PR #3

Personal Response #3- The Gospel According to Matthew

The gospel of Matthew is unique from the gospel we have recently studied, Mark, in that Jesus is depicted in a whole new light. Due to the infancy narrative, and Matthew’s references to the fulfillment of the scriptures, Jesus is presented in a much more holy way. What I have found interesting so far is the fact that Matthew is constantly making references to Jesus’ fulfillment of the Old Testament scriptures. First of all, Matthew is constantly referring to Jesus as the son of David. To Matthew, it is important to let people know that Jesus is who prophets before him predicted he would be, as well as a symbolic king of Israel. Matthew also compares Jesus to Moses, because Matthew explains that Jesus will leave Egypt and lead Israel out of oppression just like Moses did in the Old Testament. Also, King Harod who ruled during Jesus’ childhood can be compared to the Pharaoh during Moses’ life because both rules killed the first-born sons of each family. Later on in the gospel, Matthew re-emphasizes Jesus’ fulfillment of the scripture by being tested by God for forty days and forty nights, like Israel’s exodus from Egypt. By comparing Jesus to great leaders in Israel, even mentioning his royalty, Matthew presents Jesus as a holy leader instead of a Mark’s image of suffering messiah.

Having read the gospel of Mark and transitioning into the gospel of Matthew, it is very noticeable that the two authors have different depictions of Jesus. What I liked most about reading the gospel of Matthew was having the author of The Gospel According to Matthew, Barbara E. Reid, point out Matthew’s references to the Old Testament. I never gave much thought to Jesus’ lineage or comparison to great prophets before him. I knew that Jesus was born in Bethlehem but I never knew that it was the same town the David was anointed king. Wether Jesus was really born in Bethlehem or not helps me understand why Matthew would choose this town to write about, because it is a allusion to Jesus as the “King of Israel”. I have noticed that I am looking at Mark’s gospel in a much more metaphorical approach, and looking into the deeper means instead of getting caught up on the facts. I enjoy thinking that even if some of the accounts of Jesus are not true, that there is a deeper meaning that the author meant behind them. Like that fact that Jesus is compared to Moses, Jesus may not have actually gone to Egypt and then returned to Israel. If he did not, than it does not make me think Jesus is less real but makes me understand the symbolic meaning behind the geography and actions of Jesus. Authors like Matthew viewed Jesus as more glorified and holy than authors like Mark did, which is why Matthew makes sure to remind readers that Jesus is even holier than great figures in the past. Overall, insight into Matthew’s references to fulfillment of the scriptures helped me understand his views on Jesus more.