The Angel Of The Lord Aids The Son Of David In Matthew 1–2

By David H. Wenkel

[David H. Wenkel is an adjunct faculty member at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, Deerfield, Illinois.]

Abstract

Recent Matthean studies have focused on the presence of “the angel of the Lord” in Matthew 1–2 as reflecting Jesus’s identity as the divine “Immanuel” and son of God. This conclusion must be expanded to include Jesus’s identity as the son of David and king of Israel. Support for this derives from exegetical details in Matthew 1–2, Matthew’s use of apocalyptic discourse, concepts from Second Temple Judaism, and especially Old Testament antece-dent theology.

* * *

The figure of the “angel of the Lord” appears four times in Matthew 1–2 and does not appear again until after the resurrection, when “an angel of the Lord descended from heaven and came and rolled back the stone and sat on it” (28:2). In the table below, it is evident that Matthew took care to establish a pattern in the first two chapters but departed from it afterward.

Matthew	Figure	Description	Context	Generalized Action
1:20, 24	“angel of the Lord”	“appeared”	“in a dream”	commanded
2:12	N/A	N/A	“in a dream”	warned
2:13	“angel of the Lord”	“appeared”	“in a dream”	commanded
2:19	“angel of the Lord”	“appeared”	“in a dream”	commanded
28:2	“angel of the Lord”	“descended”	“from heaven”	sat down and talked

In Matthew 28, this angel appears in person, not in a dream, and talks with the women seeking Jesus’s body. In chapters 1–2, Matthew presents this angel as helping Joseph when he was going to divorce Mary and when Jesus’s life was threatened by Herod. The presence of this angel may also be inferred from the “warning” in “a dream” given to the wise men not to return to Herod (2:12).

The Old Testament regularly uses the phrase “angel of the Lord” to describe a divine figure.[1] This study assumes that the angel of the Lord in Matthew, however, is not divine but an angelic, created being who acts on behalf of God.[2] Why, then, does this angel appear, and what does this appearance contribute to Matthew’s portrait of Jesus? Recent studies have suggested that the angel is correlated with Jesus as “Immanuel” or the manifestation of “God with us.”[3] In this view, the angel is present with Jesus because he is divine. However, another option is more inclusive and befitting of the data. While the angels are indeed with Jesus because he is the divine son of God, they also reflect his identity as the human son of David.

This article offers five main supports for this claim, with most of the evidence drawing from Old Testament antecedent theology. First, the angel of the Lord appears immediately after Jesus is identified by the genealogy as the “son of David.” Second, the angel of the Lord appears amid conflict, issuing commands to Joseph and the wise men like a military commander. Third, the commanding nature of the angel’s appearance points to a militaristic conflict. Fourth, the canonical context of this text evokes the connection between the God of angel armies and the Davidic king. Fifth, the God of angel armies will bring about the Davidic covenant.

The Angel Of The Lord Aids The Son Of David

First, the appearance of the angel of the Lord follows Jesus’s introduction in the genealogy as the “son of David.” For the purpose of this argument, it is important to read Matthew 1–2 as Matthew, rather than as redacted Mark or Q (or “Quelle,” meaning “source”). This study attempts to read Matthew as a real work of the first century rather than as a specimen in the laboratory of post-modernity. The historical-critical method is well known for reading Matthew as something other than itself.[4] Mark may indeed be “thoroughly apocalyptic” and a major source for Matthew.[5] It may even have provided structure for Matthew’s approach to geography and place.[6] Luke may also have provided some material.[7] But Matthew’s witness must be heard in its own voice as a coherent whole Gospel. For example, the text of Matthew is keenly interested in the final judgment, God’s wrath, and the exorcism of demons, but at least one theory about Q finds “little interest in exorcisms, demons, and Satan.”[8] If Matthew is read as redacted Q, Matthew’s distinct theology may be lost. It is not necessary to deny the possibility of redaction, but this study places an emphasis on listening to Matthew’s unique portrait of Jesus, the son of David.

