Matthew, Disciple and Scribe

by Patrick Schreiner

  Although some accuse the Gospel writers of not developing a theology of the cross in their passion narratives, this theology surfaces upon closer inspection of the details and circumstances surrounding Golgotha. Through mocking, Matthew communicates that salvation comes through the king’s enthronement on the cross. He saves the people through sacrifice and letting himself fall under the weight of sin. Although this is not explicit in Matthew’s narrative, it is underneath the words of the lampooners. The conquering of the king comes in overpowering his enemies through love and sacrifice, not by the sword and war horses. The fulfillment of the Davidic king is upon them, but it is also redefined.

  Why does Matthew employ an abundance of irony here? Why not be more explicit in declaring that this is the enthronement of Jesus? The answer comes in reflecting on the nature of irony. Irony allows Matthew to wisely assert two things at once, rather than just one. First, it allows readers to see that Jesus is opposed and crucified not because of something he has done, but on account of false accusations. They want him dead. They deny their king, thus fulfilling Ps. 2. They deny the ruler of the universe. But by denying him, they set him up as king. Second, it allows Matthew to connect the cross and the throne and his suffering with his wisdom. Without this strategy, one of these points is lost. Matthew affirms that through mockery and defeat, Jesus is enthroned.78

  Conclusion

  This chapter has focused on the wisdom of Matthew in presenting the journey of the king to his throne from a geographic perspective. Jesus’s life begins in Jerusalem and ends in Jerusalem, but his ministry takes place mostly in Galilee. While Matthew announces that Jesus is the Davidic king in 1:1, he makes readers go through his narrative to see how Jesus becomes king of the kingdom:

  Jesus is declared to be the son of David (Matt. 1:1).

  He is exiled by the king of Jerusalem to Nazareth of Galilee (Matt. 2).

  Ministry in Galilee ensues (Matt. 3–20).

  He suffers as the wise servant (Matt. 26–28).

  Jesus is enthroned on the cross (Matt. 27–28).

  The exile of Jesus to Galilee is key because through this movement he mimics David’s exile from his throne and unites the north and the south as the wise king.79 Upon his return to the city, he is crowned as the king on the cross.

  The bookend chapters of the Gospel (1–2; 26–28) can be viewed as passive instances where Jesus is portrayed in Davidic hues. All of the examples in chapters 1–2 depict Jesus as being acted upon or sovereignly placed. For example, Matthew’s genealogy paints Jesus as the son of David. Even before Jesus could act intentionally, God has sovereignly placed him in David’s family. So while Jesus is “passive” in one sense, Matthew’s “active” imagination makes the connection. The same activity from the scribe and passivity from Jesus are found in Jesus’s infancy narrative in chapter 2. Jesus is placed in Bethlehem, visited by the magi, challenged by a rival king, and then brought to Egypt and Nazareth. These are all passive activities. Matthew deftly puts a Davidic quote in the mouths of the chief priests and the scribes, allowing readers to see a deeper meaning. He also calls him a Nazarene, letting readers know that this Jesus is the branch of David.

  The “passive” example of Jesus continues at the end of the Gospel (chaps. 26–28). Like David, Jesus suffers as the wise servant. He is acted upon, mocked, ridiculed, and treated shamefully. He is passive because he allows himself to suffer although he has all authority.80 He also allows himself to be hoisted on the cross, permitting others to enthrone him. Jesus’s life begins and ends under the control of others. He suffers under the hands of those who oppose him, but they unwittingly exalt him when they lift him up on the cross. Even in all these instances of others acting on him, Jesus still fulfills the life of David.

  Usually when studies are done on Jesus as the new David (or the Davidic messiah), scholars focus on the specific mentions of David. While these references have an important role to play, narratives are meant to be read for their development. It is quite unsatisfactory to dissect the narrative, cut it to pieces, and then try to reassemble it and say, “See, here is David.” Such an approach is more typical of the hard sciences than of the soft sciences. What I have attempted to do is trace a narrative view of Jesus as the Davidic messiah in Matthew, looking more at his broad brushstrokes and the development in the story than merely at the occurrences of David’s name.

