Bibliotheca Sacra 151 (April-June 1994) 175-97.
Copyright © 1994 by Dallas Theological Seminary. Cited with permission.
THE KINGDOM-OF-GOD
SAYINGS IN MATTHEW
Mark Saucy
More than three decades ago Ridderbos made the
observation that at the beginning of Jesus' ministry the kingdom
was present (Matt. 4:17), but at the end of His ministry it was far
away, almost "as if it had not yet come" (Matt. 28:19-20; Acts 1:6-
8).1 While many will see in this observation evidence for the
"already/not yet" view in regard to the timing of the kingdom,
few have considered Ridderbos's observation as a warrant to say
much else for the kingdom because of the narrative chronology he
has assumed. Could the kingdom in the beginning of the Gospels
have differed in nature from the kingdom at the end of the
Gospels? This article proposes a yes answer to that question, as
seen in the Gospel of Matthew.2 Kingdom sayings at the begin-
ning of Matthew's Gospel should not be "leveled" with those of the
end and vice versa. Such a procedure, when applied to the investi-
gation of the kingdom of God in Matthew, will aid in explaining
Ridderbos's observation, and also will yield helpful insights into
the nature of the kingdom Jesus preached.
THE KINGDOM OF GOD IN MATTHEW 1–10
JOHN THE BAPTIST
Though Matthew is replete with references to basilei<a
("kingdom"), the phrase "kingdom of God" appears only rarely
Mark Saucy is Professor of Systematic Theology, Kiev, Ukraine.
1 Herman Ridderbos, The Coming of the Kingdom (Philadelphia: Presbyterian
and Reformed, 1962), 469.
2 Important resources for the kingdom theme specifically in the Gospel of
Matthew are O. L. Cope, "`To the Close of the Age': The Role of Apocalyptic Thought
in the Gospel of Matthew," in Apocalyptic in the New Testament, ed. J. Marcus and
M. L. Soards (Sheffield: JSOT, 1989), 113-24; Jack Dean Kingsbury, Matthew: Struc-
ture, Christology, Kingdom (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1975); Georg Strecker, Der Weg
der Gerechtigkeit (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1962), 166-72; Wolfgang
Trilling, Das Wahre Israel (Munich: Kosel, 1964), 143-50.
176 BIBLIOTHECA SACRA / April-June 1994
compared with "kingdom of heaven," which is more than eight
times as frequent.3 As the synonymity of the two forms in
Matthew has been upheld by exegetes since Dalman,4 in this arti-
cle "kingdom of God" shall be considered inclusive of both forms.
The kingdom of God in Matthew is first encountered in the
wilderness proclamation of John the Baptist: metanoei?te h@ggiken
ga>r h[ basilei<a tw?n ou]ranw?n ("Repent, for the kingdom of heaven
is at hand," 3:2). Several observations about the kingdom are im-
portant here. First, the activity associated with the kingdom is
"preaching" or proclamation (khru<sswn, 3:1). The kingdom is
proclaimed from the herald's mouth. "He cries aloud so that all
who wish to hear may do so, and his summons is ‘Repent.’"5
Though more will be said about this later in conjunction with the
"evangelizing" (eu]aggeli<zw), "teaching" (dida<skw), and "preach-
ing" (khru<ssw) activities of Jesus relative to the kingdom, it is
important to note that at the outset of Matthew the kingdom is the
subject of a "herald's proclamation."
Second, in John's preaching, the kingdom is related in a for-
mulaic way to the message of Jesus and the disciples. In this first
portion of Matthew, John's proclamation is repeated verbatim in
the proclamation of Jesus (4:17) and the disciples (10:7). "John the
prototype, Jesus the teacher, the twelve disciples—all preach the
same message."6
3 Matthew used kingdom vocabulary more than any other Gospel (53 times; Mark,
18 times; Luke, 45 times; John, 4 times). Matthew used "kingdom of God" four times
with the probable addition of a fifth occurrence in 6:33—note the comment by Bruce
M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (Stuttgart: Bib-
lia-Druck, 1975), 18-19—and "kingdom of heaven" 33 times.
4 Gustaf H. Dalman, The Words of Jesus, trans. D. M. Kay (Edinburgh: Clark,
1909) has been a 20th-century benchmark for the kingdom of God in critical study
particularly on the question of the kingdom as a dynamic rule versus a territorial
realm. On the question of the synonymity of "kingdom of God" and "kingdom of
heaven" in Matthew, see ibid., 93. Trilling summarizes, "That the expression
basilei<a tw?n ou]ranw?n has been introduced for basilei<a tou? qeou? by Matthew into
the synoptic tradition belongs to the most assured results of Matthean exegesis"
(Das Wahre Israel, 143). Also see Kingsbury, Matthew: Structure, Christology,
Kingdom, 134; Strecker, Der Weg der Gerechtigkeit, 17; Theological Dictionary of
the New Testament, s.v. "basilei<a," by Karl Ludwig Schmidt, 1:582; Herman L.
