Wednesdays Are for the New Testament.
10/9/24
Gibbs, Jeffrey A. (2010). "Matthew 13." Matthew 11:2-20:34. (pages 659-736). St. Louis, MO: Concordia Publishing House. (Personal Library)
Gibbs prefaces his discussion of the parables in Matthew 13 with an extensive discourse on the nature of parables.
Early interpreters of the parables, until the time of the Enlightenment, took them to have symbolic elements which would require decoding (Gibbs 2010, p. 659). In general, the smaller elements would be viewed in the context of the parable as a whole. The interpretation tended to be more allegorical in nature than many modern conservatives would like. Gibbs maintains that, in general, Jesus and the apostles intended an allegorical interpretation. This does not, in Gibbs' estimation, endorse "unlikely or outrageous interpretations" (Gibbs 2010, p. 660).
With the rise of the Enlightenment Gibbs sees a shift toward distrust of the biblical accounts. This led toward attempts to re-interpret the events and statements to find the "historical Jesus" (Gibbs 2010, p. 661). One of the important interpretive changes, endorsed by Adolf Jülicher in the late 1800s, was to make a sharp distinction between metaphor and simile (Gibbs 2010, pp. 661-662). He endorsed the idea of a simile being used to clarify a concept, and a metaphor to obscure it. An extended simile is a "similitude" while an extended metaphor is an "allegory" (Gibbs 2010, p. 662). He also took the original words of Jesus to have been clear similes, which were converted into allegories by the evangelists and other interpreters. Gibbs considers Jülicher's process to be "wrong-headed" partly because it creates confusion in interpretation of modes of communication and also because it denies the fact that symbolic language appears on a continuum rather than as an either-or proposition where a message is symbolic or it isn't (Gibbs 2010, p. 663).
Gibbs notes that an actual definition of a parable is somewhat elusive. The Greek word is used in a number of ways, and different scholars take different views about what constitutes a parable in the canonical materials (Gibbs 2010, p. 665). Matthew's Gospel uses the term 17 times, 15 of which "refer to brief past-time narratives that are really about something other than the surface meaning of the story. Most are about the reign of heaven/God" (Gibbs 2010, p. 665). This is generally the case with Mark and Luke as well. There are often exaggerated aspects which appear unexpectedly (Gibbs 2010, p. 666).
Gibbs suggests four principles for interpretation of parables. First, he cautions against over-interpreting small details (Gibbs 2010, p. 667). Second, it is important to look for ways in which the details complement one another. The large and small may work closely together. Third, it is important to pay attention to the story as told. Interpretation of what we perceive to be literary and historical contexts are very important (Gibbs 2010, p. 668). Events and statements before and after are significant contextual clues.
Gibbs observes that the process of reaching an understanding of a parable is significant. In some instances a parable might make a concept more readily understandable, while at other times it may provoke ongoing thought and questioning to get the point (Gibbs 2010, p. 669). An important question in Gibbs' view is the overall purpose of Jesus in use of parabolic teaching. If Jesus were only intent on obscuring his teaching from the crowds he could simply have taught only his closest disciples. There is a more complex situation in Jesus' teaching. Gibbs postulates that it may be that Jesus' teaching in parables pushes people to invest the necessary mental energy to understand concepts at a later time (Gibbs 2010, p. 670).
Matthew chapter 13 is taken up with a series of parables. Gibbs notes that there have been a variety of patterns proposed for the overall structure of the passage (Gibbs 2010, p. 671). There is a major break in 13:36 where we see a shift from teaching crowds outside to teaching disciples inside (Gibbs 2010, p. 672). The parables can also be divided into two groups of three, from 13:24-50. Gibbs proposes a three part structure. Here, the first part is the parable of the Sower (1-23) (Gibbs 2010, p. 672), followed by a second part in 24-35 and a third part in 36-50 (Gibbs 2010, p. 673). This creates a count of seven parables. The brief explanation in 51-52 signals the end of the discourse.
Following this pattern, Gibbs returns to his commentary on the text proper, starting with the Parable of the Sower and its explanation, 13:1-23 (Gibbs 2010, p. 674). After his translation, Gibbs provides textual and grammatical notes as is his custom. The grammatical notes are fairly extensive here due to the slightly obtuse and choppy language used by Matthew.
