Please Vote For This Post On Pickafig

Text: Matt 3:13-17

Notes:

The exchange between John and Our Lord is often said to be an attempt at explaining why the sinless Jesus accepted John’s baptism. Simply put, the explanation is that it was God’s will. But what takes place here should also be seen as telling us something about Jesus and his teaching on discipleship.

“Throughout the Gospel Matthew emphasizes the necessity of “doing” or “observing” God’s law as opposed to simply knowing and talking about it and not doing it. His positive example is Jesus Himself who does the will of the Father perfectly. His primary negative example is the caricatured “typical” Pharisee. His secondary negative example, and some would say his “target”, is the Christian of whom Jesus says: “You can tell a tree by its fruit. None of those who cry out,’Lord,Lord,’ will enter the Kingdom of God but only those who do the will of my Father in heaven” (Matt 7:20-21). It is the same type of Christian who will say to Jesus after Jesus has condemned him: “Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or away from home or naked, or ill or in prison and not attend you in your needs?” (Matt 25:44). False disciples are non-doers.

The first words of Jesus recorded in Matthew’s Gospel, characterize him as a “doer” of God’s will. “Give in for now,” Jesus says when John tries to dissuade him from being baptized, “we must do this if we would fulfill all of God’s demands” (Matt 3:15). It is the same throughout the Gospel. It is especially so in the way Jesus voluntarily undergoes the ordeal of the passion as an act of obedience. His most characteristic words in relation to the passion are the words of the agony: “My Father, if this cannot pass me by without my drinking it, your will be done” (matt 26:42). And when he teaches his disciples to pray, he teaches them to say: “Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven” (Matt 6:10). Peter F. Ellis, MATTHEW, HIS MIND AND HIS MESSAGE.

The opening of the heavens in verse 16 may allude to Ezekiel’s inaugural vision, which took place in the vicinity of a river (Ezekiel 1:1). The opening of the heavens is a fairly common motif in Scripture, designating divine communication. Isaiah 63:7-19; 64:1 may also be in the evangelists mind here. This passage is a prayer that God would come to help His people. The text, like Matthew’s baptism account, contains a reference to the Exodus, the descent of the spirit, and the Fatherhood of God. It ends with the cry: “O that you wouldst rend the heavens, and wouldst come down.”

The descent of the Spirit “as a dove” probably should not be taken as meaning that the Spirit took the form of a dove but, rather, that His descent was dove-like.

Verse 16 implies that Jesus Himself was the only one to see the descent, though such an interpretation is not absolutely necessary. Verse 17 has the words from heaven being spoken to others: “This is my Son, the Beloved, in whom I am well pleased” (Literal translation). The twofold designation of Jesus, followed by the heavenly assessment, recall important designations in the OT. “My Son” (the Davidic King Psalm 2:7). “Beloved” (Isaac, when God asked for him to be sacrificed Genesis 22:2, 16). “well pleased” (God’s servant in Isaiah 42:1-4). All three personages are seen as foreshadowing Christ; and all three are significant for the world at large. The Davidic Kings, who foreshadowed Christ by being God’s adopted sons, were promised that one day their inheritance would be the nations (Psalm 2:8). The near sacrifice of Isaac, the beloved one of Abraham, which foreshadowed the sacrifice of Christ, motivated God to promise that through Isaac, all the nations of the earth would find blessing (Genesis 22:15-18. See Gal 3:15-29). God’s servant would bring forth justice to the nations, and justice upon the earth.

Please vote for this post at Pickafig

Matt 3:1-2 In those days (at that time). This vague temporal reference is taken as indicating the beginning of a new period of time. It may have no connection with the preceding narrative, or, it may mean “while Jesus was still residing at Nazareth” (see Matt 2:23).

Cometh John the Baptist preaching in the desert of Judea. The early Christian kerygma (preaching) usually began with the mission and witness of the Baptist. Whereas Mark and Luke emphasized that John preached a “baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins” (Mark 1:4; Luke 3:3); Matthew downplayed the focus on John’s baptism to highlight the theme of repentance. Also, Mark/Luke referred to the Baptist’s preaching in narrative, whereas Matthew places the call to repent on the Baptist’s lips: “Do penance, for the kingdom of Heaven is at hand.” These are the same words Jesus Himself will latter use (Matt 4:17).

The desert. The region is more closely identified in vs 6 which mentions the Jordan River. This area would call to the minds of the Jews the Prophet Elijah who was taken up into heaven in a fiery chariot in the wilderness around the Jordan (2 Kings 2:1-10). The Prophet Elisha witnessed this event and would latter effect the healing of Naaman the Syrian in this same region (2 Kings 5:1-14). Both prophets were associated with the attempt to restore the covenant which Israel had broken (1 Kings 19:9-18).

Do penance (repent). Metanoeo means to turn back around, change direction, re-orient yourself, acquire a new outlook. The word is in the active voice in Greek and implies more than just an internal state of mind (though that is a major element), hence the Vulgate rendering “do penance.” Something radical has happened and men need to be made aware of it: The Kingdom of Heaven (literally, the Heavens) is near.”

