By Angus Harley

Israel, as said before, was in a state of spiritual exile, so that the land of Israel was the equivalent of Babylon. God, in his mercy, had promised a New Covenant, and so he sent his Son to the Jews with the Gospel of the kingdom of heaven. It was this Son and his Gospel that the Jews hated so much, according to Matthew.

That being said, the common perception of Jesus is that he was this super-passive preacher and healer spreading love all around. There is an element of truth to that thought, but it seriously misrepresents Jesus in the Gospel of Matthew. For he was a king whose kingdom was at war with the kingdom of Satan, spiritually fighting against him. The cross was his great weapon of warfare. These things we spoke of in the last article. This one switches to the Gospel form of the same teaching, to the Good News of the warring kingdom of heaven. Thus, one of the main headings is ‘The Gospel sword’; the other is ‘The sons of the sword’, referring to the true Israel of God, those who were separated to Jesus by that Gospel sword of judgment.

THE GOSPEL SWORD

In Matthew 10:34-39 is blended both aspects of the Gospel sword, and the sons of the sword. At the center of this is the general of the heavenly army, Jesus, who wielded the Messianic sword (cf., Josh.5:13-15).

The Messianic sword

Matthew 10:34-39

In Matthew 10:34-39 (see Luke 12:51), we read:

 “ 34 “Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35 For I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; 36 and a man’s enemies will be the members of his household. 37 “He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; and he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. 38 And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me. 39 He who has found his life will lose it, and he who has lost his life for My sake will find it.” ”

Jesus’ personal mission was to bring division and disruption to the world, more specifically, to families, even Jewish ones. Whether the microcosm of family life, or the macrocosm of the earth, or even the mediate sphere of the Jews in Israel, the Son’s sword was going divide many people and families. As we know, Jesus did not achieve this by wielding an actual sword, nor by use of armies. He was fighting using the weapons of spiritual warfare. If the cross was Jesus’ main weapon, then its Gospel expression was of next importance. Accompanying this were his kingdom miracles, which were lesser again in importance.

The sword of the Gospel

There are many examples in Matthew of this Gospel sword at work. The most prominent is Israel’s rejection of the Christ and his message, leading to his death on the cross (Matt.27). Another stark example is Matthew 23, in which Jesus scorches the Pharisees with the flamethrower of Gospel woes, for the Pharisees would not accept the one who was the true leader, the Christ, refusing to humble themselves before God (23:10-12). Another verse is Matthew 9:12, in which Jesus said that the “healthy”, namely the Pharisees who were self-righteous, did not need a physician, only the sick, who are in context the tax collectors (9:9-13). Then there is John the Baptist, who likewise torches the Pharisees and the scribes, and who dramatically declares of the Christ in Matthew 3:11-12:

“11 “As for me, I baptize you with water for repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, and I am not fit to remove His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. 12 His winnowing fork is in His hand, and He will thoroughly clear His threshing floor; and He will gather His wheat into the barn, but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.” ” 

In all of this, John is not referring to the Old Covenant and its punishments, but to the dividing sword of the Gospel of the kingdom of heaven and its Christ. And lest we think this sword was just for the religious establishment, let us not forget that it was the Jewish crowd, not just the religious leaders, who cried out for Jesus’ blood (27:24-25). It was whole cities that rejected the Christ, his Gospel, and his miracles (11:20-24).

‘The Prince of Peace!’

It will be said in response to this view that it does not adequately account for Jesus as the Prince of Peace (Isa.9:6; Matt.21:1-11). Aren’t Jesus’ kingdom disciples called ‘peacemakers’ (5:9)?

Without knowing it, Christians cherry-pick the Scriptures. The divisory work of the Gospel was not merely a consequence, or spin off, of its salvific purpose. Similarly, Jesus’ role as a divider on earth was not a negative spin off of the Gospel’s saving activity. He personally, with his Gospel, deliberately targeted the enemies of the Gospel and just as deliberately, through that Gospel, called the peacemakers to him.

This ought to be clear from a text like Matthew 11, but unfortunately it is not. In Matthew 11, Jesus goes forth with his Gospel and his kingdom miracles, only for whole cities to reject him. He then states, very profoundly, that this act of rejection by the Jews was a deliberate judgment of the Father in blinding the eyes of the “intelligent”, that is, the arrogant Jews. In two-tone contrast to these blinded ones, Jesus calls the peacemakers to himself; or, as they are named there, “the weary and heavy-laden”. It is to be lamented that this text has been misinterpreted over the years as indicating a generic and universal ‘free offer of the Gospel’. It, to be frank, does nothing of the sort; rather, Matthew 11:28-29 is Jesus calling the sons of the kingdom into their home, drawing the peacemakers into the Prince of Peace’s army. In that way, he is separating the peacemakers and weary and burdened from his enemies, those who are full of their own self-righteous energy.

