What do you think?
Rate this book
The Gospel of Matthew and Christian Judaism: The History and Social Setting of the Matthean Community
In this meticulously researched and compelling study, David Sim reconstructs the social setting of the Matthean community at the time the Gospel was written and traces its full history.Dr Sim argues that the Matthean community should be located in Antioch towards the latter part of the first century. He acknowledges the dispute within the early Christian movement and its importance. He defines more accurately the distinctive perspectives of the two streams of thought and their respective relationships to Judaism. A new and important work in Matthean studies.
364 pages, Hardcover
First published October 1, 1998
7 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
April 4, 2019
At points, I found myself agreeing with this book and its purpose. Particularly, I agree with nuancing Matthew within its own textual and social context, rather than viewing Matthew through Pauline lenses, as has too often been done. Sim carefully and effectively demonstrates that Matthew must be read in its own right, and he demonstrates that Matthew predominately belongs within the context of Judaism, despite the writer's clear conflict with certain Jewish communities of his day. However, there are some problems.
Sim presents Paul in a way that very few Pauline scholars would accept, and his arguments place Matthew and Paul at extremes that simply are unwarranted. Matthew is far more critical of Jews and far more open to Gentiles than Sim allows, and Paul is far more Jewish than Sim allows. In other words, Matthew and Paul are closer than Sim allows not because Matthew should be viewed through Pauline lenses (he shouldn't), but because they are divergent points along the same trajectory rather than on separate trajectories as Sim argues. It seems to me that, in order to emphasize Matthew's place within Judaism, Sim overreaches by pounding that point into the ground at multiple places where the arguments do not work. One example among many would include his treatment of the use of the work ekklesia. Sim tries to distance Matthew's use of the word from Paul's to the point where their parallel use is almost coincidental and have virtually no crossing points or things in common. This is simply not reasonable.
There are many other examples besides, such as; Sim not entertaining the possibility that Matthew could BOTH critique "Gentile" as a cultural norm while also still being open to a Gentile mission, assuming that there even was such a thing as a "Matthean community" when such a community might not have even existed, assuming that Matthew being a law abiding community did not come with considerable reinterpretations of the law based upon the Christ event, making very little mention of the kingdom of God despite its predominance in Matthew, not adequately dealing with Matthew's christology as an aspect of his theological approach to his Jewish milieu, and many more besides. Even Sim's definition of a "law-free Gentile" is suspect, as I would never have defined such a group the way that Sim defines them, nor would most other scholars I know. Sim also uses the Qumran community as a parallel to his Matthean arguments at multiple points, and his understanding of the sectarian nature of that community and its documents has undergone serious revision since Sim wrote this book. Many of these parallels no longer hold up. The biggest issue of them all, as I see it, is that Sim "flattens out" all of Matthew's "conflicts" rather than entertaining the possibility (likelihood?) that Matthew's concern was not with entire groups, but really only with certain Jewish leaders, such as the scribes and pharisees, and not as representatives of the larger set. Sim's arguments in this regard lead him to conclude, rather speculatively, that Matthew's "community" was sectarian, despite the decisive missional thrust of the text.
I'm sympathetic to the overall desire to emphasize the Jewishness of Matthew within the context of Christian Judaism. And, to be honest, I'm engaged by Sim's writing style and his tendency to counter many "traditional" arguments. I have the same iconoclastic tendencies. But, in this book, I found myself counter-arguing too often to be convinced by many of the book's main ideas.
Sim presents Paul in a way that very few Pauline scholars would accept, and his arguments place Matthew and Paul at extremes that simply are unwarranted. Matthew is far more critical of Jews and far more open to Gentiles than Sim allows, and Paul is far more Jewish than Sim allows. In other words, Matthew and Paul are closer than Sim allows not because Matthew should be viewed through Pauline lenses (he shouldn't), but because they are divergent points along the same trajectory rather than on separate trajectories as Sim argues. It seems to me that, in order to emphasize Matthew's place within Judaism, Sim overreaches by pounding that point into the ground at multiple places where the arguments do not work. One example among many would include his treatment of the use of the work ekklesia. Sim tries to distance Matthew's use of the word from Paul's to the point where their parallel use is almost coincidental and have virtually no crossing points or things in common. This is simply not reasonable.
There are many other examples besides, such as; Sim not entertaining the possibility that Matthew could BOTH critique "Gentile" as a cultural norm while also still being open to a Gentile mission, assuming that there even was such a thing as a "Matthean community" when such a community might not have even existed, assuming that Matthew being a law abiding community did not come with considerable reinterpretations of the law based upon the Christ event, making very little mention of the kingdom of God despite its predominance in Matthew, not adequately dealing with Matthew's christology as an aspect of his theological approach to his Jewish milieu, and many more besides. Even Sim's definition of a "law-free Gentile" is suspect, as I would never have defined such a group the way that Sim defines them, nor would most other scholars I know. Sim also uses the Qumran community as a parallel to his Matthean arguments at multiple points, and his understanding of the sectarian nature of that community and its documents has undergone serious revision since Sim wrote this book. Many of these parallels no longer hold up. The biggest issue of them all, as I see it, is that Sim "flattens out" all of Matthew's "conflicts" rather than entertaining the possibility (likelihood?) that Matthew's concern was not with entire groups, but really only with certain Jewish leaders, such as the scribes and pharisees, and not as representatives of the larger set. Sim's arguments in this regard lead him to conclude, rather speculatively, that Matthew's "community" was sectarian, despite the decisive missional thrust of the text.
I'm sympathetic to the overall desire to emphasize the Jewishness of Matthew within the context of Christian Judaism. And, to be honest, I'm engaged by Sim's writing style and his tendency to counter many "traditional" arguments. I have the same iconoclastic tendencies. But, in this book, I found myself counter-arguing too often to be convinced by many of the book's main ideas.
Displaying 1 of 1 review