Judaism in the Gospel of Matthew P. Luomanen (-01)

Key Concepts

Late Judaism

Old, distorted picture of Judaism as a legalistic religion that only seeks righteousness by works. Dominates in the literature until 1970s. The term late Judaism implies that in the Old Testament Judaism still was a living religion where God's mercy was experienced. Thus the term also implies degeneration in the history of Judaism.

Formative Judaism

Nowadays commonly used to characterize Judaism after the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple in 70 CE. In contrast to the idea of "late Judaism" it is assumed that Judaism was in the process of becoming. Judaism was in crisis after the destruction of the Temple but it managed to survive by building on the heritage of its Pharisaic-Scribal faction. The process of consolidation took some 150-200 years and resulted in the Rabbinic Judaism now documented in the Mishnah and related documents. Thus, especially the period after 70 CE is characterized by Judaisms (plural) but plurality is also assumed before that. Both concepts are often used by J. Neusner)

Covenantal nomism

The concept of covenantal nomism was introduced by E. P. Sanders in his "Paul and Palestininan Judaism". Sanders gives the impression that covenantal nomism is the basic idea of the whole religion called Judaism (= the "pattern of religion" in Judaism) , but it is perhaps more accurate to say that it is the basic structure of idea of salvation in Judaism. The structure of covenantal nomism is: (1) God has chosen Israel and (2) given the law. The law implies both (3) God's promise to maintain the election and (4) the requirement to obey. (5) God rewards obedience and punishes transgression. (6) The law provides for means of atonement, and atonement results in (7) the maintenance or re-establishment of the covenantal relationship. (8) All those who are maintained in the covenant by obedience, atonement and God's mercy belong to the group which will be

Common Judaism

Common Judaism was also by E. P. Sanders to characterize the religion of the ordinary people and to summarize what was common to all forms of Judaism preceding the destruction of the temple (the time period Sanders describes in his book is 63 BCE - 66 CE.). Covenantal nomism can be understood as the underlying ideology (or "pattern", in Sanders's terms) of common Judaism. There is a fierce debate between Sanders and Neusner concerning the usefulness of Sander's concepts (Texts 1,2 and 3 as examples).

Emic and etic points of view

Cultural anthropologists use these terms in order to characterize the viewpoint of a description. Emic point of view means that a group is understood and described the way the members themselves do. Etic point of view is the viewpoint of an outsider, modern scholar, for instance. Neusner (with Chilton) obviously favours the emic point of view (see the fourth example), and sees also Christianity as a form of Judaism. However, both emic and etic viewpoints should be used.

Jewish Christianity

Scholars have found it difficult to come to terms with defining Jewish Christianity. Several competing definitions have been offered, and usually these have been connected to a particular interpretation of the history of early Christianity. In the following we (Luomanen & Myllykoski) will list indicators of Jewish-Christianity. These include the most common meanings given to the term Jewish Christianity.

Instead of calling these sub-categories as competing "definitions" we have named them indicators. The term indicator acknowledges the value of different "definitions" as appropriate viewpoints in the discussion about Jewish-Christianity but keeps reminding that none of them can be taken as the definitive characterization of Jewish Christianity. In each case, the type of Jewish Christianity under examination can only be determined in a critical discussion that brings together several of these indicators forming a Jewish-Christian profile. The study of the indicators of Jewish Christianity calls attention to the following points:

1) Characteristically Jewish practices such as circumcision, Sabbath observance, following of the purity laws, daily prayers. Often these are, together with the second indicator, considered as the most clear evidence of Jewishness. Nevertheless, none of these indicators alone can be regarded as definite proof of the character of a community since the practices varied widely even among Jewish communities.

2) Characteristically Jewish ideas: Yahve as the only God, election, covenant, the Temple as Yahve's abode, obedience to the Law

3) The genealogy of an individual or a group. This indicator of Jewish-Christianity may be characterized as the most "natural." At the same time it is the least telling since there were contradictory practices and ideas present among the Christians of Jewish descendant. Nevertheless, in some cases knowledge about people's kin, the frame of their primary socialization, may help to understand some aspects of behavior and thinking. For instance, in the light of the first two indicators Paul hardly meets the standards of a Jewish-Christian but the fact that he was a Jew by birth helps to understand why he got tangled with the theological problem of the Law in the first place and why although he practiced law-free gentile mission he, nevertheless, wanted to pay tribute to the poor of the law the observant Jerusalem community.

4) The role of Jesus in the worship and ideology of the community. The fourth indicator turns focus on the "Christian" part of Jewish-Christianity. Together with the first two indicators this forms the core of a classic profile of Jewish-Christianity as it is determined by Strecker, for instance.

5) Baptism as an entrance rite to a community. This indicator turns attention to the point where daily purifications and baptisms known from many Jewish groups are replaced or complemented with once-and-for-all rite that marks a person's transition to a Christian community. In Pseudo-Clementines Peter bathes before eating or prayer (Hom 10.1; 11.1; Rec 4.3; 8.1). This would well fit in with Judaism but marks him off as a special kind of Christian. However, a separate baptism is also known. It replaces the sacrifices (Rec 1.32) and is necessary before a person is pure enough to eat with other Christians (Rec 2.72; Hom 9.26-27; 13.4-12).

