Tuesday, December 10, 2013

Matthew: Chapters 1 to 4

Click here for the last book of the Old Testament, Malachi.


CHAPTER 1

Here we go – New Testament time!  The introductory notes tell me that this is the most widely quoted and generally best regarded of the gospels, which is why it is placed first.  It was also long thought to be the first one written, but modern scholarship now think that it came after Mark.

Attributed to the apostle Matthew, the general sense is that this can’t be true.  Aside from the fact that the odds are the apostles were illiterate; this one seems to rely on author sources instead of his own memories.  (And you’d expect the actual apostle to rely more on his own memories).  It leans heavily on Mark and the lost Q-source, a group of sayings that are common to Matthew and Luke.  Mark is believed to have been written after the destruction of the Temple, and this one is maybe a decade after that, after Mark had already been disseminated widely enough to become a source for a new gospel. 

Anyhow, the story begins with Christ’s lineage, going all the way back to Abraham.  There is some attempted paralleling.  It’s 14 generations from Abraham to David.  14 more from David to the Babylonian Captivity.  And 14 more from that to Christ.  (Note: that means the average kid was born when his dad was 40, which is hard to believe for the era, but no matter). The 14-generations thing is clearly done for effect.  In fact, it takes 14 generations in the middle group because Matthew left out several kings mentioned in Kings I and Kings II.  So that’s an error, but it’s one done intentionally for thematic purposes.  The point is every 14 generations a big change happens – and Christ is the latest big change.

Oh, by the way, the entire genealogy actually makes no sense if you think about it.  This genealogy, as most do in that era, traces the family back through the father.  Fun fact: Christ isn’t really the son of his father, Joseph.  Christ is a miracle birth born to Virgin Mary.  Therefore Christ isn’t actually related to anyone listed above like this. 

My first thought was – well, our notion of Christ comes from a combination of the four gospels.  Maybe this one talks about his ancestry, and then the other gospels say Mary was a virgin.  But no.  Right after this ancestry, Matthew point black tells us that Mary was a virgin and the child conceived through the Holy Spirit.  We also get the Old Testament Bible quote that explains the virgin birth: Isaiah 7:14: “Behold, the virgin shall be with child and bear a son, and they shall name him Emmanuel.”  Well, that’s what it says here, but looking back, my Bible has the following for Isaiah 7:14: “Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign, the young woman, pregnant and about to bear a son, shall name him Emmanuel.”  They got the Emmanuel name right – but Christ’s name isn’t Emmanuel, but Jesus.  (Actually, it’s Joshua, Jesus is just a Greek form of Jesus). 

Anyhow, Jesus is born.

CHAPTER 2

Here they are – the Magi!  The footnotes tell me this word first referred to Persian priests, but then came to mean anyone with more than human knowledge.  These guys are astrologers.  

And we get the story of the star of Bethlehem.  My footnotes helpfully inform me that back in the day there was a belief that a new star was created whenever a king was born.  That explains why King Herod is so freaked out when the Magi (his astrologers) give him the news.  Oh, if you’re wondering, Herod ruled from 37 to 4 BC.  That puts a time stamp on this story.

The story itself is silly.  The Magi go out looking for the star, and it guides them to a house in Bethlehem.  Oh come on!  Ever tried to follow a star?  They’re not moving.  If it is moving, that should really be what gets your attention, not its brightness.  (And this is all overlooking the non-science that is astrology).  Well, they enter the house.  No, not a manger, nothing like that. Joseph and Mary have themselves a nice house.  I guess that’ll be a different gospel.  Well, the Magi give them gold, frankincense and myrrh. 

The Magi are supposed to report back to Herod, but think better of it.  Herod is infuriated, and he figures the future king has been born in Bethlehem, and orders all male children under two years of age to be killed.  For the record: there is no evidence of any such order occurring outside Matthew. The order wouldn’t make much sense.  Why would Herod be so frightened?  Even if he believed in astrology and all that, he’s still got time.  People can believe in astrology and still assume it won’t 100% dictate the future.  (Clearly Herod thinks that’s the case, or it would be futile to kill all the young male babies).  But it sure makes Herod look horrible, and he already had a horrible reputation when this book was written). Also, it’s utterly pointless.  Christ never is a king on earth anyway. 

