WE ARE ABOUT TO EMBARK on a journey through one of the most treasured writings of the Christian faith. The Gospel according to Matthew, according to citations found in early Christian writers, was the most widely read and frequently used Gospel in the formative years of the church. Manlio Simonetti, a renowned expert in patristic literature, states of Matthew’s Gospel: “It is no exaggeration to state that the faithful who lived between the end of the first and the end of the second centuries came to know the words and deeds of Christ on the basis of this text.”1 It has retained its appeal throughout the centuries and exerted a powerful influence on the church.2 Many contend that this Gospel was the most important one for much of church history.3 One of the main reasons why this Gospel is so important is because of its verification that Jesus was the long-awaited Messiah of Israel, who had brought salvation not just to the Jews but to all nations.
By the time of the writing of this Gospel, Jesus Messiah had arrived with little fanfare in Israel some thirty years prior. He was associated with the fiery prophet John the Baptist, but that became a dangerous association, since John was beheaded by the Roman puppet ruler of Galilee, Herod Antipas. Like John, Jesus Messiah soon became popular with the people, attracting thousands to hear his message, experience his healing miracles, and be challenged by his preaching about the arrival of the kingdom of heaven. But also like John, Jesus Messiah became the target of opposition from the religious and political powers in Israel. That opposition escalated dramatically until sadly, in the third year of his ministry during the Passover season, he was arrested, tried by both the Jewish religious establishment and the Roman occupying government, and executed by crucifixion.
At first this seemed to put an end to the messianic movement surrounding Jesus. But soon rumors began circulating that Jesus Messiah had been resurrected, that he had appeared to his followers, and that all he had preached about the arrival of the kingdom of heaven was true. He really was the Messiah of Israel and the Savior of humanity. His followers began to spread his message throughout the Mediterranean world. But as happened in his own earthly ministry, Jesus’ message created divisions among those who heard it. Pockets of Jews became followers of Jesus Messiah in Palestine, in the increasingly important gathering of Judaism in Syria Antioch, and even in Rome, the hated center of Roman imperialism. Wherever Diaspora Judaism had settled, it was impacted by the persistent, and even pervasive, incursions of Jewish Christians.
Emperor Claudius had been troubled by the fast-spreading Christian movement, which Suetonius apparently records as a result of the dispute over one “Chrestus” in Rome in the 40s.4 This may well have been a dispute between Jews and Christians over the preaching about Jesus Messiah.5 Christians claimed that Jesus was raised from the dead and pointed to an empty tomb. Jews countered with the story of a stolen body. Frustrated with both sides, Claudius expelled all the Jews from Rome (Christianity was seen as a sect of Judaism; Acts 18:2).
Caesar (Claudius?) then did one other thing. He had a local governor set up the famous “Nazareth Decree” in approximately A.D. 50 in Nazareth, the birthplace of the object of the furor. This is a stone slab with an imperial decree warning of capital punishment for those violating tombs, and points to the seriousness with which disturbing graves and moving dead bodies was held in the ancient world. It may also give some insight to the events in Matthew’s narrative, if it was erected (as some propose) in response to the controversy between Jews and Christians about Jesus’ empty tomb.6 This would be consistent with Matthew’s statement that the Jews continued to circulate a story about Jesus’ body being stolen by his disciples (see comments on 28:11–15).
It is into these kinds of controversies that the first Gospel was written. The very first verse gives the direction to the author’s purpose for writing: to establish Jesus’ identity as the Messiah, heir to the promises of Israel’s throne through King David and heir to the promises of the blessing to all the nations through the patriarch Abraham. So this first Gospel serves as an evangelistic tool to Jews, contending that they should turn to Jesus as their long- awaited Messiah, but also to Gentiles, emphasizing that salvation through Jesus Messiah is available to them. It also serves as an apologetic tool to Jewish-Christians, encouraging them to stand firm in the face of opposition from their Jewish compatriots and from Gentile pagans, knowing that Jesus Messiah has fulfilled the promised arrival of the kingdom of heaven.
Against the backdrop of a world increasingly hostile to Christianity, the author solidifies his church’s identity as the true people of God, who transcend ethnic, economic, and religious barriers to find oneness in their adherence to Jesus Messiah. His Gospel becomes a manual on discipleship, as Jew and Gentile are made disciples of Jesus Messiah and learn to obey all that he commanded his original disciples.
