MATTHEW:

Gospel of the Kingdom

 

The Evangelist Matthew Inspired by an Angel – Rembrandt 1661
Credit, Wikimedia Commons

 

By

Jim Gerrish

Copyright 2019 (c)Jim Gerrish

Light of Israel Bible Commentaries

 

All Scripture quotations, unless otherwise noted, are from: The Holy Bible: New International Version®, NIV®, Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by the International Bible Society. Used with permission.

 

 

INTRODUCTION

In the first century, the Gospel of Matthew was considered to be the first and oldest of the gospel accounts.  In fact, the Bible specialists, Barker and Kohlenberger, state, “During the first three centuries of the church, Matthew was the most highly revered and frequently quoted canonical gospel…” ¹   Matthew enjoyed the distinction of having the greatest quantity of the Master’s teaching. The book also had the greatest number of links with the Old Testament and with Judaism.²   It was felt by many early Christians that Matthew was not only written by the disciple of that name, but that it was originally written in Hebrew.³  In those early days Matthew was always listed first among the gospels.

So Matthew, the disciple of Jesus and tax collector, was always considered to be the author.  Scholars have felt that his business knowledge of shorthand may have enabled him to record many of the discourses of Jesus.⁴  The great Scottish commentator, William Barclay, says of him, “Matthew rose up and followed him and left everything behind him except one thing – his pen…” ⁵

Concerning the dating of Matthew, this has been much disputed in modern times.  This dispute involves what is called the Synoptic Problem.  The word “synoptic” is a Greek word which means “to see together.”  The Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke are called the Synoptic Gospels because they closely parallel each other.  Modern scholars now propose that Mark was first written since both Matthew and Luke draw heavily from Mark.  The Anglican cleric and scholar, R. T. France says, “Roughly 45 percent of Matthews’s Gospel consists of material found in similar (sometimes verbally identical) form in Mark, and in roughly the same order; a further 20 percent or so is similarly shared with Luke…” ⁶   This is a problem so complex and so tangled that it is not likely to be solved even in our century.

The original Hebrew document of Matthew may have been written early, and Matthew himself may have put the document into Greek at some point.  After all, Matthew in his profession had to be skilled in Greek and he also lived very near the Decapolis, a Greek-speaking area of the Galilee.  While we cannot date the early Hebrew edition, many scholars are agreed that the Greek issue of Matthew occurred somewhere in the AD 60s.⁷

Scholars feel that Matthew was not only written by a Jew (Jewish Christian) but that it was written in an area where there were many Jews living.  The general opinion today is that Matthew was written somewhere in Syria and most likely at Antioch.  After all, Ignatius Bishop of Antioch, writing about 110-115, was the first to quote from the book.⁸  Apparently the Greek Matthew was not sent out to some particular church but was happily used by the many Greek speakers of the area.

The Book of Matthew is arranged for teaching and memorization.  Asbury professor, Craig Keener, sees the book arranged not chronologically but according to topic. These sections are: “the ethics of the kingdom in chapters 5-7, the mission of the kingdom in chapter 10, the presence of the kingdom in chapter 13, church discipline and forgiveness in chapter 18 and the future of the kingdom in chapters 23-25.” ⁹   Barclay says, “…Broadly speaking, to Mark we owe our knowledge of the events of Jesus’ life; to Matthew we owe our knowledge of the substance of Jesus’ teaching.” ¹⁰

Matthew may be of utmost importance for Christians today.  In fact, it is the only gospel that mentions the church (16:18; 18:17).  It also places great emphasis upon the kingdom of God and things to come.¹¹ We greatly need these teachings in our generation.