The Kingdom of Heaven is near. Kingdom would better be translated as reign, which better conveys the sense of power and authority. Matthew’s “kingdom of Heaven is equivalent to “the Kingdom of God.

Is near is in the perfect tense. It is already here in the person of Christ. “This is the heart of the Synoptic eschatology. The concept of the Kingdom is thus a dynamic one. It is the NT equivalent to the triumphant cry of the psalms: “Yahweh has become King!” Mt usually prefers the reverent Semitic circumlocution “kingdom of heaven” for Mk’s and Lk’s “kingdom of God.” For Mt, the coming of the Kingdom is a “process event.” To a degree it was present in the OT (Matt 21:43), comes in the person of Jesus (infancy narrative), impinges even more forcefully during the ministry, breaks in definitively at the death-resurrection of Jesus, and matures in the field of the world until the parousia.” (John P. Meier. MATTHEW, pg 23).

Matt 3:3 A voice of one crying in the desert, prepare ye the way of the Lord, make straight his paths. A reference to Isaiah 40:3, which originally prophesied the return of the Babylonian exile. In ancient times kings sent word in advance to cities in their realm that they were coming for a visit. The people were expected to prepare for the event in various ways, including repairing the road (way, path) on which the king was to travel, so as to make his coming to visit more pleasant. Here the preparation is a symbol for moral straightness. John prepares the way of the Lord by his preaching and baptizing.

Matt 3:4 The garb of the Baptist recalls that of Elijah (2 Kings 1:8), and was the traditional dress of a prophet (Zech 13:4). Locust and wild honey is traditional desert food. The Baptist’s austere lifestyle is an indication of his status as a prophet (Matt 11:7-10). A girdle (belt) around the loins is a sign of readiness for the saving intervention of God (Exodus 12:11-12; Luke 12:35-40; and see 1 Peter 1:13).

Matt 3:5-6 The Baptist’s ministry is widespread among the people but, at the same time, it is localized to Jerusalem, Judea, and the Jordan region. As in Mark, no one is mentioned as coming from Galilee to be baptized except Jesus (see vs 13 and Mark 1:2-11). In his commentary on Mark, Father Eugene LaVerdiere suggests this is done to “highlight the singular nature of Jesus’ baptism” by John.

Confessing their sins. In Jesus’ day Pagan converts to Judaism underwent a ritual washing. The radical nature of the kingdom now demands that Jews take upon themselves a status no better than those Pagan converts.

Matt 3:7-8 And seeing many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his baptism, he said to them: Ye brood of vipers, who hath shewed you how to flee the wrath to come? Certainly not John with his call to repent; for it is precisely a lack of repentance which the Baptist here condemns. The fruit image along with the condemnation of the Pharisees as a brood of vipers will reappear in the words of Jesus in Matt 12:24, 34-37. In Matt 23:33-36 He will use the term again when He ask the Scribes and Pharisees how they can flee Gehenna, since they act like their fathers who rejected and killed the prophets.

Bring forth fruits worthy of repentance. The Greek word poieo (bring forth) is sometimes used as a synonym for fruit karpos. Essentially, what the Baptist is saying is :Produce something productive. See Isaiah’s famous Song of the Vineyard (Isaiah 5:1-7) See also Hosea 10:1-2, 12-13. God expected fruit from Israel but seldom got it (Hosea 9:16) The man who turns away from God (recall repentance means a turning back to God) shows a lack of wisdom, and is like a barren bush in the desert (see Jeremiah 17:5-10).

Matt 3:9-12 Merely being a child of Abraham by belonging to the race of Israel will be of no advantage on the day of judgment, for through Abraham’s seed, who is Jesus, all the nations of the earth were to find blessing on the basis of God’s promise (see Genesis 22:15-18; Galatians 3:6-14; 4:26-29; Romans 9:6-8). If God can raise up the child of the promise from the barren womb of Sarah (Isaac, the prophetic foreshadowing of Christ), then He can certainly raise up children from the stones (Gentiles).

Even now the axe is laid to the root of the trees. Every tree therefore that does not yield good fruit, shall be cut down, and cast into the fire. Obviously, this build upon the fruit image of verse 8. The day of wrath is coming but the judgment has already begun, and repentance is demanded in the face of it. In the OT the destruction of trees was sometimes used as images of God’s punishment of pride or opposition to Him (see Isaiah 10:18-19, 33-34; Amos 2:9)

I indeed baptize you with water unto penance, but he that shall come after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you in the Holy Ghost and fire. Both the person and the power of the coming one is greater than John and his activity. Holy Spirit (Ghost) and fire are sometimes taken as referring to Christian baptism, or to Pentecost, however, given the judgment motif, it is probably better to understand Holy Spirit here as meaning both Spirit and wind. Both the Greek and Hebrew words for spirit can also mean wind. Wind and fire are two OT images for Judgment: For wind see Psalm 1:4; Psalm 18:42; Hosea 13:15. For fire see Isaiah 26:11; Jeremiah 4:4.

