CHAPTER 2 . . . . . 24
CHAPTER 3 . . . . . 52
BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . 90
Untangling the narrative web of any piece of literature can be an arduous and frustrating task. In the case of modern literature, authors are often queried about their methods and models. Such information is invaluable for the study of an author's work. Frustration levels rise, however, when such resources are not available. As the researcher has fewer first-hand tools on which to rely, he or she is forced to focus upon the author's extant works and whatever other literature, contemporary or prior to the author's time, is deemed helpful. As the researcher is further removed in time and culture from the author, both time and culture become even more difficult obstacles to overcome. Finally, when authorship is uncertain, redaction has taken place, and there is only one known work written by the author, the researcher discovers there is plenty of work to do and not a lot of sure answers!
The Gospel of Matthew is such a work. Traditionally believed to have been written by the Apostle of the same name, the book is actually anonymous.(1) That is, it makes no claim for its authorship within its text.(2) The title "According to Matthew," (KATA MAQQAION) is, as Johnson has said, "uniformly" attested.(3) The meaning of the title is, however, ambiguous at best, but there is evidence that ". . . by the second quarter of the second century the book was circulating under the title . . . , and the preposition was understood as pointing to the author."(4) Were other works attributed to Matthew extant, a comparative study, such as has been done with the Pauline corpus, could prove helpful in determining authorship. Lacking such evidence, however, the researcher is left with only a trail of fading manuscripts and some unclear and unsubstantiated claims to Matthean authorship.(5)
Further compounding the issue is the Matthean author's apparent use of the Gospel of Mark as a base text. Extensive editing and rearranging of materials has taken place. One must wonder why an apostle would use another person's text rather than write his own firsthand account.(6) Also, the reader of the Greek text notes an improvement in Matthew's text over Mark's. Matthew corrects Markan grammar and has a highly polished literary style that Mark does not (more will be said about Matthew's style). Would the Apostle Matthew have had such skill? Could he have gained such skill? It is impossible to know. In short, the authorship of Matthew remains a mystery, even if some of the "prehistory" of the text is attributable to the Apostle Matthew.(7)
The portion of the text under consideration (Matthew 24-25) first drew my attention when reading it alongside its parallels in Mark 13 and Luke 21. There were marked differences in the length of the material and the approach of each author. Luke and Mark could be read straight through as if reading a chronological account: that is, event 'a' is followed by event 'b', event 'b' is followed by event 'c,' etc. Matthew's discourse, however, was much longer than either Mark or Luke and the chronological flow of events was disrupted in places (24:14; 24:31). In fact, the text seemed to be repetitious in some respects which further added to the confusion of the discourse's story line.
In this paper the goal will be to examine the structure of Matthew 24-25 using the literary category of recapitulation. Recapitulation is the style of repeatedly presenting the same information, only described in different ways. Its use may range from the simple to the complex. It may be simple repetition without a clear structure, or it may be used to focus upon and elaborate something previously mentioned. The Similitudes of 1 Enoch (chs. 37-71) are an example of simplicity with little structure, while Revelation is an example of more complex recapitulation. Both of these will be discussed further in chapter 3.
To begin the study of this discourse (Matt. 24-25), it is first necessary to access its history in critical scholarship. This is the goal of chapter one. It is possible to trace the conceptual development of the discourse's structure beginning at the turn of the twentieth century. Interpreters have variously divided the text and these proposed divisions will be presented, accessed, and a position will be taken for this paper.
Particularly germane to the study of structure in Matthew 24-25 is the final portion of the discourse: the parable of the sheep and the goats (25:31-46). How the interpreter understands the use of ta; e[qnh (the gentiles/nations) determines how the rest of the previous material is understood. If it is taken to mean the "nations," as in "all of humanity," problems arise as to how to connect 25:31 with 24:31 (the description of the coming of the Son of Man and the gathering of the elect). If it is taken to mean "the gentiles," as in "non-Jewish peoples," then theological problems arise about salvation. The account can also be read with a different emphasis. One may view 24:31 as a separate judgment of the true Jewish community, which is Matthew's community. Then, 25:31 can be seen as a separate judgment of the non-Jewish peoples. This, however, is not a standard approach of Christian scholars.
In settling the question of the interpretation of ta; e[qnh it is necessary to consider to whom ta; e[qnh (gentiles/nations) have been kind and to examine the history and concept of judgment at the last day.
The second chapter is devoted to some important literary considerations. First, a brief history and development of apocalyptic literature and its literary expression is traced. Such an effort is necessary to establish recapitulation as a characteristic of proto-apocalyptic and apocalyptic literature. Second, a section of chapter 2 is devoted to the history of the usage of the term "recapitulation," particularly as it is related to the book of Revelation. Here, my intention is to further define and credential recapitulation as an accepted scholarly methodology, and thus, to prepare for the application of recapitulation to the texts in chapter 3. Finally, Matthew's literary style will be considered. The apocalyptic nature of Matthew's gospel has long been noted. When that nature is considered, it further establishes grounds for believing an apocalyptic structure is used in Matthew 24-25.(8)
The third chapter is devoted to the application of recapitulation to selected texts. First, I examine the proto-apocalyptic work of Zechariah 9-14. The structure of chapters 9-14 are examined in light of recent scholarship. It is my position that these chapters demonstrate an early form of recapitulation. Second, I consider the Similitudes of 1 Enoch (chs. 37-71). Recapitulation can be identified, but it is in a largely unstructured format. Third, I investigate Daniel 7-12 as a work unto itself. The repeating themes of Antiochus IV's oppression, the true stance of the wise/faithful, and the hope of God's deliverance are a noted model that will be important for use with apocalyptic recapitulation. Finally, I examine Revelation as an example of a fully developed use of recapitulation. Working through each of these texts is preparation for the examination of the synoptic gospel accounts of Jesus' Eschatological Discourse.
The fourth chapter is devoted to the synoptic gospels and a comparison and contrast of their accounts of Jesus' eschatological discourse (Lk. 21; Mk. 13; Matt. 24-15). Mark is considered the base text for both Matthew and Luke. His account is chronological and apocalyptic in nature (as is his Gospel). Luke abridges Mark, but in a different direction than Matthew. He labors to produce a very chronological account and de-emphasizes the apocalyptic nature of Mark's text. Matthew edits Mark's account, expands it, and produces the longest of the eschatological discourses. He maintains the apocalyptic nature of the text, and in fact, emphasizes it -- in part by his use of the apocalyptic style of recapitulation.
The final chapter is a conclusion based on the work undertaken in the first four chapters. Certain key arguments are summarized and the importance of recapitulation as a structure for Matthew 24-25 is discussed.
STRUCTURE ACCORDING TO CRITICAL SCHOLARSHIP
Over the years scholarship has developed an interest in the structure of Jesus' final discourse found in Matthew 24-25. Most of this interest has been in the latter half of this century. Few commentators before this time have raised the issue. Morison failed to mention a structural proposal in his 1902 commentary.(9) Plummer, in his 1920 work, found a sevenfold structure to the discourse: 24:4-14; 24:15-28; 24:29-31; 24:32-51; 25:1-13; 25:14-30; 25:31-46, although he was not wholeheartedly convinced this structure exists.(10) Ten years later Bacon made a structural proposal that sees 24:4-14 as parallel with 24:15-31.(11) Plummer had hinted at this with his understanding of tevlo" in 24:14 as a term for the end of the age, although he failed to go further in his thinking.(12)
The structure of this discourse has been elusive for many reasons. One's preconceived notions about theology, eschatology, the nature of Matthew as literature, and a number of finer exegetical points all complicate this effort.
If one approaches Matthew 24-25 as a strictly chronological narrative, then one reads it differently from others who see parallel repetitive structures within it. If one conceives of only a single judgment scene portrayed in the discourse, then there is a conflict with interpreters who suggest two judgments. If one's doctrine of salvation excludes anyone who is not a confessing Christian, then 25:31-46 has an entirely different meaning than for those who read the text within the background of Jewish literature.
The text of Matthew 24-25 is of basically three types. First one finds eschatological narrative which weaves apocalyptic elements throughout. These texts are found in 24:1-31 and 25:31-46. The second type is parabolic material, found in 24:45-25:30. The third type is illustration, found in 24:32-44. The mixture and placement of the material is part of the difficulty in outlining the discourse. The parables and illustrations, for example, form a long break between 24:31 and 25:31. While both the parables and illustrations are separate types of writing, they both share the common goal of admonishing the community. Issues such as these complicate structural analysis.
The text can be crudely divided into the following sections. The first is 24:1-31. This is the narration of the eschatological events leading up to the parousia(13) and the end of the age. The second section is 24:32-25:30 which warns the faithful to live right and to be ready for the parousia of the Son of Man because the day and the hour are unknown. The final section is the parable of the Sheep and the Goats in 25:31-46; the parousia and judgment are again at issue. With this outline in view, it is the finer exegetical points of these texts that have caused the problems pertaining to structure and interpretation.
The first of these problems is understanding the division of the first section of the eschatological discourse (24:1-31). Commentators have long noted the change of topics between v. 14 and v. 15, but how they deal with the change differs. The most common view is to understand 24:3-14 as events preceding the Great Tribulation (which is thought to be portrayed in 24:15-28) followed by the parousia in 24:29-31. In this camp are Albright and Mann who view 24:3-14 as The Coming Persecution and 24:15-28 as Immediate Signs prior to the parousia.(14) Hendriksen rather blandly labels the first verses as Various Coming Events and sees the second grouping as the Great Tribulation.(15) Similarly, Hare sees these as events prior to the Great Tribulation ending with the Gentile mission (24:3-14) and followed by the Abomination of Desolation and the Great Tribulation which is the final sign of the end of the age (24:15-28).(16) D. Harrington sums up the two sections as The Beginning of the Birth Pangs followed by the Coming of the Son of Man.(17) Wisely, Hagner subdivides 24:4-8 into the Beginning of the Birth Pangs and 24:9-14 as Persecution and Proclamation Before the End.(18) He then divides 24:15-22 into Instructions to Flee Jerusalem and 24:23-28 as Claims of Pseudo-Christs and False Prophets. Gundry recognizes the multiple nature of 24:4-14 as Persecution, Antinomianism, and Worldwide Persecution.(19) He simply sees 24:15-31 as the Eschatological Sign.
All of the aforementioned commentators represent some form of the traditional view. This view is not without credence, especially with a chronological reading of 24:1-31. That is to say, in a chronological rendering one event follows upon the heels of another. Put another way, those things spoken about in 24:1-14 must precede in time and be different from those things found in 24:15-31.
Part of the question of Matthew 24:1-31 is whether or not one should read it chronologically. The literary clues are confusing. The aforementioned commentators pick up on the admonition in 24:6 that "the end is not yet," the language of "birth pangs" (wjdi;n) in 24:8, and the statement "the end will come" (24:14).(20) These clues, coupled with the narrow focus on the more detailed strife in Judea (24:15-31), are interpreted as indications that this section narrates a different set of events.
Luz puts forth a somewhat different approach.(21) His reading of 24:1-31 is not chronological in nature. Instead, he sees 24:4-14 as parallel with 24:15-31. The differences in the events of the two sections are accounted for by the fact that they are written from two different perspectives. Although Luz gives no indication he is dependant upon others for this view, others have previously come to the same conclusion.(22) It becomes easier to understand Luz's position when one considers the similar material shared by the two sections (Table 1). Each shares the problems of false Christs, false prophets, war (local versus international); each has a clear "ending." For Luz, 24:14 represents the parousia which is then paralleled and expanded upon in 24:29-31.
|
24:1-14 |
24:15-31 |
| 4-5 False Christs; Deceit
6 Wars (Nations & Kingdoms) [worldwide] 7 Famines; Earthquakes 9 Persecution 10 Apostasy 11 False Prophets 12 Increase in Wickedness & Love grows Cold. 13 Stand Firm (persecution) 14 Gospel Preached 14 The End comes |
23-26 False Christs;
Deceit; 16-21 Unequaled Distress 24 False Prophets 29 Universal cataclysm 27-28 Son of Man visible 30 Parousia |
Table 1
Taking a stance contrary to Luz's position that 24:4-14 and 24:15-31 are parallel would require one to understand "and then the end will come" (24:14) as meaning that the "birth pangs" have passed and the real, serious tribulation which leads to the "real end" are about to fall upon humanity. This is the position held by those with a chronological reading of the text.(23) However, tevlo" is a technical word for the end of the world in 24:14, and in 24:13 eij" tevlo" also probably refers to it as well, judging from the context.(24)
Furthermore, the admonition that only those who endure "to the end (eij" tevlo") will be saved" (24:13) makes little sense unless it is the end of the age. To what "end" would they be enduring otherwise? The end of their life is a possibility, if the deaths of the disciples (v. 9) are seen to be the same as the "end" (v. 13). With the description in 24:9-12 of not only death but false prophecy, lawlessness, and apostasy it seems the end of the tribulation period is in mind. Otherwise, to read this chronologically the necessary meaning would be that "those who endure to the end of the birth pangs will be saved." This further confuses the issue for those who would read the text chronologically.
Morris makes a slightly different proposal. He handles the two sections by distinguishing between the sufferings of the disciples (24:4-14) and the events taking place in Jerusalem (24:15-28). He understands the phrase "then the end will come" as meaning "will have become present, will have made its appearance."(25) This interpretation makes Jesus' statement a prediction about what will bring the end of the age to pass: the spread of the gospel. The disciples can know the end is upon them "when," that is, "whenever," they see the abomination of desolation.(26) While Morris does not say the two sections overlap, it is possible that they could in his scenario.
Patte understands o}tan the in the same sense ("whenever") as Morris, but he argues that 24:15a refers to the same time as 24:8b. "In other words, the time in question is the one that was earlier designated as 'the beginning of the sufferings,' the time of wars, of persecutions by all nations, as well as the time of wickedness in the community."(27)
It is this mix of subjects, repetition of themes, various types of text, confusion of terms, and confusion within the structure of the discourse that has been the downfall of those who would seek to hold that all these events pertain to either the destruction of Jerusalem or the judgment that follows the worldwide proclamation of the gospel. France has argued that the judgment of Jerusalem is the subject of 24:1-35 while 24:36-51 relate to the parousia.(28) Meanwhile, Kik divides the text at 24:34. Verses 1-34, then, pertain to the generation living in Jesus' day while the remainder (vv. 35-51) refer to the future parousia.(29) These positions are not very persuasive in light of more recent scholarship (i.e. Gundry, Hagner, Hare, and Luz), but the same factors continue to frustrate the efforts of those who would find a structure in the discourse.
A second problem relating to the structure of Matthew's discourse (chs. 24-25) is how to connect the last statement of the parousia (25:31) with the rest of the preceding discourse. For the chronological reader 25:31-46 is simply an extension of the parousia announcement in 24:31, with a long section of illustrative and parabolic material in between.(30) Jesus, in their view, picks up the story with his description of the events of his coming, which includes a universal judgment of all humanity. These commentators see no conflict with a universal judgment at this time despite the statement in 24:31 that the angels "will gather his elect" when he returns. The gathering of the elect is seen as a subset of the universal judgment. An exegetical problem exists relating to the identity of the sheep and the goats. Those gathered before Jesus will be pavnta ta; e[qnh (all the gentiles/nations). The commentators under discussion, with the exceptions of D. Harrington and Hare, take this to mean all of humanity, including Gentiles, Jews, and Christians.
Dissenting voices, such as D. Harrington, cry out for a judgment of the Gentiles.(31) Harrington argues that where the plural form is used, ta; e[qnh should be rendered "Gentiles" unless there is some strong reason for not doing so. He further argues that a separate judgment of the Gentiles is consistent with 19:28 where the twelve apostles will have seats of judgment over Israel, but not over the Gentiles since that is Jesus' duty. Finally, he appeals to Old Testament and intertestamental literature which depict a separate judgment of the Jews and the Gentiles.(32)
Hare is in agreement with D. Harrington and further adds that "a number of ancient Jewish texts express concern for 'righteous Gentiles'."(33) He cites Romans 2:14-16 as evidence that Gentiles can fulfill the ethical requirements of the law apart from Torah. Matthew's use of "righteous" in 25:46, he argues, may be a clue that this type of judgment is in mind.(34)
One further dissident position is held by Albright and Mann. They hold that this section is not about the final judgment. Instead, they see the death and resurrection-glory of Jesus as being the event that divides mankind. The response of each person determines whether he or she is a sheep or a goat.(35) This position has little on which to commend itself.
