The Gospel According to Matthew: A Structural Commentary on Matthew's Faith

446 Pages·1987·30.86 MB·English

by  Daniel Patte

.......... The
OSPEL
. According to
ATTHEW
A Structural Commentary
on Matthew's Faith
DANIEL PATTE
A STRUCTURAL COMMENTARY ON MATIHEW'S FAITH
THE GOSPEL
ACCORDING TO MATTHEW
Daniel Patte
FORTRESS PRESS PHILADELPHIA
OTHER BOOKS BY DANIEL PATTE
Paul's Faith and the Power of the Gospel:
A Structural Introduction to the Pauline Letters
Preaching Paul
What Is Structural Exegesis?
Biblical quotations, unless otherwise noted, are from the Revised Stand
ard Version of the Bible, copyright 1946, 1952, © 1971, 1973 by the
Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the
Churches of Christ in the U. S. A., and are used by permission.
COPYRIGHT © 19R7 BY FORTRESS PRESS
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,
stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means,
electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, with
out the prior permission of the publisher, Fortress Press.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Patte, Daniel.
The Gospel according to Matthew.
Bibliography: p.
Includes index.
1. Bible. N.T. Matthew-Commentaries. I. Title.
BS2575.3.P37 1986 226'.207 86-45218
ISBN 0-8006-1978-1
2554£86 Printed in the United States of America 1-1978
POUR ALINE
CONTENTS
Preface Xl
Abbreviations and Short Titles xv
Introduction 1
Notes on Introduction 13
The Origin of Jesus, the Christ, Son of David. Matthew 1:1-25 16
The Main Theme 16
Matthew's Convictions in 1:1-25 17
Notes on 1:1-25 28
From Bethlehem to Nazareth. Matthew 2:1-23 30
The Main Theme 30
Matthew's Convictions in 2:1-23 32
Notes on 2:1-23 40
From John's Ministry to Jesus' Ministry. Matthew 3:1-4:25 43
The Main Theme 43
Matthew's Convictions in 3:1-4:25 45
Notes on 3:1-4:25 58
The Sermon on the Mount. Matthew 5:1-7:29 60
The Main Theme 60
Matthew's Convictions in 5:3-7:27 65
Conclusions: The Beatitudes and the Lord's Prayer 101
Notes on 5:1-7:29 105
Jesus as Miracle Worker. Matthew 8:1-9:34 109
The Main Theme 109
Matthew's Convictions in 8:1-17 111
Matthew's Convictions in 8:18-9:13 117
Matthew's Convictions in 9:14-34 130
Notes on 8:1-9:34 135
vii
viii CONTENTS
Rejection as Part ofJ esus' and the Disciples' Ministry.
Matthew 9:35-13:53 138
The Main Theme 138
Matthew's Convictions in 9:35-1O:5a 141
Matthew's Convictions in 1O:5b-42 143
Matthew's Convictions in 11:1-30 157
Matthew's Convictions in 12:1-21 166
Matthew's Convictions in 12:22-50 174
Matthew's Convictions in 13:1-53 183
Notes on 9:35-13:53 200
Faith, Little Faith, and Unbelief. Matthew 13:54-14:36 206
The Main Theme 206
Matthew's Convictions in 13:54-14:36 206
Notes on 13:54-14:36 213
Jesus and the Teaching of the Pharisees. Matthew 15:1-16:12 215
The Main Theme 215
Matthew's Convictions in 15:1-16:12 216
Notes on 15:1-16:12 227
Jesus Begins to Show that He Must Go to Jerusalem.
Matthew 16:13-17:23 230
The Main Theme 230
Matthew's Convictions in 16:13-17:23 231
Notes on 16:13-17:23 241
Receiving Little Ones and Forgiving as Blessings.
Matthew 17:24-18:35 244
The Main Theme 244
Matthew's Convictions in 17:24-18:35 246
Notes on 17:24-18:35 258
Hardness of Heart, Bad Eye, and God's Goodness.
Matthew 19:1-20:16 261
The Main Theme 261
Matthew's Convictions in 19:3-20:16 263
Notes on 19:1-20:16 276
Going Up to Jerusalem and the Temple. Matthew 20:17-21:17 281
The Main Theme 281
Matthew's Convictions in 20:17-21:17 281
Notes on 20:17-21:17 2R9
CONTENTS ix
By What Authority Are You Doing These Things?
Matthew 21:18-22:14 291
The Main Theme 291
Matthew's Convictions in 21:18-22:14 292
Notes on 21:18-22:14 305
Whose Son Is the Christ? Matthew 22:15-46 308
The Main Theme 308
Matthew's Convictions in 22:15-46 309
Notes on 22:15-46 316
Condemnation of False Religious Authority. Matthew 23:1-39 319
The Main Theme 319
Matthew's Convictions in 23:1-39 321
Notes on 23:1-39 330
Watch, for You Know Neither the Day nor the Hour.
Matthew 24:1-25:46 333
The Main Theme 333
Matthew's Convictions in 24:4-25:26 336
Notes on 24:1-25:46 351
The Passion and Resurrection of Jesus. Matthew 26:1-28:20 353
The Main Theme 353
Matthew's Convictions in 26:1-28:20 355
Notes on 26:1-28:20 402
Appendix: Narrative Oppositions in Matthew 406
Bibliography 418
Index of Biblical Passages 424
PREFACE
Why did I decide to write a commentary on Matthew's faith after studying
Paul's faith? Why not study Mark, Luke, orJohn? I could offer many reasons
to explain my choice. Matthew is the Gospel of the Sermon on the Mount,
a Gospel that through its magisterial discourses nourishes so richly the life
of the church. It is also the Gospel that is spontaneously felt to be both
deeply Jewish and painfully anti-Jewish, and thus a Gospel that is both
attractive and repulsive. Similarly, it is the Gospel that seems the furthest
removed from Paul. The teachings of Matthew and Paul seem so far apart