  My argument here is that the writer of the First Gospel takes his readers on the geographic journey of the Davidic king. The king is born into the family of David, grows up in the city of David, is exiled from his home, and then returns to the city of the king, conquering through humility, suffering righteously, and finally being enthroned on the cross. The story is old, but it is also new. The discipled scribe has brought forth treasures—his wisdom—and described how the king is crowned. The next chapter will look more specifically at what this king accomplishes during his exile.

  1. Interestingly, the Qumran scrolls qualify King David as a “scholar” and a “scribe” because he wrote the book of Psalms. See 11QPsa (= 11Q5) XXVII, 2.

  2. Though in another sense, no one title is adequate to contain Jesus, and Matthew’s narrative does not require a preeminent title. On this point, see Allison, “Son of God as Israel.” This prioritization of “son of David” in some ways goes against J. D. Kingsbury’s thesis in Matthew: Structure, Christology, Kingdom that “son of God” is the most prominent title. The titles are not mutually exclusive, as the “son of David” is the “son of God” (cf. 2 Sam 7:11, 14; Pss. 2:7; 89:27–28).

  3. J. Charlesworth, “From Messianology to Christology,” 9.

  4. Richardson, Theology of the New Testament, 126.

  5. Willitts (Matthew’s Messianic Shepherd-King, 30) even says, “I attempt to read it [Matthew] narratively and in sequence, allowing the beginning of the Gospel, with its Davidic Messianism, to be the interpretive key for the whole.” See also Gibbs, “Purpose and Pattern”; Kingsbury, “Title ‘Son of David’”; Duling, “Solomon, Exorcism, and the Son of David”; Quarles, Theology of Matthew; Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Gospels; Konradt, Israel, Church, and the Gentiles; Novakovic, “Jesus as the Davidic Messiah”; Chae, Jesus as the Eschatological Davidic Shepherd; Piotrowski, Matthew’s New David; Zacharias, Matthew’s Presentation of the Son of David.

  6. W. Davies, “Jewish Sources of Matthew’s Messianism,” 500.

  7. Verseput, “Davidic Messiah,” 102.

  8. Supporting this notion is the fact that kingship and kingdom are Matthew’s main descriptors for the life and death of Jesus. Jesus came proclaiming the kingdom of heaven (Matt. 4:23; 9:35), and he sent his disciples out with the same message (10:7). Yet it is not just any kingship or kingdom that they declare; rather, this kingdom is filled in with the hues of the Davidic monarchy.

  9. The use of both terms—exile and reuniting—is intentional. Exile is already a major theme in Matt. 1–2, with the explicit mention of exile in the genealogy and of Egypt and Ramah in Matt. 2. In addition, Zebulun and Naphtali refer to the Northern Kingdom (Matt. 4:15).

  10. Messiah and David interpret one another. As Willits (Matthew’s Messianic Shepherd-King, 1) affirms, “Davidic Messianism must be treated as a kind of Messianic expectation.” Matthew redraws messianism around the person of David and Solomon. While Bultmann (Theology of the New Testament, 4) is right to say, “No saying of Jesus mentions the Messiah-king who is to crush the enemies of the People,” it is also true that Matthew takes great pains to present Jesus as the Davidic messiah. Either we can conclude that Matthew’s testimony is flawed and that we moderns have a better understanding of messianic hopes than first-century writers or we can interpret with trust and openness.

  11. Stephen Carlson (“Davidic Key”) argues that Matthew’s double-counting of David in 1:5–6 is intentional (42 rather than 41) and thus is the key to the genealogy. Though readers should also note that Jechoniah is also counted twice (1:11–12).

  12. Isaiah 9:6–7; 22:21–23; J
er. 23:5–6; Ezek. 37:24–25; Amos 9:11; Hosea 3:5. Witherington (Jesus the Sage, 353) notes that the precise Greek phrase translated “the son of David” is not attested before Pss. Sol. 17.21. However, though the precise phrase might not be used, the concept is quite prevalent.

  13. At another level, many readers would already know Jesus’s future, and thus this work could be viewed as an apologetic or something to calm their fears. Early readers may have been questioning whether the man crucified on a Roman cross could really be the Davidic messiah. In his first words Matthew answers their question. It is only through the cross that the kingdom will come.