Well, the angels tell Joseph and Mary to vamos to Egypt, and so they do.  And all those kids left behind in Bethlehem who are killed?  Man, they are just in the wrong place at the wrong time.  They’re acceptable losses.  Yikes.  Joseph and Mary stay in Egypt until Herod dies, and then go to Nazareth. This, Matthew tells us, fulfills an old prophecy that the Messiah “shall be called a Nazorean.”

What to make of this story?  A few things.  First, it announces that Christ is a big deal even when he’s a newborn.  More importantly, it tries to show Christ as the fulfillment of a bunch of prophecies.  The prophet Micah said that the messiah would come from Bethlehem.  I missed that when I read the Book of Micah, but looking back – yep, there it is: at the top of Chapter 5.  So you need Christ to be born in Bethlehem.  Problem: Christ was widely enough known in his own town as a lad from Nazareth that you need to explain how someone born in Bethlehem ended up in Nazareth. This story, with the murdered babies, accomplishes that.  There was something in Jeremiah about the hope from the future coming from Egypt, so this story has Christ’s family spend his earliest years in Egypt.  As for this prophecy of the Nazorean, well, my footnotes tell me that nowhere in the Old Testament does Nazareth rate a mention.  I thought I saw it in Isaiah, but apparently not.  This might just show our author’s imperfect knowledge of the old scripture.  Oops.

CHAPTER 3

Enter John the Baptist.  He’s supposed to be Christ’s cousin, but I don’t see that anywhere here.  That must come from a different gospel.  Here, John the Baptist is just a preacher in the desert, a latter day Elijah.  The Elijah comparison is made pretty clear, as John lives in the desert eating locusts and honey; just like Elijah did during the Kings I famine. 

John has a basic message: “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand!”  Two things about that.  First, this involves maybe the most famous mistranslation in the Vulgate.  The Vulgate was the Catholic Bible written in Latin by St. Jerome that was the common Bible for 1,000 years.  But Jerome got a few things wrong, including this one.  He didn’t have John say “Repent!” but “Do penance!” This isn’t just a minor issue, as the Catholic Church traditionally made good works central to going to heaven instead of faith.  Doing penance is works-based; repenting is faith-based.  The mistranslation was a core pillar of support for Catholic theology – and then just before the Reformation they learned it was a mistranslation.  Oops. 

Second, John is calling for the end of the world as we know it – and calling for it soon.  Yeah, get used to that.  Plenty more where that came from in the Bible.

John helps introduce us to some key themes.  First, this is where we first meet the Pharisees and Sadducees.  John helpfully calls them “You brood of vipers!” so right away we know that they’re bad guys.  Nice to get that cleared up so quickly. 

Oh, and John helps gear us up for the coming of Christ.  He tells his audience, “I am baptizing you with water, for repentance, but the one who is coming after me is mightier than I.  I am not worthy to carry his sandals.  He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.”  So look out world – Christ is coming.  That’s actually a scary way to introduce Christ, if you think about it.  He is mighty, he will baptize you with fire (!)  This is after his birth was so important that the stars themselves took notice.  I tell you what, so far this doesn’t sound like a guy who will end up on a cross.  Yeah, we all know how the story ends, but right now he sounds like an ass kicker extraordinaire. 

Well, Christ asks John to baptize him, and John thinks that is entirely backwards.  “I need to be baptized by you,” John says, “yet you are coming to me?”  Yes, in fact, he is.  So John does it and God announces to all that this is his son, who is proud of.  Yeah, a lot of parents make a scene at their kid’s ceremonial rite of passage. 

CHAPTER 4

Now that Christ has been claimed by God, it’s time for Satan to take a crack at him.  Satan leads him into the desert for 40 days, where Christ fasts.  (Why does he fast?  That’s not clear – he just does.  Why does he let Satan lead him out there?  It’s not made clear.  I guess Christ wants to hear what Satan will say.  He’s willing to negotiate – even with the devil).

Satan gives Christ three temptations.  First, he tells the fasting Christ to turn stones into bread.  No dice.  “One does not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes forth from the mouth of God.”  Nice line.

Next, Satan tells Christ to prove he’s God’s son.  Jump off a building, and let angels save him.  OK – uh, Satan?  This one sucks.  Whose idea of a temptation is to tell someone to jump off a building?  Christ doesn’t bite, saying one shouldn’t test God.  Trust him, instead. 

