MATTHEW – INTRODUCTION

The December-February quarterly in Lifeway's Explore the Bible series jumps from the first book of the Bible to the first book of the New Testament, the Gospel According to Matthew. As in the last quarterly, this new one takes only the first half of the book, and in this case it's a great thing. You could easily take a full quarter on the sermon on the mount, if not just the beatitudes!

This essay covers the introduction to Matthew. Later this week, I will add notes on next Sunday's lesson, the arrival of John the Baptist.

After the resurrection of Jesus, the day of  Pentecost, and thousands converted, the new church continued to preach Christ. Peter's sermon is a good example of that first Gospel presentation. Note that it leans heavily on the Old Testament, linking Jesus's ministry to the history of the Jews and God's dealing with them. Since the New Testament had not yet been written, the OT was all the scripture they had, The gospel of Matthew continues to point out the relation of Jesus to the ancient covenant and prophesies. I have  a Greek New Testament that prints OT quotes in bold-faced type. Much of Matthew is in bold-face, just as red letter Bibles show much of John in red type. Not only are the prophecies bold, but many sayings of Jesus are also bold, reflecting his knowledge of Scripture.

In addition to preaching, people told stories about Jesus (“I remember the time He...). They also quoted sayings they remembered. That society had few writing materials, and relatively few could read, so their memories became far better than ours. Still, many could read and write, and I'm sure some wrote down Jesus's teachings. Both the sayings and the writings got passed around, told and re-told, copied and re-copied.

As time passed, that first generation of Christians began to die out. People became concerned that the memories would fade with each generation. Plus, as the gospel spread over the world, there were not enough first-hand witnesses to go around to each church and location. So a written record became necessary, even imperative.

One church father, early in the second century, tells us that Mark wrote first, recording the preaching of Simon Peter. Matthew perhaps wrote next, the father said in Aramaic, with a Jewish audience in mind. Today, most scholars see Mark as forming a spine-like framework from which Matthew and Luke follow in their outline. Each has his own separate material though, and Matthew and Luke share a common source of Jesus's sayings known as Q (from German “Quelle,” source).
Each has its own emphasis. Mark is an action gospel, “straitway,” “immediately,” or “next” seem to recur in many verses. Luke tells more compassionate stories, lifting up women and the weak. He relates the prodigal son, the good Samaritan, and other parables.

As mentioned already, Matthew emphasizes the Jewish heritage, but also contains more teaching. The Sermon on the Mount covers three chapters that must replicate many of Jesus's teaching sessions. We don't get to it in this quarterly, but all four gospels from the beginning aim toward the cross and the resurrection as the heart of their story. I'll try to point out as we go along that the reflection of the cross can be seen all through the book.

Traditionally Matthew is the author, and some early manuscripts include his name. The work itself, however, doesn't name the author. We remember Matthew, also called Levi, as the tax collector Jesus called to follow him. Without question, he left his business, threw a party for Jesus, and became his disciple. He would have been an educated man and capable of writing such a gospel.

All sorts of dates have been suggested from about 60 all the way to 100. One writer I read recently thought the destruction of the temple in 70AD led the Jews to scatter and also resulted in the gospels being written. I prefer to think Mark wrote about 55 and Matthew and Luke ten or fifteen years later after reading Mark and feeling led to add other materials. Most believe John wrote last near the end of the century.

THE SACRIFICE

The sacrifice of Isaac is one of the most heart-wrenching stories in the Bible. The story seems to be a test of Abraham's obedience, therefore faith, in Yahweh. No reason is given for the test, and though commentators suggest this or that reason, I find only one that makes sense to me. Only one or two others allude to this idea.

The Promise in the Covenant declared a whole nation of people will arise from Abraham's seed. Yet, both he and his wife were so far past the child-bearing age, they even laughed when God promised them a child. In fact, they had tried to help God out by conceiving a child by Sarah's handmaid. AND THIS IS THE POINT! The Lord was seeking to find out whether Abraham's faith had grown since the birth of Ishmael. God was threatening to put him back in that same childless condition (so far as Sarah was concerned). Where the couple had failed to trust God to send them a son in His own time and way, can they now rely on Yahweh to fulfill His promise, even if Isaac died? The man's obvious willingness to sacrifice his son became evidence that he had indeed strengthened his trust in the Lord.

Now let's look at the passage.

The scripture here is blunt and clear.

God calls Abraham by name, and he immediately replied, “Here I am.” Two thoughts come to mind. God knows us by name. And the question is wheether we are tuned in when He calls.

God then throws on Abraham the awful challenge: sacrifice your son. Killing you own child is unimaginably horrible, but even more is involved here. For the last ten chapters Abe has followed where God led him, and still he has not seen the promised land, nor had a grandchild. Giving up Isaac means he is willing to surrender the covenant and its promise. The author of Hebrews believes he had faith that God would save Isaac or resurrect him.

Very simply verse 3 says Abraham got up the next morning and began following the Lord's instructions. Three days later they arrive at a suitable place, so the patriarch leaves his two servants, going on with just the boy. Note his comment at the end of verse 5, “we will come back to you.” You wish Genesis told us more about what was going on in Abraham's mind. How did he endure that agony. Did he really expect to come back with his living son, or was he brushing off his men?

The story slows down, becomes more detailed.

