2

THE

MATTHEAN APOCALYPSE

Schuyler Brown Heythrop College, University

Most
are

of London.

students of the gospels believe that Matthew and Luke separated from their Marcan source by the catastrophic This makes the difference between events of the Jewish War. the Matthean and Lucan editing of the Marcan Apocalypse rather puzzling. Luke takes considerable liberty in updating Mark, but Matthew is so faithful to his source that the modern reader may assume that he is mainly repeating Mark in this section of his gospel. But though Matthew respects the Marcan wording more than Luke, he eliminates the breaks in Marks discourse, so that sections originally concerned with the present or future, or even with Gods final intervention, are reinterpreted in the light of history. The fulfilment of Jesus prophecies warns Matthews readers of a coming judgement like the one which overtook Jerusalem and prepares them for the universal mission mandate with which the gospel closes.

Chapters 24-25 of Matthews gospel occupy a key position in the structure of the work. They follow the Woes against the Pharisees (23:1-31) /1/ and precede the Passion Narrative (chapters This position of the Matthean Apocalypse suggests that it 26-27). has a crucial function in the development of the gospel, and we hope to elucidate that function in this article.

Apocalyptic literature is pseudonymous, that is, it is attributed to some celebrated personage who lived before the actual composition of the work. Consequently, it is of the nature of apocalyptic writing that the events with which it deals are presented from the historical vantage point of the supposed author of the work, that is, they are represented as future. A basic problem in interpreting apocalyptic literature is to determine which events are past from the vantage point of the actual author, which
are

present, and which

are

future.

This task is rendered more difficult when, as in the case of the Matthean Apocalypse, the author has based his composition on a

For we must reckon with work /2/. the possibility that certain sections of the earlier apocalypse which had to do with the future were understood by the later apocalypticist as already past, that is, as fulfilled prophecy. This possibility becomes a strong likelihood in the case of the For although both Mk 13 and Matt 24-25 have Matthean Apocalypse. a great deal to do with the Jewish War and the destruction of the temple, Mk 13 was probably composed before these crucial events, whereas Matt 24-25 are generally thought to have been composed Hence we may not assume that wherever Matthew is afterwards /3/. The difference faithful to his source he is simply repeating Mark. in historical perspective makes a difference in meaning not only possible but even likely. Moreover, since the Marcan Apocalypse had dominical authority for Matthew, his interpretation of those sections which contain unfulfilled prophecies is particularly crucial. Matthews concern to uphold the eternal authority of Jesus words (24:35) could well lead him to interpret predictions which history had proved false in such a way that they could be understood by the reader of the later gospel to be fulfilled

previously existing apocalyptic

prophecies.
In our judgement the entire section 24:4-31 has to do with the Not until v.32 does Jewish War and the destruction of the temple. Matthew turn his attention to the coming of Christ at &dquo;the close of the age&dquo; (3). The principal evidence for our position lies in Matthews removal of three crucial caesuras in his Marcan scurce. The first is in Mk 13:9a, where Mark turns from the impending Jewish War, which for him was still future, to speak of the suffering of the community. The second is in Mk 13:14a, where Mark, having terminated his discussion of the present suffering of the community, returns to a consideration of the future consequences of The third is in Mk 13:23, where Mark turns from the the Jewish War. future consequences of the Jewish War to depict the final event of world history, the coming of the Son of man.
In 24:9 How has Matthew gone about removing these caesuras? he has eliminated Marks second warning, &dquo;Take heed to yourselves,&dquo; along with the adversative particle de /4/. Moreover, the insertion of the temporal particle tote ties vv.9ff to what precedes. In 24:15 Matthew has replaced Marks adversative de with the inferential In 24:25 he has removed the third Marcan warning particle oun. (&dquo;But take heed&dquo;) and dropped panta (&dquo;I have told you all things In v.26 the inferential particle oun connects vv.26ff beforehand&dquo;). In v.29 Matthew has replaced Marks strongly with what precedes. adversative Alla (Mk 13:24) with Euthe5s de.

Besides eliminating these Marcan caesuras, Matthew links together vv.4-31 in various other ways: 1. The inclusio between vv.4b-5 and vv.23-24 (cf. Mk 13:5b-6;

21-22).
2. The addition of ho Christos in v.5, which begins a progression continued by polloi pseudoprophetai (11), and concluded by pseudochristoi kai pseudoproph6tai (24; cf. Mk 13:22). 3. The repetition of identical or similar words or phrases: a. (hoi) polloi (four times): vv.10,11(2),12. b. thlipsis (three times): vv.9,21 (cf. Mk 13:19), 29 (cf.
Mk 13:24). c. eklektoi (three times): vv.22,24,31 (cf. Mk 13: 20,22,27). d. (to) telos (three times): vv.6 (cf. Mk 13:7), 13 (cf. Mk 13:

13),14.
e.

panta
me

ta ethne

(twice) : vv.9,14.

pisteus6te (twice): vv.23 (cf. Mk 13:21),26. g. megale (21) ; megala (24). h. semeia megala (24); to semeion tou huiou tou anthropou (30) i. phainetai (27); phanesetai (30). heos dusmon (27); ap akron ouranon heos j. apo anatolon
...

f.

t6n akron aut6n

(31).

If Matt 24:32 is taken as the major break in Jesus reply to the disciples question (3), then we may propose the following outline as a basis for our discussion /5/: I. Transition from the Woes against the Pharisees (23:32-39).
II. III. A.
B.

Jesus

Prediction of Jerusalems Destruction and the

Answer

Disciples Question (24:1-3).

Jesus
The

Judgement

of Jerusalem and the Mission to the ethne

/6/

(24:4-31)
Parabolic Instruction and Exhortation for the The

Disciples

(24:32 - 25:30)
IV.

Judgement
I.

of the ethne

(25:31-46)

Transition from the Woes against the Pharisees (23:32-39)

In the seventh Woe Matthew introduces the theme of the murder of the prophets (23:31). Jesus is addressing the scribes and Pharisees (29), but as the Lament over Jerusalem (37-39) will make clear, the charge is not limited to a particular group within Judaism; it is not only the Jewish leaders who are implicated in

shedding &dquo;righteous

blood&dquo;

(35). (32).

The accusation of murdering the prophets is followed by an ironic imperative: &dquo;fill up, then, the measure of your fathers&dquo;

Addressing his antagonists in the same language as John the Baptist (3:7), Jesus asks rhetorically, &dquo;How are you to escape being sentenced to hell?&dquo; (33). Continuing the theme of judgement, Jesus /7/ declares: &dquo;therefore I send you prophets and wise men and After a parenthesis (34b) the purpose of this scribes&dquo; (34) /8/. sending is given: &dquo;that upon you may come all the righteous blood
The Matthean Jesus reveals the purpose of the shed on earth.&dquo; Mission to Israel (10:5-6) to have been not conversion but judgement /9/. The logical connections are to be taken seriously. Since the antagonists cannot escape the judgement of Gehenna (33), /10/ therefore (dia touto) Jesus sends them emissaries (34a) in order that (hopds) all righteous blood may come upon them (35a).
In the parenthetical insertion in v.34b (&dquo;some of them you will kill and crucify, and some you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute from town to town&dquo;) the last five words recall Jesus warning to the missionaries: &dquo;when they persecute you in one town, The fate of scourging and death was flee to the next&dquo; (10:23). announced to the missionaries in the Central Section already (10:17,21). Now reference is made to death by crucifixion /11/. In the Lucan version of Matt 23:35b &dquo;Zechariah&dquo; is clearly &dquo;the son of Jehoiada&dquo; (2 Chron 24:20), whom the people &dquo;stoned in the court of the house of the Lord&dquo; (21). The reference is to the last martyr mentioned in the Hebrew scriptures, even as Abel was the first (Gen 4:8). &dquo;the son of Barachiah,&dquo; Matthews addition, has been taken to mean that he confused this Zechariah with Zechariah the prophet (Zech 1:1). However, in view of Matthews it is more historicizing tendency likely that he is referring to the Zechariah mentioned by Josephus (BJ IV 5,4) who was killed in the temple in 67/68.

