GNT2012 - Matthew 6.19-7.6

Jesus was one of those dangerous and dynamic people who lived with no attachment to wealth. He called his followers to a radical anxiety-free existence while depending on God for basic needs (Mt 6.19-33). This concept is so foreign in the contemporary western world. Personally, I have no physical need that is not currently met. Even more, I have no foreseeable need that I will be unable to fill. How do Jesus’ words about trusting God for basic needs apply in such a context?

In the middle of his teaching on wealth Jesus provides an odd metaphor for understanding his exhortation to trust God with basic needs.

The lamp of the body is the eye. Therefore, if your eye is sincere [ἁπλοῦς], your whole body will be shining. But if your eye is evil, your whole body will be dark. Therefore, if the light in you is dark, how great is the dark? (Mt 6.22-23)

The adjective “sincere” [ἁπλοῦς] is unique, appearing only in this saying in the entire NT (Mt 6.22 || Lk 11.34). Additionally, it is extremely rare outside the NT, making it difficult to translate. The NIV, NRSV and ESV translate it “healthy,” while the NASB reads “clear.” It is an odd word to use for vision because it typically means something like “sincere” or “straightforward.” The Jewish historian Josephus uses the adjective to describe “frank” speech in the context of political intrigue (JW 1.469).  The Jewish philosopher Philo uses the same word to mean “simple” or “clear” when describing the commands of God in the Torah (Spec. Laws 1.299). Thus, it refers to honest and unpolluted disposition as well as something uncomplicated.

There is one clear parallel in Jewish literature from around the same time (c. 150 BCE). In Testament of Issachar,

“The genuine [ἁπλοῦς] man does not desire gold, he does not defraud his neighbor, he does not long for fancy foods, nor does he want fine clothes. He does not make plans to live a long life, but awaits only the will of God.”^[1]

This is quite similar to Jesus’ conclusion, “But seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things [basic needs] will be added to you” (Mt 6.33).

In this text, the phrase “of God [τοῦ θεοῦ]” is a difficult textual variant. Matthew rarely uses the phrase “kingdom of God” (Mt 12.28; 19.24; 21.31, 43) and when he does it appears he is following source material (Mt 12.28 || Lk 11.20; Mt 19.24 || Mk 10.25 || Lk 18.24). The textual evidence from the very early codex Sinaiticus, however, supports the reading against the majority of texts. Ultimately, I think including the phrase is the best reading because otherwise it is difficult to explain the modifying pronoun “his” on righteousness and it is easily conceivable for a scribe to drop a phrase so rare in Matthew.

---

^[1] H. C. Kee, “Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs,” The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (ed. James H. Charlesworth; New York: Yale University Press. 1983), 803. 

GNT2012 - Matthew 6.1-18

The first part of Jesus’ teaching in the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5-7) focuses on Jesus’ relationship to the scriptures of Israel. While affirming the eternal value of the law (Mt 5.17-20) Jesus sets his teaching as the standard of living for those in God’s kingdom and intensifies OT teachings that were particularly debated among the Pharisees. There is a transition in Mt 6.1 where the focus shifts to the three actions that were particularly emphasized in first century Judaism – almsgiving, prayer and fasting. Jesus has turned from how to interpret the law (5.21-48) to how it ought to be practiced (6.1-18).

Jesus emphasizes righteous actions are not for publicity (Mt 6.1, 2, 5, 16), but done secretly for the father in heaven (Mt 6.4, 6, 17-18). The reason for secrecy is explicitly connected to reward for righteous actions. Public actions merit the “reward [μισθός]” of public attention. This Greek word μισθός is an economic term referring to the wages earned by a laborer (Mt 20.8; Lk 10.7; 1 Cor 3.8, 14; 1 Tim 5.18; James 5.4). Thus, Jesus says that those who perform righteous action for recognition receive the praise of men as their “pay.” However, Jesus uses another economic term to refer to God who will “repay [ἀποδίδωμι]” those righteous actions done secretly (Mt 6.4, 6, 18). This economic term refers to the act of repayment (cf. Mt 5.26; 18.25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 34). These two words can even appear in the same context. For example, in a later parable in Matthew a work manager is commanded, “Call the workers and pay [ἀποδίδωμι] them the wage [μισθός]” (Mt 20.8). Jesus says that the present payment of righteous action is public acclaim, but the “payment” deferred until future judgment will be given by God in eternal reward (cf. Mt 16.27).