The parable of the Sower follows on the heels of a passage in which it has been clear that the Pharisees are rejecting Jesus. Gibbs sees this as a very deliberate move, as Jesus is explaining why there are such different responses to him (Gibbs 2010, p. 680). Some of the seeds are prevented from doing their natural work, for various reasons. However, the seed which falls in good ground is quite productive (Gibbs 2010, p. 681). Gibbs points out that while the reasons for a lack of productivity are fairly clearly given, the way the good ground makes the seed thrive is not very clear. He takes this to suggest that there are a variety of ways that a positive life for Christ may be lived out.
Matthew 13:10-17 records Jesus' disciples asking him not how to understand his parable, but why he is teaching the crowds by using parables. Gibbs points out that Jesus' disciples typically ask him questions when away from the crowds. Jesus' answer is an explanation of the parable, not an answer to the disciples' specific question (Gibbs 2010, p. 83). Yet it is an interaction which demonstrates that Jesus, at least here, instructs only his disciples. The revelation of meaning, further, does not come due to intellectual ability or persistence, but because God has chosen to reveal it (Gibbs 2010, p. 684). Gibbs observes again that the parabolic teaching is not merely intended to be difficult to understand, but that it also provokes thought and further inquiry, in a way similar to God's teaching through Isaiah (Gibbs 2010, p. 685).
Gibbs closes his discussion of the Parable of the Sower with a reflection on the intended impact of the parable. He takes this parable to caution us against an expectation that Jesus will work and succeed in the ways we might think normal (Gibbs 2010, p. 687). The disciples may have been in doubt as to the effectiveness of Jesus' work. He, on the other hand, understands and teaches that there are reasons why God's Word would not be embraced by all. Yet there is a positive response, which would bring joy (Gibbs 2010, p. 688). God spreads his word freely and generously. And, finally, life in light of God's word is to be lived out in wisdom. It is necessary for Chrsitians to be conscious of the "soil" they are, and to seek to improve it.
The next three parables, concerning weeds, a mustard seed, and leaven, are treated together (Matthew 13:24-35). Gibbs treats them together for three primary reasons. The three parables are distinguished by their setting of being in a crowd, as well as by the theme of the present reality of Jesus' kingdom, though it is not completely realized yet (Gibbs 2010, p. 694). Gibbs points out the kingly action of reigning is under way in Jesus. However, we find it in an unexpected way.
Gibbs understands the parable of the wheat and the weeds to signify a present kingdom of God, with the master planting his grain in the ground (Gibbs 2010, p. 696). The kingdom is not fully realized when the work of an enemy is discovered. The weeds are found to be growing along with the desired grain. The master commands that nothing should be changed until the harvest. Gibbs concludes that the audience would observe two things: first, God's kingdom is present already, and second, that Jesus is content to let it develop as it has begun (Gibbs 2010, p. 697).
Matthew 13:31-32 is a very brief parable about the kingdom of God. Again, Gibbs notes it speaks to the presence of God's kingdom (Gibbs 2010, p. 697). He points out the strongly hyperbolic description given by Jesus of the mustard plant, which never grows into a large tree (Gibbs 2010, p. 698). In its present form, God's kingdom appears insignificant. However, it will grow beyond the listeners' expectations. Though we have no record of an explanation given to the disciples, Gibbs takes Jesus to be the one planting in both the parable of the Sower and the Mustard Seed. The apparently small thing Jesus is doing can be expected to grow. God's reign is established using his own means (Gibbs 2010, p. 699).
Matthew 13:33 contains a very brief parable. Surprisingly, the main character is a woman, and she is using leaven, which is often associated symbolically with sin (Gibbs 2010, pp. 699-700). The quantity of flour, about ten gallons, is a very substantial pile, which will bake a large amount of bread. Gibbs takes the essential message of the parable to be the hidden nature of God's kingdom. The bread will rise, given time. Yet it may not be immediately perceptible (Gibbs 2010, p. 700).
