This thesis investigates the theme of mission to the Gentiles in Matthew’s gospel.  Questions arising include:  Was Matthew a Jew or a Gentile?  What was the nature of the community that he addressed, and how was it related to Judaism?  How did he view the Judaism of his time?  Should there be a continuing mission to the Jews?  Did Matthew believe that the church, including specifically his own community, should be involved in mission to the Gentiles?  How could he show this in a Gospel about a Jesus who rarely met Gentiles and even told his disciples not to go to Gentiles during his lifetime?  If he did commend mission to the Gentiles, were there any conditions (such as circumcision and other Jewish commandments) that they must fulfil?  How did Matthew’s attitude compare with those of the other Synoptic Evangelists and Paul? The thesis arises from the need to respond to such scholars as D. Sim, A. J. Saldarini and J. A. Overman who are sceptical to various degrees that Matthew was an enthusiast for mission to the Gentiles.  Although a majority of scholars have held that Matthew was a proponent of the Gentile mission, nobody has as yet responded to the case against this view and treated the evidence supplied by the Gospel in detail.  After summarising current scholarly debate (Introduction) the present thesis will go carefully through the Gospel, treating all those passages that are relevant to the problem and interacting particularly with scholars who deny Matthew’s concern that his own church should evangelise the Gentiles.

Jesus' invitation to rest in Matthew 11:28-30 is part of the evangelist's special material, inserted between the pronouncement that only the Son fully knows the Father and possesses the unique prerogative to reveal him (11:25-27) and the only two sabbath stories in this Gospel (12:1-14). This dissertation explores the significance of such a juxtaposition. Since the use of the Jewish Scriptures is pervasive in Matthew’s Gospel, the dissertation studies the use of the evangelist’s term for rest (a0na/pausiv) throughout the LXX. As a result of this analysis, it proposes that there are three main potential backgrounds for the concept of rest in this two-fold pericope and these can be summarized under the categories of "sabbath rest", "peaceful inheritance" and "wisdom's repose." These categories then provide the resources for a fresh evaluation of the significance of Jesus' offer of rest in its Matthean narrative context. In addition, the examination of Matthew’s theology of rest and Sabbath in 11:25-12:14 in light of the major themes of law, eschatology and Christology in this Gospel suggests that Matthew’s approach to interpreting Sabbath law and his eschatological perspective are primarily based on his beliefs about Jesus. Jesus is the Mosaic-Davidic eschatological agent prophesied in the Jewish Scriptures and through him has been inaugurated a new era of Christ-centered law interpretation along with a present realization of the eschatological expectations of the sabbath rest of the messianic age that is to be consummated at his parousia. This Christological conviction has placed the Matthean community at odds with the leaders of its own religious society, who have rejected its belief about the identity and mission of Jesus, including its proposal that the sabbath commandment’s rest from now on points to the eschatological reality of rest that is centered in Jesus.

No description available.

This thesis is a literary-critical analysis of the Gospel of Matthew and its interaction with Davidic tradition and use of Davidic typology. Throughout the narrative, the evangelist makes pervasive use of Davidic tradition from the Old Testament in his portrayal of Jesus. This begins from the first verse and the declaration that Jesus is the Son of David, and culminates in Jesus' usage of Psalm 22's Davidic lament on the cross. The incipit and genealogy predisposes the reader to look for interaction with the Davidic tradition. Matthew's Davidic program utilizes throughout the narrative formal quotations, allusions, and echoes to the Davidic tradition found particularly in the OT prophets. In addition, Matthew makes use of Davidic typology numerous times, with David as type and Jesus as anti-type. This is done in order to present to the reader a scripturally-grounded redefinition of what it means for Jesus to be the Son of David: not as a violent militant leader, as was expected, but as a physical descendant of David, a healing shepherd, and a humble king. Within the Gospel, Matthew utilizes Davidic typology to show how the Son of David even has similar experiences as his royal predecessor. Even David's own words from the psalms are utilized as testimony to the legitimacy of Jesus as the Davidic Messiah.

