what others do not. The crowds will initially ask “Can this be the Son of David?” in Matthew 12: 23, which will bring about another conflict with the Pharisees where Jesus will again claim the title Son of Man and link his healings and work to the Spirit and the Kingdom of God. Finally, in Matthew 21:9 and 21: 15 the crowds will shout, “Hosanna to the Son of David.”

While Jesus will almost always use the Son of Man title (see below) to refer to himself, the linkage with David and the hope of a renewal of the Davidic line is present in Matthew. Jesus’ actions also enhance the linkage with David as we will see when we look at the ‘triumphal entry’ into Jerusalem in Matthew 21: 1-11. Matthew regularly taps into the prophetic hope surrounding the reestablishment of a Davidic king who will be the awaited messiah. Yet Matthew, along with the rest of the New Testament, attempts to deploy a wide range of titles and narratives to describe the central importance that Jesus of Nazareth will occupy in the hope and faith of the disciples who make up Matthew’s community.

Son of Man (Son of Humanity)

As I watched in the night visions, I saw one like a human being (Son of Man—this is a place where the NRSV’s desire for inclusivity unfortunately obscures the textual linkage) coming with the clouds of heaven. And he came to the Ancient One and was presented before him. To him was given dominion and glory and kingship, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that shall not pass away, and his kingship is one that shall never be destroyed. Daniel 7: 13-14

The Son of Man, or one like a human being as the NRSV renders this figure, appropriates the connection between the Davidic king and God and places it within a cosmic context. Daniel, where this title emerges from, is probably one of the later books of the Hebrew scriptures but it operates in a world where God reveals how God is active in the midst of the rise and fall of empires and kings. The worldview of Daniel, sometimes called an apocalyptic worldview, believes that the God of Israel is ultimately in control in the world and the God will judge the nations and restore the faithful ones to their proper place once God acts in judgment toward the nations. In place of the domination of the nations the cosmic Son of Man assumes a dominion that will not end. Although there is a strong resonance with the Son of Man and the Son of David, the Son of David is closely linked to Israel while the Son of Man’s dominion is over all peoples, nations and languages.

Among the ‘Son of’ titles Jesus, in Matthew, uses the Son of Man exclusively in referring to himself. The Son of Man title is often used to refer to both the suffering of the Son of Man and the authority or glory of the Son of Man while other times it simply seems to be a self-reference to Jesus as he describes either what it means to follow him or how he is received. The title Son of Man is first used in Matthew 8:20 when a scribe approaches Jesus as a ‘Teacher’ and offers to follow him wherever he goes. Here Jesus describes the manner of his life, and by implication the life of those who would follow him wherever he goes by stating, “The Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head.” Similarly, Jesus uses the title for description of how he is received in Matthew 11: 19, “the Son of Man cam eating and drinking, and they say, ‘Look, a glutton, and a drunkard, and a friend of tax collectors and sinners!’ And finally, in Matthew 20: 28, “The Son of Man came not to be served, but to serve and to give his life as a ransom for many.” Finally, when Jesus asks his disciples about how he is perceived he uses this title again, “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” (Matthew 16: 13) but then immediately follows that question with asking his disciples “But who do you say that I am?”

Most of the usages of the Son of Man title are explicitly tied to either Jesus’ authority or his suffering. Many of the texts of suffering are explicitly tied to the handing over of Jesus to those with religious and political authority and his crucifixion (Matthew 12: 40; 17:12, 17:22, 20: 18, 20:28, 26:2, 26:24, 26:45) repeatedly tying Jesus’ embodiment of this title with suffering, crucifixion and death. Yet suffering and glorification are linked in this title both in terms of resurrection (17:9) in manners that have a strong resonance with Daniel’s vision of the Son of Man receiving authority and coming on the clouds of heaven (Matthew 19: 28, 24: 27-44, 25: 31-46, and in response to the accusation of being the Messiah the Son of God in Matthew 26: 64). But it can also be used in more mundane ways to justify the authority Jesus exercises to forgive sins (9:6) or to have greater authority than his opponents concerns about Sabbath regulations (12:8). The Son of Man title is closely tied to the authority, suffering, resurrection, glorification and self-identification of Jesus. Matthew, with seeing Jesus’ authority extending beyond Israel to include all the nations, probably hears in this title a more universal claim to authority and power than the Son of David title carries.