There are numerous minor textual variants to the end of the “Lord’s Prayer” (Mt 6.9-13). The shortest reading ends the prayer, “but deliver us from the evil one [ἀλλὰ ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ]” (6.13). Various other endings include:

• “Amen [αμην]”
• “Because yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory for the ages, amen [ὁτι σου ἐστιν ἡ βασιλεία καὶ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοῦς αἰῶνας αμην]”
• “Because yours is the kingdom of the Father and the son and the Holy Spirit for the ages, amen [ὁτι σου ἐστιν ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος εἰς τοῦς αἰῶνας αμην]”

These differences are easily explained by the fact that this prayer was widely used in the early church. Thus, scribes probably spent little time “copying” and tended to simply write the text as they remembered it.

GNT2012 - Matthew 5

My reading the NT aloud in Greek prompts ridicule from my wife. She finds my voice stumbling over the foreign words obnoxious, yet I persist. Reading through Matthew 5 I became all the more convinced that reading aloud is good practice.

In the text of Matthew 5 itself there are numerous indictors that these are words for speaking and hearing. At the very beginning of Jesus’ most famous teaching Matthew writes, “having opened his mouth he taught them saying . . .” Matthew draws attention to Jesus’ delivery of this speech. Then throughout the teaching Jesus refers to hearing and speaking sacred words (Mt 5.21, 27, 31, 33, 38, 43) and his contrasting vocalization (Mt 5.22, 28, 32, 34, 39, 44). Exploring the way these words roll of the tongue, even inarticulately, is one step closer to hearing Matthew as the early Christians did.

I expected to see numerous textual variants in Matthew 5. After all, this is some of Jesus’ most uncompromising teaching. Yet the manuscripts have no proclivity to soften the words of Jesus or make them more palatable. Nearly all the textual variations are small changes in verb tenses or word order. There is an interesting textual variant, however, in Matthew 5.44. Earliest manuscripts (Siniaticus, Vaticanus, et. al) read, “But I say to you, ‘Love your enemies and pray for those persecuting you [προσευχεσθε ὐπερ τῶν διωκόντων ὑμας].’” Codex Bezea and some other early manuscripts reads instead of the italicized portion above, “Speak well of those cursing you [ευλογειτε τους καταρωμενους ὑμας].” Other early manuscripts read, “Do good to those hating you [καλως ποιειτε τοις μισουσιν ὑμας],” and others still, “pray for those tempting you [προσευχεσθε ὑπερ τῶν επηραζοντῶν ὑμας].” Each of these readings is very much in keeping with the difficulty of Jesus’ teaching and appears connected to closing beatitudes addressed in the second person (Mt 5.11-12). Ultimately, these additions appear to be an attempt at harmonizing this teaching with Luke’s version (Lk 6.27-28). What is clear is that these textual variants show no attempt to moderate Jesus’ difficult teaching about loving enemies

GNT2012 – Matthew 4

The story of Jesus’ temptation in the wilderness has always fascinated me. It can function on so many levels, but I want to briefly explore the way it functions in Matthew’s narrative of Jesus' Messianic identity.

The story is framed as a divinely ordained encounter. Jesus “was led into the desert by the Spirit” (Mt 4.1). God has just confirmed Jesus’ identity in baptism, and now he sends him into the desert to be tested. Numerous scholars have observed the striking similarities to Israel’s story of passing through water and being led into the desert to be tempted in the Exodus. Again Matthew is activating the story of Israel as he tells the story of Jesus.

After forty days of fasting, “the testing one [ὁ πειράζων]” arrives and suggests that Jesus confirm his identity as the “Son of God” (4.3, 5-7). Post-Nicea, this phrase is commonly interpreted to refer to Jesus’ ontological status as the second member of the trinity. Yet, that theological framework did not yet exist when Matthew wrote his gospel. Furthermore, Matthew has already framed this narrative as a story about Israel’s Messiah, and in the scriptures of Israel “Son of God” is the title for the king as evidenced in the allusion to Ps 2 in Jesus’ baptism (Mt 3.17).

The devil is not suggesting Jesus confirm his divinity but rather his identity as Israel’s king by feeding himself and then again by putting his identity on display in the temple (4.5-7). Finally, the Devil offers what rightfully belongs to Israel’s king – the kingdoms of the world (4.6-7). Here is the means for Jesus to accomplish God’s will without having to suffer God’s way.

In each instance Jesus refutes temptation by speaking Israel’s sacred scriptures. He refuses the satanic shortcuts to Messianic confirmation. These shortcuts could probably have prevented John’s death (Mt 4.12) and Jesus’ cross. Yet, they would ultimately fail to bring the kingdom of heaven.

