Matthew

The main body of Matthew's Gospel and the culmination of Jesus' public ministry end with a strange warning against spreading the word about Jesus' true identity. The next verse, with which the final main division of the Gospel begins, will dramatically clarify why.

Immediately on the heels of his triumphant confession of Jesus as Son of God, Peter betrayed a serious flaw in his understanding of that sonship. He was not prepared to hear about the road to the cross, to learn of the suffering Jesus must endure. But a Messiah without an atoning death fits in with the goals of Satan, not the plans of God. In fact, disciples too must be prepared to carry their own crosses, experiencing persecution and even death for their Master when need arises. These verses set the stage for the rest of the Gospel, which narrates the unfolding drama of how Christ was in fact crucified but also resurrected. Glory lies ahead, but the cross must precede the crown.

Jesus, nevertheless, gives His three closest disciples a preview of that glory. He provides a glimpse of His majesty no longer incognito, through the miraculous self-disclosure on a high mountain we have come to call the mount of transfiguration. Matthew 16:28 probably predicts this event. Matthew 17:1-9 describes it in more detail. With Jesus appeared Moses and Elijah, key Old Testament prophets and miracle workers, leading the disciples naturally to ask once more about the prophecies of Elijah's return. In striking contrast with the triumph of the transfiguration appears the failure of the other nine disciples to work a "simple" miracle for which they had long ago been commissioned (recall 10:8). Jesus rebuked their paltry faith and reassured them that even confidence of the size of the proverbially tiny mustard seed would have been sufficient.

Matthew 17:22-27 rounds off this section as it began—with Christ again predicting His suffering, death, and resurrection. A question about whether or not Jesus paid the temple tax leads Him to teach a remarkable lesson about the freedom of God's people from the Old Testament laws coupled with the necessity of avoiding unnecessary offense in transgressing them (a balance Paul would repeat in a quite different context in 1 Cor. 8:10).

In his fourth major sermon in Matthew, Jesus began to outline regulations for life in Christian community under the sign of the cross. This discourse divides naturally into two sections. The first focuses on humility; the second, on forgiveness (vv. 15-35). In verses 1-9 Jesus called His disciples to a humble demeanor. Positively, this means adopting a childlike dependence on God. Negatively, it means ruthlessly excising from one's life anything that could cause another believer to sin. In verses 10-14 Jesus explained why He can command these things of His followers. God has already demonstrated the ultimate humility in leaving His nearly complete flock of ninety-nine sheep to seek to recover one stray.

Closely linked with humility is forgiveness. When believers offend fellow believers, they should seek reconciliation at almost any cost. Verses 15-20 describe the appropriate process but recognize that at times one party will still refuse to be reconciled. When all other measures fail, the unrepentant sinner must be "excommunicated" from the fellowship. But even then the goal is rehabilitative and not punitive. Treating people like pagans or tax-collectors suggests first of all that they are not considered as members of the community. But it also indicates that, even as Jesus dealt with the literal pagans and tax collectors of His day, they are continually to be wooed to repent so that they might return. Decisions made by the church in keeping with the procedures of verses 15-18 will be ratified in heaven. On the other hand, when believers do repent, forgiveness should be unlimited. For in light of the immense sin God has forgiven each of us, a professing Christian's refusal to forgive a fellow believer who requests it (and demonstrates a change of heart and action) proves so callous that one can only conclude that such a person never truly experienced Christ's forgiveness in the first place.

In 19:1 Jesus left Galilee for the final time to begin His fateful journey to Jerusalem, where He met His death. En route He worked but one more miracle, focusing rather on teaching those around Him. He increasingly stressed the nature of discipleship, but as He entered the city, He underlined the theme of impending judgment for Israel.

In 19:1-20:34 Jesus was literally "on the road," journeying to Judea. Matthew 19:1-20:16 describes three encounters with people who accosted Him with various kinds of questions or demands. First, the Pharisees tried to trap Him by asking Him His views on divorce. In His reply Jesus went beyond both competing schools of Pharisaic thought—the Hillelites, who granted divorce "for any good cause," and the Shammaites, who limited it to adultery. Instead, He stressed the permanence of marriage as God's original design. He did agree with Shammai in permitting divorce and remarriage when adultery has already ruptured a union. But unlike Shammai, He did not require it. And very much out of keeping with conventional Jewish sympathies, He pointed out God's call to some to lead a single, celibate lifestyle.

