The Gospel of Matthew and Apocalyptic Discourse

Apocalyptic Discourse

Some detractors notwithstanding, Matthew’s Gospel is about the person of Jesus in the genre of a bios containing Jewish apocalyptic discourse. In other words, Matthew is eyewitness testimony about the person and work of Jesus. But this is where most agreement ends. Matthew is not a literary apocalypse along the lines of Revelation, but rather it is a Hellenistic bios with elements of Jewish apocalyptic discourse. ⁹ One terminology issue must be explained: whereas ‘apocalyptic eschatology’ deals largely with the final judgment and its aftermath, ‘apocalyptic discourse’ reflects the concept that God’s judgment is at work in the present time (wherever that might be) as well as in the future. ¹⁰ Matthew’s Jewish character reflects the complex Hellenistic milieu of the first century Mediterranean but draws from both texts and traditions influenced by the Jewish scriptures. Matthew is a gospel that reveals the present world and the present age to be characterized by invisible cosmic forces that require faith and God’s direct intervention to understand. Matthew uses apocalyptic discourse to reveal things about the past, present, and the future in order to demonstrate that Jesus is truly the king in charge of the world. ¹¹

Reading Matthew as apocalyptic discourse means asking how texts function, rather than simply identifying genre. There are certain themes and dramatic elements that accompany apocalyptic discourse, including: messianic character(s), resurrection, the arrival of a new age, the immanence of the end times, divine intervention in history, heavenly journeys, visions/revelations, and a final judgment. ¹² They may be used for persuasion or for visual description. ¹³ The concept of apocalyptic discourse is that a worldview or lens is created through which typical (and non-typical) human events are interpreted. In its most basic sense, ‘apocalyptic discourse’ is a way of speaking about people, places, and events in a way that reveals them to have significance from a divine perspective.

Any focus on apocalyptic symbols in Matthew must consider the text as Matthew, rather than as redacted Mark or Q. Matthew must be read as a genuine product of first-century Jewish thought and the events surrounding Jesus’ death and resurrection. The historical-critical method is well-known for reading Matthew as something other than itself. ¹⁴ Mark may indeed be ‘thoroughly apocalyptic’ and a major source for Matthew. ¹⁵ Mark may even have provided structure for Matthew’s approach to geography and place. ¹⁶ Luke may also have provided some material. ¹⁷ 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’. ¹⁸ Again, 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 exegesis must place an emphasis on listening to Matthew’s unique portrait of Jesus. ¹⁹

Matthew’s Gospel ultimately functions as a witness to Jesus – himself the apocalyptic prophet. ²⁰ One of the central features of Jesus’ teachings that proves him to be an apocalyptic prophet is his parables. Unfortunately, the apocalyptic character of parables is often neglected in modern scholarship. ²¹ An analysis of Jesus’ parables in Matthew considers their referent, not just their formal literary and rhetorical features. Consideration of the symbolic world projected by the parables is often lacking in form and redaction criticism that tends to be atomistic and isolationist. ²²

What Matthew’s Gospel does is project or create a symbolic world in front of the text. A ‘symbolic world’ according to Luke Timothy Johnson is:

a system of shared meaning that enables us to live together as a group. It includes more than specialized concepts; it involves in particular the fundamental perceptions that ground the community’s existence and that therefore do not need to be debated or justified. These symbols pervade every level of the group’s life. They effect the spatial and temporal arrangements and the rituals that mark them. ²³

The symbolic world in Matthew is one in which God is actively revealing and hiding things. This is evident in Jesus’ prayer: ‘I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to little children’ (Matt 11:25). Parables are one of the primary instruments used in this divine action (Matt 13:35). The ending scenes of Matthew are also strongly characterized by apocalyptic discourse.

The Gospel of Matthew opens with apocalyptic discourse scenes, is followed by apocalyptic parables, and closes with apocalyptic discourse scenes. These literary features are an important aspect of the argument. Matthew’s Gospel has similar qualities to apocalyptic literature like the book of Daniel. Daniel is a book that addresses the people of God who are suffering oppression by human powers. ²⁴ Likewise, the church that Matthew addresses, its implied readers, are battling powers and finding themselves in the midst of conflict. Their faith has made them soldiers for Christ and they need a field-guide for confronting the very Gates of Hades (Matt 16:18). Matthew’s apocalyptic discourse conceptually parallels John the Seer’s apocalyptic literature of Daniel or even Revelation 12 – the story of the woman giving birth to a son, the dragon who is the devil and Satan, war in heaven, the victory of God, and the fury of the dragon who makes war with the offspring of the woman. Matthew tells the same apocalyptic story of the war between heaven and the hell as found in Revelation 12, albeit in a different way.

Based on this comparison, the book of Daniel offers a template for considering apocalyptic thinking. Daniel’s use of apocalyptic language focuses on ‘the persecution of the righteous, the activity of heavenly beings, and God’s judgement’. ²⁵ These three qualities appear quite clearly in the opening scenes of Matthew. The birth narrative of Jesus requires angelic intervention to present Joseph from divorcing Mary (Matt 1:18-25). Herod’s slaughter of the babies in Bethlehem reflects persecution of the righteous (Matt 2:16-18). And God’s judgement and wrath is central to the conflict between John the Baptist and the unrepentant Pharisees and Sadducees seeking to be baptized (Matt 3:1-12). ²⁶ The crucial point is that the opening texts of Matthew’s Gospel point to the centrality and importance of Jewish apocalyptic thinking. ²⁷

Matthew reveals his purpose in the ‘way it presents certain information about Jesus’. ²⁸ Throughout the text of Matthew, the literary features of place, plot, character, timing, action, and resolution all engage human and cosmic conflict. Perhaps Matthew is drawing from and expanding upon Mark’s use of ‘inaugurated holy war’ against demonic entities. ²⁹ One of the aims of this study is to follow the geographical places where the kingdom of heaven battles the kingdom of hell. For example, at the climax of the Gospel, Matthew points to the decisive battle at the ‘Place of the Skull’ (Matt 27:33; also, Mark 15:22; John 19:17) in which the enemies of God are forever defeated. This victory achieved by Christ’s death and resurrection has ensured that his followers will also partake in victory. But Matthew also provides his gospel as a resource for Christians who continued to endure persecution at the time of his writing. ³⁰ The victory of the cross does not mean that spiritual progress comes without a cost. Simply stated, the people of God are a people at war and Jesus is their victorious king.

Matthew’s Gospel is a narrative of a God who rescues people from his righteous wrath. It is this satisfaction of divine wrath that makes victory possible for God’s people. For Jesus is the one who ‘will save his people from their sins’ (Matt 1:21). But this salvation from sins has important dimensions related to concepts traditionally tied to the image of Christus Victor – the defeat of death, sin, and the powers of Satan. The life and death of Jesus is about atonement and victory. Those who enter the kingdom of God become soldiers of Christ, fighting temptations, demons, and the devil. ³¹ This Gospel is also about cosmic conflict. Matthew uses apocalyptic discourse to show that the kingdom of heaven advances through war with the kingdom of hell. It is a tale of the king who has finally come to take his rightful place from the deceiver, destroyer, and diminutive king of the earth, who is Satan.

Apocalyptic Warfare

The warfare in Matthew is apocalyptic warfare – it is not immediately obvious what is really going on when babies are killed, the lame are healed, and an obscure Jewish carpenter’s son is put to death on a cross. To truly understand the significance of these events and how they relate to each other requires divinely given wisdom and insight. It is only in reading through Matthew’s gospel that the necessary connections are made so that the whole text can be rightly understood. Reading a mere excerpt of Matthew may lead to an atomistic reading that neglects the divine perspective as brought to bear by apocalyptic discourse(s). Again, Matthew is not an apocalypse, but a gospel with apocalyptic elements. ³² The conflicts throughout Matthew are designed to reveal the reality of the war between the kingdom of heaven and the kingdom of hell and the establishment of Jesus as the king of the world.

Matthew identifies two kingdoms. There is the ‘kingdom of heaven’ – a reference to place where God himself lives. John the Baptist preached repentance ‘for the kingdom of heaven is at hand’ (Matt 3:2). When Jesus began his ministry in Galilee, he went and proclaimed the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ (Matt 4:32; 9:35; 10:7). This is the same as the ‘kingdom of God’, the dominant phrase found in Mark and Luke. Those who follow Jesus and obey his commandments should ‘seek first the kingdom of God’ (Matt 6:33). The kingdom of heaven appears on earth and in Israel specifically, with the advent of Jesus’ public ministry.