Broadly speaking, the first chapter of Matthew focuses on the “who” question. Matthew reveals his purpose in the “way [he] presents certain information about Jesus.”[9] Two important points can be drawn from the genealogy and birth narrative. First, Jesus is the son of David. Second, Jesus is the embodiment of Yahweh, the human-yet-divine presence of God who has come to save his people. This identity of Jesus as the answer to the “who” question is evident from the focus on names and genealogy, with the climax coming in Jesus’s name Immanuel (“God with us”) in Matthew 1:23. The identity of Jesus established in Matthew 2 is critical for the whole narrative that follows and the conflict between heaven and hell that constantly accompanies Jesus.

Matthew labors to demonstrate from the start that Jesus was born a king.[10] There is a sense in which Jesus becomes a king, and there is also a sense in which he has always been a king. It is true that Jesus’s “kingdom dawns with his cross/resurrection/ascension/ session,”[11] but in Matthew 1, the emphasis is on Jesus as the king at his birth. This kingship is publicly established at the beginning of his ministry (Matt 3), and he is portrayed as reigning over the wheat and tares of the “kingdom of heaven” (Matt 13).[12] The appearance of the baby Jesus as king occasions conflict; a murderous rage of vast powers seeks to destroy him.

One of the most important Christological titles for Jesus in Matthew is “Son of God.” Along with Matthew’s interest in the Gentiles, he is profoundly interested in the nation of Israel as God’s covenant people.[13] Israel is identified as “God’s son” (Exod 4:22); so it is vitally important that Jesus is God’s son.[14] This title is repeated eight times throughout the text of Matthew (4:3, 6; 8:29; 14:33; 26:63; 27:40, 43, 54 [cf. 5:9]). It refers to Jesus fulfilling Israel’s destiny to be a kingdom of priests, a light to the nations, and those who love God.[15] Jesus is the Israelite par excellence. He embodies Israel and recapitulates her story as he is called out of Egypt (2:15). Even Satan recognizes that Jesus is “the Son of God” and can claim God’s promise of protection from Psalm 91:11–12 // Matthew 4:6: “He will command his angels concerning you.”

Another important Christological title for Matthew’s portrayal of Jesus is “son of David.” Jesus is the son of David through the legal fatherhood of Joseph (1:20). In spite of Mary’s pregnancy by the Holy Spirit, Jesus is the legal son of Joseph and thus “grafted into David’s line.”[16] Jesus has the legal right to use and respond to the messianic title “son of David” in his ministry (9:27). The title “son of David” is closely related to the name Immanuel, which Matthew introduces with a fulfillment formula, citing the Septuagint of Isaiah 7:14.[17] Both the name Immanuel and the interpretation “God with us” establish the twin themes of “divine sonship of Jesus as well as his Davidic lineage.”[18] Matthew also highlights Jesus’s relationship to David by noting that the period of kings can be rendered in fourteen generations, perfect multiples of seven (1:17).

The crucial point here is that Matthew’s repeated details about this angel of the Lord in chapters 1–2 reflect his interest in promise and fulfillment as indicated by Matthew 1:22. Thus, when the angel of the Lord protects Jesus, he is protecting and establishing the son of David so that God’s promises never fail, while also reflecting God’s love for “his Son,” who embodies Israel.

The Angel Of The Lord Works Amid Conflict

Second, the angel of the Lord’s commands suggest a military context and cosmic conflict. This reading of Matthew 1–2 views this Gospel as containing apocalyptic discourse. Following the opening genealogy of Jesus (1:1–17) and his birth narrative (vv. 18–25) comes the visit of the wise men to see the newly born “king of the Jews.” The narrative about their visit is followed by Herod’s attempt to destroy Jesus, Jesus’s escape to Egypt, and his subsequent return to Judea. These are cosmic conflict scenes in which the life of the nascent messiah of Israel is under threat. There are no references to demons or Satan; yet according to Matthew’s apocalyptic worldview, these powers are working in earnest, veiled only by the work of human actors.[19] The wise men’s search for the infant king Jesus is met with murderous jealousy and rage.[20] Apocalyptically speaking, this open warfare against the infant Jesus by Herod is nothing less than Satan wielding his power over the human authorities on earth. Such a conflict requires the intervention of Yahweh—the God of the armies of Israel who fights on behalf of his Davidic king. Two exegetical details from Matthew 1–2 point to the angel of the Lord operating amid conflict.