Second, He dealt with His disciples' impatience at certain individuals who asked Him to bless their children. As in 18:1-5, He used this opportunity to teach about childlike dependence on God. Third, He responded to the rich young man's question about how to receive eternal life. His call to this man demanded that he sell his possessions, give to the poor, and follow Him in discipleship. He called other people to deal with their money differently (see Luke 19:1-27); but whenever something becomes an obstacle to doing God's will, it must be jettisoned. This third encounter led Peter, on behalf of the Twelve, to ask what reward they would receive inasmuch as they had left families and possessions behind in their itinerant ministries. Jesus' answer points to their eternal reward but also hints at manifold compensation in this life, presupposingthat fellow disciples share their possessions and functions as a large, extended family (see Mark 10:30).

In 20:17-34 Jesus centered further attention on His "passion," eliciting contrasting responses from His audiences. Verses 17-19 form the third and final passion prediction. Verses 20-28 illustrate an inappropriate response. James and John, two of the apostles, through a request by their mother, sought status in Jesus' kingdom and were rebuked. Verses 29-34 illustrate an appropriate response. Two blind men recognized Jesus as Son of David, the legitimate Jewish Messiah, and merely begged for mercy. Christ was gracious and healed them of their malady, leading them to follow Him in discipleship.

Chapters 21-22 find Jesus arriving in Jerusalem itself. There He taught about the imminent destruction of the Jewish temple, capital, and nation if its people as a whole and leaders in particular did not repent. Matthew 21:1-22 introduces this topic by a series of object lessons or enacted parables. Jesus began with what has been improperly termed "the triumphal entry." Six days before the Passover, on what we now call Palm Sunday, He rode a donkey into the city. He was acclaimed by the crowds as Messiah and ushered into town in a fashion reminiscent of conquering warriors and kings of Old Testament and intertestamental times. But the crowds did not recognize what kind of Messiah Christ is. They had no place in their plans for Him to be presented on such a humble animal nor to be arrested and suffer. Hence, the howling mob merely five days later clamored for His crucifixion. As Jesus entered the temple precincts, He did the entirely unexpected. He overturned the benches of the moneychangers, drove out the sacrificial animals, and accused the Jewish leaders of having corrupted a place of prayer by turning it into an extortionary marketplace.

This judgment of the temple by "purification" is followed immediately with judgment by threatened destruction. The strange miracle of cursing the fig tree is best interpreted by Jesus' parable that uses identical imagery (Luke 13:6-9). Fig trees often stood for Israel in the Old Testament. Jesus was showing what would happen to the nation if it did not repent.

Matthew 21:23-22:46 presents a series of controversies with the Jewish leaders. Various individuals and groups approached Jesus, each with a question in keeping with their own commitments. But they were not seeking enlightenment. Rather, again they were trying to trap Jesus so as to be able to arrest and condemn Him. The temple authorities understandably asked about Jesus' authority. How dare He come in and so disrupt their proceedings? Recognizing the trap, He posed a counterquestion. How do they account for John the Baptist's ministry? They could not reply without either conceding Jesus' divine authority, since His message parallels John's, or falling out of favor with the crowds who applauded the Baptist. So they refused to answer, and Jesus did likewise. But He recounted a series of three parables that clearly imply His (and John's) God-given authority, even as they successively depict God's indictment, sentence, and execution of Israel.

The parable of the two sons makes the point that performance takes priority over promise. The parable of the wicked tenants predicts that "the kingdom of God will be taken away from [the Jewish leaders] and given to a people who will produce its fruit." The parable of the wedding banquet prophesies the destruction of Jerusalem in response to the Jews' rejection of Jesus but also threatens judgment on any would-be Christians who refuse to come to Christ on His terms.

The series of controversies resumed as the Pharisees and Herodians questioned Jesus about paying taxes to the Roman emperor. The former did not support doing so; the latter did. No matter His reply, Jesus would alienate one of the two groups—except that He found a way out! Both God and human governments deserve allegiance, each in its rightful sphere of influence.

The Sadducees took the stage next and ridiculed the resurrection by means of a worst-case scenario. This Jewish sect refused to believe in any doctrine that could not be established from the five books of Moses. So Jesus replied by proving the resurrection from Exodus 3:6 after correcting their mistaken assumption that humans would retain sexuality in heaven.

A lawyer approached Christ to ask about the greatest commandment in the law. Jesus gave not one but two answers, combining Deuteronomy 6:5 and Leviticus 19:18. The lawyer had no dispute with Jesus' reply. The questions ceased as the crowds remained amazed at Jesus' responses. Jesus concluded this round of teaching in the temple by turning the tables on His questioners and baffling them with a question about Psalm 110:1: How can David's son (the Messiah) be merely human if David (king of all Israel) also calls Him his Lord?

