Matthew is the scribe who remembers Jesus speaking about the Law and the Prophets, about the new and the old. He demonstrates his expertise in the Hebrew Scriptures, showing interpreters how to put their Scriptures together as a unified whole, and also presents an interpreted view of Jesus’s life that relies on Israel’s past to explicate Jesus’s significance.75 He therefore comes to modern readers as the specialist on both the life of Jesus and the Jewish Scriptures. To understand one, you must understand the other. This emphasis on understanding fits perfectly with how Matthew employs the term in 13:51–52. After Jesus has recounted the kingdom parables, he asks them, “‘Have you understood all these things?’ They said to him, ‘Yes.’” Then Jesus continues to speak about the scribe. Matthew’s Jesus uses the term “scribe” in relation to the disciples precisely because they have understood the parables.76 A discipled scribe is one who understands the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven.
Finally and more briefly, as Matthew walks with Jesus, he learns how to scrutinize nature and human nature (point 1 above). Jesus commands them, “Look at the birds of the air. . . .” (6:26). He speaks of the outward performance of the scribes and Pharisees but also of their inward disease (23:1–36). Therefore, for Matthew, to be a scribe is first to be a learner. Matthew walks with his teacher, who claims to be from God, and as he does so, he learns to interpret the Torah from the one who claims to be the new Torah. Jesus instructs him about the tradition of the elders and makes observations about nature as the sage. Matthew thereby learns the ways of wisdom.
The second activity of a scribe is “writing.”77 Having learned, Matthew also transmits his learning to future generations.78 In Jub. 4.16–18, Enoch is identified as “the first who learned writing and knowledge and wisdom . . . and who wrote in a book the signs of the heaven.” While scribes worked on various forms of literature, both sacred and nonsacred texts, some evidence shows that sacred texts were handled with more care.79 Baruch wrote down the oracles “from the mouth” of the prophet (Jer. 36:4 KJV). This image portrays Baruch as a faithful recorder, who transmits Jeremiah’s words. Tov notes the restriction for scribes recorded in rabbinic texts, stating that writings by a heretic, pagan, informer, Samaritan, or converted Jew are not acceptable.80 Other internal evidence exists that scribes corrected their mistakes when they deviated from their base text.
But scribes in this period were more than just recorders; they were also interpreters.81 Matthew did not just copy Mark’s material, nor did he merely sit down and tell a step-by-step story of Jesus. He adapted his narrative for his own purposes and therefore was a unique type of scribe. There is evidence that Ben Sira adapted wisdom traditions for his own purposes. Some of the texts found in the Judean Desert were original compositions rather than copies of earlier sources. As Emmanuel Tov has pointed out, “The majority of persons involved in the transmission of the biblical and other texts took more liberties than copyists of later periods. . . . Many scribes took an active role in the shaping of the final form of the text, and therefore the general term ‘scribe’ is more appropriate for them than ‘copyist,’ since it covers additional aspects of scribal activity and could easily include creative elements.”82
This is important to recognize for Matthew’s narrative, because he is not just copying down the life of Jesus but also crafting it. As Orton says, Matthew is a “charismatic, creative interpretation of the scriptures in light of . . . the eschatological events going on around him.”83 More specifically, he crafts it under the shadow of Jewish history. Thus we must recognize both faithfulness and flexibility in the role of a scribe. Matthew is the discipled, careful, and creative scribe, bringing out treasures new and old through his writing.84
Scribes were not only learners and writers, but their writings were also distributed. The evidence for this third task comes directly from Matthew. While we might think of scribes as writing notes in a dark room, Matthew gives evidence that scribes were “sent out.” In Matt. 23:34 Jesus says, “Therefore I send you prophets and wise men and scribes.” While the statement from Jesus should probably be interpreted as a “divine sending,” this is not opposed to distributing but coheres with it. Scribes needed their work to be transmitted to have its effect. They wrote, copied, and interpreted so that they could have a public hearing. If they themselves were “sent out,” then they would be the natural ones to “read aloud” the copies and interpret them for people. The scribe portrayed by Ben Sira “appears before rulers” and “travels in foreign lands” (Sir. 39:4). Scribes therefore, it seems, interpreted texts for others and distributed them as needed. Readers get some sense of this reality when Jesus castigates the scribes and Pharisees in Matt. 23, implying that they must have been involved in the distribution.