First, the angel of the Lord speaks with commands. Matthew shows that Joseph obeyed completely and immediately. His obedience is emphasized by the repetition of “taking” in 1:20 and “he took” in 1:24 as well as “rise” in 2:13 and “he rose” in 2:14. The commands may even suggest the angel’s role as an angelic soldier in the “host” or army of heaven. The angel commanded Joseph partly because Joseph was ignorant of God’s plans—which is why Mary’s pregnancy had to be explained to him. These angelic commands also protected Jesus and his family from the murderous plots of Herod. The command-and-obey pattern found in Matthew 1–2 stands in contrast to the angel who sits on the stone and converses in Matthew 28. The women at the tomb initially fear for their lives, but the angel’s language and their responses focus on news of the risen Lord Jesus, not on “verbatim obedience.”[21]

Second, the angel of the Lord’s appearance in dreams has to do with royalty. The angel paradoxically “appears,” but is not seen outside of dreams. Only when the stone is rolled away in Matthew 28:2 is the angel physically seen. The language of “appearing” in conjunction with these dreams suggests that those who experienced them had unusual confidence in their interpretation. In a sense, these dreams needed no interpretation.[22] In Second Temple Judaism, dreams were associated with royal persons and expressed God’s special concern in human affairs.[23] For example, Josephus’s account of the dreams of Archelaus and Glaphyra were included especially for these two purposes (Ant. 17.345–456). Josephus includes extrabiblical accounts of dreams in his accounts of Gideon (Ant. 5.215), David (Ant. 7.147), and Solomon (Ant. 8.125).

The repeated appearance of the angel of the Lord in Matthew 1–2 directs the reader to God’s special intervention in human affairs because of the cosmic nature of the conflict and the warfare against his Son. The presence of this angel within the apocalyptic discourse of Matthew’s Gospel points to the reality of cosmic conflict between unseen spiritual forces. The commands and warnings of this angel also point to the royal identity of Jesus and the importance of his protection.

The Angel Of The Lord Evokes The God Of Angelic Armies

Third, the reality of angelic conflict evokes the title “Yahweh Sabaoth”—the God of armies who uses angels to fight on behalf of the Davidic king of Israel.[24]

The first two times that Yahweh reveals himself to be Yahweh Sabaoth (“the God of armies”) in the Hebrew Bible are in 1 Samuel (1:3, 11).[25] Although the identity Yahweh Sabaoth is used elsewhere in the Old Testament,[26] the exegetical nuances of its appearances in 1–2 Samuel and 1–2 Kings offer clues as to who Yahweh Sabaoth is and what he does. The uses of this title in 1 Samuel focus on David or function within the narrative progression that culminates in the Davidic monarchy.

The Septuagint text of 1 Samuel (1 Reigns) has substantial differences from the Masoretic manuscripts. However, for the purposes of the present argument, these textual variants are negligible. The Septuagint regularly avoids the Tetragrammaton, so forms of κυρίος plus σαβαωθ appear in 1 Reigns 1:3, 11, 20; 15:2; and 17:45 (see also Josh 6:17, LXX).

The first appearance of the title “Yahweh Sabaoth” in 1 Samuel is related to David only broadly, as it occurs in the description of Elkanah, the husband of Hannah and Peninnah. “Now this man used to go up year by year from his city to worship and sacrifice to the Lord of hosts [“Yahweh Sabaoth”] at Shiloh” (1:3).[27] The use of this title for God at this point is difficult because there is no immediate context to explain it. But the title takes on greater clarity as 1 Samuel progresses.

A second reference to Yahweh Sabaoth appears in 1:11, again in the context of the temple at Shiloh, which was the tent of meeting. Hannah includes this title in her prayer for a son. Eli the priest blesses Hannah as she departs with a request that her petition may be granted by the God of Israel (1:17). Hannah’s prayer adds a personal dimension to Yahweh Sabaoth while also connecting the title to her son Samuel—the one who would eventually anoint David as king (16:13).