Son of God

I will tell of the decree of the LORD: He said to me, “You are my son; today I have begotten you.” Ask of me, and I will make the nations your heritage, and the ends of the earth your possession.” Psalm 2: 7-8

Most modern readers assume that the Son of God title automatically assumes divinity, but in the ancient world being called a son of a god was associated with being king. Caesar Augustus, emperor of Rome at the birth of Christ was often referred to on inscriptions and coins as ‘the son of the divine Julius’ (Julius Caesar being afforded divinity upon his death) but this practice also has strong ties in the Hebrew Scriptures, especially in the language of the book of Psalms. As one whose authority was derivative from the LORD the God of Israel, and one who reigned on God’s behalf the anointed king could be referred to, as in Psalm 2 above, as the son.

In Matthew this title probably has the most surprising application. On the one hand it is implied twice from the voice from heaven of a cloud where the implied speaker is God (Matthew 3:17, 17:5) declaring Jesus as the Son, the beloved. On the other hand it is most frequently found in the mouth of forces in resistance to Jesus: the devil in the temptation (Matthew 4: 1-11), 2 demon possessed men (8:29), the high priest at Jesus’ trial (26: 63) and mockers at the cross (27: 30-34).  Yet, it can also be found on the mouth of Jesus’ disciples in general (14:33) and Peter specifically in his answer to the question “But who do you say I am” when he responds, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” (16:13) In Peter’s answer we see Messiah (anointed king) and Son of the living God tied together. While the Son of God title in both Jewish and empire context are linked closely to the authority of a king, Matthew is probably hinting with both the title from the voice from heaven and its ironic usage by both the devil and demoniacs that something greater is at play. This is also alluded to in Matthew 14:33 when the disciples not only declare Jesus the Son of God but also worship him.

The three ‘Son of’ titles overlap in their understanding of the kingly role of Jesus. Jesus at a minimum in Matthew is linked to the hope for a Davidic king and to God’s action to act on behalf of God’s people and to reign over the nations. The titles in their usage are also tied to the title of Jesus as Christ/Messiah and his proclamation of the kingdom of heaven/God. In Matthew, Jesus intentionally uses the Son of Man title for self-reference with its more universal application than the Son of David or Son of God titles. Yet, all three titles link Jesus to the hope for a divinely anointed leader who would rescue the people and through the narrative of Matthew we see how Jesus both accepts and changes the expectations for these hopes.

Faith in Matthew’s Gospel

3 Replies

Jesus Healing the Blind From 12th Century Basilica Catedrale di Santa Maria Nouva di Monreale in Sicily.

 

Faith, believing, and unbelief are frequently used terms in Matthew, all originating with the Greek pistis. When modern people use terms like faith or belief they typically are referring to some type of cognitive assent-I believe certain things to be true, but the frequent usage of faith related terms in Matthew indicates definitions closer openness or trust than some type of cognitive assent to certain beliefs. There is a certain elasticity to how Matthew employs these terms but when we think about faith in Matthew it is not belief in the dogmatic sense.

As I’ve alluded to several times while discussing portions of Matthew that we view the world differently than the people that Matthew’s gospel is written to. I still find one of the more helpful ways to think of this difference comes from the philosopher Charles Taylor in his work A Secular Age where he differentiates between our ‘disenchanted’ world and the ‘enchanted’ world of our ancestors. Most ancient cultures, and the readers of Matthew’s gospel certainly fit within this characterization, believed there were times, places and individuals where the spiritual side of reality permeated their reality. Divine and demonic forces were actively at work in the world and responsible for sickness, famine, war, acts of nature and could be at work for or against the individual living in this enchanted world. Demons might cause a person to be mute or have a seizure, they might cause a storm to come upon the sea or the crops to fail. God or another deity might bring a bountiful harvest or hold back the rains as a judgment on the lack of ‘faithfulness’ of the chosen people. Ritual, when done by the priests, or magic, when done by others, often tapped into these people, times, and places where the spiritual world drew close to our own.

The gospel of Matthew is written from the perspective that the spiritual realm of the LORD the God of Israel, the Kingdom of Heaven, has now drawn near and turning towards the approaching Kingdom of Heaven is the proper response. (Matthew 4: 17) Although this is a minimalistic way of putting things, in Jesus we have a person where the spiritual side of reality associated with the God of Israel is able to act upon the earth and against the demonic forces that enslave, the sin that condemns and the lack of holiness that excludes. Faith or belief in Matthew’s gospel seems to reflect an openness or an awareness of this reality that some have while others do not. Some, like the centurion and the Canaanite woman, seem to perceive this reality in Jesus without having the background of the Jewish scriptures and practices, but instead use their own frameworks to understand who Jesus is and what Jesus means.