D. Harrington and Hare make the best use of the data and take a controversial exegetical position in so doing. A notoriously difficult exegetical problem exists pertaining to the judgment scene in 25:31-46. Whom is being judged and to whom have the deeds of mercy been extended or withheld? The text of 25:31-32 reads [Otan de; e[lqh/ oJ uiJo" tou' ajnqrwvpou ejn th/' dovxh/ aujtou' kai; pavnte" oiJ a[ggeloi met! aujtou', tovte kaqivsei ejpi; qrovnou dovxh" aujtou': 32 kai; sunacqhvsontai e[mprosqen aujtou' pavnta ta; e[qnh, kai; ajforivsei aujtou;" ajp! ajllhvlwn, w{sper oJ poimh;n ajforivzei ta; provbata ajpo; tw'n ejrivfwn (When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on the throne of his glory. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep [NRSV]).(36)
The first question is to whom the aujtou;" (them) of v. 32 refers. The nearest and most logical antecedent is ta; e[qnh, but it is of the wrong gender. This mismatch of gender has led some, such as the NIV, to see ta; e[qnh as "the nations" and aujtou;" (them) as "the people." This indicates the translators understand the text as referring to a judgment of the individuals of the nations. Gundry holds to this position: "The shift from the neuter ta panta ta ethne, 'all the nations,' to the masculine autous, 'them', implies individual rather than national judgment (cf. 28:19-20)."(37) For Gundry, the clarification of this is the similitude "as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats . . . ." In his thought it is a judgment of the individual members of the collective flock: "Palestinian shepherds commonly herded mixed flocks of sheep and goats, but separated the sheep and goats in the evening because sheep prefer the open air at night and goats need the warmth of shelter."(38)
Newman and Stine also hold the position that it is a judgment of all of humanity, ". . . the translations should not give the impression that the judge will separate righteous nations from others; it is the righteous people as individuals who will be separated from the others."(39) Hagner sides with this perspective as well, "[d]espite the disagreement of the gender of autous, 'them,' the antecedent remains ta ethne, 'the nations' (cf. 28:19 for the same phenomenon)."(40) He concludes that, ". . . probably included, therefore, are the gentile nations, Israel, and also the corpus mixtum of the Christian Church. . . ."(41)
D. Harrington and Hare do not subscribe to the above theories. Their rendering clearly indicates they believe the autous to refer back to ta ethne, which they render as "the Gentiles."(42)
One obvious question that supports D. Harrington and Hare is this: how is judgment portrayed in Matthew? For Matthew, angels are instruments of judgment.(43) Matthew's previous uses of the angels are in judgment scenes. The first, 13:40-43, has the angels compared to farmhands who remove weeds from Jesus' garden at the end of the age. The garden is the kingdom of heaven which consists of the righteous. The angels are, then, instruments of judgment. They only tend to the righteous by way of eliminating the wicked.
The second use is found in 13:47-50 where the angels are like fishermen who collect the good fish and discard the bad ones. It is explicitly stated that they will be the ones who cast the wicked into the fiery furnace. What is then inferred is that the righteous people (like the fish) will be gathered together before Jesus. In these parables it does not seem that the righteous must face a judgment - they have already been judged by the fact of gathering or separating.
This begs a question of 24:31: Are the angels gathering the elect for the day of judgment or are they gathering them to heaven as already being victorious in life? Based on his previous uses, it seems they are being gathered to heaven. Matthew's Jesus speaks more clearly on the basis of the judgment in 16:27 when he says, "For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father's glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done." This theme of personal responsibility is again raised in 25:31-46 where the judgment is based on how others have been treated. But just who are the others? They are either Christians in general, or Christian missionaries specifically.(44)
The Matthean version of the judgment of the Gentiles (25:31-46) departs from the usual emphasis on the relationship between Matthean Christians and other Jews. It acknowledges the presence of non-Jews who were not Christians and tries to explain how and why such persons can be part of God's Kingdom. How? By acts of mercy to Christians. Why? Because such acts are done to the Son of Man/King (see Matt 10:40-42).(45)
If the gathering of the elect is one judgment of the Church and the parable of the Sheep and Goats is one of the Gentiles, how can two separate judgments at the end of the age be explained? The Old Testament has texts that portray a judgment of the Gentiles apart from Israel.(46) Amos 1:3-2:5 is a list of judgments against Israel's neighbors (Damascus, Gaza, Tyre, Edom, Ammon, and Moab). At the end of the list, Israel is judged (2:6 ff.). Ezekiel 25-33 is a series of oracles against Israel's neighbors. Although Israel is not judged, it clearly shows the pattern of a Gentile judgment.
The New Testament writings are not uniform in just how the judgment will be done nor how many judgments there will be. Romans 2:9-10 sees a progression in Judgment from the "Jew" to the "Gentile."(47) Similarly, 1 Peter 4:17 has the judgment beginning with the "household of God" and ending with those "who do not obey the Gospel of God."(48) First Corinthians 6:2-3 portrays a judgment of the world and of angels by the "saints."(49)
Apocalyptic literature supports these themes as well. In The Apocalypse of Weeks at the beginning of Book V, Enoch tells his children that three judgments will take place.(50) First, in 91:11 the "righteous one" will execute judgment; in v. 12 all the righteous will execute judgment on all the wicked; second, in v. 14 ". . . the righteous judgment shall be revealed to the whole earth; and all the deeds of wickedness will vanish from the whole world . . ."; finally, in v. 15 the "eternal judgment" comes to the angels.(51) In addition, of particular interest is The Testament of Benjamin 10:8-9 which calls for the judgment of Israel first then a judgment of the nations:
Then all shall be changed, some destined for glory, others for dishonor, for the Lord first judges Israel for the wrong she has committed and then he shall do the same for the nations. Then he shall judge Israel by the chosen gentiles as he tested Esau by the Midianites who loved their brothers.(52)
Another strong point of D. Harrington and Hare's position is the criteria on which the Gentiles are judged. In Matthew 25:31-46 the judgment is based on how the Christians (God's people) were treated by the Gentiles.(53) In Joel 3:1, 19-21 the nations are judged by how they treated Judah (God's people).
It makes no sense to judge Christians by standards of which they are ignorant when there has been plenty of teaching on how the Christian should live, i.e. the Sermon on the Mount and the admonition material in 24:32-25:30. Nor does it make sense to judge them with the rest of the nations when they have already been gathered together by the angels. Unless one deems that the "gathering by the angels" is equivalent to the "international judgment," then these two events must be viewed as separate events.(54) This also serves as a fitting complement for the note of impending judgment in 24:30, "and the nations will mourn," because in 25:31-46 the judgment is realized.
Before moving on to the next chapter, let me recap the major positions adopted for this work. First, Luz is correct in seeing 24:4-14 and 24:15-31 as describing the same events only from different perspectives. Second, D. Harrington and Hare are correct in understanding 25:31-46 as a judgment of the Gentiles (whether this is individual or corporate judgment matters little for my structural argument).
These two important concepts are
expressed in Figure 1. First, the two parallel passages are
illustrated by parallel lines headed toward the end of the age.
Second, the judgment of the Gentiles is illustrated by a dot, to
show that it takes place at the end of the age. With these
concepts in mind, we are ready for chapter two.
World-view of Apocalyptic and Its Storyline Features
In order to understand the storyline of Matthew's eschatological discourse, it is necessary to examine apocalyptic literature. Matthew's gospel has an apocalyptic overtone to it, particularly chapters 24-25. It is my contention that knowledge of apocalypse and its features, particularly its use of recapitulation, can shed light on Matthew's work.
The description of "apocalypse" as a genre is a Christian era development that arose from the book of Revelation. This is because the Book of Revelation is the first text to identify itself as an apocalypse (Rev. 1:1).(55) The Greek word from which apocalypse is transliterated is ajpokavluyi", and it means "an unveiling" or "revelation."(56) That is, secrets or mysteries known only to the supernatural world are revealed to a human being. Certain things could not be known by humans unless they were "revealed" to them by some supernatural force. The texts commonly identified as apocalyptic share this basic feature of uncovering hidden things.(57)
Just what gave rise to apocalyptic literature is still ". . . a matter of scholarly conjecture."(58) Hanson has proposed that it arose as ". . . the mode assumed by the prophetic tradition once it had been transferred to a new and radically altered setting in the post-exilic community."(59) There may be truth in his approach, but other factors surely come into play, such as wisdom, religious piety and validation, the human fascination with the future, and the fascination with the spiritual realm.(60) The genre may even have come from Akkadian roots.(61) J. J. Collins finds Persian influence behind the texts:
It appears that several key features of the historical apocalypses were paralleled in Persian writings already in the Hellenistic age, notably the periodization of history, eschatological woes, resurrection, and the supernatural forces of good and evil.(62)
He also finds evidence for the otherworldly journey motif (one of the two types of apocalypse, see below), but does not concede these elements are simply adopted from the Persians. Instead, he holds that they have been ". . . thoroughly reconceived and integrated with other strands of thought by the Jews."(63)
Apocalypses fall basically into two types, otherworldly journeys and historical accounts.(64) The journeys are simply trips on which a person is taken (usually through visions, dreams, or an alleged physical transportation) into the realm of the supernatural.(65)
Of the journey type, 1 Enoch 13-36 is a good example. Enoch is taken into heaven through a vision and given a tour of heaven and sheol. He discovers the secrets of the universe: where the light from the luminaries originates, where the snow, ice, and rain come from and are kept, and where the tree of life is located.(66)
A slight variation on this tour theme is the Astronomical Book of 1 Enoch (chs. 73-82). It is also an apocalypse, but, rather than the tour itself, the reader learns about the tour as Enoch tells his son Methuselah.
Such journeys show a fascination with the unknown. The apocalyptic mind searches for answers relative to its existence - whether simply dealing with the mysterious physical world around it, or with the mysteries of the afterlife. It is important to note that there is a world beyond this one, a realm where forces exist (both good and evil) and influence humankind's condition.(67)
Historical apocalypses are a recounting of past history up to the author's day. In such works, the end of the age is near and the author's community is the agent of God's renewal. The Animal Apocalypse of 1 Enoch 83-90 provides a clear example of this genre. In it, Israel's history is retold through a vision using animals to represent people and nations. Moses and the Israelite people are portrayed as sheep that cross a "pool of water" that is "rent asunder" by "the Lord of the sheep," who represents God (89:23).(68) Thus the exodus event is recast in the language of apocalypse. The author's own time is that of the Hasmonean period.(69) He approves of the revolt led by Judas Maccabees. In the author's view, the end of the oppression of Israel will soon come to pass through God's intervention: "And I kept seeing till the Lord of the sheep came upon them [the oppressors] in wrath" (90:18). God will then enable Israel to defeat its enemies: "Then I saw that a great sword was given to the sheep; and the sheep proceeded against all the beasts of the field in order to kill them [all the other nations] . . . " (90:19). Next, judgment will be meted out upon everyone: "Then I kept seeing till a throne was erected in a pleasant land; and he sat upon it for the Lord of the sheep; and he took all the sealed books and opened those very books in the presence of the Lord of the sheep. . . . Then his judgment took place," (90:20, 24). Finally, those obedient to God are blessed: "All the sheep were invited into that [God's] house . . . . The eyes of all of them were opened and they saw the beautiful things; not a single one existed among them that could not see" (90:34-35).
Apocalyptic thought had its expression not just in literature but in communities as well.(70) The Qumran community reflects this in the Damascus Document. This work begins with a brief summary of Israelite history and the rise of the Qumran community (CD-A I.4-21).(71) A longer recounting of Israel's history takes place in columns II-VIII and chronicles the apostasy of the nation, according to the author's perspective. This leaves only the author's community as the faithful ones of Israel who are led by the Teacher of Righteousness (I.5-12).
Like the authors of the journeys, the authors of historical apocalypses were interested in how human events play out and what spiritual forces are at work in the world.(72) They foresee a time when God will bring an end to all sin and wickedness and bless the righteous. Emergence of apocalyptic thought has followed a development process in the theological expressions of ancient Israel. As it is reflected in the biblical canon, initially, the blessings of God were dependant on obedience to Israel's covenant with God. Exodus 19-24 is thought to be based on the model of a suzerainty covenant.(73) This covenant was a unilateral covenant made by a king or a sovereign with a lesser status person or people group.(74) This covenant style carried with it six basic attributes (for an exception, see note #18).(75) The most important attribute for this study is the final one, Sanctions. Sanctions were comprised of blessings and curses that were to fall upon those under the king or sovereign depending upon whether or not they kept their part of the covenant. The king's protection was extended if they were obedient, but his judgment - and even total destruction - were promised if they violated the treaty.(76) The prophet Amos was a strong proponent of the "doom" that awaited a disobedient nation.
"Amos reversed the popular logic of his time, saying: Yahweh has 'known' only Israel of all the families of the earth; therefore, Israel will be punished for its iniquities. Israel's special calling, said Amos, does not entitle it to special privilege, but only to greater responsibility."(77)
The rise and fall of obedience to
God's covenant in Israel's history is portrayed in Figure 2.(78) As Israel is obedient, its
fortunes rise as God blesses it. When it is disobedient, its
fortunes decline as God punishes it. The peaks and the valleys of
the chart represent the extreme high and low points of Israel's
fidelity to Yahweh's covenant.
Commenting upon The Apocalypse of
Weeks, found in 1 Enoch 91-107, Le Roux notes this up and
down pattern. In this scheme periods of righteousness alternate
with iniquity. The righteousness of the first era is followed by
the evil of Noah. At the end of the third week Abraham introduces
a new age of righteousness which continues throughout the fourth
week when the law is given up to the construction of the temple
in week five. The sixth heralds a period of decline in the course
of which the temple is destroyed and the nation carried off into
captivity, while the seventh week is likewise a time of evil.(79) Figure 3 is a chart of the
Apocalypse of Weeks.(80) As
Le Roux has illustrated the chart, certain familiar elements are
omitted. For example, the birth of Enoch is in week one; the time
of Noah is part of the decline at week two; and wickedness
reaches its greatest extent at the time of Abraham. This may seem
strange, since the time of Noah is considered by most today to
have been the pinnacle of evil, but 1 Enoch does not see it in
that manner. Instead, the structure here is based upon the
key-points of righteousness: Enoch, Abraham, the temple, the
"elect ones of righteousness," and the end of the age.
The cardinal event, viz the building of the temple, is placed at the centre. The final three weeks correspond to the first three prior to Abraham, whose place in the scheme in turn corresponds to that of the righteous in the last days. This knowledge is very precious to them since it proves undeniable that they are the true heirs of Abraham. Like him they are upright and chosen people and as such form part of the fixed pattern of history. Although they are living amid the evils of the last days they are the righteous, the true descendants of Abraham. God had ordained a fixed pattern in all this so their misery will have an end.(81)
While The Apocalypse of Weeks is properly apocalypse in that it expects divine intervention in the last weeks, it still sees the fortunes of Israel as rising or falling based upon obedience to the covenant.
The next phase in the development of apocalyptic thought is what Hanson has called "proto-apocalyptic."(82) Proto-apocalyptic is concerned with history and covenantal obedience, just as in "The Two Ways" before it.(83) Where it differs in its expression is that it employs mythic motifs that are a move in the direction of full-fledged apocalypse.(84)
Myth is reintroduced into Israel's religion to add a cosmic dimension to a Yahwism languishing under an interpretation of divine activity which limited divine action too severely to historical events, but in such a way as to stop short of an escape into the purely visionary realm of myth.(85)
God begins to be described in terms of the "Mighty Creator" and the "Divine Warrior," images drawn from Canaanite and Babylonian mythology.(86) He is increasingly seen to be at war with evil and its agents on a cosmic scale.(87)
The reason for this change was a reaction to Israel's history. With "The Two Ways," God was perceived to act based upon his covenant - almost a deterministic relationship. Blessings came with obedience and curses came with disobedience to the covenant. However, Israel's history was not working out as it should. "Yahweh's acts were tied almost exclusively to historical events, events which now contradicted the promises of the covenant."(88) In other words, blessings were not following upon the heels of righteousness. Josiah was a case in point. Here was the most righteous king since David, yet he fell in battle.(89) Furthermore, God seemed to abandon his covenant when the Northern Kingdom of Israel was taken into captivity and finally when the Southern Kingdom of Judah went into exile.
Prophets like Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Second Isaiah began to see a way to reconcile history with God's covenant. God had not abandoned his covenant; he was working in a different way. "Indeed, it was Yahweh himself who had given Israel to her spoilers (Isa. 42:24ff), but with the express purpose of preparing for a more glorious future act (Isa. 43:18-21)."(90) This act was to be a divine deliverance, hence, the adoption of "Divine Warrior" imagery. God would also enable his people to now keep the covenant (Ez. 11:19; I will give them one heart, and put a new spirit within them; I will remove the heart of stone from their flesh and give them a heart of flesh). Jeremiah envisions a "new covenant" (Jer. 31:31), but it is only by God's enabling that people will be able to keep the covenant: "But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people" (Jer. 31:33).(91)
Figure 4 represents the development of
proto-
apocalyptic from the Deuteronomic covenant's "Two
Ways" model. As in the previous model, obedience brought blessing
and disobedience brought punishment. Only now, it has been
decided that the people cannot keep the covenant on their own.