The Septuagint includes a third reference to Yahweh Sabaoth in 1 Reigns 1:20 in Hannah’s explanation of Samuel’s name: “Because from the Lord God of Hosts [ὃτι παρὰ κυρίου θεοῦ σαβαωθ], I asked for him.”[28] The end of Hannah’s song in 1 Samuel 2 continues to press the narrative toward a Davidic king with the reference to the future exaltation of “the horn of his anointed” (2:10).[29]

The description of worship in Shiloh associates the title Yahweh Sabaoth with angels. The ceremonial worship of Yahweh was in and around the temple, or “house of Yahweh” (1:7, 24), in Shiloh where the ark of the covenant was kept (3:3). The text of 1 Chronicles 13:6 describes the “ark of God” as “called by the name of the Lord who sits enthroned above the cherubim.” This is similar to the description in 1 Samuel 4:3: “Let us bring the ark of the covenant of the Lord here from Shiloh.” One of the key points here is that the title Yahweh Sabaoth is associated with the unseen realm of angels and cherubim when he is described as seated between cherubim (4:4), God’s angelic army.[30] On two other occasions, the word צָבָא is used for a human army in the phrase “commander of the army” (12:9; 14:50), strengthening the association between Yahweh Sabaoth and armies. It is likely that because the ark was associated with Yahweh’s military powers, perhaps angelic powers, it was taken to the battlefield as a quasi-magical talisman after Israel was defeated by the Philistines (4:3).[31]

The Angel Of The Lord Evokes The Davidic King

Fourth, the canonical context of the “angel of the Lord” in Matthew 1–2 evokes the connection between the God of angel armies and his protection of the Davidic king. The title Yahweh Sabaoth in 1 Samuel points to the larger context and trajectory that ends in the kingship of David. The Lord heard Hannah’s prayer and vow, and she bore a son named Samuel (1 Sam 1:20). He foreshadowed David with piety, faithfulness, and godly leadership.[32] Samuel was a “prophet of the Lord” who received revelation from Yahweh about establishing a human king in Israel (3:19–21). Samuel also functioned as a judge over Israel (7:7) and as a priest (7:9, 17).

At the end of Samuel’s life and the twilight of his ministry to Israel, the people of Israel asked him for a king (1 Sam 8:6). This led to warnings from Samuel, but the people were determined to be like other nations (8:19–20). This passage tightly associated kingship with the defense of the people and military prowess. The king of Israel must be able to judge Israel internally and protect the nation externally. He must be able to fight the battles of Israel. Before a human king was established in Israel, there were prophets and priests (such as Samuel), but Yahweh was the sole king of the nation.[33] A human king would replace or at least supplement Yahweh as king of Israel. There is a certain tension between the pursuit of any human king, which is a rejection of Yahweh (8:7), and the establishment of David as “his [God’s] king” (2 Sam 22:51).[34] Within the literary trajectory of 1 Samuel, the description of what the people want in a king is suggestive of what Yahweh Sabaoth already is—the king of Israel who fights on behalf of his people.

The trajectory that began with the piety of Elkanah and Hannah toward Yahweh, the God of Armies, ends with a prophet/priest who transitions Israel into having a human king. This result points to the significance of the God of Israel as Yahweh Sabaoth in the opening frames of the book: it describes who he is and what he does. Specifically, Yahweh Sabaoth is the king of Israel who sovereignly controls the destiny of Israel for his purposes, including the establishment of the Davidic king.

The fourth instance of Yahweh Sabaoth in 1 Samuel occurs when Yahweh speaks through Samuel to King Saul with directives about destroying the Amalekites (1 Sam 15:1–3). This narrative immediately leads to Yahweh’s rejection of Saul as king over Israel because Saul disobeyed and kept the best sheep, oxen, calves, and lambs. After this, Yahweh “regretted” making Saul king (15:11). This paved the way for David to take the throne. Once again, the title Yahweh Sabaoth seems related to his sovereign control of human affairs to bring about the Davidic throne.

The fifth appearance of the title Yahweh Sabaoth in 1 Samuel directly relates to David and offers more contextual clues about its significance. The narrative of 1 Samuel 17 describes Israel facing the dreaded Philistines in the Valley of Elah, with King Saul leading Israel against Goliath of Gath. Goliath, a fearsome warrior, began taunting “the ranks of Israel,” leaving the army and King Saul “dismayed and greatly afraid” (17:11). Goliath’s use of curses from an unnamed god makes this scene a theological challenge between the god(s) of the Philistines and Yahweh (17:43).[35]

Contextual clues point to Yahweh Sabaoth as the one who fights for Israel through David, perhaps even through angels. Goliath shouted to the “ranks of Israel,” “Why have you come out to draw up for battle?” (17:8). David showed his understanding of the title Yahweh Sabaoth: “Then David said to the Philistine, ‘You come to me with a sword and with a spear and with a javelin, but I come to you in the name of the Lord of hosts [Yahweh Sabaoth], the God of the armies of Israel, whom you have defied’ ” (1 Sam 17:45).

