Sometimes the hardest things to see are right in front of us, even all around us. It was G. K Chesterton who said, “The whole object of travel is not to set foot on foreign land; it is at last to set foot on one’s own country as a foreign land.”1 In a similar way, we have traveled through the life of Jesus through the eyes of the discipled scribe, attempting to see his teacher afresh and with more depth. We have done so in order to put our foot down again in the familiar country of Gospel literature as if we were foreigners again. The mountains begin to look different, as if they have come from a common history; the faces are somehow familiar, as if we have seen them before; their clothes look worn with a rich history, and the lakes and rivers flow from a time past. This chapter returns to the land of Matthew but climbs the mountain peaks of Matthew to take a bird’s-eye view of the landscape.
In this chapter my aim is to demonstrate that Jesus is not merely represented as a new individual but that Matthew’s plot as a whole completes the story of the nation. Jesus not only embodies and mimics the life of characters but of Israel as a whole. Israel can be viewed through its individual figures, but Israel can also be conceived as a corporate entity. Matthew offers Jesus’s life through both of these lenses, and therefore we would be remiss if we didn’t follow the scribe in his teaching. More specifically, I will argue that Matthew sequences his narrative as the plot of Israel, in which Jesus leads the nation out of exile.2 If David is associated with the kingdom, Moses with the exodus, and Abraham with family, then Israel’s narrative can be put under the banner of exile. Matthew reveals Jesus through the curtain of the history of Israel; the story of Jesus is the story of Israel in repeat. Jesus is not merely the son of David, or the son of Abraham, but the Son of Yahweh, who perfects the narrative of Israel.
This sequencing of Matthew’s narrative should not be surprising for four reasons.
These four arguments set us off on the trail of attempting to see the history of Israel as a whole in Matthew’s portrayal of Jesus. But before we embark, I should clarify what I am and am not arguing. I am not claiming that all the echoes and resonances follow a chronological sequence; I am arguing that the large narrative blocks point toward this arrangement. For example, Ps. 22 is used in great detail in Matthew’s portrayal of the crucifixion. But this doesn’t necessarily work against the fact that Matthew employs monarchy themes in chapters 11–12 (David, Solomon, temple, and rest). Matthew can portray Jesus as the suffering and vindicated son of David at the end of his Gospel and at the beginning, while still following a basic narrative development and focusing on the monarchy in chapters 11–12. Therefore pointing out that there are references to Moses or Adam or Abraham at the end of the Gospel does not overturn this sequential argument. The sequence and intermixing of persons and events don’t have to be at odds, because the Scriptures intermix people, places, and time.
Narratives function at several levels, and those who search for “one meaning” in narratives are not attending to the richness that lies within. Matthew doesn’t have to restrict himself to one point. He can use one narrative to present Jesus as both a Moses-type figure and a David-type figure. He can intermix these not only because this is how narratives work, but also because all of Israel’s history is unified in Jesus. All of these figures connect not only because they are part of Israel’s history but also because they are unified in Christ. Moses, David, and Abraham’s lives carry all the way through, yet there is also a sense in which readers can view the transitions of this Gospel from a higher level.
Multiple analyses can stand side by side rather than our needing to argue that only one character or theme predominates in Matthew’s account. Readers don’t need to choose teams but can end up seeing the varied layers of meaning presented in the text. Jesus can recapitulate the roles of both major individuals and the nation as a whole. In fact, these two should not be opposed, for the role of individuals and the role of the nation itself are tied together. For example, when Jesus is tempted in the wilderness, he is acting as the new Adam, new Israel, and new prophet. When he feeds the people on the mountain, he is providing food both as a new Moses and a new Elisha. When Jesus gives the Great Commission, it is mirroring Cyrus’s edict (2 Chron. 36:23), the commission to Moses (Deut. 31:14–15), and the commission to Joshua (Josh. 1:1–9). Matthew can be generous with his intertextual links while also being structured and thoughtful.
The sequential and nonsequential references also don’t need to be at odds, because there is a difference between looking at specific texts that speak to fulfillment and examining how Matthew employs the OT in his larger structure. These coincide at times, but they can also be distinguished. In chapter 2 I explained how Matthew uses “shadow stories” that mirror Jewish history. In this chapter I will look not only at the fulfillment quotations but also at how the narrative transitions reflect and repeat the history of Israel.5 Matthew can be very imaginative and resourceful, employing these themes throughout his Gospel while also following a basic chronology. There are enough correspondences in the chief narrative movements to lead us to conclude that Matthew accomplishes something bigger than merely presenting Jesus as the new Moses, or the new David; he retraces the history of Israel through his portrayal of Jesus. Jesus’s footsteps fill in the strides of Israel as he leads the people out of exile.
The Story of Israel in the Structure of Matthew
Structure is clearly important to Matthew. Many call Matthew the most structured of all our Gospels.6 Matthew relates his message largely by how he put things together, like an architect communicating through the construction. How an artist has placed things speaks volumes about what they are trying to say. In the same way, this scribe has constructed his biography of Jesus in what we could call a “fulfillment form.” The placement of each piece builds the argument. Yet the reality is that the structure of Matthew continues to be debated. We can boil down the proposals to three large categories.7
These outlines don’t need to be opposed to one another; they are different ways of looking at Matthew’s narrative structure. The geographic outline provides a look at Jesus’s travels, highlighting the exile and return of the Davidic king. It also allows readers to see “where” Jesus ministers and helps paint a portrait of the various responses to Jesus. The narrative-plot outline also rightly recognizes major transitions in the life and ministry of Jesus, allowing readers to follow the preparation for ministry, the presentation of Jesus, and the passion of Jesus. The narrative-discourse outline recognizes that Matthew groups his material into blocks and provides clues as to when and where key transitions take place.
I tend to favor the narrative-discourse outline for a few reasons. First, it is the most detailed outline. It provides more transitions and allows readers to see how the discourses are related and how the narratives connect to the discourses. Second, it allows us to see Jesus as the teacher and his followers as disciples and scribes. Third, it best enables us to see Jesus repeating the history of Israel as a whole.8 While some parts are clearer than others, the clarity of the bookends and the center compel readers to begin searching for more connections. Matthew 1:1–17 reflects a Genesis and new-creation intertext, Matt. 26–28 imitates the exile and return from exile, and Matt. 13 centers on a wisdom tradition.
The argument I provide here builds on, at least in part, the work of three other scholars: B. W. Bacon, Dale Allison, and Peter Leithart. Bacon argues that this organization is part of Matthew’s attempt to present his Gospel as the new Pentateuch. He suggests that the Gospel was structured by an alternating fivefold pattern of discourses and narratives, which combine to form five “books” of the Torah.9 Bacon’s theory has both defenders and detractors.10 To label Matt. 1–2 as a prologue and chapters 26–28 as an epilogue seems to give far too little emphasis to these important sections. Also, Bacon’s assertion that the Pentateuch alternates between “narrative” and discourse” is not entirely convincing. While it is fair to point out some of these criticisms, Bacon’s fundamental insight is on track. Matthew does gather his teaching into large blocks, and there are examples of other Jewish literature that consciously imitate the Pentateuch’s five-book structure.11
Dale Allison has probably done the most work in noting the connections to Moses in the narrative of Matthew.12 In my opinion, Allison has solidified the importance of Moses throughout Matthew’s Gospel. But it is striking that most of the clear Moses echoes appear in Matt. 1–9. As Leithart says, though Allison’s proposal on the large structure for Jesus as new Moses is quite compelling, there is still something lacking. “Half of the strongly Mosaic passages are exhausted by the end of Matthew 7.”13 After that, they seem more spread out.
Peter Leithart has come alongside Bacon and Allison and added some key details.14 The discourses are not imitating the five-book structure of the Pentateuch, but the fivefold story of Israel as a whole. Jesus recapitulates not only the Pentateuch but also the narrative of the nation itself. Matthew moves not only from the infancy narrative of Moses (Matt. 1–2) to the commissioning of a successor (28:16–20) but also from creation to the end of exile. Therefore Leithart proposes that Matthew moves sequentially through the history of Israel, with the five discourses and the surrounding narrative marking out major periods of Israel’s history. Hence we cannot study only the discourses, for the narratives also give us hints that Matthew is following the history of Israel. The discourses certainly stand as large billboards—alerting readers to the path one is to follow—but the narratives also supply vital “packaging” that further supports the view that Jesus comes as the new Israel. He walks in Israel’s footsteps, completing the strides the nation was never able to accomplish and suffering the fate the people deserved.
| Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5–7) | New Moses |
| Sending out the Twelve (Matt. 10) | New Joshua |
| Kingdom parables (Matt. 13) | New Solomon |
| Community discourse (Matt. 18) | New Elisha |
| Prophetic discourse (Matt. 23–25) | New Jeremiah |
New Creation, New Wisdom, and New Adam in Matthew 1:1–17
For Matthew, the birth of Jesus is the commencement of the new creation. His introduction immediately propels readers back to Genesis. The first words, “the book of the genealogy,” could also be translated as “the scroll of origin,” “the book of Genesis,” or “the scroll of the lineage.” The explicit phrase (βίβλος γενέσεως) occurs in the LXX in only two places, Gen. 2:4 and 5:1. Genesis 2:4 is about the origin of heaven and earth (place), while 5:1 concerns the origin of Adam and Eve (people). These first words thus assemble the themes of heaven and earth that track their way throughout the Gospel.15 Jesus reunites these realms as all authority “in heaven and on earth” are given to him (Matt. 28:18). A cosmic and spatial unifying force appears at the birth of Jesus (1:1).16
The genealogy is not only about the new creation but about the new creation with people at the center (Gen. 5:1). Matthew mobilizes his story as a recovery and resuscitation of the people lost by the prophets, priests, and sovereigns of old. He establishes the redemptive-historical context as one of ongoing exile. The one “event” that Matthew names outside of the birth of Jesus is the exile, which acts as a hinge of Matthew’s genealogical structure in chapter 1 and provides the perspective for the Gospel as a whole.17 Matthew views the plot of Israel under the banner of exile and return from exile.18 The king therefore comes to rescue Israel from exile; he has been sent to the lost sheep of Israel. This exile stretches further back than the Babylonian exile, for the exile actually begins with Adam (Gen. 3).19 Though the people of God are in exile, hope bursts through the shadows: a child has come. While Gen. 5 is a picture of genealogical death, the ending of Matthew’s βίβλος γενέσεως is not death but resurrection life. A child has been born who will never die.20
The revelation of Jesus as the new creation also connects with wisdom themes.21 Wisdom possesses creative and redemptive functions in the Scriptures and other Wisdom literature outside the Bible. Wisdom 9:2 says, “and by your wisdom you have formed humankind,” and wisdom “was present when you made the world” (Wis. 9:9). Proverbs 8:22–31 claims:
The LORD possessed me [wisdom] at the beginning of his work, the first of his acts of old. Ages ago I was set up, at the first, before the beginning of the earth. When there were no depths I was brought forth, when there were no springs abounding with water. Before the mountains had been shaped, before the hills, I was brought forth, before he had made the earth with its fields, or the first of the dust of the world. When he established the heavens, I was there; when he drew a circle on the face of the deep, when he made firm the skies above, when he established the fountains of the deep, when he assigned to the sea its limit, so that the waters might not transgress his command, when he marked out the foundations of the earth, then I was beside him, like a master workman, and I was daily his delight, rejoicing before him always, rejoicing in his inhabited world and delighting in the children of man.
Wisdom thus is the architectonic being who establishes the world.22 Matthew’s genealogy concerns Wisdom taking on flesh.
After four hundred years of deafening silence since Malachi’s final prophecy, people are wondering, What has happened to God’s promises? Will God lead them out of exile? Will he rescue them? Matthew breaks the stillness with the opening proclamation that Jesus is the new creation, the new genesis, the new beginning, and new wisdom. Matthew launches his Gospel by showing how the return from exile will take place. While Solomon’s sons have led the people into exile, the birth of Solomon redivivus, the wise king, will bring them back from exile.23 Therefore, the plausibility of Matthew retracing the footsteps of Israel commences with the explicit lexical references to the beginning of Genesis. Matthew begins by presenting Jesus not only as the new David and the new Abraham but also the new genesis.
New Abraham in Matthew 1:18–25
The genealogy largely echoes Genesis and the start of a new creation, but then Matt. 1:18–25 moves to the birth of the figure who will bring these blessings to all people and lead them back to their home.24 This mirrors the structure of Gen. 1 and Gen. 2. Genesis 1 gives a broad poetic presentation (cf. Matt. 1:1–17), while Gen. 2 zooms in on the birth of humankind (cf. Matt. 1:18–25). Rather than mirroring the “birth” of Adam, however, Matthew moves on to the next most significant birth in the OT: the birth of Isaac. Richard Erickson argues that the birth narrative in 1:18–25 reflects the story of Abraham and the birth of Isaac in Gen. 12–17.25 If the people are going to be led back to the presence of God (Immanuel), it will be, as in the OT, through an unnatural birth. Sarah was barren and Mary was a virgin, yet God grants both of them a promised child. Seven features point toward a connection between the Abraham story and the Matthean Joseph story.
Matthew 1:21: τέξεται δὲ υἱόν, καὶ καλέσεις τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Ἰησοῦν.
Matthew 1:23: καὶ τέξεται υἱόν, καὶ καλέσουσιν τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Ἐμμανουήλ.
Genesis 17:19 LXX: τέξεταί σοι υἱόν, καὶ καλέσεις τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Ισαακ.
Thus Erickson concludes that we should read Matt. 1:18–25 in an Abrahamic way. As God promised Abraham a child in a miraculous way, so too God promised Adam and Eve and Israel a miracle child. This child will be Immanuel, God with his people, as God will dwell with Abraham’s child Isaac. Matthew began his Gospel with the theme of “new creation” from Genesis, and he immediately moves on to the story of Abraham and his children in 1:18–25. The person through whom the whole world would be blessed, who would bring the people back to the presence of God, is Abraham’s seed. Jesus’s children are the promised ones who will return the people of God from their wanderings and exile. Matthew has structurally moved from Genesis (1:1–17) to the story of Abraham (1:18–25).
New Moses and Israel in Matthew 2–4
In Matt. 2 the scribe then enters into the Exodus story, portraying the early life of Jesus under the banner of the early life of Moses and Israel as a whole. In chapter 5 I covered how Jesus is the new Moses when he is confronted by Herod in 2:1–23, so it need not be repeated here. But readers should note the sequence. After 1:18–25 the story transitions to a king seeking to destroy God’s chosen people and a flight “out of Egypt” (2:15). Then Jesus crosses the water (3:13–17) and goes into the wilderness to be tempted for forty days (4:1–11). This foreshadows the escape from exile that Jesus takes his people on.26
| antagonistic king | → | flight out of Egypt | → | through the water | → | into the wilderness |
The movement of Jesus is remarkably similar to the exodus. Israel is sent into Egypt, meets an antagonistic king, comes out of Egypt, goes through the water, and then retreats into the wilderness. Israel’s redemption is a foretaste of the redemption that is to come, just as Jesus’s redemption prefigures the exile out of which he will bring the people. Jesus’s footsteps follow the beginning of the Torah so far.27
Understanding this movement helps one appreciate the fulfillment quotations in Matt. 2:15 and 2:18.28 Mary and Joseph grab Jesus and flee to Egypt because of the threat of King Herod. Matthew says this act is to fulfill what was spoken by the prophet Hosea (11:1), “Out of Egypt I called my son.” This verse has been the subject of much debate.29 Some argue that this is a form of midrash or pesher by Matthew. Others think it is typology or sensus plenior. Still others think Hosea is predictive prophecy. While most quickly go to the contextual argument, and this partly solves the problem, additional help comes from recognizing what Matthew is doing structurally. If Jesus is viewed as the new Israel, then Jesus’s journey out of Egypt and Matthew’s use of Hosea 11:1 are not so odd. There is a rich tradition of Israel coming out of Egypt.30
The departure from Egypt loomed large for Israel and shaped the people’s imaginations in a unique way. This departure theme is confirmed in Matt. 2:18, when he cites from Jer. 31:15 as Rachel mourns for her children who are deported to Babylon (Jer. 40:1). Both places (Ramah and Egypt) and both prophets (Hosea and Jeremiah) declare that God will both send his people into exile and reach out in mercy and bring them back. Thus Matthew is not playing fast and loose with Hosea 11 but reading the movement of Jesus figurally.31 As Richard Hays says, “The fulfillment of the words can only be discerned through the act of the imagination that perceives the typological correspondence between the two stories of the exodus and the Gospel and therefore discerns that Jesus embodies the destiny of Israel.”32 In other words, time collapses in Matthew’s view of these two stories.33 Jewish exegetes kept in mind something we may tend to overlook: from the perspective of God in eternity, the Scriptures are really a “timeless unity in which each and every verse is simultaneous with every other, temporally and semantically.”34 The movement of Jesus mirrors and completes the struggle of Israel as a nation. Not only does Matthew begin echoing Genesis and Abraham, but he also quickly transitions to the early movement of Israel as they come out of Egypt. The new Israel foreshadows a future return from exile in his geographical movements.35 Jesus not only walks in the footsteps of Israel––he is Israel.
New Moses in Matthew 5–9
After mirroring the redemption from Egypt, in chapters 5–7 Matthew has Jesus ascend the mountain and instruct his people as the new Moses. A number of intertextual connections have already been noted in a previous chapter, but a few more rise to the surface.36 First, when Jesus begins teaching, Matthew employs the phrase “and opening his mouth” (ἀνοίξας τὸ στόμα αὐτοῦ), using words similar to those employed in Ps. 78:2 LXX, where the speaker says, “I will open my mouth in parables” (ἀνοίξω ἐν παραβολαῖς τὸ στόμα μου).37 Psalm 78 recounts the time of Moses with the Israelites at Sinai and in the wilderness, and therefore these words from the Psalms also point to Moses connections. Second, Jesus presents them with the way of blessedness and the way of death in the Sermon on the Mount (like Deuteronomy). Third, the Torah becomes the focal point in the Sermon. In Matt. 5:17–20, the Torah is upheld by Jesus, and he clarifies the intention of the Torah in 5:21–48.
Moses may also be in view in 5:5 when Jesus says, “Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth” (μακάριοι οἱ πραεῖς, ὅτι αὐτοὶ κληρονομήσουσιν τὴν γῆν). The church fathers made a connection between this text and Num. 12:3.38 Finally, at the conclusion to the Sermon, Matthew has Jesus coming down the mountain (καταβάντος δὲ αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ τοῦ ὄρους, 8:1). This is similar to the language of Exod. 34:29 (ὡς δὲ κατέβαινεν Μωυσῆς ἐκ τοῦ ὄρους), where Moses comes down the mountain. The phrase forms a bookend to the Sermon as a new Torah, like what Moses received while on Mount Sinai. Jesus has therefore followed the history of Israel all the way to Sinai in Matt. 1–7, and therefore chapters 8–9 recount what it “looks like” to enact the law and reverse the curse.
