Reapproaching this from an academic perspective 📜Academics generally think of it as fiction meant to support Matthew’s idea of Jesus as the new Moses.Here’s the relevant quote from Brown’s chapter on ‘Pre-Matthean Material’ in his Birth of the Messiah, where he listed exhaustive parallels between Matthew’s birth narrative of Jesus and the Exodus birth story…

It essentially talks about Satan attempting to “tempt” Jesus, Jesus then states “Jesus said to him, “Again it is written, ‘You shall not put the Lord your God to the test.” It’s a parallel verse that follows to Deuteronomy 6:16. Notice how Deuteronomy 6:16 is MOSES talking. “Complementing the mention in Mark 1:12–13 that Jesus…

They are fictitious genealogies written independently of each other, so it’s little surprise they don’t match. See Raymond E. Brown, The Birth of the Messiah.Like Matthew, Luke appears to have used a numerological formula to build his list. It features about 77 generations (depending on how you count them and which manuscript you use), and…

According to Matthew, Jesus had a legitimate Davidic pedigree through his legal father Joseph (Miller, Born Divine, 89, 91). The Preposition ek Matthew’s use of the Greek preposition ek in his two references to Mary’s being pregnant “by a holy spirit” is not necessarily an indication that Jesus has no human father. It is true…

The birth of Jesus is the culmination of the history of Israel (Zhodi Angami, “The Heavenly Canopy: A Reader-response Approach to Matthew’s Infancy NarrativefromtheTribalContextofNorth-EastIndia,”(Ph.D.diss.,MelbourneSchoolofTheology, 2012), 123; Ulrich Luz, Matthew 1-7: A Commentary (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007), 88 and Daniel Marguerat, Jésus et Matthieu: À la recherche du Jésus de l’histoire (Genève: Labor et Fides, 2016), 164).…

Paul and MatthewMatthew was un-Pauline or non-Pauline (Graham N. Stanton, AGospel for a New People: Studies in Matthew, 314) but few were prepared to go beyond that conclusion. There seemed to me to be plenty of evidence in the Gospel that Matthew was neither pro-Pauline nor simply un-Pauline; rather, the evangelist was openly anti Pauline…

The earliest possible date ( terminus a quo ) for Matthew is sometime after 70 CE. Mark 13:14 refers to the “ desolating sacrilege ” set up where it ought not to be, and this gospel is usually dated about 70 CE. Matthew 24:15 – 16 interprets the Markan words (see “ Sources and Intertextuality…

Matthean Posteriority Hypothesis A Brief Overview of Matthean PosterioritistsGottlob Christian Storr: Johann Gottfried Herder: Christian Gottlob Wilke: Gustav Schläger: William Lockton: Ernst von Dobschutz: H. Philip West Jr: Ronald V. Huggins: Martin Hengel: Alan J.P. Garrow: His arguments: (a) Matthew’s Reordering of Markan Material as an Analogy for His Use of Luke (d) Resolving Luke’s…

Bartosz argues/assumes that gMatthew: Matthew using Mark Response to Luke using Matthew His arguments for Matthew using Luke Allan Garrow has also argued for this: Bartosz states that the Gospel of Matthew was probably written c. ce 130–150, most likely c.e 145–150. Parallels/Use of DSS In fact, the artificial scheme of 3 times 14 generations…

Biblical scholars George Dunbar Kilpatrick: Books were originally published with no names attached. Titles were attached decades later. Most scholars reject apostolic authorship. gMatthew is the work of an unknown diciple (not Matthew). It’s the common position that gMatthew was originally written in Greek by a non-eyewitness (Raymond E. Brown). Francis Watson argues that the…