 

CHAPTER 1

 

This is the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah the son of David, the son of Abraham: ² Abraham was the father of Isaac, Isaac the father of Jacob, Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers, ³ Judah the father of Perez and Zerah, whose mother was Tamar, Perez the father of Hezron, Hezron the father of Ram, ⁴ Ram the father of Amminadab, Amminadab the father of Nahshon, Nahshon the father of Salmon, ⁵ Salmon the father of Boaz, whose mother was Rahab, Boaz the father of Obed, whose mother was Ruth, Obed the father of Jesse, ⁶ and Jesse the father of King David. David was the father of Solomon, whose mother had been Uriah’s wife, ⁷ Solomon the father of Rehoboam, Rehoboam the father of Abijah, Abijah the father of Asa, ⁸ Asa the father of Jehoshaphat, Jehoshaphat the father of Jehoram, Jehoram the father of Uzziah, ⁹ Uzziah the father of Jotham, Jotham the father of Ahaz, Ahaz the father of Hezekiah, ¹⁰ Hezekiah the father of Manasseh, Manasseh the father of Amon, Amon the father of Josiah, ¹¹ and Josiah the father of Jeconiah and his brothers at the time of the exile to Babylon. ¹² After the exile to Babylon: Jeconiah was the father of Shealtiel, Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel, ¹³ Zerubbabel the father of Abihud, Abihud the father of Eliakim, Eliakim the father of Azor, ¹⁴ Azor the father of Zadok, Zadok the father of Akim, Akim the father of Elihud, ¹⁵ Elihud the father of Eleazar, Eleazar the father of Matthan, Matthan the father of Jacob, ¹⁶ and Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, and Mary was the mother of Jesus who is called the Messiah. ¹⁷ Thus there were fourteen generations in all from Abraham to David, fourteen from David to the exile to Babylon, and fourteen from the exile to the Messiah.  Matthew 1:1-17

No doubt, a long genealogy would be an unusual way to begin a book today.  For the modern person, reading this would be considered drudgery and the genealogy would likely be skipped by many readers.  However, to the Jewish person the genealogy was of great interest and of absolute necessity.  Jewish people in Bible times were obsessed with pedigree.  For folks in the priestly line, this was greatly magnified.  For priests it was critically important to trace pedigree all the way back to Aaron, the first high priest.¹

In the days of Nehemiah, three priestly families, Hobaiah, Hakkoz and Barzillai could not produce their genealogical records and thus they were excluded from the priesthood (Neh. 7:63-65).  In later times, such records were kept by the Sanhedrin, but individual families no doubt had theirs memorized.  It is said that the genealogical lines in Scotland were memorized and repeated at every coronation over hundreds of years, and that land was much more primitive than Israel.²   One family in Israel was greatly jealous over pedigree and that was the family of King Herod.  Herod was of Edomite background and because of it he was greatly despised by most people in Israel.³

We note that the genealogy of Jesus immediately connects with two people, Abraham and David.  For one to be a Jew, that one had to connect with Father Abraham (Gen. 12:3; 18:18; 22:18).  But for one to inherit the throne of Israel it was necessary to connect with David (v. 6), to whom the eternal kingdom had been promised. (2 Sam. 7:13; Psa. 132:11).

This genealogy is very similar to those found in Genesis 5:1 ff., 1 Chronicles 1:34; 2:1-15, and Ruth 4:18-22.  American New Testament scholar, Grant Osborne, says of the passage here: “In the first 17 verses we meet 46 people whose lifetimes span 2,000 years…God’s work in history is not limited by human failures or sins, and he works through ordinary people.” ⁴

In verse 3 we realize one of the early problems with the genealogy.  Judah, through an illicit relationship with his daughter-in-law, Tamar, became the father of the twins Perez and Zerah (Gen. 38:27-30).  Tamar, who was not sexually pure (neither was Judah for that matter) became the first of three sexually impure women in this genealogy.  These ladies were not exactly shining lights in the holy record. All three were probably Gentiles,⁵ and this speaks in type of the coming outreach to the nations by Israel.  We might point out that it was highly unusual for women to be listed in ancient genealogies.⁶