In David’s war cry, Yahweh Sabaoth moves from the obscure and ceremonial (1 Sam 1:3) to a title with personal and clarified connotations. The title is here related to the person of David as well as the whole army of Israel with King Saul. Some commentators draw attention to the plural noun: “the God of the armies [מַעַרְכוֹת] of Israel.” Such a description of Israel’s present state in the battle suggests that there was more going on than met the eye. The plural may have referred to unseen angelic forces fighting on behalf of Israel.[36] David’s war cry suggests that Yahweh Sabaoth should be understood as “Yahweh the God of armies,” which, in the context of 1 Samuel 17, includes angelic forces such as the cherubim and the human forces of Israel, especially David.

David’s war cry in 1 Samuel 17:45 may even reveal him to be leading the charge of both human and spiritual forces fighting for Israel. When David charges Goliath, he goes alone, physically speaking, but his war cry points to his faith in Yahweh’s spiritual presence. His sling was essentially no weapon at all, and the text emphasizes “there was no sword in the hand of David” (17:50). Israel’s crisis required a strong and capable king and/or warrior, but David was only a boy (17:14, 33, 42, 55, 58; 16:11). The narrative’s attention to David’s lack of traditional weaponry and his shepherd’s sling points to a total dependence on Yahweh to fight for him. David functions as the “shepherd-king” of Israel while Saul is only nominally king.[37] The dynamics of the story in 1 Samuel suggest that David leads the armies of God, both human and angelic, on behalf of Israel.

It seems, then, that the title Yahweh Sabaoth in the narrative context of 1 Samuel means the “God of armies” both angelic and human. This conclusion complements the conjecture that the title refers to “the heavenly king who sits on his cherubim throne in the temple.”[38] In addition, Yahweh Sabaoth fights on behalf of his people Israel, especially through David, as is indicated by David’s war cry in 1 Samuel 17:45. Yahweh reveals himself to be the “God of armies” in relationship to David and establishes an important salvation-historical precedent: the “God of armies” helps the king of Israel. Thus, when the “angel of the Lord” appears and protects David’s son Jesus, the canonical context points to his identity as the Davidic king who relies on the God of angel armies.

The Angel Of The Lord Evokes The Davidic Covenant

Fifth, the close connection between Yahweh Sabaoth and the house of David focuses on the establishment of a covenant. The phrase “son of David” draws in a large corpus of texts that center on the Davidic covenant in 2 Samuel 7. David’s prayer of gratitude in response to God’s covenant reiterates what was spoken by the Lord: “And your name will be magnified forever, saying, ‘The Lord of hosts [Yahweh Sabaoth] is God over Israel,’ and the house of your servant David will be established before you” (7:26). From a human perspective, the promise of a name magnified “forever” seems to be hyperbole at best. But Yahweh’s covenant with David is to be taken at face value: “And now, O Lord God, you are God, and your words are true” (7:28). God’s promise will come to pass and reflects his power as the “Lord of hosts” (Yahweh Sabaoth).

This connection between the Davidic covenant and its future establishment by the hand of Yahweh Sabaoth is evident in the post-exilic prophet Zechariah: “On that day the Lord will protect the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that the feeblest among them on that day shall be like David, and the house of David shall be like God, like the angel of the Lord, going before them” (Zech 12:8).

This text from Zechariah establishes a hope that David’s house will be “elevated to a divine or semi-divine status,” being “like God.”[39] It also specifically refers to an angel of the Lord who will go before the house of David. Despite the lexical and conceptual parallels between the ἄγγελος κυρίου in Matthew 1:20, 24; 2:13, 19; and 28:2 and the ἄγγελος κυρίου in the Septuagint of Zechariah 12:8, commentators are reluctant to see an allusion here.[40] However, Matthew has “mined deeply” from Zechariah, and this text explains the presence of this mysterious “angel of the Lord.”[41]

Again, Matthew’s interest in providing repeated details about this angel of the Lord in chapters 1–2 may reflect his focus on promise and fulfillment. Because Joseph is descended from David, Jesus is also a son of David and the promises of 2 Samuel 7:12 and Psalm 89:4 are being fulfilled.[42] According to Matthew, the birth of Jesus meant that God was fulling his promise through Jesus who was both Immanuel (“God with us”)—and thus “like God”—and a “son of David,” establishing the “house of David” forever.

