Matthew, Disciple and Scribe

by Patrick Schreiner

  58. Van Egmond, “Messianic ‘Son of David,’” 62; N. Johnson, “Passion according to David.”

  59. N. Johnson (“Passion according to David,” 249–52) rightly asserts that while Matthew reproduces around 80 percent of Mark’s material, the arrest scene and Judas’s death are redacted to a great extent. He notes the following parallels. First, once on the Mount of Olives, Jesus falls down and prays, as David did. Second, the weariness of Jesus’s and David’s followers is emphasized. Third, both leaders tell their followers, “Arise, let us go (flee).”

  60. See N. Johnson, “Passion according to David,” 252–56.

  61. Origen (Sel. Ps. 3.1.29, 36 [PG 12:1120c]) also drew parallels between Ahithophel and Judas, as did Chrysostom (Exp. Ps. [PG 55:103]).

  62. Although Ps. 42 is a psalm of Korah, the entire Psalms collection is generally regarded as from David.

  63. Matthew adds this use of “friend” to Mark’s narrative, and the term is unique to Matthew in the NT. Of the seventeen uses in the LXX, eight of these are employed in the Davidic succession narrative. N. Johnson (“Passion according to David,” 254–55) also notes that in rabbinic literature Ahithophel is known as the “friend” of David in the Psalms.

  64. N. Johnson, “Passion according to David,” 272.

  65. See Senior (“Matthew’s Special Material”) on the material unique to Matthew in the passion. He notes the Judas episode.

  66. Judas himself says he has betrayed “innocent blood” and departs to hang himself (Matt. 27:4–5). This act by Judas relates to the emphasis in the Psalms on God’s defeating all of David’s enemies: “For you strike all my enemies on the cheek” (Ps. 3:7); “All my enemies shall be ashamed and greatly troubled” (6:10); “Now my head shall be lifted up above my enemies all around me” (27:6).

  67. Hays (Echoes of Scripture in the Gospels, 133) notes that when the people ask for Jesus’s blood be upon them and their children (Matt. 27:25), it resonates with David’s wrathful response to the Amalekite messenger who brings the report of Saul’s death. David declares to him, “Your blood be on your own head, because you have killed the Lord’s anointed” (2 Sam. 1:16 AT).

  68. Maybe there is also a narrative allusion to 2 Sam. 23:15–17, where David said with longing, “‘Oh, that someone would give me water to drink from the well of Bethlehem that is by the gate!’ Then the three mighty men broke through the camp of the Philistines and drew water out of the well of Bethlehem that was by the gate and carried and brought it to David. But he would not drink of it.”

  69. Nolland (Gospel of Matthew, 1191) says, “Various features of the psalm could illuminate Jesus’ situation, and certainly the broad theme of the psalm, the suffering of the righteous, is an important one.” Although some suppose this detail is included because it was a custom in crucifixions (as mentioned in the Talmud), Matthew’s pattern is to include these details as a fulfillment of Scripture. He more likely includes this because he wishes to confirm the continual mocking of Jesus. “He was despised and rejected by men” (Isa. 53:3). As Gundry (Use of the Old Testament, 202) says, “The offer of the bitter drink is not an act of mercy, but an act of mockery.” The sour wine is like poison, a mockery of the pure wine that a true king would drink.

  70. It is hard to avoid the idea that Matthew may have been writing to fellow Jews at this point. He looks at his scroll and tells them that this suffering figure is meant not to be a stumbling stone or rock of offense but the fulfillment of all their hopes.

  71. George Nickelsburg (Resurrection, Immortality, and Eternal Life) has proposed the existence of a traditional genre of suffering and vindication stories that can be seen in Jewish stories such as Joseph in Gen. 37–42; Esther; Dan. 3–6; Susanna; and 2 Macc. 7. The parallels between Joseph’s life and Jesus’s are striking. Joseph’s death is plotted by his kin, his clothes are stripped, he is betrayed, sold for silver, and taken by others.