Whose fan (winnowing fork) is in his hand, and he will thoroughly cleanse his (threshing) floor and gather his wheat into the barn; but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire.

This continues the wind and fire image of the previous verse. Harvested grain was taken to a threshing floor where it was either beaten with heavy sticks or run over with heavy wooden sleds. This was done to remove the grain from the husks (chaff). The threshing floor was then cleaned of the chaff with a winnowing fork which was used to throw the chaff into the air to be driven away by the wind. The heavier grain would fall back to the floor so it could be collected and stored, while the chaff was gathered and burned.

Please Vote For This Post At Pickafig

Matt 2:13 This is the third time an angel has appeared in a dream, once to the wise men, and now, twice to Joseph. The appearance to the wise men, and this appearance to Joseph, were for the purpose of preserving the child’s life. I believe that I mentioned in a previous post that the persecution of the infant Messiah mirrors the persecution of the Son of Man in the final narrative in the Gospel. In that narrative the wife of Pilate, a pagan like the wise men, has a dream which does not save his life.

Arise, take the child and his mother. “Take” is a translation of the Greek paralambano, it is used several times in reference to St Joseph’s protection of the infant and his mother. The basic meaning of the word is”to receive near, that is, associate with oneself (in any familiar or intimate act or relation).” In the passion narrative the word paradidonai is used for the “handing over (arrest) of Jesus.

Matt 2:14 He arose, he took the child and his mother. Note the parallel with the previous verse. This is an example of what biblical scholars call a command and compliance motif. This serves to highlight the fidelity of Joseph, “the just man,” to God’s will.

Egypt. Commentators often note that Egypt is presented as a place of refuge in the Scripture, noting passages such as Gen 10:12; 1 Kings 11:40; Jer 26:21. However, in the first text Abraham is in fear of being killed; in the second the Patriarchs, who are shepherds, are told the Egyptians loathe them; in the third text, the alleged place of refuge proves ineffectual. Perhaps the flight of the Holy Family shoud be seen in the context of the Gospel narrative alone. Jesus has just been worshipped by Gentiles rather than by the rulers and authorities of His own people; now he is presented as being safe in a Gentile land as opposed to His own homeland. The flight should probably be seen as a foreshadowing of the mission of the Chruch to all nations (Matt 28:19).

Matt 2:15 That it might be fulfilled which the Lord spoke by the prophet, saying: Out of Egypt have I called my son. This verse relates to the end of the last verse: and he was there until the death of Herod. It also points towards Matt 2:21. The quotation is from Hosea 11:1. In that context, the prophet is referring to the exodus from Egypt, and the statement introduces a presentation of Israel as unfaithful to God, inspite of the care he showed them (Hosea 11:2-4). This leads to the threat of exile to Egypt and Assyria because the people refuse to repent (Hosea 11:5-7). In spite of all of this, God’s love still burns for his people, He will call them once again out of Egypt (a symbol in Hosea for exile) and Assyria (Hosea 11:10-11). Jesus comes out of exile from Egypt and will be portrayed by Matthew as the perfect Israel, faithful to God (see Matt 3:15, 4:1-11). Notice too that in Hosea 11:9 God refers to Himself as “The Holy One present among you,” reminding us that Jesus is “Emmanuel,” “God with us” (Matt 1:23).

Matt 2:16 Herod, realizing that he has been “deluded” ( Greek: empaizo”mocked”, jeered at) by the gentile wise men is enraged. The word empaizo appears elsewhere in Matthew only in the passion prediction of Matt 20:19 (refeerring to gentiles) and in the passion narrative in Matt 27:29, 31 (Gentiles); Matt 27:41 (Jews). Herod’s feeling that he had been mocked led him to order the slaughter of the infants; the mocking of Jesus begins after the people state :His blood be upon us and our children” (Matt 27:25).

“Exceedingly angry” is used to describe the emotion of Herod. The word thumoo is used to describe the fiereceness of the possessed man in Matt 8:28.

The dilligent enquiry of Herod recalls his secret examination of the wise men in Matt 2:7.

Matt 2:17-18 See Jeremiah 31:15. Ramah was beseiged by the Assyrians (Isaiah 10:29; Hosea 5:8) as the northern kingdom disintegrated. More to the point in this text, it was the place where people from the southern kingdom of Judah were assembled by the Babylonians for deportation (Jeremiah 40:1). This was the low point of the Kingdom of David (Matt 1:11, 17). Matthew sees the text as a prophecy of the slaughter of the holy innocents, but, as always, whenever Matthew appeals to Scripture, it is important to note the context of the prophecy.  These words of Jeremiah are a call to cease mourning because God will change the people’s fortunes if they show true repentance.  In light of the next section of the Gospel (Matt 3:1-12; see especially the condemnation of the religious leaders in vss 7-12)  The Jeremiah text He is clearly implying that King Herod is the leader of a new Babylon who drives Jesus into exile and carries off Rachael’s children. In chapter 24, with numerous allusions to the prophets, Jesus will insinuate that the leaders of the people (both political and religious) have become like the traditional enemies of God’s people.  For Matthew the new leader of the People of God is Jesus and, through Him, leaders of the Church.