Therefore, it is necessary for God to enable the people to keep
the covenant (see Ez. 11:19 and Jer. 31:31-33).
The world-view of fully developed apocalyptic thought is one of tribulation and triumph. Like proto-apocalyptic, apocalyptic sees the world on a downward slide that can only be corrected by God's intervention. "The apocalyptist meets this present age with radical pessimism. The world is on a downward course and cannot be halted."(92) As the world (under the control of evil) continues to decline, wickedness increases. Thus, God's people suffer because they are naturally at odds with the world.
Restoration of Yahweh's true followers could no longer be envisioned within the present evil social and natural order. Therefore that day of restoration had to be preceded by a cosmic battle which would eliminate the enemies of wickedness who caused the fall of the world to evil, and then by a new creation intended to restore the world to a paradisiacal purity suitable as a context for the restoration.(93)
Barr summarizes the principal points of fully developed apocalyptic thought.
1. God has appointed a time for the end of the present world order, and that time is imminent.
2. This age is under the control of the powers of evil, so that we must expect that the good will suffer and the wicked will prosper. This represented a shift from the earlier optimistic tradition that proclaimed that good would prosper and evil be punished.
3. This age will soon be replaced by another, the age to come, which will be the exact opposite of this one. The new age will be accompanied by the judgment of evil and the reward of the righteous.
4. Between the two ages stands the decisive act of divine intervention. This would be accomplished either by God himself, a heavenly agent, or a human agent.
5. As the end of this age approaches there will be an increase in the activity of evil and a period of intense suffering for the righteous. Usually called the period of tribulation, its most common metaphor as the labor of a woman in childbirth-- birth pangs of the new age.(94)
Jewish apocalyptic thought (Figure 5)
envisions ever-increasing persecution for God's people until the
time that God intervenes and puts an end to all wickedness.(95) At this time there will be a
new time of blessedness for God's people.(96) By this point in the development
process, "[t]he saving activity is initiated and carried out by
the Divine Warrior himself, and human agents appear as mere pawns
in a cosmic chess game. Insofar as the elect participate in the
events of the eschaton, they are absorbed into the cosmic hosts
of the Divine Warrior and play no part as members of 
the real historical
order."(97) Achtemeier has
similarly diagramed this view (Figure 6).(98)
Christian apocalyptic thought adds a new wrinkle to the scenario of apocalypse. In this scheme, God has intervened through his agent, Jesus.(99) This event, though, was not "The Day of the Lord," as one might have expected. Instead, Christians live in a dual time: one of the declining world which runs parallel with the breaking in of the kingdom of God.
Until Christ comes in judgment, believers live in a world whose structures are passing away. However, they have been delivered from the clutches of sin and are assured that at the consummation they will be saved -- they will be like Christ and will have a resurrection like his.(100)
The parousia brings an end to the old time of the world
and ushers in the fullness of the new time of the kingdom. In
considering Paul's apocalyptic viewpoint, Sampley has developed
the following chart (Figure 7).(101) Achtemeier sees a similar
expression of this thought based on Romans, particularly, chapter
five (Figure 8).(102)
Where Christian apocalypse differs from the standard apocalypse is that it transfers to Jesus and his parousia those things that were originally attributed to Yahweh and the "Day of the Lord:" increasing persecution, wrath, judgment, and rewards. The changes in God's chosen agent and the dual kingdoms in which Christians live, pointed out by Sampley, are reflected in Figure 9.
To state them succinctly, the storyline features of apocalyptic thought are as follows. (1) The world is increasingly growing more evil and this growth cannot be checked by any human means. (2) Because evil is in control, the righteous can expect to suffer while the wicked prosper. (3) Only direct, decisive intervention from God can correct matters, and only then by doing away with the present state of the world. This intervention may come from God himself, a heavenly agent, or a human agent. (4) The righteous can be assured of vindication for their suffering because God is thought to have a plan, a timetable, on which the events of history are working out. (5) The time of the end is the present day of the author, and the end is imminent. (6) Just prior to the end the suffering of the righteous will increase as evil reaches its zenith. (7) When the end comes, a time just opposite of the present one will become a reality. (8) There will be judgment of the Jews and then the Gentiles. (9) The wicked will be punished and the righteous will be rewarded.
Literary Expression of Apocalyptic
Apocalyptic works have many and varied features and none incorporates them all.(103) As previously noted, the apocalyptic authors returned to mytho-poetic language and imagery.(104) The Divine Warrior image was important because the assurance of God's intervention and vindication of the righteous could help the suffering community endure.(105) There is little doubt that many of the apocalypses served such a purpose. Stock terms and themes such as suffering, tribulation, birth pangs, the end, judgment, and many others developed around this genre.(106)
Also central to the genre is the theme of revelation. The apocalyptic authors seek to describe alleged revelations of God's purposes given through the media of dreams, visions, or journeys to heaven by which the seer learns the secrets of God's world and the future.(107) These events are usually narrated or explained by a heavenly interpreter, such as an angel.(108)
Although actually written from the mid to late third century B.C.E. on, these works are usually attributed to some Old Testament saint who lived long ago.(109) These works employ an elaborate symbolism as a means of conveying their predictions of the future.(110) They see the end as near and anticipate God's judgment.(111)
The presentation of these apocalyptic elements varies within the different apocalypses. One of the more common forms is repetition. J. J. Collins observes this in his comments:
The juxtaposition of visions and oracles, which cover essentially the same material, with varying imagery is a feature of a great number of apocalypses and related writings -- Daniel, Sibylline Oracles, Similitudes of Enoch, 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch, Revelation.(112)
Some commentators refer to this technique as "recapitulation."(113) However, this usage of the term does not meet the dictionary definition, "a concise summary."(114) We are most familiar with this term in modern parlance when we hear a speaker say, "Let me recap for you," after which follows a brief summary of what the speaker has said to that moment. This word seldom functions in this manner in discussions of apocalyptic literature. Instead, the definition is broadened to refer to the repetition of themes within the literary work, whether they are summations, expansions, or a restatement in different terms of the theme. Barr notes this in his comments about Revelation, "Recapitulation is not a matter of simple repetition, for the later symbols modify, intensify, and focus earlier ones."(115) This can best be illustrated by the history of the term in conjunction with the book of Revelation.
It is thought that the theory of recapitulation, related to Revelation, originated with Victorinus of Pettau and the Donatist Tyconius.(116) "According to Victorinus, both the trumpets and the bowls predict the eschatological punishment of unbelievers," (a repetition of themes).(117) This approach, as applied to Revelation, flourished between 275-300 C.E. (the time of Victorinus' most prominent activity) and 1882, when the literary-critical method unseated it.(118) This new approach saw the repetitious elements of Revelation as evidence the author had compiled sources rather than written a text.(119) While most scholars turned to the new source criticism, Bousset still held to the recapitulation theory, arguing that the repetitions were a literary feature.(120) Boll also held to the theory in 1914.(121) However, the revival of recapitulation did not come until Bornkamm in 1937 and it is still accepted as a valid method in the present day.(122)
So from its initial discovery, through fifteen centuries of church history, and upon its revival in the late 1930's, recapitulation has been associated with apocalypse. Furthermore, it has been seen, not as a summary of previous material, but, as a restatement of a theme. As A. Y. Collins puts it, recapitulation is ". . . to describe the same events several times in different ways."(123)
Additionally, these restatements can advance the storyline. "Such recapitulation does not preclude the possibility of progress within the narrative, but the progress will be on the level of the images rather than their meaning."(124)
Defining recapitulation does not explain the reason for its use. A. Y. Collins gives the following reasonable suggestions regarding "use" of recapitulation:
The phenomenon of recapitulation, the repetition of the same basic pattern in a variety of specific formulations, is not limited to eschatological writings, but seems to be an essential characteristic of mythic language. According to Paul Ricoeur, myth is condemned by its very nature to division into multiple cycles. The reason for this is that myth aims at the intuition of a cosmic whole, its intent is the restoration of a wholeness which is not given, but simply aimed at. Thus its method must be symbolic, and no act of signifying is equal to its aim. The totality of the various formulations thus represents the message more fully than any single expression.
According to Claude Lévi-Strauss, myths and other types of oral literature so often repeat the same sequence because the function of the repetition is to make the structure of the myth apparent.
[Wayne Meeks said] If a message is to be conveyed in the presence of distractions, "noise," the communicator must resort to "redundance." The signal must be repeated, as many times as possible, in different ways. The repeated impact of the varying signals communicates the basic structure which they have in common.(125)
I will proceed to analyze apocalyptic recapitulation in the following manner. First I will seek to identify the apocalyptic storyline elements in a (or a portion of a) book or text. Accomplishing this, I label this section of the text a "cycle." Next, I search for a repetition of the same storyline elements in the continuing flow of the narrative and determine its validity as recapitulation. Each further repetition will constitute another cycle (i.e., cycle two, cycle three, etc.). As I proceed, I will look for any progression in the presentation of the repetitious elements (i.e. "cycles"), and the manner (if any) in which these elements are related to their previous occurrences.
Any consideration of structure must give some attention to Matthew as an author. This overview is intended to paint a portrait of Matthew as a clever, educated, Jewish-Christian author interested in the state of affairs between the Jewish, Christian, and Gentile communities.(126)
Matthew is one who is concerned with tying "the old" (Judaism) to "the new" (Christian teaching).(127) He uses the typical interpretive tools of his day to do so.(128) He is very much interested in presenting a "Jewish" flavored Gospel. He does so in many ways: by his use of scripture, by depicting Jesus' personal religion as Torah Judaism, by holding strongly to Pharisaic teachings; yet he is bold enough to call those Jews who disagree with him "blind guides" and "hypocrites."(129) "Mark has no Jewish coloring such as we find in Matthew. In fact, he finds it necessary to explain Jewish customs such as handwashing (7:3) and he always translates Aramaic phrases (e. g., 5:41; 7:11)."(130)
Matthew writes a much longer gospel than Mark, even though he used Mark as his base text.(131) Although he uses ninety percent of Mark, he edits it heavily and compresses it, often using a third fewer words than Mark.(132) He will frequently turn narration from Mark into dialogue for his gospel.(133) He also adds a good deal of material: a genealogy, a birth narrative, a resurrection appearance, and lots of discourse material, to name but four.(134) He will also (like Luke) correct Mark's grammar.(135) While Mark has an affinity for sets of threes, Matthew has even more of an affinity. He also uses other numerical groupings, such as seven and six.(136)
One element that Mark has that Matthew lacks is the sense of dramatic force. Matthew has long sermons and discourses that Mark does not, which slows down the pace. Mark stressed action, not discourse. "Mark is a quickly moving drama heading toward the crucifixion as the narrative climax. It is more the actions of Jesus, the suffering servant, that are crucial for Mark's situation."(137) This is most likely because Mark's gospel is more akin to the orality of the day and Matthew's is more connected with the literary conventions.(138)
Matthew uses summary transition statements between his discourse and narrative material which provide some structure for the book.(139) He also has two temporal transitions, which mark the beginning of Jesus' ministry and the beginning of his presentation as Christ.(140)
Matthew is further organized in his arrangement of the text. He almost always groups the sayings collections by topics, and he uses similar formal elements within each discourse (i.e. parables, beatitudes, woes).(141)
The division of the book is not agreed upon by scholars. Two major proposals exist. One considers it to be modeled after the Pentateuch, that is, it consists of five books marked by the phrase "Now when Jesus had finished saying these things. . ." (Mt. 7:28; 11:1 13:53; 19:1 26:1).(142) The other uses the temporal transitions and divides the book into three parts marked by "From that time on Jesus began to . . ." (4:17, 16:21).(143) Regardless of which position one takes, Matthew demonstrates a literary awareness.
A strong characteristic of Mark's gospel is that of apocalypse. While the concentration of apocalyptic material is found in chapter 13, Johnson can still say that Mark is "an apocalypse in narrative form" because apocalyptic elements so pervade the gospel.(144) It is the strong apocalyptic tone to chapter 13 and its parallels (Luke 21 and Matthew 24) that has had them deemed as "the little apocalypses" or "the Apocalypses of Jesus."(145)
While many elements of apocalyptic literature are found in these texts, they are not, strictly speaking, apocalypses. The disciples are not taken on an otherworldly journey, nor are they shown mysteries which need explaining by a heavenly interpreter, such as an angel. As the speaker, Jesus does not function in the role of such an interpreter. Nevertheless, the apocalyptic elements are strong in Mark and also in Matthew. A partial list of these elements in Matthew includes the following: God's people fall under persecution (24:9), there will be increased lawlessness (that is, increasing tribulation until the end comes, 24:12), a certain "elect" will be saved (24:23, 24, 31), the Son of Man comes (24:30); he has his heavenly retinue -- the angels (24:31) there will be an "end" (24:13, 14, 29-31) and a judgment (25:31-46) where the righteous are rewarded and the wicked punished (25:46).(146) The universal cataclysm portrayed in 24:29 draws upon Old Testament texts which portray the coming "Day of the Lord."(147) Apocalyptic thinkers believed that when God intervened in human history, the cosmos would either be reordered in some drastic manner or entirely recreated.(148) This language is now applied to the parousia since it will be the final and decisive act of God's judgment. There is a shaking of "the powers of heaven" (24:29) which is typically apocalyptic and tied to the Day of the Lord. Earthquakes and theophanies often occur together in Scripture (e.g., God appearing on Mount Sinai in Ex. 19-21).(149) They also occur with the Day of the Lord which is now represented by the parousia.(150)
The apocalyptic nature of Matthew's gospel, though, is not limited to chs. 24-25. Resurrection is also a common element of the Day of the Lord.(151) Jesus' death in 27:51-53 shows the presence of God and the theme of the resurrection at work in Matthew's gospel. God makes his presence known through an earthquake and supernatural darkness while the resurrected saints are apparently the prototypes of the general resurrection which is to come.
Matthew also has the idea of the parousia with judgment earlier in his text: "For the Son of Man is to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay everyone for what has been done" (16:27). This theme is also found in 19:28 along with the subject of renewal and the participation of the righteous in judgment: "Truly I tell you, at the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man is seated on the throne of his glory, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel."
Matthew's use of apocalyptic language and his literary crafting of his presentation of the gospel are preparatory for the discussion of chapters 24 and 25. He draws upon his considerable writing skill in developing this discourse.
RECAPITULATION AS A MODE FOR APOCALYPTIC STORYLINE
Recapitulation is a prominent means of literary expression among ancient authors. The book of Revelation and chapters 7-12 in Daniel are probably the two most well-known examples. These are also, probably, the most misread examples since modern readers are not as familiar with recapitulation as readers in antiquity surely were. The present goal is to illustrate this literary technique from ancient texts in preparation for the discussion of Matthew's eschatological discourse (chs. 24 and 25). I seek to show that the literary technique of recapitulation was a strong, recognizable, and ready-at-hand apocalyptic writing technique from the mid 3rd century B.C.E. to the time of Matthew's writing. These texts will be examined in chronological order, with the exception that Revelation will be placed before the discussions of the synoptic gospels. Of the synoptic gospels, Luke will be addressed first, followed by Mark, then by Matthew. This will be done to show the contrast between the first two and Matthew.
Argument from Zechariah 9 and 14
The dispute over the text of Zechariah has existed at least since the first part of the seventeenth century.(152) Scholars have noted a marked difference in the text beginning with chapter nine. In 9-14 ". . . there are no dates and no clear historical allusions. There is no mention of the central figures of the earlier chapters, Joshua and Zerubbabel, nor of the rebuilding of the Temple. . . ."(153) Also of note are familiar elements of apocalypse, although the genre did not flourish until after the time of the historical Zechariah - the sixth century B.C.E.(154) The general consensus is that the last chapters were added to Zechariah's work, perhaps around 325 B.C.E. (if Yahweh's march through Syria is considered to portray Alexander the Great's conquest of the Persian empire).(155) By any dating, it is the earliest extant example of apocalypse. The importance of locating it within the fourth century is that this was the time which was giving rise to the popularity of apocalypse and apocalypse often uses recapitulation.
A preliminary example of recapitulation can be found in the poetic material of chapter nine in vv. 1-8. Here we have what I will call the "First Cycle." The First Cycle is the basic framework of the story around which the rest of the text is built. The First Cycle contains, by necessity, a beginning but most importantly it contains a clear ending. That is, the narration of events comes to a natural conclusion and resolution. Were the story to end there, it would make sense to the reader. Only then do the subsequent cycles begin. The subsequent cycles will pull a theme or themes from the First Cycle and use them again. They may simply use them with no clear relation to the First Cycle (simple repetition), they may be used as parallels (usually with building emphasis, i.e. Revelation's trumpets and bowls), or they may choose to "zoom in" and focus upon an element from the first cycle in greater detail (as here and Zech. 14).