that one might think that they represent two contradictory kinds of Chris
tian faith-although their relationship is really much more complex than
that.
I could add other reasons to explain my decision to study Matthew's
faith. Yet all of them would explain why I am interested in Matthew, and
not why I was driven to write this commentary. Indeed, my interest would
not have become a fascination if it had not been nourished and fueled by
the community of scholars to which I am privileged to belong at Vanderbilt
University. To my colleagues, Professors Peter Haas, Fernando Segovia,
and Mary Ann Tolbert, lowe the confidence to pursue such a project, a
confidence that they give me by their generous appreciation of my work.
Yet other partners in this scholarly community contributed even more di
rectly to my study of Matthew. Fred W. Burnett, through his dissertation,
"The Testament of Jesus-Sophia: A Redactional-Critical Study of the Es
chatological Discourse in Matthew" (1979), kindled my interest for that
Gospel by sharing with me his enthusiasm for his project. Gary Phillips's
dissertation, "Enunciation of the Kingdom of Heaven: Text, Narrative,
and Hermeneutic in the Parables of Matthew 13" (1982), transformed my
interest into fascination by revealing to me the hermeneutical process at
work in the Gospel of Matthew. In addition, through his theoretical and
methodological work, Phillips prevented me from misconstruing Greimas's
semiotic theory and structural exegesis; he forced me to recognize the fun
damentally dynamic character of Greimas's model. Larry Vigen's disser
tation, "To Think the Things of God: A Discoursive Reading of Matthew
16:13-18:35" (1985), provided me with an important key for the inter
pretation of that central passage. Vigen's work taught me much through
its original theoretical proposal concerning the "discoursive structures," a
xi
xII PREFACE
part of semiotic theory that was much in need of development. His con
tribution on this theoretical issue is particularly significant for the study of
the entire Gospel.
Similarly, the graduate students who participated in the several seminars
devoted to the structural exegesis of the Gospel of Matthew over the last
few years have contributed much more than they may think to the elab
orations in this commentary. They quickly became partners in research,
making many valuable suggestions concerning one passage or another, as
I attempt to acknowledge in my notes. By their probing questions and their
concern for rigor, they prevented me from forgetting that the semiotic
theory we were using was a "theory" open to revision. Robin Mattison,
by her insightful comments, forced us to look closely at the "Fatherhood"
of God in Matthew. Judith Middleton repeatedly reminded us not to confuse
the "ideal" disciples described in Jesus' teaching and the ever-struggling
"actual" disciples; all the participants in the seminars kept me aware that
as their teacher, I am nothing else than an "actual" teacher ever in need of
being corrected by my students.
I am particularly indebted to two of my students. Jeff Tucker's excellent
structural exegesis of Matt. 19:1-20:16 helped me refine a first draft of my
own study of that important passage. He was also my teaching assistant.
Because I could have total confidence in his pedagogical qualities when he
was leading undergraduate students in their first steps in New Testament
exegesis, and because he went much beyond the call of duty in helping me,
he gave me both the time and the freedom of mind to complete this com
mentary despite a heavy teaching load.
Jonathan Kraus served as my research assistant. It is difficult to express
in a few words the extent of his contribution to the preparation of this
commentary. He spent two full summers preparing a semantic analysis (one
of the stages of the formal structural analysis) of two-thirds of the Gospel,
a semantic analysis that many times helped me correct oversights, imprecise
statements, or outright errors in my own analysis. He also did a vast amount
of bibliographical work and read critically a first draft of most of the com
mentary, challenging parts of my interpretation, suggesting better for
mulations, pointing out how the interpretation of a given passage needed
to account for the proposal of one scholar or another. lowe him many
notes and the reformulation of many passages of the commentary. Kraus
was such an invaluable research assistant not merely because of his mastery
of structural methods and of his command of the secondary literature, but
also because of his remarkable knowledge of early Jewish literature, a
knowledge particularly helpful in the semantic analysis of a text such as the
Gospel of Matthew.
It was in struggling with the semantic system we were discovering in
Matthew's Gospel that I found that the semiotic theory we were using
needed to be refined. Fundamental theoretical research was necessary before