Matt 2:19-21 Another dream, another command and compliance narrative (see notes on 2:13-14).

Matt 2:22-23 Another dream! Archelaus’ reign was as bad as his father’s but was certainly not as tolerated by the Romans; he reigned less than ten years.

“He shall be called a Nazarene.” See footnote #12 to 2:23 in the NAB

Then Herod secretly called the wise men, and learned from them exactly what time the star appeared. 2:8 He sent them to Bethlehem, and said, “Go and search diligently for the young child. When you have found him, bring me word, so that I also may come and worship him.”

2:9 They, having heard the king, went their way; and behold, the star, which they saw in the east, went before them, until it came and stood over where the young child was. 2:10 When they saw the star, they rejoiced with exceedingly great joy. 2:11 They came into the house and saw the young child with Mary, his mother, and they fell down and worshiped him. Opening their treasures, they offered to him gifts: gold, frankincense, and myrrh. 2:12 Being warned in a dream that they shouldn’t return to Herod, they went back to their own country another way.

NOTES:

2:1 Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of King Herod, behold, wise men from the east came to Jerusalem, saying, 2:2 “Where is he who is born King of the Jews? For we saw his star in the east, and have come to worship him.”

Bethlehem, which means “City of Bread” was the original “city of David”, that is to say it was the place of his birth, and therefore a fitting place for Jesus, the Son of David to be born. For background on the city see HERE (Catholic) and HERE (protestant).

King Herod was only half Jewish, the other half being Idumean (Edomite), traditional enemies of the Jews. The Idumeans were converted to Judaism by force by John Hyrcanus and, as a result, their status was suspect. Herod was made a king by the Roman Senate in 40 BC, a fact that didn’t sit well with the Jewish people. He was only able to begin his reign in 37 BC after appealing to Rome for the military to help him take control. His reign was maintained by a combination of cruelty (persecution, bloodshed, intimidation) and ingratiation (his massive building projects, including the beautiful remodeling and enlargement of the temple).

Wise men: Magi. Almost certainly astrologers from Persia (roughly modern Iraq). This was the area from whence came Balaam, a Magus (according to Philo) and prophet who was called upon to curse God’s people, but could in fact only bless them (See Numbers 22-24). The fourth and final oracle of Balaam contained these words:

I see him, but not now. I see him, but not near. A star will come out of Jacob. A scepter (a symbol of kingship) will rise out of Israel, and shall strike through the corners of Moab, and shall break down all the sons of Sheth. Edom (Idumea) shall be a possession (Greek: shall be dispossessed). Seir his enemies, also shall be a possession, while Israel does valiantly. Out of Jacob shall one have dominion (reign as king).

The star should be seen as a prophetic sign rather than an historically verifiable event. In other words, just because the Magi saw the sign, it does not follow that others did, or could. Just as a “sky sign” heralds the first coming of Christ, so too, will signs in the heavens herald his second coming (see Mt 24:30).

King of the Jews: A title given to Herod by the Roman Senate but used only of Jesus in the Gospel. This is the only reference to the title outside the passion narrative.

2:3 When King Heard it, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him.

King Herod…troubled: In Jesus’ day it was popularly believed that the Messiah would be a warrior king who would crush his enemies by military might. A rival king, particularly one who had a legitimate claim to the throne would no doubt cause Herod concern. If Herod was aware of the prophecy of Balaam, his concern no doubt would have been increased for he, as an Edomite would be “possessed” (ruled over) by the Messiah or-according to the Greek text- “dispossessed” (no longer in control).

And all Jerusalem with him: People probably had various reasons for their troubled feelings. When Jesus enter Jerusalem the city will once again be in turmoil (see Mt 21:10).
2:4 Gathering together all the chief priests and scribes of the people, he asked them where the Christ would be born.

That Herod was so out of touch with the prophecies concerning the Messiah shows that the Jews were right in suspecting his religious status. The gathering together of the leaders of the people foreshadows the future conspiracy against our Lord, (Mt 26:3) and may be an allusion to Psalm 2:2. In that psalm the reference is to pagan peoples, but Matthew, latter in this Gospel, will compare the Jewish leaders to pagans.

2:5-6 They said to him; “In Bethlehem of Judea, for this is written through the prophet, ‘You Bethlehem, land of Judah, are in no way least among the princes of Judah: for out of you shall come forth a governor, who shall shepherd my people Israel.