The First Cycle deals with the present distress, then jumps to the near future hope of deliverance, and finally to the eschatological reign of God. Verses 1-3 define God's enemies; vv. 4-7 describe the near-present, warrior-like punishment he will mete out against them; verse 8 describes the eschatological outcome: God dwelling in Jerusalem with a permanent peace over the land. The author has taken us three levels deep into the story: 1) present distress, 2) future hope of deliverance, 3) eschatological reign of God.
In Cycle Two, vv. 9-10, the author backs up one level, from 3 to 2 - the near-present hope of deliverance.(156) He also focuses now on the nation of Israel, described as Ephraim and Jerusalem (v. 10, see also v. 13). The language of this cycle anticipates joy for Israel because God is about to intervene and use them to defeat their enemies (v. 9). Again, the outcome is victory and peace (v. 10).
The third cycle, 11-17, begins with a word of hope and joy (11-15) just as the second cycle (v. 9).(157) Finally, the eschatological peace and blessedness following God's victory (vv. 16-17) is restated (see Table 2 and Figure 10).
|
First Cycle 9:1-8 |
Second Cycle 9:9-10 |
Third Cycle 9:11-17 |
| 1-3 God's enemies (the present distress) | ||
| 4-7 near-present deliverance | 9 rejoice because of the near-present deliverance | 11-15 rejoice because of the near-present deliverance |
| 8 Eschatological outcome: peace & restoration for God's people. | 10 Eschatological outcome: peace & restoration for God's people. | 16-17 Eschatological outcome: peace & restoration for God's people. |
Table 2
This structure is significant because it bears apocalyptic elements (such as the Divine Warrior, the eschatological reign of peace, and the rescue/vindication of God's people), but it is not properly apocalypse, as described by Hanson.(158) It employs mythic motifs of God, but it is still tied to the historical. Nor does it have a heavenly interpreter, a vision or dream.
Much the same is true of the Matthean
eschatological discourse. It lacks many of the same apocalyptic
features, yet its structure resembles the pattern found in Zech.
9. In Mt. 24:14 the "end" is reached, then 24:15 picks up with a
further description of the events leading to the end and narrows
the focus to Judea alone. The same thing is done in Zechariah 9,
only there are three examples rather than two. 
Chapter 14 of Zechariah carries on the strain of apocalyptic warfare, only in narrative rather than poetic style.(159) In vv. 1-2 Jerusalem is captured, plundered, and half the population carried away into exile (perhaps the present distress?).(160) However, God arises (v. 3) to fight against the nations (the near-present hope of salvation). The physical effects of the Day of the Lord are described (vv. 4-10), then the eschatological state of blessedness and peace is foretold (v. 11). This completes one cycle.(161)
The second cycle begins with v. 12 where the author backs up to elaborate on what will happen to the enemies of God (vv. 12-15). Verse 3 foretold of God's war against the nations, but it did not describe it. The eschatological state is again raised in vv. 16-21, to end the cycle. The surviving members of the nations will now worship at Jerusalem and it will be a place of utter and complete holiness, down to the most common cooking pot.
|
14:1-11 |
14:12-21 |
| 1-2 Defeat of God's people
3 God's intervention and war against the nations. 4-10 Physical consequences 11Eschatological blessedness and peace |
12-15 description of the defeat of the nations. 14-21 Eschatological blessedness and peace |
Table 3
Again, the repetition of themes shows the parallel nature of the two cycles (Table 3 and Figure 11). Like chapter 9, events are described up to the point of God's eschatological reign, then the author elaborates on previous elements of the first cycle. Unlike chapter 9 (and Matthew 24), the second cycle does not focus on God's people, but on his war with the nations. Still, it shows the process of narrowing the focus upon something from the first section.
Verses 16-21 might also be said to focus in on the eschatological state mentioned in v. 11. Only three things are said about the eschatological age in v. 11: Jerusalem will be inhabited, it will never again be destroyed, and there will be a state of security around it. Verses 16-21 describe the day-to-day life of the city and nations after God's victory, and emphasize the holiness of the city.
Meyers and Meyers have analyzed the reoccurrence of themes within Zechariah 9-14. This is interesting in that it shows cross-thematic structuring at work not simply within the chapters, but within the whole of Second Zechariah. Their work is reflected in Table 4.(162)
Innertextuality in Second Zechariah:
Thematic and Lexical Connections with Chapter 9-14.
|
9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
|
| 9 |
horse/chariot/ bow/war
grain flourishing return people as sheep |
people as
sheep fire consumes |
clans in
Judah fire consumes |
people as sheep silver/gold imagery | Yahweh in Jerusalem,
against invaders basin at altar nation/ universality battle/ warrior motif gold/silver/ wealth horse |
|
| 10 | horse/chariot/
bow/war grain flourishing return people as sheep |
Lebanon/Gilead Bashan filled people as sheep |
horse
(rider) bulwarked siege |
false
prophecy people as sheep |
battle/ warrior
motif horse wealth gathering |
|
| 11 | people as
sheep fire consumes |
Lebanon/ Gilead Bashan filled |
blindness | people as sheep | neighbor's hand image | |
| 12 | clans of
Judah fire consumes |
horse/ (rider) bulwark/siege | blindness |
leaders of Jerusalem/ house of David Stabbing |
nations
gathered nations annihilated Jerusalem inhabited |
|
| 1 3 | people as
sheep silver/gold imagery |
false
prophecy people as sheep |
people as sheep | borders of Jerusalem/ house of David Stabbing |
exile/ devastation sin/ cleansing sin fountains/ waters of Jerusalem |
|
| 14 | Yahweh in
Jerusalem, against invaders basin at altar nations/ universality battle/ warrior motif gold/silver/ wealth horse |
battle/ warrior
motif horse wealth gathering |
neighbor's hand image | nations
gathered nations annihilated Jerusalem inhabited |
exile/
devastation sin/ cleansing sin fountain/ water of Jerusalem |
Table 4
The Book of the Similitudes has recapitulation as its framework.(163) Like the book of Revelation, there are varying ways to divide 1 Enoch depending upon a number of exegetical factors. That not withstanding, the use of recapitulation can be shown to be relatively clear by simply making some observations of the Similitudes' major themes. The author is clearly interested in the fates of the wicked, the righteous, and the fallen angels. Furthermore, he is preoccupied with the flood, secrets, and a character called the Righteous/Elect One who will carry out this judgment.
Unlike the Zechariah texts, there is no clear pattern for the subsequent cycles within the Similitudes.(164) It does seem that the first cycle sets the framework for the rest of the book by introducing the major elements. My best representation is found in Figure 12.
Chapter 37 begins with statements about
visions and revelation of the secrets and mysteries that have
been given to Enoch. This is the first element of the first
cycle. 
Chapter 38 introduces the judgment of the wicked, which includes the elimination of kings and rulers. There is also a reference to the coming of the Righteous one (38:2). Chapter 39 turns to the blessed dwelling of the righteous. This appears to be the natural end of the first cycle since the storyline reaches a resolution with the righteous living in paradise.
Cycle Two. From chapters 40-44 Enoch has secrets revealed to him. This appears to expand upon chapter 37. The first clear repetition of themes is found in chapters 45-47, where the fate of the unbelievers is raised again. The judgment of God is again the subject of ch. 48, this time through the Son of Man. A character called the Elect One appears in chs. 49-50 and may be identical with the Righteous One from ch. 38 and the Son of Man in 48.(165) He will pass judgment, rewarding the righteous and destroying the wicked (50:4). A new element, the Resurrection of the Dead, is introduced in ch. 51 followed by the elimination of all metals so that there will be no weapons of war (ch. 52). An era of peace is ushered in, typical of the apocalyptic model.(166)
Cycle Three. The kings, rulers, sinners, and Azaz'el (the leader of the fallen angels) become the subjects for chs. 53-56:4. Their impending judgments are narrated. Enoch returns to the topic of the Righteous in chs. 57-58. He is again given more visions of mysteries (chs. 59-60). The judgment of the Elect One is again the subject in ch. 61 followed by the condemnation of the rulers, kings, and the blessing of the righteous in chs. 62-63.(167)
Cycle Four: The sinfulness of the fallen angels is established in chs. 64-67 and the flood, which was judgment, is discussed at length.(168)
Cycle Five: Following this is a long discussion about the fallen angels and their judgment (chs. 68-69). Enoch, however, being the prototypical righteous person, is taken into heaven to enjoy the fruits of righteousness (chs. 70-71). Thus the book ends as the first cycle ended, in paradise.
Like Zechariah, the book of Daniel has been divided into two sections, 1-6 and 7-12, by scholars. The reasons for this are numerous and well-noted.(169) Chapters 7-12 are, by scholarly consensus, clearly apocalyptic and clearly late additions to the text. Almost the entirety of these chapters is devoted to Antiochus IV Epiphanes and the anticipation of his fall.(170) Nickelsburg recognizes the historical nature of this text. He reflects it in his outlines (Figures 13 and 14).(171)
With this same framework in mind, Lacocque has posited the following structure for Daniel 7-12: A - Events prior to the Career of Antiochus, B - Career of Antiochus, and C - Eschatological Outcome.(172) He finds this construction consistent when the visionary material is outlined 7:1-14, 17-18; 7:19-22, 23-7; 8:1-12, 20-5; 10:20-12:3.(173) I have adapted his outline for Table 5 and my subsequent work in this section.
|
Cycle One 7:1-14, 17-27 |
Cycle Two 8:1-12, 20-25 |
Cycle Three 10:20-12:3 |
| 1-7; 23 Recounting of
history
up to Antiochus 8; 19-21; 24-25 Antiochus 9-14; 22; 26-27 Anticipation of Antiochus' judgment and the eschatological reign |
1-8; 20-22 Recounting
of history up to Antiochus 9-14; 23-25b Antiochus 25c God's judgment of him |
10:20-11:20 Recounting
of history up to Antiochus 11:21-44 Antiochus 11:45-12:3 God's judgment of him & the eschatological reign |
Table 5
The first cycle simply recounts history in apocalyptic language up to the time of Antiochus IV (vv. 1-7 and its parallel in the angel's interpretation in v. 23). Antiochus arises in v. 8 (parallels vv. 19-21 & 24-25) which prompts the intervention of God to begin in v. 9. Antiochus's rule ends and the new rule of God's agent, the Son of Man, comes into being (vv. 10-14 and parallels, 22; 26-27). Unlike material in Zechariah, there is no war, simply God's judgment.
The second full cycle begins with chapter 8 where history is again recounted (8:1-8). Antiochus IV appears in v. 9 and controls Judea. There is a promise of relief in v. 14, although the eschatological age is not referenced in this section. The interpreting angel now explains the vision in narrative form (vv. 20-22) until Antiochus arrives (vv. 23-25). He then changes back to the prophetic, poetic style. God intervenes again (v. 25c), but no further mention of the eschatological state is made.
The third cycle begins in 10:20.
History is recounted through 11:20 and Antiochus takes his place
in 11:21. As in the second section, further attention is given to
the crimes he has committed against Jewish piety. This is a theme
that began developing in 7:8 & 11 with simply "arrogant"
words. It was expanded in 7:25, then again in 8:9-14 and finally
in 11:21-24. Antiochus's death is foretold in 11:45, but unlike
the other accounts there is no real hint of divine intervention.
Presumably, the reader should know by now that God is the one
behind his death. Lastly, the eschatological age comes in chapter
12.
My outline of this book is found in Figure 15. This excludes the redundancies of the angel's interpretations of Daniel's dreams.
Since the revival of recapitulation at the hands of Günther Bornkamm, scholars have again been applying this method to Revelation.(174) Revelation, however, is quite a complex literary work and scholars have seen at least three ways to determine its structure, all of which have some merit.
Historically, the number seven has been used
to structure the book because of obvious repetitions of series of
sevens (seven letters, seven 
seals, seven bowls, seven
trumpets, etc.). Farrer has put forth the basic model based on
these repetitions (Figure 16).(175) Hendriksen followed this outline
in his commentary on Revelation, but using recapitulation to try
and connect the divisions and demonstrate in each a progression
further into the eschaton (Figure 17).(176) Ford, however, has proposed a
six-fold division.(177) Others,
like Barr (Figure 18), prefer to organize it around the scrolls
or not impose a strict outline at all.(178) Nevertheless, the consensus is
that recapitulation plays a significant role in this book despite
the manner by which it is divided.(179)
A. Y. Collins has defined the visions according to the chart in Table 6.(180) She uses recapitulation as the basis for her model, but significantly, she has determined the first five chapters should not be considered part of the recapitulation structure.
The five series then each depict the eschatological woes and their resolution. The description of the woes vary from series to series, especially in the earlier parts. But a recurring pattern is clearly present in each of the series which consists of (a) persecution of the faithful, (b) divine judgment on their adversaries, followed by (c) their triumph and salvation. This pattern is illustrated in the following chart.(181) (See Table 7)(182)
|
Five Series of Visions which Manifest Recapitulation |
| 1. The seven seals
6:1-8:5
2. The seven trumpets 8:2-11:19 3. Seven unnumbered visions 12:1-15:4 4. The seven bowls 15:1-16:21 Babylon appendix 17:1-19:10 5. Seven unnumbered visions 19:11-21:8 Jerusalem appendix 21:9-22:5 |
Table 6
|
Recapitulation in the Five Series |
|||||
|
SEVEN SEALS |
SEVEN TRUMPETS |
UNNUMBERED (1) |
SEVEN BOWLS |
UNNUMBERED (2) (A) |
(B) |
| Persecution
fifth seal (6:9-11) (cf. 7:14) |
[Persecution] interlocking vision (8:3-5) |
Persecution first three visions (chs. 12-13) |
Persecution third bowl (16:4-7) |
Persecution fifth vision (20:4) |
[Persecution] sixth vision (20:9) |
|
[Armies Assembling for Final Battle] sixth trumpet (9:13-21) |
Armies Assembling for Final Battle sixth bowl (16:12-16) |
||||
|
Day of Wrath Sixth seal (6:12-17) |
Destruction and
Judgment seventh trumpet (11:18) |
[Judgment and
Destruction] sixth vision (14:14-20) |
Destruction seventh bowl (16:17-20) |
Battle and
Destruction first four visions (19:11-20:3) |
Battle and
Judgment fifth and sixth visions (20:7-15) |
| Salvation inserted visions (7:1-8) and 9-17) a. heavenly scene (vss. 9-17) b. liturgy (vss. 10-12) |
Salvation seventh trumpet (11:18) a. heavenly scene (15-19) b. liturgy (vss. 15-18) |
Triumph and
Salvation seventh vision (15:2-4) a. heavenly scene (vss. 2-4) b. liturgy (vss. 3-4) |
Triumph and
Salvation appendix (19:1-10) a. heavenly scene (vss. 1-10) b. liturgy (vss. 1-8) |
Salvation fifth vision (20:4-6) |
Salvation seventh vision and appendix (21:1-22:5) |
Table 7
The book of Revelation cannot properly be understood apart from recapitulation. Any attempt to read it through as though it were a novel or biography is bound to lead one into chronology problems.(183) Each time the reader is led to a point where resolution is expected, only to discover another series of visions. The reader is further confused by the reoccurrence of imagery in different scenes. The author does this ". . . to interlace the two scenes, a technique known as intercalation."(184) These are similar problems faced in the study of Matthew's eschatological discourse.
COMPARISON OF THE SYNOPTIC GOSPEL ACCOUNTS
Any discussion of Matthew's discourse must also consider the parallels in Mark 13 and Luke 21. Much scholarship has been poured into the nuanced changes made by the authors and the unique material in each one.(185) For the purpose of this work, I accept the position that Mark is the base text for both Matthew and Luke.(186) However, rather than begin with Mark's account, I prefer to begin with Luke's because it bears the most striking differences from the other two.
Luke's account of the eschatological discourse (Lk. 21:5-36) is more of a chronological account than either Matthew's or Mark's. Johnson see the temporal structure as "a) the times of persecution facing the Christians; b) the times of the destruction of the city; c) the times of the Son of Man."(187) Green says that Luke sets the stage in the opening verses, then proceeds
. . . to lay out the progress of events in chronological order: persecution and witness (vv 12-19); the fall of Jerusalem, leading to the 'times of the Gentiles' (vv 20-24); and heavenly signs and earthly distress, leading to the coming of the Son of Man (vv 25-28).(188)
The positioning of the persecution of the disciples before the preliminary signs of the end differs significantly from both of the other synoptic gospels.(189) In fact, Luke removes much of the eschatological language found in Mark. Temporal markers like "near," "first," and "before" disappear.(190) He omits the "birth pangs," "the abomination of desolation," and he does not have Matthew's great emphasis on the parousia.(191) The theme of false prophets does not explicitly appear. He omits the claim that the gospel must be proclaimed to all the nations, and that those who endure to the end will be saved.(192) He drops the clear reference to "the end" (v. 19) for a more ambiguous statement about endurance.