A special usage of this term, oligopistoi, what I’ve translated ‘little faith ones’ is always used in relation to Jesus’ disciples. They may not demonstrate the moments of clarity or openness that those coming to Jesus requesting a healing or exorcism may, but their faith is enough to recognize the call that Jesus extends to them. Traditionally translators and commentators have viewed ‘little faith’ as a criticism but Jesus, even asked to increase the disciples’ faith in Matthew 17: 20 (after they were unable to exorcize the demon of the son the father brings to them) tells that if they have ‘faith the size of a mustard seed’ they can command mountains to move. Being a ‘little faith one’ is not a crisis, for indeed these little faith ones will be sent out with the authority to heal and cast out demons and carry out the mission in chapter ten as emissaries of the kingdom and workers in the harvest. Jesus seems to be indicating that those with a small amount of faith can still do incredible things. As Mark Allan Powell can state,

So, Jesus seems to be saying, the amount of faith is not what’s important; you just need to know what to do with the faith you have. Quit worrying about whether you have enough faith and start asking, “Which mountains does God want me to move?” (Powell, 2004, p. 112)

Jesus may be able to expound about people like the Canaanite woman or the centurion that they have ‘great’ faith (in contrast to the little faith of the disciples) and they may simply have a greater openness to what God is doing in the world. This is not limited to Jesus’ time. There are many who are outside of organized religion who demonstrate a greater openness to God’s action than those who have been shaped by congregations. That doesn’t mean that faith and understanding cannot coexist, merely that they are not the same thing. I do think when Matthew invites the disciples who come to hear his gospel into the world of Jesus, he is also trying to invite us into a world where God’s kingdom is active and present, where in Jesus we meet the ‘God who is with us’ and to invite us, whether our faith is great or little, to hear about the people whose faith enabled them to see in Jesus the opportunity for God’s healing, forgiveness, and even resurrection.

Matthew 9: 27-31 Never Has Anything Like This Been Seen in Israel part 2

7 Replies

Matthew 9: 27-31

Jesus Healing the Blind From 12th Century Basilica Catedrale di Santa Maria Nouva di Monreale in Sicily.

Parallels Mark 10: 46-52, Luke 18: 35-43 but these are closer to Matthew 20: 29-34

27 As Jesus went on from there, two blind men followed him, crying loudly, “Have mercy on us, Son of David!” 28 When he entered the house, the blind men came to him; and Jesus said to them, “Do you believe that I am able to do this?” They said to him, “Yes, Lord.” 29 Then he touched their eyes and said, “According to your faith let it be done to you.” 30 And their eyes were opened. Then Jesus sternly ordered them, “See that no one knows of this.” 31 But they went away and spread the news about him throughout that district.

Irony is strong in these two chapters which are preparing us for the sending out of the followers of Jesus into the plentiful harvest. Untouchable and unclean lepers have been touched and made clean, a Centurion can express a trust in terms of his understanding of authority that Jesus has not seen in all Israel, disciples may wonder ‘what sort of man is this’ but demon possessed men can speak truthfully about Jesus being the Son of God, a scribe who will follow Jesus anywhere may not but a disciple will get in the boat even as a father is needing burial, sins can be forgiven a paralytic and sinners can become disciples, two daughters (one of the leader, one who Jesus addresses as daughter) are beyond touch but through their own or a parent’s faith are enabled to ‘rise up’ and have a new opportunity at life. Now two blind men see what others cannot and once again Jesus, the Son of David, is called as a healer who can bring sight to the trusting blind men.

The report has spread throughout the district that Jesus has done incredible things to those who have asked of him. Most recently a girl who was dead has been raised to life, and if Jesus is capable of restoring life or healing a flow of blood then it would be reasonable to assume that Jesus can bring sight to the blind. The number of blind men also links us to the two demoniacs in Matthew 8: 28-34 and this story’s close counterpart of the two blind men at Jericho in Matthew 20: 29-34. The Son of David title for Jesus in Matthew often occurs in contexts where healing occurs (Matthew 12: 23, 15: 22, and 20: 31) which is interesting because David is never lifted up as a healer in the stories and poetry about or attributed to him and this title is related to his role as the expected messianic figure from the line of David that brings about this new connection with God. (Hays, 2016, p. 147)

Within this short healing story faith/belief plays a strong role. The words for faith and believe are both from the Greek pistis and, as mentioned before, this word has the connotation in trusting that Jesus is powerful enough/capable of doing what is asked. Jesus says to the blind men, “Do you believe (pistis) I am able (dunamai-literally powerful) to do this?” Their response beginning with “Yes, Lord” indicates by both affirmation and title they choose to address Jesus by an understanding that is favorable in Matthew. These blind men can see that Jesus is Lord, not merely a teacher. They are healed according to the faith/trust they have in Jesus.