The apostolic sword

The apostles

Just before Jesus’ speech in Matthew 10:34-39, he cautions his disciples about the Jews’ attitude to the Gospel and to them, “ “If the house is worthy, give it your blessing of peace. But if it is not worthy, take back your blessing of peace” ” (10:13). There is no generic offer of peace, here. Only the house worthy of peace was extended the apostolic blessing of peace. It is to these disciples that is given the authority to set loose or bind in both earth and heaven, to forgive or not those who take the name of Christ (16:19; 18:15-20). It was not until after Jesus’ resurrection that these apostles were to go into the whole earth and preach the Gospel to make disciples of all nations (28:16-20). This certainly resulted in them dividing families, nations, and the earth itself!

John 3:16

The most famous text in the bible, John 3:16, teaches the same principle: the apostolic Gospel divides humanity. Although the verse is placed, contextually, in the setting of Jesus’ interaction with Jewish Nicodemus, John 3:16 is worldwide in its scope. The Gospel of eternal life to those who believe in the crucified Son is a form of judgment and division on the earth. Thus, John 3:18-21 states:

“ 18 “He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil. 20 For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. 21 But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God.” “

Two major factors stand out. First, the preaching of the Gospel of salvation is ‘naturally’ acting in judgment of unbelievers, for it marks them out as sons of darkness. What is striking here, secondly, yet is more often than not missed, is that the Gospel is a magnet for those who practice the truth, who love the light. Plainly, there are considered, by John, already two types of people in the world as the Gospel goes forward: those who love the light, and those who love the darkness. There is not one, generic, blob of ‘sinners’, to whom must be made a ‘free offer of the Gospel’. Two versions of the world therefore exist: those who are sons of the truth, lovers of the Light, and those who are sons of evil works, and who love the darkness. The Gospel sword saves and judges, separating into two camps: one of eternal life, the other of eternal condemnation.

Having laid down the principle of the divisive nature of the Christ’s mission, death, and Gospel, and the apostolic Gospel’s representation of the same, we move on to the theme of the sons of the sword, that is, those believers who are separated from the world unto the kingdom of heaven.

THE SONS OF THE SWORD

From the very outset of Matthew’s Gospel, a unique group of people are identified and set aside as followers of Christ. This group is, throughout Matthew, incessantly contrasted to those who are not true disciples of the Christ. Let us begin with Jesus’ genealogy and birth.

Jesus’ genealogy and birth

Not completely Jewish

In Matthew 1, we are informed of Jesus’ genealogy stemming all the way back to David, and before him, to Abraham (Matt.1). This, on the face of it, is a typically Jewish genealogy. Except, we must not forget that Abraham himself was not a ‘Jew’, nor was Isaac. It was in Jacob the Jews received the name ‘Israel’. The non-Jewish ‘root cap’ of Abraham is a crucial component of Matthew’s Gospel outlook. Abraham was divinely invested with spiritual value in the line of Christ due to God’s choice and Abraham’s faith, not because of any natural religious connection to Yahweh, for he was a Gentile who came from pagan Ur of the Chaldees (Gen.11:31).

Not ‘thoroughbred’

Even when it does come to the actual Jewish main-section of Jesus’ genealogy, it is peppered with inconsistencies from a Jewish religious perspective. Four women are highlighted, all of whom were Gentile in origin (Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, and Bathsheba), each of them associated with dubious sexual behavior. So that the line of Judah, who impregnated Tamar, is actually a polluted line, if genealogies are understood as preserving a ‘pure’ Jewish ancestry. Similarly for David, was his half-Gentile son, for Solomon came from the adulterous and shameful relationship David had with Gentile Bathsheba. Of course, then Israel was dispatched into exile for its very un-Jewish, yet very Gentile-like, behavior over centuries. During that Gentile exile (contrasted, in Matthew, to the Jews’ spiritual exile in the land of Israel), Jeconiah gave birth to a son. By the time we come to Jesus’ birth, we have yet another woman in Mary associated with dubious sexual behavior, at least to the outsider Jew’s eye, but not from God’s perspective. Moreover, Jesus was not, technically, a pure-bred Jew himself. Why not? Again, from the Jewish ‘purity’ perspective, he was not born of two Jewish parents. All sorts of genealogical improprieties exist if the measurement is ‘unadulterated Jewishness’.