The title Yahweh Sabaoth reflects God’s sovereign control over Israel’s destiny, working in the affairs of humanity to bring about his purposes, including his covenant with David. In 1 Samuel, this title seems to be closely associated with the establishment of the Davidic kingship. When the baby Jesus appears, his identity as the son of David evokes the promises of Yahweh Sabaoth, who achieves his covenantal purposes through his angelic army.

Conclusion

The presence of the angel of the Lord in Matthew 1–2 reinforces the presentation of Jesus as the royal son of David. This angel protects Jesus and directs those around him because Jesus is Immanuel and the son of David. This conclusion is supported by the immediate literary context of Matthew 1–2 and the Old Testament antecedent theology that associates Yahweh’s angelic army with the protection of his Davidic king. First, the appearance of the angel of the Lord in Matthew 1–2 follows Jesus’s introduction as the son of David. Second, the angel of the Lord’s commands suggest a military context. Third, the angelic conflict in Matthew’s apocalyptic discourse evokes the title of Yahweh Sabaoth—the God of armies who uses angels to fight on behalf of the Davidic king of Israel. Fourth, the wider canonical context of the angel of the Lord in Matthew 1–2 recalls the connection between the God of angel armies and his protection of the Davidic king. Fifth, the close connection between Yahweh Sabaoth and the house of David focuses on the establishment of a covenant.

Two important points should be drawn from Old Testament antecedent theology. First, Yahweh Sabaoth is associated with establishing the covenantal and eternal house of David. Second, the title Yahweh Sabaoth is associated with God’s authority over the angelic army of heaven. This connection between Yahweh Sabaoth and the Davidic king and covenant extends even to the postexilic prophets such as Zechariah, who provided a theological and conceptual bridge into the new covenant era. The presence of the angel of the Lord in Matthew 1–2 supports Jesus’s identity as the king of Israel as well as the continuation of God’s plan to bring about a house of David, as promised in 2 Samuel 7. Matthew uses the angel of the Lord to present Jesus as the son of David—the one who embodies God’s saving presence on behalf of all sinners and fulfills Yahweh’s promises to Israel.

