Israel and Typology in Matthew’s Gospel

Israel and Typology in Matthew’s Gospel
by Nicholas T. Batzig 7 March 2009 3 Comments

It is probable that the whole of Matthew’s Gospel is a typological fulfillment of Israel’s history. This means, of course, that all of Christ’s life is the chronological anti-type of Israel’s experience. Here is a brief explanation:

Matthew opens with the words: “The book of the generations of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the Son of Abraham.” Why only mention David and Abraham? Simply put, they were the two Israelitish covenant heads who were organically related to Christ. Jesus did not come from Moses’ seed, but he did come from Abraham and David. Note also the way that Matthew mentions David first, then Abraham. As the genealogy unfolds he starts with Abraham, moves to David, goes through the exile and finally comes to the fulfillment of the promises. This structure sets the grid for understanding Matthew’s Gospel.

Matthew could have chosen to take the genealogy back to Noah and Adam (as Luke chooses to do) but it appears that he wanted to stop at Abraham to explain the Israel/Christ typology. This is further developed by the reference to Hosea 11:2 in Matthew 2, “Out of Egypt I called My Son.” Then by the baptism, the temptation in the wilderness, the Sermon on the Mount, the feeding of the multitudes, the references to David and Solomon, the pronouncement of ‘woes’ on the leaders of Israel, and His death on the cross (i.e. the great exile).

In summary, Jesus, the Son of Abraham, is therefore the true Israel. He goes down into Egypt, comes up from Egypt, passes through the waters (see 1 Cor. 10:1-2 for a reference to the crossing of the sea as baptism), goes into the wilderness, goes up on the mountain to deliver the law, miraculously multiplies bread from heaven, parallels the life of David and his mighty men when he walks through the grain fields on the Sabbath with His disciples, parallels the life of Solomon with His wisdom and His entry into Jerusalem on a lowly animal, parallels the ministry of the prophets by pronouncing ‘woes’ on the rulers of Israel, and is finally cut off (i.e. exiled)from the land of the living, at the cross, on account of disobedience–i.e. He is made a curse because of the disobedience of His people.

This is some of the strongest evidence that Jesus was the true Israel, God’s Son who obeyed in every way that Israel disobeyed, and who, by His obedience merited the blessings that Israel forfeited by its disobedience. I would also suggest that Matthew’s purpose, as so many have argued, was not to write to a Jewish audience so as to win them to faith in Christ, but it was to show that Jesus is the true Israel. Now, I know that some may disagree with this and may chalk it up to being something fanciful or allegorical, but the evidence is there, and unless it can be clearly refuted ought to be given serious attention.