Jesus enacts the law in chapters 8–9, and thus Matt. 5–9 can be compared to a recounting of Exodus–Deuteronomy.39 He heals a leper, welcomes an outsider, cures an ailing mother, relieves a paralytic, and brings life from death. These miracles deal with some of the same issues that appear in Leviticus. But Jesus also confronts the demonic forces (8:28–34; 9:32–34), showing that the sin problem is sourced in a deeper cosmic battle that has been raging from the beginning of time. Leithart has also proposed that these ten miracles may mirror the ten rebellions of Israel in the wilderness (Num. 14:22). Chapters 8–9 show that Israel has not been faithful to the covenant, and the ten rebellions take place after Sinai like the ten healings that take place after the Sermon.40 As Jesus heals a leper first (8:1–4), so one of the first rebellions after Sinai results in Miriam being made leprous and then healed (Num. 12:1–15).
Matthew 5–9 stretches from Sinai to the end of Deuteronomy because both of these narratives center on Moses. Though at times it might feel as though Matthew moves back and forth between Exodus and Deuteronomy, Leviticus through Deuteronomy also does not travel in a straight line. Leviticus zooms in on the laws from Exodus, and Deuteronomy gives a summary account of how the people are to act. Neither Matthew nor the Pentateuch needs to move in strictly chronological fashion. The narratives pause, zoom in, go backward, and thrust forward at different times, but they still deal with the same large block of time.
The large narrative structure from Matt. 1 to 9 recounts the story from new creation to the end of the Pentateuch. Matthew begins with Gen. 1–2 and the birth of the new creation, then indicates that a return from exile is coming. This new hope will come through one family and one child (Matt. 1:18–25). God preserves his redeemer, brings him out of Egypt, takes him through the water and into the wilderness. Then Jesus ascends the mountain and delivers the new Torah (Matt. 5–9). The law is given so that the people of God can walk rightly before him. Finally, the law is explained and embodied, and warnings are given of what will happen if they don’t follow the law. In sum, the narrative from Matt. 1–9 largely follows the narrative of the Pentateuch and prepares readers for the ultimate rescue from exile. It can schematically be portrayed as follows:
Matthew and the Pentateuch
| Matthew | Old Testament |
| 1:1: Book of Genesis | Gen. 2:4; 5:1 |
| 1:1–17: son of Abraham | Gen. 12–26 |
| 1:18–25: son of Abraham; Israel is birthed | Gen. 18 |
| 2:13–15: Herod kills children | Exod. 1–2: Pharaoh kills children |
| 2:14: Jesus rescued, flees | Exod. 2: Moses rescued, flees |
| 2:19–23: Jesus returns to Israel | Exod. 3–4: Moses returns to Egypt |
| 3:13–17: Jesus passes through waters | Exod. 14: The exodus |
| 4:1–11: Temptation in the wilderness | Exod. 17–19 or Numbers // Travel to Sinai, or Travel in the wilderness |
| 4:18–22: Jesus calls disciples | Exod. 18: Moses appoints rulers |
| 5–7: Sermon on the Mount | Exod. 18 or Exodus–Deuteronomy // Giving of the Torah |
| 8–9: Healings | Leviticus–Deuteronomy // Blessings of the Torah |
| Source: This chart is largely adapted from Leithart, Jesus as Israel, 15. I’ve made only minor changes. | |
Conquest in Matthew 10
Matthew 1–9 recounts the movement of the Pentateuch, and then Matt. 10 begins with the conquest and entry into the land. Just as the Sermon on the Mount was bracketed by Jesus ascending and descending the mountain, the Mission Discourse is bracketed by an inclusio of “his twelve disciples” in 10:1 and 11:1.41 Matthew 10 mirrors both the sending of the twelve spies into the land and the commissioning of Joshua as Moses’s successor. The picture presented by this discourse is one of taking territory for the kingdom of God, similar to the conquest. At the end of Matt. 9 Jesus describes Israel as “harassed and helpless, like a sheep without a shepherd” (9:36). This parallels the text in Num. 27:15–18, where Joshua is appointed because Moses will no longer lead them. “Moses spoke to the LORD, saying, ‘Let the LORD, the God of the spirits of all flesh, appoint a man over the congregation who shall go out before them and come in before them, who shall lead them out and bring them in, that the congregation of the LORD may not be as sheep that have no shepherd.’ So the LORD said to Moses, ‘Take Joshua the son of Nun, a man in whom is the Spirit, and lay your hand on him.’”
In verse 20 the Lord says, “You shall invest him with some of your authority.” So Moses “laid his hands on [Joshua] and commissioned him as the LORD directed through Moses” (27:23). In the same way, Jesus calls the Twelve to him and gives them “authority over unclean spirits” (Matt. 10:1). Like Moses, Jesus instructs the heads of Israel of their duties once they enter the land. The apostles are sent out like the twelve spies and like Joshua on a military operation. They are to go into the land (only a certain land) and let their peace fall on houses who welcome them (think Rahab) and who will receive a reward (10:40–42).42 When they enter the land, they will face persecution, and they may be tempted to be afraid. But they are told not to be anxious (10:19) because their Father cares for them. This is the same language with which Moses instructs his people and specifically Joshua before the conquest (Num. 14:9; 21:34; Deut. 1:21; 3:2, 22; 31:8; Josh. 8:1; 10:8, 25).43
Though there seems to be some back and forth between the sending of the twelve spies into the land and the conquest of Joshua, this should not trouble the readers. For in some sense, this is the same event. One recounts the people’s failure to enter the land; the other recounts the success (though partial) of the people entering the land. Thus it is not odd in the least for Matthew to combine these events in his retelling of the sending of the Twelve. The persecution, trouble, and sword they will face also reminds us of the books of the former prophets (Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings). Because of the lack of good leadership, persecution and the sword fall on the nation until the true king of Israel arises. Similarly, the Twelve prepare the way for Jesus, the true king. Jesus sends his messengers to recapture the land, but they will need his resurrection life to truly enter the new creation.
Monarchy in Matthew 11–12
As chapter 10 is about the conquest, so chapters 11–12 concern the monarchy. The opening of chapter 11 speaks of the prophet John the Baptist, who prepares the way for Jesus. Like Samuel, who anointed David, John is somewhat confused about the one he anoints, but Jesus confirms that he is the one promised from long ago. John is thus a Samuel-type figure, while Jesus is the new David. As in the time of David, the people of Israel don’t always welcome the king. Jesus condemns “this generation” for their response to him (11:16). Yet Jesus offers to give Sabbath rest to the people as God promised to Israel after the conquest (11:25–30) and as David provided for the people by conquering their enemies. “Of the ten uses of the word ‘Sabbath’ in Matthew, eight are in chapter 12.”44 But the people quarrel about what Jesus is doing on the Sabbath rather than accepting the rest he offers to them.
In this section Jesus is presented not only as the new David, but Jesus also speaks of himself as greater than the temple (12:6), which pushes readers into the latter days of the monarchy. Jesus is also the one who can enter into the temple and eat the bread (12:1–8; 1 Sam. 21). As N. T. Wright has asserted, this assigns to the Pharisees the role of the persecuting Saul or spying Doeg; the disciples are the companions of David, and Jesus is David himself. Just as David flees from Saul, Jesus, knowing the Pharisees’ plot against him, withdraws after the encounter with the Pharisees (Matt. 12:14–15).45 “Like David, Jesus is approved by the crowds, but opposed by the leaders of Israel (1 Sam. 17–18).”46 Some welcome Jesus, but many reject the king. Even the religious leaders accuse Jesus of possessing a false spirit, as Saul accused David of deceitful motives. Jesus makes plain in this section that the religious leaders, like Saul, are the ones with the false spirit. They are the unresponsive generation from whom the kingdom will be torn. Jesus is creating his true family (Matt. 12:46–50) around himself, and even the gentiles will hope in him (12:15–21).
One more argument confirms the monarchy theme in chapters 11–12. In the middle of chapter 12, Matthew employs the longest fulfillment quotation in his Gospel:
Behold, my servant whom I have chosen, my beloved with whom my soul is well pleased. I will put my Spirit upon him, and he will proclaim justice to the gentiles. He will not quarrel or cry aloud, nor will anyone hear his voice in the streets; a bruised reed he will not break, and a smoldering wick he will not quench, until he brings justice to victory; and in his name the Gentiles will hope. (12:18–21)
While this quotation is from Isaiah, the text reaches back to Davidic and monarchal language. The person of whom Isaiah speaks is “a chosen servant, a beloved one, with whom Yahweh is pleased” (cf. Matt. 12:18). This language echoes Davidic and kingly descriptions. David and Solomon are the chosen servants. The Lord does not choose the other sons of Jesse (1 Sam. 16:10), but the Lord chooses David. In Ps. 89:3 Yahweh says, “I have made a covenant with my chosen one; I have sworn to David my servant” (emphasis added here and below). The Lord likewise chooses Solomon to build a house for the sanctuary (1 Chron. 28:10). In addition, David is a servant of the Lord (1 Sam. 25:31). In a most important text Yahweh calls David his servant: “Go and tell my servant David . . .” (2 Sam. 7:5, 8, 20). Then again in Ps. 89:3 Yahweh calls David not only his chosen one but also his servant, and this is repeated in Ps. 89:20, 39.
This servant and chosen one is also the one who possesses the Spirit. Both Matthew and Mark attribute the Psalms to David’s being in the Sprit (Matt. 22:43; Mark 12:36).47 So while the Matthean fulfillment quotation is from Isaiah, it speaks of a future deliverer modeled after the life of David. Thus, the longest fulfillment quotation in this section, and even in the whole Gospel, tells of a future king who will be like David. Matthew portrays Jesus as the king who brings Sabbath rest like the chosen servant of the Lord, David. As in the previous narratives, the exile concepts loom large behind these stories.