Eyes can be opened but tongues can apparently not be stilled. Eyes have been opened and the faithful and newly non-blind followers of the Lord the Son of David are told to see that others do not see. They are commanded to say nothing to anyone but instead they go away and spread the news throughout the district. The command for silence leads to proclamation, secrets are shouted from the rooftops, and the seeds of the upcoming harvest continue to be planted. Those who have never seen now see what no one in Israel has seen before and there are others who need to hear the good news of the kingdom to have their eyes opened, to receive healing from their diseases and sickness and to have their demons exorcised.

Matthew 9: 18-26 Never Has Anything Like This Been Seen in Israel part 1

8 Replies

Gabriel von Max, The Raising of the Daughter of Jairus *(1881)

Matthew 9: 18-26

Parallels Mark 5: 21-43, Luke 8: 40-56

18 While he was saying these things to them, suddenly a leader of the synagogue came in and knelt before him, saying, “My daughter has just died; but come and lay your hand on her, and she will live.” 19 And Jesus got up and followed him, with his disciples. 20 Then suddenly a woman who had been suffering from hemorrhages for twelve years came up behind him and touched the fringe of his cloak, 21 for she said to herself, “If I only touch his cloak, I will be made well.” 22 Jesus turned, and seeing her he said, “Take heart, daughter; your faith has made you well.” And instantly the woman was made well. 23 When Jesus came to the leader’s house and saw the flute players and the crowd making a commotion, 24 he said, “Go away; for the girl is not dead but sleeping.” And they laughed at him. 25 But when the crowd had been put outside, he went in and took her by the hand, and the girl got up. 26 And the report of this spread throughout that district.

Matthew is an efficient narrator bringing together stories and structure to attempt to prepare us to be sent out as bearers of the good news. Comparing how Mark and Matthew construct their narratives, which are both designed to be heard and remembered, Mark often spends significantly longer in stories, like this one, where Jesus is bringing healing to those who need to receive it. Matthew’s narration of this story is roughly half the size of Mark’s because Matthew is moving quickly to what is commonly know as the ‘Mission discourse’ in Matthew 10. Matthew wants us to hear these final three healing stories as planting the seeds for the plentiful harvest that is coming at the end of the chapter.

Most hearers are familiar with the longer Markan and Lukan narration of this story, and some of the deletions that Matthew makes simply make the story shorter, others are interesting because they change the possible ways of hearing the story. The first major change is not reflected in most translations because in Matthew it is a merely leader who comes to Jesus, not necessarily a leader of the synagogue (of the synagogue is not in the Greek text, most translations harmonize this with the Mark and Luke parallels). The father here comes with an incredible request, to raise a daughter from the dead and although he doesn’t comment on the father’s faith it links the story to two others who ask on behalf of their children: the Centurion in Matthew 8:5-13 and the Canaanite woman in Matthew 15: 21-28. It is possible that Matthew wants us to hear this story in terms of a leader who is not a Jewish leader (although there isn’t the resistance that both the Centurion and the Canaanite woman receive so I view this as less likely), but it also may be Matthew using the bonds of parent to child in a powerful bond that makes us willing to ask the incredible and to believe on their behalf. The other instance of a father bringing a child occurs after the Transfiguration where a father brings his son who has seizures to Jesus and his disciples and bows down to Jesus asking for healing.

Jesus rises up and follows the father with his disciples but is interrupted on his journey. This first healing story, of the familiar pattern of three, actually involves two individuals seeking incredible things: a man on behalf of his daughter and a woman for her own healing. Matthew notes that the woman has been suffering for twelve years but deletes the age of the daughter (which in Mark and Luke is twelve structurally linking the two healings and the two suffers). The woman trusts that merely touching Jesus’ clothing will bring about healing. In both cases, the flow of blood and death, to touch the person would render a person unclean according to the law. By being out among those in the presence of Jesus this woman risks, in the views of the ancient world, contaminating anyone who comes into contact with her. Much like we have at times had erroneous ideas about the spread of diseases, the ancient world believed that contamination was spread by physical contact. The woman would have lost her place in society and in her desperate situation she dares to come up behind Jesus and touch the fringe of his garment. Even as Jesus ignores that taboos of purity violations of blood or death in the law, we have Matthew highlighting the fringe of the garment, a specifically Jewish custom in clothing. Jesus sees her, he doesn’t have to seek her out as in the other gospels’ narration of this scene, but his response is one of encouragement and announcing the healing that is done in her. It is her faith, her trust that Jesus can do that which she asked, which has, in the presence of Jesus, made her whole again.