There is also the kingdom of Satan. This kingdom is most clearly identified when Jesus asks the hypothetical question: ‘And if Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself. How then will his kingdom stand?’ (Matt 12:26). According to Jesus’ logic, the kingdom of Satan is not chaotic or divided. The kingdom of Satan is united and the demons who are under Satan’s authority do not cast each other out. Jesus opposes Satan and the demons who are under his control. When demons are cast out, this indicates the presence of the kingdom of God (Matt 12:28). The kingdom of Satan extends to all of the earth. Satan was able to take Jesus to ‘a very high mountain’ and show ‘him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory’ (Matt 4:8). The imagery of a ‘very high mountain’ suggests that there is no place, city, or empire in the world, which is left out of this offer, including Jerusalem.

According to this offer, Satan is the power behind all human kingdoms – which are really vassal states or sub-kingdoms of Satan. All of their power and glory is under the control of Satan, who is able to give it to whomever he wills, whenever he wills. Of course, Satan’s abilities are subject to God’s hidden providence and sovereignty. But when he offers this to Jesus, he is not rebuked for thinking he has this power or this ability. What Jesus rejects is the notion that anyone should receive worship but God. Thus, Matthew’s view seems to be that Satan’s kingdom on earth has real power to control human institutions and rulers, along with their splendor, yet without compromising the sovereignty of God.

Each respective king has a kingdom with subjects. The king of the kingdom of heaven is Jesus, the Son of Man and son of David and the subjects of this kingdom are the disciples. Jesus teaches his disciples to view him as a ‘teacher’, ‘master’, and themselves as ‘those of his household’ (Matt 10:24-25). The danger is within themselves and without. This may begin with evil thoughts in the heart (Matt 9:4) that may lead to questioning Jesus’ authority to forgive sins or his power (Matt 9:6, 28). It may involve self-righteousness and a refusal to acknowledge one’s ‘sickness’ (‘Those who are well have no need of a physician’ in Matt 9:12). As Jesus’ disciples, they will have ‘enemies’ from their own household (Matt 10:36). They are taught to view themselves in militaristic language. Jesus states, ‘Do not think I have come to bring peace on earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword’ (Matt 10:34). Jesus also warns that the future conflicts awaiting the disciples will parallel his own conflict with those who accuse him of being aligned with Satan: ‘If they have called the master of the house Beelzebul, how much more will they malign those of his household’ (Matt 10:25).

The kingdom of hell also has a king – Satan. He is never explicitly called ‘king’ but Jesus states that he possesses a ‘kingdom’ (Matt 12:2). Of course, the head of a kingdom is the king. And Satan’s power is described so that it is understood that he is the king of the earth (Matt 4:8). Satan is also called ‘the devil’ (Matt 13:39) and he is the ‘enemy’ of the Son of Man who is gathering in the ‘sons of the kingdom’ (Matt 13:38). It is noteworthy that the use of the ‘Son of Man’ title here is placed in relationship to the conflict between the kingdom of God and the kingdom of Satan. This suggests that that ‘Son of Man’ title carries some apocalyptic overtones. ³³ Satan is the king-like authority within the sphere of authority that he has been given. It is difficult not to conclude that Satan’s kingship can operate through human institutions and governments.

The subjects of Satan’s kingdom include humans and spiritual beings called ‘demons’ or ‘unclean spirits’ (Matt 12:43). These demons inhabited human beings with aliments such as blindness and muteness (Matt 12:22). These human hosts were considered ‘home’ by demons (Matt 12:44). Possessed people were brought to Jesus and to other spiritual leaders for healing. ³⁴ Satan attacks the work of the Son of Man and those near the kingdom of heaven by trying to undermine the truths that are ‘sown’ in the heart (Matt 13:19). Satan also attacks the Son of Man and his work by actively planting ‘weeds’ who are ‘the sons of the evil one’ (Matt 13:38).