The Author of the First Gospel
IT APPEARS OBVIOUS that the person responsible for penning this Gospel has Jewish concerns in view, which leads us to the question of his identity. As we open to this book in our modern translations, we usually find the title “Matthew,” or “The Gospel According to Matthew.” But many longtime readers are surprised to discover that all of the four Gospels are technically anonymous. The titles that are now assigned to each one were likely not headings to the original manuscript. They were added later to distinguish the four Gospels from one another.
Additionally, none of the Gospel writers states his name explicitly within the text as the author. This is actually what we should expect, because they were not writing letters to far off church communities to which were attached the names of the addressees and senders, such as we find in the New Testament letters. Rather, they were compiling gospel stories for churches of which they were active participants and leaders. They likely stood among the assembly and first read their Gospel account themselves. To attach their names as authors would have been unnecessary, for their audiences knew their identity. It may have even been seen as inappropriate to attach their names to their accounts, since they did not intend to assert their own authority but to record for their audiences the matchless story of Jesus’ life and ministry.
Ancient Records of Authorship
THEREFORE, WE MUST look to the records of church history to find evidence for the authorship of the Gospels. The earliest church tradition unanimously ascribes the first Gospel to Matthew, the tax collector who was called to be one of the original twelve disciples of Jesus. Written toward the end of the first century, the Didache demonstrates direct knowledge of the first Gospel, quoting it more than any of the other three (e.g., quoting the Lord’s Prayer: cf. Did. 8:2; Matt. 6:9–11). A few years later, a letter of Pseudo-Barnabas cites the first Gospel as divinely inspired Scripture (Barnabas 4.14 [Matt. 22:14]). The first explicit mention of this Gospel dates to the third decade of the second century, by Papias, bishop of Hierapolis in Asia Minor (c. 135), and then somewhat later in the second century by Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons in Gaul (c. 175).
Papias (c. 60–130) claimed that he was a hearer of the apostle John, and he was later a companion of Polycarp (Irenaeus, Against Heresies 5.33.4). He was quoted and endorsed by the church historian Eusebius (c. 325) as saying, “Matthew for his part compiled/collected the oracles in the Hebrew [Aramaic] dialect and every person translated/interpreted them as he was able” (Eusebius, Eccl. Hist. 3.39.16).
Irenaeus was born in Asia Minor in approximately 135, studied under Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, and according to tradition died as a martyr around 200. In one of his five monumental books against the gnostic heresies (c. 175), Irenaeus states, “Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome, and laying the foundations of the Church” (Against Heresies 3.1.1).
These church leaders either knew the apostolic community directly or were taught by those associated with the apostles; thus, they were directly aware of the origins of the Gospels. While the full meaning of their statements is still open to discussion, no competing tradition assigning the first Gospel to any other author has survived, if any ever existed. Subsequent authors (e.g., Hippolytus, Tertullian, Cyprian, Novatian) cite the Gospel of Matthew regularly as inspired Scripture on the same level as the Old Testament.7
The testimony of the early church fathers to the apostolic authorship of the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) cannot be lightly overlooked.8 All of the evidence uniformly supports the belief that Matthew (the tax collector turned disciple), Mark (the companion of Peter and Paul), and Luke (Paul’s “beloved physician”) were the authors of the Gospels attributed to them. It is difficult to conceive why Christians as early as the second century would ascribe these otherwise anonymous Gospels to three such unlikely candidates if they did not in fact write them. Mark and Luke were not among Jesus’ twelve apostles. Mark is best known for abandoning Paul (Acts 13:13; cf. 15:37–40), and Luke is particularly obscure, being mentioned by name only once in the New Testament (Col. 4:14). Matthew, although an apostle, is also best known for a negative characteristic—his unconscionable past as a tax collector (Matt. 9:9–13). Tax collectors were considered traitorous to their nation.
By contrast, the apocryphal gospels consistently picked better-known and exemplary figures—such as Philip, Peter, James, Bartholomew, or Mary—for their fictitious authors.9 Even Thomas, despite his famous doubts about Jesus’ resurrection (John 20:25), seems a more likely person to whom to attribute a Gospel than Matthew, Mark, or Luke, because he ultimately made such a profound declaration of faith in the risen Jesus (cf. John 20:28). This is consistent with the gnostic Gospel of Thomas purporting to be written by the apostle Thomas. False ascription of the first Gospel to a relatively obscure apostle such as Matthew seems unlikely until a later date, when canonization of apostles was common.