The crowd in their mourning does not respond to Jesus as the father of the deceased girl does or the woman with the flow of blood. When Jesus tells them to cease their activities of mourning and to depart, ‘for the girl is not dead but sleeping’ they laugh at him. The crowd knows death when they behold it but unlike the girl’s father, they do not trust that Jesus or any other person can have power over death.  Yet, the father’s faith has caused Jesus to rise up and he will not be deterred by the crowd’s lack of faith. Instead he drives them out and proceeds to the girl and takes her by the hand and causes her to rise up. Jesus can do what Elijah and Elisha had done in bringing a child back to life, but Matthew is not content with us hearing Jesus as merely a prophet or wonder worker like Elijah or Elisha. Part of the cumulative effect of these three groups of miraculous stories and the introduction of titles is to draw the disciples and soon the crowds into wondering who this is who is in their midst because, “Never has anything like this been seen in Israel.” The word of this begins to pass throughout the land and the seeds are planted for the future harvest.

Matthew 9: 14-17 The Nature of Discipleship Part 2B

4 Replies

Carvaggio, The Calling of St. Matthew (1599-1600)

Matthew 9: 14-17

Parallels Mark 2: 18-22, Luke 5: 33-39

14 Then the disciples of John came to him, saying, “Why do we and the Pharisees fast often, but your disciples do not fast?” 15 And Jesus said to them, “The wedding guests cannot mourn as long as the bridegroom is with them, can they? The days will come when the bridegroom is taken away from them, and then they will fast. 16 No one sews a piece of unshrunk cloth on an old cloak, for the patch pulls away from the cloak, and a worse tear is made. 17 Neither is new wine put into old wineskins; otherwise, the skins burst, and the wine is spilled, and the skins are destroyed; but new wine is put into fresh wineskins, and so both are preserved.”

I’ve been a pastor long enough and have seen enough conflicts among people to know that sometimes the action of welcoming someone into a congregation who is viewed as an outsider can create a schism in the fabric of the community. Sometimes the people who are the most invested in the community will be the ones who tear away when the community no longer looks or acts like they expect. In this continuation of the reflection about what the nature of the community of disciples will look like we see some older groups, like the disciples of John and the Pharisees, who are uncomfortable in the way in which this community of Jesus’ disciples practice their righteousness. The question the disciples of John ask about fasting identifies one of the differences in practice between Jesus and these other two groups of people attempting to faithfully embody their relationship to but the two portions of Jesus answer point to a different understanding of time and the inability to fit Jesus’ merciful conception of righteousness in the established practices of righteousness of either John’s disciples or the disciples of the Pharisees.

Jesus did address fasting in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 6: 16-18) and as I mentioned there fasting is often conceived in terms of a personal piety, but even though most translations of Matthew 6 refer to practicing piety before others the term translated piety is righteousness. One thing to notice is the difference in the practice, the disciples of John are looking for a visible practice of fasting, while in the community of Jesus’ disciples the fasting does not exempt one from interacting with the community in a normal fashion. Their righteousness is practiced in their relationship with their Father who sees their action done in private and their interaction with the community in public ways. They may be those who hunger and thirst for righteousness who enter this time in the hope that they will be filled, but not so that their practice of righteousness is seen by others.

Jesus’ answer to the disciples of John consists in two parts, one focuses on the time in which the disciples of Jesus find themselves and the second takes the two images of old things being incompatible with new. In relationship to time, the time is now a time of celebration, like a wedding. Jesus is metaphorically cast as the bridegroom, an image that in both Psalm 19:5 and Isaiah 62:5 use to refer to God’s presence and Matthew may want us to hear this echo. Weddings are a time of joy in the ancient world, a time of feasting and celebration where the community is invited to share in the joy of the bridegroom and the bride. There are times that are inappropriate for the joyous feasting and celebration of a wedding, like the context of judgement we see in texts like Jeremiah 7:34, 16:9, 25: 10 and Joel 2: 16, but in Jesus’ view the time when he is present with the disciples is a time for eating and drinking and rejoicing rather than a time of mourning and fasting. The Pharisees and John’s disciples may view the times they find themselves in differently. They may look at the continued occupation of Galilee and Israel by Rome or the reign of Herod Antipas over Galilee, who will later execute John the Baptist (Matthew 14: 1-12), as indicative of a time closer to Jeremiah and Joel where feasting is inappropriate. Yet, Jesus views this as a time where tax collectors and sinners are welcomed to recline around the table with him as evidence of the kingdom of heaven continued expansion to those previously excluded.