The group of three parables concludes in 13:34-35 with a brief explanation of Jesus' use of parables,citing Psalm 78 (Gibbs 2010, p. 701). In the context, the Psalm calls people to attend to its riddles which will be made plain. Jesus' work in Matthew 13 includes speaking of God's work, but in a way which may seem unclear at first. God's kingdom has come, and will be revealed more plainly given time.
Gibbs takes the move into a house in Matthew 13:36 to signal a new section where we have an explanation of the parable of the weeds, then three additional parables (Gibbs 2010, p. 703). The section continues through verse 50. The audience here is no longer the crowds but Jesus' disciples, who ask for an explanation of the Parable of the Weeds (Gibbs 2010, p. 705). Gibbs considers that the disciples, in staying with Jesus and asking for his explanation, are also asking that they be under the protection of God's kingdom, even though they don't fully see it as Jesus does (Gibbs 2010, p. 706). They are struggling with their lack of understanding, and need Jesus' reassurance.
Gibbs describes Jesus' explanation of the parable of the Weeds and divided neatly into two parts. In Matthew 13:36-39 Jesus briefly explains who or what the different elements are in the story (Gibbs 2010, p. 706). He then goes on to a description of the end of the age (13:40-43). Those who do not follow Jesus have a horrible fate, while those who believe Jesus will receive a place in glory in God's reign (Gibbs 2010, p. 707).
There is an interpretive challenge inherent in the parable's relatively extended discussion of the conversation with the farm workers and the master's insistence that nothing is to be done. The explanation given by Jesus lacks any focus on that prominent element (Gibbs 2010, p. 708). Gibbs considers the different setting of the parable and its explanation to be important in this regard. The parable was told to the crowds, but interpreted to the disciples in private. The crowd may have had a greater benefit thinking about the present age when those who trust Jesus are mixed in with those who don't. The disciples, on the other hand, may have been more in need of reassurance of their future state.
Another interpretive challenge is the identification of "the field" with "the world." Much historic commentary has taken "the field" to be the visible church, thus leading to an overall interpretation related to church discipline (Gibbs 2010, p. 709). More recent commentary has emphasized the identity as "the world," thus placing the interpretation into the realm of the Church as compared with unbelievers. Gibbs, though acknowledging the strength of the more recent views, thinks the imagery is more apt in terms of the visible church, with believers and unbelievers in Christ mixed together. The focus is on the different seeds in one compact location (Gibbs 2010, p. 710).
The two brief parables in Matthew 13:44-46 have a challenging history of interpretation. The parables of the hidden treasure and the pearl have regularly been interpreted along the lines of a call to commitment and discipleship. Gibbs surveys interpretations along these lines in some detail (Gibbs 2010, pp. 712-713). There has been a more Christological interpretation articulated periodically since the 1840s in which Christ is the one seeking a treasure, which turns out to be His people (Gibbs 2010, pp. 713 ff). Gibbs provides an exegetical summary of the significant differences between the two parables, as well as a summary of their striking similarities of a decision to sell or give up all so as to obtain the reward. He finds the force of giving up all and being able to make the purchase a compelling argument in favor of understanding Christ as the one who purchases the treasure (Gibbs 2010, p. 715). Gibbs continues with a detailed exegetical study of the two parables from a Christocentric point of view (Gibbs 2010, pp. 716ff). Gibbs concludes that throughout these parables Jesus is illustrating his concern for the world and his treatment of his disciples as a treasure for which he would give everything to redeem (Gibbs 2010, p. 720). The motif of hiddenness is significant throughout all the surrounding context. The glory of God's reign has been present, unnoticed, in Christ and the disciples (Gibbs 2010, p. 721). Gibbs sees this as an encouragement to the disciples. They and Jesus are seeing what the world surrounding them does not see.
Matthew 13:47-50 describes a dragnet, a departure from the agricultural motif (Gibbs 2010, p. 721). In distinction from the parable of the weeds, here there is no indication of anybody interfering with a good outcome. However, Gibbs notes the outcome is still encouraging. The good will be saved (Gibbs 2010, p. 722).
Gibbs takes Matthew 13:51-52 as a conclusion. Here the disciple is able to reveal God's mysteries (Gibbs 2010, p. 723). The disciples of Jesus are coming to understand the mysteries of God's kingdom. They know that all will be put to right in the end. Gibbs interprets this as "a treasure-store of wisdom and truth that comes from the Christ" (Gibbs 2010, p. 724).