In verse 5 we have the mention of Rahab the harlot, who is said to be the mother of Boaz, who was father of Obed (cf. Jos. 2:13; 6:17, 23,25).  Obviously, some generations are missing, since Rahab was certainly not the mother of Boaz.⁷   This is something we see frequently in genealogies.  For instance, in the four hundred year period covered by four generations from Perez to Amminadab (1:3-4; cf. Gen. 15:13; Ex. 12:40) there were probably several generations omitted.  The apologist Norman Geisler says: “In biblical Hebrew culture being a father was thought in the same light as being a forefather or ancestor. Begat can mean ‘was the ancestor of.’ The word son (ben) can mean descendant.  Jesus was the ‘son of David.’” ⁸   This was the accepted manner in which genealogies were done in antiquity.  It is interesting that even the avowed enemies of Christianity in ancient times never once questioned these public records.⁹

Verse 6 brings us to King David, and his mention is very important.  The eternal kingdom was promised through David and his heirs (2 Sam. 7:16; Rev. 22:16).  Some of his heirs did not do too well, but David for the most part had a heart after God (1 Sam. 16:7).  His one major fault was his adultery with Bathsheba, the wife of Uriah the Hittite.  She too had apparently consented to have the adulterous affair with the king and this ended in the murder of her husband.  It is likely that Bathsheba was also a Gentile woman, and this whole sordid affair did not look well in the family tree.

Still, it was through the line of David that the Messiah came. Pastor and religious broadcaster, Warren Wiersbe, says, “Since royalty depends on heredity, it was important for Jesus to establish his rights to David’s throne.  Matthew gave his human heredity (Matt. 1:1-17) as well as his divine heredity (Matt. 1:18-25).” ¹⁰

Solomon, who became heir of David through Bathsheba, did marvelously well at the beginning but in the end fell into idolatry through his many foreign wives.  His reign established idol high places in Jerusalem and it began the ultimate ruin of the nation.  His son Rehoboam, through his foolish decision, caused the division of the northern and southern kingdoms.  As we have noted, genealogies sometimes leave a lot to be desired.

In verse 8 we have another skip in the kings after Jehoram.  The three kings of Ahaziah, Jehoash (Joash) and Amaziah are left out.  These kings were quite involved with the evil house of Ahab in Samaria and it is thought by some that it was for this reason that they were skipped by Matthew.¹¹

In verse 10 we have the dubious distinction of meeting King Manasseh, one who held the reputation of being the worst king Judah ever had (cf. 2 Kgs. 21:2-7).¹²  His evil reign lasted fifty-five years, but strangely in the end he repented and was forgiven by God (cf. 2 Chr. 33:10-25).

In verse 11, mention is made of Jeconiah, who is also known as Jehoiachin.  It was Jehoiachin who essentially lost the kingdom to the Babylonians.  He was carried to Babylon where he later died.  His uncle Zedekiah was made the puppet king in Jerusalem.

After the exile, Zerubbabel  (v.12), grandson of Jehoiachin, became one of the main leaders in the return to Israel under King Cyrus of Persia.  From this point on until the birth of Christ the names do not appear in the Old Testament, for this was the intertestamental period.  The names were probably derived from the family record of Joseph.¹³  Nevertheless, they continued to be of the royal line of David.

Verse 12 gives us another mind-twister regarding David’s descendants.  Shealtiel is here listed as the father of Zerubabbel (cf. Ezra 3:2; Neh. 12:1; Hag. 1:1).  This seems to depart from 1 Chronicles 3:19, where Pediah is listed as Zerubbabel’s father. What we most likely have here is what is called a levirate marriage, where a brother dies childless and another brother takes the widow and raises a child for the deceased brother (Deut. 25:5-10; cf. Gen. 38:8-9).¹⁴  We can see how this was of utmost importance for a people intent upon bringing forth the Messiah.