The two images of an unshrunk patch on old clothing and new wine in old wineskins also point to the inability to fit Jesus’ practices and authority into old patterns of piety or old conceptions of righteousness. The way of Jesus is not the way of John or the Pharisees. The forgiveness of sins and the eating with sinners is bound to create a schism in among the religious community. The word translated tear is the Greek schisma where our English schism comes from. Like a wineskin without the ability to stretch with the release of gas that is a part of the fermentation process or a fabric which shrinks and tears away from the fabric it is sewn onto, sometimes the old is unable to contain the new. Yet, Jesus doesn’t try to force this new wine into the existing wineskins of the disciples of John or the Pharisees. Instead for those who are able to receive this new wine he allows them to receive it rather than attempting to patch up the existing movements that Jesus encounters. Perhaps in God’s economy there is a place where both have value and meaning and both can be preserved. As a person who has seen a church go through a schism in the past, I can only hope that those who viewed the practices and boundaries of the community differently still have a place in the coming of God’s kingdom. Jesus will have conflicts with the Pharisees and different practices than John’s disciples, and yet he seems content with welcoming the sinners and tax collectors that have been previously excluded rather than expecting the Pharisees and followers of John the Baptist to join him in the practice of this manner of righteousness.

Matthew 9: 9-13 The Nature of Discipleship Part 2A

9 Replies

Carvaggio, The Calling of St. Matthew (1599-1600)

Matthew 9: 9-13

Parallels Mark 2: 13-17, Luke 5: 27-32

 9 As Jesus was walking along, he saw a man called Matthew sitting at the tax booth; and he said to him, “Follow me.” And he got up and followed him.

10 And as he sat at dinner in the house, many tax collectors and sinners came and were sitting with him and his disciples. 11 When the Pharisees saw this, they said to his disciples, “Why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?” 12 But when he heard this, he said, “Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. 13 Go and learn what this means, ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice.’ For I have come to call not the righteous but sinners.”

Matthew composes his gospel for both the scribes who can read and the hearers who hear, and while we have lost the sensitivity to the rhythmic patterns that Matthew uses (especially when we break it up into small sections like is frequently done in worship) it is a skill that can be learned. Like a composer using a set of triplets to set up the following note (think for example of the beginning of Beethoven’s fifth symphony) and what comes before prepares us for what happens next. This interweaving of the narratives that highlight the identity and authority of Jesus with narratives that highlight what it means to follow Jesus prepare us for the next major block of instruction in chapter ten and connect us back to the Sermon on the Mount.

We are finally introduced to the disciple whose name is associated with this gospel, Matthew. Matthew’s name in Greek (Matthion) is closely related to the word translated followed him in verse 9 and disciples in verse 11 (mathetais) as well as the word translated learn in verse 13 (mathete). Ultimately a disciple is a learner, pupil or student of master who learn by listening and by following. Just as the name Matthew for the gospel gives us a clue of the purpose of the gospel, to form followers and learners from Jesus, also here in this central reflection on the nature of discipleship we continue to learn not only what it means to follow Jesus, but who our fellow followers might be. I’ve argued earlier in the Sermon on Mount against a perfectionistic reading of Jesus’ first sermon, here we find tax collectors and sinners reclining at the table with Jesus while the Pharisees protest this arrangement.

Matthew as a skilled editor places this text immediately following a story where Jesus has demonstrated he has the power to forgive sins. Jesus has authority over the elements, over the demons and over sins, stepping into a role that was presided over by the priests in the temple. Jesus claims for himself authority that the priests in the sacrificial system had mediated for the people of God. The sacrificial system was originally intended to be a means of reconciliation between God and the people and a way of restoring relationships within the community. Yet, we see in this story that there are those who by their vocation of by some previous action have been excluded from the reconciliation that the temple was to mediate. Matthew and the fellow tax collectors and sinners are those who, like the leper in Matthew 8: 1-4, would be assumed to be unclean and like the Centurion in 8: 5-13 would be viewed as emmisaries of a hostile empire. Any religious group has the potential to become exclusive with the insiders composing the righteous and the outsides consisting of the ‘sinners’ and yet we are encountering in Matthew a different understanding of what righteousness will consist of than the Pharisees or even the disciples of John the Baptist would conceive.

Matthew quotes Hosea 6:6 twice, once here and later in Matthew 12:1-8 in the context of plucking grain on the Sabbath. In both places we encounter one whose role is greater than the role of the temple. Jesus invites Matthew, and the other tax collectors and sinners to recline with him at the table, to break bread with them and invite them into the circle of followers invited to the banquet. The removal of the barrier for the sinners and tax collectors to gather with Jesus raises concerns among some other watchers of Jesus.

The Pharisees in this text refer to Jesus as ‘teacher’ like the scribe in Matthew 8: 19, and as I mentioned in discussing that scribe, when someone refers to Jesus as teacher in Matthew they are almost always challenging his authority. These Pharisees probably believe that one who shares bread with sinners becomes like them. They may point to a text like Proverbs 4: 14-17

14 Do not enter the path of the wicked, and do not walk in the way of evildoers. 15 Avoid it; do not go on it; turn away from it and pass on. 16 For they cannot sleep unless they have done wrong; they are robbed of sleep unless they have made someone stumble. 17 For they eat the bread of wickedness and drink the wine of violence.

