INTRODUCTION Modern Christians instinctively spiritualize the story of the gospel. When Jesus is called “King of the Jews,” we think that refers to His “spiritual” kingdom. Herod didn’t think so. Herod knew that Jesus’ birth was a threat to his power. THE TEXT . . . . Continue Reading »
David Moffitt argues in the current issue of JBL (125:2) that “Matthew alludes to Lamentations three times in chs. 23 and 28 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 Lam 4:13 resonates throughout . . . . Continue Reading »
In his midrashic/lectionary treatment of Matthew, M. D. Goulder suggests that “The three fourteens are to a Jew who had read Daniel six weeks of generations; and if six, then looking forward to a seventh, to make a week of weeks . . . . This, then, is to be the last week, initiated by the . . . . Continue Reading »
In a 1987 article in CBQ, Frank Matera deploys a highly technical narratological apparatus to draw the astonishing conclusion that “the plot of Matthew’s gospel has something to do with salvation history, the recognition of Jesus’ identity, his rejection by Israel, and with the . . . . Continue Reading »
Assuming that Matthew was composed very early in the history of the church - in the early 30s, I suspect - it fits neatly into the early persecution situation of the church. As a retelling of Israel’s history, it mimics Stephen’s sermon, which presents the history of Israel as a history . . . . Continue Reading »
On both the cover and the title page, a recent book on Jeremiah typology in Matthew is subtitled “The Rejected Profit Motif in the Matthaean Redaction.” . . . . Continue Reading »
In a 1997 article in NTS , Christopher Smith defends the five-discourse structure of Matthew against narrative critics who focus attention on the plot of Matthew. The problem with narrative approaches, Powell argues, is that as story Matthew doesn’t always work all that well: “it is a . . . . Continue Reading »
In a 1975 article in JBL, one Bruce Dahlberg suggests that the background to Matthew 16:13-23 is less Isaiah 22 (the “key” of Eliakim’s shoulder) than Jeremiah 1, the call of the prophet. Some of his arguments rely on extrabiblical associations of keys with the temple (this has a . . . . Continue Reading »
In his study of Matthew’s five-discourse structure, BW Bacon mentions commentators who connect the miracles of Matt 8-9 with the ancient idea that there were 10 plagues, 10 miracles by the sea, and 10 miracles in the sanctuary. His main reasin for disputing this interpretation is that the . . . . Continue Reading »
Austen Farrer suggests this numerological interpretation of Matthew 1: Matthew arranges the genealogy in “three pairs of sevens, six ‘weeks’ grouped in twos.” Thus, “we have only six, as it were the working ‘days’ of a week of weeks. In six days God made . . . . Continue Reading »
Subscribe
Latest Issue
Support First Things