Matthew has categories for people that defy simplicity. In the end, there will only be two simple categories for people: good and evil (Matt 13:49: ‘So it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come out and separate the evil from the righteous’). But this clear dichotomy between those in the kingdom of heaven and those in the kingdom of hell reflects God’s perfect justice and divine perspective at the end of the age. In the present, the perspective of Matthew allows for a third category of those who oppose Jesus but do so out of confusion, momentary failure, or other weakness. This is why Jesus teaches that ‘whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven’ (Matt 12:32). Some people truly are members of the kingdom of hell and are aligned with Satan against the Holy Spirit. But there is a third category for those who oppose Jesus but are not actually members of the kingdom of hell. Some of the tension in Matthew’s gospel revolves around the fact that a person who is a part of the kingdom of heaven may in fact begin to act according to the principles of the kingdom of hell.

Matthew also depicts Jesus teaching the crowds about John the Baptist and the kingdom of heaven (Matt 11:7-18). This follows John’s disciples coming to Jesus and asking the question: ‘are you the one who is to come, or shall we look for another?’ (Matt 11:3). Within this scene is a notoriously difficult text but one that describes the kingdom of heaven, John the Baptist, and violence.

Truly, I say to you, among those born of women there has arisen no one greater than John the Baptist. Yet the one who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he. From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven has suffered violence, and the violent take it by force. For all the Prophets and the Law prophesied until John, and if you are willing to accept it, he is Elijah who is to come (Matt 11:11-14).

Of particular interest is the reference to: ‘the kingdom of heaven has suffered violence, and the violent take it by force’ (Matt 11:12). This difficult text has three major interpretations: (1) the kingdom is being violently treated, (2) violent people are trying to bring it about by force as though it were a political kingdom, and (3) the kingdom is entered through forceful zeal. ³⁵ Some arguments about this text rely heavily on the theory that Jesus did not speak Greek, and attempt to interpret Matt 11:12 on theoretical reconstructions of the Aramaic or Hebrew. ³⁶ The interpretation offered here briefly defends the first interpretation: the kingdom is being violently treated.

The later part of Matt 11:12 consists of two different statements. The first statement is ‘the kingdom of heaven has suffered violence’. Part of the difficulty with this first passage is that the verb for ‘suffered violence’ (βιάζεται) could be either middle or passive. ³⁷ The ones who carry out this violence are the ‘violent ones’ (βιαστής). ³⁸ The repetition through noun and verb cognates emphasizes the idea of violence. The action verb of the violent ones (ἁρπάζω) is the word that always carries a pejorative sense in Matthew (12:29; 13:19). It is a word that refers to an evil person’s action of ‘stealing’ or ‘snatching away’.

The main idea in Matt 11:11-14 is that the kingdom of heaven has been attacked since its announcement by John and violent people are coercing or controlling others away from the kingdom. A parallel passage that describes the scribes and Pharisees controlling access to the kingdom of heaven: ‘But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you shut the kingdom of heaven in people’s faces. For you neither enter yourselves nor allow those who would enter to go in’ (Matt 23:13, emphasis mine). This passage indicates that the wider literary context supports the idea that the kingdom of heaven suffers from wicked people attacking it. Jesus goes on to describe ‘this generation’ (Matt 11:16) who will not accept the austerity of John or the generosity of Jesus. John is opposed as a man who ‘has a demon’ (Matt 11:18) and Jesus as a man who is a rebellious ‘fool’ according to Deut 21:20 (Matt 11:19). ³⁹ Ever since John the Baptist, the kingdom of heaven advances amidst violence with the kingdom of hell. According to this view of history, it is because the kingdom of heaven is beset by violence that God’s righteous wrath is being poured out. Thus, Matthew’s Gospel encourages the reader by offering a revelation of God’s divine plans and promises.

The presence of these two kingdoms, the kingdom of heaven and the kingdom of Satan means war. Each army draws from their respective powers. Matthew retains a certain amount of tension when explaining the powers of each respective kingdom. Jesus’ divine power as the incarnate son of God and son of Man is hidden. The Father is explicitly associated with ‘power’ (δύναμις). The Son of Man will be ‘seated at the right hand of Power’ (Matt 26:64). Jesus’ power as the Son of Man is veiled and hidden during his earthly ministry. It is only in his future return that ‘they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory’ (Matt 24:30). The powers of the kingdom of hell are distorting God’s word and ways, causing physical and mental illness, possessing people through demons. The powers associated with the kingdom of heaven are: (1) teaching God’s word and ways, (2) healing physical and mental illnesses, and (3) exorcising demons.