Matthew 13 closes, in verses 53-58, with a description of Jesus being questioned and rejected in Nazareth (Gibbs 2010, p. 726). Gibbs observes that this show of unbelief is the close of a "bracket of unbelief" around the chapter 13 parables (Gibbs 2010, p. 728). Here, in verses 54c-56, the people are reported as asking a stream of five questions, all centered on Jesus' identity. In Gibbs' estimation it shows not only a failure to recognize Jesus as the Messiah, but that they don't even see him as a prophet (Gibbs 2010, p. 729). Except for the first and last questions, which assume Joseph is Jesus' father and that there is no way Jesus could have miraculous powers, the questioners are correct in identifying family members. Matthew, in 13:57-58, tells us the people are not so much wrongly informed but are stumbling into unbelief (Gibbs 2010, p. 731). The unbelief, as it spreads, ultimately is what kills Jesus and incurs God's judgment, as we will see in later chapters of Matthew.
Gibbs, taking the rejection of Jesus in Nazareth as his impetus, discussies the view of Jesus' brothers and sisters, as well as the concept of the perpetual virginity of Mary (Gibbs 2010, p. 732). Though the Church of Rome and the Orthodox churches consider Mary to have remained a virgin all her life, the Lutheran community is not entirely in agreement. Gibbs takes the clear statements of Scripture about Jesus' family, particularly Matthew 12:46-47 and 13:55-56 to be that Mary and Joseph had at least six children (Gibbs 2010, p. 732). There are no hints of the brothers and sisters being from a previous marriage of Joseph, adopted, or otherwise brought into the family. Gibbs notes a statement in the Latin version of the Smalcald Articles (1.4) referring to "ever-virgin" Mary, but that the allusion was a later insertion (Gibbs 2010, p. 733). The claims of perpetual virginity of Mary, in Gobbs' opinion, are intended to create a doctrine about Mary. However, the theologically important view is that Mary was a virgin at the time of the miraculous conception and birth of Jesus (Gibbs 2010, p. 734). This is clearly stated in Scripture.
10/9/24
Gibbs, Jeffrey A. (2010). "Matthew 13." Matthew 11:2-20:34. (pages 659-736). St. Louis, MO: Concordia Publishing House. (Personal Library)
Gibbs prefaces his discussion of the parables in Matthew 13 with an extensive discourse on the nature of parables.
Early interpreters of the parables, until the time of the Enlightenment, took them to have symbolic elements which would require decoding (Gibbs 2010, p. 659). In general, the smaller elements would be viewed in the context of the parable as a whole. The interpretation tended to be more allegorical in nature than many modern conservatives would like. Gibbs maintains that, in general, Jesus and the apostles intended an allegorical interpretation. This does not, in Gibbs' estimation, endorse "unlikely or outrageous interpretations" (Gibbs 2010, p. 660).
With the rise of the Enlightenment Gibbs sees a shift toward distrust of the biblical accounts. This led toward attempts to re-interpret the events and statements to find the "historical Jesus" (Gibbs 2010, p. 661). One of the important interpretive changes, endorsed by Adolf Jülicher in the late 1800s, was to make a sharp distinction between metaphor and simile (Gibbs 2010, pp. 661-662). He endorsed the idea of a simile being used to clarify a concept, and a metaphor to obscure it. An extended simile is a "similitude" while an extended metaphor is an "allegory" (Gibbs 2010, p. 662). He also took the original words of Jesus to have been clear similes, which were converted into allegories by the evangelists and other interpreters. Gibbs considers Jülicher's process to be "wrong-headed" partly because it creates confusion in interpretation of modes of communication and also because it denies the fact that symbolic language appears on a continuum rather than as an either-or proposition where a message is symbolic or it isn't (Gibbs 2010, p. 663).
Gibbs notes that an actual definition of a parable is somewhat elusive. The Greek word is used in a number of ways, and different scholars take different views about what constitutes a parable in the canonical materials (Gibbs 2010, p. 665). Matthew's Gospel uses the term 17 times, 15 of which "refer to brief past-time narratives that are really about something other than the surface meaning of the story. Most are about the reign of heaven/God" (Gibbs 2010, p. 665). This is generally the case with Mark and Luke as well. There are often exaggerated aspects which appear unexpectedly (Gibbs 2010, p. 666).