Luke lacks reference to coming tribulation (Mark 13:8), as well as the remark expressing uncertainty about the hour or day (Mark 13:32). In addition, in spots his version is less apocalyptic in tone, but this is because he expressly differentiates events that are not a part of the end from those that are. In Luke's view the fall of Jerusalem in A. D. 70 is part of God's plan and judgment. This fall pictures the end.(193)
Luke also differs by failing to view the destruction of Jerusalem (v. 20 ff.) as the definite sign of the consummation and fulfillment.
He does not mention that the tribulation in this period is the most intense ever to fall on humans; he does not mention that no human would have survived if the Lord had not cut short these days; he does not note that the time should not be in the winter; and he does not discuss the "abomination of desolation," only "its desolation." Conversely, Luke alone mentions "the time of the Gentiles."(194)
Luke's redaction of Mark serves to give the text a chronological presentation of events that Matthew lacks and is weakly attested in Mark. Further, without the strong apocalyptic tone, it is less likely that recapitulation would occur since it is strongly associated with apocalypse.
While there are past, present, and future elements of the discourse, it only seems to be by the necessity of prophetic speech and Luke's authorship in a post-70 C.E. time period. That is to say, to portray Jesus as a prophet, these events must be cast in the form of a prediction even though Luke is writing after the fact.
For the reader of Luke-Acts, therefore, these first predictions of Jesus about the future are now clearly past, and have been shown to have reached fulfillment-in Luke's own narrative! Luke not only thereby strengthens the literary unity of his two-volume work, and accomplishes once more a literary "prophecy and fulfillment," but most significantly, he has enhanced the presentation of Jesus as the Prophet.(195)
The repetitive structure seen in the previous examples of recapitulation is not obvious. Notably absent from Luke's account is the repetition of the theme of false Christs, found only in v. 8. There is no repetition of the parousia, nor is there any repetition about judgment or the gathering of the elect. The material Matthew and Mark describe as "birth pangs" (21:8-11) is clearly not parallel to any of the other material in Luke's chapter, as is the case in Matthew.(196) First, there is no clear end marker as is found in Matthew ("then the end will come"). Second, the first verses (21:5-11) do not form a complete framework off of which the rest of the discourse can be built. Verses 8-11 form an excursus that is out of chronological order.(197) When Luke's material is arranged in chronological order (vv. 5-7; 12-19; 8-11; 20-38), the chronology of events is easily seen. The conclusion must be that Luke does not use recapitulation in his eschatological discourse.
Scholarly consensus has yet to be reached on the structure of the gospel of Mark. Various approaches have been taken: geographical, thematic, Christological, literary, rhetorical.(198) Recently Myers has proposed a structure based on recapitulation that divides the book into two halves.(199) Of even more interest for this study, however, is the material of chapter 13 from which Matthew has drawn much of his account.(200)
Mark's account begins with the "beginning of the birth pangs" (13:5-8) which is a general description of false Christs, wars, earthquakes, and famine. He then turns more specifically to the disciples' plight (13:9-13). Next his focus shifts back to the temple, its destruction, and the suffering in Judea (13:14-19).
The reference to false Christs (13:20-23) forms an inclusio with vv. 5-6, in that it explicates the warning of deception found in vv. 5-6 and ends the section of discourse. Drawing upon Old Testament language, Mark then introduces the coming of the Son of Man which includes the gathering of the elect (vv. 24-27).(201) Jesus then warns them to look for the signs (vv. 28-31) and warns them to remain in a watchful state (vv. 32-37).
If Mark is writing to his community before the fall of Jerusalem, he may well have faced the problems of false Christs, false prophets, and even persecution.(202) He certainly would be living in a time of war. Still in the future is the destruction of the temple, the universal proclamation of the gospel, and the coming of the Son of Man, which brings relief for the righteous. It is difficult to see recapitulation at work in this text. First, this is the case because it is relatively short. Second, because there is a question as to whether v. 13 is the end of a cycle as it is in Matthew.(203) Cranfield and Hendriksen argue that it does refer to the end of the age.(204) Cranfield, however, sees vv. 3-23 as one unit.(205) Hendriksen, on the other hand, seems to see vv. 5-13 as a separate unit from vv. 14-23.(206) Gundry argues for vv. 1-4 and vv. 5-37 as units.(207) I am inclined to side with Cranfield because I do not feel the statement of "the end" is strong enough to constitute an end to the cycle. This simply seems to be a natural outgrowth of the statements about persecution. Why withstand persecution? Because you will be saved. Mark simply could not talk about persecution without such a statement. With this reading, then, the topic of persecution is extended next to Judea (vv. 14-23). In either event, certain themes reoccur. First, vv. 1-8 lay the groundwork of deception and war which is focused upon in vv. 9-13a (the persecution of the disciples). There is a statement of salvation and of an end in 13b. In v. 14 Jesus gives the disciples the "sign" they asked for, then takes the opportunity to expand upon the suffering of the Judean community (vv. 15-20). He picks up the theme of deception, this time adding false prophets (vv. 21-23). Then the near-present salvation is described as the coming of the Son of Man (vv. 24-26). The elect are mentioned in vv. 20, 23 and 27. Finally, the righteous are gathered, presumably to their reward. Nothing is said about the wicked. The admonition to "be alert (v. 23) is reflected somewhat in the lesson of the fig tree, in that there are discernable signs available to see. The theme is clearly picked up in vv. 32-37 where the command is to keep awake.
Despite the temptation, I do not consider this to be of the same class as the other ancient literature examined previously nor of Matthew's discourse. Remember, the basic definition of recapitulation is ". . . to describe the same events several times in different ways."(208) Most of the repetition can be accounted for simply by necessity. Three mentions of the "elect" simply do not constitute enough grounds to really consider it true recapitulation. How else is he to talk about the elect? Recapitulation is not simply a repetitive use of terminology nor of descriptions of things that happen to groups or individuals. It is a description of the same events in different ways. Further, since there is no clear division in vv. 3-23 it is difficult to see how vv. 20 and 23 could be anything but part of the same narrative. Verse 27 is simply a statement about the events of the end and a mention of the elect is almost unavoidable. The inclusio with the false Christs seems to frame vv. 5-23 and should not be considered recapitulation since vv. 21-23 only explicate what is said in vv. 5-6. The conclusion must be that the framework of recapitulation does not form the framework for this discourse as a whole.
Matthew's eschatological discourse is the longest of the synoptic accounts.(209) It exhibits a more clear structure for recapitulation than either of its parallels (see Table 1). It also exhibits a stronger cyclical break in the text (24:14) which is more in keeping with previous examples of recapitulation.(210) Luz is correct to see a parallel between 24:4-14 and 24:15-28.(211) The theme of the parousia is strong, with its being implied in 24:14, described in 24:29-31, and raised again in 25:31.(212) Judgment can be found in 24:28, 30, 24:45-51, 25:14-30, and 25:31-46.(213)
Matthew also exhibits a stronger sense of the past, present, and future structure found in the apocalypses and proto-apocalypses. The past history of the community can be found in 24:4-8. Their present distress can be found in 24:9-13 and their hope for rescue in 24:14.(214)
Once again, the 
destruction of Jerusalem is past
history (24:15-22). The present distress of the community is
reflected in 24:23-26, and their hope for rescue is found in
24:29-31 (see Figure 19).
From 24:32 until 25:31 are found illustrations and admonitions concerning how to live in the present.(215) They are to live watching for the signs (24:32-35), in preparation since they do not know the time (24:36-44), faithfully in light of the judgment that awaits the return (24:45-51), wisely in preparation (25:1-13), and by the ability each is granted in light of the judgment that awaits the return (25:24-30). Depending upon how these parables are shaded by the exegete, several parallels can be drawn. All have an element of judgment stated or implied. Preparation, watchfulness, and faithfulness to the task also are reoccurring themes.
The final judgment scene serves as an
expansion of 24:31 where only the gathering of the elect is
mentioned. Up to that point only positive judgment has been
implied, and this by lack of any statement concerning the wicked.
In the ensuing material up to 25:31 judgment of the community has
been a major theme. Now, in the final section, the judgment of
the rest of humanity takes place. Judgment and rewards are part
of the apocalyptic scenario.(216) This is a fitting end to the story
since it elaborates upon the events following the
parousia and ends with the reward and punishment of the
righteous and wicked respectively (Figure 20).
Matthew's eschatological discourse, unlike Mark and Luke's which employ a straight line structure for all practical purposes, has a discernible structure of recapitulation appropriate to apocalyptic discourse.
As we have seen, recapitulation is not a feature easily defined. Nor is every repetition of word or theme recapitulation. In the examples in this work, apocalyptic recapitulation takes a basic framework established in the first cycle, then repeats two or more themes from that framework throughout the remainder of either the book or the selected portion of the book. In doing so it will, at the least, describe the same thing in different terms. Such is the case with Zechariah 9, where little new information was given in the succeeding cycles.
Recapitulation may be used to focus upon one element from a preceding cycle and elaborate upon it. Zechariah 14 is an example of this usage. The war with the Gentiles is only mentioned in the first cycle then elaborately described in the second cycle. The eschatological age is treated in the same manner, receiving only a mention in the first cycle and a full description in the second cycle. There is often a progression in the repetition, moving the reader farther along the storyline. The prime examples of these are Daniel 7-12, Revelation, and Matthew 24-25. In each of these the ultimate goal is to reach "the end" and the blessedness of the new state of being. As the stories progress, the reader is taken further along the time-line until the goal of salvation is achieved. However, recapitulation does not always mean that a clearly defined internal structure exists, as was demonstrated in our analysis of 1 Enoch 37-71. I Enoch 37-71, like Daniel, Revelation, and Matthew, advances to a state of blessedness for the righteous. Within the work certain themes are clearly repeated (i.e. the judgment of the kings and rulers; the coming of the son of man), but these seem to lack any organized structure. Instead, they appear to serve as repeated assurances that God's righteous people will be vindicated and the wicked will be punished. Therefore, they encourage the Enochic community to remain faithful amidst their suffering.
Recapitulation is usually associated with both myth and apocalypse. By its very structure it sends a repetitive message that the author wishes for the reader to understand. The reader is taken on far and fanciful emotional journeys only to finally reach a happy resolution after suffering through the highs and lows along the way.
In conclusion, what can be said about Matthew 24-25? While Matthew's eschatological discourse is not properly an apocalypse, it nevertheless manifests many apocalyptic literary elements, including structural ones. This is not unexpected when one considers the apocalyptic nature of Matthew's Gospel and his practice of organizing material. He has structured his entire gospel around five groupings of discourse and narrative; he often prefers to arrange material in groups of threes; he tends to arrange material according to topic.(217) Furthermore, in the eschatological discourse he follows the apocalyptic storyline quite well. He holds a pessimistic view of the earthly future, as would any apocalyptist. He sees God working out his plan in history. He thinks his community is living in the last days (24:34). He predicts earthly chaos will break out as the reign of evil grows more powerful (24:6-8, 15-20). The disciples suffer and are deceived by false prophets and messiahs (24:9-11, 21-28). The persecution increases just before the end (24:12, 21), and the end arrives with the gathering of the elect (24:14, 29-31). The judgment of the Gentiles takes place (25:31-45) and the righteous and wicked receive their recompense for their deeds.
Matthew 24-25 differs significantly from its parallels in Mark and Luke in its literary technique and emphasis, even though it is built off of Mark's account, as is Luke's discourse. The element of recapitulation plays a prominent role in Matthew's discourse while it appears absent in the parallels. Matthew's discourse exhibits a more fully developed apocalyptic structure (past, present, future) than do the others. Also, like 1 Enoch, it shows more of an interest in secretive, futuristic, post-parousia events. Although not couched in the vision/interpreter mode as 1 Enoch 37-71, it nevertheless reveals things that could only be known by supernatural means.
A structural analysis of Matthew's discourse is notoriously difficult, and for good reason. The most significant exegetical difficulties are (1) the relationship of the apparent parallel structure of 24:1-14 and 24:15-31 and (2) the interpretation of the judgment of the "gentiles/nations" (25:31-46).
Matthew's discourse is quite difficult to read in a chronological manner with 24:14 announcing that the end will come after the universal proclamation of the gospel. Mark's account has this saying as part of a unit, but Matthew's redaction has made it the end of a unit. Thinking about the two units (24:1-14 and 24:15-31) as parallel brings the full picture to mind and provides a reasonable chronology of events (something Luke has chosen to provide with his editing of his discourse to a straight, chronological flow). If either 24:1-14 or 24:15-31 were omitted, the storyline would still be the same, only with fewer details.
A chronological reading of this text offers very little explanation of the difficulties it encounters. What is more, the reader is in danger of missing Matthew's main message. With his use of recapitulation he wants his readers to know that God is in control. Historical events are evidence of God's plan working itself out. The destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple are evidence that the beginning of the end has started. Matthew, however, does not view the end as coming as quickly as Mark does. Matthew sees a delay; thus he includes the admonition material in 24:32-25:30.(218)
Indeed, the material in Matt. 24:31-25:30 is the weighty message for Matthew's community in their historical situation. Matthew wants people to live properly in light of Jesus' expected coming. He does this by explaining that the time of Jesus' expected coming is unknown and his return will be sudden and unexpected (24:32-44). He then includes parables about delay. The master is delayed and the slave becomes unfaithful (24:45-50). The bridegroom is delayed, not unreasonably so, but nevertheless he is delayed (25:1-13). Finally, the master returns, after a long absence, to settle accounts with the slaves he had left in charge of his talents (25:14-30).
All of this admonition material is located after the announcement that the Son of Man will return and send his angels to gather the elect (24:30-31). The positioning of the admonition material (24:32-25:30) acts as a parenthetical explanation of the grounds for judgment in 24:30-31. The believing community must remain watchful (24:32-44), faithful (24:45-50), prepared (25:1-13), and each one must use his or her own abilities as they have been granted to them (25:14-30).
The positioning of the admonition material also shows where Matthew thinks his community is living: just prior to the parousia. In writing after 70 C.E. Matthew has the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple in the past. According to the information in the second cycle, the parousia follows the fall of Jerusalem: "Immediately after the suffering of those days . . . the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the heavens . . . they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds . . . he will send out his angels . . . and they will gather his elect . . ." (24:29-31). Therefore, the parousia remains to be fulfilled, and Matthew and is community are living in the interim period.
Only after this very important parenthesis (24:32-25:30) is the narration of the end events completed. The first judgment has passed with the gathering of the elect, that is, the true Jewish community (24:31) and the second judgment, that of the Gentiles, begins (25:31-46). Ultimately, the goal of God's presence or punishment is reached in 25:46.
Matthew clearly sees his community as living in the last days, as any good apocalyptist would. The authors of Daniel 7-12, 1 Enoch 37-71, and Revelation also thought they were living in the last days. Although Matthew realizes there is a delay in the parousia, he does not think it will be a long delay. So, he can confidently say: "Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have taken place" (24:34). Because they are living in the last days, the importance of remaining true to the faith is critical for Matthew. He hopes to fortify his community by asserting that the plan of God is near fulfillment and he backs his admonitions with the reminder of impending judgment. The chronological reader misses the repetitious emphasis and progression that Matthew intended for his readers to have with his breaks at 24:14 and 31.
Perhaps the most significant exegetical detail is the judgment of the Gentiles in 25:31-46. This material is unique to Matthew. At stake for modern translators is the concept of salvation. If the reading of the text as it has been proposed for this work is accepted, then it is possible for some people to attain salvation without becoming Christians proper. That is, without a Christian statement of belief, confession, and baptism. By the criteria of judgment in 25:31-46, people are saved based upon how they have treated Christians. This is contradictory to some aspects of modern theology, but perhaps it should not be a surprise after reading through Matthew up to the eschatological discourse. The Gentiles receive favorable treatment from Matthew. The Magi are the first to recognize and worship Jesus. The second specific act of healing Jesus is said to do is directed to a centurion's servant. Jesus acclaims the faith of the centurion as greater than any he has found in Israel (8:5-11). Later, a Canaanite woman is also said to have great faith (15:21-28). This is in contrast to Jesus' rejection by his home town (13:54-58), and his rebuke of the cities where he did most of his miracles because they did not repent (11:20-24). It may be that the death of Jesus is intended to bring about the conversion of the Gentiles by the declaration of the soldier: "Truly this man was God's Son" (27:54). Certainly, the Great Commission has to be seen as a blessing for the Gentiles since they have been deemed worthy of the Gospel (28:18-20). One may even stop to wonder what the significance is of Matthew's calling Galilee, where Jesus began his ministry, "Galilee of the Gentiles" (4:15).