In verse 16, we finally arrive at Jacob the father of Joseph.  It was Joseph who became the husband of Mary.  Luke mentions that Joseph was the son of Heli rather than Jacob (Lk. 3:23).  Once again, what we probably have here is more evidence of levirate marriage.  Heli probably died without children and his brother Jacob then married his widow.  In order to continue his brother’s line he begat Joseph, who was thus a legal son of Heli.¹⁵

When we compare Matthew’s genealogy with that of Luke, we end up with all kinds of variations (Lk. 3:23-38).  Albert Barnes, the nineteenth century American Presbyterian theologian says: “The difficulty lies in that part of the genealogy from David to Christ. There they are entirely different…Not only are the names different, but Luke has mentioned, in this part of the genealogy, no less than 42 names, while Matthew has recorded only 27 names.” ¹⁶   To further complicate the lists, Luke goes from son to father while Matthew goes from father to son.

Some have tried to solve this dilemma by claiming that Matthew gives the genealogy of Joseph (the legal father of Jesus) and that Luke gives us the genealogy of Mary (the actual blood line).  The problem with this thinking is that genealogies were usually not reckoned through the mother.

Leon Morris, the Australian professor, says: “The best suggestion is that Matthew’s list represents the legal descendants of David, those who would actually have reigned had the kingdom continued, while Luke gives the descendants of David in the line to which Joseph belonged…” ¹⁷  France says it was, “…clearly intended to be that of Jesus’ ‘legal’ ancestry, not of his physical descent.” ¹⁸   At about this point it might be helpful to remember Paul’s warnings about being too caught up with genealogies (1 Tim. 1:4; Tit. 3:9).

When we arrive at verse 17 we encounter an unusual system of dating.  Matthew divides the genealogy into three parts with fourteen names in each part.  This seems on the surface to be a neat way of dividing time, but the truth is that it does not work out so well.  Barker and Kohlenberger say, “Matthew has grouped them according to fourteens, most likely a symbolic number. It is impossible to get the three fourteens without counting either David twice or Jeconiah twice.” ¹⁹  No doubt this section is arranged in such a way as to aid in memorization.  In those days few people had copies of scripture so it was necessary for most people to store portions of the Bible in their memory.²⁰

Some scholars feel that Matthew made use of the “perfect number” “seven” and that he made three groups of “twice seven” which would have represented wholeness or completeness.  Ancient Hebrew had only consonants and no vowels.  Therefore the name of David would have been spelled DVD.  Hebrew letters had numerical value, so DVD would have represented the numerals 4+6+4 or the total of 14.²¹   The scholars feel that this was a means of emphasizing David’s central place in the genealogy.

Let us say something that will hopefully clear up the whole matter of genealogy.  The human race is broken, and has been broken since the fall.  In other words, the whole genealogy is fallen because of sin.  In the best of human records we have things like lust, adultery, deceit and murder.  Everywhere we have the evidence of death which came through sin.  Therefore, we have the necessity for levirate marriages. As G. K. Chesterton once said, “whatever else is true of man, man is not what he was meant to be.” ²²   We can thank God though that the Bible tells it like it is.  It truly presents human sinfulness.

The bright spot in the genealogical record is the presence of the Messiah.  He came to the earth to repair and restore humanity to its pristine and sinless condition.  Because of the depth of sin in all creation, this was a complicated task that would take many centuries.  In the end, the heavens would rejoice and the earth would be glad.  The trees of the field would sing for joy, along with all creation. (Psa. 96:11-13).  Habbakuk says, “For the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the LORD as the waters cover the sea” (Hab. 2:14).  In the end, redeemed humanity will shine with the radiance and glory of the Lord (Rom. 8:18-19).  In the meantime, it is only the Messiah and him alone who maintains the biblical genealogies, makes sense of them and brings them to completion.