Gibbs suggests four principles for interpretation of parables. First, he cautions against over-interpreting small details (Gibbs 2010, p. 667). Second, it is important to look for ways in which the details complement one another. The large and small may work closely together. Third, it is important to pay attention to the story as told. Interpretation of what we perceive to be literary and historical contexts are very important (Gibbs 2010, p. 668). Events and statements before and after are significant contextual clues.
Gibbs observes that the process of reaching an understanding of a parable is significant. In some instances a parable might make a concept more readily understandable, while at other times it may provoke ongoing thought and questioning to get the point (Gibbs 2010, p. 669). An important question in Gibbs' view is the overall purpose of Jesus in use of parabolic teaching. If Jesus were only intent on obscuring his teaching from the crowds he could simply have taught only his closest disciples. There is a more complex situation in Jesus' teaching. Gibbs postulates that it may be that Jesus' teaching in parables pushes people to invest the necessary mental energy to understand concepts at a later time (Gibbs 2010, p. 670).
Matthew chapter 13 is taken up with a series of parables. Gibbs notes that there have been a variety of patterns proposed for the overall structure of the passage (Gibbs 2010, p. 671). There is a major break in 13:36 where we see a shift from teaching crowds outside to teaching disciples inside (Gibbs 2010, p. 672). The parables can also be divided into two groups of three, from 13:24-50. Gibbs proposes a three part structure. Here, the first part is the parable of the Sower (1-23) (Gibbs 2010, p. 672), followed by a second part in 24-35 and a third part in 36-50 (Gibbs 2010, p. 673). This creates a count of seven parables. The brief explanation in 51-52 signals the end of the discourse.
Following this pattern, Gibbs returns to his commentary on the text proper, starting with the Parable of the Sower and its explanation, 13:1-23 (Gibbs 2010, p. 674). After his translation, Gibbs provides textual and grammatical notes as is his custom. The grammatical notes are fairly extensive here due to the slightly obtuse and choppy language used by Matthew.
The parable of the Sower follows on the heels of a passage in which it has been clear that the Pharisees are rejecting Jesus. Gibbs sees this as a very deliberate move, as Jesus is explaining why there are such different responses to him (Gibbs 2010, p. 680). Some of the seeds are prevented from doing their natural work, for various reasons. However, the seed which falls in good ground is quite productive (Gibbs 2010, p. 681). Gibbs points out that while the reasons for a lack of productivity are fairly clearly given, the way the good ground makes the seed thrive is not very clear. He takes this to suggest that there are a variety of ways that a positive life for Christ may be lived out.
Matthew 13:10-17 records Jesus' disciples asking him not how to understand his parable, but why he is teaching the crowds by using parables. Gibbs points out that Jesus' disciples typically ask him questions when away from the crowds. Jesus' answer is an explanation of the parable, not an answer to the disciples' specific question (Gibbs 2010, p. 83). Yet it is an interaction which demonstrates that Jesus, at least here, instructs only his disciples. The revelation of meaning, further, does not come due to intellectual ability or persistence, but because God has chosen to reveal it (Gibbs 2010, p. 684). Gibbs observes again that the parabolic teaching is not merely intended to be difficult to understand, but that it also provokes thought and further inquiry, in a way similar to God's teaching through Isaiah (Gibbs 2010, p. 685).
Gibbs closes his discussion of the Parable of the Sower with a reflection on the intended impact of the parable. He takes this parable to caution us against an expectation that Jesus will work and succeed in the ways we might think normal (Gibbs 2010, p. 687). The disciples may have been in doubt as to the effectiveness of Jesus' work. He, on the other hand, understands and teaches that there are reasons why God's Word would not be embraced by all. Yet there is a positive response, which would bring joy (Gibbs 2010, p. 688). God spreads his word freely and generously. And, finally, life in light of God's word is to be lived out in wisdom. It is necessary for Chrsitians to be conscious of the "soil" they are, and to seek to improve it.
