The Father and the Son: Matthew's Theological Grammar

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Date

2014

Authors

Leim, Joshua E.

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Repository Usage Stats

646
views
4490
downloads

Abstract

To say that the first Gospel is about Jesus is to state what any reader knows from the most cursory glance at Matthew's narrative. Yet the scholarly discourse about Jesus' identity in Matthew reveals a fundamental confusion about how to articulate the identity of Jesus vis-à-vis "God" in the narrative. Not infrequently, for example, scholars assert that Matthew portrays Jesus as the "expression" or "embodiment" of Israel's God, but those same scholars - often leaving opaque the theological content of such descriptors - assert that Jesus is not therefore to be "identified" or "equated" with God; Jesus is "less than God," God's agent "through" whom God works. The result is a significant lack of perspicuity regarding the proper articulation of Jesus' identity in Matthew's Gospel.

The present work attempts to bring greater clarity to the articulation of Jesus' identity in Matthew by attending more precisely to two unique linguistic patterns woven deeply into the entire narrative's presentation of Jesus, namely, Matthew's use of προσκυνέω and his paternal-filial idiom. We turn first to Matthew's extensive use of the word προσκυνέω. Such language constitutes an important part of Israel's liturgical-linguistic repertoire - used often, for example, for the "worship" of Israel's God in Deuteronomy and the Psalms - and Matthew clearly shares that theological grammar (e.g., 4:9-10; cf. 22:37). At the same time, προσκυνέω serves as a Christological Leitwort in Matthew's narrative. While the word's meaning of course depends on its context - it need not mean "worship" in every instance - Matthew uses it ten times for Jesus and in all portions of the narrative; it constitutes the most basic (proper) response to Jesus. Matthew's reservation of the word προσκυνέω for these two figures - Israel's Lord God and Jesus - and his pervasive use of it for the latter suggests it may help render more intelligible the expression of Jesus' identity vis-à-vis "God" in the first Gospel.

We begin our study of προσκυνέω, therefore, by surveying its history of usage in Matthew's cultural encyclopedia, which helps sensitize us to the linguistic "training," so to speak, in which Matthew participates. Since the narrative, however, is the actual discourse in which the meaning of words is determined, I then go on to consider the particular contours of Matthew's appropriation of προσκυνέω language in the whole narrative. Not only does Matthew use προσκυνέω frequently for Jesus - unlike Mark and Luke - but more importantly, he employs it repeatedly in Christologically provocative and literarily strategic ways. At the climactic moment of the magi's visit, for example, the magi's action is expressed this way: καὶ ἐλθόντες εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν εἶδον τὸ παιδίον μετὰ Μαρίας τῆς μητρὸς αὐτοῦ (2:11). Likewise, at the climactic moment of Jesus' temptation, those same words reappear in Satan's mouth - ταῦτα σοι πάντα δώσω, ἐὰν πεσὼν προσκυνήσῃς μοι - only to be rebuffed by Jesus in the words of Israel's most basic confession: κύριον τὸν θεὸν σου προσκυνήσεις (4:9-10). I argue that Matthew has carefully shaped these accounts to reflect one another in a number of significant details, such that the reader is left with an apparent incongruity - Jesus receives from the magi what he declares belongs to Israel's God.

Several literary phenomena further confirm that these initial appearances of προσκύνησις are not incidental to Matthew's theological grammar. The sharpness of the incongruity between 2:1-12 and 4:8-10 is intensified cumulatively as Matthew repeatedly deploys προσκυνέω language in a way that re-activates his earlier uses. In his next use of προσκυνέω - after the temptation - the leper falls down in προσκύνησις before Jesus, whom he addresses as κύριε (8:2-4). Along with other important elements, Matthew has added/adapted these words to/from his Markan source as well as "intratextually" reflected Jesus' words at his recent temptation - only the κύριος receives προσκύνησις (see also 9:18; 15:25; 20:20). In such accounts, I argue, the content of the characters' actions remains ambiguous - προσκύνησις need not mean "worship" at the story level - but Matthew has nonetheless made a number of moves at the literary and lexical levels that make his προσκυνέω motif reverberate loudly for the reader in a christologically significant manner; the προσκύνησις offered to Jesus reflects that which Israel offered to its God. Importantly, similar patterns obtain not only in the details and literary settings of various pericopae, but also in the narrative's broader shape.

For instance, Matthew - uniquely among the synoptists - brings three episodes in a row into close correspondence linguistically and thematically, which come together to underscore the question of true and false "worship" (14:33 [προσκυνέω]; 15:9 [σέβω;]; 15:25 [προσκυνέω]). The "worship" of the two "outer" episodes turns explicitly on the question of Jesus' identity (14:33; 15:25), thereby setting in bold relief the "inner" episode that highlights Israel's "vain worship" (15:9). As another example, the magi's action in the narrative's introduction of Jesus is mirrored in its corresponding literary frame - the women grasp the risen Jesus' feet and offer him προσκύνησις, as do the eleven disciples (28:9; 17). What Satan requested of Jesus - only to be refused on theological grounds (4:8-10) - Jesus receives.

Finally, I consider how Matthew closely connects the προσκύνησις offered to Jesus in the narrative's frame with a decisive episode at the center of the narrative, 14:22-33. There, the disciples render Jesus προσκύνησις as "Son of God" (θεοῦ υἱός) after Peter repeatedly addresses him as the "Lord" in whose "hand" is the power to "save" from the mighty waters. I argue extensively that 14:22-33 - both in its literary form and in its sustained appropriation of OT imagery for YHWH - compels the reader to see Jesus, the filial κύριος as the recipient of the προσκύνησις Israel reserved for κύριος ὁ θεός. How Matthew can make this christological move while affirming Israel's basic commitment to the one God, I argue, turns on the filial language that comes to expression in the disciples' dramatic confession. Matthew, that is, reshapes the articulation of Israel's Lord God around the relation of the filial and paternal κύριος.

It is to that filial and paternal language, therefore, that we turn as the capstone of our discussion of Matthew's theological grammar. I contend that the narrative as a whole reflects the basic logic of 14:22-33; to tell the story of Israel's κύριος ὁ θεός is to tell the eschatologically-climactic story of the filial κύριος who rules and saves. I examine closely several passages - and their literary contexts - that serve seminal roles in Matthew's theological grammar, tracing how each brings Father and Son together in mutually constitutive relationship around their identity as κύριος (e.g., 22:41-46; 3:1-17; 11:1-12:8; 23:8-10; 23:37-24:2). I further trace the pattern of Matthew's filial and paternal language, demonstrating the ubiquitous christological shape to Matthew's paternal idiom; the identity of "God" in Matthew cannot be articulated apart from this particular Father-Son relation. Finally, I conclude the study by considering the close relation between Matthew's Emmanuel motif and his filial grammar (1:23; 18:19-20; 28:19-20); the Son is the filial repetition of the Father, his immanent presence among the people whom he saves (1:21; 2:6).

Description

Doctor of Theology

Provenance

Citation

Citation

Leim, Joshua E. (2014). The Father and the Son: Matthew's Theological Grammar. Dissertation, Duke University. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/9474.

Collections


Dukes student scholarship is made available to the public using a Creative Commons Attribution / Non-commercial / No derivative (CC-BY-NC-ND) license.