Some modern scholars deny the Matthean authorship of the first Gospel on the basis that they subscribe to the priority of Mark and cannot imagine how an apostle (Matthew) would borrow from a nonapostle (Mark). But even if Matthew did have access to Mark’s Gospel, Mark represented Peter’s authoritative account and would certainly only give an even greater apostolic weight to the account.
Matthew, the Person
THE LIST OF the twelve disciples in Matthew’s Gospel refers to him as “Matthew the tax collector” (10:3), which harks back to the incident when Jesus called Matthew while he was sitting in the tax office (cf. 9:9; 10:3). When recounting the call, the first Gospel refers to him as “Matthew” (9:9), while Mark’s Gospel refers to him as “Levi, son of Alphaeus” (Mark 2:14), and Luke’s Gospel refers to him simply as “Levi” (Luke 5:27). Speculation surrounds the reason for the variation, but most scholars suggest that this tax collector had two names, Matthew Levi, either from birth or from the time of his conversion.10 Some have attempted to show that Levi was not one of the Twelve and therefore different from Matthew, but this is unwarranted speculation, since the circumstances of the calling is the same in Matthew and in Mark and Luke.11
The name Levi may indicate that he was from the tribe of Levi and therefore familiar with Levitical practices.12 Mark’s record of the calling refers to him as “the son of Alphaeus” (Mark 2:14), which some have understood to mean that he was the brother of the apostle “James son of Alphaeus” (cf. Mark 3:18). But since the other pairs of brothers are specified to be brothers and are linked as such, it is unlikely that Matthew-Levi and James were brothers.
Matthew Levi was called to follow Jesus while he was sitting in the tax collector’s booth. This booth was probably located on one of the main trade highways near Capernaum, collecting tolls for Herod Antipas from the commercial traffic traveling through this area. Matthew immediately followed Jesus and arranged a banquet for him at his home, to which were invited a large crowd of tax collectors and sinners (Matt. 9:10–11; Luke 5:29–30). Since tax collectors generally were fairly wealthy and were despised by the local populace (cf. Zacchaeus, Luke 19:1–10), Matthew’s calling and response were completely out of the ordinary and required nothing short of a miraculous turnaround in this tax collector’s life.
Little else is known of Matthew Levi except for the widely attested tradition that he is the author of the Gospel that now bears his name. As a tax collector he would have been trained in secular scribal techniques, and as a Galilean Jewish Christian he would have been able to interpret the life of Jesus from the perspective of the Old Testament expectations.13 Eusebius said that Matthew first preached to “Hebrews” and then to “others,” including places such as Persia, Parthia, and Syria (Eccl. Hist. 3:24.6). The traditions are mixed regarding Matthew’s death, with some saying that he died a martyr’s death and others a natural death.
Date and Destination
NO PRECISE DATE for the writing of Matthew is known, although Jesus’ prophecy of the overthrow of Jerusalem (24:1–28) has been used to indicate that the Gospel may have been written after A.D. 70. However, such a conclusion is necessary only if one denies Jesus the ability to predict the future. Since the early church father Irenaeus (c. 175) indicates that Matthew wrote his Gospel while Paul and Peter were still alive (Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3.1.1), the traditional dating has usually settled on the late 50s or early 60s. Matthew tells us that as of the time he was writing, the “field of blood” in Jerusalem continued to be called by that name (27:8), showing his continual connection with conditions in Palestine and hinting that this is prior to the devastation in Jerusalem in 70.14
The highly influential church at Antioch in Syria, with its large Jewish-Christian and Gentile contingents (cf. Acts 11:19–26; 13:1–3), has often been recognized as the original recipients of the Gospel. This is confirmed in part because of its influence on Ignatius the bishop of Antioch and on the Didache. But Matthew’s message was equally relevant for the fledgling church throughout the ancient world and appears to have been disseminated fairly quickly.
Matthew’s Distinctive Perspectives
MATTHEW’S GOSPEL RETAINED its appeal throughout the centuries and exerted a powerful influence on the church through much of history. Its popularity is explained at least in part because of the following distinctives that are found throughout this Gospel.