He gets Isaac to carry the wood. Thus the lad was probably a stout teenager. He carries the torch and the knife, as most commentators like to say, in order his son would not hurt himself. And the two trudge on together, father and son.

Isaac asks where is the sacrificial lamb. His father replies God will supply it. Which of course, He does. And they kept walking.

Under God's direction, Abraham built an altar, tied up his son, and laid him on the altar. The story now inches forward as the old man reaches out to take the knife to kill his son. At the critical moment God called Abraham strongly by name again. And once again, he replied immediately and simply. “I am here.” Are you ready when He calls, or do you hide or dodge?

God tells Abraham he had passed the test, showing that he trusted the Lord with his son, his covenant, and His promise. The patriarch sees a ram caught in a bush, and proceeds to sacrifice that animal instead. And God renews His promised covenant and promise. And yet, Abraham dies some time later, never owning even a piece of the Promised Land, unless it was the cave he bought in which to bury his wife!

Faith is the evidence of things not (yet) seen.

What do you suppose God is calling us toward?

LATE-LIFE BABY

You can't rush God. He promised Abraham and Sarah a baby, and they had a baby! When she was 100 years old! Apart from Sarah, the record holder known to science is 70! (The youngest mother known is 5! She was the result of a rare syndrome that brings on very early puberty. Other early births have been known to a few other girls under 10.)

Can you blame the pair for their difficulty in belief? Thomas had just been told his friends had seen a dead man walking. Not surprising he said, “Sure you did.” And three strange guys show up and tell Abe and his wife, that same elderly wife who had traveled all over the Levant with him, was going to give birth. They both laughed. But God had the last laugh – if He wanted it. She did indeed conceive and gave Abraham a son at an age he should be having great-great- grandsons!

Have you noticed how often the Bible tells of a child being born from God's intervention? Off hand, I can think of Samuel's mother promising to give her son back to the Lord. In Isaiah 14:7 the prophet predicts the salvation of Israel before a woman can conceive, bear, and wean a child. (The same prophecy was used in a heightened way to predict the Virgin Birth.) And then there were John the Baptist and his cousin, Jesus.

Could that mean that God's purpose lies behind every child? I think so, and I've never found someone who failed to find God's mission for them if they sincerely searched. It means we're unique. God has a purpose for you like for no one else. Have you found that purpose?

And what must this say about abortion?

SODOM AND GOMORRAH

Remember when Abram and Lot parted ways, the nephew going toward what looked like the good grass for his sheep and his uncle taking what was left?
When we tune back in to the adventures of Lot, we find he is now a city boy, living in Sodom, one of twin towns to the East of the Dead Sea.

Also remember the three guys in last weeks' lesson who showed up to talk with Abram and change his name? They repeated the promise of a son for Sarah and added the requirement of circumcision. In today's lesson, before they move on, they announce that the Lord was about to destroy the towns where Lot lived. The cries of the victims had come up before Him.

Two of the guys moved on, but the third one remained. To Him, Abraham expressed concern over the innocents in Sodom. What if 50 righteous or just men lived in Sodom, would they be killed along with the wicked? The Lord agreed to spare the city if there were 50. Abraham continues to bargain for fewer and fewer innocents, and the Lord agrees until they stop at 10! Apparently, there were less than that, perhaps only Lot himself. We shall see when he tried to compel his sons-in-law to come with him and escape, they refuse. Only Lot and his daughters and wife escape. Well, his wife almost escapes.

Who were these three men? My vote is they were angels of the Lord. Historically some have called these men the Trinity, but scripture says no one has seen God at any time. In the OT one or more angels of God come to earth appearing as men. Two of the men go to Sodom and meet Lot, who invites them to his house for the night.

Now you must understand that in the Middle East of that day – and in some places still – hospitality was the chief virtue. The land was mostly desert, and travelers often went a long way between stops. So the custom was that people took care of each other, even to their own inconvenience. Lot demonstrates his virtue by insisting the two men become his guests for the night.

The wickedness of the city immediately became apparent, as the men of the town surrounded Lot's house. They demanded Lot surrender his visitors, so they could rape and probably kill them. When he went outside to reason with them, they tried to seize him, and his guests rescued him! They were perfectly capable of taking care of both themselves and Lot, and they blinded those closest to the door. Note Lot had offered to bring out his two daughters instead, and the townsmen refused. Before criticizing Lot for offering the girls, use it as an example of how seriously they took hospitality as important. Caring for your guests was of extreme importance in that society. We should also notice that while their sexual lust is obvious, to that society their denying hospitality would be as bad.

The townsmen refused Lot's offer and tried to press into the house when he tried to go back in. The angels themselves intervened, shoving the men back and blinding those around the door. They then tell Lot it's time to go, to gather his family. He tries to bring his sons-in-law with them, but they refuse. So the angels grab his wife and their girls by the hand and led the four of them out of town. They escaped to a small village named Zoar, but Lot's wife looked back against orders and suddenly became a statue of salt!

The two cities were destroyed by fire and brinstone. Some believe the Lord did this through volcanic eruption, comparable to Pompeii. Others believe he rained down fire directly from heaven. This was God's response to a city whose wickedness matched the world before the flood: every imagination of their hearts was only evil continually.

Actions have consequences. Some feel our world is becoming so wicked the Lord must be ready to come back in wrath. What do you think? And what is the proper Christian response?