But the way of interpreting scripture and the meaning of righteousness that Jesus embodies centers around mercy, and the use of Hosea 6:6 becomes a key verse to understanding the practices of Jesus. Jesus who has authority to forgive the sins of the paralytic has authority to welcome the sinner who is forgiveable. Jesus who can heal Peter’s mother-in-law, the paralytic, the Centurion’s child, and the Gadarene demoniacs is the physician who can heal the sick (literally the bad/evil ones, Greek kakoos). This the cumulative effect of this narrative in the string of preceding stories illuminates a different way of perceiving the relationship between God and those who have been excluded. As Richard B. Hays can state:

Thus, if the Pharisees go to learn what Hosea 6:6 means, they will need to read more than one verse. Once they search the wider context of God’s scriptural intentions, they will find there, in the midst of a judgment oracle against the people, a call for repentance and a portrayal of a merciful God who wants his people to show mercy, not contempt to those who have gone astray. (Hays, 2016, p. 126)

This merciful reading of scripture points to a merciful God welcoming those who have gone astray. Righteousness is not a perfectionistic bar which sinners and tax collectors can never clear, but instead is an invitation to be a part of a community of disciples like Matthew who recline with Jesus around the table amazed at their inclusion in this community of learners who are learning that it is blessed to be merciful because they to have received mercy.

Matthew 9: 1-8 What Sort of Man is This Part 3

2 Replies

Christ Healing a Paralytic, Mosaic from the Cycle of the Life of Christ, Chora Church, Constantinople (1310-20)

Matthew 9: 1-8

Parallels Mark 2: 1-12; Luke 5: 17-26

1 And after getting into a boat he crossed the sea and came to his own town.

2 And just then some people were carrying a paralyzed man lying on a bed. When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, “Take heart, son; your sins are forgiven.” 3 Then some of the scribes said to themselves, “This man is blaspheming.” 4 But Jesus, perceiving their thoughts, said, “Why do you think evil in your hearts? 5 For which is easier, to say, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Stand up and walk’? 6 But so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” — he then said to the paralytic — “Stand up, take your bed and go to your home.” 7 And he stood up and went to his home. 8 When the crowds saw it, they were filled with awe, and they glorified God, who had given such authority to human beings.

In this final miraculous story of this set of three which have all pointed to the authority Jesus bears and opened windows into who Jesus is in Matthew’s gospel we hear for a second time in this section of Matthew the use of the title the Son of Man. The differences in the way Matthew narrates this story from Mark and Luke probably are elements that may add details to the story (like the house being so full that the friends of the paralyzed man have to dig through the roof) but for all the gospels the central issue of this narrative is the authority that the Son of Man has and how to answer the charge of blasphemy that Jesus and his disciples will encounter.

We are returned to Capernaum which acts as a base of operations for Jesus’ ministry in Galilee and while the return connects us to the previous two stories where Jesus crossed to the other side of the sea, the return voyage is merely noted as we transition back to Jesus’ hometown. Unlike Mark and Luke we are not told that we are in a home and therefore there is no need for the friends of the paralytic find a way through the crowd at the home, climb up on the roof and open the roof to lower their friend. The story could take place in a home or in an outdoor location, but instead of the actions of the friends demonstrating their faith Jesus sees their faith. The faith may include the faith of the paralytic man or it may just be the faith of his friends, but this faith is enough for Jesus to see and speak.

Faith in Matthew’s gospel involves trusting that Jesus can do what is being hoped for, and here the faith can come from those other than the one being healed. I’ve been asked if it is possible to believe for someone else, and in the way the church has traditionally understood belief in terms of cognitive assent to doctrines my answer would be no, but in the way the New Testament discuss faith I think we need to say yes. Here, and in several places in Matthew’s gospel (ex. Matthew 8: 5-13, Matthew 9: 18-26, Matthew 15: 21-28) the trust of another in Jesus’ ability to bring about the healing they desire works on behalf of another person.

Jesus’ initial response to observing the faith of the friends and the paralytic man is to declare forgiveness on the man’s sins. While the declaration of forgiveness may seem strange to those of us who live in a world where injury and sickness are rarely viewed as dependent on the moral character of the ill or injured one, in the ancient world sin and sickness were often viewed as connected. Skin diseases or bleeding made one unclean and untouchable, blindness may be viewed as caused by either the individual’s or the parent’s sinfulness, and even injury or disability was viewed as either an action by a demonic threat or of divine judgment. These views are not limited to Judaism, but were common among cultures and in some strange forms persist even today when those who are sick or injured are viewed as lazy, gluttonous, or have done something morally deviant to incur their disease (Think for example of the way people think about diabetes or in the past the way HIV/AIDS was viewed). Matthew’s placement of this story as the climax of a series of stories where Jesus has demonstrated his authority over the elements, over the demonic prepares us for the declaration that he is one with the ability to forgive sins.