The Son of David is nothing less than a warrior-king like his father David. This Jesus is the son of David par-excellence (Matt 1:17), the one who is the son of but also greater than his father, the iconic warrior-poet-king of Israel. Jesus is both warrior and healer. ⁴⁰ From a different vantage point, one could state that the centurion views Jesus’ disciples as being under his authority like soldiers are under the authority of a centurion. The key difference is that Jesus’ army of disciples fight battles through wisdom, humility, and the Holy Spirit rather than swords. ⁴¹

Lastly, the warfare in Matthew is not natural warfare or warfare according to the world, it is spiritual warfare: ‘For all who take the sword will perish by the sword’ (Matt 26:52). Jesus’ status as a Davidic king does indeed mean that he is a warrior as well as a healer. But Jesus’ kingdom is not of this world nor are his methods of warfare. He humbly enters the ‘city of the great king’ on a donkey, not on a powerful war horse (Matt 21:2). Yet this should not be misunderstood as a warfare that has no real impact in the material world. On the contrary, the warfare waged between heaven and hell has consequences for all of creation.

The role of place is significant for Matthew’s projection of the war between the two kingdoms. The place of heaven is engaging the place of hell on the battlefield of the world. There is a sense in which the ‘crisis’ that precipitates Matthew’s apocalyptic discourse will continue perpetually until the Second Coming. The battles between Jesus’ kingdom and Satan’s kingdom in the world will result in his binding. ⁴² These battles are sometimes impossible to discern without divine help. They may even look as innocuous as weeds growing alongside of wheat. Other times, these battles are patently obvious and directly impact the entire Christian community. The presence of the kingdom of heaven means war on earth and Jesus did not ‘come to bring peace, but a sword’ (Matt 10:34). The earth is the battlefield between the kingdom of heaven and the kingdom of hell and nothing less than a renewed earth and a liberated people is in view.

Apocalyptic Cosmology

It has long been observed that geographical schemes communicate theological messages. ⁴³ This study builds on previous studies of how Matthew uses the category of place through a spatial hermeneutic. The study of place or spatiality is not just limited to the physical realm of the earth that can be engaged with the senses - through taste, touch, and smell. Rather, place is a category that encompasses the entire cosmos of creation. This study follows the ‘spatial turn’ in biblical studies but seeks to integrate it with Matthew’s apocalyptic discourse and typology. These three places of heaven, earth, and hell are central to Matthew’s symbolic universe because they provide the context for apocalyptic warfare. ⁴⁴

After all, there are long stretches in Matthew’s narrative where nothing seems to happen. The key to understanding the role of long discourses with no action is to consider the place or location where they happen. And Matthew sometimes provides precise details about the locale where the blocks of teaching take place. ⁴⁵ Some are on a mountain, some at a lakeside, and some on the Mount of Olives. Geography is theological. Students of Matthew’s gospel have long realized that Matthew was keenly interested in portraying Jesus as the new Moses by highlighting parallels between the Sermon on the Mount and Moses receiving the Ten Commandments on the mountain. The place where Jesus gives his teaching is an integral part of his identity and the content of his teaching. Thus, when Jesus begins teaching on a mountain, he is functioning as the new Moses giving new covenant commandments for a new community of God’s people.

Another way in which Matthew’s geography is theological is the way that Matthew constrains the travel route of Jesus. The Gospel of John identifies several visits to Jerusalem. ⁴⁶ But Matthew emphasizes two phases to Jesus’ ministry: (1) a period in Galilee followed by (2) the last week in Jerusalem. ⁴⁷ This may or may not reflect Matthew’s reliance on Mark’s Gospel. But it reflects Matthew’s willingness to craft a narrative that has both historical and theological aims. This means that Matthew’s interest in place or geography was intentionally shaped to convey or support certain theological messages.