If this is the case, this event should not be taken as a strict terminus usque ad quem of the persecution. Rather it is Matthews way of connecting the suffering of his community with the events of the Jewish War /12/. Nor should one argue on the basis of a misplaced logic that the catastrophe of 70 cannot be represented as the punishment for crimes committed after that date. The connection between the murder of the prophets and the destruction of Jerusalem /13/ depends, within the structure of the gospel, not on historical chronology but on literary sequence. Therefore, the fact that the persecution of Jesus and those whom he sends (23:32-39) is represented as the cause of what follows (24:1-31) does not imply that the persecution of the Matthean community was completed before the events referred to in the latter section. The intensity of the evangelists hostility to the scribes and Pharisees suggests rather that persecution was a present

reality for Matthews

readers and not

simply

piece

of past

history.

Moreover, indications from outside the gospel put the conflict between the Pharisees and Christian Jews after the year
70 and not before

/14/.

In an Amen saying (36) Jesus announces the time of punishment: &dquo;all these things,&dquo; that is, all the crimes referred to in v.34b and v.35, &dquo;will come upon this generation.&dquo; /15/ The murder of the
II

prophets, including the missionary disciples of the Matthean community, will be avenged within the lifetime of Jesus contemporaries.
In v.37 Jerusalems murder of the prophets and stoning of Jesus emissaries is joined to its rejection of Jesus himself: &dquo;how often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers IT her brood under her wings, and you would not.&dquo;

Following the indication of the time of punishment (36) comes allusion to its nature: &dquo;behold, your house is forsaken&dquo; (38). II Jerusalems &dquo;house,&dquo; the temple, will be abandoned by God to its enemies. But Jesus declaration has a more immediate reference to his prophetic gesture of abandoning the temple (24:1). This gesture will result in Jesus disappearance (39a: &dquo;you will not see me again&dquo;), which will be finalized by his death (27:50) and entombment (59-60).
an

Jesus

reappearance will coincide with Jerusalems

acknowledgement, &dquo;Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord&dquo; In the Lucan version (Lk 13:35) the adversative particle (39b). de suggests that the forsaking of Jerusalems house will be offset some day by Israels conversion; Matthews lego gar humin removes this implication. By itself Jerusalems use of the acclamation from Ps 118:26 /16/ dces not necessarily imply conversion. It can also be the expression of a forced acknowledgement of the dignity of the one whom Jerusalem has rejected. At this point in Matthews gospel v.39 remains ambiguous. However, the words ap arti point ahead to ap arti opsesthe in 26:64. In Jesus reply to the high-priest it will become clear that Jerusalem will see Jesus again when the Son of man comes in judgement on the clouds of
heaven.
II.

Jesus Prediction of Jerusalems Destruction and the Disciples Question

(24:1-3).
As the result of Matthews editorial Jesus only after he has left the
as

approach

work, the disciples temple (24:1; contrast

Mk 13:1),

he &dquo;was

going away.&dquo;

II

Matthew has also

expanded Marks

reference to &dquo;one of his disciples&dquo; (Mk 13:1) so as to include the entire group. The disciples purpose in approaching Jesus is &dquo;to point out to him the buildings of the temple.&dquo; Jesus response is significantly altered in the Matthean version. The evangelist replaces Marks reference to the temple buildings (Mk 13:2) with the phrase tauta panta: &dquo;dont you see all these things?&dquo; (2). Tauta panta has the same reference here as in 23:34, that is, it points to Jerusalems persecution of the prophets, culminating in the rejection of Jesus and the persecution of the Matthean community. The seeing in question is not an act of the exterior senses; rather, the Matthean community is urged to take note of Jerusalems crimes and to perceive in the following prediction the announcement of Gods punishment: &dquo;truly, I say to you, there will not be left here The one stone upon another, that will not be thrown down.&dquo; disciples have responded to Jesus veiled allusion to the destruction of the temple (23:38) by pointing out to him the magnificence of the temple buildings. Jesus is unimpressed and repeats his prophecy in words whose meaning cannot be mistaken.
II II

disciples&dquo; (not just the four mentioned in Mk 13:3) a second time. They do so &dquo;privately, as he sat on the Mount of Olives&dquo; (3) /18/. The disciples ask: &dquo;tell us, when will these things (tauta) be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the close of the age?&dquo; &dquo;These things&dquo; are clearly the destruction of the temple foretold in the previous verse. The second half of the question concerns the &dquo;sign&dquo; of two events, which, as the use of but one article (tes) makes clear, are understood by the questioners to be simultaneous: &dquo;your coming&dquo; and &dquo;the close of the age.&dquo; /17/ approach
Jesus
IT

In v.3 &dquo;the

interpret Jesus answer correctly it is important that he accepts the connection between his parousia and &dquo;the close of the age&dquo; that is implied in the disciples question /19/. The fact that Jesus designates &dquo;the close of the age&dquo; as the terminus usque ad quem of his presence with the community (28:20) cautions us against a univocal understanding of his &dquo;coming.&dquo; /20/ There are two occurrences of parousia in Jesus reply (27,37), but only a study of the context of these two verses will reveal when Jesus coming is conceived as taking place.
In order to
assume

not to

IIIA.

The Judgement of Jerusalem and the Mission to the ethne (24:4-31)

Vv.4ff are explicitly characterized as Jesus answer (apokritheis) to the disciples question /21/. The words s6meion and parousia will occur in the verses which follow, and sunteleia

This section will be picked up by the cognate word telos. includes material derived from Mark (4-9; 13-25; 29-31) and Q (26-28), as well as three verses of Matthews own composition (10-12). However, as we have shown above, Matthew has combined all these materials into a unified whole /22/.

Jesus initial response to the disciples request for information is exhortation: &dquo;take heed that no one leads you astray&dquo; (4b). The appearance of deceivers (5), wars (6a, 7a), famines, and earthquakes (7b) is &dquo;not yet the end&dquo; (6b) but only &dquo;the beginning of the birth-pangs&dquo; (8) /23/. The Matthean community was in no danger of falling into the error against which Mark had warned his community, that is, identifying the impending Jewish War with the end of the world. The Jewish War was now past, and the world continued to exist. From Matthews historical vantage point these verses are fulfilled prophecies, but he passes them on to his community as proof of the unshakeable authority of Jesus words (24:35) /24/. Matthews addition of ho Christos (5; cf. Mk 13:6) gives a to the deception referred to by his Marcan source. Of course, not every Jewish insurrectionist claimed to be the Messiah. But the fact that Rabbi Aqiba gave Simon ben Kosibah the Messianic title &dquo;Son of the Star&dquo; (cf. Num 24:17) /24a/ is proof enough that Messianic pretenders played a role in leading the Jewish nation to disaster not only during the Jewish War but also afterwards. Consequently, although Matthews interpretative addition was occasioned by past history, it had continuing relevance for Matthews community, insofar as they shared Jewish hopes for national restoration /25/.