Strack and Paul Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud and
Midrasch (Munich: Becksche, 1969), 1:172. Some raise the possibility of a differ-
ence in the two since both forms are found in the Gospel. See for example Armin
Kretzer, Die Herrschaft der Himmel and die Sohne des Reiches (Stuttgart:
Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1971), 21-31, who denies a strict substitution and sees
Matthew's "kingdom of heaven" emphasizing the dynamic of the divine kingdom's
in-breaking rule toward earth.
5Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, s.v. "khru<ssw," by Gerhard Friedrich, 3:706.
6 Robert H. Gundry, Matthew: A Commentary on His Literary and Theological
Art (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982), 43.
The Kingdom-of-God Sayings in Matthew 177
Third, the message of John, Jesus, and the disciples associ-
ated the kingdom with a demand. Given the coming lordship of
God in judgment, there is only one task for humanity: repent.
The heralds' call for repentance demands nothing less than gen-
uine conversion. The hearers must return to the prophetic piety of
the Old Testament and surpass that of their Jewish contempo-
raries.7 Meta<noia as part of Matthew's summary formula for the
proclamation of the kingdom indicates that repentance condi-
tioned the whole kingdom proclamation.
The whole proclamation of Jesus, with its categorical demands for
the sake of God's kingdom, is a proclamation of meta<noia even
when the term is not used. It is a proclamation of unconditional
turning to God, or unconditional turning from all that is against
God, not merely that which is downright evil, but that which in a
given case makes total turning to God impossible.8
Fourth, the kingdom Jesus announced is in vital nexus with
the one John announced. For Matthew the ministry and message
of both John and Jesus came in fulfillment of the Old Testament
prophetic promise.9 John was referred to by Isaiah as "the voice of
one crying in the wilderness" (Matt. 3:3; Isa. 40:3). John is the
one who carried on the line of the Old Testament prophets as their
fulfillment (Matt. 11:13), and he is the one whom Jesus specifi-
cally identified as Elijah "who was to come" according to the pre-
diction of the prophet Malachi (Matt. 11:14; 17:12; Mal. 3:1; 4:5).
John's position as herald and fulfillment of the prophetic voice
7 Behm notes that the traditional Jewish forms of expressing repentance
(feelings of remorse, gestures of sorrow, works of penance, or self-mortification)
have no value in John's announcement. "God's definitive revelation demands final
and unconditional decision on man's part. It demands radical conversion, a transformation of
nature, a definitive turning from evil, a resolute turning to God in total obedience" (Theological
Dictionary of the New Testament, s.v., "metanoe<w," by J. Behm, 4:1002).
8Ibid.
9 Matthew's stress on the fulfillment theme for Jesus is well known from his
formulaic usage of plhro<w in 1:22; 2:15, 17, 23; 4:14; 8:17; 12:17; 13:35; 21:4; and 27:9.
John's nexus with Jesus also placed him in the time of fulfillment. In 3:15 Jesus
and John participated in the fulfillment of the Old Testament righteousness at Je-
sus' baptism. In 21:23-27 Jesus and John had the same divine authority. Filson
notes that Jesus' answer to the challenge of the chief priests and elders about His
authority comes from the fact that "Jesus knows that his work and John's are con-
nected, and that the Jewish leaders, in failing to see that God had sent John, had
forfeited their right to judge John's successor" (Floyd V. Filson, A Commentary on
the Gospel according to St. Matthew, 2d ed. [London: Black, 1975], 226). Mark 1:15
("the time is fulfilled [peplh<rwtai], and the kingdom of God is at hand") presents
the fulfillment theme as part of the proclamation itself, setting a precedent for
New Testament literature in joining a kingdom-of-God saying with such a time el-
ement (Werner H. Kelber, The Kingdom of God in Mark [Philadelphia: Fortress,
1974], 10-11).
178 BIBLIOTHECA SACRA / April-June 1994
means he himself proclaimed the nearness10 of the Old Testa-
ment messianic hope.
