GOSPEL OF MATTHEW: PROPOSED ORGANIZATIONS

Any survey of the literature on this gospel account will reveal that scholars are united in praising Matthew’s organizational skills – “an author with an astonishingly orderly mind,” in Guthrie’s words. On the other hand, there is a surprising diversity to the various structures that have been proposed for this work. Osborne notes, “I am in the process of doing a major commentary on Matthew and am quite discouraged by the unbelievable plethora of suggestions regarding the outline of the book. I am even more discouraged over how many of them sound plausible.”

Contrary to the above consensus is the contention of Breck that “Matthew has produced a work whose individual units are often presented in a tight chiastic or parallel pattern, while an overall parallelism is less clearly present.” Thus, he presents chapters 1-8 as a series of unrelated chiasms, most of which are rather weak examples. And then he states that “Matthew does not abandon chiasmus outright after the Sermon; he merely allows it to deteriorate, to unravel, as it were, to the point where its presence in a given pericope can at times be neither proven nor disproven.” The analysis presented below will, it is hoped, totally disprove Breck's contention.

For convenience sake, the primary approaches may be categorized as follows: (a) the older geographical or chronological divisions – nearly abandoned in recent years; (b) topical, “conceptual” or linear structures, which are not really literary structures and will not be further discussed (see Childs, Bauer); (c) five-part organizations based on the similar statements which conclude the major discourses in the book; (d) three-part divisions based on two similar introductory statements in the text; (e) combinations of the last two approaches; and (f) chiastic, or mirror-image, structures. These last four types are discussed below.

Five-Part Divisions

This view, first proposed by B. W. Bacon in 1930, is perhaps the most popular. It begins by recognition of five similar statements in the book, each of which directly follows a block of discourse material.

“And when Jesus finished these sayings...” (7:28)

            “And when Jesus had finished instructing his twelve disciples...” (11:1)

            “And when Jesus had finished these parables...” (13:53)

            “Now when Jesus had finished these sayings...” (19:1)

            “When Jesus had finished all these sayings...” (26:1)

The discourses which precede these pronouncements are well recognized to be arranged topically and to cover subjects that are, respectively, ethical, missionary, kergymatic, ecclesiastical and eschatological. But Brown notes, “Although each major discourse has a different focus, the theme of God's reign is accented in each of them.” Each of the discourses also ends on a note of judgment. Those who hold that these passages constitute the main structural markers for Matthew’s composition generally emphasize Jesus’ teaching ministry over his identity as the Son of God as the major theme of the Gospel. According to this view, Jesus is portrayed as the new Moses throughout the book, especially in his giving the fulfilled law to the people in five discourses that parallel the books of the Pentateuch.

With the above markers to start with, one would expect formulation of an overall structure for the Gospel to be relatively simple. Unfortunately, there are still several issues to deal with:

1. The bounds of the Infancy Narratives must be determined.

            2. The indicators of where the five discourses begin are not as clear as where they conclude, as Bauer notes.

            3. The relationship between the teaching and narrative sections is sometimes muddy.

Because of these uncertainties, a number of different five-part proposals have been put forth. Gundry’s divisions are representative of those schemes pairing up each discourse section with a preceding narrative:

Part     Narrative             Discourse

A         3:1-4:25              5:1-7:29

B         8:1-9:34              9:35-11:1

C        11:2-12:50           13:1-52

D        13:53-17:27         18:1-35

E        19:1-22:46           23:1-25:46

Variations on this basic structure have narrative sections ending instead at 9:35; 9:38;10:4;10:42; 12:45;13:54;17:21;17:23 and/or 23:39, depending on which commentator you follow. On the other hand, Bauer points out that the five formulas clearly connect the preceding discourses with the narratives that directly follow as well as with what precedes. Other objections to this method of dividing the Gospel include the following:

1. It relegates the Passion and the Resurrection to a mere supporting role, an epilogue to the teaching ministry of Jesus. There is a similar problem with its treatment of the infancy narratives.

2. It is by no means clear that the theme of Jesus as the new lawgiver pervades the Gospel although parallels between the lives of Moses and Jesus are certainly present. Blomberg points out that Matthew actually spends more time contrasting Jesus’ teachings with the Law than paralleling them.