6) In connection with the analysis of the all above aspects the question is raised about their role in the social interaction within the community as well as in relation to outsiders.

The above list is not an exhaustive collection of the questions that may help to sketch a Jewish Christian profile of a community. Obviously under every indicator more sub-categories could be listed and number of other indicators could be used as well. However, we do think that the above list contains the core of the questions that deserve to be discussed before phenomena are labeled as Jewish Christian.

History of Research

A Scratch: Three phases in the history of research:

I Time of Matthean priority (from the second century until 1900 CE)

II Matthew as a redactional work. (first studies in the beginning of the 20^th century but mainly from the 1950s to 1970s)

III Present discussion, based on the corrected picture of Judaism (starting in the mid 1970s

I Papias, according to Eusebius (Hist. eccles 3.39.16) said that Matthew was written in Hebrew. He was followed by other church fathers. Jerome even though he found (or at least knew) where the original was (De vir. ill. 3)

Matthew, also called Levi, apostle and a foretimes publican, composed a gospel of Christ at first published in Judea in Hebrew for the sake of those of the circumcision who believed, but this was afterwards translated into Greek though by what author is uncertain. The Hebrew itself has been preserved until the present day in the library. at Caesarea which Pamphilus so diligently gathered. I have also had the opportunity of having the volume described to me by the Nazarenes of Beroea, a city of Syria, who use it. In this it is to be noted that wherever the Evangelist, whether on his own account or in the person of our Lord the Saviour quotes the testimony of the Old Testament he does not follow the authority of the translators of the Septuagint but the Hebrew. Wherefore these two forms exist "Out of Egypt have I called my son, " and "for he shall be called a Nazarene."

However, scholars think that Matthew was written in Greek.

II E. von Dobschütz: Matthew as Rabbi and Catechist. G. Stanton (ed.): The Interpretation of Matthew. Issues in Religion and Theology 3. Philadelphia - London 1983, 19-29 (Originally published in German in 1928; ZNW 27, 338-348)

D. regarded Matthew as a converted Rabbi. Matthew's style, numerous repetitions, formal expressions ("And it happened when Jesus had finished these sayings"; 7:28; 11:1; 13:53; 19:1; 26:1), some of which were also used by Rabbis ("the kingdom of heaven") show that we was a converted Rabbi, perhaps the pupil of Jochanan ben Zakkai.

Bacon, B.W. 1930 Studies in Matthew. London.

Matthew arranged his gospel after the five books of Moses.

Trilling, W. 1959 Das wahre Israel. Studien zur Theologie des Matthäusevangeliums. ETS 7. Leipzig.

Matthew's church understood itself as a new Israel. Israel had failed. It had not been faithful enough. The new Israel had to do better.

Strecker, G. 1962 Der Weg der Gerechtigkeit. Untersuchung zur Theologie des Matthäus. FRALNT 82. Göttingen.

The indicative (God's mercy) and the imperative (God's demand) go hand in hand in Matthew ("imperativisher Indikativ")

Hummel, R. 1963 Die Auseinandersetzung zwischen Kirche und Judentum im Matthäusevangelium. BEvT 33. München.

Davies, W.D. 1964 The Setting of the Sermon on the Mount. Cambridge.

Both these studies describe Matthew's congregation against the foil of rabbinic Judaism after 70 CE. However, Judaism was seen as a uniform religion and especially Davis put much emphais on the Birkat-Ha-Minim (the curse of heretics) that was presumably added to a Jewish prayer in the 90s CE.

Frankemölle, H. 1974 Jahwebund und Kirche Christi. Studien zur Form- und Traditionsgeschichte des 'Evangeliums' nach Matthäus. NTAbh. Erg.Bd. 10. Münster.

Studies Matthew's Gospel mainly from a literary point of view. Social setting is not important for the interpretation. Matthew takes up the OT (deuteronomistic) idea about God's covenant and God's presence. Jesus' presence is the leading idea in Matthew (Matt 1:23; 28:16-20).

III *Przybylski, B. 1980 Righteousness in Matthew and his world of thought. SNTSMS 41. Cambridge.

E. P. Sanders' student. Matthew shares the idea of righteousness with his Jewish contemporaries.

*Overman, J.A. 1990 Matthew's Gospel and Formative Judaism. The Social World of the Matthean Community. Minneapolis.

Matthew's background is to be found in the sectarian Judaism of the first century. Matthew was fighting with the Jewish community and losing the battle.

Saldarini, A.J. 1994 Matthew's Christian-Jewish Community. Chicago Studies in the History of Judaism. Chicago - London.

Matthew is still within Judaism.

Homework: Pamment, M. 1981 The Kingdom of Heaven According to the First Gospel. NTS 27, 211-232.

What is the main thesis of the author?

What kind of reality is the kingdom of God?

What kind of reality is the kingdom of heaven?

What is the ethics of the gospel?

Do you agree with the author's theses? Why? Why not?