Notes

1. Exod 14:19; 2 Kgs 19:35; 2 Sam 14:17, 20; 16:23. The literature on this topic is voluminous. Important volumes include Charles A. Gieschen, Angelomorphic Christology: Antecedents and Early Evidence, Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums 42 (Leiden: Brill, 1998). For a recent study of angelomorphic Christology and seeing God “face to face,” see David H. Wenkel, Shining Like the Sun: A Biblical Theology of Meeting God Face to Face (Bellingham, WA: Lexham, 2018).
2. So also Gerhard Maier, Das Evangelium des Matthäus: Kapitel 1–14, Historisch-Theologische Auslegung (Witten: SCM R. Brockhaus, 2015), 79; John Nolland, The Gospel of Matthew: A Commentary on the Greek Text, New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005), 95; Daniel J. Harrington, The Gospel of Matthew, Sacra Pagina (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2007), 35; David L. Turner, Matthew, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2008), 66. For the view that this angel is a euphemism for God, see Stephen L. White, “Angel of the Lord: Messenger or Euphemism?,” Tyndale Bulletin 50 (1999): 299–305.
3. Kristian A. Bendoraitis, “Behold, the Angels Came and Served Him”: A Compositional Analysis of Angels in Matthew, Library of New Testament Studies 523 (London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2015), 42; Young S. Chae, Jesus as the Eschatological Davidic Shepherd: Studies in the Old Testament, Second Temple Judaism, and in the Gospel of Matthew: Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2/216 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2015), 89. For similar conclusions about the angel and the concept of “God with us,” see David D. Kupp, Matthew’s Emmanuel: Divine Presence and God’s People in the First Gospel, Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 90 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 57–59. Ulrich Luz also focuses exclusively on Jesus as “Immanuel” in Matthew 2:1–12 when he states, “The christological theme is only intimated in this story. One might say that it is mirrored in people’s reaction to Immanuel—in the murderous rejection of the Christ by the murderous Jewish king, Herod.” Ulrich Luz, Matthew 1–7, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007), 115.
4. Dale Allison Jr., Studies in Matthew: Interpretation Past and Present (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2005), 234; echoed by Jason B. Hood, The Messiah, His Brothers, and the Nations: Matthew 1.1–17, Library of New Testament Studies (London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2011), 139.
5. Greg Carey, Apocalyptic Literature in the New Testament (Nashville: Abingdon, 2016), 94, cf. 10.
6. R. T. France comments, “The first obvious point is that Matthew has adopted the same narrative structure as Mark.” R. T. France, “Matthew and Jerusalem,” in Built upon the Rock: Studies in the Gospel of Matthew, ed. Daniel M. Gurtner and John Nolland (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008), 111.
7. Harold Riley, The First Gospel (Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1992), 130.
8. John S. Kloppenborg, “Symbolic Eschatology and the Apocalypticism of Q,” Harvard Theological Review 80, no. 3 (1987): 298–99.
9. D. A. Carson, Matthew, rev. ed., Expositor’s Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2010), 45.
10. Here I draw heavily from comments by D. A. Carson, “The Tripartite Division of the Law: A Review of Philip Ross, The Finger of God,” in From Creation to New Creation: Biblical Theology and Exegesis, ed. Daniel M. Gurtner and Benjamin L. Gladd (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2013), 231.
11. Carson, “The Tripartite Division of the Law,” 231.
12. Carson, “The Tripartite Division of the Law,” 231.
13. On Jesus as the “son of David” and “son of God” for the salvation of Israel and for the rest of the world in relation to Abraham, see Peter Fiedler, Das Matthäusevangelium, Theologischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1993), 92.
14. Further references to Israel as God’s son include Jeremiah 3:9; 31:20; Deuteronomy 14:1; 32:5; and Psalm 82:6.
15. James D. G. Dunn, Christology in the Making: A New Testament Inquiry into the Origins of the Doctrine of the Incarnation, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989), 48–49, 59. Also see Nicholas G. Piotrowski, Matthew’s New David at the End of Exile: A Socio-Rhetorical Study of Scriptural Quotations, Supplements to Novum Testamentum 170 (Leiden: Brill, 2016), 118–20.
16. David E. Garland, Reading Matthew: A Literary and Theological Commentary on the First Gospel (Macon, GA: Smyth & Helwys, 2001), 21.
17. The name “Immanuel” likely draws from Isaiah 8:10 in the Septuagint: “Speak a word, but it will not help, for God is with us” (Bendoraitis, “Behold, the Angels Came and Served Him,” 42). For a comparison of Matthew 1:21b, 23 and the Septuagint of Isaiah 7:14, see Charlene McAfee Moss, The Zechariah Tradition and the Gospel of Matthew, Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 156 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2008), 18.
18. Bendoraitis, “Behold, the Angels Came and Served Him,” 42.