In response to Herod’s question, the priests and scribes appeal to the Prophet Micah, chapter 5, verses 2 and 4, but they also use a subtle reference to 2 Sam 5:2. In addition, they also add the words “are in no way least.” It is interesting to note that the addition from 2 Sam 5:2 concerns, in its original context, the military greatness of David in comparison to Saul, whom he replaced as king. In addition, the words “are in no way least” which they added to the text could subtlety suggest the idea of greatness. Were the leaders trying to motivate fear in Herod, who was so paranoid about possible rivals to his throne. According to historians, the Jewish priests and other authorities by and large tried to maintain the status quo with Rome, and therefore were not very keen on the idea of a Messiah (see John 11:45-53). Were the authorities trying to get Herod to act with his characteristic brutality in order to “nip” the problem “in the bud?”

2:7-8 Then Herod secretly(lathra) called the wise men, and learned (akriboo) from them exactly (akriboo) what time the star appeared. He sent them to Bethlehem, and said, “Go and search diligently (akriboo) for the young child. When you have found him, bring me word, so that I also may come and worship him.”

The secrecy of Herod stands in marked contrast to the very public nature of what the Magi had seen and said (vss 1-3). His desire to know exactly when the star appeared to them seems, in the present verses, to be idle curiosity, but, in fact, the question is part of a murderous plot. Likewise, his orders to the Magi to search with diligence for the child “so that I also may come and worship him” is part of the plot.

Herod also is contrasted with Joseph. Joseph, because he was a just man, did not wish to make a public example of Mary so he sought to keep things quiet (lathra) for her benefit (1:19), whereas Herod’s secrecy comes after a public revelation and is inspired by evil mechanizations. Towards this end Herod seeks to learn exactly (akriboo) things concerning the child, whereas Joseph simply ponders (enthymeomai= Was inspirited; inspired).

2:9-10 They, having heard the king, went their way; and behold, the star, which they saw in the east, went before them, until it came and stood over where the young child was. When they saw the star, they rejoiced with exceedingly great joy.

Apparently, the star which they saw while in the east (Persia, apparently), hung over Jerusalem and led them to that city. Once in Jerusalem, however, and after having ascertained the place of the Messiah’s birth, the star began to move, thus acting as a guide. Are we to see in this event a sort of pagan exodus? Just as a pillar of cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night guided the Israelites out of pagan Egypt and away from its gods, so too does the star guide the Magi to him who would bring an end to all false worship.

2:11 They came into the house and saw the young child with Mary, his mother, and they fell down and worshiped him. Opening their treasures, they offered to him gifts: gold, frankincense, and myrrh.

The Magi had set out to worship (proskyneo see 2:2) the King of the Jews and here their purpose is fulfilled. The reference to the child being with “Mary, his mother” will be repeated several times in the rest of the infancy narrative. Some see this as a reminder of the Virgin birth, but I see it as a subtle polemic against Herod. Historically (see 1&2 Kings), the lineage of the Davidic kings was traced not only through the father, but through the mother as well; a fact necessitated by polygamy. Herod had at least ten wives; his favorite was Mariamne, whom he murdered, along with his eldest son, Antipater, and at least two other sons, Alexander and Aristobulos. This caused the Roman Emperor Augustus to quip: “It is better to be one of Herod’s pigs, than one of his sons.” Herod refused to worship the child and rightful heir of the kingdom, instead, he hatched a plan to kill him, but God, through Joseph, had “the child and his mother” protected; a stark contrast to Herod’s “care” for his family.

Gold, frankincense, and myrrh (see Isaiah 60:1-6): Gold was fit tribute for a king. Frankincense is an aromatic gum used for incense in worship, a fitting gift for a priest. Myrrh is derived from aromatic gum and rendered into oil form, it was used both for the anointing of priests (Ex 30:23-33), and as a burial spice (John 19:39-40). Considering who Jesus is, and what he came to do, the gifts are prophetic and appropriate. en (Concerning the gifts, see St Irenaeus, Against Heresies Book 3, chapter 9)

2:12 Being warned in a dream that they shouldn’t return to Herod, they went back to their own country another way.

This dream, like several Joseph will have, serve to save the child’s life. Like the righteous Joseph, they heed the divine communication of the prophetic dream. Again, this stands in marked contrast to Herod, who would not heed the prophetic scripture. The text may also contain an allusion to the Balaam story, for after blessing Israel, he “went his way back to his home” (Num 24:25). Latter in the Gospel another pagan, the wife of Pontius Pilate, will have a dream that will not succeed in saving Jesus from death (27:19).

Earlier in the Gospel the Messiah was named Jesus, because he would, “save his people from their sins;” here we begin to see just who the Messiah’s “people” are. They are all those who heed and do God’s will, like St Joseph or the pagan Magi. The Magi should be seen as a prophetic indication that the Gospel will be for all peoples, and not just for those descended from Abraham “according to the flesh” (see the preaching of the Baptist, 3:7-10; parable of the tenants, 21:33-45; and the end of the gospel, 28:18-20).

