Thursday Scholarly Notes
8/21/25
Kingsbury, Jack Dean. (1975). Chapter 1: The Structure of Matthew's Gospel and His Concept of Salvation-History." in Matthew: Structure, Christology, Kingdom. (pp. 1-39). Philadelphia: Fortress Press. (Personal Library)
Kingsbury asserts a lack of consensus about both the structure of Matthew's Gospel and about the history of salvation (Kingsbury 1975, p. 1). For this reason, he proposes his view of each.
From a structural standpoint, Kingsbury finds that some commentators have essentially assumed and described a topical structure in which there is no purposeful overall goal in the progression of topics (Kingsbury 1975, p. 2). A second type of topical structural outline leans toward Matthew structuring his writing in five parts, with some sort of connection to the Pentateuch (Kingsbury 1975, pp. 2ff). This perspective has gained much influence, though different interpreters approach the purpose of the parts in various ways. Because of the lack of overall agreement on the purposes of the portions of Matthew, while the divisions are reasonably easy to identify, the interpretive framework as a whole remains unstable.
Kingsbury notes that from a structural standpoint it may be fruitful to consider the formula "from that time Jesus began" found at 4:17 and at 16:21 (Kingsbury 1975, p. 7). The two passages serve as pivotal instances in the narrative, in Kingsbury's view (Kingsbury 1975, p. 9). He therefore attempts to demonstrate that this is the appropriate transitional cue which Matthew uses to arrange his narrative. The passage 1:1-4:16 he takes to be a first section, introduced as the background information about Jesus' lineage, birth, and preparation to begin his tasks which consume the remaining two parts of the book (Kingsbury 1975, pp. 10-11). He makes extensive comments on chapter three, which could easily be seen as an independent sense unit. Kingsbury considers it to be closely tied to the earlier and later materials from a standpoint of language usage (Kingsbury 1975, p. 15). Kingsbury's overall conclusion is that 1:1-4:16 introduce the person of Jesus.
Kingsbury takes Matthew 4:17-16:20 as focused on Jesus' public proclamation of himself as Messiah (Kingsbury 1975, p. 17). It is in this portion of the text tha Jesus performs miracles which accompany his teaching, attracting crowds. He commissions twelve disciples whose ministry resembles his. It is in this portion of the text that his popularity grows and shrinks (Kingsbury 1975, p. 18).
The third and final portion of Matthew's Gospel may then be seen as 16:21-28:20, which describes Jesus' suffering, his death, and his resurrection (Kingsbury 1975, p. 21). In this section Jesus and the public come into greater tension as he is being rejected. He still heals people, but his teaching is primarily focused on his disciples (Kingsbury 1975, p. 22).
Kingsbury, considering his structural thesis as proven fact, moves on to discuss Matthew in terms of salvation-history (Kingsbury 1975, p. 25) He notes there has been increasing interest in the conceptual framework in recent years. Much of the scholarship he considers has evaluated the conceptual structure in terms of salvation history. Kingsbury notes authors who take as central the concept of Christians serving as the true and new people of God, others as a shift from the call of Israel to a call of the Gentiles. The temporal shift and a shift in the way salvation is understood work together (Kingsbury 1975, p. 26). Patterns of analysis have typically divided salvation history itno three parts. Yet Kingsbury does not think that a three period view is a foregone conclusion (Kingsbury 1975, p. 27).
There is no contest to the fact that Matthew uses temporal terms more frequently than Mark (Kingsbury 1975, p. 27). While some of his usages are relatively vague, many are used in the context of vivid descriptions of a time to come. Matthew tends to give eschatological significance to his temporal markers (Kingsbury 1975, pp. 28-29).
Of more importance to Kingsbury is his understanding tha Matthew considers history to be divided into only two periods, rather than the conventionally assumed three (Kingsbury 1975, p. 31). The "time of Jesus" takes over from the "time of Israel." Matthew would seem to consider himself as living in the "time of Jesus," which includes all the age of the Church (Kingsbury 1975, p. 32). Kingsbury finds that within Matthew the distinction is made between Jesus and his disciples, but there is not such a temporal distinction that would show a difference between a time of Jesus and a time of the church. This leads Kingsbury to conclude that "the christology of Matthew, not his ecclesiology, more than anything else has molded his concept of the history of salvation" (Kingsbury 1975, p. 36).
In sum, Kingsbury understands Matthew to be topical, rather than chronological, in nature. The topical development he takes to be governed by matthew's Christology (Kingsbury 1975, p. 36). What chronology does exist in Matthew is a division of history into prophecy and its fulfillment in Christ (Kingsbury 1975, p. 37).
Kingsbury ends the chapter with some comments on a study of Matthew by H. Frankemölle, released shortly before publication of this book. The study appears to take a covenant theology point of view, with a strong element of continuity rather than changes in era (Kingsbury 1975, p. 37). While Kingsbury does agree with Frankemölle on one level, he rejects the view of covenant theology which is used. The level of continuity which matthew shows between Old and New Testament is not as great, in Kingsbury's opinion, as Frankemölle would allege (Kingsbury 1975, p. 38).