THE BIRTH OF THE LORD JESUS

This is how the birth of Jesus the Messiah came about: His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be pregnant through the Holy Spirit. Matthew 1:18

Now we come to the very heart of the Christian gospel or good news.  God was about to break into the dismal human scene and bring deliverance.  That deliverance would be affected through Mary, an extremely devout young girl in the Galilee.  What Satan brought about by the deception and fall of Eve, God would undo through the obedience of this young girl.  She would bring forth the Messiah, the very Son of God.  Paul says, “But when the set time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those under the law, that we might receive adoption to sonship” (Gal. 4:4-5).

Young Mary was betrothed or pledged to marry Joseph, who was a carpenter. Mary was probably around twelve to fourteen years of age and Joseph was likely between eighteen and twenty.²³   In those days the betrothal was a legal contract for full marriage in about a year’s time.  During the period the couple lived apart, however, it took a legal divorce to dissolve their agreement.²⁴   There was no sexual relationship during this time so it was strange indeed that Mary, who was a virgin, became pregnant.  To the natural mind it would indicate to all that Mary had been unfaithful.  No doubt the tongues began to wag in Nazareth.

However, the real story was that the Virgin Mary had experienced a visitation from the angel Gabriel announcing to her that she would bring forth a child by the Holy Spirit and that he would rule on the throne of David forever (Lk. 1:26-35).  It would take another angelic visitation in the dreams of Joseph for him to accept the child and agree that the baby would become his legal heir.  According to prophecy, the Messiah was to be born of a woman (Gen. 3:15), of the seed of Abraham (Gen. 22:18), and through the tribe of Judah (Gen. 49:10).  Wiersbe says, “…Jesus Christ is the only Jew alive who can actually prove his claims to the throne of David!” ²⁵

In that era, society was rife with stories about pagan gods impregnating women.²⁶   No doubt because of this, the story of the virgin birth was seldom related in the later writings and preaching of Paul and the others.  It was too easy to be confused with the ever-prevalent Greco-Roman mythology.²⁷   We must bear in mind that the relationship between God and Mary was not sexual.²⁸   It was a holy relationship brought about by the Holy Spirit coming upon Mary.

Since Jesus was born of Mary he was born one-hundred percent human.  Because he was fathered by the Holy Spirit he was born without a trace of human sin.²⁹   Jesus was born as the God-man.  God had at last come to live in the midst of his people.  People could never again charge God with being unconcerned about the lot of human beings.

“Because Joseph her husband was faithful to the law, and yet did not want to expose her to public disgrace, he had in mind to divorce her quietly” (1:19).  At the outset, Joseph naturally assumed that Mary had been unfaithful to him.  In such a case the only way a husband could protect his integrity was to divorce his wife.  In earlier times an adulterous wife would have been stoned to death (Lev. 20:10; Deut. 22:13-21; Jn. 8:5), but in these days such a thing was handled by divorce.  However, since a public divorce was a humiliating thing Joseph decided to do a private divorce.  This was authenticated by two witnesses and afterward the woman would be sent away (Deut. 24:1).  Such a procedure was alluded to in the Mishnah (Sotah 1:1, 5).³⁰

“But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, ‘Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit’” (1:20).  God addressed Joseph through the angel as “son of David,” thus bearing witness to the legality of his connection with David of old.³¹   Dreams are rare in the New Testament when used as a means of divine contact.  They are essentially confined to Matthew’s prologue (1:20; 2:13, 19, 22).³²

“She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins” (1:21).  Mary’s child would be a son and she was instructed to name him Jesus.  This is the Greek form of the Hebrew “Joshua” and it means “the Lord saves.” ³³   Just as Joshua led the people into the natural land, Jesus now leads us into the spiritual land. Unfortunately, the Jews had developed a tragic misunderstanding about their coming Messiah which would bode ill for Jesus.  Over the years the Jewish people had come to believe that the Messiah would be a political leader who would free Israel from Roman domination.  How wrong that concept was!  Jesus came to free people from the sin that had caused bondage to Rome in the first instance.