19. Matthew’s Gospel follows the genre of a bios containing Jewish apocalyptic discourse. On Matthew’s Gospel as “apocalyptic,” see Percival Hadfield, “Matthew the Apocalyptic Editor,” London Quarterly and Holborn Review 184 (1959): 128–32; Donald A. Hagner, “Apocalyptic Motifs in the Gospel of Matthew: Continuity and Discontinuity,” Horizons in Biblical Theology 7, no. 2 (1985): 6; Leopold Sabourin, “Apocalyptic Traits in Matthew’s Gospel,” Religious Studies Bulletin 3, no. 1 (1983): 19; Daniel M. Gurtner, “Interpreting Apocalyptic Symbolism in the Gospel of Matthew,” Bulletin for Biblical Research 22, no. 4 (2012): 527. For a discussion of Matthew’s use of apocalyptic materials from Zechariah, see Moss, The Zechariah Tradition and the Gospel of Matthew, 211.
20. Josephus writes that Herod the Great showed “great barbarity toward all men equally” (Ant. 17.191).
21. Bendoraitis, “Behold, the Angels Came and Served Him,” 198.
22. “Weil der Engel klare Weisungen gibt, braucht der Traum keine Deutung.” Walter Klaiber, Das Matthäusevangelium, Teilband 1: Mt 1, 1–16, 20 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2015), 28.
23. Louis H. Feldman, “Prophets and Prophecy in Josephus,” in Prophets, Prophecy, and Prophetic Texts in Second Temple Judaism; ed. Michael H. Floyd and Robert D. Haak, Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies 427 (London: T&T Clark, 2006), 228. Also see the discussion by Rebecca Gray, Prophetic Figures in Late Second Temple Jewish Palestine: The Evidence from Josephus (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993), 27–28.
24. The word “Sabaoth” uses the Hebrew root צבא and is transliterated in Greek as σαβαωθ, occurring twice in the New Testament (Rom 9:29; Jam 5:4). It occurs about 261 times in the Masoretic text, usually with Yahweh but also with Elohim and variations (24x).
25. David Toshio Tsumura, The First Book of Samuel, New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007), 110; Ralph W. Klein, 1 Samuel, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, 1998), 7.
26. For other uses of “Yahweh Sabaoth” regarding angels, see 1 Kings 22:19; 2 Chronicles 18:18; Nehemiah 9:6; Zechariah 4:6; and Amos 9:5a.
27. On the location of the “temple” or tent of meeting in Shiloh, see Joshua 18:1–10 and Judges 18:31.
28. Unless otherwise noted, all English quotations from the Septuagint are from Albert Pietersma and Benjamin G. Wright, eds., A New English Translation of the Septuagint (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009).
29. Sirach 47:5 identifies David’s defeat of Goliath as Yahweh exalting “the horn of his people.”
30. The concept that Yahweh is the God of angels appears throughout the Old Testament. For references to Yahweh and cherubim, see Exodus 25:22; Numbers 7:89; 2 Samuel 6:2; Psalms 80:l; and 99:1. Yahweh is a king who is “mighty in battle” (Ps 24:4). That Yahweh is a warrior and even a “man of war” (Exod 15:3) is an important theme not only in Moses’s song but in the Old Testament as a whole.
31. Roland de Vaux, Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institutions, trans. John McHugh (1961; reprint, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 304.
32. Peter J. Leithart, A Son to Me: An Exposition of 1 and 2 Samuel (Moscow, ID: Canon, 2003), 48.
33. On Yahweh as the king of Israel see Gideon’s refusal to accept the kingship of Israel: “I will not rule over you, and my son will not rule over you; the Lord will rule over you” (Judg 8:23).
34. For a helpful discussion of this tension, see Stephen B. Chapman, 1 Samuel as Christian Scripture: A Theological Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2016), 78–79.
35. For comments on the “theological struggle” between David and Goliath see Klein, 1 Samuel, 180, and James E. Smith, 1 and 2 Samuel, College Press NIV Commentary (Joplin, MO: College Press, 2000), 228.
36. Mary J. Evans, 1 and 2 Samuel, Understanding the Bible Commentary Series (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2012), 83.
37. Klein, 1 Samuel, 183.
38. Tsumura, The First Book of Samuel, 110; similarly Robert Alter, The David Story: A Translation with Commentary on 1 and 2 Samuel (London: W. W. Norton, 1999), 20; Leithart, A Son to Me, 191.
39. Chae, Jesus as the Eschatological Davidic Shepherd, 89.
40. This potential parallel is omitted by Wayne Baxter, Israel’s Only Shepherd: Matthew’s Shepherd Motif, Library of New Testament Studies (London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2012); John Nolland, “The King as Shepherd: The Role of Deutero-Zechariah in Matthew,” in Biblical Interpretation in Early Christian Gospels: Volume 2: The Gospel of Matthew (London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2015), 133–46; Clay A. Ham, The Coming King and the Rejected Shepherd: Matthew’s Reading of Zechariah’s Messianic Hope (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2005); and P. Foster, “The Use of Zechariah in Matthew’s Gospel,” in The Book of Zechariah and Its Influence, ed. C. Tuckett (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2003), 65–85.
41. Moss, The Zechariah Tradition and the Gospel of Matthew, 212.
42. Maier, Das Evangelium des Matthäus, 80.