The next three parables, concerning weeds, a mustard seed, and leaven, are treated together (Matthew 13:24-35). Gibbs treats them together for three primary reasons. The three parables are distinguished by their setting of being in a crowd, as well as by the theme of the present reality of Jesus' kingdom, though it is not completely realized yet (Gibbs 2010, p. 694). Gibbs points out the kingly action of reigning is under way in Jesus. However, we find it in an unexpected way.
Gibbs understands the parable of the wheat and the weeds to signify a present kingdom of God, with the master planting his grain in the ground (Gibbs 2010, p. 696). The kingdom is not fully realized when the work of an enemy is discovered. The weeds are found to be growing along with the desired grain. The master commands that nothing should be changed until the harvest. Gibbs concludes that the audience would observe two things: first, God's kingdom is present already, and second, that Jesus is content to let it develop as it has begun (Gibbs 2010, p. 697).
Matthew 13:31-32 is a very brief parable about the kingdom of God. Again, Gibbs notes it speaks to the presence of God's kingdom (Gibbs 2010, p. 697). He points out the strongly hyperbolic description given by Jesus of the mustard plant, which never grows into a large tree (Gibbs 2010, p. 698). In its present form, God's kingdom appears insignificant. However, it will grow beyond the listeners' expectations. Though we have no record of an explanation given to the disciples, Gibbs takes Jesus to be the one planting in both the parable of the Sower and the Mustard Seed. The apparently small thing Jesus is doing can be expected to grow. God's reign is established using his own means (Gibbs 2010, p. 699).
Matthew 13:33 contains a very brief parable. Surprisingly, the main character is a woman, and she is using leaven, which is often associated symbolically with sin (Gibbs 2010, pp. 699-700). The quantity of flour, about ten gallons, is a very substantial pile, which will bake a large amount of bread. Gibbs takes the essential message of the parable to be the hidden nature of God's kingdom. The bread will rise, given time. Yet it may not be immediately perceptible (Gibbs 2010, p. 700).
The group of three parables concludes in 13:34-35 with a brief explanation of Jesus' use of parables,citing Psalm 78 (Gibbs 2010, p. 701). In the context, the Psalm calls people to attend to its riddles which will be made plain. Jesus' work in Matthew 13 includes speaking of God's work, but in a way which may seem unclear at first. God's kingdom has come, and will be revealed more plainly given time.
Gibbs takes the move into a house in Matthew 13:36 to signal a new section where we have an explanation of the parable of the weeds, then three additional parables (Gibbs 2010, p. 703). The section continues through verse 50. The audience here is no longer the crowds but Jesus' disciples, who ask for an explanation of the Parable of the Weeds (Gibbs 2010, p. 705). Gibbs considers that the disciples, in staying with Jesus and asking for his explanation, are also asking that they be under the protection of God's kingdom, even though they don't fully see it as Jesus does (Gibbs 2010, p. 706). They are struggling with their lack of understanding, and need Jesus' reassurance.
Gibbs describes Jesus' explanation of the parable of the Weeds and divided neatly into two parts. In Matthew 13:36-39 Jesus briefly explains who or what the different elements are in the story (Gibbs 2010, p. 706). He then goes on to a description of the end of the age (13:40-43). Those who do not follow Jesus have a horrible fate, while those who believe Jesus will receive a place in glory in God's reign (Gibbs 2010, p. 707).
There is an interpretive challenge inherent in the parable's relatively extended discussion of the conversation with the farm workers and the master's insistence that nothing is to be done. The explanation given by Jesus lacks any focus on that prominent element (Gibbs 2010, p. 708). Gibbs considers the different setting of the parable and its explanation to be important in this regard. The parable was told to the crowds, but interpreted to the disciples in private. The crowd may have had a greater benefit thinking about the present age when those who trust Jesus are mixed in with those who don't. The disciples, on the other hand, may have been more in need of reassurance of their future state.
Another interpretive challenge is the identification of "the field" with "the world." Much historic commentary has taken "the field" to be the visible church, thus leading to an overall interpretation related to church discipline (Gibbs 2010, p. 709). More recent commentary has emphasized the identity as "the world," thus placing the interpretation into the realm of the Church as compared with unbelievers. Gibbs, though acknowledging the strength of the more recent views, thinks the imagery is more apt in terms of the visible church, with believers and unbelievers in Christ mixed together. The focus is on the different seeds in one compact location (Gibbs 2010, p. 710).
