Matthew 14-28

UMI: Foreign Text omited ... Matthew 14-28. By Donald A. Hagner. WBC 33b. Dallas: Word, 1995, xxxix + 935 pp., $28.95.

With Matthew 1-13 having been published in 1993, the present volume completes Hagner's commentary on Matthew. Since vol. 1 sets the stage for vol. 2, some introductory comments on the first volume seem appropriate here. The laudable format of the WBC is already known to readers of JETS and is well utilized by Hagner, although I thought that some of the "explanation" sections were not as helpful as the sections on "form/structure/setting" and "comment." Despite the current trend of emphasis on the new literary criticism, he argues for and writes from the traditional historical-critical perspective, albeit with an evangelical worldview. He believes that Matthew has adapted the Markan tradition to his own ends, though he departs from the mainline critical consensus in his inclination toward a pre-70 CE date. The Markan material is largely assumed to be a stable and reliable tradition that represents the authentic historical Jesus. Thus Matthew's theological Tendenz and his resulting editorial activities are based upon authentic dominical tradition. Matthew has not invented pericopes in a wholesale fashion, though Hagner assumes (contra e.g. Carson, Matthew [EBC]) that Matthew's editorial work, not a single historical event, is the basis for the sermon on the mount pericope. Hagner's approach to the structure of Matthew is based on the alternation of narrative and discourse material, though he does not believe the evidence clearly leads to a detailed structural outline. As to authorship, Hagner believes that a Hellenistic Jewish Christian of the Matthean school redacted material derived largely from the apostle Matthew. The community addressed by the gospel is viewed as consisting of Jewish Christians, who exist in a sort of theological/existential "no-man's land," wishing for ongoing continuity with Jewish brothers and sisters at the same time that they need to be responsive to the widening purpose of God in reaching the Gentiles. While sensitive to the fact that Matthean polemics have been used by anti-Semites in a devastating fashion, Hagner nonetheless views the original provenance of this material as conventional intramural Jewish rhetoric.

Judging from the respective lengths of the two volumes, it appears that vol. 2 handles the material in more depth. In this volume Hagner continues his agenda of theological exegesis based on a conservative view of the dominical tradition and an ongoing dialogue with the current scholarly literature. He understands the flow of Matthew 14-28 as comprising eight sections: (1) Further ministry and confrontation with religious authorities (14:1-16:20), (2) the announcement of the cross as turning point (16:21-17:27), (3) the fourth discourse on life within the community (18:1-35), (4) increasing confrontation on the way to Jerusalem (19:1-20:35), (5) the last days in Jerusalem (21:1-22:46), (6) castigation of the scribes and Pharisees (23:1-39), (7) the fifth discourse on the destruction of the temple and the end of the world (24:1-25:46), and (8) the story of Jesus' death and resurrection (26:1-28:20). These divisions of Matthew 14-28 are rather typical, but the arguments for handling of Matthew 23 as distinct from Matthew 24-25 are notable, since some (e.g. Blomberg, Matthew [NAC]) link Matthew 23 with Matthew 24-25 as the two parts of the fifth and final discourse.

Brief comments on several cruces interpretum are in order. Hagner takes the view that Peter, who confesses Christ as the representative of the apostles as a whole, is the rock on which Jesus will build his Church (16:18). On the problem of the coming of the kingdom in power (16:28; cf. 10:23), he is less decisive. After some discussion he seems to say that Jesus originally spoke of the 70 CE destruction of Jerusalem, but that Matthew thought of this only in terms of the end of the age, and thus meant that some of the disciples would live to see the glorious return of Jesus. On the difficult parable of the vineyard and its application (21:33-46), it is concluded that God is setting aside Israel in favor of the Church, which becomes in effect the new Israel. This is qualified somewhat by the affirmation that the Church includes some Jews and that the Jews are included in the ... ... ... of 28:19. Nevertheless, some will be concerned with this evidently supersessionist view and prefer to understand the parable as teaching that God is replacing Israel's present leaders with new ones, Matthew's group and its leaders, as argued by A. Saldarini (Matthew's Christian-Jewish Community [1994] 58-63). On a final passage, the Olivet discourse, Hagner argues that due to the theological linkage of the fall of Jerusalem in 70 CE with the end of the age, elements of the preterist view must be combined with elements of the futurist view. However, some will part company with Hagner's view that Jesus' original words about the imminence of the destruction of Jerusalem are taken by Matthew to refer to the imminence of the parousia. This view and the similar approach to the problems of 10:23/16:28 seem to lead to the conclusion that Matthew was mistaken about the timing of the parousia. It is one thing to note that Jesus did not know of this timing (24:36) but another thing to hold that Matthew affirmed a mistaken view of it.