  72. Solomon is also opposed as king but promised the throne (1 Kings 1:13, 17, 30, 37, 47; 2:12).

  73. A number of articles exist on the title “son of man” in Matthew. Luz (“Son of Man in Matthew”) argues that Matthew uses “son of man” to reinforce Jewish misunderstanding of Jesus but also teaches his disciples through the employment of the title. After 16:13 Jesus speaks only to the disciples about himself as the son of man (20×). The only exception is 26:64 before the Sanhedrin. Kingsbury (“Title ‘Son of Man’”) argues that “son of man” is a public label, while “son of God” is a confessional label and that the two complement each other. Pamment (“Son of Man”) asserts that Jesus uses the term “son of man” to define his destiny and to call his disciples to participate in it.

  74. Readers can compare this question from a Gentile king with Matt. 2, where Gentile wise men worship the king of the Jews, bringing him gifts as the new Solomon (1 Kings 4:34).

  75. Simon’s carrying the cross also points to Simon becoming a disciple of the new king.

  76. Ferda, “Matthew’s Titulus.” Already Matthew has noted that the people “gather together” against Jesus (2:4; 12:30; 22:34, 41; 26:3; 26:57; 27:17, 27, 62; 28:12).

  77. Ferda, “Soldiers’ Inscription.”

  78. The scene of mockery is similar to what happens as David leaves the city and Absalom sets himself up as king. In 2 Sam. 16:5–14 Shimei (one of Saul’s relatives) follows along and curses David: “And he threw stones at David and at all the servants of King David, and all the people and all the mighty men were on his right hand and on his left. And Shimei said as he cursed, ‘Get out, get out, you man of blood, you worthless man!’” (2 Sam. 16:6–7). Abishai offers to kill the man for David, but David tells Abishai and his servants to leave Shimei alone, for maybe the Lord will look upon David and bless him for the wrong done to him this day. The narrative functions on a number of levels. As David flees for his life, and readers might be questioning if this will be David’s downfall, Shimei is inserted to prove that David is still a righteous man. When he is cursed, he does not curse back. The foil characters reveal David’s true identity, just as Jesus’s identity is revealed at the cross through those who mock him.

  79. In the next chapter I speak more about fulfilling the covenant requirements during the exile.

  80. In another sense this is an active passivity from Jesus. In the trial, those who put Jesus on trial think that they are in charge, but Jesus is directing these episodes as the victim.

  4

  Jesus as the Ideal and Wise King

  Monarchy is the chief metaphor Matthew employs to illuminate Jesus.1 The First Gospel presents Jesus as the Davidic king who leads Israel in faithfulness to the wisdom found in the Torah. He shepherds the people toward flourishing and righteous living, thus securing the nation’s territory. The king is the conduit through which God will bless and prosper his nation, thereby blessing the world. Yahweh rules through the obedience of his appointed monarch. This idea is not unique to Israel, for in the ANE numerous cultures viewed their king as the intermediary between the divine and the mundane worlds (sometimes labeled “sacral kingship”). While the discipled scribe presents Jesus as the Davidic messiah whose purpose is to restore his nation, the way in which he does so is unique and clarifies the promises that came before. Matthew wisely brings out treasures both new and old through the employment of shadow stories.

  If the last chapter provided a bookend to the journey of Jesus, showing the geographic journey of the king, then this chapter takes a plunge into Jesus’s Davidic actions while in exile––the actions of the ideal and wise king.2 Matthew does not begin his Gospel with a theme and then leave it to shiver in anonymity. He extends it through his account, indicating the introduction and conclusion are the windows to the rest of his world. He invites readers to look more closely at the life of Jesus and to see him through the life of David. The previous analysis concerned Jesus’s birth and infancy and finally his reentry into Jerusalem and his death. In these we saw how Jesus was crowned as the king. He undergoes rejection, exile, sufferi
ng, and mockery, which is his path to the throne, as was David’s. Jewish readers should have been expecting an unsteady trip to the throne since this was David’s experience too.

  In this chapter, we examine a different angle of Jesus’s Davidic kingship: the activities of this king while he is in exile (Galilee).3 In Galilee Jesus personifies what it means to be the true and wise king by embodying the Torah, thereby showing both Israel and the world the shape and character of his kingdom. In exile Jesus seeks the good of the city. Although this chapter can’t be exhaustive, three specific Davidic actions will be explored.