Gowan has well summarized the Old Testament prophetic
hope for Israel: "God must transform the human person; give a
new heart and a new spirit.... God must transform human so-
ciety; restore Israel to the promised land, rebuild cities, and
make Israel's new status a witness to the nations. . .. And God
must transform nature itself."11 Because historically the king-
ship of God in the Old Testament had been closely connected with
Israel's national life,12 the prophetic hope also put the kingship
and reign of God in physical and national terms for Israel when
world events had caused her national life to decline. The coming
manifestation of God's kingship was "the center of the whole Old
Testament promise of salvation" (Isa. 24–27; 40–55, esp. 40:9-11;
10 Kummel's discussion of the linguistic differences between h@ggiken (3:2) and
e@fqasen (12:28) is largely thought to have laid to rest the contention of realized es-
chatology that equated the two words and would have meant that John, Jesus, and
the disciples here announced that the kingdom had come in its fullness (W. G.
Kummel, Promise and Fulfillment, trans. Dorothea M. Barton [Naperville, IL: Al-
lenson, 1957], 105-9). On the strength of Kammel's observations most interpreters
see a difference between the kingdom's near approach (h@ggiken) and its arrival
(e@fqasen). See Ladd's discussion and bibliography in The Presence of the Future
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974), 138-45; G. W. Beasley-Murray, Jesus and the
Kingdom of God (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986), 75-80; Filson, A Commentary on
the Gospel according to St. Matthew, 73; and Gundry, Matthew: A Commentary on
His Literary and Theological Art, 43-44. See, however, an attempt at equating the
two words in Richard H. Hiers, The Historical Jesus and the Kingdom of God
(Gainsville, FL: University of Florida Press, 1973), 61-63.
11 Donald E. Gowan, Eschatology in the Old Testament (Philadelphia: Fortress,
1986), 2. Sigmund Mowinckel concurs, noting the prophetic hope was "always a
hope of restoration," and that the chief features in the hope are "in the main con-
stant" (He That Cometh, trans. G. W. Anderson [New York: Abingdon, 1954], 133,
137). Mowinckel himself summarized the hope this way: (1) Yahweh will achieve
the ultimate goal of the glory of His name in Israel. (2) The kingdom of David will
then be established in its ancient glory. (3) The exiles will return and Israel will be
united with Judah. (4) All the nations will pay homage to Yahweh as the only true
God. (5) Pilgrims will stream to Jerusalem from all parts of the earth. (6) Wealth
and produce from all the earth will be amassed at Jerusalem. (7) All blessing, fer-
tility, and well-being will prevail in the land. (8) Disease and misfortune will be
banished. (9) Everyone will enjoy the fruit of his labor, peace, and safety. (10) All of-
fenders and sinners will be rooted out of Yahweh's people (ibid., 137). Also see
Ladd, The Presence of the Future, 45-75. Cf. the discussion of the expression of this
messianic hope during first-century Judaism in Emil Scharer, The History of the
Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (175 B.C.-A.D. 135), rev. and ed. Geza Ver-
mes, Fergus Millar, and Matthew Black, 3 vols. (Edinburgh: Clark, 1979), 2:488-554).
12 Von Rad makes the lexical observations that tUkl;ma originally was used only in
reference to a "concrete sphere of power" and that Yahweh is never called "king"
before the monarchy (Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, s.v. "basileu<j,"
by Gerhard von Rad, 1:570). Patrick also notes that "the Kingdom language of the OT
is historical and contains an irreducibly national strain" (Dale Patrick, "The King-
dom of God in the Old Testament," The Kingdom of God in Twentieth Century In-
The Kingdom-of-God Sayings in Matthew 179
52:7; Obad. 21; Mic. 4:3; Zeph. 3:15; Zech. 14:16-17).13
Since the kingdom of the prophetic hope was to take a political
and national form for Israel, John's heralding the near fulfill-
ment of that same hope has bearing on the kingdom he preached.
This is especially noteworthy when one considers that neither
John, Jesus, nor the disciples defined the kingdom at the outset of
their ministry. They simply proclaimed it.
Jesus uses "kingdom of God" to call to mind all that his auditors
knew about the coming intervention of God to redeem his people
and pacify the world. . . . The expression itself gives a particular
coloring to the denouement of history, namely, a political and le-
gal coloring. The whole of the Scripture and tradition prepare for and are
completed in a political state in which God alone exercises sovereignty.14
JESUS
As John before him, Jesus also proclaimed, metanoei?te h@ggiken
ga>r h[ basilei<a tw?n ou]ranw?n ("Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is
at hand," 4:17). Jesus' message and ministry, like that of John,
were in fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy. However,
Matthew gave additional indications of the necessary connection
between the message of Jesus and that of the Old Testament.