Codex Bezae Cantabrigiensis is an important early manuscript of the Greek New Testament, whose Gospel text has received relatively limited attention. Because Matthew was the most widely used Gospel among the first Christian communities, the study of its textual form is of utmost significance for the understanding of the early transmission of the New Testament. The research proposed in this thesis is therefore to take a fresh look at the Bezan text of Matthew. It will challenge the commonly accepted view of its readings as reflecting scribal reworking, albeit performed at an early stage. A principal ground for viewing the text as secondary is the apparently extensive harmonisation between the Gospels. The approach adopted here has been to thoroughly re-examine the Greek text of Matthew, comparing its form in Codex Bezae with that of Codex Vaticanus, a manuscript generally accepted as having a greater claim to authenticity. After noting all the variant readings and classifying them according to the type of material they represent, the study pays particular attention to the significance of word order differences, applying the tools of discourse analysis. Thereafter, the focus of the thesis is on the issue of harmonisation, as all the instances of the feature noted in the current edition of the Greek New Testament are systematically scrutinised. The results of this work suggest that the judgement that the Bezan text of Matthew has a harmonising tendency is predominantly based on external criticism, or on the choice of the particular passage with which there is alleged harmonisation. It will be suggested that the existence of common material in Codex Bezae where it is absent in other manuscripts may not be only a consequence of genuine harmonisation but also of the simple fact that the text was originally in agreement. It is hoped that the research presented in this thesis may serve to advance the study of Matthew’s Gospel, in particular with reference to harmonisation, in the field of New Testament textual criticism as well as in the related field of Synoptic studies.

The purpose of this thesis is to explore the significance of conflict stories in the Gospel of Matthew from a literary critical perspective. The key research question the thesis has attempted to answer is, how do conflict stories function in Matthew’s narrative? Because their interest is often limited to the Sitz im Leben behind the Matthean text, previous studies attempting the similar pursuit view conflict stories as transparent accounts of Matthew’s polemical program against the Jews or Judaism. Thus they have neglected a vital purpose of the author, that is, besides his interest to record or preserve what happened in history, the Gospel author is also interested to arouse or affirm the readers’ faith in Jesus through his preservation and redaction of his sources, which is an inseparable part of the author’s theological program. How exactly then has his literary work achieved this purpose? Assuming the literary unity of the Matthean text, this study has treated the Matthean text as a mirror and explored literary nuances reflected by the textual ‘surface.’ Under such a premise, the narrative analysis of this thesis has highlighted three foci: 1. The connection which each conflict makes with its narrative context; 2. How the Hebrew Scripture interacts with the author’s composition or redaction of the stories; and 3. The literary impact these stories have on the implied reader. This study selects a total of seventeen conflict stories in Matthew based on three criteria, Matt 9.1-8, 9-13, 14-17; 12.1-8, 9-14, 22-37, 38-45; 13.53-58; 15.1-9; 16.1-4; 19.1-9; 21.14-17, 23-27; 22.15-22, 23-33, 34-40, 41-46: 1. The presence of an attitude of hostility or challenge in the setting of the narrative (either explicit or implied); 2. The presence of a question of an accusation or a challenge; and 3. The question or the accusation is usually followed by a reply of Jesus. In conclusion, the literary analysis of this study suggests two most important functions of Matthean conflict stories: 1. Conflict stories function, either individually or in clusters, as kernels of the Matthean plot to advance the narrative forward in order to reach its climax in the passion narrative. 2. The Christological focus in conflict stories is consistently concerned not only with the superiority of Jesus over the opponents, but more importantly with the nexus between the divine status of Jesus and him being the messianic figure.

This study examines singular readings in the Gospel of Matthew across five of the earliest extant Greek copies of Matthew: Codex Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Ephraemi, Bezae, and Washingtonianus. In each of the selected MSS, it is determined where a spelling, word, clause, phrase, sentence, or group of sentences is different from other MSS. These “singular readings” are collected in order to shine light on what such idiosyncrasies can tell us about the MS or tendencies of the scribe who copied the MS. One of the more interesting finds is that some of our MSS add text more than they omit it, which is contrary to other studies. Apart from itacistic changes, alternate spellings are not always the most frequent type of singular reading in our MSS. The MSS have similar types of singular readings, but they often go about creating them in different ways. Conclusions are that our MSS either prefer Attic Greek to Koine (Washingtonianus) or vice versa (Sinaiticus), but two MSS (Vaticanus and Bezae) fluctuate between both grammatical standards. Our MSS typically have a high percentage of error due to parablepsis, but one MS seems to skip letters within words more often than entire words (Ephraemi). Ephraemi does not transpose words, but when the other MSS create transpositions, they all record instances where the genitive pronoun is placed prior to the word it modifies and verbs are moved forward in sentences. In addition, transpositions in Sinaiticus could have resulted from corrected leaps. Context often plays a part in the creation of singular readings, but context affects each MS differently. Nearby text seems to prompt changes in all of our MSS, but remote text such as a gospel parallel, does not often influence our scribes: Ephraemi contains the only harmonization seems to be intentional. In Sinaiticus and Washingtonianus, several readings exhibit possible interpretations of the text (but typically these do not appear to be theological changes) and they both contain readings that conflate textual variants. All of the singular readings record either a textual addition, omission, or substitution, but the MSS do not end up with the same amount of text: both Codex Vaticanus and Ephraemi add more words than they omit, whereas Codex Sinaiticus, Bezae, and Washingtonianus end up with more omissions. This final element adds a counterweight to other studies that contend MSS omit text more than they add. The examination yields few singular readings of dramatic theological import. Rather, the singular readings expose grammatical currents of the 4th-5/6th centuries, currents that are more prevalent than scribal attempts to re-present the text of Matthew.