When a person can be labeled as a sinner the community is not responsible for their care, they can be left as an outsider. Forgiveness makes a way for inclusion. Like Job’s friends, religious people can sometimes spend time justifying why a person is dealing with an illness or injury, why they are disabled and while religion does help provide order for people’s lives it can also be used to exclude those who do not fit within the framework that they have established. Job’s friends needed to explain why Job’s suffering was Job’s fault and often it is easier to blame those who are needing assistance than engage the uncomfortable reality that sometimes people suffer and there is no apparent reason. On the other hand there are times where one’s actions do cause pain for oneself or others: one is intoxicated and causes an accident, one is injured while doing something unethical. We don’t know why the man in this story is paralyzed: was he injured while working, was he a revolutionary or a bandit who was injured, we can speculate and create a story behind this story but ultimately whatever the cause his friends trusted that Jesus could provide the answer and Jesus forgives whatever the believed or real cause of his paralysis was.

The reaction of the scribes which is not spoken publicly but only saying among (literally in) themselves and yet Jesus chooses to address this unspoken, or softly spoken deliberations. Unlike the friends of the paralytic who trust that Jesus is able to do what they desire for their friend, the scribes do not believe that Jesus is able to do what he says and that is the evil in their hearts. Jesus commands the paralytic to ‘rise up’ (again the Greek word egeipoo which is frequently used in this section and for Jesus at the resurrection) and take his bed and go home. His command and the paralytics response to the command, which demonstrates the authority Jesus had over the disability of the paralytic, demonstrates to the crowd the authority that has been given to human beings by God (not just Jesus in particular). On the one hand the Son of Man’s authority is implied in the narrative to be granted to the sons of humanity.

The title Son of Man is used in Matthew for the second time (Initially in Matthew 8:20). The title originates in the book of Daniel in a vision of judgment. This is one of the times where the desire for inclusive language in the NRSV obscures the linkage between texts. As the book of Daniel relays the vision:

I saw one like a human being (Aramaic is one like the son of man) coming with the clouds of heaven. And he came to the Ancient One and was presented before him. To him was given dominion and glory and kingship, that all peoples, nations and languages should serve him. His dominion that shall not pass away, and his kingship is one that shall never be destroyed.  Daniel 7: 13-14

The Son of Man is often discussed as an apocalyptic title in writing about the New Testament, but since the word apocalyptic carries a lot of baggage for many Christians that may not be appropriate to the way that scripture actually is used in books like Daniel or Revelation and certainly not in terms of Jesus. In the literature around the time of Jesus we do see a hope for God’s intervention in the world through a representative of God. Much like the earlier Jewish hope where the Davidic king would be the means through which God would provide security and blessings for God’s people, now this ‘heavenly figure’ becomes the one through which the dominion, glory and kingship of the kingdom of heaven is exercised. The term is used frequently in the gospels and with Son of God and Son of David become ways of referring to Jesus. The intentional use of the title Son of Man in relation to the authority to forgive sins links Jesus to operating with the authority of God.

The Son of Man has appeared in two sections related to the scribes at this point in the narrative and it is worth watching as we continue to journey through Matthew when this title continues to be used instead of another title. Matthew is very concerned with demonstrating that who Jesus is and what Jesus does is in accordance with the scriptures and yet the scribes, those with the ability to read and interpret the scriptures seem resistant to Jesus’ authority. Perhaps the introduction of the Son of Man whose authority comes directly from God and doesn’t need to be mediated through scripture is one of the reasons that it is introduced in relationship with the scribes. Jesus as we encounter him in Matthew makes some astounding claims of authority and interprets scripture at times in ways that are either blasphemous or awe inspiring. Perhaps the demons in the previous story may see who Jesus is because the threat he poses to them and their dominion, for them Jesus is an undeniable threat to their power and authority and denies them the ability to continue their oppression. The people in Gadarene and the scribes may see the acts Jesus does, but they are unwilling or unable to grant him the authority he claims. Where the evil that lies in their hearts originates (and the heart is the organ of decision not emotion in scriptures) that stands in contrast to the faith of the centurion and the friends of the paralytic but for the followers of Jesus he is one with authority from God, for the crowds he is one who embodies the authority God is granting to the sons and daughters of humanity, but we will continue to see conflict with those who will be unwilling or unable to see who Jesus is through the actions he does and the words he says.