Jesus' final discourse takes place in two parts. First, while still in the temple He unleashed a series of warnings against the scribes and Pharisees, in view of God's judgment on Israel. Then with His disciples on the Mount of Olives He predicted the destruction of the temple but also the final judgment of all peoples. The temple invective divides into three sections. In 23:1-12 Jesus warned against imitating various kinds of undesirable behavior the Jewish leaders too frequently exemplified. In 23:13-36 proceed seven woes decrying their hypocrisy. Matthew 23:37-39 changes the tone as Jesus more compassionately lamented Israel's downfall and hinted at a future restoration.

Chapters 24-25 comprise Jesus' predictions of what will unfold after His death to usher in the end times. Its structure and interpretation are notoriously complex; the following is but one of several viable options. Matthew 24:1-35 describes the signs and times of the temple's destruction and of Christ's return. The disciples asked about both events, probably thinking of them as occurring simultaneously.

Jesus made clear in His reply that they are distinct. First, He reviewed a series of signs that do not herald the end but consistently characterize life in the Christian era. Second, He described the horror of the actual destruction of the temple. Third, He alluded to the subsequent "great tribulation," which for Matthew, at least, seems to embrace the entire period between Christ's two comings (compare "then" in v. 21 and "immediately" in v. 29). Fourth, He described Christ's actual return, an unmistakable, universally visible event. Fifth, and finally, He drew a series of conclusions or implications from this scenario of events.

Of these, two remain crucial in the face of many false prophets, ancient and modern. First, no one, not even Jesus, knows or can predict when He will come back. Second, all of the preliminary signs leading up to but not including Christ's actual return were fulfilled in the generation immediately following Christ's death. This is why Christians ever since have been able to believe Christ could come back in their day. No modern event (such as the restoration of the nation of Israel) can carry any special significance in pointing to the end of the last days; all the things necessary for Christ to come back were completed by a.d.. 70. We now must merely remain faithful and expectant.

Verse 36 may also be seen as the first of many implications that form the second half of the Olivet discourse. Here Jesus strung together a series of parables and metaphors to underline one central theme—believers must always be prepared for Christ's return whenever it may occur. Matthew 24:37-44 describes how it will catch many by surprise. Matthew 24:45-51 warns disciples not to assume Christ will stay away longer than He actually does. Matthew 25:1-13 warns them against assuming that He will return more quickly than He actually does. Matthew 25:14-30 teaches proper behavior however long that interval turns out to be—faithful stewardship of every resource with which we have been entrusted.

Whenever Christ does come back, He will judge all humanity, separating people into one of only two categories—sheep and goats, disciples who will be rewarded with eternal life and unbelievers who will be eternally separated from God. The criterion for determining who goes where is how a person has responded to "the least of these brothers of [Jesus]." A popular, modern interpretation is that Jesus was teaching judgment on the basis of response to the poor and needy of the world, whoever they are. But the more common view throughout the history of the church, which is supported by Matthew's uniform usage of the words "brothers" and "least" or "little ones" elsewhere, is that Jesus' brothers refer to fellow Christians. Those who welcome itinerant Christian missionaries by providing for their physical needs (as in 10:11-14,40-42) demonstrate that they have also accepted the Christian message.

From here on events move quickly to the climax of the Gospel—Jesus' death and resurrection. Chapter 26 outlines the events that set the stage for Jesus' condemnation and execution. Chronologically, the items narrated in 26:1-16 precede "Maundy" Thursday night, the night of His arrest. These include a final reminder that Jesus knew exactly what was going to happen to Him. When He submitted, He would do so voluntarily and thoughtfully. The Jewish leaders plotted against Him. Mary of Bethany (see John 12:1-8) anointed Jesus with precious perfume, symbolizing, possibly inadvertently, His coming death and burial. Judas prepared to betray Him.