1:18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was like this; for after his mother, Mary, was engaged to Joseph, before they came together, she was found pregnant by the Holy Spirit. 1:19 Joseph, her husband, being a righteous man, and not willing to make her a public example, intended to put her away secretly.  1:20 But when he thought about these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, don’t be afraid to take to yourself Mary, your wife, for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit.   1:21 She shall bring forth a son. You shall call his name Jesus, for it is he who shall save his people from their sins.”
1:22 Now all this has happened, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying,

1:23 “Behold, the virgin shall be with child,

and shall bring forth a son.

They shall call his name Immanuel;”

which is, being interpreted, “God with us.”^*1:24 Joseph arose from his sleep, and did as the angel of the Lord commanded him, and took his wife to himself; 1:25 and didn’t know her sexually until she had brought forth her firstborn son. He named him Jesus.

1:18 Now (Greek, “de”) the birth of Jesus was like this: As I noted in my last post on Mt, verse 18 contains the Greek conjunctive “de,” which can have either a contiuative, or a adversative sense. Throughout the genealogy which opens the Gospel the word (often untranslated into English) is used in the continuative sense: “and Isaac begot Jacob, and Jacob begot Judah…, and Judah begot…” This repeated usage serves to highlight what is rather obvious to most people already-men beget offspring. This fact, however, comes to a crashing halt in the second part of verse 16: And Jacob begot Joseph, the husband of Mary. Of her was born Jesus…” The effect is a jolt. Joseph is not said to have begotten Jesus, instead, his birth is related solely to Our Lady! Obviously, and explanation is needed. That is where the current passage comes in; and why the adverse conjunctive is important. If I may paraphrase the meaning of verse 18: All the others were begotten in that way, but Jesus was born in this way.”

1:18 cont. for after his mother, Mary, was engaged to Joseph, before they came together, she was found pregnant by the Holy Spirit. “Before they came together” is often taken in a sexual sense by protestants who, by focusing on the word “before” see it as implying latter sexual activity. The Greek word translated as “came together” is sunerchomai, which is used a total of 32 times in the NT, with only one instance of it having sexual connotations (1 Cor 7:5). Here, the meaning of the word is clearly indicated by the word “engaged” (espoused. Greek, mnesteuo) and the disjunctive primary participle eta, which is not translated into English. This participle links the phrase “was engaged to Joseph,” with “before the came together,” while highlighting the two different states. All of this needs to be seen against the backdrop of Jewish marriage custom.

A Jewish marriage began with the engagment or espousal (mnesteuo). At this point the man and woman were considered married, though they continued to live apart. This period could last up to a year, and sexual relations could take place, though they were generally frowned upon at this stage. The marriage was considered completed and “full” when the Groom traveled to the home of the Bride and took her to his home. It is to this action that the word sunerchomai is referring. This action was absolutely necessary for ensuring that Jesus belonged to “the house of David,” and could thus claim to be “son of David.” (For images of the Groom coming to take his bride see Matt 25:1-13; John 3:29-30; John 14:3)

1:19 As a righteous man, Joseph was more interested in “justice, mercy, and fidelity”, rather than the minute observance of the letter of the law (see Matt 23:23-24). He begins contemplating how to handle the situation according to the light he has when, suddenly:

1:20 Behold, suddenly, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take to yourself Mary, your wife (i.e. complete the wedding ritual as noted above) for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit. The dreams of Joseph (he will have several), and the instructions which are given in them, serve to establish Jesus’ claim to Davidic sonship (first dream); protect his life (secon and fourth dreams); and help fulfill prophecy (all the dreams).

The dreams of Joseph reminds us of the great patriarch of the same name whose dreams helped save himself and his family (see the Joseph cycle of stories in Genesis 37-50).

Son of David reminds us of the title given to Jesus in the heading Matthew gave to his genealogy in 1:1. It also reminds us that the current verses under consideration are meant to answer the anomalies raised by the genealogy (see my notes on 1:1-17). The Messiah, (”anointed one”) was to be from the line of David according to prophecy (see 2 Sam 7; Psalms 2, 45, 72, 89, 110, 132; Micah 4-5; Isaiah 7-11; ect). Joseph’s subsequent actions establish Jesus’ legal claim to Davidic sonship.

take to yourself mary: various forms of the word “take” will be used in the infancy narrative in relation to Joseph’s protective action towards mother and child. This action is always connected with the fulfillment of God’s will (see 1:24; 2:13-14; 2:20-21;). Various forms of the word (or related words) will also be used in the passion narrative for Jesus being arrested (e.g. 26:55).

1:21 She shall bring forth a son. You shall call his name Jesus, for it is he who will save his people from their sins. The name Jesus means “Yahweh (God) is salvation.” What is meant by “his people”? This will be a question that the Gospel will have to answer. How will he “save his people from their sins?” Again, this will be answered during the course of the Gospel.

1:22-23 Now all this happened, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying, “Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son. They shall call him “Immanuel;” which is, being interpreted, “God with us.”