While Gentiles having a place in the eschatological age apart from becoming Christians proper may seem strange today, it probably was not so for a Jewish Christian in the first century. The Old Testament has quite a few places where separate judgments of Jews and Gentiles take place, and many places that indicate the Gentiles will ultimately have a place in the eschatological age to come.(219) Matthew seems to be wrestling with the problem of righteous Gentiles and trying to explain how they have a part in the kingdom. That part is gained through aiding the Christians rather than persecuting them. It is a revival of the "cup of cold water" theology, which was mentioned earlier in the gospel (Mt. 10:42). No one who gives even the smallest assistance to a Christian -- a simple cup of cold water -- will lose his or her share in the kingdom of God. Certainly, this is a powerful motive for treating Christians well. Besides, if Matthew's community is in hostile relations with competing Jewish groups, it can only be beneficial to be on good terms with the Gentiles.
Reading 25:31-46 as pertaining to the Gentiles is most consistent with Matthew's use of ta; e[qnh to refer to those who were Gentiles. It also makes sense with the missionary aspect of the Great Commission in 28:19. The disciples are to take the gospel to all the Gentiles (ta; e[qnh). The treatment that they receive in this endeavor seems to be, at least, part of the issue for Matthew.
If one rejects this reading of the text for a chronological one, then he or she is encumbered to explain why this detail of judgment in 25:31-46 is so far removed from 24:31, where it most naturally would follow. One is also hard pressed to explain why Christians are in need of a general judgment by standards of which they are not aware, and how this final judgment harmonizes with the gathering of the elect in 24:31.
There is no clear way to harmonize this final judgment with the gathering of the elect in 24:31 except to say that Matthew assumes the reader will make the connection when he restates that the Son of Man will come with his angels (25:31). Such an argument is weak at best in light of the apocalyptic nature of the discourse and Matthew's literary style. Yet, this is the easiest of the problems to explain. Why a chronological account would break at 24:31 is more difficult. Was Matthew trying to frame his illustrations and admonitions with scenes of the parousia? Or, perhaps, was this just an excursion he decided to take? It seems more likely that the material grew out of the need for faithful diligence while living in anticipation of the parousia. Unless one sees the admonition material as Matthew's message to his community, strategically located as I have argued above, then this material would have been just as effective at the end of the discourse where it would not break the chronology of events.
The most condemning problem is that of the judgment. Why would Christians be judged only on how they treated other Christians? The preceding parables call Christians to watchfulness, faithfulness, preparedness, and service according to their abilities. The Sermon on the Mount sets forth standards for Christians, of which brotherly love is only one. It seems inconceivable that Christians would be judged based on the standards in 25:31-46 in light of all that Matthew has taught up to this point.
Once one accepts the fact that this judgment cannot reasonably be that of Christians, one is left to explain of just whom it is. The "Gentiles" is the logical answer. This being so, then why is it so far removed from 24:31 if 24:1-31 is a chronological account? Again, there is no good answer.
When the chronological theory is rejected and recapitulation is accepted as the framework, then the distance between 24:31 and 25:31 is not out of place. Matthew is intent upon the reader's focusing upon the intervening material (24:32-25:30). He positions it for emphasis between the two parousia and judgment scenes since his community is living just prior to the expected return of Jesus. We have examples of such approaches in the material examined in chapter 3, particularly the book of Revelation.
In the end, I think a structural analysis of Matthew 24-25 based on the model of recapitulation is defensible and probably deserves further study. The outlook for positive results seems good, especially when comparisons with Mark and Luke are made. It appears Matthew is using his material in a different manner, not just intent on relaying a chronological series of events, but of taking the reader on an emotional, triple-loop roller-coaster ride. Each loop has an excitement of its own. Each loop takes you backward in space but moves you forward in time until the appropriate end is reached and you disembark, no worse for the wear, to share the joy of the ride with others.
Achtemeier, Paul J. Romans. Interpretation. Atlanta, GA: John Knox, 1985.
Albright, W. F. and C. S. Mann. Matthew. The Anchor Bible, Vol. 26. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1971.
Anderson, Bernhard W. Understanding The Old Testament, 4th ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1986.
Bacon, Benjamin W. Studies in Matthew. New York: Henry Holt, 1930.
Baltzer, Klaus. The Covenant Formulary in the Old Testament, Jewish and Early Christian Writings. Trans. by David E. Green. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1971.
Barr, David L. New Testament Story, 2nd ed. New York: Wadsworth, 1995.
Bauer, Walter. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 2nd ed. Trans. by William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich. Revised by F. Wilbur Gingrich and Frederick W. Danker. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1979.
Blomberg, Craig L. Matthew. The New American Commentary. Vol. 22. Nashville: Broadman, 1992.
Bock, Darrell L. Luke. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Vol. 2: 9:51-24:53. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994.
Boll, Franz. Aus der Offenbarung Johannis: Hellenistische Studien zum Weltbild der Apokalypse. Stoichea 1. Leipzig: Teubner, 1914.
Bornkamm, Günther. "Die Komposition der apokalyptischen Visionen in der Offenbarung Johannis." ZNW 36 (1937): 132-49. Reprint in Studien zu Antike und Urchristentum: Gesammelte Aufsätze Band II. Bevt 28. Munich: Kaiser, 1959.
Bousset, Wilhelm. Die Offenbarung Johannis. Meyer 16, 5th ed. Göttingen: Vandehoeck und Ruprecht, 1896.
Brown, Colin, ed. Dictionary of New Testament Theology. Vol. 2. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1986.
Bruner, Frederick Dale. Matthew. Vol. 2. Dallas: Word, 1990.
Caird, G. B. The Language and Imagery of the Bible. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1980.
Charlesworth, James H., ed. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Vol. 1. New York: Doubleday, 1983.
Clements, R. E. Prophecy and Covenant. London: SCM, 1965.
Collins, Adela Yarbro. The Combat Myth in the Book of Revelation. Harvard Dissertations in Religion 9. Missoula, MT: Scholars, 1976.
Collins, John J. The Apocalyptic Imagination: An Introduction to the Jewish Matrix of Christianity. New York: Crossroad, 1989.
________. Daniel: With an Introduction to Apocalyptic Literature. The Forms of the Old Testament Literature. Vol. 20. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984.
________. Daniel. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993.
________. Daniel, First Maccabees, Second Maccabees. Old Testament Message. Vol. 16. Wilmington, DE: Michael Glazier, 1981.
Cranfield, C. E. B. The Gospel according to St. Mark. Cambridge Greek Testament Commentary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1959.
Cross, F. M. Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1973.
Donaldson, Terence L. Jesus on the Mountain. Journal for the Study of the New Testament. Vol. 8. Sheffield: JSOT, 1985.
Douglas, J. D. and Merrill C. Tenney, eds. The New International Dictionary of the Bible. Pictorial Edition. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1987.
Elwell, Walter A. ed., Evangelical Commentary on the Bible. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1989.
Farrer, Austin. A Rebirth of Images: The Making of St. John's Apocalypse. Westminster: Dacre, 1949.
Ferguson, Everett. Backgrounds of Early Christianity, 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993.
Fiensy, David A. New Testament Introduction. The College Press NIV Commentary. Joplin, MO: College Press, 1994.
Ford, J. Massyngberde. Revelation. The Anchor Bible. Vol. 38. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1975.
France, R. T. The Gospel According to Matthew. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985.
Green, Joel B. The Gospel of Luke. The New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997.
Guelich, Robert A. Mark 1-8:26. Word Biblical Commentary. Vol. 34a. Dallas: Word, 1989.
Gundry, Robert H. Matthew: A Commentary on His Handbook for a Mixed Church under Persecution, 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994.
________. Mark: A Commentary on His Apology for the Cross. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993.
Hagner, Donald A. Matthew 1-13. Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 33a. Dallas: Word, 1993.
________. Matthew 14-28. Word Biblical Commentary, Vol. 33b. Dallas: Word, 1993.
Hanson, Paul D. The Dawn of Apocalyptic. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1975.
Hare, Douglas R. A. Matthew. Interpretation. Louisville: John Knox, 1993.
Harrington, Daniel J. The Gospel of Matthew. Sacra Pagina. Vol. 1. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1991.
Harrington, Wilfrid J. Revelation. Sacra Pagina Series. Vol. 16. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1993.
Harris, Stephen L. The New Testament: A Student's Introduction. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield, 1988.
Hendriksen, William. Exposition of the Gospel According to Mark. New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1975.
________. Matthew. New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1973.
________. More than Conquerors. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1967.
Hengel, Martin. Studies in the Gospel of Mark. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985.
Hillers, D. R. Treaty-Curses and the Old Testament Prophecy. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1964.
Himmelfarb, Martha. Ascent to Heaven in Jewish and Christian Apocalypses. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993.
Hellholm, David. "The Problem of Apocalyptic Genre and the Apocalypse of John." Semeia 36 (1986): 13-96.
Johnson, L. T. The Gospel of Luke. Sacra Pagina Series. Vol. 3. Collegeville, Minnesota: Michael Glazier, 1991.
________. The Writings of the New Testament: An Interpretation. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986.
Kelber, Werner H. Mark's Story of Jesus. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979.
Kik, Jacob Marcellus. Matthew Twenty-Four: An Exposition. Philadelphia, PA: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1948.
Kingsbury, Jack Dean. Matthew As Story, 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988.
Kodell, Jerome. Lamentations, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, Obadiah, Joel, Second Zechariah, Baruch. Old Testament Message. Vol. 14. Wilmington, DL: Michael Glazier, 1982.
Kümmel, Werner Georg. Introduction to the New Testament, 17th ed. Trans. by Howard Clark Kee. Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 1973.
Lacocque, André. The Book of Daniel. Translated by David Pellauer. Atlanta, GA: John Knox, 1979.
Le Roux, J. H. "The 'Last Days' in Apocalyptic Perspective." In Essays on Jewish and Christian Apocalyptic: Proceedings of the Fourteenth Meeting of Die Nuwe-Testamentiese Werkgemeenskap van Suid-Afrika, in Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, August 1-3, 1978. Pretoria: The New Testament Society of South Africa, 1978.
Lévi-Strauss, Claude. "The Structural Study of Myth." Structural Anthropology. New York: Basic Books, 1963.
Licht, J. "Time and Eschatology in Apocalyptic Literature and in Qumran," The Journal of Jewish Studies, Vol. XVI, 1965.
Luz, Ulrich. The Theology of the Gospel of Matthew. New Testament Theology. Translated by J. Bradford Robinson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.
Martínez, Florentino García. The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated: The Qumran Texts in English. Translated by Wilfred G. E. Watson. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996.
Meeks, Wayne. "The Man from Heaven in Johannine Sectarianism," JBL 91 (1972): 23-48.
Mendenhall, George E. Law and Covenant in Israel and the Ancient Near East. Pittsburgh: Biblical Colloquium, 1955. Reprinted from The Biblical Archaeologist, XVII, 2 (May 1954), 26-46; and no. 3 (Sept. 1954), 49-76.
Meyers, Carol L. and Eric M. Zechariah 9-14. The Anchor Bible. Vol. 25C. New York: Doubleday, 1964.
Mitchell, Hinckley G., John Merlin Powis Smith, and Julius A. Bewer. Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, and Jonah. The International Critical Commentary. Vol. 25. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1971.
Morris, Leon. The Gospel According to Matthew. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992.
Morison, James D. A Practical Commentary on the Gospel According to St. Matthew. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1902.
Myers, Ched. Binding the Strong Man. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1988.
Newman, Barclay M. and Philip C. Stine. A Translator's Handbook on The Gospel of Matthew. London: United Bible Societies, 1988.
Nickelsburg, George W. E. Jewish Literature Between the Bible and the Mishnah. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981.
Ollenburger, Ben C. Zechariah. The New Interpreter's Bible. Vol. 7. Nashville: Abingdon, 1994.
Overman, J. Andrew. Matthew's Gospel and Formative Judaism: The Social World of the Matthean Community. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990.
Patte, Daniel. The Gospel According to Matthew: A Structural Commentary on Matthew's Faith. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986.
Petersen, David L. Zechariah 9-14 and Malachi. The Old Testament Library. Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox, 1995.
Plummer, Alfred. An Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to Matthew. London: Robert Scott, 1920.
Pritchard, James B. Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1969.
Ricoeur, Paul. The Symbolism of Evil. Boston: Beacon, 1969.
Ridderbos, H. N. Matthew. Translated by Ray Togtman. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1987.
Sabourin, Leopold. "Apocalyptic Traits in Matthew's Gospel," Religious Studies Bulletin 3 (1983): 19-36.
Saldarini, Anthony J. Matthew's Christian-Jewish Community. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994.
Sampley, J. Paul. Walking Between the Times: Paul's Moral Reasoning. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991.
Schmithals, Walter. The Apocalyptic Movement: Introduction and Interpretation. Trans. by John E. Steely. New York: Abingdon, 1975.
Schweizer, Eduard. The Good News According to Mark. Trans. by Donald H. Madvig. Richmond, VA: John Knox, 1970.
Smith, Robert H. Matthew. Augsburg Commentary on the New Testament. Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1989.
Soulen, Richard N. Handbook of Biblical Criticism, 2nd ed. Atlanta, GA: John Knox, 1981.
Stanton, Graham N. The Interpretation of Matthew. Studies in New Testament Interpretation, 2nd ed. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1995.
Stock, Augustine. The Method and Message of Matthew. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1994.
Thompson, J. Arthur. The Ancient Near Eastern Treaties and the Old Testament. London: Tyndale, 1964.
Unger, Merrill F. Zechariah. Unger's Bible Commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1963.
VanderKam, James C. Enoch and the Growth of an Apocalyptic Tradition. The Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series. Vol. 16. Washington, DC: The Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1984.
Von Rad, Gerhard. Old Testament Theology II. Trans. D. M. G. Stalker. New York: Harper and Row, 1965.
________. Wisdom in Israel. Trans. J. Martin. Nashville: Abingdon, 1972.
1. Stephen L. Harris, The New Testament: A Student's Introduction (Mountain View, CA: Mayfield, 1988), 90; Douglas R. A. Hare, Matthew, Interpretation, (Louisville: John Knox, 1993), 2; Donald A. Hagner, Matthew 1-13, Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 33a (Dallas: Word, 1993), lxxv. For opinions that hold the Apostle Matthew to be author, see Robert H. Gundry, Matthew: A Commentary on His Handbook for a Mixed Church under Persecution, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994), 609-22; David A. Fiensy, New Testament Introduction, The College Press NIV Commentary (Joplin, MO: College Press, 1994), 135.
2. Johnson points out that "the manuscripts of the Gospel uniformly bear the heading 'According to Matthew' and twice in the text itself this name is supplied," (9:9; 10:3), Luke T. Johnson, The Writings of the New Testament: An Interpretation (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986), 172. These two occurrences do not constitute a direct claim for authorship since the first simply identifies Matthew and the second lists him as a member of the twelve disciples. Although he takes a position for Matthean authorship, Gundry, Matthew, 609, recognizes the anonymity of the Gospel when he says ". . . nowhere does the Gospel of Matthew identify its author by name."
3. Johnson, Writings, 172; Gundry, Matthew, 609, speculates that "[i]t is even possible that the book never circulated without that title, for we have no positive evidence to the contrary."
4. Gundry, Matthew, 609.
5. For a list of the relevant ancient sources and brief discussion of the problems, see Harris, 90; Fiensy, 134; Johnson, Writings, 172. For a detailed discussion, see Hagner xliii-xlv; Gundry, Matthew, 610-20.
6. For Harris, 90, the use of Mark is the strongest evidence that the Apostle Matthew was not the author. On the other hand, Gundry sees no problem in the use of Mark since it is one apostle (Matthew) using an account (the Gospel of Mark) based on the record of another apostle (Peter), Gundry, Matthew, 621-22. Similarly, Johnson sees Matthew as cleaning up and commenting on Mark, Writings, 173. Related to this issue is the question of priority: which came first, Matthew or Mark? For the relevant history of this question see Graham N. Stanton, The Interpretation of Matthew, Studies in New Testament Interpretation (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1995), 3-5.
7. Johnson, Writings, 173.
8. Daniel J. Harrington, The Gospel of Matthew, Sacra Pagina, vol. 1 (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1991), 13-14.
9. James D. Morison, A Practical Commentary on the Gospel According to St. Matthew (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1902).