In Aelius Theon’s introduction to his Progymnasmata (written about the same time as Matthew’s Gospel), Theon says a person who wants to read aloud well and speak well should “write every day.”85 It is challenging for a person to read fluently if they are not skilled at writing. Therefore, it makes sense that at times the scribe would be not only the writer but the reader. All writing in this time period needs to be embedded in the reality of oral communication. Most written texts were inscribed partly or mainly as guides in oral recitation. In a similar way, Matthew sends his scroll out into the future by copying down the record of his narrative. He transmits the knowledge he has obtained through parchment and reed pen and also through oral communication.86 Many times scrolls functioned as aide-mémoire for scribes as they prepared for an oral performance. Matthew’s authority comes from being with Jesus, who sanctions him to be a faithful representative of the message that Jesus taught his followers. In many ways Matthew is “sent” by Jesus so that the message of the kingdom can be spread. “The mission of the NT scribe is the same as of the prophets and wise men.”87 The scribe is a commissioned one and has the task of prophetic teaching. Scribes functioned as custodians, transmitters, and interpreters of the Scriptures. Now that Jesus has arrived, a scribe needs to sit down and explain the Jewish Scriptures in the shadow of the messiah.88
Finally, scribes are also viewed as teachers and therefore wise.89 As Matthew walks with Jesus, he becomes wise. Proverbs 13:20 says, “Whoever walks with the wise becomes wise.” Matthew 7:29 notes how Jesus “was teaching them as one who had authority, not as their scribes” (emphasis added). While the point of this passage is that the scribes do not have authority like Jesus, the assumption is that they are supposed to have authority. This authority is confirmed in Matt. 17:10, when the disciples ask Jesus, “Then why do the scribes say that first Elijah must come?” Their question to Jesus implies an authority attributed to the scribes. Matthew 23:2 also establishes the authority of the scribes, with Jesus saying, “The scribes and Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat.” It seems that in their role as scholar-teachers, the scribes had attained enormous prestige among the people and were given seats of honor and enjoyed esteem from the people. In a similar way, Matthew sets himself up as the authoritative teacher in the same tradition as his rabbi. He presents his Gospel as a learned and trustworthy transmission of Jesus’s life and teaching. David claims that the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple (Ps. 19:7). Readers are therefore not only to learn from Jesus but also to learn from Matthew’s presentation of Jesus. Matthew is the discipled, careful, and creative scribe who learns, interprets, distributes, and teaches readers about the messiah.
Treasures New and Old
We have seen how Matthew was trained by his teacher of wisdom and more broadly examined the work of a scribe. Now it is time to turn to the specific task of the wise scribe detailed in 13:52: “bringing forth treasures both new and old.” Matthew passes on the wisdom of his teacher by being a host who brings out goods for his guests based on his understanding and through interpretation. Treasures (θησαυρός) are not only the person’s cherished values, but also more general goods or commodities. These supplies are likely demarcated in the domain of knowledge when connect
ed to the idea of disciple. The use of treasures probably reflects the OT wisdom tradition.90 Proverbs 2:1–8 parallels treasures with wisdom, understanding, commands, and knowledge, while having other conceptual parallels to Matthew’s language as emphasized below.
My son, if you accept my words and store up my commands within you, turning your ear to wisdom and applying your heart to understanding—indeed, if you call out for insight and cry aloud for understanding, and if you look for it as for silver and search for it as for hidden treasure, then you will understand the fear of the LORD and find knowledge of God. For the LORD gives wisdom; from his mouth comes knowledge and understanding. He holds success in store for the upright, he is the shield to those whose walk is blameless, for he guards the course of the just and protects the way of his faithful ones. (Prov. 2:1–8 NIV, emphasis added)
Proverbs 7:1 also brings the idea of treasures (though in the verbal form) in close connection to commandments. “My son, keep my words and treasure up my commandments with you” (emphasis added; see also Prov. 21:20).