Christology. The church has consistently drawn on this Gospel as the foundational clarification of the identity of Jesus Christ, who is the Son of God, the King of Israel, and the Lord of the church. From the announcement of Jesus’ conception (1:18–25), to the divinely superintended protection of the child (2:15), to the Father’s heavenly announcements at the baptism and transfiguration (3:17; 17:5), to Jesus’ anguished prayers in the Garden (26:39, 42), Matthew focuses on Jesus’ identity as the incarnate Son of God the Father.
Matthew also gives focused perspective on Jesus as the promised King of Israel (1:1–16; 2:1–6), who came to inaugurate the kingdom of heaven (4:12–17), even though life in this kingdom would be of a different sort from what many expected (cf. ch. 13). That life in the kingdom of heaven is especially centered on an intimate, ongoing relationship of Jesus with his disciples throughout the ages (28:20), which alone in Matthew’s Gospel is designated to become “the church” that Jesus himself will build and superintend (16:18; 18:17). The portrait that Matthew paints of Jesus to clarify his identity and mission is often colored most clearly by the various titles associated with him.
Matthew opens his Gospel with the name “Jesus Christ” (1:1). Jesus is explained as his given name, which is the common designation throughout his life and denotes his role as Savior (cf. 1:21). Christ, which in Hebrew is mašiaḥ or Messiah, is a title meaning “anointed one.” It occurs thirty-nine times to describe kings (2 Sam. 1:14, 16; cf. 1QSa 2:14, 20), priests (Ex. 28:41; cf. 1QS 9:11), and prophets (Ps. 105:15; cf. CD 2:12; 5:21–6:1; 1QM 11:7–8). It came to be an expression linked in the Jewish mind to David as the anointed king of Israel and to the promise of the “anointed one” who would be the light of hope for the people of Israel. Matthew points to this title as rightly belonging to Jesus because of his lineage as a descendant of David (see comments on 1:16–18).
The name “Christ” has provided the church with its most widely used title. The fact that the believers in Jesus were at an early stage described as “Christians” is eloquent testimony to the importance of this concept in their minds. Jesus accepted the designation and in so doing was claiming to be God’s “Anointed” agent in establishing the kingdom (26:63–64). He was the Christ, the messianic king in its fullest sense. His hesitation or reservation in using the title to refer to himself had only to do with the popular use of the term in the first century, which carried political overtones. Jesus was careful to define or restrict the use of the term to designate the kind of messianic deliver he was to be (see 4:12–17).
Son of David is an important expression in this Gospel.15 Matthew uses the name of the great king seventeen times, more than any other book of the New Testament. Like the title “Messiah,” “son of David” expresses a promised figure who would perpetuate David’s throne, thereby pointing to Messiah’s lineage and royal expectation of an eternal throne (see 2 Sam. 7:11b–16). But it also evoked images of a Messiah as a mighty warrior like David, who would destroy Israel’s enemies and reestablish the throne in Jerusalem and the kingdom of Israel as in the golden days of David. The hope of a restored kingdom was seen to be a fulfillment of the divine promise to David (see comments on 9:27).
The title Son of God is a powerful designation in this Gospel to reveal Jesus Messiah’s true identity. The expression bears witness to a relationship between Jesus and God throughout Matthew’s narrative. Jesus is uniquely God’s Son by way of conception (1:21–23), as is fulfilled in Jesus’ return from Egypt (2:15), reiterated by the Father at Jesus’ baptism (3:17), challenged by the devil at the temptations (4:2, 5), and acknowledged by demons who are about to be exorcised (8:29). Throughout Matthew’s narrative Jesus continually lays claim to a unique relationship to his heavenly Father.16 This also points back to the profound prophecy about David’s line, “I will be his father, and he will be my son” (2 Sam. 7:14), which spoke immediately of Solomon but also of the future messianic line.
The importance of “Son of God” in this Gospel is seen not only in its explicit use (e.g., 8:29; 14:33; 16:16; cf. 3:17; 17:5), but also where it is implied.17 Jesus refers to God as his Father some twenty-three times in Matthew, fifteen of which are unique to this Gospel (see comments on 5:16). Peter confesses Jesus as “the Christ, the Son of the living God” (16:16), the most exalted title in Matthew. The confession is made only by believers (except where it is blasphemy; cf. 4:3, 6) and only by revelation (16:7; 11:27; cf. 13:11). The Fourth Gospel makes explicit the ontological Sonship of Jesus, while Matthew assumes it as the foundation of the relationship (see comments on 1:20–23). Jesus is the divine Son of the heavenly Father.18
The title Son of Man may be the most significant to get at Jesus’ clarification of his self-identity (see comments on 8:18–22). During his earthly ministry the expression would have struck a relatively ambiguous chord. Those who heard the expression would recall its use in Ezekiel, where God refers to the prophet with the expression “son of man” over ninety times (e.g., Ezek. 2:1, 3, 6, 8, etc.; cf. Dan. 8:17), pointing to Ezekiel’s frailty as a human before the mighty God revealed in the vision.19 But they also would recall how the expression “Son of Man” was used in Daniel’s prophecy to refer to a glorified sovereign ruler, the apocalyptic messianic figure who rules forever with the Ancient of Days (Dan. 7:13–14).