When it comes to the nature of Jesus’ kingdom in the Gospel of Matthew, there is a long history of interpretation that has intentionally focused on the concept of reign to the exclusion of place. ⁴⁸ As a result, Patrick Schreiner comments, ‘little attention is given to the “where” or “space” of the kingdom’. ⁴⁹ In response to this over-emphasis on the ‘kingdom of God’ as a dynamic rule or reign of God, Howard Marshall states, ‘While it has been emphasized almost ad nauseam that the primary concept is that of the sovereignty of kingship or actual rule of God and not of a territory ruled by a king, it must also be emphasized that kingship cannot be exercised in the abstract’. ⁵⁰

The point is that the kingdom of God (or the kingdom of heaven) is the reign of God in a place. Unnecessary dichotomies continue to plague studies of Matthew. It is a false dichotomy to state that ‘When Jesus talks about the “kingdom of heaven”, he doesn’t mean a place called ‘heaven’, but the rule of “heaven”, that is, God’s reign, coming to birth on earth’. ⁵¹ The problem with this view is the little word ‘but’ creates a dichotomy between the place of heaven and the rule of heaven. The place of Jesus’ kingdom begins in the land of Israel, moves into the city of Zion, but then moves outward to ‘all nations’ through Jesus’ ascension into heaven (28:18). Eventually the whole earth will be a renewed sacred space characterized by the reign of Jesus’ kingdom.

It is true that ‘sacred space is wherever Jesus is present with his followers’. ⁵² But this must be balanced with the reality that sacred space must be taken and conquered. There is a sense in which the ‘lord of heaven and earth’ has already ensured a victory over the earth as a possession of heaven through the Son. But there is another sense in which the people of God must diligently pursue that which they already have victory over. The earth’s possession requires conflict because of the reality of Satan and the kingdom of hell. This is evident in Matthew’s concern with private spaces and public spaces. Jesus’ identity as Lord must be concealed until the appropriate time because of his submission to the divine plan of the Father and the necessity of waging war according to principles of the cross and not according to the principles of the world.

Recently, Jonathan Pennington’s landmark study of the ‘kingdom of heaven’ has firmly concluded that this language reflects Matthew’s appropriation of Daniel 2-7. ⁵³ The language is not simply a Jewish way to avoid offense by using God’s name in the typical phrase ‘kingdom of God’. Studies of place and cosmology in Matthew often refer to its ‘duality’ or focus on heaven and earth. ⁵⁴ For example, the Father is ‘lord of heaven and earth’ (Matt 11:25). And Jesus has been given ‘all authority in heaven and on earth’ (Matt 28:18). This expression of ‘heaven and earth’ reflects Matthew’s use of Genesis. ⁵⁵ It is in Christ and the concept of a new creation (παλιγγενεσίᾳ) that God’s work that began in creation will be consummated (Matt 19:28). ⁵⁶ But this bipartite scheme, as important as it is, does not do justice to the whole reality and place of hell in Matthew’s cosmology.

Matthew’s reference to Genesis does indeed serve as ‘the foundation for both his Weltbild (philosophy) and Weltanschauung (worldview)’. ⁵⁷ Matthew is a retelling of God’s creative power as found in Genesis, but it is also a story about the fall in the garden of Eden. Whereas Genesis is a narrative about the Snake who deceives Eve and ensnares Adam, the book of Matthew is about the Gates of Hades that threaten to take down the King, the kingdom of heaven, and its people. Matthew refers to ‘hell’ (Hades 2x and Gehenna 7x) more than any other Gospel. Some studies remain hesitant to make conclusive comments about the way this place integrates into Matthew’s Gospel. However, an understanding of the ‘hell’ as a proper place in Matthew’s cosmology provides significant explanatory power. ⁵⁸ It is arguably the best bridge between the concept of Matthew as containing apocalyptic discourse and the repeated references to hell. Moreover, Matthew is keen to reveal that the kingdom of hell is active on earth and is actively opposing the kingdom of heaven.

Each respective kingdom of Jesus and Satan has a place, even if it temporary. The greatest argument for the existence of hell as a proper place and not just a rhetorical category is that the earth is not Satan’s proper domain. When Jesus explains the kingdom of God he states, ‘Or how can someone enter a strong man’s house and plunder his good, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house’ (Matt 12:29). ⁵⁹ What is significant for this study is the fact that Jesus is the one making an incursion into the ‘house’ or place of Satan, which is the earth. This parallels Jesus’ explanation in the Parable of the Sower in which the Son of Man battles the devil (Matt 13:37, 39) and ‘the field is the world’ (Matt 13:38). The earth is not Satan’s proper domain because it is only temporary.