We have traveled through the Pentateuch in Matt. 1–9 and into the conquest and monarchy in Matt. 10–12. The third discourse can be put in parallel with the wisdom tradition.48 Toward the end of chapter 12, Matthew signals that he is moving to the end of the monarchy with his reference to Solomon and wisdom (12:42). In some ways, the heading for chapter 13 could be “Something greater than Solomon is here.”49 In chapter 13 Jesus speaks in parables and in poetic form like David (Psalms) and his son Solomon (Proverbs). Matthew explicitly quotes from the Wisdom literature, saying that these words fulfill the line “I will open my mouth in a parable; I will utter dark sayings from of old” (Ps. 78:2; cf. Matt. 13:34–35). As before, a key fulfillment quotation provides a clue to where readers are in the history of Israel. Two arguments point toward us seeing this quotation as informative for the section and structure of Matthew as a whole.
First, structurally, this fulfillment quotation sits at the center of the parabolic discourse,50 and therefore it is also structurally at the center of the Gospel as a whole. Often this quotation is passed over with little comment, but Matthew may be alerting his readers to a structural clue with the placement of this text. Second, and related, as I argued in chapter 2, Matthew reduces the number of fulfillment quotations as the narrative continues and begins to drop them in to summarize large sections of his narrative. In the same way, this quotation is inserted to summarize this whole section. All of chapter 13 has Jesus opening his mouth to speak in parables, as in the wisdom tradition.
It is not just the fulfillment quotation that helps readers see the connection with Wisdom literature in chapter 13. The word “parable” is employed twelve times in this chapter, indicating the completeness of the parabolic and mashal tradition. The Wisdom literature is thus summed up in this new son of David, who showers the people with wisdom and truth. Matthew even explicitly says that the people are astonished at his “wisdom” (13:54) immediately after Jesus gives his kingdom parables. Apart from this reference to wisdom, the word appears only in 11:19 and 12:42, with the latter being a reference to Solomon, who so impressed the queen of Sheba. In the next section, gentiles come to Jesus (15:21–29), as the queen of Sheba came to Solomon to sit at his feet, while the nation of Israel rejects him, and Jesus declares Israel to be a wicked generation (16:1–12). When the queen of Sheba comes to Solomon, the explicit wisdom referred to is the house he has built, the temple (1 Kings 10:4; chaps. 5–8). As in the past, the tabernacle’s construction was made possible by the Spirit of wisdom resting on people (Exod. 31:1–11). Now in Matthew a Solomon redivivus constructs the new temple (the new community) by spreading his message of wisdom.
Overall, there are enough correspondences (the fulfillment quotation, the larger context, the form of the chapter, and the references to wisdom) to appropriately label Matt. 13 as mirroring the wisdom tradition in the OT. If the wisdom tradition comes after the monarchy, then it makes sense that Matt. 13 comes after Matt. 11–12. The true king bestows his wisdom about the kingdom to his people. As in the wisdom tradition, we learn that the kingdom is not all that everyone expects. Revelation is needed. The disciples say they understand (13:51), and they too will be called to go into the nations, calling people out of exile, but many will ask, “Where did this man get this wisdom?” (13:54).
The Divided Kingdom in Matthew 14–17
In chapters 14–17 Matthew moves out of the monarchy to the divided kingdom, which Solomon’s sons brought about. The rest that David brought to the kingdom was temporary in Israel’s history; now life begins to fall apart again for Israel despite the presence of the son of David showing them that the sin problem runs deep in their hearts. The former prophets emerge on the scene as chaos descends on the nation. Compared to chapters 1–13, the structure in Matt. 14–17 is harder to discern, compelling many commentators to claim that Matthew’s carefully structured first half takes a different turn.51 But these arguments are quite unsatisfying. The structure becomes more chaotic at this point because of the disorderly kingdom that followed Solomon’s reign.
A careful look at these chapters reveals a broad structure, though a chaotic element exists. Although many Jews reject Jesus, he still holds out the promise of life to them like the prophets and the prophetic literature. There is a remnant left within Israel, though the nation is divided. The prophets give hope to the remnant and warn the Israel of the flesh that the people are headed for destruction and exile. As the Gospel continues, Jesus fulfills the role of the former prophets and even the whole of the prophetic literature. At the same time, Jesus turns to the gentiles, provides for them, and welcomes them, because his eye is focused on the new covenant. Amid this chaos, Jesus establishes his new community, built on the confession of Peter (16:16), which points to the hope of the future.
Chapter 14 begins with the story of John’s death at the hands of Herod (14:1–12). We can see what Matthew is doing by reading both backward and forward. The narrative aligns Herod with Ahab, and John the Baptist with prophets of old. Herod is a prototypical anti-king, so here he functions as an Ahab-like figure. Herod attacks and kills the prophet of God; similarly, Ahab allows the murder of prophets (1 Kings 18:4). And “like Ahab, Herod is egged on to attack the prophet by his bloodthirsty wife (Matt. 14:6–8; 1 Kings 18:4; 19:1–2).”52 Yet this section also introduces what is to happen to God’s chosen prophets.53 Thus this opening episode (14:1–12) continues the tradition of an anti-king killing the prophet of God, foreshadowing what will happen to Jesus the prophet.
| Anti-King | Prophet | Fate |
| Ahab | Elijah | Attempted death, but life |
| Herod | John the Baptist | Death |
| Pilate | Jesus | Death, but life |
The narrative also alerts readers to a key transition: the end of one prophet and the start of another. First, Jesus explicitly links John the Baptist to Elijah (17:12–13). Second, Jesus also specifically references John the Baptist as the “Elijah who is to come” (Matt. 11:14). Third, the Baptist’s clothing was earlier described in detail and mirrors the apparel of Elijah (Matt. 3:4; 2 Kings 1:8). Matthew therefore has told the story of John the Baptist’s death in a way that mirrors the life of Elijah. The Baptist, like Elijah, is an eclectic prophet who challenges Israel’s leaders and therefore suffers under their wrath.
And when Elijah dies, Elisha must take up the prophetic mantle. Matthew largely follows this chronology in chapters 14–17. As John the Baptist (Elijah) dies, Jesus (Elisha) steps onto the scene. The prophetic period has commenced. The negative response to Jesus does not diminish Jesus’s care for his people, as the prophets in the divided kingdom still exercised watchfulness for the people of Israel. Jesus still feeds Israel, though his hometown rejects him and though he knows he is going to his death at the hands of the Jewish religious leaders. The feeding of Israel (the five thousand) mirrors a story from the life of Elisha (2 Kings 4:42–44).54
Matthew then recounts the water-crossing miracle (14:22–33). Most tie this to Moses/Joshua, who feeds the people in the wilderness and then brings them into the promised land. This is not wrong, but there is more. For when the transition from Elijah to Elisha takes place (2 Kings 2:12–14), Elisha takes up the cloak of Elijah and strikes the water, which parts, and Elisha crosses over.55 The sons of the prophets announce, “The spirit of Elijah rests on Elisha” (2 Kings 2:15), just as the disciples recognize, after Jesus walks across the water, that he is “the Son of God” (Matt. 14:33). Already Matthew has tied the Spirit’s anointing on Jesus with the title of Son at Jesus’s baptism (3:16–17). The point again is that Jesus is not only the new Moses but also the new Elisha, because he stands in the prophetic stream. Interpreters don’t need to choose one theme over another; the prophetic tradition couples them.
Jesus turns to the nations, and the gentiles respond rightly (symbolized by the Canaanite woman in 15:21–28; see Isa. 57:19). This is unlike what we see in 2 Kings, for Jehoshaphat comes to Elisha, asking if he should go and destroy the Moabites, and Elisha says the Moabites will be given into his hand (2 Kings 3:18). Yet it also mirrors Elisha’s ministry, since as Jesus heals the Canaanite woman’s daughter, so too Elisha raises the Shunammite’s son (2 Kings 4:8–37).56 Both healings have food as central to the story, in both the disciples of the prophets try to keep the women away (Matt. 15:23; 2 Kings 4:27), and in both it is followed by a healing on or near a mountain (Matt. 15:29–31; 2 Kings 4:27–37). Feeding accounts also follow these stories (feeding of the four thousand in Matt. 15:5–12; feeding of the prophets in 2 Kings 4:38–44), and there is leftover bread (Matt. 15:37; 2 Kings 4:44).
Peter’s confession introduces the hope of a new community amid a divided kingdom (Matt. 16:13–20), and Jesus also instructs his new community on how to act (chaps. 18–20). Though Peter recognizes who Jesus is, he misunderstands the path to Jesus’s enthronement. Therefore Jesus reveals his glory to Peter, James, and John on the Mount of Transfiguration, where the two prophets par excellence (Moses and Elijah) show up beside Jesus (17:1–8). The transfiguration of Jesus, like the baptism and the fulfillment quotations, are hot spots for what Matthew is doing with his narrative. It might even mirror Elijah’s ascension in a whirlwind (2 Kings 2), or the glory of angels that surround Elisha (2 Kings 6:15–17). “Of the nine uses of the name of Elijah, six are in chapters 16–17.”57 Like Elisha, Jesus tells his disciples to “have no fear” (Matt. 17:7; 2 Kings 6:16).58 The cluster of explicit or implicit references to Elijah and Elisha places us in a divided-kingdom context, which naturally flows from what we have seen earlier with the two different responses to Jesus from Israel and the gentiles (chaps. 14–17). Yet Jesus creates his new community in the midst of this divided kingdom. Though he feeds the people, the religious leaders are angry at him. Though his hometown rejects him as a prophet, and some ask for signs, no sign will be given except the sign of the prophet Jonah. The strain of hope will not be snuffed out because God preserves his people amid chaos. He will establish his new community and bring them into their land.