With such a general ambiguity, “Son of Man” is for Jesus a convenient vehicle to convey his messianic identity. It did not have popular associations attached to it, such as were attached to titles like “Messiah,” “Son of David,” or even “Son of God.” Instead, he could teach the meaning of his true identity by referring to himself as “Son of Man.”20 With a general threefold progression, Jesus uses the expression to clarify exactly who he is and what is his ministry.
• The Son of Man is the humble Servant, who has come to forgive sins of common sinners in his earthly ministry (8:20; 9:6; 11:19; 12:8; 12:32; 12:40).
• The Son of Man is the Suffering Servant, whose atoning death and resurrection will redeem his people (16:13, 27–28; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45).
• The Son of Man is the glorious King and Judge, who will return to bring the kingdom of heaven to earth (10:23; 13:37, 41; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 39, 44; 25:31; 26:64).
Jesus’ mission was not always understood because of the misperceptions and faulty expectations of the people, the religious leaders, and even his own disciples. But at the end, after he used the sufficiently ambiguous title “Son of Man” to clarify his identity and ministry, when he used it for the last time at his trial before Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin, it was perfectly clear that he was claiming to be the divine Messiah of Israel (cf. 26:63–68).
Lord is also a title that increasingly reveals Jesus’ identity and mission. Sometimes during his ministry, the term is used by people simply as a title of respect (e.g., 8:21; 18:21; 26:22). But the use of the title in Matthew’s Gospel also has much more significance. We find that “Lord” is the title that is regularly used by people who approach Jesus in search of divine aid (e.g., 8:2, 5; 9:28; 15:22, 25; 17:15; 20:30, 31, 33), including his own disciples when they need divine assistance (e.g., 8:25; 14:30). As Jesus’ ministry unfolds, his disciples use the title with increasing deference, because he is turning out to be more than they had originally understood him to be. He is connected with God’s power and has a relationship with God as the Son who can only be addressed with a title normally reserved for God, “Lord” (e.g., 14:28; 16:25; 17:4).
This is particularly momentous when people see his miraculous deeds, call on him as Lord, and then worship him (14:33), an activity reserved solely for deity. “Lord” is also one of the titles, like “Son of Man,” that Jesus uses to refer to himself in a way that increasingly reveals his divine identity.21 As the only One who refers to God in heaven as “my Father” (e.g., 7:21) and the One who has authority to banish false prophets to eternal judgment (7:22–23), Jesus is more than any mere respected master; he is the Lord, who is worshiped as having all authority in heaven and earth (28:16–20).
Salvation-historical particularism and universalism. The terms particularism and universalism indicate that Matthew’s Gospel places striking emphasis on both the fulfillment of the promises of salvation to a particular people, Israel, and the fulfillment of the universal promise of salvation to all the peoples of the earth. The church, made up of every nationality, has cherished this Gospel because Matthew aims to record the continuation of the history of salvation to all nations. His introductory statement that Jesus Christ is both the “son of David” and the “son of Abraham” (1:1) is the preliminary indication that salvation promises made both through David to God’s chosen people, Israel (e.g., 2 Sam. 7:8–17), and through Abraham to all peoples (Gen. 12:1–3; 22:18), have been fulfilled through the life and ministry of Jesus Christ, the promised Savior of all nations.
Matthew’s Gospel alone points explicitly to Jesus’ intention to go first to “the lost sheep of Israel” (10:5–6; 15:24), showing historically how God’s promise of salvation to Israel was indeed fulfilled. Yet the promises made to Abraham that he would be a blessing to all the nations are also fulfilled as Jesus extends salvation to the Gentiles (cf. 21:44; 28:19). The church throughout the ages has found assurance in Matthew’s Gospel that God truly keeps his promises to his people.