Save his people from sin

The whole point of giving the genealogy of Matthew 1 is to build-up to Jesus’ appearance as Immanuel, God with us, the one who “ “will save his people from their sins” ” (1:21-23). Notice that it does not say he will save everyone from their sins; it is specifically stated, by contrast, that he will save his people from their sins. This recalls the same separating function spoken of before. Moreover, given the context, his people are those who are a mixed bunch of Jews and Gentiles, and are of dubious propriety from a Jewish lineage perspective.

Jesus’ true kingdom-family

This brings us to the specifically heavenly and kingdom nature of Jesus’ true disciples and family.

Jesus’ heavenly family

It is evident that Jesus’ kingdom-family was not of this world, but comprised those of faith, or as John the Baptist referred to, those who showed “good fruit” (3:10). For that reason, Jesus dismissed any familial and fleshly union with himself:

“46 While He was still speaking to the crowds, behold, His mother and brothers were standing outside, seeking to speak to Him. 47 Someone said to Him, “Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside seeking to speak to You.” 48 But Jesus answered the one who was telling Him and said, “Who is My mother and who are My brothers?” 49 And stretching out His hand toward His disciples, He said, “Behold My mother and My brothers! 50 For whoever does the will of My Father who is in heaven, he is My brother and sister and mother.” ” The sword of division!

Jesus’ call and its relevance

In Matthew 4:18-22, Jesus called some of his apostles to himself. The relevance of this is that it reflects Jesus’ Gospel activity and how he draws to himself “his people”. That was why, in a rather bare and undescriptive manner, Matthew related that one day Jesus was walking along and suddenly called disciples to himself to follow him. For God’s call draws to itself the sons of Light, the sons of the sword. This is the same pattern of drawing out the sons of Light that we saw before in regard to John 3:16-21. Jesus is looking for, and calling, his own. The sword of division!

Sermon on the Mount

Jesus sat down on the Mount to teach his disciples (5:1). What he gave to them was a Gospel of a spiritual and heavenly nature, a kingdom ethic rooted in the New Covenant, not in the Old Covenant. The blessed ones were therefore not Jews after the flesh, nor even the marginalized of society, but those of a high and noble character, of a heavenly bearing, who followed the Christ, taking up his cross of persecution (5:2-11). The Sermon closes by dividing between true and false prophets, true and false disciples of the Christ, and true and false builders in God’s kingdom (7:15-29). The sword of division!

Roman centurion

We must take time to look at the Roman centurion who came to Jesus for help to heal his son (8:1-13), for of that Gentile, Jesus crucially exclaimed:

“10 “”Truly I say to you, I have not found such great faith with anyone in Israel. 11 I say to you that many will come from east and west, and recline at the table with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven; 12 but the sons of the kingdom will be cast out into the outer darkness; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” ”

Why was the centurion welcomed into the kingdom banquet, along with many other Gentiles from the east and west, to recline at the kingdom of heaven’s table with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob? And, why was it said that the current “sons of the kingdom will be cast out into the outer darkness”? It was patently not because of Old Covenant violations, but due to one simple fact: the centurion by faith accepted Christ’s authority and word; the Jews did not. The sword of division!

Implied in Matthew’s teaching, and Jesus’ words, is that the Roman centurion, and other Gentiles, are worthy additions to a spiritual lineage through Abraham unto David, onto the Christ himself.

Matthew’s parables

Matthew’s Gospel proceeds in the same divisory manner right unto the end, but, a word about Matthew’s famous use of parables is called for in that light.

In Matthew 13, Jesus expressly declares that his parables are deliberately divisive:

“13 “Therefore I speak to them in parables; because while seeing they do not see, and while hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand. 14 In their case the prophecy of Isaiah is being fulfilled, which says,

‘You will keep on hearing, but will not understand;
You will keep on seeing, but will not perceive;
15 For the heart of this people has become dull,
With their ears they scarcely hear,
And they have closed their eyes,
Otherwise they would see with their eyes,
Hear with their ears,
And understand with their heart and return,
And I would heal them.’

16 But blessed are your eyes, because they see; and your ears, because they hear.” “

Jesus could not be any more forthright and pointed if he’d tried: the parables were given to those with seeing eyes to see more of the kingdom, yet, also to identify and judge those who were blind, to confirm them in their stubbornness. The sword of division!

Jewish-centered?

‘…lost sheep of the house of Israel’

It will be said in criticism that my theology neglects Jewish centrality, for Jesus came for the “lost sheep of the house of Israel” (15:24). He did not come for the Gentiles, therefore. He even states that fact to the Canaanite woman, “He replied, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs” ” (15:26). Clearly the Jews were in a place of eminence, even in regard to the Gospel, it is said.