The phrase all this must certainly be taken as referring not only to the events of 1:18-21, but of everything implied by the genealogy as well; for the prophecy of Isaiah 7:14, which Matthew quotes, concerns “the house of David” (see Isaiah 7:2, 13, 17). The hub, the focal point, or center of salvation history is the virgin birth of Christ and its purpose: the bodily death and resurrection for our salvation. To put it another way, the focal point is the incarnate Son of God, “who, for us men and our salvation, came down from heaven, was born of the Virgin Mary, and became man. He suffered under Pontius Pialte was crucified, died, and was buried. On the third day he rose from the dead…” The salvation history that has been and is yet to be gets its meaning only at this point.

God with us is the translation of Immanuel. The fact that the promises made to David and Abraham are being fullfilled in Christ is a sure sign that “El” (God) is “immanu” (”with us”= “im” followed by pronominal suffix). Whenever God promised to be with his people, or individuals chosen for some purpose, it was not merely a statement of divine presence. Rather, it was a promise of divine help through the workings of the divine power. It is only in virtue of this promise and what it means that the other promises of God work, even in the face of human sinfulness. The divine promises are fulfilled because of God’s fidelity, not man’s. No matter how sinful the Davidic kings were, the promise was not nullified. At the end of this Gospel, Jesus will declare himself “Immanuel” by promising “I am with you always;” and he does this in spite of the lack of faith of the Apostle: “They worshipped him, but they doubted” (see MT 28:17-20) Anyone who uses the faults and failings of the Church’s leaders as a pretext for leaving the Church, or for starting a pretending church of their own, have not understood the power of God and his Christ, nor trusted in their promises.

1:24 Joseph arose from his sleep, and did as the angel of the Lord commanded him, and took his wife to himself, and did not know her until she had brought forth her (firstborn) son.

as the angel of the Lord commanded him: Joseph is thus shown to be a model of discipleship. Doing all that is commanded is a major theme of Matthew’s Gospel; indeed, the Gospel will end on that note.
By doing what was commanded of him (finishing the marriage process and naming the child), Joseph becomes the legal father of Jesus, which establishes the latter’s claim to Davidic sonship. brought forth her son is a reminder of the anomaly introduced by the end of the genealogy (see my note on 1:16), which necessitated the narration/explanation given in the verses we have been studying. Some translations, including the one with which I began this post, speak of her “firstborn son.” While this word would, to a certain extent, help emphasize the virgin birth, “firstborn” is almost certainly a scribal error imported into the text from Luke’s Gospel. Firstborn was a legal title given to the first male child in virtue of the fact that he was just that- the first male child. it cannot be taken as implying that such a child had older sisters any more than it can be taken as implying younger siblings, for the title was not dependent on either.

he did not know her until… To know someone is a biblical euphemism for sexual relation. Some people, focusing upon the word “until,” see the passage as implying that sexual relations occurred after the birth of Christ. Such an interpretation overlooks the intentions and aim of the 1:18-24, which is to describe and defend the virgin birth as a fact and a fulfillment of prophecy. “Until” (Greek: heos) should, therefore, be taken in its primary and strongest sense, meaning, “up to the time of” without any bearing, meaning, or implication regarding the future.

The opening verse of Matthew’s Gospel is to be understood as a title. Unlike modern authors, who employ the use of a title page, or, at the very least, separate the title of their work from the text by placing it atop the page, ancient authors used other methods. Those who wrote in Greek alerted their readers to the fact that they were employing a title by several literary devices: (1) a title always stood at the head of what was being entitled; (2) a title had no verb, either explicit or implied; (3) a title never began with a definite article. Matthew 1:1, Mark 1:1, and Revelation 1:1-2 are all titles, but, unlike the last two mentioned, Matthew’s title is not given to the whole book, rather, it is used to designate the genealogy and subsequent birth narrative.

To modern man, reading a genealogical list is probably about as exciting as reading the county tax roll; but with many ancient peoples, such was not the case. Among the Jews, a persons family history is, at the same time, ones own history of God’s dealing with you and yours. Further, for certain classes of people, such as priests and royalty, genealogies were important for establishing ones claim to priestly or royal office. I have read somewhere that priests who wished to serve in the temple at Jerusalem were required to prove their heritage all the way back to Aaron; and that their wives had to prove that their Aaronic pedigree was at least five generations long. At the time of Ezra, after the end of the Babylonian exile, when the temple was being rebuilt and the priesthood reorganized, some who could not adequately prove their priestly heritage were “put from the priesthood” (Ezra 2:62).

Son of David. Though the actual genealogy begins with Abraham (vs 2) David is mentioned first in the title. No doubt this was done for added emphasis, in view of the importance of the kingdom and kingship themes in this Gospel. In this Gospel the title is used a total of 9 times in relation to Jesus, and once of St Joseph. Equivalent terms include “Messiah” (Greek, Christos= Anointed One. Used 14 times), “Emmanuel” (meaning “God is with us”. See 1:23; also 28:20), “King” (used several times in direct reference to Christ, and by allusion in some parables), “the one who is to come” (11: 3).