Prophetic Hope and Judgment in Matthew 18–25
Prophetic Hope in Matthew 18–20
Chapters 18–20 continue the prophetic theme and center on the new people of God, which the prophets predicted (Isa. 49:3–6; 66:18–21; Zech. 2:11; Ezek. 47:21–23). Through the visionary words of Jesus, he establishes and teaches his ἐκκλησία (church).59 This is both in contrast to and in continuity with the “assembly of Israel” (cf. Deut. 4:10). The new community even has its own structures of authority and the presence of God uniquely to enforce standards (Matt. 18:15–20). The people of God, like Israel of old, are to remember the Torah and the instructions about humbling themselves before God and caring for the down-and-outs (18:1–14). They are to become like children in humility (18:1–6) and care for little ones (18:10–14). Likewise, they are instructed to be peacemakers (18:15–35) and care for one another, seeking out reconciliation. In short, Jesus forms a remnant in the midst of a hardened people and instructs them on how to live in the new kingdom he is establishing. The disciples and followers of Jesus represent an Israel within Israel, those who will follow the teachings of the true prophet. This is just as Elijah and Elisha did during the false dynasty under which they lived.
Chapters 19–20 provide the ethics of this new community as Jesus begins to travel south. Now Jesus heads to Judea and Jerusalem (the southern kingdom). As he does so, he turns to his disciples to train them in the way of the covenant, as a prophet would. On the way, Jesus also welcomes the children, reversing the curse on the children who have rebelled against Yahweh. Isaiah said: “Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth; for the LORD has spoken: Children have I reared and brought up, but they have rebelled against me. . . . Ah, sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, offspring of evildoers, children who deal corruptly! They have forsaken the LORD, they have despised the Holy One of Israel, they are utterly estranged” (Isa. 1:2, 4). But Jesus calls to his estranged children and welcomes them to his side, “for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 19:14).60 Jesus establishes his new community and redeems the children who have rebelled against him (see Isa. 45:11; 49:25; 54:1, 13; 60:9), thus launching his new community.
Like the prophets, Jesus instructs his community to keep the commandments given in the covenant, but he also says they must follow him and give up what is most precious to them (Matt. 19:16–26). They must not demand to be first but must understand that the kingdom of Jesus is one where status consciousness has no place. They must remember that Yahweh dwells “in the high and holy place,” yet he also dwells with “him who is of a contrite and lowly spirit, to revive the spirit of the lowly, and to revive the heart of the contrite” (Isa. 57:15). God will look on the humble, those who tremble at his word (66:2). The new community must become a servant of all, a servant to the nations, so that all can come and drink from the wealth of the king. Matthew 18–20 thus constitutes the “hope” and instruction that the prophets hold out to the community willing to come back to Yahweh as their true king and thus release them from exile.
Prophetic Judgment in Matthew 21–25
Matthew 21 marks a definite shift. Though Jesus has given hope to his community in Matt. 18–20, from here onward Jesus is the “judging prophet.” He enters the city of Jerusalem on a colt. This comes in fulfillment of Zech. 9:9, which speaks of the king coming in a humble way. “Though the entry certainly has royal overtones, the crowds announce that the prophet has arrived (21:11).”61 In the Zechariah context, the prophet assures Israel that they will be saved by a coming king; Matthew shows that not all Israel is true Israel, and they are not ready to receive their king. Rather than coming into the city as the conquering messiah, Jesus acts as the condemning prophet by three related temple acts. First, he confronts the temple system. Second, he castigates the leaders of Israel (especially the scribes) in the temple. Third, he foretells the destruction of the temple. For Israel, the destruction of the temple and exile went hand in hand.
Jesus first enters the temple and confronts the current regime. Jeremiah also prophesied against the temple in his so-called temple sermons (Jer. 7; 26). Jesus’s language even mirrors Jeremiah’s as he calls the temple a “den of robbers” (Matt. 21:13; Jer. 7:11). The temple is not a place where the poor can come and find solace; rather, it has become like a cave, where robbers lie in wait for the poor who would travel along the road. The condemnation of the temple is confirmed when the prophet-king curses the fig tree (Matt. 21:18–22). The cursing of the fig tree builds on Jeremiah and Isaiah’s vineyard parable (Jer. 12:10–11; Isa. 5), where these prophets speak of Israel as grapevines or fig trees; when the Lord tries to gather fruit, “there are no grapes on the vine, no figs on the fig tree; even the leaves are withered” (Jer. 8:13). Therefore, the nation will be overthrown.62
Second, Jesus condemns the religious leaders in Matt. 23–25, which matches the condemnation by the prophets, especially Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Isaiah. As Leithart says, “Jesus is the last and greatest of the Prophets. He is the Prophet that Moses predicted (Deut. 18). That means He gives the final word, brings the blueprints for the final temple, speaks the final world into existence, and has complete and permanent access to the divine court, where He can offer a defense for His people. Everything prophets have done, Jesus does, and more.”63 Though the setting of chapter 23 is not made explicit by Matthew, it seems that Jesus is most likely still in the temple. This again establishes strong connections to the temple sermons of Jer. 7 and 26. Jeremiah’s declaration sounds like a perfect summary of Jesus’s message: “Amend your ways and your deeds, and I will let you dwell in this place” (Jer. 7:3). Jesus himself laments that Jerusalem is “the city that kills the prophets” (Matt. 23:37), and he says, “See, your house is left to you desolate” (23:38; cf. Jer. 22:5).
Significantly, Jesus tells the religious leaders that he has sent them prophets, wise men, and scribes, but they have rejected all of them. God has sent them these prophets (and Jesus himself) so that “the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah” might come on them (Matt. 23:34–35). He links Abel and Zechariah through righteous blood being shed, which reveals Matthew’s awareness of the larger story line of the Hebrew Bible. Abel is the first in the Hebrew Bible whose blood is spilled (Gen. 4:10), and Zechariah is the last prophet whose violent death is reported (2 Chron. 24:21). In essence Matthew is saying that the blood speaks from “cover to cover,” from Genesis through Chronicles.64 The major point here is that Matthew is aware and tracing themes from beginning to end. In the last discourse, he reveals he is cognizant of the trajectory of the OT.
Finally, Matthew 24–25 then rightly presents the eschatological discourse, describing both the end of the temple period and the end of the world in apocalyptic terms—exile is coming. The discourse begins with Jesus looking at the temple and predicting its destruction (24:1–2). The glory of the Lord is leaving the temple, as Ezekiel prophesied. Ezekiel is brought into the court and told to go and see the vile abominations being committed in the temple. Engraved on the wall are creeping things, loathsome beasts, and idols (8:10). Ezekiel even calls it a great abomination (Ezek. 8:13; Matt. 24:15). Decisively, the glory of the Lord goes out from the threshold of the house and stands over the cherubim. And the cherubim lift up their wings and go out (Ezek. 10:18–19). For Jesus, the glory of the Lord is not only leaving the temple; the temple must also be destroyed.
The apocalyptic language employed in this fifth discourse is eerily similar to Isaiah’s prophetic apocalyptic condemnation of Babylon in Isa. 13. Jerusalem has become Babylon—so the city will be left desolate. Isaiah speaks of a coming battle. People are coming from distant lands. The day of the Lord is near, and “all hands will be feeble” (13:7). The land will become a desolation. “For the stars of the heavens and their constellations will not give their light; the sun will be dark at its rising, and the moon will not shed its light” (13:10). Yahweh will make the heavens tremble, and the earth will shake out of its place. Jesus similarly speaks of coming wars (Matt. 24:6–7); he says that tribulation is coming, and the people should flee (24:16). After the tribulation “the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken” (24:29).
The apocalypse and exile come together when Jesus tells his disciples that when the Son of Man appears, coming with the clouds of heaven, “he will send out his angels with a great trumpet, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other (24:30–31). Matthew’s addition of the phrase “a great trumpet” alludes to the climactic sentences of Isaiah’s apocalypse in Isa. 24–27.
And in that day a great trumpet will be blown, and those who were lost in the land of Assyria and those who were driven out to the land of Egypt will come and worship the LORD on the holy mountain at Jerusalem. (Isa. 27:13, emphasis added)
Though much of Matthew’s discourse is focused on condemnation and the end of the temple period, the allusion also shows that in the midst of destruction there is hope. Matthew’s allusion proves that Jesus prophesies not only the end of an era, but the end of exile and the final regathering of the people of Israel.65
Although Matt. 18–20 mirrors the prophets’ hope that is held out to the people, Matt. 21–25 reflects the prophetic judgment that Jesus, as the true prophet, announces on the nations that will not heed his words. Matthew has therefore moved all the way from Genesis into the prophetic literature and right up to the edge of the exile. The sequence we have seen so far can be summarized with the following chart:66
| Matthew | Section Title | Old Testament Theme |
| 1:1–17 | Genealogy | Genesis, new creation, Adam |
| 1:18–25 | Birth of Jesus | Abraham |
| 2:1–23 | Travel narrative | Israel’s travels |
| 3–4 | Beginning of ministry | Exodus begins |
| 5–7 | Sermon on the Mount | Mount Sinai: Exodus–Deuteronomy |
| 8–9 | Healings | Law enacted: Exodus–Deuteronomy |
| 10 | Sending of the Twelve | Conquest |
| 11–12 | Reactions to the king | Monarchy |
| 13 | Kingdom parables | Wisdom tradition |
| 14–17 | Divided reactions to Jesus | Divided kingdom: Elijah and Elisha |
| 18–20 | Instruction for the church | Prophets’ hope: Establishment of a new community |
| 21–25 | Clash of the kingdoms | Prophetic condemnation: Castigation of current leadership |
Exile and Return from Exile in Matthew 26–28
If Matthew is following the history of the OT, the next thing that should happen is the destruction of the temple and the exile. Jesus had already affirmed that his body was the temple and that it would be destroyed but rebuilt in three days (Matt. 26:61). Blood should fill this section as the people of Israel are attacked and destroyed by their enemies. But a twist occurs in the passion. The blood of Israel is spilled, but it is innocent blood.67 Blood turns out to be not only the cue to the exile and destruction of the temple but also the prompt for the rebuilding of the temple and the return from exile. Blood is both the curse and the blessing, and it lies at the center of Israel’s future. Through the dust of the fallen temple, a ray of light will be seen.
