What is the Value of Studying a Gospel in its Own Right?

This essay intends to discuss the importance of studying a gospel in its own right, looking particularly at Matthew’s Gospel. When the four gospels are examined together it is easy to see how they both compliment and contradict each other. It is only when reading each gospel in depth on its own terms that it is possible to appreciate what it is that makes a particular gospel distinctive. Each gospel writer had his own particular emphasis and audience in mind when it was being written.

Matthew’s gospel, despite being the first of the four gospels in the New Testament is unlikely to have been the first one actually written (most modern scholars give that distinction to Mark’s gospel). Reading through Matthew’s gospel one quickly becomes aware of the “Jewish flavour” to the writing, moreso than in any of the other three gospels. While the other gospels tend to be more outreaching in their scope, Matthew is more concerned with reaching the Jewish audience of the day. This theory is supported when one sees that the author makes more extensive use of the Old Testament than the other gospel writers in his quest to convince the Jews of the validity of Jesus as the promised Messiah. The author’s intention could be summed up by his quote of Jesus, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfill” (Matt 5:17). The law (of Moses) was a rule of life and relationship with God that was unique to the people of Israel. For Jesus to say that he was the fulfillment of the law would make sense at that time only in a Jewish context, something that the immediate audience of the gospel would be able to understand.

Assuming that Mark’s gospel was the first to be written, most modern scholars accept the theory that much of Matthew (and indeed Luke) was based upon material taken from Mark. Matthew’s gospel however is around 50 percent longer than Mark’s, so it is apparent that the author uses material that was not available to the writer of Mark. Some of this material is shared by Luke and is known as “Q”. Brown states, “Mark had been designed to make Jesus intelligible to a Gentile audience; and Matthew, in order to serve a community that was becoming more and more Gentile, found Mark a useful framework into which to incorporate Q, a very Jewish collection of Jesus’ teaching.” Even when recounting the same events Matthew is generally shorter than Mark, using Mark more as a frame on which to hang his own take on the proceedings, and going on to add material such as the genealogy and infancy storylines in a way that would make it more relevant to his target audience.

Given that the Old Testament depicts the Jewish people as God’s “chosen people”, it is important to understand something of the cultural and religious background. Matthew’s gospel begins by tracing the lineage of Jesus through David, back to Abraham. This account, while not being strictly accurate is intended to show the reader the pedigree of Jesus as the Messiah, by linking him through the generations to the great prophets and kings of Israel.

Jewish identity was important to the target audience in those days in much the same way as it is in modern day Israel, and this emphasis on Jesus’ Jewish roots has a twofold effect. Firstly, as we have seen, it makes visible the historical continuation of Jesus with those who have gone before him, something that was of great importance to the original readers of the gospel. Secondly, it allows readers of subsequent generations (including our own) a greater insight into the Jewish background of Jesus and the context out of which he came, something which is not presented quite as prominently in the other gospels.

One of the central themes found in the gospel is that of Jesus as teacher. This brings us back to Jesus’ claim to fulfill rather than destroy the law. He was not there to bring down the great teachings of the Old Testament prophets, but rather to bring those teachings to completion. Matthew groups the teaching of Jesus into five main sections (chapters 5-7; 10; 13; 18 and 24-25). The most well known of these teaching sessions is the “Sermon on the Mount” (ch 5-7) and echoes the time Moses received the law from God on Mount Sinai.

Johnson makes the link between Jesus and Torah in Matthew. Torah (Law) was the central rule of living that governed every aspect of the life for the observant Jew. He speaks of the eternal nature of Torah and how “Taking upon oneself the observance of Torah was to “take on the yoke of the kingdom of heaven” ” . Because to Matthew’s audience every aspect of life was viewed in terms of how it related to Torah it became necessary to come to a new understanding of the Law. Johnson argues that this “new understanding” is found in Jesus. He goes on to describe Jesus as “Teacher of Torah, Fulfillment of Torah, and the Personification of Torah” . He is portrayed throughout the gospel as a great teacher as he holds his lengthy discourses, and rather than doing away with what has been passed down in Torah he is shown to radically re-interpret it. The Sermon on the Mount shows a number of examples of Jesus re-interpreting the law. Two notable instances are in chapter five, verses 38-39 and 43-44, where Jesus speaks about a new attitude towards ones enemy. It is an attitude of love and selflessness, rather than one that seeks vengeance. In this sense he is teaching a new way of life that reaches beyond the Torah as originally received.

He becomes in Matthew, not only the “teacher”, but also the “fulfillment” of the law. Matthew’s genealogical account at the very beginning of his gospel emphasizes the long and honourable line of ancestors culminating in announcing Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 1:16). The author then goes on in the gospel on numerous occasions to speak of Jesus in terms of “fulfillment” of various Old Testament prophecies, where the words of the prophets are applied to Jesus in order to show the work of God through him. Such “fulfillment” passages may be found in 1:22-23; 2:5-6; 3:3; 4:14-16; 21:4-5, and numerous other times in Matthew’s writing. This literary device is used to firmly fix in the mind of the reader/hearer the idea that Jesus has come to bring about the purposes of God as revealed to the prophets and original recipients of Torah.

As I have outlined in this essay by focusing on Matthew, each gospel writer can be better appreciated for their contribution to the whole story of Jesus by looking at each one through the particular lens in which they view their own world. In the case of Matthew it is a very Jewish lens, seeking to show the relevance of the ancient prophecies which he saw fulfilled in the person of Jesus. When one is able to look at each of the gospels in this way it is possible to build up the sense of a “bigger picture” formed from a number of different, yet in many ways very similar sketches of Jesus life, and therefore come to understand more fully the inter-relation of the four gospels with one another.

 Bibliography

Brown, R.E; An Introduction To The New Testament, Doubleday, 1997

Brown, R.E., Fitzmeyer, J, A. & Murphy, R. E. (eds), The New Jerome Bible Commentary, Prentice Hall, 1990

Burridge, R.A; Four Gospels, One Jesus?, SPCK, 1994

Burkett, D; An Introduction to the New Testament and the Origins of Christianity, Cambridge, 2002

Drane, J; Introducing the New Testament, Lion, 1999

Ehrman, B. D; The New Testament, Oxford University Press, 2008

Johnson, L. T; The Writings of the New Testament, SCM Press, 1999