Colossians 2:3 develops our understanding of these Proverbs by arguing that in Christ are hidden “all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.” Here in Matthew’s context, he correlates wisdom with the kingdom, for “the kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field” (13:44, emphasis added). As already noted, the connection between wisdom and what is secret or hidden is a common refrain. The treasure that the discipled scribe is to bring forth is therefore the secrets of the kingdom (Ps. 51:6). On at least three occasions Matthew claims that the disciples “understand” Jesus’s teaching (13:51; 16:12; 17:13). The parallel passages in Mark indicate that the disciples do not understand (Mark 6:52; 8:21; 9:10, 32). True disciples of Jesus will understand his teaching in the sense of gaining wisdom.91 Therefore, it seems likely that Matthew pulls from the wisdom tradition in his use of “treasures” to speak of the secrets of the kingdom he absorbed from his teacher.92
Matthew further defines the content of this treasure, labeling it as both “new and old” (καινὰ καὶ παλαιά; see also 9:17). Many church fathers understood the new and old with reference to the NT and the OT.93 However, this view, while not entirely wrong, is anachronistic, since the NT as a canonical collection did not exist when Matthew wrote. It is better simply to assert that Jesus himself and his teaching is the new, while the old is the Jewish tradition more generally.
The First Gospel often draws on and quotes from the Jewish Scriptures, but Jesus also interacts a good deal with the oral tradition of the elders and the shaping of the Jewish tradition. Jesus is negative toward the law only when it has been misinterpreted. Jesus himself brings out the old, as confirmed in his teaching in Matt. 5:17–19, where he says that he has come to fulfill the Law and Prophets.94 Like Jesus, Matthew clarifies the balance between the new and the old because he has been trained in the ways of the kingdom of heaven. He confirms the continuation of the old, when rightly understood, while also uncovering how the new clarifies the old. He does not discard the past and simply cling to the new, but he employs the new to interpret the old. The relevant point for Matthew’s Gospel is that the new and the old come in tandem. These elements are defined by each other. The old can be perceived because of the presence of the new, and the new reinterprets the old. Discontinuity and continuity ultimately belong together.95 As Barton observes “the new has priority over the old. . . . But the conjunction [and] is significant: the old retains its fundamental worth.”96 And as Morris says, “If the word order is significant, the new matters more than the old and Jesus is saying that the new teachings his followers are embracing do not do away with the old teachings (those in the Old Testament), but are the key to understanding them. The new age has dawned, and it is only in recognition of that fact that the old can be understood in its essential function of preparing the way for the new.”97
Matthew is now this discipled scribe who was so familiar with the OT and Jewish traditions and Jesus’s life that he interweaves the two and uses the new-old paradigm as the key for organizing, interpreting, and describing the life of Jesus. The wisdom Matthew learns concerns the mysteries of the kingdom revealed in Jesus himself (the new) and predicted in Jewish tradition (the old). Jesus causes the old era of expectation to burst forth to the new era of realization.
Certainly other NT writers have similar convictions. However, in Matthew’s Gospel the relationship and alternation between the new and the old assumes a dominant role.98 This alternation in Matthew is unique for at least three reasons. First, unlike the rest of the NT outside the Gospels and Acts, Matthew’s literature is narrative.99 His story can parallel and echo the Jewish story in a way that other NT genres are unable to do. The OT and the whole of the Scriptures are primarily carried along by narrative. Even other genres, such as poetry, Wisdom literature, prophecy, and law, find themselves embedded within a narrative framework.
So by using this genre, Matthew can carry on and complete the Jewish hopes in a unique way. He can also insert subgenres into his narrative as the OT did. In the Gospels, we get a more direct sense of the Bible’s great story line.100 The whole of God’s revelation is a great story, and the Gospel narratives recapitulate, evoke, and satisfy the old story. This is not to assert that narrative is a superior form of communication, or that the Epistles are secondary, but simply to recognize that the Gospels more than other genres mirror the mainstay of the Hebrew Scriptures. Therefore, the particular form of the Gospel of Matthew lends itself to a unique alternation between the new and the old.