political interpretation

in v.9 Matthew drastically modifies his Marcan Besides his removal of the Marcan caesura in Mk 13:9a he has eliminated all reference to Jewish persecution. Marks reference to the disciples being handed over to Jewish councils and beaten in the synagogues (Mk 13:9) has been anticipated in the Central Section (10:17-21). In 24:9-14 Matthew is dealing with the of the Jewish War (6a,7a). The sufferings of this time have period been brought about by Jewish persecution of the community (23 :32 24 :2), but during the war itself it is the ethne who are the persecutors: &dquo;you will be hated by all the ethne for my names II sake.&dquo; /26/ Panta ta ethne thus becomes the inferred subject of paradosousin; it is the ethne who, in the course of the Jewish War,

Beginning

source.

will deliver up the Matthean community to thlipsis /27/. Matthews redactional substitution of this noun for the sunedria and sunagbgai of Mk 13:9 has the effect of connecting the &dquo;tribulation&dquo; of the Matthean community with the &dquo;great tribulation&dquo; (21) associated

with the Jewish War. During this catastrophe of the Jewish nation Matthews community of Christian Jews shared the suffering of nonChristian Jews, and this thlipsis, when borne by those who confess Christ, is endured on account of Christs name (dia to onoma mou)

/28/.
Also connected with the Jewish War (kai tote) is an upheaval within the Matthean community: &dquo;and then many will fall away, and betray one another, and hate one another&dquo; (10). The internecine strife which afflicted Jews during the war /29/ affected Matthews community of Christian Jews. But the factionalism within his community was not over political issues. It involved apostasy (skandalisthsontai) from the law (12: anomia). Those responsible for this development are named in v.ll: &dquo;many false II prophets will arise and lead many astray.&dquo; Matthew recalls that during the Jewish War many within his community, seduced by false prophets (11), apostacized from Judaism (10,12) in order to escape persecution by the ethne (9).

development is cryptically alluded to in &dquo;because anomia is multiplied he agape ton pollon will grow cold.&dquo; If ton pollon is understood as a subjective genitive, this verse is an anticlimatic banality: lawless behaviour will lead to lovelessness on the part of many in the community. Matthews fourfold repetition of (hoi) polloi suggests that the climactic
v.12:
II

The result of this

of polloi is part of a more significant statement than interpretation of ton pollon as an objective genitive concluding words of v.12 touch on a key concern of the evangelist: his communitys relationship to the ethne. As a result of the apostasy from the law occasioned by the false prophets, the communitys love for &dquo;the many&dquo; has grown cold. Hoi polloi is identical in meaning with panta ta ethne (9,14) /30/.
occurrence

this. An makes the

Matthews community, as the true Israel, is called to be &dquo;the of the world&dquo; (5:14; compare Rom 2:19). However, because of the hatred suffered from the ethne during the Jewish War and the anomia which this has brought forth among the disciples, the Matthean community has forgotten its vocation.

light

V.13 is an apocalyptic consolation saying: &dquo;but he who endures to the end will be saved.&dquo; /31/ In the Central Section this saying followed immediately after the prediction &dquo;you will be hated by all for my names sake&dquo; (10:22). Now it is separated from
the parallel prediction in v.9b by the verses concerning developments within the community (10-12). Following immediately after h6 agape t6n pollon &dquo;final perseverance&dquo; /32/ seems to refer to perseverance in the communitys responsibility of love for &dquo;the
II

10

many.&dquo; Salvation is made to depend on fidelity to this responsibility, despite the trauma of the Jewish War /33/.
This connotation is strengthened by the close connection between verses 13 and 14a, which are joined by kai: &dquo;and this gospel of the kingdom will be preached throughout the whole world, as a testimony to all nations.&dquo; V.14 is based on Mk 13:10, but Marks reference to the Gentile mission has been reworded and placed in a new position. Matthew does not state to whom or by whom the gospel will be preached but only where it will be preached, In some unspecified that is, &dquo;throughout the whole world.&dquo; /34/ way the ethne will be the beneficiaries of this worldwide preaching Eis marturion pasin tois ethnesin parallels the mission. formulation in 10:18. However, just as all reference to Jewish persecution has been dropped from v.9, so too have the Jews (10:18: autois) /35/ been dropped as beneficiaries of the &dquo;testimony&dquo; given through the worldwide mission. Matthews rewording of Mk 13:10 has made v.14 into an indirect answer to the disciples question (3): only &dquo;then,&dquo; that is, after the preaching mission has been carried out worldwide, &dquo;will the end come.&dquo; /36/
II II

II

Oun

(15), which replaced Marks adversative de (Mk 13:14),

links verses 15 and 16 with v.14: because the end cannot come until the worldwide preaching mission is carried out, therefore the community is to flee Judea upon seeing &dquo;the abomination of desolation.&dquo; Matthews redactional activity in these three verses seems motivated by the situation of the community brought about by the Jewish War. Although the special tradition of Matthews indicates that the community originated in Palestine, it gospel was clearly located in a Greek-speaking area at the time the gospel was written /37/. Indeed, the reference to Syria in 4:24, which is proper to Matthew, may point to the actual home of his readers. Vv.14-16 are therefore fulfilled prophecy: /38/ the Matthean community has fled Judea (16) as a result of the upheaval of the Jewish War (15), /39/ and this has brought them into an area where a worldwide preaching mission is possible (14). But these verses are not simply an historical reminiscence. The admonition, &dquo;let those in Judea flee&dquo; (16), when addressed to a community of Jewish origin, takes on allegorical significance. Especially when linked by Matthews redactional activity to the worldwide mission which will be &dquo;as a testimony to all ethne&dquo; (14) but not to the Jews (contrast 10:18), the imperative has the implication: abandon Judaism! The shift from ti (Mk 13:15) to ta in v.17 confirms such an allegorical interpretation, since in the desperate circumstances described in these verses one would scarcely think of trying to save all ones household goods (ta ek tes oikias autou).
II

11

If this is the daring implication that Matthew would like his readers to see in v.16, his sensitivity to their present situation is reflected in the curious addition in v.20: &dquo;pray that your flight may not be in winter or on a sabbath.&dquo; /40/ Jesus concern for the communitys observance of the sabbath even during the exceptional circumstances of the flight from Judea reflects the evangelists realization of his readers fidelity to a Pharisaic interpretation of the law (cf. 23:2-3). Furthermore, the communitys observance of the sabbath during the &dquo;great tribulation&dquo; (21) of the Jewish War is an expression of its solidarity with Judaism during its hour of national crisis.

Although the false Messiahs continue to be a threat for the community even after the Jewish War (23), it is the false prophets who cause the evangelist the greatest concern. In vv.ll12 their leading the community astray (24) was seen to consist in Now reference is made teaching apostasy from the law (anomia). to &dquo;signs and wonders&dquo; which they perform in order to accomplish their seductive purpose. Although the appearance of false prophets is connected with the Jewish War, they remain a threat for the community. This is clear from the evangelists warning in 7:15-23. The metaphor, &dquo;who come to you in sheeps clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves&dquo; (15), suggests persons who claim to be Christian disciples (cf. 18:12) but are actually teachers of
Matthean heretical doctrine (cf. Acts 20:29). Matthews characterization of them in chapter 7 corresponds to what we have seen in chapter