GNT2012 - Matthew 2-3

The “Magi [μάγοι]” are unique to Matthew’s gospel and fit awkwardly in the story. Nearly everything that occurs in Matthew’s infancy narrative is described as the fulfillment of prophecy (Mt 1.23; 2.6, 15, 18, 23). Even minute details, such as the escape to Egypt or settling in Nazareth, are fulfilled prophecy. Shockingly, the one exception to this fulfillment theme is the conspicuous Magi. Surely, Matthew’s creative exegesis could have made use of Isaiah 18.7, Isaiah 56.6-8, or Ps 72.10-11.  Or why not Isaiah 60.4-6, a text that mentions foreigners carrying “gold” and “frankincense” to Jerusalem in celebration of God’s glory dwelling in Israel? Yet Matthew’s Magi are not depicted as fulfilling prophecy. Matthew surely knew these texts for he cites Isa 56.7 later in his gospel (Mt 21.13). Why, then, are these significant characters uniquely not portrayed fulfilling prophecy? Perhaps Matthew intends an oblique allusion hoping his readers will make the connection? Maybe he hopes to focus his hearers’ attention on Jesus as Israel’s Messiah?

There are not many interesting textual variants in Matthew 2-3, save one. When Jesus comes out of the Jordan River, Matthew 3.17 reads, “And behold a voice from heaven saying, ‘This is my beloved son, in whom I am pleased.” Codex Bezea, a fifth century western text reads otherwise, “And behold a voice from heaven saying to him [προς αυτον], ‘You are [συ ει] my beloved son, in whom I am pleased.” The Western text turns Matthew’s public announcement into a personal message directed explicitly to Jesus. This reading is also found in synoptic parallels (Mk 1.11; Lk 3.22) which both read, “you are [σὺ εἶ] my son.” All three texts allude to the LXX Ps 2.7, an enthronement song of David that reads, “The Lord said to me, ‘You are [εἶ σύ] my son, today I have begotten you.’” This variant is possibly an attempt at harmonization with both the other gospels and Psalm 2. The allusion to Psalm 2 is also an interesting example of an instance where Matthew chose not to exploit an OT text for his fulfillment theme. It is curious to attempt to follow Matthew’s logic in applying the fulfillment theme.

Reading the Greek New Testament in 2012

Today I began reading through the Greek NT as part of a 2012 reading plan. It's a light load, leisurely completed in a year. I’m using Zondervan’s A Reader’s Greek New Testament 2^nd edition alongside my wide-margin NA²⁷. My reading is focused in three ways. First, I’m reading the Greek text aloud. The oral culture of the ancient world used texts as vehicles for verbal performances, so I want to see how reading the text aloud will help me experience it more similarly to the earliest Christians. Second, I’m paying attention to textual variants as interpretive clues. Variant readings provide some of the earliest interpretations of texts as well as potentially superior alternatives. My explorations of textual variants will sometimes relate to better readings and other times to early interpretation. Third, I am avoiding all commentaries. I want allow my imagination be shaped solely by closely reading the text. Lastly, and this is how I want to process my reading, I will blog short observations with the commitment to keep posts under five-hundred words.

Today I read the first chapter of Matthew. Admittedly, the genealogy (1.2-16) was lackluster, but it allowed me to concentrate on the pronunciation and rhythm of the text. I was struck by the repetition of sounds with only occasional variation (1.3, 5, 6, 11, 16). One quickly notices that changes from the repetitious "X begat Y . . ."  draw attention to the women included in the genealogy (1.3, 5, 6) as well as David as a king (1.6), Babylonian exile (1.11) and the passive verb used to describe Jesus who “was born” (ἐγεννήθη) from Mary and is called “Messiah” (1.16). These variations suggest that an ancient reader, like many modern ones, would have taken notice of these conspicuous women, David’s kingship and Babylonian exile coming together in the Christ son of God. Additionally, the summary counting of generations in 1.17 draws a line from Abraham to David to exile to “the Messiah” suggesting that Jesus is the fulfillment of promises to Abraham, David and post-exilic longings for redemption. Thus, the genealogy provides the expectation to read Matthew looking for Abraham, David and Exile.

A particular textual variant also caught my eye. Matthew 1.21 reads, “And she will bear a son, and you will call his name Jesus, for he will save his people [λαὸν αὐτοῦ] from their sins.” The Curetonian Syriac text reads “He will save the world [κοσμον] from their sins.” Obviously, this lone Syriac witness does not represent a better reading, but it does suggest an interesting interpretive move. Among early Syriac Christians Jesus was understood as the savior of the world from his infancy. This is somewhat different from Matthew’s emphasis on Jesus as Israel’s Messiah in the genealogy, but I thought it worthy of note nonetheless. It will be helpful to take not of other differences in Syriac manuscripts to see if universalizing the mission of Jesus is a Syriac tendency or an anomaly.