Matthew 26:17-46 details the final hours Jesus and His disciples shared. They were celebrating the Passover meal, the Jewish festival that commemorated the Israelites' liberation from Egypt at the expense of the Egyptian firstborn. Lambs were slaughtered, special meals celebrated, and an elaborate liturgy rehearsed. Extended families ate together on this joyous occasion. Jesus and the eleven (minus Judas) constituted such a "family," and Jesus Himself would soon become the sacrificial Lamb to spiritually liberate all people from their sins. During this "Last Supper" Jesus ate with His followers, He turned the Passover meal into the first celebration of what Christians have come to call the Lord's Supper (or Holy Communion or the Eucharist). As He broke the loaf of bread and drank the cups of wine that formed part of this festive meal, He invested them with new and deeper significance. They symbolized His soon-to-be-broken body and shed blood for the forgiveness of the sins of all humanity, inaugurating God's new covenant, which fulfills the prophecies of Jeremiah 31:31-34. Christians must repeat this ceremony to commemorate Christ's atoning death but also to anticipate His glorious return.

After celebrating this meal in an "upper room" somewhere in Jerusalem, the little troupe adjourned for the Mount of Olives to the east of town across the Kidron Valley. On its western slopes lay the garden of Gethsemane—a wooded olive grove. Here Jesus took His three closest companions aside and asked them to stay awake and pray with Him. Three times they failed Him, even as He had predicted Peter would shortly deny Him three times.

Christ, who alone remained awake, nevertheless teaches profound lessons for us through His praying. As fully human, He no more wanted to endure His coming torture than any of us would. He asked of God if there were any way possible that He might be spared this ordeal. But He left room for God's sovereign will to override His natural human inclinations. It became increasingly clear as He prayed that God required Him to die for the sake of the world, and so He submitted compliantly. Here if ever is proof that all human prayers must include the condition "if it be God's will" (recall 6:10) and that God does not always grant the desires of those who pray even when those prayers are uttered with complete faith and every good motive.

Suddenly Judas arrived with a combination of Jewish and Roman guards. Matthew 26:47-75 narrates the proceedings taken against Jesus by the Jewish authorities. He was arrested, but Jesus made plain that He would countenance no fighting on His behalf. He was bound and led away to the home of the high priest, Caiaphas, where a hastily called nighttime gathering of the Sanhedrin, the Jewish "supreme court," had been convened.

The proceedings that followed broke many later Jewish laws. Perhaps not all of these were yet in effect; perhaps desperate men were willing to set aside legal provisions so as not to let Jesus escape from their hands. Despite the various illegalities, there was a pretense of due process, which itself almost stymied the authorities.

Finally they found some testimony that led the high priest to confront Jesus directly with the question of His self-understanding. Did He claim to be the Christ, the Messiah? He answered with a qualified affirmative, which might be paraphrased, "That's your way of putting it." But since the council was anticipating a merely human liberator, He went on to clarify. He is a heavenly Son of man who will sit at the very right hand of God and return on the clouds of heaven. Son of man for Jesus is a heavenly, Christological title based on Daniel 7:13-14. Such claims made Jesus seem too clearly to have been usurping prerogatives reserved for God alone. Caiaphas tore his clothes in grief and cried, "Blasphemy!" Little did he know it was he and not Jesus who was scandalously rejecting God's true revelation.

The council condemned Jesus to be sentenced to death; blasphemy was a capital offense. The Romans had taken the right to execute criminals away from the Jews, however, so they had to appeal to the imperial authorities in town (John 18:31). Before they did, Matthew returned outside to where he had left Peter and narrated the pathetic account of Peter's denial, just as Jesus had prophesied. Peter provided a sad contrast with Jesus, who remained stalwart under life-threatening pressure.

Chapter 27 moves quickly to Jesus' sentence and execution, the events that occurred on the day we now call Good Friday. Verses 1-31 unfold His sentencing. In verses 1-2 the Jews, more legally now that morning had broken, confirmed their verdict. They then sent Jesus to Pilate, the Roman governor. Pilate did not care if Jesus had blasphemed God according to Jewish law, but he would take careful notice if the Jews charged Him with treason against Rome (as, for example, if Jesus claimed to be king, v. 11).

Again Matthew interrupted the chronology to sandwich another event that offers a bitter contrast—Judas' remorse and suicide. Not only did Judas and Jesus dramatically differ, but also Judas and Peter provided instructive contrasts. Both betrayed their master, even if in differing ways. Both were deeply grieved after-wards. But Peter apparently demonstrated true repentance, which would permit him to be reinstated (John 21:15-18), whereas Judas sought absolutely the wrong remedy by taking his own life.

Verses 11-26 proceed with the Roman sentencing of our Lord. Pilate seems to have been convinced that Jesus had committed no crime against the empire but found himself in a delicate position. If the Jews rioted, he could have been in trouble with the emperor for not preserving the peace. What did it matter to him if the price of peace was the life of one Jewish religious fanatic? Despite his own instincts and warnings from his wife, he acceded to the request of the Jewish leaders and the mob they had whipped up into an irrational frenzy.