10. Alfred Plummer, An Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to Matthew (London: Robert Scott, 1920), 327.
11. Benjamin W. Bacon, Studies in Matthew, (New York: Henry Holt, 1930), 467.
12. Plummer, 326-28.
13. Parousia is a Greek word meaning "presence, arrival, coming." It is found in the Gospels only in Matthew 24:3, 27, 37, & 39. In these instances it refers to the coming of Jesus at the end of the age (often wrongly called his "second coming"). "In the mother tongue of Jesus and the early church there is no word for "return" or "come again," Eduard Schweizer, The Good News According to Mark, trans. by Donald H. Madvig (Richmond, VA: John Knox, 1970), 262. Elsewhere in the New Testament the word is used only 24 times, 14 of which are found in Paul's writings. It may denote the arrival of a person (2 Cor. 7:6) or it may be used, as in Matthew, to denote the end of the age (1 Thess. 4:15). For a complete survey of the word, see Colin Brown, ed. Dictionary of New Testament Theology, vol. 2, parousiva, by G. Braumann, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1986), 898-901.
14. W. F. Albright and C. S. Mann, Matthew, The Anchor Bible, vol. 26 (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1971) 284-310.
15. William Hendriksen, Matthew, New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1973) 846-49.
16. Hare, 274-91.
17. D. Harrington, 331-60.
18. Hagner, 685-747.
19. Gundry, Matthew, ix.
20. Unless otherwise noted, all scriptural references are from the New Revised Standard Version.
21. Ulrich Luz, The Theology of the Gospel of Matthew, New Testament Theology, trans. by J. Bradford Robinson, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), 127.
22. Bacon, 467; Robert H. Smith, Matthew, Augsburg Commentary on the New Testament (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1989), 285; see also Frederick Dale Bruner, Matthew, vol. 2 (Dallas: Word, 1990), 858. Although he ultimately rejects the position, for a similar outline, see Terence L. Donaldson, Jesus on the Mountain, Journal for the Study of the New Testament, vol. 8(Sheffield: JSOT, 1985), 165.
23. Those were Albright and Mann, Hendriksen, Hagner, Gundry, Hare, and D. Harrington, as noted above.
24. Brown, Dictionary, vol. 2, tevlo", by R. Schippers, 62. The same position is taken on this verse in Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature 2nd ed., (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1979), 811.
25. Leon Morris, The Gospel According to Matthew (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992), 602.
26. Ibid., 603.
27. Daniel Patte, The Gospel According to Matthew: A Structural Commentary on Matthew's Faith (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986), 338.
28. R. T. France, The Gospel According to Matthew (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985), 333.
29. Jacob Marcellus Kik, Matthew Twenty-Four: An Exposition (Philadelphia, PA: The Presbyterian and Reformed, 1948), 9.
30. See H. N. Ridderbos, Matthew, trans. Ray Togtman (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1987), 465; Craig L. Blomberg, Matthew, The New American Commentary, vol. 22 (Nashville: Broadman, 1992), 376; Patte, 348; Morison, 509; Smith, 296; Plummer, 348-9; Bruner, 911-13; Gundry, Matthew, 511; Hagner, 724; Hendriksen, Matthew, 886; Morris, 635. It is important to note that at this point both D. Harrington and Hare depart from a chronological reading.
31. For full discussion, see D. Harrington, 358-60.
32. The following list is compiled from D. Harrington, 359: Ezekiel 39:21 "all the nations shall see my judgment"; Joel 3 and Amos 1 where judgments fall upon various nations, including Judah/Israel; 1 Enoch 91:14; Psalms of Solomon 17:29; 4 Ezra 13:33-39; 2 Baruch 72:4-6; Testament of Benjamin 10:8-9.
33. Hare, 289.
34. Ibid, 288-90, for his full discussion.
35. See Albright and Mann, 308-9.
36. My emphasis added. In rendering it "people," the NRSV takes a neutral stance.
37. Gundry, Matthew, 512.
38. Ibid.
39. Barclay M. Newman and Philip C. Stine, A Translator's Handbook on The Gospel of Matthew, (London: United Bible Societies, 1988), 805.
40. Hagner, 742.
41. Ibid. See also Morris, 635, particularly note 58.
42. "The Greek phrase panta ta ethne is usually translated as 'all the nations' (including Israel). But elsewhere in Matthew (see 4:15; 6:32; 10:5, 18; 12:18, 21; 20:19, 25; 21:43; 24:7, 9, 14; 28:19) ethne and panta ta ethne refer to nations other than Israel; that is, the Gentiles," D. Harrington, 356. Hare, observes that in the first century ethne was a technical term for gentiles, equivalent to the Hebrew goyyim. In commenting on why translators do not render it as such he says, "[t]ranslators shrink from so rendering it in 25:32, because it is assumed that the judgment involves all human beings. This is an unjustified presupposition. Jewish and Christian apocalyptic writings often speak of two or more judgments, sometimes explicitly differentiating the judgment of Israel from the judgment of the Gentiles," 289.
43. Hendriksen, Matthew, 886; Hagner, 742.
44. Gundry, Matthew, 514, holds that they are missionaries. See his footnote #189 for counter positions. See also Hagner, 744-45 and Blomberg 377-78 for good surveys of the major opinions. Hare, 289-90, is more vague but considers them Christians. Others who interpret them as Christians are Augustine Stock, The Method and Message of Matthew, (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1994), 387; Morris, 639; Smith, 298; Ridderbos, 468; and Morison, 513. Plummer, 351, opts for the poor and needy of the world.
45. D. Harrington, 359.
46. There is no mention of this background in Hagner, Gundry, Hendriksen, Bruner, Plummer, Morison, Ridderbos, Blomberg, or Morris. When reference to the Old Testament or 1 Enoch is made, it is only for the elements that portray Jesus in messianic terms or Day of the Lord imagery. Otherwise, all references to judgment are based in the New Testament texts, particularly the Pauline corpus and Revelation. See Hagner, 744; Hendriksen, Matthew, 886; Bruner, 914-15.
47. D. Harrington, 359. For a related discussion, see Hare, 279-280.
48. Harrington, 359.
49. Ibid.
50. It is important to note that The Apocalypse of Weeks is found in 91:11-17 and 93:1-10, Charlesworth, 5; James C. VanderKam, Enoch and the Growth of an Apocalyptic Tradition, The Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series, vol. 16 (Washington, DC: The Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1989), 147, "As 4QEng shows, 91:11 follows immediately on the material that corresponds with 93:10; it is, consequently, part of the paragraph devoted to the seventh week." So also, J. J. Collins, Imagination, 49. Only with this understanding are the chart and chronology supporting these three judgments in le Roux able to make sense to the reader. See J. H. le Roux, "The 'Last Days' in Apocalyptic Perspective," in Essays on Jewish and Christian Apocalyptic: Proceedings of the Fourteenth Meeting of Die Nuwe-Testamentiese Werkgemeenskap van Suid-Afrika, in Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, August 1-3, 1978 (Pretoria: The New Testament Society of South Africa, 1978), 66-7. Also see, Wilfrid J. Harrington, Revelation, Sacra Pagina Series, vol. 16 (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1993), 3.
51. Unless otherwise noted, all citations from 1 Enoch are from James H. Charlesworth, ed., The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, vol. 1, 1 Enoch, by E. Isaac (New York: Doubleday, 1983), 5-89.
52. Charlesworth, vol. 1, Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, by H. C. Kee, 775-828.
53. Though they go in different theological directions, the general statement that those being judged are being judged based on their treatment of Christians (in some form) is agreed upon by Gundry, Matthew, 514; D. Harrington, 359; Hagner, 745; and Hare, 289-290.
54. See discussion on pages 22-23.
55. The Anchor Bible Dictionary, s. v. "Apocalypses and Apocalypticism," by Paul D. Hanson, 279. "The genre was vigorously pursued in some early Christian circles, by reediting older apocalypses to make them explicitly Christian (IV Ezra or by writing entirely new works (in addition to those attributed to John and Peter, there is also one of Paul, one of Thomas, and at least two of James, as well as several that used the names of earlier writers, such as the Ascension of Isaiah, roughly contemporaneous with Revelation)," David L. Barr, New Testament Story, 2nd ed. (New York: Wadsworth, 1995), 383.
56. The New International Dictionary of the Bible, Pictorial Edition, "Apocalyptic Literature," 67.
57. Ibid., "The outstanding apocalypses are 1 Enoch or Ethiopic Enoch, a composite book written during the first two centuries B.C. that is notable for its description of the heavenly Son of Man; Jubilees, an alleged revelation to Moses of the history of the world from creation to the end, written in the second century B.C.; the Assumption of Moses, late first century B.C.; Fourth Ezra or Second Esdras and the Apocalypse of Baruch, both written after the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 and reflecting the tragic fall of God's people; Second Enoch or Slavonic Enoch, date uncertain. Other writings have been discovered among the Dead Sea Scrolls that have not yet been made available for study. A number of other writings are usually included in the discussion of apocalyptic literature, although they are not, properly speaking, apocalypses: The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, The seventeenth and eighteenth Psalms of Solomon, and The Sibylline Oracles."
58. The Anchor Bible Dictionary, s. v. "Apocalypses and Apocalypticism," by Paul D. Hanson, 281.
59. Hanson, 10; so also Barr, 385.
60. For a good critique of Hanson, see Martha Himmelfarb, Ascent to Heaven in Jewish and Christian Apocalypses, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), 25-28. For von Rad's discussion of the origin of apocalypse, see Gerhard von Rad, Old Testament Theology II, trans. D. M. G. Stalker (New York: Harper and Row, 1965), 201; and idem, Wisdom in Israel, trans. J. Martin (Nashville: Abingdon, 1972), 277-83.
61. The Anchor Bible Dictionary, s. v. "Apocalypses and Apocalypticism," by A. Kirk Grayson, 282.
62. John J. Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination: An Introduction to the Jewish Matrix of Christianity (New York: Crossroad, 1989), 25; while he acknowledges some influence, he also acknowledges that the theory of Persian influence has fallen on hard times in the scholarly community because much of the material is difficult to date with accuracy, 23; see also, Everett Ferguson, Backgrounds of Early Christianity, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993), 448; Hanson, 5.
63. Collins, Imagination, 25.
64. John J. Collins, Daniel (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993), 5.
65. John J. Collins, Daniel, First Maccabees, Second Maccabees, Old Testament Message, vol. 16 (Wilmington, DE: Michael Glazier, 1981), 133-35.
66. Charlesworth, 5; J. J. Collins, Daniel, First Maccabees, 135.
67. J. J. Collins, Daniel, First Maccabees, 131.
68. Charlesworth, 5. J. J. Collins, Daniel, First Maccabees, 131, "The history prior to this [eschatological] judgment may be outlined in greater or lesser detail. In may cases thee is a review of history, which is divided into set periods (e. g. four kingdoms, seventy weeks of years)."
69. J. J. Collins, Daniel, 28.
70. The Anchor Bible Dictionary, s. v. "Apocalypses and Apocalypticism," by J. J. Collins, 286.
71. All citations are from Florentino García Martínez, The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated: The Qumran Texts in English, trans. Wilfred G. E. Watson (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996).
72. Evidence for this is found in the division of world history into weeks. "The division of history into a set number of periods is a common feature of the 'historical' type of apocalypse. One effect of this periodization is the impression of an ordered universe where everything proceeds in a predetermined manner. Periodization also makes it possible to locate the present in the overall schema of history," J. J. Collins, Imagination, 50.
73. Bernhard W. Anderson, Understanding The Old Testament, 4th ed. (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1986), 98-101.
74. "For an example of the suzerainty treaty, see the 'Treaty between Mursilis and DuppiTessub of Amurru' in James B. Pritchard, Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1969), 203-5. [Item number] 4, which is missing in this example, is not always present in the treaty form. Other examples, biblical and extra biblical, of this treaty form are given in J. Arthur Thompson, The Ancient Near Eastern Treaties and the Old Testament (London: Tyndale, 1964)," Anderson, 99, footnote #16. For an example of this form applied to a biblical text, see Anderson, 147-50.
75. Anderson, 100. This list is from analysis by George E. Mendenhall, Law and Covenant in Israel and the Ancient Near East (Pittsburgh: Biblical Colloquium, 1955, reprinted from The Biblical Archaeologist, XVII, 2 (May 1954), 26-46; and no. 3 (Sept. 1954), 49-76; and Klaus Baltzer, The Covenant Formulary in the Old Testament, Jewish and Early Christian Writings, trans. by David E. Green (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1971; see Anderson, 98, note #15.
76. Ibid.
77. Ibid., 295; "R. E. Clements, Prophecy and Covenant, (London: SCM, 1965), 39-44, has an excellent discussion of 'the curse of the law' which was rooted in the covenant cult and, under Amos' prophetic interpretation, was transformed into a message of doom. He argues that Amos has taken the covenant threat and radically reinterpreted it to mean not just the purging of sinners within Israel, but the end of Israel absolutely. See further D. R. Hillers, Treaty-Curses and the Old Testament Prophecy (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1964), who points out that the curses of Israel's covenant are paralleled by the curses (e. g., captivity, exile) of ancient Near Eastern treaties," Anderson, 295, footnote #14.
78. This chart is based on Anderson's model of retributive justice, 295.
79. Le Roux, 67.
80. The chart was found in Le Roux, 67, but originally appeared in J. Licht, "Time and Eschatology in Apocalyptic Literature and in Qumran," The Journal of Jewish Studies, Vol. XVI, 1965, pp. 177-180. J. J. Collins, Imagination, 51, also recognizes this pattern.
81. Le Roux, 67.
82. Hanson, 27.
83. See Ezekiel 20:11-32 for a recounting of history and covenant and God's motives.
84. Hanson, 27.
85. Ibid., 25. See also Barr, 385-86.
86. Hanson, 24. See also 301-3 for comparisons to Canaanite and Babylonian battle myths. Some of Hanson's examples of such material in the biblical canon are Isaiah 40:1, 22; 5:9-11; 51:9-11. See further, F. M. Cross, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge: Harvard University, 1973), 107-8.
87. Walter Schmithals, The Apocalyptic Movement: Introduction and Interpretation, trans. by John E. Steely (New York: Abingdon, 1975), 22.
88. Hanson, 23.
89. Ibid., 22.
90. Ibid., 23. See Ezekiel 34-37 for language of restoration and prophecy of destruction of God's enemies. Also, one finds the language of covenant: a "covenant of peace," (Ez. 34:25; 37:26).
91. Emphasis, mine.
92. Schmithals, 21.
93. Hanson, 379.
94. Barr, 386. This list has been abridged for the sake of brevity.
95. Schmithals, 21. For a similar chart and expression of persecution, see J. Paul Sampley, Walking Between the Times: Paul's Moral Reasoning, (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991), 9. "At the end there is a period of acute crisis, often involving the signs of the end. The judgment leads to the reward of the good and the punishment of the wicked in a life beyond death," J. J. Collins, Daniel, First Maccabees, 131.
96. "The time of eternal peace will dawn, and the golden age of Paradise will return. God will dwell in the midst of the blessed. Sin, as the root of all evil, will be eradicated, so that 'from this time forth forever sin shall no more be mentioned,' (1 Enoch 91:17). The righteous, who will find entrance into that age, 'will all become angels in heaven, their faces will shine with joy,' (1 Enoch 51:4-5). They are like the stars and wear the clean garments of celestial brilliance," Schmithals, 22.
97. Hanson, 28.
98. Paul J. Achtemeier, Romans, Interpretation (Atlanta, GA: John Knox, 1985), 7.
99. Sampley, 8.
100. Ibid., 11.
101. Ibid.
102. Achtemeier, 12.
103. Hanson, 7, cites these as only a partial list: "transcendentalism, mythology, cosmological orientation, pessimistic historical view, dualism, division of time into eras, teaching of two eras, numerology, pseudo-ecstasy, artificial claims of inspiration, pseudonymity, esotericism, unity of history, conception of cosmic history which treats of earth and heaven, notion of primordiality, speculation on source of evil in the world, conflict between light and darkness, good and evil, God and Satan, Son of Man, life after death, individualism." See also, Barr, 384.
It is because of this varied and fluctuating list of elements that some have argued that the book of Revelation is not an apocalypse. "Revelation differs radically from NT apocalyptic. Neither the word "parousia" nor the title, "The Son of Man," in distinction from "one like a son of man" (Dan. 7:13, Rev 1:13), occur. Indeed, save for the vision in Rev 1 (which is probably Christian) the figure of the Son of Man plays an extremely minor role. He appears only in Rev. 14:14 and is probably to be identified as an angel." J. Massyngberde Ford, Revelation, The Anchor Bible, v. 38 (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1975), 6. For the uniqueness of Revelation, cf. 26-28. Cf. Morris, Revelation; David Hellholm, "The Problem of Apocalyptic Genre and the Apocalypse of John," Semeia 36 (1986): 13-96.
104. See the discussion of Proto-apocalyptic above. Additionally, see Hanson 23-28; Fiensy, 66; and J. J. Collins, Imagination, 14, "The apocalyptic literature provides a rather clear example of language that is expressive rather than referential, symbolic rather than factual." See also, Barr, 387-92, for a very helpful discussion of symbolic language.