Matthew 18:18-20 is an important section of the discourse of Matthew 18 and one of the most important passages for Matthew's theology. The near identical wording of Mt. 18:18 to Mt. 16:19b-c gives this section even further importance. Mt. 16:17-19 has long been a source of disagreement about the place of Peter or the structure of the church in early Christianity, so the connection of Mt. 18:18 to Mt. 16:19b-c closely ties one important passage of Matthew to another. This thesis proposes a new interpretation for Mt. 18:18-20 and also for Mt. 16:19b-c, though the primary aim of the thesis is directed to the new interpretation of Mt. 18:18-20. The entire section of Mt. 18:18-20 is an expression of a central and repeated emphasis of Matthew's theology, his emphasis on divine causation in human behavior. The heaven-first order of binding and loosing in Mt. 18:18 expresses the conviction that God causes a person to repent (which does not deny there also being human causation). When the sinner of Mt. 18:15 looses his sin from himself through repentance, and when disciples respond by treating him as if his sin were loosed, such loosing has already occurred in heaven because God caused the person to repent. When the sinner holds fast to his sin and thus is treated by disciples in kind as if his sin were indeed bound to him, this is so because of the absence of such divine influence to repentance or because of the withdrawal of such influence in cases where the sinner has resisted it. It is thus appropriate to say that what has been loosed or bound on earth has already been loosed or bound in heaven. This explains the periphrastic future perfect verbal forms of Mt. 16:19b-c and 18:18. Matthew moves from the focus primarily on sin in Mt. 18:18 to a focus on conflict in Mt. 18:19. When two persons reconcile and thus resolve conflict, such reconciliation will have been divinely caused. The apodosis of Mt. 18:19 gives information about the cause of the event of the protasis. Something similar happens in Mt. 18:20, where the presence of the exalted Jesus mediates the presence of God, who works together with the exalted Jesus to bring reconciliation for the name of Jesus. Such an interpretation is the basis for renaming the discourse. It is a repentance discourse. This proposal for Mt. 18:18-20 avoids problems that have plagued previous interpretations of these verses. It does justice to the periphrastic future verbal forms and respects the linguistic evidence of Mt. 18:18-20. It also allows the interpreter to find a triad of triads structure that aligns the repentance discourse with the structure of the preceding discourses and with Matthew's use of triads in non-discourse material. Further, though this proposal is defensible on its own, it is also in continuity with Matthew's emphases on reconciliation and divine causation prior to Mt. 18. The results of this study are significant for source and redaction critical assessment of Mt. 18, for understanding Matthew's theology, and for understanding his conception of righteousness.