First, alongside the preaching (khru<sswn) of Jesus, the
"gospel" (eu]agge<lion) is associated with the kingdom (4:23). In
fact twice in the first nine chapters of Matthew Jesus' ministry is
summarized as teaching in the synagogues, preaching the
"gospel of the kingdom," and healing every disease and infir-
mity (4:23; 9:35). The "gospel of the kingdom," which is idiomatic
to Matthew, inherently ties Jesus' good news about the kingdom15
to the promised hope of the Old Testament.
Most significant for the NT concept of eu]agge<lion is Deutero-Isa-
iah and the literature influenced by it (Is 52:7; 61:1; 40:9; 41:27;
Nah 2:1). . . . The close connection between this whole circle of
thought and the NT is evident. The eschatological expectation,
the proclamation of the basilei<a tou? qeou?, the introduction of the
Gentiles into salvation history, the rejection of the ordinary religion of cult
and Law (Ps 40), the link with the terms dikaiosu<nh(Ps 40:9), swthri<a
(Is 52:7; Ps 95:1), and ei]rh<nh (Is 52:7)—all point us to the NT.16
terpretation, ed. Wendell Willis [Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 19871, 79).
13 Ridderbos, The Coming of the Kingdom, 5.
14 Patrick, "The Kingdom of God in the Old Testament," 71; cf. Ridderbos, The
Coming of the Kingdom, 3.
15 The form is an objective genitive. See Jack Dean Kingsbury, The Parables of Je-
sus in Matthew Thirteen (London: SPCK, 1969), 19; cf. idem, Matthew: Structure,
Christology, Kingdom, 128-29.
16Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, s.v. "eu]agge<lion," by Gerhard
Friedrich, 2:708-9.
180 BIBLIOTHECA SACRA / April—June 1994
Second, Jesus' healing ministry was in fulfillment of the Old
Testament messianic hope.17 Jesus Himself noted the signifi-
cance of His miracles in light of His mission. In Matthew 11:5
Jesus' response to John's disciples summarizes His ministry ac-
tivity up to that time. Quoting from Isaiah 35:5-6 and 61:1, Jesus
told the disciples to report to John that "the blind receive sight and
the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the
dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to
them."18 Matthew 8 and 9 chronicle the details of Jesus' healing a
leper (8:3), a centurion's paralyzed servant (8:13), Peter's ill
mother (8:15), the two demoniacs of the Gadarenes (8:32), a para-
lytic (9:7), a woman with a hemorrhage (9:22), a synagogue offi-
cial's daughter who had died (9:25), two blind men (9:30), and a
demonized dumb man (9:33). Therefore, as Matthew wrote, the
words of Isaiah 53:4 were fulfilled: "He Himself took our infir-
mities, and carried away our diseases" (Matt. 8:17). The physical
nature of the miracles points to the physical dimension of the
kingdom. The kingdom Jesus announced was not a spiritual ful-
fillment of the promises to the lame, sick, and demonized; there-
fore one cannot assume that the promises to the nation of Israel
were given a spiritual fulfillment.19
17 Some have used rabbinic sources to dispute that the Messiah was expected to
work miracles in the first century. "The Messiah is never mentioned anywhere in
the Tannaitic literature as a wonder-worker per se" (Joseph Klausner, The Mes-
sianic Idea in Israel, trans. W. F. Stinespring [New York: Macmillan, 1955], 506).
However, Matthew (and other Gospel writers; see Luke 7:22; John 7:31) believed the
Messiah would prove His identity by means of miracles (cf. Schurer, The History
of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ [175 B.C.-A.D. 135], 2:525). In re-
sponse to Klausner and the many scholars who lean on him (e.g., G. Delling, "Das
Verstandnis des Wunders im Neuen Testament," Zeitschrift fur systematische
Theologie 24 [1955]: 274, n. 18, and Rudolf Pesch, Jesu Ureigne Taten? [Freiburg:
Herder, 1970], 151), it should be noted that the rabbinic sources are notably anti-
Christian (cf. the portrayal of Jesus as a sorcerer) and considerably later than the
first century. The pseudepigrapha are somewhat ambivalent about a miracle-work-
ing Messiah. On one hand there are no explicit statements for or against the Mes-
siah working miracles. On the other hand the portrait of the messianic age as a
time of miracles, the affirmation of the Messiah as a type of Moses and Bearer of
the miracle-working Holy Spirit all make a miracle-working Messiah compatible
with the pre-Christian messianic hope. See Theological Dictionary of the New Tes-
tament, s.v. "Mwus^?," by Joachim Jeremias, 4:863; A. Kolenkow, "Relationship be-
tween Miracle and Prophecy in the Greco-Roman World and Early Christianity,"