Second, this framework of the new and the old is distinctive to Matthew because of his explicit employment of the Hebrew Scriptures. Matthew is not the only Gospel: three other canonical Gospels exist, and all of them depend on the tradition that came before them. So the natural question is “Why couldn’t we use this ‘new-old’ framework for them as well?” Moreover, it is true that anyone reading the Gospels should have their ears attuned to the sounds of the Hebrew Scriptures. However, Matthew’s explicit use of the OT sets him apart. As a Jewish writer, he uses forms of the word fulfill far more than the others. Richard Hays has asserted that Matthew is the most explicit Gospel in his OT interpretative strategies.101
On some countings, Matthew uses some sixty-one quotes from the Hebrew Scriptures. According to the NA28, forty of these are explicit citations, and twenty-one are quotations without explicit mention of the source. When allusions (which are harder to quantify) are taken into account, the number soars to about three hundred.102 Therefore, the biblical tradition is the lifeblood of Matthew’s presentation. Matthew also divides his narrative into units that naturally compare to the different parts of Israel’s story (more on this in the last chapter). Hence, while there is quite a bit of overlap with the other Synoptic Gospels, Matthew assembles his Gospel to indicate his purposes. Donald Hagner says that Matthew provides “exceptionally fruitful ground” for exploring how this Gospel relates to the Scriptures of the Old Covenant.103 Thus, while this alternation between the new and the old can be found in the other Gospels and could be used in an examination of them, it appears most prominently in Matthew.
The final reason the alternation between the new and the old is pertinent to Matthew’s Gospel is because of its canonical placement. Although each writer of the NT recognizes Jesus’s fulfillment of OT hopes, a canonical reading recognizes that the First Gospel sends the NT off with this theme. The First Gospel eventually set the table for the rest of the NT meal. Matthew becomes the lens through which to read Mark, Luke, John, Paul, and Peter’s literature. If Jesus is the messiah, then the rest of the writers tie up loose ends and explore the implications of this historical reality. So while it is true on one level that the alternation between the new and the old could be applied to all NT books, it is also accurate to say that this theme is particular to and characteristic of Matthew. As R. T. France says, “Where others [NT writers] might be content to quote a few rather obvious texts as ‘fulfilled’ in Jesus, Matthew exp
lores the nature of fulfillment with remarkable ingenuity, and with systematic attention to the place of Jesus’s ministry with the unfolding purpose of God which affects and controls his presentation of all aspects of the story and the teaching of Jesus.”104 The First Gospel presents Jesus as the continuation and climactic completion of the story of Israel. He shapes his stories to sound like OT narratives to show that his narrative joins seamlessly to God’s unfinished work.
What is evident, as Orton notes, is that Matthew is producing new things as well as old from his treasure store of special understanding.105 The new content of the treasure is Jesus and the gospel of the kingdom. Matthew produces material based on the old, but it is still altogether new because “it rests on a living experience of revelation.”106 Stanton argues that Matthew should be thought of as an exegete, or a “creative interpreter,” who forms “new” sayings of Jesus.107 These should not be thought of as creations de novo. Matthew is not some sort of innovator but retells the stories of Jesus as a creative redactor. Stanton rightly says, “Matthew is creative but not innovative: he is committed to the traditions at his disposal, but he endeavors to elucidate them for his own community.”108
Ben Sira himself saw the Torah as the locus of wisdom, where the wisdom of heaven meets earth. Jesus as the sage teaches Matthew about the telos of the Torah to show that he is Wisdom personified. This is not in opposition to the Torah but in fulfillment of it. The discipled scribe is the one who sees Jesus as fulfilling all wisdom. He sees that in Jesus all spiritual things are discerned by looking to his sage. As the Wisdom of Solomon puts it: “Who has learned your counsel, unless you have given wisdom and sent your holy spirit from on high? And thus the paths of those on earth were set right, and people were taught what pleases you, and were saved by wisdom. . . . Wisdom . . . showed him the kingdom of God and gave him knowledge of holy things . . . so that he might learn that godliness is more powerful than anything else” (Wis. 9:17–18; 10:9–10, 12).
Matthew, Disciple and Scribe Page 4