24: they cast out demons and perform miracles (7:22) but are actually &dquo;doers of anomia&dquo; (23). G. Barth has made a persuasive case that the false prophets represent a type of antinomian Gentile Christianity which prided itself in its charismatic powers Matthew sees in such self-styled Christians (cf. Mk 16:17-18) /41/. the fulfilment of Jesus prophecy in Mk 13:22. If, as we are suggesting, a major concern of Matthews gospel was to move a community of Christian Jews to break its ties with Judaism and to
on a mission to Gentiles, then the antinomianism of certain strains of Gentile Christianity clearly posed a formidable objection /42/. Matthew is concerned to convince his readers that despite 10:5b-6, the law, as interpreted by Jesus, does not prohibit turning to the Gentiles but actually requires it (28:19). To argue this effectively Matthew must show his awareness of the danger posed by a Gentile Christianity which substituted charismatic signs for the righteousness required for entrance The path which the evangelist into the kingdom of heaven (5:20). wishes his community to take is a difficult via media (cf. 7:14) between Scylla and Charybdis: on the one side, post-70 Judaism, which, in persecuting the Matthean community, carried on the

embark

12

tradition of murdering the prophets (23: 31-35); on the other side, form of Gentile Christianity which taught apostasy from the law (7:23; 24:10-12). For the evangelist, however, there is a clear criterion: &dquo;you will know them by their fruits&dquo; (7:20).
a

Eliminating a major Marcan caesura (Mk 13:23), Matthew continues the theme of false Christs, linking vv. 26ff to what
precedes by oun: &dquo;so, if they say to you, Lo, he is in the wilderness, do not go out; if they say, Lo, he is in the inner rooms, do not believe it.&dquo; In the period during and after the Jewish War Messianic pretenders, following the example of the Maccabees, chose the inaccessible desert as the place to gather their supporters (cf. Acts 5:36; 21:38) /43/. In contrast, the parousia of the Son of man will be as manifest as lightning flashing across the sky (27). But what is the &dquo;sign&dquo; of this parousia, which the disciples had requested (3)? We see Matthews cryptic answer in the proverbial saying in v.28: &dquo;where the pt6ma /44/ is, there the aetoi will be gathered together.&dquo; The surface
II

second metaphor to illustrate the meaning saying provides manifest character of the parousia of the Son of man: it will be as evident as a corpse to circling vultures. However, because of the
a

of this

meanings attested for both pt6ma and aetos a deeper significance is possible: &dquo;where the temple ruin is, there the Roman standards will be gathered together.&dquo; In this enigmatic fashion, so characteristic of apocalyptic writers in referring to political events, Matthew may be suggesting to his readers: the sign of the parousia of the Son of man is given in the presence of Roman standards on the temple mount /45/.
This suggestion seems less fanciful when we see how closely Matthew connects the coming of the Son of man (30) with the thlipsis of the Jewish War. Where Mark has &dquo;But (Alla) in those days, after that tribulation&dquo; (Mk 13:24) Matthews version reads: &dquo;Immediately after the tribulation of those days&dquo; (29). Matthew has evidently understood Marks thlipsis as the fall of &dquo;the holy place&dquo; (15). Therefore he had no alternative but to believe that &dquo;the Son of man really came on the clouds in A.D. 70.&dquo; /46/ What would have been an unfulfilled prophecy, if interpreted in terms of Jesus final coming, as Mark undoubtedly intended, can be seen as fulfilled, if this coming is viewed as the heavenly counterpart to the earthly sign in v.28. After mentioning the accompanying heavenly portents (29) Matthew declares: &dquo;then will appear the sign of the Son of man in II heaven&dquo; (30). The parallel mention of lightning in v.27 suggests some heavenly light, and it is interesting that Josephus tells us that just before the fall of the temple &dquo;a star appeared over the

second

13

in the shape of a sword&dquo; (BJ VI, 289). However, it is doubtful that Matthew intended this celestial phenomenon to be understood any more objectivistically than the star of Bethlehem (2:2). The heavenly sign is the Son of man himself (cf. 12:39; 16:4)/47/.

city

If Matthew has interpreted Mk 13:26 as having been fulfilled in the destruction of the temple (28), then it follows that Mk 13:27 must also have been deapocalypticized in its Matthean interpretation Given Matthews concern for the Gentile mission, it is not difficult to imagine how he understood the sending out of the angels. The Marcan formulation already suggests an analogy with the sending out of the Twelve /48/, which is strengthened when we recall the Matthean reference to &dquo;twelve legions of angels&dquo; (26:53) /49/. What could have been more natural for someone who understood Mk 13:27 to be fulfilled prophecy than to see in the sending out of the angelic messengers by the Son of man the heavenly counterpart to Jesus sending out the Twelve? But the function of the angels not to backwards the points original mission, which was restricted to &dquo;the lost sheep of the house of Israel&dquo; (10:6), but ahead to the final scene of the gospel, in which Jesus instructs the Twelve to &dquo;make disciples of all nations&dquo; (28:19). The angels &dquo;will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heaven to the other.&dquo; Particularly in view of the parallel in v.27 (&dquo;from east to west&dquo;; cf. 8:11), it seems natural to understand Matthews akra ouranon as the points at which heaven and earth touch each other on To the worldwide manifestation of the coming of the horizon /50/. the Son of man (27) corresponds the worldwide gathering of the elect (31; cf. 14) /51/.
II
II

of v.31 is confirmed by the Matthean material which special separates the sign of the Son of man from the reference to his coming: &dquo;and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn.&dquo; The verb koptomai (&dquo;beat ones breast&dquo;) expresses an exterior action of grief or regret, whose causes may be quite varied: the loss of a relative (11:17), repentance, or despair. In the passage from Zechariah which Matthew cites in v.30 the mourning of the phulai (Zech 12:12) is the result of God pouring out &dquo;on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of compassion and supplication&dquo; (10). In this context the beating of the breast is a sign of repentance and not despair. Matthew evidently understands ge in Zech 12:12 to mean &dquo;earth&dquo; rather than &dquo;land&dquo; (of Israel). His formulation pasai hai phulai tes ges is borrowed from Gen 12:3, which announces the participation of the Gentiles in the blessings of Gods covenant with Abraham. Matthews combination of Zech 12:12 /52/ and Gen 12:3 suggests a repentance of the ethne in stark contrast to Jerusalems impenitence
A

missiological interpretation
II

14

Consequently, the parousia of the Son of man (27), which sign of judgement against Jerusalem, now in ruins and occupied by a foreign power (28), is a sign for the gathering into the kingdom of all the tribes of the earth (30-31).
(23:37).
a

is

concluding this section of our discussion of the discourse that despite Matthews relative fidelity to his sources (Mark and Q), his reinterpretation of these materials, from his post-70 vantage point, is considerable. The general tendency of Where Mark this reinterpretation is in an historicizing direction. of the of his Matthew 13:9-13) (Mk spoke present plight community refers to the past suffering of his community which resulted from
In
we

may note

War.

as Jews in the national catastrophe of the Jewish Where Mark urged his readers to flight (Mk 13:14) Matthew looks back on a displacement of his community which has already taken place. Where Mark looks forward to a coming of the Son of man soon after the tribulation of the impending Jewish War (Mk 13: 24-27) Matthew sees a coming of the Son of man which has already taken place in the temples destruction.

their involvement

this historicizing tendency Matthew is still able &dquo;fulfilled prophecy&dquo; (as Matthew understands it) speak to the present situation of his community. The flight motive has a secondary metaphorical significance, suggesting the breaking of ties with official Judaism. The coming of the Son of man in 70 suggests that the mission to Israel, which seemed open-ended in 10:23, has now been closed, so that the worldwide gathering of the ethne can take its place.
But

despite

to make Marks

IIIB.