  Jesus not only gives the new law as the prophet in the Sermon on the Mount; he embodies the law as the wise king. Kings were meant not only to be lawgivers but also to live the law and demonstrate to their subjects what it means to be a citizen of their kingdom. The next two points then intertwine and function subordinately to the manner in which Jesus lives the law. First, Jesus personifies the law by acting as the righteous Davidic shepherd who watches over his flock—being the merciful, arbitrating, and sacrificial shepherd in contrast to the religious leaders of the day. Second, Jesus enacts justice as the Davidic merciful healer (which also has shepherding impressions). While in Galilee, Jesus restores those around him as they call out to the “Son of David.” Jesus does not neglect the weightier matters of the law: “justice and mercy and faithfulness” (23:23). In all of these actions, Jesus actively fulfills the role of the ideal and wise Davidic king, and the discipled scribe illustrates how the new interprets the old, and the old reveals the new.

  The Living Law

  Jesus has been introduced as the Davidic king in the genealogy; he is revered and rejected, and then exiled to Galilee. As Jesus begins his ministry, he is officially anointed as king in his baptism (3:16). Jesus claims that this is “to fulfill all righteousness” (3:15), which means to fulfill the total will of God for the earth by being its king. Not surprisingly, the word “righteousness” is regularly connected to wisdom in the wisdom tradition (Deut. 16:19; Ps. 37:30; Prov. 1:3; 9:9; 10:31; Eccles. 7:16; 9:1; 10:2; Jer. 23:5; 1 Cor. 1:30). John the Baptist, the last prophet of the old age, anoints him, and the Baptist later ends up being killed by King Herod.4 As David proves himself as fit to be the people’s deliverer by demonstrating his power over Goliath (1 Sam. 17), so too Jesus also proves himself as fit to be the people’s king by resisting Satan (Matt. 4:1–11). Both are loyal to God (1 Sam. 17:26; Matt. 4:10) and are dependent on God (1 Sam. 17:37; Matt. 4:4). David does not put on the normal armor of the king but clothes himself in humility (1 Sam. 17:38–40); Jesus defeats Satan by clothing himself not with the power of a normal king but with the armor of dependence on God’s word (Matt. 4:4).

  This leads Jesus to declare that the kingdom is here through his teaching and healing. “He went throughout all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues and proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom and healing every disease and every affliction among the people” (Matt. 4:23).5 The actions of the king in the exile are a combination of both authority and mercy. He “teaches” and “proclaims” the kingdom, but he also “heals” every disease and affliction. Jesus is the ideal and wise king. Camelot, so to speak, has arrived in King Jesus. These two tasks define and delineate the kingdom, and therefore Matthew devotes the rest of his narrative to an alternation between the teaching and the healing of Jesus.

  Matthew’s first major discourse (teaching section) of Jesus comes in the famous Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5–7). But when it comes to Jesus’s teaching, most commentators run to Jesus as a prophet. Nevertheless, much of the confusion concerning Jesus and his attitude toward the law stems from a narrow prophetic lens, forgetting that Matthew has begun the Gospel by announcing that Jesus is king. While I will be interacting with Jesus as the prophet in the next chapter, significant clarity comes to Jesus’s attitude toward the law if we begin by viewing Jesus as the Davidic king. Looking at the Sermon through the lens of royalty smooths out the rough hills, and separating kingship themes from the νόμος (law) wreaks havoc on our understanding of Jesus’s relationship to the law. Law and wisdom come in tandem in the Scriptures and in a king’s reign.

  Although the title David never appears in the Sermon, and only once does the noun “king” occur (5:35), it would be a severe mistake to overlook Jesus as king here. At least three reasons present themselves for viewing the Sermon through the lens of royalty. First, the very occurrence of βασιλεία (kingdom), both throughout the Sermon and in the narrative leading up to the Sermon, give warrant for viewing each discourse as a kingship discourse. As just noted, Matthew speaks of Jesus “proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom” in two summary statements (4:23; 9:35), which are meant to act like an abbreviated canopy thrown over the entire narrative. The Beatitudes are framed with “kingdom of heaven” statements (5:3, 10), and the term kingdom (βασιλεία) occurs eight times in the discourse. The Sermon on the Mount is the king’s speech.