Finally, Satan offers Christ a lot of land.  OK, this is a good one, Satan.  Much better than that last lousy temptation.  But this temptation is also rejected.  “Get away, Satan!”  Well, he’s given Satan a fair hearing, and decided against him.  Now Christ will stay safely away from him from this time onward.

Instead, he begins his ministry.  Apparently while Christ was in the desert, the authorities arrested John the Baptist.  It happened offstage and we never really hear why, but regardless, John is now off the scene.  Christ goes off to the shore.  Matthew tries to provide some cover for Jesus.  He says he’s doing it to help fulfill a prophecy by Isaiah that a light will arise from the coastline, but this reads like a weak post-facto justification.  The guy Christ had gone around with (and who it appears inspired Christ to begin his work) has just gone to jail and Christ skips town.  I can see why Matthew would want to claim that it’s to fulfill a prophecy, but it looks like Christ is laying low.

He doesn’t lay low long, and begins his ministry shows just how much John the Baptist influenced him.   His first words are, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”  That’s John’s line.

Now it’s Jesus to put together his Christ posse.  He picks up four right here.  He gets brothers “Simon who is called Peter.”  My, what a confusing way we have for referring to St. Peter.  Also, he takes Pete’s brother, Andrew.  They are fishermen and Christ gets them with the famous line, “Come after me, and I will make you fishers of men.”  He then picks up another pair of brothers, James and John.  They are also fishermen.  We’re told, “they left their boat and their father and followed him.”  Aw, that’s a shame – they abandoned their father.  Well, four down and eight to go. 

Christ begins his work, and he is initially a faith healer.  He cures the possessed, the lunatics, paralytics, and those racked with pain.  This is an aspect of his ministry I find most interesting.  How does this work exactly?  Is it just mental problems that sometimes manifest themselves physically?  I know there have been other faith healers, but the concept of it strikes me as … weird.

Click here for the next part - featuring the Sermon on the Mount.

2 comments:

  1. The Q source remains a hypothesis to explain parallels in Matthew and Luke. I wonder if you are nailing your colours too firmly to Q for comfort.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It leans heavily on Mark and the lost Q-source, a group of sayings that are common to Matthew and Luke.

    There are many who believe in a Q-source; that is, one original source from which the synoptic gospels derive. And while it's possible that there was one main source, I personally don't think that it logically follows that there must be.

    Let's suppose that Chris, Larry, and another Chris all go to a baseball convention every summer. They hang out together, attend the same seminars, go to the same game together, and pretty much spend the majority of their time with each other. Now suppose they each write their memoirs about what went on at, oh, say, three of the conventions. I imagine that, while each version will have it's own point of view, nearly all the events spoken of in any one of the memoirs will also be spoken of in the other two. Would it therefore be logical of me, after having read all three memoirs, to conclude that there must be a fourth "original" source, from which these three were copied? No; of course not.

    Moving on, I must confess to being somewhat disappointed that you gave no mention to Matthew 2:3-5:

    "When Herod the king heard this, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him. And when he had gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together, he inquired of them where the Christ was to be born. So they said to him, 'In Bethlehem of Judea....'"

    So the scribes and chief priests all knew where the Messiah was to be born. So did they all head out to Bethlehem to go see the Messiah? Oh no; they were much too busy reading about the coming Messiah to actually go out and see Him for themselves. These folks were the original bunch who needed to get their heads out of their spreadsheets and go see a game.

    As for this prophecy of the Nazorean, well, my footnotes tell me that nowhere in the Old Testament does Nazareth rate a mention. I thought I saw it in Isaiah, but apparently not.

    Ah, wordplay! Jesus would be called a Nazarene by the people because he grew up in Nazareth; Nazarene derives from the root word netser, which means "offshoot" or "branch". And that's why Matthew says prophets in the plural, because you've already read about the branch in Isaiah (4:2; 11:1) and Jeremiah (23:5; 33:15) and Zechariah (3:8; 6:12).

    Incidentally, this was a cool way of further aggravating Jesus' detractors. Whenever the religious leaders would disparage Jesus, in order to be clear which Jesus they were talking about (because, then as now, Jesus is a pretty common name) they would have to specify "Jesus the Nazarene." You know; "Jesus the Branch", just like the prophets spoke about when they discussed the coming Messiah.

    “One does not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes forth from the mouth of God.” Nice line.

    I'm too lazy to go back and check, so I'll just ask: Did you also like it when you first read it in Deuteronomy 8:3?

    Peace and Love,

    Jimbo

    ReplyDelete