Matthew, as the narrator, laces prophetic texts to locate Jesus at the end of Israel’s history. Jesus is Jeremiah, the lamenter, who mourns the sin and exile of the people Israel. But he is also the Jeremiah who declares that a new covenant has come through blood. He is Zechariah, the chastiser of the religious leaders, and he is the one who speaks of the rejected Davidic shepherd. Finally, Jesus is the new Cyrus, who declares that the people shall return from exile, rebuild their kingdom and their temple, and reestablish their family.
Blood and Exile in Lamentations
Blood is everywhere in Matt. 26–28 and ends up being central to both the exile and the return from exile.68 David Moffitt argues that, to portray Jesus’s death as an act of righteous bloodshed, Matthew draws on Lamentations in his account of the events leading to the crucifixion.69 This comes at the hands of the religious authorities and ultimately results in the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. Matthew draws on Lamentations because laments were key cultural frameworks for the Jewish community during the exile. Lamentations expresses grief at the destruction of the temple and the hope of return from exile. Matthew consistently interweaves Lamentations at the end of his Gospel, thus portraying Jesus as the one who also laments the plight of the people, yet speaks of the hope of a return from exile.
One of the clearest allusions to Lamentations comes at the end of Matt. 23: “So that on you may come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah the son of Barachiah, whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar” (23:35, emphasis added). Though we have already looked at this text, and it comes in the preceding section, it sets up how we are to read Matthew’s passion.70 The phrase from this verse “all the righteous blood” echoes Joel 3:19; Jon. 1:14; and also Lam. 4:13, which is specifically dealing with the destruction of Jerusalem and saying that it happened “because” its prophets and unrighteous priests “have shed righteous blood in their land.”
In 27:39 Matthew describes the people who pass by as “wagging their heads” at Jesus, thereby mocking him. Though this is probably an allusion to Ps. 22:7, it also reflects Lam. 2:15: “All who pass along the way clap their hands at you; they hiss and wag their heads at the daughter of Jerusalem: ‘Is this the city that was called the perfection of beauty, the joy of all the earth?’” The context of Lam. 2 is the destruction of the temple (see 2:7). Therefore, those who pass by and wag their heads at Jesus’s death fulfill the role of those who shake their heads at the destroyed temple (Jesus’s body). Hays asserts that the text “subliminally suggests that the crucified Jesus paradoxically has become the embodiment of the scorned and destroyed city of Jerusalem.”71 On the cross Jesus is also offered gall, which mirrors the bitterness and wormwood of Lam. 3:19. Matthew therefore interweaves the themes of the exile, the destruction of the temple, mocking, and bloodshed into the final days of Jesus, showing that it is by his blood that return from exile occurs. As Moffit says in his conclusion,
Matthew alludes to Lamentations three times in chs. 23 and 27 of his Gospel (23:35; 27:34; and 27:39). The fact that these allusions come from chs. 2, 3, and 4 of Lamentations, that the allusion to Lamentations 4:13 resonates throughout the scenes that immediately precede the crucifixion (see Matt. 27:19, 24–25), and that the allusion to Lamentations 2:15 is so closely related thematically to the way Matthew uses Lamentations 4:13, all suggest that Matthew has employed Lamentations as a significant intertext. The allusions to Lamentations function as scriptural warrant for interpreting certain historical events theologically and polemically—namely, for understanding Jesus’ crucifixion as the act of righteous bloodshed par excellence that directly results in the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple.72
The final chapters of Matthew display that Jesus acts as Israel as he experiences the exile and restoration in his death and resurrection.73 Jesus submits himself to exile in his death and burial, but then at his resurrection he returns from exile. The bones that were once dead are brought again to life (Ezek. 37), and the bones of those in the city also awake for a time to show the power of Christ’s work.
Blood, Zechariah, and the Rejected Shepherd
The story of blood continues from Lamentations to Zechariah (see Matt. 23:35). Four more references to blood appear in Matt. 27. First, in 27:4 Judas claims that he has sinned by betraying “innocent blood” (αἷμα ἀθῷον).74 Second, Pilate’s wife urges him in 27:19 to “have nothing to do with [Jesus,] that righteous man.” Third, Pilate in 27:24 washes his hands and declares himself “innocent of this man’s blood.”75 Fourth, in 27:25 the people call for Jesus’s “blood [to] be on us and upon our children!” These four references point back to 23:35 to show Jesus as following in the tradition of Abel and Zechariah. He will die at the hands of the people, thereby bringing about the destruction of the temple and the exile. In fact, Jewish interpretive traditions link the story of the murder of Zechariah with the destruction of the temple and Jerusalem.76
Ham also argues that Matthew has employed Zechariah (the post-exilic prophet) in his portrayal of Jesus and his mission. In particular, Matthew has the dual related themes of Jesus as coming king and rejected shepherd—themes that come right from Zechariah’s predominant messianic image.77 The rejected-shepherd theme comes to the forefront when Judas recants of his betrayal in 27:3–10, and Matthew says that this episode fulfills Jeremiah the prophet. “And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him on whom a price had been set by some of the sons of Israel, and they gave them for the potter’s field, as the Lord directed me” (27:9). Jeremiah and Zechariah come into unity here.78 Only Matthew among the Gospel writers provides the details of Judas asking the chief priests and elders how much they will give him, followed by their payment to him.
Matthew 26:16 says that they weigh out for Judas thirty silver coins. A similar expression appears in Zech. 11:12, where the people weigh out thirty pieces of silver to the shepherd, who loses his temper and breaks his covenant with them. In its canonical setting, the payment of the silver to Zechariah reflects a negative evaluation of his shepherding by leaders of Israel. In the Matthew scene, when Judas asks for the leaders of Israel to set a price on Jesus’s head, they weigh out the same amount. In both texts, Israel’s leaders reject the shepherd, and in both stories the coins are thrown back into the temple. Both Zechariah and Jesus are the rejected shepherds, whose worth is estimated by their enemies at thirty pieces of silver—the compensation for a slave (Exod. 21:32). Judas and the leaders of Israel thereby devalue and reject Jesus’s shepherding ministry. Innocent blood is betrayed at a truncated price, a price that is later used to buy a field. Matthew therefore links the corrupted leaders of Israel in Zechariah’s scene to the leaders of Israel in Jesus’s day via the low price paid to worthless shepherds.79
Destruction of the Temple and Return from Exile
The temple theme that started in Matt. 21 therefore comes to a climax in the passion of Jesus. Of the twenty references to the temple in Matthew, fourteen of them occur in chapters 21–28. Readers find that at Jesus’s trial the charge centers on the temple; they claim that he said he “is able to destroy the temple . . . and to rebuild it in three days” (26:61). While Jesus hangs on the cross, those who pass by mock him: “You who would destroy the temple and rebuild it in three days . . .” (27:40). Then when Jesus dies, the temple curtain is torn in two (27:51), signifying the end of the temple period.80 While chapters 24–25 predict the destruction of the temple, in 26–28 we see the temple era end.
The temple and exile themes are held together by the above conglomeration of references to blood. The messiah undergoes exile himself as he is rejected and cast out of the city by his own nation. He suffers the death of a criminal at the demand of Israel’s leaders. Regularly in the Prophets, the nation is condemned because of a lack of leadership, and the people suffer because of “worthless shepherds” (Ezek. 34; Zech. 11:17). In an intensified way, Jesus suffers at the hands of the worthless shepherds of Israel, who end up giving him over to the judgment of the nations. Ironically, though, the judgment that falls on Jesus becomes both the “end” of Israel and the “salvation” of Israel.
At the tearing of the temple curtain, the new exile begins; at the resurrection, it ends. The temple is destroyed and then rebuilt. In Jewish history, the destruction of the temple signaled the inauguration of exile, but by leaving the temple, Jesus indicates that a new age has come (24:1–2). The time of the temple is over, and the time of Jesus is here. This is confirmed at Jesus’s resurrection, where he bursts forth from the tomb, declaring that the era of darkness is over—the epoch of light has come. Though he suffered exile by submitting himself to the wrath of the religious leaders and becoming the rejected shepherd, death cannot contain him. At the center of each shadow story that Matthew tells stands the cross and the resurrection. To miss the climax is to miss the story itself.
Go! Rebuild and Expand the Temple
Matthew closes his narrative with Jesus’s commission to go and bring people out of exile by spreading his temple presence (28:16–20). Second Chronicles, the last book of the OT according to the Hebrew ordering, also ends with an eschatological note about the restoration project looming in the future—a restoration project that concerns Israel’s kingdom. Cyrus gives a command, a commission, for Israel to go up to Jerusalem to rebuild the temple. Cyrus, the king of Persia, says, “The LORD, the God of heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth, and he has charged me to build him a house at Jerusalem, which is in Judah. Whoever is among you of all his people, may the LORD his God be with him. Let him go up” (2 Chron. 36:23). Cyrus speaks of his universal authority, the source of his authority, and his commission to “go.” Jesus lists the same three elements. He has all authority in heaven and on earth, given to him by his Father, and in light of that authority he tells his disciples to “go.”
