John P. Webster Library First Church of Christ, Congregational, UCC 12 South Main Street West Hartford CT 06107

+Library home +Resources and services +News and events +New materials +Online catalog +Hours and location +Contact us

Online Summer Bible Study, 2004
Week 12 (August 22-28): Matthew 1-10

Hello all,

Moving on to Matthew, the last book we will be looking at. Getting into one of the gospels is timely, given George and David's questions about the implications of Christian claims about Jesus for how Christians should believe and behave today.

The first and most important point about the gospels is that they were written at specific times for specific communities. This is not the place, and I am not the person, to get into theories about Mark and Q and redaction criticism and the rest: suffice to say that the gospels are not in agreement with each other on many points, and looking at those areas of disagreement can tell us something about the assumptions and goals of the authors. For talking about the assumptions and goals of Matthew, I will be relying on Paul Beeching's book Awkward Reverence: Reading the New Testament Today (Continuum, 1997).

First, an overview...

"Apocalyptic thought had lost its immediate relevance. The special knowledge or gnosis that had brought the group together in the first place was now too narrow to hold the new, larger number of believers, as people of various social classes joined the movement and as the feelings of social deprivation that may have originally motivated the group began to weaken. The problem now was how to broaden belief so that more and more could be accommodated. Yet paradoxically, because of the passage of time, it was also necessary to emphasize the historic and respectable roots of the whole spiritual enterprise." (pp. 62-63)

Not so different from the contemporary predicament of mainline Protestantism, according to some observers, with doctrinal purity and the urge to social activism having both been diluted. Yet what do mainline churches turn to do justify themselves? Theology and social justice declarations.

"Matthew addressed people who still thought of themselves as Jews, and he understood himself as a Jew writing for them. He is therefore intent on showing that Christianity is a natural development from the old ethnic religion, a development that is superior, respectable, and long-term--the fulfillment of prophecy." (p. 63)

Not, in other words, a supercessory faith.

Now, to the narrative itself...Matthew begins at the beginning, the birth of Jesus, which has become somewhat of a litmus test for both conservative and liberal Christians because of the report that Mary was a virgin when she became pregnant. Given that the virgin birth is not mentioned again in the narrative, nor in the authentic letters of Paul (which predated all the gospels), how do we put it into perspective? The genealogy and infancy story "may have originally been attempts to refute allegations of illegitimacy, and/or add grandeur to Jesus' humble birth. This will seem less strange if one reflects that in the Hellenistic period, a virgin birth was awarded to several important ancients including Alexander the Great, who was delighted with the story and frequently repeated it...In Matthew, the story of the virgin birth is consonant with the ruling purpose of the whole infancy tale: to legitimize Jesus as the messianic, Davidic heir." (p. 64)

Looking to George's question about what a non-fundamentalist Christianity might look like, we can put forth Matthew 5:19, one of the verses in the whole Bible that is most personally meaningful to me: "Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, will be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven." (NRSV) As Beeching observes: "It is important to read carefully what Matthew's Jesus says here about people who, like Paul, had in fact set aside the law. Are they condemned to Gehenna? Cast into outer darkness? No. Preachers of such un-Jewish theology will take only a lower place in the kingdom of heaven. What Matthew's Jesus objects to is their inferior but still acceptable version of Christianity." (p. 70) There may be only one Best Way, or only one True Way, but other ways are acceptable, and their followers are still our brothers and sisters.

Now, Matthew is understood to be referring only to other Christians. But (looking ahead to next week's section), in Matthew 12:32, Jesus says: "Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come." (NRSV) Non-Christians could be said to be "speaking a word against the Son of Man," yet be quite faithful to the Holy Spirit, the work of God among people. A non-fundamentalist Christianity could recognize them as brothers and sisters, though they might expect them to end up least in the kingdom of heaven. (When we get to Matthew 25, we'll examine that expectation in a little closer detail).

Also in Matthew 1-10 are the passages about anger equalling killing, lust equalling adultery, pluck out the eye that causes you to sin, etc. These statements have troubled many readers of the Bible, both Christian and non-Christian. Beeching observes: "Matthew cannot be preaching...perfection. A solution may lie in the 'Jewishness' of these verses (5:23-24), which assume that the Temple cult is still functioning...One should recall that within the Jewish world teachers were in the habit of setting 'fences' around the Torah, rigid man-made admonitions intended to protect one from ever breaking a God-given rule...In effect, such dicta make up an idealized, extreme ethic which is nevertheless interpreted realistically." (p. 71)

Next week: Matthew 11-20.

Peace,
Mark Kille
John P. Webster Library

Please visit the First Church home page!