8/21/25
Kingsbury, Jack Dean. (1975). Chapter 1: The Structure of Matthew's Gospel and His Concept of Salvation-History." in Matthew: Structure, Christology, Kingdom. (pp. 1-39). Philadelphia: Fortress Press. (Personal Library)
Kingsbury asserts a lack of consensus about both the structure of Matthew's Gospel and about the history of salvation (Kingsbury 1975, p. 1). For this reason, he proposes his view of each.
From a structural standpoint, Kingsbury finds that some commentators have essentially assumed and described a topical structure in which there is no purposeful overall goal in the progression of topics (Kingsbury 1975, p. 2). A second type of topical structural outline leans toward Matthew structuring his writing in five parts, with some sort of connection to the Pentateuch (Kingsbury 1975, pp. 2ff). This perspective has gained much influence, though different interpreters approach the purpose of the parts in various ways. Because of the lack of overall agreement on the purposes of the portions of Matthew, while the divisions are reasonably easy to identify, the interpretive framework as a whole remains unstable.
Kingsbury notes that from a structural standpoint it may be fruitful to consider the formula "from that time Jesus began" found at 4:17 and at 16:21 (Kingsbury 1975, p. 7). The two passages serve as pivotal instances in the narrative, in Kingsbury's view (Kingsbury 1975, p. 9). He therefore attempts to demonstrate that this is the appropriate transitional cue which Matthew uses to arrange his narrative. The passage 1:1-4:16 he takes to be a first section, introduced as the background information about Jesus' lineage, birth, and preparation to begin his tasks which consume the remaining two parts of the book (Kingsbury 1975, pp. 10-11). He makes extensive comments on chapter three, which could easily be seen as an independent sense unit. Kingsbury considers it to be closely tied to the earlier and later materials from a standpoint of language usage (Kingsbury 1975, p. 15). Kingsbury's overall conclusion is that 1:1-4:16 introduce the person of Jesus.
Kingsbury takes Matthew 4:17-16:20 as focused on Jesus' public proclamation of himself as Messiah (Kingsbury 1975, p. 17). It is in this portion of the text tha Jesus performs miracles which accompany his teaching, attracting crowds. He commissions twelve disciples whose ministry resembles his. It is in this portion of the text that his popularity grows and shrinks (Kingsbury 1975, p. 18).
The third and final portion of Matthew's Gospel may then be seen as 16:21-28:20, which describes Jesus' suffering, his death, and his resurrection (Kingsbury 1975, p. 21). In this section Jesus and the public come into greater tension as he is being rejected. He still heals people, but his teaching is primarily focused on his disciples (Kingsbury 1975, p. 22).
Kingsbury, considering his structural thesis as proven fact, moves on to discuss Matthew in terms of salvation-history (Kingsbury 1975, p. 25) He notes there has been increasing interest in the conceptual framework in recent years. Much of the scholarship he considers has evaluated the conceptual structure in terms of salvation history. Kingsbury notes authors who take as central the concept of Christians serving as the true and new people of God, others as a shift from the call of Israel to a call of the Gentiles. The temporal shift and a shift in the way salvation is understood work together (Kingsbury 1975, p. 26). Patterns of analysis have typically divided salvation history itno three parts. Yet Kingsbury does not think that a three period view is a foregone conclusion (Kingsbury 1975, p. 27).
There is no contest to the fact that Matthew uses temporal terms more frequently than Mark (Kingsbury 1975, p. 27). While some of his usages are relatively vague, many are used in the context of vivid descriptions of a time to come. Matthew tends to give eschatological significance to his temporal markers (Kingsbury 1975, pp. 28-29).
Of more importance to Kingsbury is his understanding tha Matthew considers history to be divided into only two periods, rather than the conventionally assumed three (Kingsbury 1975, p. 31). The "time of Jesus" takes over from the "time of Israel." Matthew would seem to consider himself as living in the "time of Jesus," which includes all the age of the Church (Kingsbury 1975, p. 32). Kingsbury finds that within Matthew the distinction is made between Jesus and his disciples, but there is not such a temporal distinction that would show a difference between a time of Jesus and a time of the church. This leads Kingsbury to conclude that "the christology of Matthew, not his ecclesiology, more than anything else has molded his concept of the history of salvation" (Kingsbury 1975, p. 36).
In sum, Kingsbury understands Matthew to be topical, rather than chronological, in nature. The topical development he takes to be governed by matthew's Christology (Kingsbury 1975, p. 36). What chronology does exist in Matthew is a division of history into prophecy and its fulfillment in Christ (Kingsbury 1975, p. 37).
Kingsbury ends the chapter with some comments on a study of Matthew by H. Frankemölle, released shortly before publication of this book. The study appears to take a covenant theology point of view, with a strong element of continuity rather than changes in era (Kingsbury 1975, p. 37). While Kingsbury does agree with Frankemölle on one level, he rejects the view of covenant theology which is used. The level of continuity which matthew shows between Old and New Testament is not as great, in Kingsbury's opinion, as Frankemölle would allege (Kingsbury 1975, p. 38).
RSS Feed