Jesus and the Sabbath in Matthew's Gospel

Jesus and the Sabbath in Matthew's Gospel. By Yong-Eui Yang, JSNTSup 139. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1997, 352 pp., $70.00.

This is a dissertation written under the supervision of R. T. France and G. N. Stanton, and examined externally by I. H. Marshall and D. Wenham. Yang also acknowledges insights from M. M. B. Turner who himself has contributed substantially to the Sabbath debate through his contributions in what is undoubtedly the finest treatment of the Sabbath issue available today, From Sabbath to Sunday (ed. D. A. Carson). Yang's judgments place him squarely in the "non-sabbatarian camp very much akin to Carson. Yang arrives at the conclusion that "For Matthew, the Sabbath is perpetual only until its fulfillment, like the temple (chs. 24; cf. 12:6) and accordingly the priesthood and sacrifices. After Jesus' fulfillment of the Sabbath, the function of the Sabbath as the sign/type is replaced by Jesus' redemption, the antitype of the Sabbath, and thus is no longer required."

The author begins with a brief historical overview of the Sabbath/Lord's Day controversy throughout Church history and a short review of the current literature and the major Sabbath views they represent. Yang rightly notes that while each position seeks to justify its views on Biblical grounds, they do not always treat the Biblical data in sufficient depth. His work seeks to make a contribution to the Sabbath/Lord's Day debate by attempting a thorough and comprehensive examination of three very important Sabbath controversy pericopes found in Matthew's Gospel (Matt 12:1-8, 9-14, and 24:20).

His work can be divided into three parts. Chapters one and two, "The Sabbath in the Old Testament" and "The Sabbath in Judaism to the first century c.E"" form the background for the main exegetical work found in chaps. three through six. Chapters seven and eight form the final section and examine how the apostolic fathers "adopted, adapted, or overlooked" Matthew's treatment of the Sabbath.

Yang achieves his objective well. And while his volume makes a meaningful contribution to the Sabbath/Lord's Bay debate in general, the real value of the work is in understanding Matthew's particular treatment of the Sabbath controversy in light of his community and especially his understanding of what Jesus meant when he declared Himself "Lord of the Sabbath." Secondarily it confirms many of the conclusions reached earlier by B. A. Carson and his collaborators, in whose steps Yang largely follows.

To the serious student of the Sabbath controversy Yang's treatment of Matthew's texts makes an appreciated and genuine contribution. It is well-researched, well-written, and contains adequate indexes. Its costs and the difficulty of the subject matter will, I fear, prove prohibitive for all but the most serious inquirers.

William A. Dale

Bethel Seminary; San Diego, CA

Copyright Evangelical Theological Society Mar 2000
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved