Matthew 1:1-17

(Text only for Ch. 1,2,3 Audio available for most Matthew sermons from Chapter 4-28)

Title: Introduction to Matthew

I am truly excited about our study in the book of Matthew.  I went back to look at the last time we, as a congregation, were doing a sermon series through a gospel, and the last time that happened was when Pastor Ron Cooper began preaching through the gospel of John in 2000, a book that he then handed off to me in 2001 when I began my interim here.  I finished up John by the end of 2001 and then we studied through Galatians, Acts, Romans and then I,2,3 John.

So it has been almost 10 years since we, as a congregation has been intensely studying a gospel.  So I’m very excited to be able to look directly at the words of Christ and be challenged by them.

Some people have asked me why I decided to pick Matthew, and I must admit, it was sort of a process of elimination for me.  First, we’ve already gone through John.  Second, we’ve already gone through Acts, written by Luke, and I wanted to study an author that we hadn’t looked at yet, so that left me with either Matthew or Mark.  

Now, there is nothing wrong with Mark, nothing at all, but Matthew is much longer, much more detailed, and I thought we might be able to get a little more out of Matthew understanding who Matthew was writing to and what the major themes of his gospel are.

(read passage)

So let’s begin our overview of Matthew:

  1. Authorship
  1. The author never identifies himself.
  2.   Early church tradition held that Matthew (also called Levi) “arranged the oracles”
  3.   There has been some interesting debate (starting in the 18th century) based on the original language the gospel was written in.  Essentially, here is the argument
    1. Matthew supposedly wrote in Hebrew and Aramaic, (because of his target audience) but this gospel does not read like a translation of Hebrew or Aramaic, instead, it reads like a translation from Greek.  Therefore, some argue that Matthew was not the writer, but the translator from Greek to Hebrew, and what we call “The Gospel of Matthew” is actually the original Greek gospel from an unknown author.
    2.   The second possibility is that Matthew wrote in BOTH Greek and Hebrew, as many scholars have, to spread his message as far as possible, and we have the copy of that Greek gospel.
  4. Point?  

Fair question.  The author does not identify himself, showing that he didn’t think it was important to know who the author was, but that the message and the inspiration of the Holy Spirit’s authorship are what’s important.

  1. My view:  I hold very high regard for church history, and as far back as the 3rd century, this book was commonly known as “The Gospel of Matthew” so I have no problem attributing this book to him, and if I’m wrong, it doesn’t change any of the meaning or power of the message.
  1. Date:  Between A.D. 64 and 70.

Most conservative evangelical scholars accept this time period based on a few observations and clues within the gospel:

  1. There are many warnings against the Sadducees in Matthew.  The Sadducees rapidly fell from power after the destruction of the Temple in A.D. 70.  Within a few short years, they were extinct, therefore a date later than A.D. 70 in unlikely.
  2. In Chapter 24 Jesus talks at length about the destruction of the temple in A.D. 70.  If the book was written before A.D. 70 it’s Jesus predicting.  If the book is written after A.D. 70 Matthew is then recording his memory of a historical even that already took place, which seems very out of place.
  3. Matthew did use a lot of Mark, and overwhelming evidence suggests that Mark was written in Rome with help from Peter before A.D. 64.
  1. Audience

Matthew was writing to a primarily Jewish audience.  (Whereas Luke was writing to a Greek audience).  The biggest piece of evidence is the vast amount of O.T. references included in Matthew including:

  1. Fulfillment of O.T. prophecies
  2. Constant referrals to the patriarchs and appeals to genealogies
  3. A vast understanding of Jewish law and tradition.
  4. Huge focus on the King’s identity and the Kingdom of Heaven.

Now, with all of that having been said, let’s look again at the opening genealogy of Matthew (a very Jewish argument for the validity of Jesus as Messiah), and see what we can discover.

  1. Matthew begins his genealogy at Abraham, the one through whom God established his nation.  Luke shows his genealogy going backward from Christ all the way to Adam, showing that Christ represented all of mankind.  Both are totally correct, but they do show who their intended audiences are.
  2. Matthew shows his high view for God’s sovereignty by pointing out how Solomon came through David, even through sin.

This is a huge theological point to be made.  God can use “all things” even things He calls sin, in this case, murder, adultery, and betrayal, for His Good Purpose.  Never, ever think that God can’t use what we call “broken” for His glory! Amen!