This dissertation analyzes the Matthean “Son of Man” sayings, paying particular attention to their function in the development of conflict and in the anticipation of conflict resolution. The major premise is that the Son of Man is described in Mt as being at the center of the formative conflict that both forced the split between “this generation” of unbelieving Jews and the Matthean community and initiated the community’s Gentile-inclusive mission. According to Matthew, the Son of Man is not engaged in aimless conflict; he confronts and destroys his enemies for the sake of promoting his universal reign and establishing his Church, i.e., the “sons of the kingdom” (13.38), among the nations (cf. OG Dan 7.14; 24.14; 28.18-20). It is his authority over the kingdom of God, given subsequent to and consequent to the judgment of God against “this generation” in 70 CE, that enables the global mission of the disciples, provides the raison d’être for their mission, and assures the Christian community that the Son of Man will return at the eschaton to bring a final end to conflict. A corollary question that will be investigated is what Jesus’ idiomatic self-designation meant to Matthew and his community. The first chapter observes that despite the enormous literary footprint of the “Son of Man” debate, their is a notable lack of adequate studies concerning the Matthean “Son of Man” concept. What literature exists is surveyed, common trends in the debate are analyzed, and a statement of the thesis is provided. Based on the successes and failures of previous studies, it is suggested in the second chapter that the most promising method by which to examine the Matthean “Son of Man” concept is composition-critical and narrative-sensitive. This provides a rational for examining the Matthean “Son of Man” sayings in relation to the gospel’s structure and plot, both of which are shown to have been shaped by the theme of conflict. Finally, interpretive issues such as synoptic relationships, composition date, authorship, provenance, and the status of Matthew’s community are discussed. Chapters Three and Four examine the “Son of Man” sayings in Matthew 8-13 and 16-26 respectively to determine how each saying contributes to the evolving Matthean “Son of Man” concept and the unfolding conflict between Jesus and his “sons” and Satan and his “sons” (cf. 13.37-39). It is shown that the “Son of Man” sayings are not a heterogeneous mixture of “earthly,” “suffering,” and “future” statements that simply concern the life and ministry of Jesus. Matthean redaction has woven the “Son of Man” sayings into a grand tapestry of meaning, sewn into the conflict that precipitated the split of the Matthean community from “this wicked and adulterous generation.” It is shown that the advancement of conflict is matched by the resolution of conflict. This resolution occurs in two stages. According to Matthew, God began to resolve the conflict with “this generation” in 70 CE, whence he destroyed Jerusalem and bestowed upon the Son of Man universal dominion and an everlasting kingdom. The Son of Man’s empowerment enables him to preside over the Eschatological Assize, consequently fulfilling the predictions of end-times reprisal given to “this generation” (cf. 11.20-24; 12.39-42) and bringing a permanent end to conflict. Chapter Five examines the allusion to Old Greek Dan 7.13-14 in 28.18-20 and its connection to the commissioning of the disciples. It is suggested that “all authority in heaven and on earth” is not obtained through a supposed proleptic experience of the Parousia in Jesus’ resurrection or death, or simply by means of his son-ship to the Father. Rather, the Son of Man’s universal sovereignty, by which the Matthean community is empowered to “make disciples of all nations,” was received from the Ancient of Days after the Temple’s ruination in 70 CE. That is, the exaltation of the Son of Man, which is physically signaled by the destruction of Herod’s Temple, initiated and provided justification for the Matthean community’s schism from “this generation” and their mission to the Gentiles. Additionally, the divine empowerment of the Son of Man grounded the community’s eschatological hope for conflict resolution. This chapter ends with a discussion of how this theory impacts one’s understanding of Matthean christology, missiology, and salvation-history. The final chapter summarizes the preceding evidence, details the contributions of this dissertation, and concludes that for Matthew “Son of Man” is more than a mere signal word for speech about Jesus’ death, resurrection, and exaltation. “Son of Man” is a self-designation employed by Jesus that Matthew has interpreted as a title referring to Jesus’ office as the exalted human-like figure of Old Greek Dan 7. Like the enigmatic “man” of Daniel’s night-vision, the Son of Man is the representative of the elect who remains with his community “until the end of the age” (28.20).

The aim of this study is to explore the issue, whether or not Matthew in 8.16- 17 quotes Isaiah 53.4a as a proof-text without considering its context. This issue of the quotation has a great significance for two areas: hermeneutics and theology. First, the hermeneutical significance of the quotation is concerned with the issue, whether the intention and method of Matthew’s quotations of the Old Testament is a contextual approach or a non-contextual approach. Second, the theological significance of the quotation is connected to theoretical (dogmatic) and practical theology. Firstly, the significance for theoretical theology is concerned with the discussion of Matthean Christology: the identity of Jesus, the nature of his healing ministry; the provenance of his understanding of atonement. Particularly, the last one is crucial, for the whole Christian doctrine of Atonement depends on the answer to this problem. Secondly, the significance for practical theology is related to the discussion of “healing in the atonement” in Charismatic circles. This discussion can be progressed, only when it is shown that Matthew quotes Isaiah 53.4a in Matthew 8.16-17 with regard to its context, because this at least provides the basis for such a discussion. This study has attempted to treat the issue of the quotation by applying narrative analysis to Matthew 8.16-17 and the necessary part of Isaiah 52.13-53.12. This analysis includes semantic, linguistic philosophical, literary and theological explorations. With this analysis, this study has discovered an answer to the issue and some important findings, which are significant in terms of methodology, hermeneutics and theology. The answer provided by this study is that Matthew does not quote Isaiah 53.4a as a proof-text without considering the context. Rather, he, familiar with the context, quotes it in Matthew 8.16-17 in order to strategically affect the implied reader’s recognition of Jesus as, firstly, the suffering servant who is finally to offer himself as a guilt offering or a ransom, and secondly, as the Messiah. The findings are the significance of “prolepsis” in Matthew; the relationship between “ransom” lu,trον and “guilt offering” םשָ אָ ; complementary parallelism (the relationship between structure and meaning); the complementary structure of the “we” and “they” in the unfolding narrative of Isaiah 52.13-53.12; the death of the servant; and the relationship of “diseases” and “sufferings/sorrows” in 53.4a. All of these findings have enabled this study to trace the events of Jesus’ ministry and their underlying causes as far as possible to the depiction of the servant in Isaiah 52.13-53.12.