Verse 25 climaxes this section with a ringing acceptance of the responsibility for Jesus' death on the part of the Jewish crowds present. "His blood be on us and on our children," however, cannot be taken to refer to all Jews of all times. Matthew doubtless envisaged "our children" as the next generation, which was indeed judged by the destruction of Jerusalem in a.d.. 70. But Jesus' blood would also be on the heads of Jewish people for good if they turned to Christ for the salvation His shed blood makes available. Meanwhile Pilate handed Jesus over to his soldiers, who mocked Him and then prepared to lead Him to His execution site.

Matthew offered few details about the nature of crucifixion in general or Jesus' experience on the cross in particular. He was more interested in the reactions of other people and of nature itself. The crowds and Jewish leaders mocked and misunderstood. Two who would have alleviated Jesus' suffering were rebuffed. Jesus would endure the agony to the fullest and to the end. An excruciating death that often lasted several days until slow asphyxiation was completed ended abruptly. Jesus sensed alienation from God in a way we can scarcely explain or imagine, yet He seemingly still chose the moment to stop fighting for life.

Even more remarkable was nature's testimony. Darkness accompanied Jesus' final three hours on the cross (from 12:00 to 3:00 p.m.). After His death the temple curtain was ripped open, signifying the new, intimate access with which Jew and Gentile alike may approach God. An earthquake disrupted the cemeteries, and after Jesus' own resurrection other Old Testament saints were raised, apparently demonstrating that Christ's resurrection is indeed the firstfruits of the destiny of all believers (see 1 Cor. 15:20).

The Gentile commanding officer keeping watch at the cross climaxed Matthew's account of the crucifixion by confessing what most of the Jews had failed to accept—Jesus' divine sonship. The burial scene emphasized the reality of Jesus' death, while the guard at the tomb accounted for the standard Jewish explanation of the Christian resurrection claim.

Matthew's Gospel fittingly concludes with the most dramatic and glorious miracle in all of Scripture—the resurrection of Jesus Christ. With this event stands or falls Christianity's claim to be the one true way to God (1 Cor. 15:12-19).

Verses 1-10 describe how the women who had watched where Jesus was buried (27:55-56,61) went to the tomb after the Sabbath (Saturday) had passed to give His corpse a more proper anointing. To their astonishment they found an angel instead, beside an open door revealing an empty burial cave. The angel commanded them to go tell Jesus' disciples that He was risen. On the way they met Jesus Himself, who repeated the command. Verses 11-15 comprise the sequel to 27:62-66 and disclose how flimsy alternatives to belief in the resurrection inevitably proved to be.

Verses 16-20 summarize all the major themes of the Gospel—Christ's divine sovereignty and authority, the nature of discipleship, the universal scope of Christian faith, the importance of doing the will of God, and the promise of Christ's presence with His followers in everything they may experience. Verse 19 has understandably come to be known as the Great Commission. Believers' task in life in essence is to duplicate themselves in others, leading men and women in every part of the world to faith, baptism, and obedience to all of Christ's commands. But the final word of the book properly returns our focus to Christ rather than keeping it on ourselves. Even when we are faithless, He remains faithful.

Theological Significance. Matthew's Gospel shows the essential unity between the Old Testament and the New. The prophesied Messiah of the Old Testament has come in the person of Jesus of Nazareth. Matthew presents Jesus Christ as the One who fulfills the Old Testament promises and predictions (1:18-2:23; 5:17-18). While Jesus is presented as the promised King, He is portrayed as a Servant King, whose kingdom is established on His redemptive work.

The kingdom is presented as both present and future. The rule of God over the earth is inaugurated in the person and ministry of Jesus. Its present manifestation is expressed through the moral transformation of its citizens. Followers of Christ reflect an ethical vision of the kingdom as presented in the Sermon on the Mount (5:17:29). They are people who seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness (6:33). The kingdom awaits its consummation at the return of Christ (24:1-51). In the present time kingdom citizens are to live out their calling as obedient disciples. Disciples express their allegiance to Jesus by obeying His Word (28:19-20).

Blomberg, Craig L. Matthew. The New American Commentary. Nashville: Broadman, 1992.

Carson, D. A. "Matthew." The Expositor's Bible Commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984.

France, R. T. Matthew. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries. Leicester: InterVarsity, 1985.