The bridge between Old and New Testaments. Matthew’s Gospel has been a pivotal book throughout church history to help the church understand the relationship between Old and New Testaments. Placed first in the earliest collections of the New Testament canon, this Gospel is a natural bridge between the Old Testament and the New Testament. Matthew demonstrates repeatedly that Old Testament hopes, prophecies, and promises have now been fulfilled in the person and ministry of Jesus. Matthew begins with the “fulfillment” of the messianic genealogy in the birth of Jesus (1:1–17), and then goes on to demonstrate the fulfillment in Jesus’ life and ministry of various Old Testament prophecies and themes (e.g., 1:22–23; 2:4–5, 15, 17, 23) and the fulfillment of the Old Testament law (5:17–48). The early church likely placed Matthew first in the New Testament canon precisely because of its value as a bridge between the Testaments.
A “great commission” for evangelism and mission. This first Gospel has held special status in the missionary and evangelistic outreach of the church because of the prominent placement of the Great Commission, which climactically concludes the story of Jesus’ ministry (28:18–20). The form of Jesus’ commission to “make disciples of all the nations” (28:19) is unique to Matthew’s Gospel, providing continuity between Jesus’ ministry of making disciples in his earthly ministry and the ministry of making disciples to which the church has been called. This is Jesus’ final command, and it uniquely charges his followers with an imperative that has impelled Christians throughout church history to look outward to all the peoples of the earth who have not yet heard and obeyed the gospel of the kingdom of heaven. This Great Commission has been at the heart of evangelistic and missionary endeavor throughout the history of the church.
The new community of faith. Facing the threat of gathering Roman persecution within a pagan world, Matthew addresses a church that is representative of the emerging community of faith. The community apparently has a large membership of Jewish Christians, who are familiar with temple activities and the Jewish religious system. But it also has a large contingent of Gentile Christians, who are discovering their heritage of faith in God’s universal promise of salvation. The church has consistently found in Matthew a call to a new community that transcends ethnic and religious barriers to find oneness in its adherence to Jesus Messiah. The church has continually been challenged by Matthew’s message that former barriers to discipleship have now been abolished.
The offer of discipleship found in the Great Commission broke down the same barriers that Jesus broke down all through his earthly ministry. Restrictions on the basis of gender, ethnicity, social status, and religious practice were abolished so that now women and men, Jew and Gentile, rich and poor, clean and unclean are all called to be Jesus’ disciples. With Matthew’s clear understanding of the Old Testament and Jewish practices, his Gospel has held a radical position in sustaining Jesus’ call to “all . . . who are weary and burdened” (11:28).
Matthew alone among the evangelists uses the term ekklesia, which later became the term that designates the church. He emphasizes explicitly that God’s program of salvation history will find its continuation in the present age as Jesus builds his church and maintains his presence within its assembly (16:18; 18:15–20; cf. 28:20). Whoever responds to his invitation (22:10) is brought within the church to enjoy his fellowship and demonstrate the true community of faith.
The disciples, crowds, and Jewish leaders.22 These three groups provide a background for Matthew’s story of Jesus. The “Jewish leaders” are the antagonists, the one’s responsible for Jesus’ crucifixion. The “crowds” are a basically neutral group; they are the object of Jesus’ ministry of preaching, teaching, and healing, but as a group they do not exercise faith in him. The “disciples” are Jesus’ true followers, true believers.
The “crowd” is not attached in any serious way to Jesus and are at various times either positively or negatively oriented toward him.23 The crowds are the mass of people who are the objects of Jesus’ saving ministry. His objective is to make them disciples. As Jesus teaches and preaches, the sign of faith is when one comes out of the crowd and calls Jesus “Lord” (cf. 8:18, 21; 17:14–15). When an individual comes out of the crowd, he or she chooses either to exercise faith and become a believer or to remain an unbeliever (cf. 19:16–22).
The role of Peter. Peter plays an important role as a leader and spokesman for the disciples in the several incidents in this Gospel. Matthew narrates five incidents about Peter in five central chapters found nowhere else in the Gospels (14:28–31; 15:15; 16:17–19; 17:24–27; 18:21). He emphasizes Peter’s leadership role but also shows how Peter is an imperfect leader in process of development, as Jesus prepares him for the early days of the church ahead.24
For example, in 14:28–31, Peter demonstrates tremendous courage when he requests to walk to Jesus on the water, something no Old Testament figures ever did. Yet at the same time, Peter’s courage to walk to Jesus on the water becomes the occasion for failure when he begins to sink. The following graph of events clearly demonstrates how Peter is up and down in his discipleship to Jesus, yet how he is continually led forward to be a leader among the Twelve.