Parabolic Instruction and Exhortation for the Disciples (24:32 - 25:30)

The first part of the disciples question, pote tauta estai (3), needed no answer from Jesus, since by the time that Matthew wrote his gospel the answer had already been provided by history. As far as the second part of their question is concerned, Jesus reply thus far has suggested that the disciples assumption of a simultaneity in Jesus parousia and the close of the age is fallacious. The destruction of the temple did not bring the end /53/, but it did bring a parousia of the Son of man (27-31). However, no answer has been given to the question about &dquo;the sign ... of the close of the age.&dquo; To this question the second half of Jesus answer will provide an indirect response, as the evangelist turns
II

his attention from &dquo;fulfilled close of the age.

prophecy&dquo;

to Jesus

parousia

at the

15

spoken to the Jewish leaders in parables he gives parabolic instruction to his disciples. The earlier group of parables was preceded by the cursing and withering of the fig tree (21:18-22); Jesus begins the instruction of his disciples with the parable of the fig tree (32). Matthews understanding of this parable and of its application does not differ essentially from Marks. But Mk 13:28-29 is closely connected with the previous section on the coming of the Son of for Mark, was still future. man (Mk 13:24-27), which, Consequently, the unexpressed subject of estin (Mk 13:29) is quite clearly &dquo;the
Just
as

Jesus had
so

(21:28 - 22:14),

now

Matthew does not render explicit Marks implicit he did in v.20 (cf. Mk 13:18), nor does he supply a subject of his own. But if we are correct in seeing v.32 as the beginning of the second half of Jesus reply, then it seems appropriate to understand sunteleia tou ai6nos as the implied subject of estin (33). The parable of the fig tree does not provide &dquo;the sign ... of the close of the age&dquo; which the disciples had requested (3). However, it does provide a sign of its nearness: &dquo;when you see all these things /54/ know /55/ that it is near, at the very gates.&dquo;

II Son of man.&dquo;

subject,

as

II

There is an apparent tension between eggus estin epi thurais (33) and the motif of delay in v.48 (&dquo;My master is delayed&dquo;) and 25:5 (&dquo;As the bridegroom was delayed&dquo;) /56/. However, it is hazardous to take details out of their parabolic context and allegorize them into a veiled allusion to a delay in the close of the age. Furthermore, if we examine v.48 more closely, we will observe that the wicked servants judgement was erroneous: the master was not delayed; he arrived back earlier than the servant expected him (50). Matthew is concerned not about a delay in Jesus final parousia but about irresponsible conduct, whether this is motivated by thinking that there is still plenty of time before the judgement (24:48) or by assuming that the critical moment will arrive immediately, as the foolish maidens evidently did (25:3). Both ways of thinking are equally dangerous, since &dquo;of that day and hour no one knows&dquo; (24:36). Matthews exhortation to his readers to know that the end is near (24:33) is to be interpreted in the light of his admonitions to watch (24:42; 25:13) and to be ready (24:44) /57/. Matt 24:33 provides exhortation, not information.
From Matthews historical

vantage point v.34 is another

one

fulfilled prediction, which parallels the

II

in 23:36.

Matthews

contrasting phrases, tauta panta and panta tauta, are brought into relationship with &dquo;this generation,&dquo; that is, Jesus contemporaries. They have been punished for their crimes (tauta panta), and they have lived to see the destruction of the temple and everything that

16

Matthew associates with it (panta of the Son of man (27-31) /58/.

tauta), including

parousia

The clause heos an panta tauta genetai (34) recalls the The words of 5:18: heos an panta genetai /59/. Matthean Jesus had taught: &dquo;till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass away from the law until all is accomplished.&dquo; The opening words of 24:35 (&dquo;heaven and earth will Could the pass away&dquo;) recall the opening words of this same verse. earthquakes (7), the darkening of sun and moon, the falling of stars from heaven, and the shaking of the heavenly powers (29) have been understood as a fulfilment of v.35a, that is, as a &dquo;passing away&dquo; of heaven and earth /60/? If so, the implication of v.34b and v.35a for 5:18 would be clear. Since &dquo;all these things&dquo; have been and and heaven earth have passed away, the terminus accomplished usque ad quem for the literalist interpretation of the law has been reached, and only Jesus words continue to have validity (&dquo;my words will not pass away&dquo;) /61/.

concluding

V.36 serves as an important qualification for v.33. &dquo;All these things&dquo; are a sign of the nearness of the close of the age, but the day and hour remain unknown even to those who are the principal actors in this climactic event: the angels and the Son /62/.
V.37 introduces a comparison which illustrates the unknowability of the end (36): &dquo;for as were the days of Noah /63/, so will be the II coming of the Son of man.&dquo; Into this double tradition material But now Matthew has again introduced the word parousia (cf. v.27). the word refers to the coming of the Son of man at the end of the The parousia immediately after the thlipsis was manifest; the age. final parousia is unknown: &dquo;they did not know until the flood came and swept them all away&dquo; (39). Matthew has taken the two eschatological comparisons from Q and associated them with two different events.

Vv.40-41 recall motifs from the judgement against Jerusalem. The &dquo;two men in the field&dquo; parallel &dquo;the man in the field&dquo; (18); the &dquo;two women&dquo; recall the pregnant women and nursing mothers (19). The verb aphietai is the same one used in Jesus prediction that the temple will be &dquo;forsaken&dquo; (23:38). The judgement against Jerusalem thus serves as a warning for the disciple that a day of reckoning will come for him also. If he is caught unprepared, like the people in Noahs days, he too will be &dquo;forsaken.&dquo; The two-fold use of parousia serves to underscore the parallelism.
V.42 (cf. Mk 13:33,35) draws the conclusion (&dquo;Watch therefore&dquo;) repeating the reason why vigilance is necessary (&dquo;for you do not

17

know

on what day your Lord inclusio with v.36.

/64/

is

coming&dquo;)

and thus

forming

an

are double tradition material the logic is defective. The implication of the contrary to fact condition in v.43 is just the opposite of what Matthew intends. The householder cannot be blamed for not watching for the thief, since he had no idea when he was coming;. since the disciples cannot know when the end is coming, they cannot be expected to watch either! Nevertheless, the metaphor of the householder forms a transition to a modification of the admonition to watch; now the disciples are told: &dquo;be ready&dquo; (44). The reason for the command is also modified: not only is the day of the masters return unknown (42); the Son of man will come unexpectedly (he ou dokeite h6ra), like the flood (37).

The next two

verses

(43-44)

(cf. Lk 12:39-40).

Actually,

In 24:45 - 25:13 being &dquo;ready&dquo; (24:44) is explained as being &dquo;prudent&dquo; (phronimos: 24:45; 25:2) /65/. The disciple is a
servant who must give to his masters household their food at the If the master finds him doing this, he will proper time (24:45). be rewarded by being set over all the masters possessions (46-47), but the wicked servant, who beats his fellow servants (instead of feeding them) and eats and drinks with drunkards, /66/ will be surprised by his masters unexpected return and severely punished

(48-51) .
The Parable of the Talents (25:14-30) gives a further The &dquo;good and faithful illustration of eschatological prudence. servant&dquo; (25:21,23) does not play it safe out of fear (25) but invests his masters money with the bankers, so that when the master comes he gets what belongs to him with interest (27).
In 24:32 - 25:30 Jesus exhortation addresses a single theme: redeeming the time. Burning lamps (25:7) are a metaphor for good works; /67/ the servants obligation to feed his masters household

(24:25) and
to

to make

use

point ahead (28:19).

to the

communitys responsibility
is

of what the master entrusted to him seems for the ethne

The theme of

judgement
Jerusalem.

expressed

in terms which recall the

judgement against

hexei tauta panta (23:36). hypocrites&dquo; (24:51) recalls the Woes, in which the Pharisees were repeatedly attacked as &dquo;hypocrites&dquo; (23:13,15, etc.). The punishment inflicted on the wicked servant (25:28: arate oun ap autou to talanton) is similar to the prophecy addressed to the chief priests and Pharisees (21:45): The Lords arthesetai aph humon he basileia tou theou (43).