3. There is no one-to-one correspondence between the five sections of Matthew and the five books of the Pentateuch. This is especially true in the case of Leviticus, according to Albright and Mann.

4. Hill rightly states that the five formulas above are “unable to bear the symbolic and structural strain placed on them by this theory.” Instead they appear to be only connecting links or transitional phrases between one sub-unit and the next.

5. The “all” in Matthew 26:1 is felt by some to clearly reference the totality of Jesus’ teaching ministry, not just the immediately preceding discourse.

6. The number “five” does not appear to have any symbolic significance for Matthew

elsewhere in his Gospel although series of threes and sevens are quite common. To counter this objection, one could note that a five-fold body with a prologue and epilogue could be viewed as a seven-fold structure. And that is an important symbolic number for Matthew.

The seven occurrences of “righteousness” are particularly of interesting since their appearances seem to form a chiastic pattern:

John's ministry of baptism for repentance (3:15)

    The need to hunger and thirst after righteousness (5:6)

        The reward for those who are persecuted in this life (5:10)

            Our righteousness must exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees (5:20)       

        No heavenly reward for those who get admiration in this life (6:1)

    The need to strive first for the kingdom of God (6:33)

John's ministry of baptism for repentance (21:32)

The genealogy that begins Matthew's Gospel contains three groups of fourteen names each, perhaps an example of gematria since the numerical values of the letters in David's name total fourteen. In addition, the Gospel contains fourteen appearances each of “Father in heaven,” “people (referring to Israel),” “repent” and “hypocrite.” The phrase “your Father” appears fourteen times in the Sermon on the Mount (as two groups of seven interrupted by one “our Father” at 5:9). Within the Sermon are fourteen teachings, each structured the same. There are fourteen references to Jeremiah's prophecies in the book. Also, the phrase “I tell you the truth” (without gar) is present 28 (4x7) times in the gospel.

However, certain key words and phrases do appear exactly five times in the book, and several sets of three throughout the Gospel have also been noted, as well as seven clauses in the Lord's Prayer, seven parables in Matt. 13 and seven woes.

7. The difficulty in force-fitting alternating blocks of narrative and discourse into a five-fold pattern, as evidenced by the many conflicting proposals, must be considered a major objection to this approach. The weak relationship between some of these pairings is an issue that proponents of this view must address as well as the predominance of narrative material over discourses. (Lohr)

Three-Part Divisions

At two points in the text, similar statements appear to signal the beginning of major literary units.

“From that time Jesus began to preach...” (Matt. 4:17)

            “From that time Jesus began to show his disciples that he must...suffer.” (Matt. 16:21)

Thus, these marker passages could be said to herald, respectively, the preaching ministry and the Passion story. According to this view, a process of elimination defines Matthew 1:1-4:16 as the first major unit, dealing with the pre-ministry events in Jesus’ life. An interesting contrast results from this approach in that the second division (4:17-16:20) ends with Jesus instructing his disciples to tell no one that he is the Christ while the last major section of the book (16:21-28:20) ends as the risen Christ tells his followers to go and make disciples of all nations. Childs dismisses this three-part structure, attributed to Krantz, as having met with little reception elsewhere. However, a major breakpoint in the text after 16:20 was recognized as early as E. W. Bullinger, and an increasing number of modern scholars appear to have adopted this basic view as the starting point for more detailed proposals.

Objections to this scheme have also been offered:

1. The phrase “from that time” also appears in Matt. 26:16 with no important structural significance attached, according to Brown.

            2. This viewpoint tends to ignore or downplay the role of the five parallel statements that end the discourse units.

            3. A three-point division to such a large book is insufficient to adequately define its method of organization. Even Thiemann, one of its defenders, admits that the second division “does not exhibit the tight structure of the first and last sections.”