“All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: ‘The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel’ (which means ‘God with us’)” (1:22-23).  This is the first of what scholars have called the formula citations, which function as evidences of Jesus’ messianic identity.  France lists these passages as 1:22-23; 2:15; 2:17-18; 2:23; 4:15-16; 8:17; 12:17-21; 21:4-5; 27:9-10.  After each of these citations there is an appropriate reference to the Old Testament.³⁴

Verse 23 concerning the virgin conceiving has brought about a good deal of discussion over the centuries.  This was obviously a sign that was given through Isaiah the prophet to Ahaz, King of Judah.  The account is recorded in Isaiah 7:14.  The essence of the prophecy was that a virgin would give birth to a son and before the son was able to discern right from wrong the two kings who were troubling Judah would be eliminated.  There have been many and diverse theories about this passage.  Obviously, this was not just an ordinary woman giving birth to an ordinary child.  There was something special and miraculous about this birth or it would not have qualified as a sign.  We simply have to conclude that a young virgin did give birth to a son at that time and that this event served as a type and pattern for the virgin birth of Mary over seven centuries later.

The Greek word parthenos used here can mean virgin or young woman of marriageable age.  However, the Septuagint Greek translation of Isaiah 7:14, has the Hebrew word almah rendered as parthenos and almost always has the meaning of “virgin.”  In fact, the overwhelming appearances of parthenos in biblical and non-biblical Greek require it to be rendered as “virgin.” ³⁵

Paul Kretzmann, Lutheran pastor, professor and author, notes how the virgin birth of Christ was not questioned for around eighteen centuries until modern rationalism emerged.  It was a part of the Apostolic Creed, “…born of the Virgin Mary…” and it reflected the necessary sinless birth of Christ.³⁶  All that has changed as many of the scholars of this age have tended to deny biblical truth.

Distinguished New Testament scholar, Craig Blomberg, says: “In no sense can this prophecy be taken as less than messianic or as fulfilled in a merely human figure. So it is best to see a partial, proleptic fulfillment of Isaiah’s prophecy in his time, with the complete and more glorious fulfillment in Jesus’ own birth.” ³⁷

“When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife” (1:24).  The dream of Joseph must have been a powerful spiritual experience because he awoke with full intentions to carry it out regardless of traditions to the contrary.  He quickly completed the marriage arrangement, taking Mary as his wife although the one-year waiting period had not elapsed.³⁸   Nevertheless, they had no sexual relations until the Christ Child was born.

 “But he did not consummate their marriage until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus” (1:25).  France says: “The Greek expression for ‘not until’ would normally suggest that intercourse did take place after the end of this period, and that therefore Jesus’ ‘brothers’ (12:46, etc.) were subsequently born of Joseph and Mary in the normal way. There is no biblical warrant for the tradition of the ‘perpetual virginity’ of Mary.” ³⁹   Incidentally, we read in Mark 6:3 that Jesus also had some sisters.

Early in church history Mary began to be exalted, although Jesus had specifically taught against this very thing (Lk. 11:27-28).  In early church theology she was said to be the “Mother of God” and “The Queen of Heaven.”  By AD 451 the doctrine of Mary’s perpetual virginity was introduced.  This doctrine would have prevented her other sons and daughters mentioned in scripture as being her own.  In 1854, Pope Pius IX established the doctrine of the immaculate conception, freeing Mary from the taint of original sin.  In 1894, Pope Leo XIII proclaimed Mary as the Mediatrix of Divine Grace.  She could now be the recipient of prayers.  By 1950, Pope Pius XII proclaimed that Mary at the end of her life was assumed body and soul into heaven.  As we can see, the scriptures say none of these things about Mary and even plainly rebuke such thinking.  In 1 Timothy 2:5 scripture says, “For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus…”

It is true that Mary was a very special young lady. She was a young virgin highly favored by God.  All the coming generations would call her “blessed” (Lk. 1:48).  However, she was not to be worshipped or unduly adored.

 

Continue to Chapter 2