There is no issue with a ‘Jews first’ theology (see 2:6; 8:5-13, 28-34; 10:5; 15:21-28). Paul himself makes that clear (Rom.1:16). Yet, this is not because of a continuing place of covenantal relevance. The same Paul equally asserted, in Romans 11:28, that the Israelites were enemies of the Gospel of the kingdom of heaven; yet, there were Israelites that were “loved on account of the patriarchs”. This entailed that the promises to the fathers concerning salvation in Christ were extended to their progeny. It followed, then, that the Gospel had to go to the Jews first. This did not require that the Jews as a nation were still in an eminent covenantal relationship with God. They were, as to the flesh, the natural heirs of that Gospel promise (see Rom.9:1-5), yet, most of them rejected its kingdom message and were enemies of the Gospel and the New Covenant.

Coming back to Matthew 15:24, it does not draw attention to Israel the nation, nor to its house, but to the house’s lost sheep. These lost sheep were not considered to be your typical Jews, contextually. Jewish religion was dominated by the Pharisees and scribes, who mixed together Mosaic Law with their elders’ tradition. Jesus tore down their religious edifice when declaring their teaching and its emphasis on clean-unclean rules did not in any manner address spiritual defilement, which was solely internal and of the heart (15:1-20). This state of play is contrasted, dramatically, to the faith of the Canaanite woman who called upon Jesus as the Son of David to have mercy on her. Now, even though Jesus calls the Gentiles “dogs” (15:26), he grants her request because of her “great faith” (15:28). The final section, Matthew 15:29-31, then reveals how Jesus had compassion on the four thousand, a vast sum of people who had gathered to receive mercy from the Messiah. Jesus’ miracles and even his physical presence divided between the ‘lost sheep’ and those sheep not lost (see Luke 15:1-7). His ministry to the Jews drew out the sons of Light in their midst, and, at the same time, shone the light on the sons of darkness who hated him.

Kingdom transferal

After sufficiently exposing the hardness and rebelliousness of the Jews toward his Gospel, Jesus announced he was the Servant of God spoken of by Isaiah, upon whom will be the Spirit of the Lord. God will send his Servant forth to, “ “proclaim justice to the Gentiles” ”, so that “ “in his name the Gentiles will hope” ” (12:18-20). This transferal from Jews to Gentiles had already been adverted to. There was, from the outset, the Gentile element of Jesus’ lineage. Also, the Gentile Magi had come from the east (2:1-11). John the Baptist warns Israel that the “axe is already laid at the root of the trees; therefore every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire” (3:10). Being an Israelite no longer qualified one to be a kingdom heir. Then in Matthew 4:15, Jesus takes a trip into Capernaum at the very beginning of his ministry, which was in fulfillment of Isaiah once again: “ “The land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, By the way of the sea, beyond the Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles—” ”. It was for that reason that a Gentile ‘dog’, living in, of all places, Tyre and Sidon, could reason and plead with Jesus to give to her the crumbs from her “ “master’s table” ” (15:21-28). And, of course, there was the great faith of the Roman centurion (8:5-13).

What is happening before our eyes in the Gospel of Matthew is that we are seeing the transferal of the promises of the kingdom and of the inheritance from the Jews to the Gentiles and to a remnant of the Jews (the lost sheep of the house of Israel). Not because they were Jews, but because they believed the promise of the Messiah, and took up their cross to follow him. To these were added Gentiles of faith; not because they were ‘God-fearers’, Gentile worshippers within a Judaistic setting, but, once again, because of their faith and their belief in the Son of David to bring healing to all men. It is but a matter of time before the Jewish ‘skin’ of the kingdom is cast off entirely, shed, in all its features. So, even though Jesus’ message and presence was not concerned directly with the casting off of all things of the former Jewish primacy, this judgment is implied through Matthew, especially by Matthew 24. As we would expect, it is post-Pentecost books of the NT that describe the actual finalization of the shedding process.

‘But the twelve tribes’

It is strongly counter-argued that Jesus advocated Jewish primacy in Matthew 19:28, for the Jewish apostles were to sit on thrones, at the end of time, to judge the twelve tribes of Israel.

What did Jesus mean by saying that his twelve apostles will sit on thrones and rule over the “twelve tribes” of Israel? He was not referring to a restored or reconstituted Israel. God was tearing away the kingdom from them. As a fleshly nation dominated and ruled by demonic powers, Israel was being judged, not set free. Jesus’ apostles represented the assembly, the spiritual body of Christ. Even if these twelve tribes were considered merely to be Jews, they would be, as before, Jews of the ‘lost sheep of the house of Israel’ type. They would not be the house of Israel, or Israel itself.