Hexei ho kurios &dquo;Put him with the

(24:50) parallels

18

of the foolish maidens, ouk oida humas (25:12), resembles the repudiation of the false prophets (7:23): oudepote egnon humas /68/.

repudiation

In Matt

his

angels

16:27 Jesus declared: &dquo;the Son of man is to come with in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay
II

Jesus instruction to the everyone for what he has done.&dquo; disciples in the second half of his reply illustrates this principle. The praxis of Matthews readers will determine their fate in the judgement. IV. The

Judgement

of the ethne

(25:31-46)

The final section of Matthews Apocalypse is not an answer to disciples question (24:3), and this is significant. What the evangelist has to tell his community in this section is not something they are expecting to hear,and its purpose is to dispose them for the command with which the gospel ends (28:19), which was equally unexpected. For this final command goes beyond the personal praxis of the disciples. They are not simply instructed to observe Jesus teachings themselves but rather to &dquo;make disciples of all ethne, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you&dquo; (28:19). The judgement of the ethne /69/ must bear some relation to this final scene /70/. the
In 1 Cor 6:2 Paul reminds his readers: &dquo;do you not know that the saints will judge the world?&dquo; In 25:31-46 Matthew makes an equally astounding claim: all the ethne will be judged on the basis of how they have treated Jesus brethren (25:40), that is, the We should not think of hoi elachistoi as Matthean community /71/. a special group within the community. Rather, the phrase is in II apposition to &dquo;these brothers of mine.&dquo; /72/. In the Community Discourse &dquo;the little ones&dquo; is a designation for the Matthean community (18:6,10,14) /73/, and the superlative, elachistos, can be used for mikros without any difference in meaning. Matt 25:31-46 is a captatio benevolentiae which prepares the community for the responsibility of the universal mission (28:19). Its purpose is to heighten the communitys sense of its own importance: the Messiah king will understand as done to himself whatever is done to them. Even though they are elachistoi, the eschatological judge is behind them, carefully noting who has treated them well and who has neglected them. Such an assurance should give the community confidence in approaching the dangerous /74/ and, for many, odious task of evangelizing the ethne.

Nowhere in the judgement scene is it stated that the ethne will be judged on the basis of their acceptance of the teaching of

19

the elachistoi (contrast 10:14). In fact, nothing in the episode indicates that the contact between the ethne and the elachistoi /75/ will take place in the context of the mission. Nevertheless, the criterion according to which the ethne are judged points ahead to the situation of 28:19. The ethne will inherit the kingdom if they feed the elachistoi, give them to drink, welcome, clothe, and visit them when sick or in prison (34-36). Similarly, in the Central Section Jesus declares: &dquo;whoever gives to one of these little ones /76/ even a cup of cold water because he is a disciple /77/, he shall not lose his reward&dquo; (10:42).
Matthew 10:42 has no original connection with the section in which it occurs. However, in its present context it clearly refers to the situation of the Mission to Israel (5-6). Similarly, 25:35-45 receives its context from the situation of the mission to all the ethne with which the gospel closes. The reason why only &dquo;corporal works of mercy&dquo; are mentioned in the judgement of the ethne is because at this point in the gospel the command to make disciples of all the ethne has not yet been given.
Two more

steps need

to be taken before the

evangelist

delivers

injunction to which his entire gospel has been building up. First, the coming of the Son of man in judgement against Jerusalem, which was cryptically alluded to in 24:27-28, will be announced in forthright terms in Jesus response to the highpriest (26:64). Secondly, after the &dquo;innocent&dquo; Gentile, Pilate, has been forewarned by his wife (27:19) and has disassociated himself from responsibility for Jesus death (24), &dquo;all the people answers, His blood be upon us and upon our children&dquo; (25). Pilates warning, humeis opsesthe, parallels Jesus warning to the high-priest,ap arti opsesthe. By joining their voices to the unjust condemnation of Jesus by the highpriest (26:66) the entire Jewish people call down upon themselves and their children the fearful punishment which Jesus had announced (23:36; 24:2).

the

NOTES
Matt 21:23 - 25:46 is actually a single bipartite discourse. /1/ The characteristic formula with which Matthew concludes his discourses (7:28; 11:1; 13:53; 19:1) occurs in 26:1 but not after the Woes against the Pharisees. Furthermore, Matthew has omitted the Widows Mite (Mk 12:41-44), so that the Lament over Jerusalem (23:37-39) is followed immediately by the Prediction of the Destruction of the Temple (24:1-3). The two parts of Matthews

20

final discourse are introduced, respectively, by Jesus entering temple (21:23) and leaving it (24:1). This same situation exists for the Marcan Apocalypse, if, /2/ is widely believed, it was based on an apocalyptic pamphlet of Jewish
or

the
as

Jewish-Christian origin. follow here what is still the more common opinion concerning the date of composition of Mark and Matthew. The two warnings in Mk 13:5b,9a introduce present dangers for /4/ the Marcan community: deception by those who falsely use the egõ eimi formula (6) and persecution (9b-13). Except for the last three words ē arch ōdinōn tauta ( ) the intervening verses (7-8) have to do Since for with events which were still future for Marks community. Matthew this entire section has to do with past events, he has removed the grammatical break in Mk 13:7. Marks temporal clause hotan ( akousēte) is replaced by a future indicative (mellēsete akouein), which continues the future indicative planēsousin. Thus in Matthews version the de serves to connect these two future indicatives; it no longer has the adversative force that it had in Mark. For We will be very selective in citing secondary literature. /5/ a fuller survey see W. Grundmann, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus, 494-529; J. Lambrecht, "The Parousia Discourse. Composition and Content in Mt. XXIV-XXV" in D. Didier (ed.), LÉvangile selon Matthieu, pp. 309-342; W.G. Thompson, "An Historical Perspective in the Gospel of Matthew," JBL 93 (1974) 243-262. It is disputed whether ethn ē in Matthew means "nations" /6/ (including Israel) or "Gentiles" (excluding Israel). The ambiguity of the Greek word may have been advantageous to Matthew, insofar as the final command in 28:19 does not have to be understood as a turning away from Israel (contrast Acts 13:46). The status of Jews ē remains an open question, and for a writer who among panta ta ethn was urging a community of Christian Jews to evangelize Gentiles this may have made the task less difficult. See our article, "The Two-fold Representation of the Mission in Matthews Gospel," StTheol 31 (1977) 21-32. The Lucan version of this saying attributes it to "the Wisdom /7/ of God" (Lk 11:49). The use of these three terms assimilates the fate of the /8/ Matthean community to the fate of the righteous in Israel. The mission of the Twelve to Israel thus parallels Jesus own /9/ mission (Matt 13:13), whose paradoxical outcome fulfils the prophecy of Isaiah (13:14-15; Is 6:9-10). It is significant that Matthew, who softened Marks version of Jesus explanation for speaking in parables (Matt 13:13: hoti; Mk 4:12: hina , does not hesitate, after ) the Woes against the Pharisees, to declare that judgement is the purpose of the Mission to the Twelve.

/3/

We

...

...