Both Matthew and 2 Chronicles end with a construction project. The new temple will expand, a new home will be provided, a new people will be born.81 The “servant of Yahweh” has commanded the people to “go out,” and he can do so because all authority has been given to him. They are to gather people into this new kingdom because, as the Genesis story has set things up, God is going to rule this earth through his vice-regents. His people are to spread the news of this king—the embodiment of Wisdom—to the whole world. At the center of this story stands Jesus—the new Israel—the teacher of wisdom, who brings blessings to all nations through his life-giving monarchy. Jesus promises his people his presence, he has given his blood, and he has conquered death by his resurrection; he will be with them to the end of the age.
Conclusion
The discipled scribe demonstrates the wisdom he learned from his teacher in a variety of ways. We can follow him down into the valleys and watch how he shifts OT quotations to make a point, or we can track him up to the mountain and watch as he looks out over the life of Jesus as a whole. As we stand at the peak, we can see that Jesus is the new Adam, Abraham, Moses, Joshua, David, Solomon, Elijah, and Jeremiah, but Matthew also has Jesus recapitulate a broad chronological structure of the history of Israel, and therefore Jesus stands as the new Israel, who leads his people out of exile.
All of these figures are contested in different ways. Adam is challenged by the devil, Moses is resisted by Pharaoh, David has to flee from his own nation, and Elijah must be wary of the Israelite kings above him. In the story of Israel, the resistance comes not only from the outside but also from the inside. The people of God have corrupt hearts, as the prophets long ago declared. Therefore, Israel needs to be saved not primarily from foreign armies or tyrannical kings but from their own twisted desires. The resistance comes from within, and therefore Jesus must change their hearts. In one sense the future of Israel is grim in Matthew. From the opening pages, the leadership rejects Jesus. Jesus laments their attitude, but he knows that this has been the plan all along. The leaders end up bringing him to his death.
In an ironic twist, the grim hope for Israel leads to a bright future. For Israel to have hope, it must undergo death. Matthew’s sequencing of Israel’s history through his narrative reveals that where Israel has failed, Jesus succeeds. Israel was called to be a light to the nations, but Jesus ends up being the one who calls the centurion and the Canaanite woman to himself. Israel was meant to crown an everlasting king, but Jesus becomes that king as he is enthroned on the cross by gentiles. Israel was supposed to welcome the prophets and listen to them, but Jesus becomes the prophet whom they must now obey. Israel should have welcomed their messiah and paved the way for him, but Jesus must chart his own path.
Through his structure the scribe has Jesus completing the whole history of Israel by sequencing the life of Jesus in the mold of Israel’s history. Matthew traces his story from Genesis to the end of Chronicles (the first and last books in the Jewish canonical order). Though he did not do so in a wooden fashion, there are enough clues in his Gospel to reveal that underneath the narrative there is a frame: an infrastructure pointing readers to Jesus as Israel’s hope. This is the wisdom Matthew absorbed from his teacher of wisdom and wrote down for future generations (Matt. 13:52; 28:18–20) as he was discipled by his rabbi in the secrets of the kingdom of heaven (13:11). From his teacher he learned Jesus himself is the faithful Son, who completes the mission of Israel. Jesus pursues his Father’s will and becomes a sacrifice not only for Israel but also for the nations. He thereby fulfills the mission of Adam, Abraham, Moses, David, Jeremiah, Elijah and many more. He is Israel, but the better Israel.
1. G. K. Chesterton, “Riddle of the Ivy.”
2. Peter Leithart (Jesus as Israel) has already argued a form of this in his introduction to his Matthew commentary. I will follow him in many ways, add to his discussion, and then depart from him in others. He does not gather the entire movement under the banner of exile.
3. For a good introduction to this method, see Roberts and Wilson, Echoes of Exodus.
4. This is not to deny that there were some issues with pseudonymity.
5. In this sense, this chapter works against mistakes that regularly occur in the current study of the NT use of the OT. Sometimes these studies restrict themselves to “quotations” and forget that large narrative movements also have resonances. With the help of C. H. Dodd, scholars are realizing that quotations are reaching back to whole contexts; yet this step is not enough. Even if we work with quotations and their past contextual whole, we may forget to tie these to the current narrative as a whole. In other words, we can atomize on both horizons. In sum, though there has been a narrative turn in the study of the Gospels, it has not turned enough to study how the Gospel writers especially have employed the OT.
6. As evidenced by numerous proposals, only a few of which I list here. Allison, “Structure, Biographical Impulse, and the Imitatio Christi”; Carter, “Kernels and Narrative Blocks”; Lohr, “Oral Techniques in the Gospel of Matthew”; Matera, “Plot of Matthew’s Gospel”; Powell, “Narrative-Critical Understanding of Matthew”; Smith, “Fivefold Structure in the Gospel of Matthew.”
7. Yet there are many minor differences within these proposals.
8. Largely through the discourses, but the narratives also support this argument.
9. Bacon, “Five Books of Matthew”; Bacon, Studies in Matthew; Enslin, “Bacon on the Gospel of Matthew.”
10. For example, Allison (Studies in Matthew, 138) says, “Once one abandons the vain attempt to construct a Matthean Pentateuch, what is the rationale for such procedure? What happens when instead one simply evaluates each narrative section and each discourse on its own terms, as a large thought unit? The results, in my judgment, allow both the structure and plot of the First Gospel to emerge clearly.” Kingsbury (Matthew as Story, 113) flatly denies the Pentateuchal connection: “Contrary to what many scholars have claimed over the years, the great speeches of Jesus do not constitute the climactic feature of Matthew’s Gospel nor do they stand apart from the rest of the story being told.”
11. See Gundry, Matthew, 10–11.
12. Allison, New Moses.
13. Leithart, Jesus as Israel, 11.
14. Leithart acknowledges that he builds on Allison, Gundry (Use of the Old Testament, 210), and Goulder (Midrash and Lection in Matthew).
15. Pennington, Heaven and Earth.
16. Schreiner, Body of Jesus. Leithart (Jesus as Israel, 53–54) also looks to the generations for a new creation theme: “Six weeks of generations are between Abraham and Jesus and that means that Jesus is the first name in the seventh seven, the beginning of a new week, the week of the new creation.”
17. Eloff, “Exile, Restoration.”
18. Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Gospels, 110–11.
19. Adam has “wisdom” in the garden, but the serpent is “crafty” and tempts Adam and Eve to eat of the tree of “knowledge.” Ezekiel 28:12 says, “You were the signet of perfection, full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.” If we view the story line from this perspective, returning from exile is regaining wisdom. See Longman, Fear of the Lord Is Wisdom, 94–100.
20. The theme of “return from exile” will return with greater clarity in Matt. 26–28.
21. Nolan (Royal Son of God, 228–32) briefly develops the theme of Jesus as wisdom since wisdom possesses creative and redemptive functions.
22. Or at least related to the Creator in a personified way.
23. The Jews were hoping for a return from exile, a return to their land, an establishment of their kingdom. As Dempster (Dominion and Dynasty) has noted, the twin themes of geography (dominion) and genealogy (dynasty) run a straight line through the OT and right into the NT.
24. Leihart and Goulder argue that this section is about Joseph (Gen. 37–50). Goulder points out that the original Joseph ben Jacob has a set of three dreams, and Matthew’s Joseph (also ben Jacob, 1:16) has three dreams (1:20; 2:13; 19). Both of the dreams lead them to Egypt but also end up protecting the promised line from destruction. This also works well because in the OT Joseph precedes Moses and the exodus. I don’t think these correspondences necessarily need to be pitted against each other, but the lexical connections make the Abraham tie more convincing.
25. Erickson, “Joseph and the Birth of Isaac.”
26. Hays (Echoes of Scripture in the Gospels, 140) says, “Jesus saves people from their sins (1:21) by representatively overcoming their unfaithfulness––proleptically in his baptism (3:15) and wilderness temptation (4:1–11), where he shows himself to be the obedient ‘Son of God’ in a way that Israel had failed to be, and definitively in the passion/resurrection narrative. Thus, as Messiah, he brings the exile to an end (1:17).”
27. That Jesus is functioning as both a new Israel and a new Moses need not be put at odds, for it is Moses who is connected to the deliverance from Egypt.
28. Piotrowski (Matthew’s New David) even argues that Matthew’s quotations draw on texts associated with Israel’s exile and restoration and therefore evokes the “end-of-exile.”
29. Beale, “Use of Hosea 11:1 in Matthew 2:15.”
30. In Exod. 13:3 Moses tells the people to “remember this day in which you came out from Egypt, out of the house of slavery, for by a strong hand the LORD brought you out from this place.” The Jews even had a feast in which they ate unleavened bread to remind them of the day they came out of the land. Again and again in the Prophets, the people are reminded of the day when they were brought out of the land of Egypt (Hosea 12:13; Amos 2:10; 3:1; Mic. 6:4; 7:15).
31. Since we are products of our modern Western culture, we still tend to read a given OT statement in only a grammatical-historical manner, considering it almost exclusively from the perspective of the human author’s understanding and point in time. But Christ has bound together the disparate strands of the temporal flow into a unity of essence and meaning. The supernatural has impregnated history so deeply that there must be a further meaning to historical events.
32. Hays, “Matthew: Reconfigured Torah,” 174.
33. It seems that the idea Matthew draws out of Hosea was there germinally, but this does not mean Hosea had the messiah in mind when he penned 11:1. “One might accuse Matthew of pulling this verse out of context because the reference in Hosea is clearly to Israel. However, Matthew’s point is not to prove a point, but to make a point, namely that we should be reading the life of Christ in light of Israel” (Hays, “Matthew: Reconfigured Torah”) and the history of Israel in light (now) of Christ.
34. Stern, Midrash and Theory, 108.
35. The exile theme is also hinted at by the use of Jer. 31:15 in Matt. 2:18 and the reference to Ramah, the place where Israel went into exile (Jer. 40:1).