The spiritual powers from the realm of ‘hell’ are operative on earth. This is the same view as found in other NT writers. Paul identifies Satan as ‘the god of this world’ (2 Cor 4:4) and the words of Jesus in Gospel of John (12:31) identifies him as ‘the ruler of this world’. The Gospel of Luke’s narrative of Jesus’ temptation has Satan offering the authority and glory of this world’s kingdoms (4:6). Within the Gospel of Matthew, one of the clearest examples of Satan’s role on earth comes from Jesus’ explanation of the Parable of the Sower. Jesus refers to the seed which is sown as the ‘word of the kingdom’ (13:17) as being opposed by the ‘evil one’ who ‘comes and snatches away what has been sown in his heart’ (13:19). In this description, Satan is opposing the work of the place of heaven on earth through battles over the word of the kingdom of God.

To argue that hell is the proper domain of Satan is not the same as stating that it is an equal power to heaven. Rather, hell is the proper place for Satan, demons, and those who oppose God because it is away from the blessing of his personal presence. What this study aims to demonstrate is that the characteristics of those who are in hell are the same characteristics that some people display on earth. ⁶⁰ John the Baptist and Jesus both use highly pejorative language against their opponents. But those who reject the grace of God do not have a place on the earth because Jesus’ kingdom is taking it over. They must have a different place where they belong, and that place is hell.

The three-tiered model also fits well with the cosmological data from the OT. Edward Adams comments, ‘The Old Testament seems to presume a three-level structure of the world, with a central earth, heaven above and Sheol below (Ps 115:166-17; 139:8; cf. Sir 1:3)’. ⁶¹ This three-tiered model of heaven, earth, and hell fits well with Matthew’s first century context. When Luke is considered strictly as an example of a historically parallel document, it is significant to observe that this gospel also likely uses a three-tiered model, with the heavens above, earth, and Hades below (Luke 10:15; 16:23; LXX Ps 15:10 as cited in Acts 2:27). ⁶² This vertically oriented plane of the cosmos is matched with the horizontally oriented plane of places on earth.

The tripartite view of the universe locates places on earth such as Galilee, Jerusalem, and the temple as the battleground between the kingdom of heaven and the kingdom of hell. Marco Nobile argues, ‘The founding of the temple – seen as an ‘axis mundi’ that establishes the borders of the three main cosmic zones (heaven, earth and hell) and at the same time favours a mutual relation among all of them – means that the forces of evil are subjugated and controlled in the underground “abyss”’. ⁶³ King Jesus comes from the place of heaven to progressively inaugurate the reign of the kingdom on earth. ⁶⁴ This progressively expanding kingdom of God on earth only comes through war with the kingdom of Satan. Through the victory of the cross and God’s future judgment, Satan, his demons, and his people will all go to the place where they belong, in hell. Matthew’s apocalyptic texts help reveal this reality to those who do not have eyes to see the spiritual realities unfolding before them. Heaven has invaded Satan’s kingdom on earth with king Jesus at the tip of the spear.

Summary

This paper argued that the Gospel of Matthew uses apocalyptic discourse to reveal who Jesus is amidst the conflict between the kingdom of heaven and the kingdom of hell. Matthew should be read as Greco-Roman bios with elements of Jewish apocalyptic discourse; it is a gospel that pulls back the veil of human history to reveal the invisible spiritual warfare going on behind the persons, places, and powers of human history. The vignettes of violence in Matthew 2 along with the well-known apocalyptic discourses in Matthew 23-24 forms an inclusio and justification for a theological interpretation of the whole text. The place where these events take place is equally important as heaven, earth, and hell provide the context for apocalyptic warfare between the kingdoms of God and Satan. According to this reading, Jesus is the victorious king who stands at the center of this conflict, defeating the powers of sin, death, and Satan. Apocalyptic discourse is not just an opportunity to interpret history in a generic way but in a specific way that offers meaning and purpose amidst conflict. The kingdom of heaven and the reign of Jesus only advances through war with the kingdom of Satan.