Son of Abraham. Abraham makes his appearance in salvation history immediately after the scattering of people and the confusion of tongues which resulted from the sin of Babel (see Gen 11). The promises to Abraham, therefore, are the beginning of God’s redemption of humanity from that situation. It is through Abraham that all the peoples of the earth will find blessing (Gen 12:3); Kings will stem forth from him (Gen 17:6), a prophecy which begins to find fulfillment in David, and is brought to fruition in our Lord, through whom we reign:

908 By his obedience unto death,⁴⁴⁴ Christ communicated to his disciples the gift of royal freedom, so that they might “by the self-abnegation of a holy life, overcome the reign of sin in themselves”:⁴⁴⁵

That man is rightly called a king who makes his own body an obedient subject and, by governing himself with suitable rigor, refuses to let his passions breed rebellion in his soul, for he exercises a kind of royal power over himself. and because he knows how to rule his own person as king, so too does he sit as its judge. He will not let himself be imprisoned by sin, or thrown headlong into wickedness.^{446 Catechism of the Catholic Church}

1:2-16 Abraham bgot Issac; and Issac begot Jacob… After the initial opening, mentioning that Abraham begot Issac, all subsequent births (except that of Jesus!) are introduced with the term “and” (and Issac begot Jacob, and Jacob begot… ect). The Greek is a primary particle (”de”, pronounced “deh”) which can be employed as either an adversative or a continuative; the latter being its usage here. By not employing it in relation to Christ’s ancestry the Evangelist hints at the uniqueness of Christ’s birth. This is further emphasized in 1:18 where the particle is used as an adversative introducing the birth narrative of Jesus. Every relationship in the genealogy is designated by the word “begot” and, after “Abraham begot Issac” with the word “de” as well; except when we come to Jesus, who, in addition to what has been said about “de”, is not said to be begotten of Joseph. This raises the question “how was Jesus born?” and, “how is he son of David?” Complicating this further is how the genealogy ends at 1:16, “And Jacob begot (Greek, egenneseu) Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born (Greek, egennethe).” Throughout the genealogy the accusative case of gennao, which is egenneseu, has been used, but with the birth of Christ the nominative case is used: “Divine intervention supplants the order of nature” (FIRE OF MERCY, Vol. 1, Erasmo Leiva-Merikakis). Finally, the “of whom Jesus was born” is feminine, thus relating the birth of Jesus to Our Lady rather than St Joseph. All of this serves to highlight the importance of the word “de” in the adversative in verse 18: ‘Now (”de”) this is how the birth of Christ came about.” It wasn’t like the other births; it was a virgin birth (see 1:16, 23, 25).

In addition to Mary, four other women are mentioned in the list. According to the Old Testament and/or Jewish tradition, the four women were all pagans. Since it was forbidden first by custom, but also by the Mosaic law, that Jewish men marry pagan women, their inclusion is thought to emphasize the theme of sin. In this regard it should also be noted that three of the woman, Rahab, Tamar, and Bathsheba (”the wife of Urriah”) were all involved in some kind of sexual sins. Furthermore, some other real stinkers are mentioned in the list; including the murderous and idolatrous king Manasseh. Perhaps all of this is to be seen as an apologetic or a polemic in support of the virgin birth. If God can maintain his promise in spite of sexual sins and murder, then he can certainly fulfill that promise through a virgin birth.

1:17 Fourteen generations…fourteen generations…fourteen generations… The division of the genealogy into 3 parts consisting of 14 generations each is clearly artificial. A comparison of this genealogy with others of the Abraham/David line shows that Matthew has purposely left out some names to achieve the symmetry. Thus, for example, between the names Jehoram and Uzziah the names of three kings: Ahaziah, Jehoash, and Amaziah, are excluded. Two things should be noted here: (1) the word “begot” can be used of direct ancestors who may not be immediate ancestors; in other words, a grandfather, or a great-grandfather can be said to have begotten a grand/great-grand son; (2) Genealogies often functioned as more that merely historical records; they sometimes had symbolic value often based on numbers and structure (see the introduction to Genesis in the NEW CATHOLIC COMMENTARY ON HOLY SCRIPTURE). Various suggestions have been made as to why St Matthew divides his genealogy into three sets of fourteen. The most commonly accepted explanation is based upon Hebrew gemmetria. As in Latin, letters in the Hebrew alphabet also served as numbers. The numerical value of the consonants of David’s name (Hebrew has no vowels in its alphabet) equals 14: D=6; V=4; D=6. The fact that there are three sets of 14 generations is probably meant to convey the idea of fulness.

If one counts up the generations mentioned in the third section, one finds only thirteen, not fourteen generations; this has led some scholars to conclude that A scribal error took place very early in the copying stage of the Gospel. Others think that we are to understand that Jesus, the thirteenth generation, inaugurates the fourteenth as “the Christ;” in other words, Christians from the time of the resurrection to the second coming make up the fourteenth generation.