36. In chapter 5, I mentioned some of the connections to Moses: (1) Jesus goes up on the mountain, (2) it is the mountain, and finally (3) he sits down. The Beatitudes might also mirror the Ten Commandments in that the first four concern our relationship to God, and the second four concern our relationship to other humans.
37. Pennington, Sermon on the Mount, 140–41.
38. Allison, Studies in Matthew, 119–20. Allison makes reference to Eusebius and Theodoret of Cyrrhus making these connections.
39. Others have proposed that in chaps. 8–9 there are ten miracles, which mirror the ten plagues that the Lord sends upon Egypt. Chae (Jesus as the Eschatological Davidic Shepherd) argues that the sheep and shepherd metaphors (9:36) relate to the restoration of the house of Israel. This lines up with both Mosaic and Davidic themes.
40. Leithart, Jesus as Israel, 23–24.
41. Garland, Reading Matthew, 110.
42. Allison (Studies in Matthew, 120–21) ties Matt. 10 with Exod. 12. Many of the articles of clothing or accessories that Jesus instructs his disciples not to take on the journey are the same items the Israelites had with them as they rushed out of Egypt. Furthermore, he points out that according to Deut. 8:4 and 29:5, the Israelites’ clothes and sandals did not wear out while in the wilderness, which may be a reason why Jesus’s disciples did not need to worry about taking much. The references to Deuteronomy are intriguing, since they take place before the conquest of the land.
43. Two times Jesus tells his disciples “Do not be afraid” (μὴ φοβεῖσθε, Matt. 10:28; 14:27) and once “Don’t worry” (10:19). These are similar to the injunctives given by Moses and Joshua (e.g., Num. 14:9; 21:34; Deut. 31:8).
44. Leithart, Jesus as Israel, 28.
45. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God, 393–94.
46. Leithart, Jesus as Israel, 30.
47. The king also proclaims justice, and 2 Sam. 8:15 gives a summary statement of David’s reign over Israel, saying that he administers “justice and equity” to all his people.
48. See the first chapter (above) for a more extended argument of Jesus being presented as a teacher of wisdom in Matthew as a whole but especially in chap. 13.
49. Perkins, “‘Greater than Solomon.’”
50. If one follows Davies and Allison (Matthew, 2:373) in their trifold structure, then there are three subsections in each block.
51. Davies and Allison (Matthew, 2:463) and France (Gospel of Matthew, 547) claim that there is no clear structure at this point.
52. Leithart, Jesus as Israel, 32.
53. In the same way, Pilate acts as an “anti-king,” who, as Herod did with John the Baptist, seizes Jesus (Matt. 26:4; cf. 14:3), binds him (27:2; cf. 14:3), and does not initially want to put him to death because he fears the people (21:46; cf. 14:5). Pilate’s hand is forced, despite his wife’s involvement, but he is sorry (27:11–26; cf. 14:6–12). After Jesus dies, his disciples come, take his body, and bury it, as John’s disciples did for him (27:51–61; cf. 14:12).
54. The emphasis on bread holds this section together. Herod throws a feast for his birthday (14:1–12), Jesus feeds the five thousand (14:13–21), the Pharisees and scribes from Jerusalem ask about washing hands before eating (15:1–9), Jesus speaks to the Canaanite woman about bread (15:21–28), he feeds the four thousand (15:32–39), and he warns the disciples about the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees (16:5–12). This bread then is most likely tied to Elisha, whose ministry also has food as a central theme. Elisha’s ministry revolves around the gift of food: he heals Jericho’s waters (2 Kings 2:19–22), provides food for the sons of the prophets (4:38–41), multiplies loaves to feed the multitude (4:42–44), gives bread to Aramean (Syrian) soldiers (6:20–23), and prophesies the end of the famine after the siege of Samaria (7:1, 18–20). Therefore, as the new Elijah dies, the new Elisha steps onto the scene.
55. Leithart (Jesus as Israel, 36) ties the rescue of Peter from the water with Elisha making the axe head float (2 Kings 6:1–7). I am not sure that this connection works as well.
56. Or one could tie this story to 1 Kings 17:8–24, which is also a possibility. Elisha also faces a woman seeking help, a woman who throws herself at his feet at Mount Carmel (2 Kings 4:25, 27). Though this does not continue the chronology, Matthew does not need to follow it exactly. Here he seems more concerned with presenting Jesus largely as the new prophet in the divided kingdom.
57. Leithart, Jesus as Israel, 33.
58. I am indebted to Leithart (Jesus as Israel, 36) for these observations.
59. Leithart (Jesus as Israel, 34) ties this to Elisha, who is unlike Elijah in being constantly surrounded by his disciples. Though readers have already been introduced to the community in Matt. 16, Jesus does uniquely form his new community in chaps. 18–20. This teaching has already been foreshadowed in Matt. 16, where Jesus instructs his disciples to take up their crosses.
60. Though some might balk at this simple connection, the rest of the correspondences we have seen give it more weight.
61. Leithart, Jesus as Israel, 38. The entry could even have resonances with the story of Elisha anointing Jehu as king (2 Kings 9). “Then in haste every man of them took his garment and put it under him on the bare steps, and they blew the trumpet and proclaimed, ‘Jehu is king’” (9:13). Yet Jehu must battle with Joram, as Jesus battles with the current leadership when he enters the city.
62. The vineyard theme continues as Jesus tells two parables about vineyard owners (Matt. 20:1–16; 21:33–44) and another about a father who sends his sons to work in the vineyard (21:28–32). As with the prophets (Isa. 3:14; Jer. 12:10; Hosea 2:12), the vineyard is a metaphor for Israel. The Lord has cared for it diligently, but it fails to produce fruits and rejects the prophets, so the Lord will give it over to other nations and let it be destroyed and chopped down. Jeremiah specifically speaks against the shepherds who have destroyed his vineyard: “They have trampled down my portion; they have made my pleasant portion a desolate wilderness. . . . They shall be ashamed of their harvest because of the fierce anger of the LORD” (Jer. 12:10, 13).
63. Leithart, “Least of These.”
64. Yet there is some question of whether the OT canon was closed at this point. See Peels, “Blood ‘from Abel to Zechariah.’”
65. This paragraph is largely dependent on Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Gospels, 137.
66. Noticeably, the sections covered get progressively longer. This should not be a stumbling block, since Matthew also bunches his fulfillment quotations in the first part of his narrative and then in the latter half lets them stand over large blocks of the narrative.
67. The blood in the OT is tainted by sin; Jesus’s blood is pure.
68. Gore is not a major emphasis in Matthew’s cross scene. Yet out of the eleven references to “blood” in Matthew’s Gospel, six of them do occur in chaps. 26–28, and only one before Matt. 23.
69. Moffitt, “Righteous Bloodshed,” 300.
70. In one sense, the divisions I have created are artificial, for all of Matt. 21–28 is of one piece.
71. Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Gospels, 142.
72. Moffitt, “Righteous Bloodshed,” 319.
73. Leithart, Jesus as Israel, 41.
74. See Deut. 27:25; 1 Sam. 19:5.
75. See Hays (Echoes of Scripture in the Gospels, 132), who argues that Pilate’s image inverts Deut. 21:7–8 and puts a Gentile ruler in the place of Israel when Jerusalem calls for his blood to be upon their heads.
76. See Moffitt, “Righteous Bloodshed,” 306–8. C. Hamilton (Death of Jesus) argues that innocent blood signals the end of exile.
77. Three times in this section Matthew alludes to Zechariah (Matt. 21:4–5 = Zech. 9:9–10; Matt. 24:30 = Zech. 12:10–14; Matt. 26:31 = Zech. 13:7). Jesus is thus the shepherd messianic king, whose coming leads to his death. Ham shows how eleven times Zechariah is cited (3×) or alluded to (8×) in Matt. 21–27, including two of Matthew’s fulfillment quotations (Matt. 21:5; 27:9–10) coming from Zechariah, thus framing the Zechariah references. It is not difficult to see how the theology of Zechariah has influenced the theology of Matthew. See Ham, Coming King; Foster, “Use of Zechariah”; Moss, Zechariah Tradition.
78. Matthew attributes this text to Jeremiah because the text is a mosaic of scriptural texts, some of which come from Jeremiah. Matthew most likely says it is from Jeremiah because Jeremiah is the one most commonly associated with potters and the buying of a field. In fact, Matthew seems to be taking the motifs of both coins and a potter’s jug and picking up various texts as a magnet picks up paper clips as it goes by (Jer. 18:1–11; 19:1–13; 32:14; Zech. 11:13). Yet Judas knows that he has betrayed “innocent blood” (Matt. 27:4, 24; Jer. 26:15).
79. See Moss, Zechariah Tradition, 174:
The chief priests and the elders of the people take counsel to arrest Jesus by stealth (Mt 26.1–4). After the costly anointing of Jesus by the unnamed woman (Mt 26.6ff), Judas approaches the chief priests, who pay him a paltry thirty pieces of silver to deliver Jesus to them (26.14–15). Following the supper at which Jesus has revealed his betrayer is one of the Twelve, Judas leads the arresting party from the chief priests and elders of the people to Jesus and betrays him with a kiss (26.47–50). Jesus is led to Caiaphas the high priest, where the scribes and elders have gathered (26.57). When Judas sees that Jesus has been condemned, he returns the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and the elders, in remorse over his sin of betraying innocent blood (27.3–4a). Although they refuse to absolve Judas of his bloodguilt, they are left with the pieces of silver, for Judas has thrown the money down in the temple before departing to hang himself (27.4b–5). The chief priests, knowing they cannot put such blood money in the temple treasury, use the silver coins to buy a potter’s field for use as a burial ground (Mt 27.6–8).
80. Gurtner, Torn Veil.
81. Scribes in the ancient world regularly work in temples. See van der Toorn, Scribal Culture.