The structure of narrative and discourse. Matthew’s Gospel has held a favored place in the history of the church because of its extended collection of Jesus’ teaching ministry, especially the Sermon on the Mount.25 Matthew has collected the most complete compilation of Jesus’ teachings, exhortations, prophecies, and parables found anywhere in Scripture.
The concluding element of the Great Commission, in which Jesus states that new disciples are to be taught “to obey everything I have commanded you” (28:20), gives a hint to one overall purpose for this Gospel. Matthew records five of Jesus’ major discourses, all of which are addressed primarily to Jesus’ disciples (chs. 5–7; 10; 13; 18; 24–25), and signals the conclusion of each with the recurring identical formula: “When Jesus had finished . . .” (7:28; 11:1; 13:53; 19:1; 26:1). These discourses provide a wholistic presentation on the kind of discipleship that was to be taught to disciples as the basis for full-orbed obedience to Christ and became the basis for Christian instruction within the church. These discourses reveal that Jesus’ disciples will be characterized by what they are taught to follow in these directives.
Kingdom-life disciples (chs. 5–7). The Kingdom-Life Proclamation, popularly called the Sermon on the Mount, develops what it means to be “kingdom-life disciples.” Jesus expounds the reality of a radical everyday discipleship lived in the presence and power of the kingdom of God within the disciples’ everyday world. This kind of discipleship involves an inside-out transformation into the righteousness of the kingdom (5:20). The ultimate example of this righteousness is Jesus himself, who has come to fulfill the Old Testament revelation of God’s will for his people (5:17, 21–47), so that Jesus’ disciples can pursue clearly the goal to be perfect as their heavenly Father is perfect (5:48). Kingdom life, therefore, addresses all aspects of what discipleship to Jesus means during this age, including ethical, religious, marital, emotional, and economic dimensions.
Mission-driven disciples (ch. 10). The Mission Mandate develops what it means to be “mission-driven disciples.” Jesus commissions all his disciples to go out to share and live the gospel of the kingdom of God to an alien and often hostile world until his return. Mission in this age is a responsibility of all believers (10:24–25, 40–42), not just a special category of persons. It occurs in both public confession to the world (10:32–33) and in private commitments to one’s family (10:34–39). Like Jesus, his disciples can expect opposition and persecution (10:24–25) from Jews and Gentiles, from the religious and political world, as well as from one’s own closest family and companions (10:17–21). Yet they need not fear because the Spirit will provide power and guidance (10:19–20), and the Father will exercise sovereign care and control (10:28–33). The centrality of the presence of Jesus in the disciples’ life is the most vital characteristic of the mission, so that the disciples increasingly grow to be like the Master (10:24).
Clandestine-kingdom disciples (ch. 13). The Parabolic Disclosure develops what it means to be “clandestine-kingdom disciples.” Through his parables Jesus tests the hearts of the crowd to reveal whether the message of the kingdom of heaven has taken root and is producing fruit, or whether it has been unproductive (13:18–23). Through parables Jesus also reveals to his disciples the secrets of the kingdom of God, making known that, during this age, the kingdom will exist in a hidden form. It will be an undercover kingdom, not the overpowering political, militaristic, and dominant cultural manifestation of God’s rule that many expected (13:31–33). So the Parabolic Discourse reveals what it means for Jesus’ disciples to live as kingdom subjects in a world that has not yet experienced the fully consummated kingdom of God.
However, Jesus’ disciples will act demonstrably different from others in this world through an inside-out transformation. Only at the end of this age will a final separation be made fully known between those who belong to the kingdom of heaven and those who do not (13:41–43, 49–50). The incongruity of its hiddenness and inconspicuousness causes many to overlook the kingdom of God; yet to those who discover its presence, it is the most precious reality of this age (13:44–46). Therefore, Jesus’ disciples are to give closest attention to the priority of the kingdom in their lives, so that they will continue to be the treasure of revelation to a watching world (13:51–52). The Parabolic Discourse clarifies what discipleship to Jesus is like in the inaugurated but not consummated kingdom of God.