21

Compare the implication in Matt 23:15 that the antagonists "sons of Gehenna." /11/ In view of the importance of Peter to the Matthean community, it is not impossible that his death, traditionally by crucifixion (cf. Jn 21:18-19), may be alluded to here. However, it seems more likely that the reference is to events occurring closer to the communitys present home. The power of Jewish authorities to impose capital punishment during the Roman occupation remains a hotly debated issue, but now the more specific question whether crucifixion was ever used in Judaism as a form of capital punishment has been raised by a passage from the Temple Scroll (cf. Y. Yadin, "Pesher Nahum (4Qp Nahum) Reconsidered," IEJ 21 (1971) 1-12; J.M. Baumgarten, "Does TLH in the Temple Scroll Refer to Crucifixion?" JBL 91 (1972) 472-481). /12/ See below our discussion of Matt 24:9-12. /13/ This connection has already been established by the selfincrimination of the chief priests and Pharisees (21:45), who state the punishment for the murder of the son (38-39) and the two groups of servants (34-36) whom the kurios (40) has sent: "he will put those wretches to a miserable death, and let out the vineyard to other tenants who will give him the fruits in their seasons" (41). Furthermore, in an allegorical insertion into the Parable of the Marriage Feast the king punishes the murder of the first group of servants who were sent to invite the guests to his sons marriage feast by sending his troops to destroy the murderers and burn their
are

/10/

city (22:7). /14/ See our forthcoming article in Novum Testamentum, "The Matthean Community and the Gentile Mission." /15/ The meaning of hēxei tauta panta epi ten genean tauten (Matt 23:36) is the same as elthe eph humas pan haima dikaion (35), and the two expressions are grammatically parallel, but ten genean tauten gives a chronological precision to humas. /16/ The original idea of Ps 118:26 was almost certainly "Blessed in the Lords name is he who comes," that is, the pilgrim who comes to the temple (cf. 2 Sam 6:18). However, Ps 118 was later given an eschatological interpretation (J. Jeremias, The Eucharistic Words of Jesus, p. 257), and "he who comes in the name of the Lord" was understood of the Davidic Messiah (Billerbeck I 849-50; 876). /17/ This Matthean expansion of the group to which Jesus delivers the Apocalyptic Discourse may have been motivated by Mk 13:37: "what
say to you I say to all." Matthew has dropped Marks "opposite the temple" (Mk 13:3). Jesus attention is concentrated exclusively on the disciples. /19/ In Mk 13:4 there is an implication that the telos contained in sunteleisthai coincides with the destruction of the temple
I

/18/

22

(tauta), and a major purpose of Jesus reply is to reject this assumption: "it is not yet the end" (7). /20/ Parousia originally meant the visit of a ruler or high official (cf. 3 Macc 3:17), and there is nothing in the word itself, when applied to Jesus or the Son of man, which either presupposes an earlier coming or excludes a later one. /21/ The Marcan introduction to Jesus words has simply "And Jesus began to say to them" (Mk 13:5). /22/ In commenting on Matthews redactional work we will confine our remarks to those changes which bear on the interpretation of the section as a whole. There are numerous stylistic improvements in these verses, and Matthews use of the theological passive in v.22 reflects his sensitivity to his communitys reverence for the
divine
name.

/23/
in the

Panta

...

tauta

previous

verses

(Matt 24:8) refers to the things mentioned and not to Jerusalems sins ( tauta panta:

23:36; 24:2).

/24/ For Matthews community history had provided an answer to the first part of the disciples question (Matt 24:3); all their interest was focused on Jesus response to the second part of the question. But, as is usual in apocalyptic literature, the fulfilment of predictions of the past inspires confidence in the fulfilment of predictions concerning things which are still future. /24a/ Jer. Taanith IV, 7 (68d). /25/ H.J. Schoeps ("Die Tempelzerstörung des Jahres 70 in der jüdischen Religionsgeschichte" in Aus frühchristlicher Zeit, pp. 175-183) has pointed out that Jewish hopes of rebuilding the temple remained alive until the suppression of the Second Revolt. /26/ Matthew has added tōn ethnōn (24:9) to Mk 13:13. /27/ The context makes it quite clear that Jews are not included ē in Matt 24:9; consequently, the noun here among panta ta ethn means "Gentiles." However, since in other places Matthew obviously may be deliberately exploiting the ambiguity of the noun, we will retain the Greek wherever the word occurs. /28/ "For my names sake" (Matt 24:9) need not imply that missionary activity was the reason for the thlipsis inflicted on the Matthean community by the ethn ē during the Jewish War. However, this phrase takes on additional significance if Matt 24:9 is taken together with the reference to the worldwide mission (14). /29/ This inter-Jewish strife was one of the reasons given by the rabbis why God allowed the temple to be destroyed (Joma 9b, cited
by Schoeps, art cit., p. 151). /30/ In Matt 26:28 peri pollōn has been added to the Marcan cup word (Mk 14:24). In Matthews version Christs blood is poured out "for many for the forgiveness of sins." We have here an allusion to the Fourth Servant Song: autos hamartias pollōn anenegken

23

ē is The Servants saving role in relation to the ethn stated in Matt (Is 12:18,21 42:1,4). explicitly /31/ Compare Rev 2:26:"he who conquers and who keeps my works until the end, I will give him power over the nations." /32/ Despite the parallel cited in the previous note, telos in Matt 24:13 does not seem to have the same significance that it has in verses 6 and 14. The occurrence of to telos in 26:58 makes clear that the word is not always identical in meaning with sunteleia tou aiōnos. The context of 24:13 suggests the meaning "whoever perseveres until death" (cf. 10:28). /33/ We may suppose that some in the Matthean community were more ready to suffer persecution from the Pharisees than to show love to the hated Gentiles. /34/ Acts 11:19 shows us that a "worldwide mission" is not necessarily synonymous with the "Gentile mission," although the former can easily lead to the latter (20). /35/ For the exegesis of Matt 10:18 see "The Mission to Israel in Matthews Central Section," ZNW 69 (1978) 88-90. /36/ This point is made less clearly by prōton in Mk 13:10. /37/ The fact that Matthew refers to Daniel as "the prophet" (24:15) However, may indicate that his community was using the Septuagint. it may also reflect the ignorance of a Gentile writing about Jewish

(Is 53:12).

matters

(cf. 5:43; 12:11).

The destination of the flight, that is, "to the mountains" (Matt 24:16), takes on particular significance if the communitys home at the time the gospel was written was actually in Syria. /39/ Writing after 70, Matthew refers more clearly than his Marcan source "In the (Mk 13:14) to the destruction of the temple (24:15). holy place" (cf. Acts 6:13; 21:28) replaces Marks cryptic "where he/it ought not to be." The replacement of Marks masculine participle hestekota with the neuter hestos is a grammatical improvement, since bdelugma is neuter. But it also serves to exclude a personal interpretation of bdelugma, whether in terms of the Antichrist (cf. 2 Thes 2:7-10) or as an allusion to the presence of Titus in the burning temple ( BJ VI 4,6-7). There is no doubt that Matthew is speaking of something happening in the temple. /40/ In 24:20 Matthew has also supplied an explicit subject for ē phug genetai, that is, h ē humōn (contrast Mk 13:18). "Matthews /41/ Understanding of the Law" in G. Bornkamm, G. Barth, and J.H. Held, Tradition and Interpretation in Matthew, pp. 159-164. /42/ If Matthew is describing himself as "a scribe who has been trained for the kingdom of heaven" (13:52), then he must fulfil the criterion of the "householder who brings out of his treasure what is new and what is old." Applied to the situation in which we understand the gospel to have been written, that would mean that

/38/

24

Matthew must show how the "new" direction in which he is leading the community, that is, towards the Gentile mission, is possible without sacrificing the "old," that is, fidelity to the law. /43/ This seems a more likely interpretation than to see here an "The inner rooms" may allusion to the desert community at Qumran. be an allusion to the belief in a hidden Messiah (cf. Jn 7:27; Justin, Dial. c. Tryph. 8.49.110). /44/ In the Lucan version (Lk 17:37) the word used is soma, which excludes the meaning that we are suggesting for Matthew. "standard" and sēmeion /45/ Aetos "sign" are closely related. In the Septuagint Hebrew nēs ("standard") is translated sēmeion in Is 11:12; 13:2; 18:3. The first of these passages reads kai arei sēmeion eis ta ethnē; the second one is from the same chapter from which Matt 24:29 (= Is 13:10) is taken. /46/ L. Gaston, No Stone on Another, p. 484. Matthews Eutheōs (24:29) makes the interpretation of v.30 as the final coming of the Son of man extremely difficult. Why would Matthew, writing after 70, wish to connect this final coming to the destruction of the temple more closely than his Marcan source? /47/ The interpretation of tou huiou (Matt 24:30) as epexegetical rather than subjective has support in Rev 12:1. The similarity between the two verses is striking:
= =

sēmeion mega

ē ōphth

en

ō ouranō, t

phanēsetai
en

to sēmeion tou huiou tou

gun ē anthropou

ō ouran
the

In

one

case

sign

is the woman;

in the other it is the Son of

man.

