Strange Beginning … Until

Last updated on: March 12, 2018 at 12:09 am by Scot McKnight

Strange Beginning … Until 2018-03-10T11:31:26-06:00 Scot McKnight

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

That Matthew’s Gospel begins with a genealogy strikes the contemporary reader as strange. It is at least for most a listing of names largely unknown or at least barely known. But the early church found insight into the Gospel of Matthew because of its beginning.

Both Ezekiel and Revelation record a vision of the throne with four beasts around it and in each beast the early church found one of the Evangelists, and each found something to say about how its beast corresponded with its Gospel. Here is Francis Watson, The Fourfold Gospel:

In both cases, the throne is accompanied or surrounded by four living beings, each with four different faces according to the prophet, each with one of the four different faces according to the seer.

For early readers of the canonical gospels, these scriptural images match their own experience of four very different texts that together bear witness to the one Christ. This correspondence between the different faces of heavenly creatures and earthly texts is most clearly visible in the gospels’ different starting points. There is a human face, and it corresponds to Matthew’s opening genealogy of the Jewish Jesus, descended from David and from Abraham. The lion’s face evokes the roar from the desert with which Mark introduces the wild figure of John the Baptist. The face of a calf speaks of sacrifice and the temple, which is where Luke’s narrative both begins and ends. The eagle that soars into the heights is the evangelist John, whose gospel opens by bearing witness to the eternal Word who was with God in the beginning and who was God.

When he turns to Matthew Watson explores the genealogy as the face of Matthew’s Gospel. His summary of Matthew:

Matthew’s gospel bears witness to a Jewish Jesus whose person and work are shaped by his people’s history as interpreted in the scriptural record. This gospel was placed first in the canonical collection because its early readers were convinced by its fundamental claim: salvation has come to the world in the person of a Jew.

That summary to his chp does not capture the fullness of the chapter itself. To begin with, Watson admits that while most early Christians saw the canonical order as the chronological order, Papias of Hierapolis did not. Origen and John Chrysostom represent the tradition: first Matthew.

What to me is a bit odd about this chp is that Watson not only explores the importance of the genealogy for Matthew but seems to buy into the idea that the genealogy is the hermeneutical key. Well, the whole Gospel is the hermeneutical key even if the genealogy sets out important themes. Or at least some of them.

Matthew defends the historicity of Jesus as a Jew as fundamental to salvation, which means Israel’s story is given prime place in the Gospel as its foundation. No one can deny Jesus’ Jewishness and therefore the Jewishness of the Christian gospel itself.

Critical to Watson, and for me the best idea in the chp, is the “double genesis” of Jesus. Jesus is both a son of Abraham and David as well as the son of God and Mary. A double genesis (Matthew 1:1 and 1:18). How then is Jesus the son of Joseph, when he is not born of Joseph? That’s a question that pesters Watson a bit, and leads to his belief that Jeconiah is counted twice — I don’t know why he doesn’t count both Jacob (father of Joseph) and Mary.

The narratival elements of the genealogy are explored in both accessible prose and penetrating insights. E.g., is the “Joseph son of Jacob” focused on Judah son of Jacob because the Joseph son of Jacob is used later? Why does Matthew have so many unedifying stories in his genealogy? Part of this question is rooted in some harsher readings of the women in the genealogy than might be necessary. If Watson thinks Matthew marginalizes Joseph I would say Watson marginalizes Mary: the women of the genealogy are connected to Mary. She deserves more attention.

The narrative’s shadow side of sin sets up the need for redemption in two ways: both Jesus is Messianic Savior and the story of Israel can’t redeem itself. It needs a Savior. This is well done.

Uncategorized

Previous Post

March 11, 2018

Gracious Father

Next Post

March 12, 2018 Industry Evangelicals vs. Identity Evangelicals

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Acts of the Apostles Adam Advent Anabaptism Angels Anglican Apologetics Atonement Baptism BCP Prayers Bible Biblical Studies Birds Blogging Bloglossary Bonhoeffer Books Calvinism Christianity Church Church History Coffee Colossians Commentary Recs Conversion Creation Creeds Culture Death Ecclesiastes Economics Education Embracing Grace Emergent Emerging Movement Eschatology Essays Ethics Eucharist Evangelicalism Family Fasting Fathers Fellowship of Differents Footsteps Tour Fun and Whimsical Gospel Grace Happiness Heaven Hell Holy Spirit Irenaeus James Jesus Jesus Creed Job Justification Kingdom of God Law Lectures Lent Liberalism Love and Marriage Mabanteneni Manhood Mary Miracles Missio Alliance MissioLife Missional Missional Jesus Movies and Film New Perspective Northern Seminary OneLife Origins Project Orthodox Parables Pastor's Spouse Pastoring and Leading Pastoring and Preaching Patristics Paul Paul-John Tour Pharisees Pietism Political Theology Prayer and Formation Preaching Problems for Faith Psalm 119 Psalms Public Issues Purgatory Religions Resurrection Revelation Romans Rule of JCreed Science and Faith Sermon on the Mount Sports Ten Commandments Theology Third Way Top Ten Lists Translations Uncategorized Universalism University Ministry Way Out Weekly Meanderings Wisdom Women and Ministry Work Worship Writing & Blogging Youth Ministry

Select a Month July 2021 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 0000

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What was the name of the disciple who replaced Judas Iscariot?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Matthias Barnabas Silas Timothy