Community-based disciples (ch. 18). In the Community Prescription, Jesus declares how kingdom life is to be expressed through the church that he will establish on earth through his disciples. This discourse clarifies how discipleship to Jesus is expressed through a church that is characterized by humility, responsibility, purity, accountability, discipline, forgiveness, reconciliation, and restoration. This fourth discourse is addressed to insiders. The first and third discourses were primarily addressed to Jesus’ disciples, but the crowds were included for other particular purposes (see comments on 5:1–2; 7:28–29; 13:1–2, 10–17), and the religious leaders were an implied object of rebuke (5:20; 6:1–18; 12:24–32, 46–50). But like the second and fifth discourses, the fourth is directed exclusively to Jesus’ disciples.
The collection and organization of the Community Prescription is unique to Matthew’s Gospel, as is much of the content. The uniqueness accentuates Jesus’ urgency to prepare his disciples for the time that is soon coming when a new community of faith will replace Israel during this age as Jesus’ body functioning as his witness to the reality of the kingdom’s presence. The uniqueness of this passage also accentuates the way that the presence of the kingdom of heaven turns upside down the values of this world and how the new community, the church, will be a living witness to this overturn.
Expectant-sojourner disciples (chs. 24–25). In the Olivet Discourse (or Eschatological Forecast), Jesus looks down the long corridor of time and prophesies to his disciples of his return, the end of the age, and the establishment of his messianic throne. This discourse culminates Jesus’ teaching on discipleship by describing how his disciples are to live each day in this age of the already-not yet consummation of the kingdom of God in expectant preparation for his return with power. They are to expect that Jesus could return at any time, yet responsibly plan as though he is not returning for an extended period of time.
Leaders. We can find in Matthew other significant themes scattered throughout the Gospel that supplement what is found in the discourses. Particularly relevant are extended messages directed to the religious leadership of Israel. These are messages to which leaders today should pay strict attention, because they contain principles and warnings we also must heed.26
Three Horizons
WITH THESE VARIOUS characteristics before us, it is no wonder that Matthew’s Gospel has been a favorite of Christians for more than two millennia. The full impact of this magnificent Gospel is best appreciated through the well-known practice of reading the Gospels on three horizons.27
(1) The first horizon is the level of Jesus’ historical ministry. In this commentary we will explore this horizon in the Original Meaning sections. Here we view the unfolding mission of Jesus Messiah to his people Israel, with the universal implications that will result for all the nations. We will try to place ourselves in the first-century historical setting to see and hear Jesus as those who followed him around. History is of vital importance in understanding the Gospels, because they record what actually took place in space and time. The Gospel writers were either witnesses or recorders of the heart of the Christian message that God had acted in history. They were “reporting solid history, and the chief actor in their drama was a flesh-and-blood character, living a human life under Palestinian skies.”28 This historical record was the basis of the Gospel writer’s faith, who wished to impart historical truth (e.g., Luke 1:1–4).
(2) We must try to understand Matthew’s unique perspective in which he instructs his community with regard to their own particular issues. For this, we try to understand Matthew’s own background and emphases and those of his community. Matthew did not create historical data to substantiate Jesus’ messianic identity or satisfy his audience’s needs, but he did view Jesus’ life from his own unique perspective. The Gospel writers wished to present the facts of history so as to convince their readers that Jesus was indeed the Christ, the Savior, so that people would believe and find eternal life in his name (e.g., John 20:30–31). When we look at Matthew’s Gospel, we discover that it is presented in such a way that he challenges us to ask, “What manner of man is this, and what will we do with him?” We will especially explore this horizon in the Bridging Contexts sections of the commentary.
(3) The third horizon is that of the contemporary reader. We are really not much different as humans from those explored in the first two horizons, but there are contemporary issues and circumstances we must address to make the reading of Matthew immediately relevant. These issues we will explore in the Contemporary Significance sections of the commentary. Matthew begins by referring to Jesus as Immanuel, “God with us” (1:23), and concludes with Jesus’ declaration, “I am with you always, to the very end of the age” (28:20). There is not a more radical claim than understanding that Jesus is God incarnate, who came to be with his people and who, although he has now ascended to be with the Father, still remains with his people. That was the essence of discipleship to Jesus in the first century, and it remains the privilege of Christians today as we walk with Jesus in the world of the twenty-first century.