Matthew, Paul and the origin and nature of the gentile mission: The great commission in Matthew 28:16-20 as an anti-Pauline tradition

Abstract

The Great Commission at the conclusion of Matthew’s Gospel is one of its key texts. In this tradition the risen Christ overturns the previous restriction of the mission to Israel alone and demands that the disciples evangelise all the nations. The gospel they were to proclaim included observance of the Torah by Jew and Gentile like. Matthew’s account of the origin and nature of the Gentile mission differs from Paul’s view as it is found in the epistle to the Galatians. Paul maintains that he had been commissioned by the resurrected Lord to evangelise the Gentiles and that the gospel he was to preach did not involve obedience to the Torah. The later and alternative version of Matthew can be understood as an attempt by the evangelist to undermine these claims by Paul. Such an interpretation is consistent with Matthew’s anti-Pauline polemic that emerges elsewhere in the Gospel

Reading Matthew by the Dead Sea: Matthew 8:5–13 in Light of P. Yadin 11

“…Matthew's community had accepted the Pauline position on this issue. On this latter point I must therefore disagree with Sim who argues that Matthew was 'anti-Pauline' (Sim 2002(Sim , 2008, a view closely tied to his interpretation of Matthew 5:17-20 that, as just noted, I consider unpersuasive.…”

The pacifist Jesus and the violent Jesus in the Gospel of Matthew

“…The Law-observant Matthean community was also engaged in an ideological struggle with those elements in the Christian tradition that failed to keep the ritual demands of the Torah, notably the Pauline tradition (Sim 1998(Sim :188-211, 2002b(Sim , 2007(Sim , 2008. There are two key texts in this regard.…”

The Eschatological Conversion of ‘All the Nations’ in Matthew 28.19-20: (Mis)reading Matthew through Paul

“…They are Jews. 23 The ritual of baptism in the names of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit is mentioned because it is required of ‘all the nations’, including Jewish believers in Jesus, whereas circumcision would only be required of non-Jewish converts and is already implied by the command to observe all of Jesus’ teachings in Matthew (see Sim 2008: 388).…”

“…Ultimately, the circumcision-free Gentile mission was both larger than Paul (it preceded him at Antioch) and less than Paul (he is remembered in a variety of ways in the early church). 42 He was not the ‘origin’ of the Gentile mission (Sim 2008: 383). To equate ‘Pauline Christianity’ with ‘Gentile Christianity’ seems simplistic (Sim 1998: 172).…”

“…Of most immediate concern for us is Sim’s reading of Mt. 28.17-20, which he claims ‘can be added to the list of Matthean passages that were specifically designed by the evangelist to counter the person, the theology and the mission of Paul’ (2008: 390). He sees the one mission in Matthew, inclusive of Jews and Gentiles, as positioned against Paul’s two -mission strategy (Gal.…”