This post continues to explore the underpinning of Matthew’s gospel by Isaiah from the previous post (2.), in Matthew 11 and beyond.

The woes pronounced on the unrepentant cities (Matthew 11:20-24), as well as on the scribes and Pharisees (Matthew 23) follow a more general prophetic tradition, but of all the prophets, Isaiah is the most ‘woeful’, with woes proclaimed against Cush, Samaria, and other nations in a more general sense, and against Jerusalem and Israel in her obstinate dependence on Egypt for military protection, in addition to woes pronounced on many perpetrators of injustice and oppression within Israel.

Just as in Matthew’s gospel, where the ‘woes’ of Matthew 11 on the unrepentant cities of Israel are followed by a promise of rest for the weary (Matthew 11:28-30), so in Isaiah 28, ‘woe’ on unrepentant Ephraim is followed by a promise of rest for the weary. In Matthew 11:28, it is: “Come to me all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest.” In Isaiah 28:12, it is “‘This is the resting place, let the weary rest’, and ‘This is the place of repose’.” The LXX’s αναπαυμα is echoed in Matthew’s αναπαυσω.

While the Isaianic offer of rest is rejected by Israel, and the arduous imposition of demands and failures (“Do and do, do and do, rule on rule, rule on rule; a little here, a little there – so that they will go and fall backwards, be injured, snared and captured” – Isaiah 28:13) becomes the substitute for rest, in Jesus there is no such suggestion of the offer of rest being withdrawn. The rest which God had intended for Jerusalem, which in Isaiah 28 has become a “fading flower”, “the pride of those laid low by wine” is replaced in Matthew by a rest to be found in Jesus himself.

This idea of rest is taken further in Matthew 12, where the sabbath rest is reinterpreted by Jesus. The oppressiveness of the Pharisees’ interpretation of the sabbath, and their hostility to Jesus, come to a head in this chapter, with Jesus declaring himself to be “Lord of the Sabbath” – Matthew 12:8, and authorised to heal on the sabbath.

As Jesus withdraws from the Pharisees, who are plotting how to murder him – Matthew 12:14, a direct comparison between Jesus and the Isaianic servant is drawn – Matthew 12:17-21 (Isaiah 42:1-4).

Matthew develops this conflict between Jesus and the Pharisees into a warning against calling the work of the Spirit the work of Satan in the remaining section of Matthew 12. The comparison may not be direct, but Isaiah’s “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter” – Isaiah 5:20 seems strongly apposite here. The evil spirit which returns with seven confederates to the house which has been swept clean has ominous implications for a house “swept clean” by the Pharisees, but which in reality has become the haunt of demons. The temple as the house on the hill hovers uneasily in the background of this exchange.

The fruitful seed sown by the sower of Matthew 13 echoes the fruitful seed of Isaiah 55:10 – with the same direct parallel being drawn between the ‘seed’ sown by the sower: “the word that goes out of my mouth” – Isaiah 55:11 and “the message of the kingdom” – Matthew 13:19.

Matthew now moves into various parables of the kingdom, with the parable of the sower being ‘the parable of parables’. Our attention is strikingly drawn to the very same dynamic of rebellion-induced deafness which was at work in the time of Isaiah and is at work in Israel in Jesus’s day. Matthew quotes Isaiah 6:9,10 in Matthew 13:14-15. The contrast is that now, around Jesus is a group of Israelites who do understand “the secrets of the kingdom” – Matthew 13:11, 16-17.

Isaiah is known as the prophet of the kingdom, not merely in his use of the term (which is relatively slight), but in his vision of a coming king who will rule on David’s throne over a renewed kingdom – Isaiah 9:7; 16:5; 32:1-20; Isaiah 33:17 and beyond, in Israel’s restoration. Isaiah was not unique in his prophecies of a renewed kingdom of David; he was however unique in his frequent portrayals of the nature of that kingdom. In Acts 1, when Jesus teaches the disciples over a period of 40 days about the kingdom of God (Acts 1:3), it is remarkable that the ensuing verses are full of the language and imagery of Isaiah – eg “when the Holy Spirit comes on you”; “witnesses”; “ends of the earth” – into which is woven “the kingdom of God” and “the kingdom”. The unique Isaianic vision of the kingdom also informs Matthew’s gospel. The message of the kingdom is taken up in various parables in Matthew 13.