/48/
/49/
occurs

apostelei tous aggelous Matt 10:5: toutous tous dōdeka apesteilen ho Iesous Aggelos, of course, originally meant "messenger," and it
with this

Mk 13:27:

meaning in Matthews citation of Mal 3:1 (Matt

11:10).
Mark has ap akrou gēs heōs akrou ouranou (13:27). It is worth noting the difference between the angels role in Matt 24:31 and their role in other eschatological events in Matthews gospel. In the Matthean version of the Empty Tomb story an angel descends from heaven, rolls away the stone, and sits on it (28:2). According to 13:41, in the Interpretation of the Parable of the Tares, "the Son of man will send his angels (cf. 24:31), and they will gather out of his kingdom all skandala and all who do anomia (cf. 24:10,12), and throw them into the furnace of fire." As the parallel Parable of the Dragnet makes clear, this eschatological purification of the community will occur "at the close of the age" But when the Son of man comes to judge the ethnē, (Matt 13:49). he himself "will separate them one from another" (25:32; contrast

/50/ /51/

25

13:49-50: "the angels will come out and separate the evil from the righteous, and throw them into the furnace of fire"). At the ē the angels are simply the attendants of the judgement of the ethn Son of man (25:31; cf. 16:27). Unlike Rev 1:7 and Jn 19:37, Matthew makes no use of Zech /52/ Matthew blames 12:10b: "they look on him whom they have pierced." the Jews for Jesus death (27:25) and exonerates the Gentiles (24). /53/ For Matthew Jesus instruction that "wars and rumors of war" were "not yet the end" (Mk 13:7) has been vindicated by history. /54/ Panta tauta (Matt 24:8,33,34) refers consistently to the Jewish War and everything associated with it; tauta panta (23:36; The distinction seems 24:2) refers to Jerusalems crimes. deliberate. /55/ It seems preferable to take ginōskete (Matt 24:33) as an imperative rather than as an indicative. The wicked servant did not know that the end was near (48). /56/ Compare meta de polun chronon (Matt 25:19). /57/ Since Matthew considers "watch" and "be ready" as identical exhortations, he repeats the command to "watch" at the end of the Parable of the Ten Maidens (25:13) even though all the maidens, including the wise ones, had fallen asleep (5). /58/ As he did with Mk 13:24-27, Matthew takes over an unfulfilled prediction (Mk 13:30), but only after he has reinterpreted it. His use of this Marcan prediction after "this generation" had passed away is another indication that he saw the coming of the Son of man (included in tauta panta in Mk 13:30) as having taken place "immediately after the tribulation" of the temples destruction

(Matt 24:29).

supplied from the first part disciples question (3). /60/ From the standpoint of contemporary Judaism the use of such hyperbole in reference to the cataclysmic events of the year 70 might not seem out of place. /61/ Paralleling the contradiction between Matt 10:5b-6 and 28:19 is the contradiction in Matthews gospel concerning the interpretatior of the law. Although the saying in 5:18 imposes observance of the entire law, Jesus, by citing Hos 6:6 (Matt 9:13 and 12:7),"I desire mercy, and not sacrifice," rejects the Pharisees insistence on the ceremonial law (9:11; 12:2). All the law and the prophets depend on the two commandments of love of God and love of neighbour (22:40), If our so that only the ethical portion of the law is binding. interpretation of 24:34-35 is correct, then the requirement that the entire law be observed is abrogated by the fulfilment of what is contained in the two heōs clauses in 5:18, just as the Mission to Israel is terminated by the fulfilment of what is contained in the /59/
of the

The tauta in Matt 24:34 may be

26

heōs clause in 10:23, that is, the coming of the

/62/

Such

an

emphatic denial of any

the event referred the one referred to in v.30. Indeed, Matthew distinguishes the two events terminologically. The period of thlipsis is characterized by the plural expression "those days" (19,22,29), whereas the singular is used for the close of the age: "that day" (36). /63/ The plural "days" (Matt 24:37,38) and the singular "day" "The day when Noah entered the ark" is (38) are combined here. related to "the days of Noah" just as the "day" of the close of the age is related to the "days" of the thlipsis. /64/ The phrase "your Lord" (24:42) is appropriate in speaking of the coming of the Son of man to judge the Christian disciple, and it points ahead to ho kurios (45) and kurie, kurie (25:11). /65/ We will not give a detailed exegesis of these verses or of the Parable of the Talents (Matt 25:14-30). /66/ The conduct of the evil servant reflects the conduct of those swept away by the flood: "they were eating and drinking" (Matt 24:38). /67/ Cf. Matt 5:16:"let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven." /68/ Perhaps the difference in tense has a significance. The Lord denies ever having known the false prophets (Matt 7:23), since
reason same

"that day and hour" (Matt 24:36) specific indication "immediately days" (29). This is an additional

Son of man. communicable knowledge of is in striking contrast to the after the tribulation of those

why
as

to in verses

33 and 36 cannot be the

Matthews introduction of panta ta ethn ē (25:32) puts a strain on the original story, which was obviously concerned with the n) and not ō aphorisei autous ap allēl judgement of individuals ( whole nations. /70/ Again we must forego a detailed exegesis of the passage. However, we note that Matt 25:32 represents the eschatological reversal of 10:18. Just as the missionary disciples to Israel were dragged before the governors and kings of the ethnē, so now all the ē are dragged before the Messiah king to be judged on the basis ethn of how they have treated the disciples. /71/ Thus a tradition which had drawn the eschatological consequences from the historical Jesus identification with the outcasts of society ("these least, my brethren") is made to further

they /69/

were

never

truly disciples.

community megalomania! /72/ Matthew frequently uses adelphos as a designation for the Christian disciple: 5:22(2),23,24,47;7:3,4,5; 10:21; 18:15(2),21,35; 23:8. In 12:49,50; 28:10 Jesus calls the disciples "my brothers".

27

"The little ones" are those who believe in Jesus (Matt 18:6: eis eme . The expression does not designate some ) group of disciples but the whole community, which, because of its Jewish background, was prone to be scandalized by the excesses of Gentile Christianity. Unlike Paul (1 Cor 8:7-13) Matthew does not distinguish within his community between those with strong consciences and those with weak ones. /74/ This aspect of the future mission is indicated in the reference to prison (Matt 25:36,43). ē /75/ The fact that the elachistoi are strangers to the ethn (Matt 25:35,43) is explained by the Jewish origin of the community. /76/ Elachistoi (Matt 25:40) is the equivalent of mikroi (10:42). /77/ Adelphos (Matt 25:40) is the equivalent of mathētēs (10:42).

/73/
ton

pisteuontōn