Combination of Three- and Five-fold Structures

Kingsbury treats the three-fold divisions as primary to the Gospel, but also takes into account the five-fold structural indicators:

I. The presentation of Jesus (1:1-4:16)

IIA. The ministry of Jesus to Israel (4:17-11:1)

1. Narrative (4:17-25)

2. Discourse (5:1-7:29)

1'. Narrative (8:1-9:34)

2'. Discourse (9:35-10:42)

Conclusion (11:1)

IIB. Israel’s repudiation of Jesus (11:2-16:20)

1. Narrative (11:2-12:50)

2. Discourse (13:1-52)

1'. Narrative (14:1-16:20)

III. Journey to Jerusalem and events there (16:21-28:20)

1. Narrative (16:21-17:23)

2. Discourse (17:24-18:35)

1'. Narrative (19:1-23:39)

2'. Discourse (24:1-25:46)

1''.Narrative (26:1-28:20)

Interestingly, Kingsbury’s structure, as plotted above, consists of fourteen sections. Despite some very attractive features of this view, it has so far failed to convince most students of this Gospel.

Blomberg starts with the same basic approach (a primary tripartite structure and a secondary five-part structure) to obtain somewhat different results:

I. Birth and Early Events (1:1-4:16)

A. Birth (1:1-2:23)

                        B. Pre-Ministry (3:1-4:16)

II. Teaching Ministry (4:17-16:20)

A. Discourse (4:17-7:29) followed by Narrative (8:1-9:35)

                        B. Discourse (9:36-10:42) followed by Narrative (11:1-12:50)

                        C. Discourse (13:1-52) followed by Narrative (14:1-16:20)

III. The Passion (16:21-28:20)

A. Narrative (16:21-17:23) followed by Discourse (17:24-18:35)

                        B. Narrative (19:1-22:46) followed by Discourse (23:1-25:46)

                        C. Two-Part Narrative (chs. 26-27 and ch. 28)

This approach eliminates some of the problems associated with other schemes but points out the difficulty in deciding which narratives should be paired topically with which discourses.

Chiastic Structures

Many scholars have pointed out parallels between the Infancy and Passion Narratives. These similarities are obvious and numerous enough to warrant the supposition that they are purposeful. If so, it is attractive to look for further examples of parallel sections within the rest of the book that might reveal an overall chiastic structure. Several such schemes have been proposed, two of which are shown below:

1. Several scholars adopt a variation of the organization shown below in which Chapter 13 constitutes the center of the chiasm.

A. Birth and beginnings (chs. 1-4)

B. Blessings; entering the kingdom (chs. 5-7)

C. Authority and invitation (chs. 8-9)

D. Mission discourse (ch. 10)

E. Rejection by this generation (chs. 11-12)

F. Parables of the kingdom (ch. 13)

E'. Acknowledgment by disciples (chs. 14-17)

D'. Community discourse (ch. 18)

C'. Authority and invitation (chs. 19-22)

B'. Woes; coming of the kingdom (chs. 23-25)

A'. Death and rebirth (chs. 26-28)

Ellis states that ch. 13 is a natural dividing point of the Gospel since afterward Jesus speaks only to the disciples rather than to the Jews as a whole. Similarly, both Kingsbury and Drury label Chapter 13 as the turning point in the Gospel, a statement that Snodgrass feels is an overstatement. This above scheme suffers from reliance on section divisions and markers not generally adopted by others and by weak parallels between supposedly corresponding sections, especially between C-C' and D-D'.

2. H. B. Green’s chiastic structure places ch. 11 as the focal point of the Gospel. He reasons that this chapter contains a summary of the whole Gospel and that after this point Matthew tends to follow Mark fairly closely. He pairs up the following chapters: 1-2 // 26-28, 3-4 // 24-25, 5-7 // 19-23, 8-9 // 14-18, and 10 // 12-13. Note that there are no correspondences between this scheme and the chiasm shown above in terms of parallel groupings and virtually no similarities in section divisions. Bauer assesses the supposed parallels in this structure to be even weaker than those of the previous chiastic scheme.

A New Look at Section Divisions

The diversity of opinions regarding the intended structure of Matthew’s Gospel appears to be caused by approaches that start out with assumptions regarding the overall organization of the book and only then attempt to flesh out the details in a consistent manner. I have pursued a fresh approach, one in which bounds are first placed on the individual literary units by looking for signs of topical coherence, chiasm and inclusio. Only then can an adequate definition of overall structure begin. The results of such an approach are summarized in the post “Matthew: Introduction to the Literary Structure.”