The feeding of the 5,000 and the 4,000 in Matthew 14 & 15 recalls the feeding of Israel in the wilderness with the manna. This is also reflected in Isaiah’s prophecy of Isaiah 55:1-2, where the free provision of water and bread is promised to those who “come to the waters”. It has been suggested that the numbers are significant in both cases. 1000 is a biblical symbol for a huge number. 5 represents the Pentateuch – and the covenant people of Israel. 4 represents the whole earth (4 corners of the earth), or the provision of God for all the nations. Jesus is here the new Moses, a figure also suggested in his teaching from “the mountainside” – Matthew 5:1, and the fivefold structure of Matthew’s gospel itself – reflecting the fivefold structure of the Pentateuch. Much of Jesus’s teaching was concerned with the spirit of the law, or its fulfilment and completion in himself. The significance of the new Moses, as part of the new exodus theme, extends beyond the confines of Israel to include “all nations” of the Isaianically interpreted fulfilment of God’s promises to Abraham.

The vineyard parable of Matthew 20 recalls the many comparisons of Israel to a vineyard made by Isaiah. Here, the emphasis is eschatological – on the conflict between those working all day and those hired at the end of the day in the vineyard – with an obvious eye on Israel’s sense of privilege as the long-standing servants in the vineyard, and their inability to accept the generosity of the landowner to the latecomers. A similar eschatological emphasis is given to the vineyard parable of Matthew 21:33-46.

Imagery of Israel as the bride and God as the bridegroom is a running theme of Israel’s history, and taken up by Matthew in the wedding parables: Matthew 22:1-14; Matthew 25:1-13. Isaiah reflects on the theme as Israel’s eschatological destiny in Isaiah 49:18, 61:10, 62:5. By comparison, where Jeremiah takes up the theme of bride and bridegroom, it is to do with judgment putting an end to the joy associated with wedding celebrations in Jerusalem, and only once to their reinstatement. In Ezekiel, YHWH’s care for Jerusalem as a young maiden is echoed in Paul’s use of the imagery to describe Jesus’s care for his church as a bride/wife in Ephesians 5:25-26. However, Ezekiel’s emphasis is on Jerusalem’s faithlessness, despite all the care YHWH lavished on her. It seems valid therefore that Isaiah should be taken as a particular source of bridal and wedding imagery in Matthew in relation to Israel and her destiny.

Imagery from Isaiah appears in the prophecy of Jesus over Jerusalem and the temple in Matthew 24:29, from both Isaiah 13:10 and Isaiah 34:4 – the first in relation to Babylon, the second in relation to God’s judgment on “all nations” – Isaiah 34:2.

Jesus’s Passover celebration brings together the ‘new exodus’ and the ‘new covenant’ in dramatically enacted symbolism. The ‘new exodus’ / ‘new covenant’ is to be brought about by the death of the one who brings it - Matthew 26:17-30.

The death of Jesus on the cross is the final point of connection with Isaiah – picking up the enigmatic allusions in Isaiah to the individual servant figure who suffered by bearing the sins of his people; changing from one whom “many were appalled at” – “his appearance was so disfigured beyond that of any man, and his form marred beyond human likeness” to one “who will sprinkle many nations”, and one who “will be raised and lifted up and highly exalted” – Isaiah 52:13-15. The universal backcloth of “many nations” is provided for an event which focused on one who “took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows”, who was “pierced for our transgressions and crushed for our iniquities”. The question of whom this sacrificial substitutionary death was intended to benefit is tied up with the question of Isaiah’s wider, universal vision, which must be the subject of an ensuing post.

A running theme in Isaiah is of God’s inclusion of “all nations” as beneficiaries of the covenant, and not merely recipients of judgment. It is this theme that a further post must address – looking at the expansive, universal template which Isaiah provides, and how this influences a reading of Matthew’s gospel.

Before this, a summary will be provided of the broad outlines of the Isaianic template for Matthew’s gospel which emerges from all the detail we have been exploring in this and the previous post.