105. The Anchor Bible Dictionary, s. v. "Apocalypses and Apocalypticism," by J. J. Collins, 283.
106. For a discussion of mythic language and eschatological language, see G. B. Caird, The Language and Imagery of the Bible (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1980), 219-272.
107. See page 24 and following.
108. The Anchor Bible Dictionary, s. v. "Apocalypses and Apocalypticism," by Paul D. Hanson, 279.
109. For the date, see W. Harrington, 1; The Anchor Bible Dictionary, s. v. "Apocalypses and Apocalypticism," by Paul D. Hanson, 279. Whether pseudonymity was practiced ". . . most often as a transparent fiction employing the name of a person long dead and known to be so . . . ," as Johnson claims, has not been proven, Johnson, Writings, 357.
110. "[Apocalypses] all have a highly complex and symbolic nature that often defies precise description," Walter A. Elwell, ed., Evangelical Commentary on the Bible, in "Revelation," by Walter A. Elwell (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1989), 1197.
111. Sampley, 9.
112. J. J. Collins, Imagination, 14.
113. For a competent overview of recapitulation, its definition, history, and applicability to Revelation, see Adela Yarbro Collins, The Combat Myth in the Book of Revelation, Harvard Dissertations in Religion 9 (Missoula, MT: Scholars, 1976), 8-43.
114. Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, s. v. "Recapitulation." Interestingly, recapitulation is not found as an entry in Richard N. Soulen, Handbook of Biblical Criticism, 2nd ed. (Atlanta, GA: John Knox, 1981). The only reference is under "Rhetorical Analysis," to the Latin recapitulatio, meaning "to repeat briefly the argumentatio, 169.
115. Barr, 394.
116. "Victorinus' work is the earliest extant commentary on the Apocalypse, while Tyconius' views have to be reconstructed from quotations." John M. Court, Myth and History in the Book of Revelation. (Atlanta, Georgia: John Knox, 1979), 5; A. Y. Collins, 8.
117. A. Y. Collins, 8.
118. "Literary Criticism, as a term in the general field of Biblical criticism, has three major definitions according to it historical, technical, and contemporary usage: it may refer either to (1) a particular approach to the analysis of Scripture which appeared in systematic form in the 19th cent. (often called Source Criticism) and which, considerably refined, is still practiced today as (2) that investigation of a text which seeks to explicate the intention and achievements of the author through a detailed analysis of the component elements and structure of the text itself (here the what and how of a writing rather than its whence or why, as in #1, is sought); or, quite broadly, to (3) any undertaking which attempts to understand Biblical literature simply as literature, often in a manner paralleling the interests and methods of contemporary literary critics generally. . . ," Soulen, 113.
119. A. Y. Collins, 8-9.
120. Wilhelm Bousset, Die Offenbarung Johannis, Meyer 16, 5th ed. (Göttingen: Vandehoeck und Ruprecht, 1896), 212-213, as cited by A. Y. Collins, 8.
121. Franz Boll, Aus der Offenbarung Johannis: Hellenistische Studien zum Weltbild der Apokalypse, Stoichea 1 (Leipzig: Teubner, 1914), 7-8, as cited by A. Y. Collins, 8.
122. A. Y. Collins, 11. She appeals to Günther Bornkamm, "Die Komposition der apokalyptischen Visionen in der Offenbarung Johannis," ZNW 36 (1937) 132-49. Reprint in Studien zu Antike und Urchristentum: Gesammelte Aufsätze Band II, Bevt 28. (Munich: Kaiser, 1959). This entire paragraph is abridged from A. Y. Collins, 8-13.
123. Ibid., 8.
124. Barr, 395.
125. A. Y. Collins, 44. She references, respectively, Paul Ricoeuer, The Symbolism of Evil (Boston: Beacon, 1969), 167-68. Claude Lévi-Strauss, "The Structural Study of Myth," Structural Anthropology (New York: Basic Books, 1963), 229. Wayne Meeks, "The Man from Heaven in Johannine Sectarianism," JBL 91 (1972), 48.
126. The description of Matthew as a "Jewish-Christian" is anachronistic. It is used as a means to designate Matthew as one who believes Jesus is the messiah and maintains that his community of believers is the true heir to Judaism. Matthew's faith is described as "Matthean Judaism" by Overman. See J. Andrew Overman, Matthew's Gospel and Formative Judaism: The Social World of the Matthean Community (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990), 2. See also, Anthony J. Saldarini, Matthew's Christian-Jewish Community (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994), 2-4.
127. Harris, 91; Hendriksen, Matthew, 80-83.
128. Harris, 91.
129. Harris, 91; see also, Fiensy, 136; D. Harrington, 1-2; Hendriksen, Matthew, 83-91.
130. Fiensy, 141. Johnson, Writings, 150, notes that Mark does not translate Latin loanwords for his readers. The assumption is, then, that Mark was writing for a Latin speaking audience somewhat removed from Palestine and therefore unfamiliar with Jewish customs and Aramaic, the Jewish language of the day.
131. Johnson, Writings, 173; D. Harrington, 5; Harris, 91.
132. Johnson, Writings, 173; D. Harrington, 5.
133. D. Harrington, 5.
134. Johnson, Writings, 173; D. Harrington, 6.
135. Johnson, Writings, 150.
136. Ibid., 174.
137. Fiensy, 141.
138. Robert H. Gundry, Mark: A Commentary on His Apology for the Cross, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993) 1048. "[A]ncient books were written for oral reading, a book like Mark's gospel for such reading to a groups of listeners. The ear can catch small-scale chiasm and concentricity, but hardly those phenomena on a large scale. . . ."
139. Johnson, Writings, 173.
140. Ibid., 174.
141. Ibid.
142. Pentateuch is a technical term designating the first five books of the Hebrew Bible, Genesis - Deuteronomy.
143. Johnson, Writings, 175. Gundry, Matthew, 11, D. Harrington, 6, and Hare, 3, reject the division into five books. Hare sides with Jack Dean Kingsbury, Matthew As Story, 2nd ed. (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988), 40, who proposed the division into three parts delineated by the temporal transitions.
144. Johnson, Writings, 156.
145. Ibid.
146. For a discussion of the apocalyptic storyline, see pages 24-51.
147. Isaiah 13:10, 13; 34:4; Ezekiel 32:7-8; Joel 2:10; Amos 8:9.
148. Schmithals, 21; Hanson, 379.
149. Leopold Sabourin, "Apocalyptic Traits in Matthew's Gospel," Religious Studies Bulletin 3, 1 (Jan. 1983): 30.
150. Sabourin, 30. Amos 8:8-10; Joel 4:14-17; cf. Nahum 1:5-6.
151. Sabourin, 30. 2 Baruch 30:1-2; Isaiah 26:19; Daniel 12:2 & 13.
152. For history and summaries of this debate see David L. Petersen, Zechariah 9-14 and Malachi, The Old Testament Library (Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox, 1995), 23; Merrill F. Unger, Zechariah, Unger's Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1963), 12-14. For a more detailed recounting, see Hanson, 287-92.
153. Jerome Kodell, Lamentations, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, Obadiah, Joel, Second Zechariah, Baruch, Old Testament Message, vol. 14 (Wilmington, DE: Michael Glazier, 1982), 157. For the argument that authorship is by the prophet Zechariah and that these higher critical positions are incorrect, see Unger, 12-14.
154. Hinckley G. Mitchell, John Merlin Powis Smith, and Julius A. Bewer, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, and Jonah, The International Critical Commentary, vol. 25 (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1971), 239-40. Apocalypse is generally thought to have developed in the mid to late third century B.C.E. forward, The Anchor Bible Dictionary, s. v. "Apocalypses and Apocalypticism," by Paul D. Hanson, 279; but Hanson, 27, has devised a transition from "proto-apocalyptic" (Second Isaiah), to "early apocalyptic" (Zech. 9-10), to full-blown apocalyptic eschatology" (Zech. 14). His "early apocalyptic," which addresses Zech. 9, is dated to the late sixth and early fifth centuries.
155. Kodell, 158.
156. Mitchell, 272, "The coming king is announced, and his character and mission described; also the extent of his kingdom."
157. Ibid., 227, "Yahweh promises to restore the exiled Jews, inspire them with courage to meet their oppressors, assist them in the conflict and thenceforward bestow upon them his favour and protection."
158. Hanson, 27. See also Proto-apocalyptic, page 42 and following.
159. Carol L. Meyers and Eric M. Meyers, Zechariah 9-14, The Anchor Bible, vol. 25C (New York: Doubleday, 1964), 449, "The idea of living, lying, or dwelling 'in security' is a recurrent component of the divine promise, particularly as it appears in Deut 12:10, in the archaic poem of Deuteronomy 33 (vv. 12 and 28), in the Holiness Code (Lev 25:18, 19; 26:5), in Jeremiah 23:6; 32:37: 33:16) and in Ezekiel (28:26; 34:25-28; 38:8, 14; 39:26). A perusal of these passages shows two relevant aspects of 'dwell in security.' First, it is used variously for Israel, Jerusalem, and returning exiles; thus its use here for Jerusalem would probably mean a Jerusalem symbolizing all Israel. Second, it is part of covenant language, part of the blessing that will accrue to the people who obey Yahweh. But now, in the end of days, with Israel in a new relationship to God, security along with subsistence will certainly and unconditionally be provided."
160. Ibid., 411, ". . . the specificity of the details of verses 1b and 2 is surely retrospective, drawn from the experience of the conquest of Jerusalem in the early sixth century. At the same time, the prophet envisages a further onslaught against the city at the dawn of the future age. But clearly he understands that the violation of Jerusalem's integrity has not yet ceased despite the improvement of the early restoration period. Because at least some of the conditions brought about by the Babylonians still obtained in Second Zechariah's day -- the continued exile of at least some of the people and the diminished size of the city -- the status of Jerusalem in the Persian period could well have been considered a continuation of its conquered status and thus of its need to be rescued by Yahweh's power."
161. For a similar division of the text, see Mitchell, 341-353. The suggested division is 1) The recovery of the Holy City (14:1-5; 2) the transformation of Judah (14:6-11); 3) The Fate of the Nations (14:12-15); 4) A Universal Sanctuary (14:16-21). For a three-fold division, see Ben C. Ollenburger, Zechariah, The New Interpreter's Bible, vol. 7 (Nashville: Abingdon, 1994), 802.
162. Meyers and Meyers, 35-36.
163. J. J. Collins, Imagination, 14. Also noticing recapitulation in 1 Enoch is E. Isaac, Charlesworth, 5. The structure proposed here is my own reading of the text.
164. J. J. Collins, Daniel: With an Introduction to Apocalyptic Literature, The Forms of the Old Testament Literature, vol. 20 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984), 3.
165. See 53:6 where "the Righteous and Elect One" is mentioned.
166. The destruction of weapons and a time of peace under God's rule is reminiscent of Isaiah 2:4.
167. The first two cycles have followed the same chronological order. However, this is not the case in cycle three. It is not necessary, however, that the repetition of themes be in the same order for there to be recapitulation.
168. Cycles Four and Five should not be joined, despite their sequential order and the seeming brevity of cycle four. The material here is sizable and important to establishing the sinfulness of the angels and those who sinned with them. This sinfulness was the reason for the flood, and for the fallen angels' judgment that is upcoming.
169. André Lacocque, The Book of Daniel, trans. by David Pellauer (Atlanta, GA: John Knox, 1979), 8-10; J. J. Collins, Daniel, 25-33.
170. J. J. Collins, Daniel, 27. The author does not know of Antiochus's death, see J. J. Collins, Daniel, 390, and Lacocque, 233. For a counter opinion that this is a real visionary experience, see John E. Goldingay, Daniel, Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 30 (Dallas, Word Books, 1989)305.
171. George W. E. Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature Between the Bible and the Mishnah (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981), 83-87.
172. Lacocque, 122.
173. Ibid.
174. A. Y. Collins, 11-13.
175. Austin Farrer, A Rebirth of Images: The Making of St. John's Apocalypse (Westminster: Dacre, 1949), 45.
176. William Hendriksen, More than Conquerors (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1967), 17-23. The reader should note that this chart is my construct of Hendriksen's work. It should also be noted that because of the complexity of recapitulation in Revelation, I have chosen only to portray the list of cycles and not attempt to show their connections. See also Ford, 46-48, for her construct of the seven-fold division based upon modern scholarship.
177. Ford, 48-50.
178. W. Harrington, 17, prefers no outline; Barr, 396.
179. Barr, 394-95.
180. A. Y. Collins, 32.
181. Ibid., 40.
182. Ibid., 41.
183. "Any chronological sequence of the things seen can be demonstrated only with great difficulty . . . ," Werner Georg Kümmel, Introduction to the New Testament, 17th ed., trans. by Howard Clark Kee (Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 1973), 463.
184. Barr, 395.
185. See Gundry, Matthew, 475-516.
186. Johnson, Writings, 173-74.
187. Luke Timothy Johnson, The Gospel of Luke, Sacra Pagina Series, vol. 3 (Collegeville, MN: Michael Glazier, 1991), 324.
188. Joel B. Green, The Gospel of Luke, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 732-33.
189. Johnson, Luke, 326.
190. Green, 731.
191. Johnson, Luke, 325.
192. William Hendriksen, Exposition of the Gospel According to Mark, New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1975), 518.
193. Darrell L. Bock, Luke, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament, vol. 2: 9:51-24:53 (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994), 1656.
194. Bock, 1675.
195. Johnson, Luke, 326.
196. Luz, 127.
197. Johnson, Luke, 324.
198. Robert A. Guelich, Mark 1-8:26, Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 34a (Dallas: Word, 1989), xxxvi.
199. Ched Myers, Binding the Strong Man, (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1988), 115-116. Myers is not arguing that the two halves of the book are simply mirror images in any way except by themes found within them. "Mark articulates several key themes in the major sections of Book I, and then recapitulates each at least once in Book II," further, "Mark also uses recapitulation in his internal composition of certain sections . . . ."
200. Gundry, Matthew, 475-76; Hendriksen, Mark, 516.
201. C. E. B. Cranfield, The Gospel according to St. Mark, Cambridge Greek Testament Commentary (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1959), 405-6; Hendriksen, Mark, 535-6.
202. Schweizer, 268, sees this not only as a present danger for the Markan community, but a real danger for all future disciples. Similarly, Gundry, Mark, 737, sees this as a present problem with additional future application. However, he places the writing of Mark before the events of 66 C.E., 1042. Also seeing Mark's community problems in the discourse is Werner H. Kelber, Mark's Story of Jesus (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979), 67. He also thinks the book was written after the war of 70 C.E., 68-69. Hengel believes the date of Mark to be between the winter of 68/69 C.E. and the winter of 69/70 C.E. but he does not think Mark presupposes the destruction of the temple, only ". . . the appearance of the Antichrist (as Nero redivivus) in the sanctuary and the dawn of the last, severest stage of the messianic woes before the parousia, " see, Martin Hengel, Studies in the Gospel of Mark, (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985), 28.
203. Luz, 127.
204. Cranfield, 401, "eij" tevlo"here means not 'to the End' (tevlo" does not mean the same as to; tevlo" in v. 7), but 'to the end', 'right through', 'completely' (cf. Jn xiii. 1, I Thess. ii. 16, II Chron. xxxi. 1)." Hendriksen, Mark, "For himself this period of persecution will last until death delivers him from this earthly scene. For the church in general it will last until Christ's return in glory."
205. Cranfield, 401.
206. Hendriksen, Mark, 510.
207. Gundry, Mark, 733.
208. A. Y. Collins, 8.
209. Johnson, Writings, 173.
210. See chapter 3.
211. Luz, 127, and previous discussion in chapter 1.
212. Johnson, Luke, 325.
213. Hagner, 707, sees the point of 24:28 as judgment (so also, Gundry, Matthew, 486; Morris, Matthew, 608; Hendriksen, Matthew, 861-62); D. J. Harrington, 338, sees it as stressing ". . . the clear and public nature of the coming of the Son of Man." Plummer, 334-35, sees it a referring to the false Christs and false prophets, and also perhaps to God's judgment or even the Roman conquering of Judea. For a historical overview of the interpretation of this verse, see Morison, 476-77.
214. Gundry argues that the church is undergoing distress at present. In his comments on 10:17-22 he notes "Mark's and Luke's 'synagogues' becomes 'their synagogues' because of the estrangement of the church from Judaism," Gundry, Matthew, 192. About 24:9-13 he observes that for Matthew, ". . . endurance to the end includes resisting the temptation to escape persecution by taking the antinomian way," 480.
215. The Anchor Bible Dictionary, s. v. "Apocalypses and Apocalypticism," by Paul D. Hanson, 279.
216. Barr, 386.
217. For more, see pages 46-51.
218. D. Harrington, 333.
219. See discussion on pages 20-33, specifically page 28 for the Old Testament references.