Matthew Emphasized Fulfilled Prophecies

The Church’s liturgical year officially began on the First Sunday of Advent, right after Thanksgiving about two months ago. This current year is designated Year A, and most of the gospel readings are from Matthew. (In the three-year lectionary cycle, the Year B gospel readings are mostly from Mark, and the Year C readings from Luke. John doesn’t have an official Year, but readings from his gospel are interspersed throughout all three years, especially during the Easter season.)

As with each of the four gospels, the main reason Matthew wrote about Jesus was to prove that Jesus is the Son of God, whose death and Resurrection conquered sin once and for all and made it possible—finally!—for mankind to be reconciled with our divine Creator. Each of the four gospel writers, however, used quite different styles to prove that central point.

Matthew’s distinct style was shaped by the fact that he wrote his gospel primarily for Jewish readers. He knew his audience was well-versed in the Hebrew scriptures (what we Christians now call the Old Testament), and he repeatedly emphasized that Jesus’ life fulfilled the ancient prophesies. In fact, no less than 16 different times in his gospel, Matthew described something about Jesus and then used some form of the expression, “…that what had been said through the prophet might be fulfilled…”

In this week’s gospel, Matthew explains that Jesus left Nazareth and moved to Capernaum, which fulfills a prophesy by Isaiah. Now, I think it’s safe to say that it doesn’t really matter that much if Jesus began His ministry in Nazareth or in Capernaum or in, say, Waterbury, Connecticut. The important things are Jesus Himself and His mission, not whether He was in a location that was mentioned by Isaiah seven centuries earlier. (OK, maybe it would’ve been very difficult to reconcile the ancient prophecies with Waterbury, but you know what I mean.)

Anyway, this particular fulfillment of prophecy was certainly not a make-or-break issue—and Matthew never said that it was. But Matthew crafted his gospel sort of like a prosecuting attorney. He presented every possible bit of information that would bolster his case. It’s the preponderance of evidence that made Matthew’s case, and proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Jesus really was the long-awaited Messiah.

At some point the jury, er, I mean, Matthew’s Jewish audience, had to conclude, “Wow, what are the odds that so many ancient prophecies could be fulfilled in the life of one man? It must be true!”

As we go through this liturgical year, with most of the Sunday gospel readings coming from Matthew, be aware of Matthew’s style. He wrote for a predominantly Jewish audience and he repeatedly hammered home the point that Jesus fulfilled the ancient prophecies. If his audience had been Greeks or Romans, and thus unfamiliar with the Jewish Scriptures, Matthew would have been wasting his time. (Which may be a good reason for us to become more familiar with the Old Testament. When we better understand Israel’s long history, we can better understand that Jesus did not institute a new religion, He instead fulfilled what God had started many, many centuries earlier.)

The most important point, of course, is not Matthew’s technique, but rather his purpose for writing the gospel. He knew without a doubt—he saw first-hand with his own eyes—that Jesus truly is the Son of God and the Savior of all the world. And he knew that he simply had to spread that Good News to as many people as possible. Emphasizing fulfilled prophecy was the best way to communicate that message to a Jewish audience.

And the message in this week’s gospel is worth repeating: “The people in darkness have seen a great light, on those dwelling in a land overshadowed by death, light has arisen.” Jesus came to conquer death and bring the light of life to all mankind. What great news! Thanks for telling us, Matt.