  14. Readers may wonder why I do not engage with Matt. 2:15 and the quote from Hosea 11:1. There are three reasons for my omitting it at this point. First, the text will be examined briefly in the chapter on Jesus as the new Israel. Second, this quote has received the bulk of scholarly attention in Matt. 2, and I don’t want to repeat all the research on the topic. Third, the chapter was already long enough. Having said this, Jesus’s deportation to Egypt foreshadows his deportation to Galilee and therefore nicely aligns with my argument in this chapter.

  15. Micah 5:2, which is quoted later in this passage, speaks of a ruler coming from Bethlehem.

  16. The language of “gathering together” should remind readers of Ps. 2:2, in which the rulers take counsel together against the Lord and his Anointed.

  17. Compare this to the story of Joseph, where Pharaoh is also troubled (ταράσσω) and summons the magicians and wise men––thus paralleling the scribes of the people with wise men (Matt. 2:3; Gen. 41:8). Similarly, in the days of Moses Pharaoh summons the wise men (Exod. 7:11).

  18. France, “Formula-Quotations of Matthew 2.”

  19. Hagner (Matthew 1–13, 29) proposes another solution: “If in the MT the initial ל were read as the negative particle (לֹא, lō), i.e., with the slight change of לִחְיוֹת, liḥyôt, to לֹאחְיוֹת, lōʾḥĕyôt, a reading is produced that coincides with Matthew’s Greek rendering of the passage.” But this seems to be reaching for an explanation.

  20. Some argue that Micah sees Bethlehem as small but still significant.

  21. France, “Formula-Quotations of Matthew 2,” 243. See also Hays’s analysis of 2 Sam. 5:2: Echoes of Scripture in the Gospels, 146–47.

  22. France, “Formula-Quotations of Matthew 2,” 242.

  23. In this sense, Matthew becomes the true scribal editor.

  24. In 2 Sam. 22:44–45 David says, “You delivered me from strife with my people; you kept me as the head of the nations; people whom I had not known served me. Foreigners came cringing to me; as soon as they heard of me, they obeyed me.” This passage has some remarkable parallels to the wise men coming to David as the “head of the nations” and obeying him.

  25. Powell (“Magi as Wise Men”) goes against the majority interpretation when he argues that Matthew presents the magi’s learning not as wisdom but as foolishness. Their foolishness qualifies them for divine revelation.

  26. Tertullian, Answer to the Jews 11 (ANF 3:162).

  27. Calvin, Harmony of the Evangelists, vol. 1, sect. 1, Matt. 2:1–6.

  28. Arguments exist for Daniel being a type of Joseph: both king Pharaoh and Nebuchadnezzar have a dream, both are troubled (Gen. 41:8; Dan. 2:1), both call for their magicians, both recount their dreams, both have a captain of the guard who is aware of a captive who can interpret dreams (Gen. 41:10–12; Dan. 2:14). Then both Joseph and Daniel are honored for their dream reporting (Gen. 41:40; Dan. 2:46), they are given gifts (Gen. 41:42; Dan. 2:48), and both are promoted to rulership in a foreign land (Gen. 41:40–41; Dan. 2:48). In addition, Longman (Fear of the Lord Is Wisdom, 78–93) argues that Joseph and Daniel are paradigmatic “wise men” in the Hebrew Scriptures. It could be that the “wise men” in Matthew come as a fulfillment of the pattern of Joseph and Daniel, and the scribes of the people are now those who oppose the king.

  29. In ancient literature outside the Scriptures, we also find magi receiving royal honors. In Histories 3.62–97, Herodotus tells of two magi brothers who staged a coup for the Persian Empire. After the king died, one of the magi, Smerdis, sat on the throne as king.

  30. Tertullian, Answer to the Jews 11 (ANF 3:162).

  31. In the following chapter I will argue that the king embodies and lives the law, and therefore he is the “wise king.”

  32. This connection was pointed out to me first by my friend Chad Ashby.

  33. Some of the articles of the temple were brought back in the 500s and 400s BCE. See Ashby, “Magi, Wise Men, or Kings?”