It is highly doubtful, however, that Jewish primacy was implied, even in this New Covenant setting of the end. Throughout Matthew, the apostles are the foundation of the New Covenant assembly comprising Jews and Gentile of faith. They will be rewarded according to their faithfulness to that ‘universal’ Gospel. By extension, because they are apostles, God will use them to reward devotion to Jesus. How will this work? Devotion to their apostolic, authoritative, kingdom-Gospel will set apart true disciples of the kingdom, but also expose the fake. In other words, the process started by Jesus, then initially taken on by his apostles in the Gospels, and then extended throughout the world, will once again determine mankind’s future at the end. Many will attach themselves to God’s Christ and his house, but the majority will be cast into the outer darkness.

Let us not forget that the twelve tribes were long ago dismantled as a feature of Israelite life. Even though physical Israel had many years since come back from exile in Babylon, the nation and the land entered into a worse state than that previously, becoming littered with demons and babbling barbarians (cf., 12:45). Israel the nation, the people, and the land was in a de facto state of exile from God, and there was no return-from-exile to be had, no return to the old days of David or Solomon.

Christ came to both judge Israel and to offer it a new, spiritual, existence in the form of a New Covenant in his blood (Luke 22:20). Israel did not, for the most part, accept that it was demonically controlled, and fought the Messianic Gospel tooth-and-nail. Ony a few, the remnant, were willing to accept Christ’s word, his Gospel. These, along with believing Gentiles, constitute the new world’s “twelve tribes of Israel”.

An identical theology of a new-world “twelve tribes of Israel” is found in Revelation 21:1 and James 1:1. Revelation is written to the assemblies in Gentile lands (Rev.2-3). At the end, in the era of the new heaven and new earth, the twelve tribes (i.e., the assembly) that were persecuted in this world (Rev.7), will constitute the new apostolic-Gospel city of God (Rev.7; 21; see Matt.5:14; 7:24-25; 16:8). Similarly, James wrote to “twelve tribes” of the spiritual diaspora, for all of God’s people, his assemblies, are ‘exiled’ in this world, yet, waiting the “regeneration” of all things, when the Son of Man will return and end their exile.

Sons of the cross

The non-Jewish nature of the new Israel of God is nowhere more pronounced than in Jesus’ own perception of his true family and true sons. The entire model of division that gives rise to followers of Christ as true sons of God is summed up in Matthew 10:38 and 16:24, both of which refer to taking up our cross and following the Christ. This is the Christ who went to the cross, after all (27:42). He was crucified by the Jews, let us not forget. His disciples will be murdered by them. To the extent that Jews in faith accept the Abrahamic promise of the Christ are they brought into the heavenly family.

Summing up

We have finished looking at Matthew’s own understanding of the Christ’s mission and its nature. He came to create a new Israel based on faith, repentance, and good works. His family comprised sons of the cross devoted to the words and authority of the Messiah. Israel was not measured, therefore, by an Old Covenant standard- for it was already in spiritual exile- but by the New Covenant Gospel and power of the Christ. Israel, wholly controlled by Satan, went to war with Christ and his heavenly kingdom message and salvation. Yet, in the wisdom of God, the weapons of warfare were spiritual, not physical, and the cross was itself ‘the weapon of mass destruction’, destroying Satan’s power over man. The crucified Son, the cross, and the Gospel of the cross are the weapons of warfare in the fight against evil. They mark out the true family of God, but also are their main weapons of warfare.

Thus, by the time of Matthew 24, we are way, way beyond the notion of a Jewish-centric interpretation of the temple, Jerusalem, and Judea, and are, instead, in the realm of Gospel judgment going for into the entire Judean nation, which is but the prelude of international Gospel-judgments. All of these judgments of the Gospel, the sword of division, are prophetic signs of the final end of the Satanically controlled world, when Christ returns. For if the Christ did not spare the old ‘tree’, his former people, for rejection the Gospel, he will spare no one in the world who hates the Christ.

It is failure to understand this global nature of the judgment of the Gospel that causes PP to put a wrong interpretation upon Matthew 23:37-39 and Jesus’ lament over Jerusalem. He was not lamenting their Old Covenant past, but their Gospel rejection alone. The Jews were given ‘the first bite of the cherry’ but rejected this opportunity, and now they will be swept up in international Gospel judgment. Which leads us to Matthew 24.