  Second, it would be odd for Matthew to begin with the Davidic theme so clearly and then drop it once Jesus enters his ministry. In Matthew’s case, he must have come to understand Jesus as the Davidic messiah through the ministry of Jesus’s teaching, healing, (and) dying. Jesus’s ministry is a vibrant example of Jesus being in the line of David, which caused Matthew to write his introduction as he did. It isn’t legitimate to view one part of Matthew’s Gospel through the lens of this theme and exclude other parts. The Sermon isn’t hermetically sealed off from the rest of the narrative but integral to it.

  Third, and most important for my purpose, kings in ancient times were not only to instruct in the law but also to “embody the law internally and produce good legislation that transforms the people and leads them in obedience to the law.”6 Evidence exists both in the ANE and the biblical text that kings were to be living embodiments of the law who instruct through both teaching and example what it means to follow the law. As the king goes, the nation goes. Jesus is the Davidic king who becomes the living law (à la wisdom). The true and wise king will live the Torah (Deut. 17:19; Ps. 1:2). Sirach even identifies wisdom with the Torah of Moses (Sir. 24:23). Jesus’s approach toward the law cannot be sufficiently explored by looking only at the places where νόμος occurs, but that is a place to start. Jesus’s best-known statement about the law comes in the Sermon on the Mount.

  Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. (Matt. 5:17–18)

  In Matt. 5, Jesus’s statement about fulfilling the law has been the subject of much debate. In what way does he fulfill the law? By extending it? By showing its true intention? By bringing it to its end? Clarity emerges by seeing Jesus as fulfilling the law by “living it” as the ideal and wise king. To put this another way, as the king, he embodies the law: he meets its demands and thereby fulfills it. Some scholars reject this meaning for “fulfill.”7 Leon Morris claims, “We must bear in mind that ‘fulfil’ does not mean the same as ‘keep’; Jesus is speaking of more than obedience to regulations”; yet it is also true that “fulfill” does not mean less.8 To understand what “fufill the law” means from a monarchal perspective, one must put oneself into the first-century context and the common notion about kings.

  As Joshua Jipp has shown, both Hellenistic and OT kingship discourses assert that virtuous kings submit to the law and thereby internalize it. “It is only through this royal ‘living law,’ whereby the king’s subjects imitate the king who provides the perfect pattern for their own character, that they are able to fulfill the demands of the law. The results of the people’s imitation of the royal living law are harmony, friendship, and the eradication of dissension among the king’s subjects.”9 Although Jipp is not referring here to the Sermon, this quote brings remarkable clarity to Jesus’s first speech. Jesus is not only the new Moses going up on the mountain to give the law; he is
also the new king, fulfilling the demands of the law by instructing the people how to imitate him and live in harmony with the law.

  The theme of the king as embodying the law is strewn throughout Hellenistic and kingship discourse. A few examples should suffice. In the Neo-Pythagorean essays “On Kingship,” Archytas of Tarentum presents the good king as the animate law: “Laws are of two kinds, the animate law, which is the king, and the inanimate, the written law. So law is primary; for with reference to it the king is lawful, the rulership is fitting, the ruled are free, the whole community happy. . . . So it is proper for the better to rule, for the worse to be ruled. . . . The best ruler would be the one who is closest to the law.”10

  According to this text, the wise king is the one who embodies the law, who rules in accordance with the law. He is the animate law to be imitated by his subjects. Plutarch in a similar way says that kings shape their own character by the laws so that their subjects fit their pattern.11 The just king obeys the law and becomes a wise copy of the things the law commands. While the OT does not use the language of “living law” to describe Israel’s ideal king, it does speak of the task of Israel’s ruler; he is to write out, read, and obey the Torah.

  When he sits on the throne of his kingdom, he shall write for himself in a book a copy of this law, approved by the Levitical priests. And it shall be with him, and he shall read in it all the days of his life, that he may learn to fear the LORD his God by keeping all the words of this law and these statutes, and doing them, that his heart may not be lifted up above his brothers, and that he may not turn aside from the commandment, either to the right hand or to the left, so that he may continue long in his kingdom, he and his children, in Israel. (Deut. 17:18–20)