  34. A. T. Robertson (General Epistles and the Revelation, on Rev. 22:16) gives us a picture of how the Scriptures present the star: “The Davidic King is called a star in Numb. 24:17; Luke 1:78. This ‘day-star’ (φωσφόρος) is interpreted as Christ (2 Pet. 1:19). In Revelation 2:28 the phrase ‘the morning star’ occurs in Christ’s words, which is here interpreted. Christ is the Light that was coming into the world (John 1:9; 8:12).”

  35. Hebrews 1:8, quoting Ps. 45:6, calls it a scepter of “uprightness” (εὐθύτητος), which means “straightness” or “righteousness.” Righteousness and wisdom are often paralleled in Proverbs, indicating that this is a scepter of wisdom.

  36. “For God has established you as a scepter over rulers” (1QSb V, 27–28); “The scepter is the prince of the congregation” (4Q161 frags. 2–6 II, 27). See Collins, Scepter and the Star.

  37. Jewish historian Philo (Mos. 1.276) refers to Balaam (Num. 22) as a magus. This anachronism indicates that by the first century AD, the word may have been adopted for more general use.

  38. The flurry of revelation by dreams in the first two chapters of Matthew may indicate one of Matthew’s themes: wisdom comes by revelation.

  39. Nolland (Gospel of Matthew, 111) gets too literal when he says that specific links are not to be found because the star in Numbers does not signal the ruler but is the ruler. In other words, in Numbers the star is identified with the ruler, but in Matthew it shows the way to the ruler. But this is probably more a modern disposition than a biblical one.

  40. Wisdom and temple are correlated in 8:21–9:8, where Solomon asks for wisdom to build the temple.

  41. Keener, Gospel of Matthew, 99.

  42. In the Dead Sea Scrolls, Isa. 11 is taken to be messianic in 4QpIsaa frags. 7–10 III, 22–29 and echoed in 1QSb V, 21–26.

  43. This summary was helpfully condensed by Justin Taylor in his blog. He was summarizing R. T. France.

  44. France, Gospel of Matthew, 6.

  45. France, Gospel of Matthew, 7.

  46. Jeremiah speaks of the “scribal pen” (σχοῖνος, 8:8 AT). The Septuagint writers render the Hebrew et with the Greek word κάλαμος (reed, Ps. 45:1). The scribe, using a reed pen, also wore around the waist a “scribal palette” or “scribal pen case” (“writing case,” Ezek. 9:2, 3, 11). In the case may have been a scribal knife (Jer. 36:23) used to cut parchment and papyrus.

  47. Ramah is the place from which the Judean captives left for Babylon (Jer. 40:1). Jeremiah’s image of Rachel weeping is a sign that a new exile is taking place, and the larger context of Jer. 31 points to the hope for the end of exile.

  48. Kingsbury (“Title ‘Son of David,’” 596–97) influentially maintained that Matt. 22:41–46 shows Matthew moving away from Jesus as the “son of David” and toward the “Son of God.”

  49. N. Johnson, “Passion according to David,” 249.

  50. Willitts (Matthew’s Messianic Shepherd-King, 31) argues Jesus is in Galilee because his ministry is to the “lost sheep” of Israel, which refers to the remnants of the former Northern Kingdom of Israel who continued to reside in that land. The mission of Jesus centers on the restoration of Israel.

  51. Leroy Huizenga (“Incarnation of the Servant”) argues that this is not the case on the level of the historical production of the text, but that we can now read the text this way only because of the modern Christian encyclopedia such as the O
T as the dictionary. As this section shows, I disagree with Huizenga and assert that we can read it this way on the historical level. See also Rikki Watts, “Messianic Servant.”

  52. See Treat’s argument for this in Crucified King.

  53. “Servant” = David (23×), Jacob (13×), and Moses (8×); “servant” with possessive pronoun = David (66×) and Moses (19×).

  54. Beaton (Isaiah’s Christ in Matthew’s Gospel) argues that the image of the servant is central to Matthew’s overall portrayal of Jesus.

  55. N. Johnson (“Rendering David a Servant”) also argues David is presented as the servant in Pss. Sol. 17.21.

  56. Held, “Matthew as Interpreter,” 165.

  57. Van Egmond, “Messianic ‘Son of David,’” 60.