The two brief parables in Matthew 13:44-46 have a challenging history of interpretation. The parables of the hidden treasure and the pearl have regularly been interpreted along the lines of a call to commitment and discipleship. Gibbs surveys interpretations along these lines in some detail (Gibbs 2010, pp. 712-713). There has been a more Christological interpretation articulated periodically since the 1840s in which Christ is the one seeking a treasure, which turns out to be His people (Gibbs 2010, pp. 713 ff). Gibbs provides an exegetical summary of the significant differences between the two parables, as well as a summary of their striking similarities of a decision to sell or give up all so as to obtain the reward. He finds the force of giving up all and being able to make the purchase a compelling argument in favor of understanding Christ as the one who purchases the treasure (Gibbs 2010, p. 715). Gibbs continues with a detailed exegetical study of the two parables from a Christocentric point of view (Gibbs 2010, pp. 716ff). Gibbs concludes that throughout these parables Jesus is illustrating his concern for the world and his treatment of his disciples as a treasure for which he would give everything to redeem (Gibbs 2010, p. 720). The motif of hiddenness is significant throughout all the surrounding context. The glory of God's reign has been present, unnoticed, in Christ and the disciples (Gibbs 2010, p. 721). Gibbs sees this as an encouragement to the disciples. They and Jesus are seeing what the world surrounding them does not see.
Matthew 13:47-50 describes a dragnet, a departure from the agricultural motif (Gibbs 2010, p. 721). In distinction from the parable of the weeds, here there is no indication of anybody interfering with a good outcome. However, Gibbs notes the outcome is still encouraging. The good will be saved (Gibbs 2010, p. 722).
Gibbs takes Matthew 13:51-52 as a conclusion. Here the disciple is able to reveal God's mysteries (Gibbs 2010, p. 723). The disciples of Jesus are coming to understand the mysteries of God's kingdom. They know that all will be put to right in the end. Gibbs interprets this as "a treasure-store of wisdom and truth that comes from the Christ" (Gibbs 2010, p. 724).
Matthew 13 closes, in verses 53-58, with a description of Jesus being questioned and rejected in Nazareth (Gibbs 2010, p. 726). Gibbs observes that this show of unbelief is the close of a "bracket of unbelief" around the chapter 13 parables (Gibbs 2010, p. 728). Here, in verses 54c-56, the people are reported as asking a stream of five questions, all centered on Jesus' identity. In Gibbs' estimation it shows not only a failure to recognize Jesus as the Messiah, but that they don't even see him as a prophet (Gibbs 2010, p. 729). Except for the first and last questions, which assume Joseph is Jesus' father and that there is no way Jesus could have miraculous powers, the questioners are correct in identifying family members. Matthew, in 13:57-58, tells us the people are not so much wrongly informed but are stumbling into unbelief (Gibbs 2010, p. 731). The unbelief, as it spreads, ultimately is what kills Jesus and incurs God's judgment, as we will see in later chapters of Matthew.
Gibbs, taking the rejection of Jesus in Nazareth as his impetus, discussies the view of Jesus' brothers and sisters, as well as the concept of the perpetual virginity of Mary (Gibbs 2010, p. 732). Though the Church of Rome and the Orthodox churches consider Mary to have remained a virgin all her life, the Lutheran community is not entirely in agreement. Gibbs takes the clear statements of Scripture about Jesus' family, particularly Matthew 12:46-47 and 13:55-56 to be that Mary and Joseph had at least six children (Gibbs 2010, p. 732). There are no hints of the brothers and sisters being from a previous marriage of Joseph, adopted, or otherwise brought into the family. Gibbs notes a statement in the Latin version of the Smalcald Articles (1.4) referring to "ever-virgin" Mary, but that the allusion was a later insertion (Gibbs 2010, p. 733). The claims of perpetual virginity of Mary, in Gobbs' opinion, are intended to create a doctrine about Mary. However, the theologically important view is that Mary was a virgin at the time of the miraculous conception and birth of Jesus (Gibbs 2010, p. 734). This is clearly stated in Scripture.
RSS Feed