MATTHEWS USE OF THEMESSIANIC BANQUET

__________________

A Paper

Presented to

Dr. Jonathan PenningtonThe Southern Baptist Theological Seminary

__________________

In Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirements for NT 22600__________________

by

Johnson Pang

johnson.pang@gmail.com

December 2, 2011

table of contentsPage

INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

BANQUETING IN THE OT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 BANQUETING IN INTERTESTAMENTAL LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 BANQUETING IN MATTHEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13Faith of the Centurion (8:5-13) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13The Miracle Feedings (14:13-21; 15:29-38) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17The Last Supper (26:26-29) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20 CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24 BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25

MATTHEWS USE OF THE

MESSIANIC BANQUET

The image of abundant food and overflowing wine may seem commonplace in western society. The promise of which would likely be easily dismissed, after all its just another restaurant buffet. It was not so in the Ancient Near East, especially to the mind of a Jew. The prospect of abundant provision became tied to the overthrow of oppression and the establishment of Gods reign. It meant the ushering in of a new age, the lasting joy of Gods people, death would be swallowed up and tears would be no more (Isa 24:21-25:9). The expectation of end-time feasting abounds throughout the intertestamental literature and surfaces several times in Matthews gospel. This eschatological banquet provides a poignant picture of Gods kingdom promised to the Jews (and ultimately, the nations). Characteristic of the banquet is an element of inclusion/exclusion; the joy of Gods people contrasted with the punishment of his enemies. Also, inherent in the image is the promise of abundant life and satisfaction. How does Matthew utilize this image to develop his gospel? Or, what do we gain by reading Matthew through the lens of the messianic banquet?

This study proposes that Matthew alludes to the banquet in several instances to deepen the readers understanding of the kingdom of heaven. By doing so Matthew surprises his listeners by affirming the Christ-centered nature of the kingdom, the international flavor of its participants, and also the abundant provision in what is to come.

In the Old Testament the theme of God as host can be detected from beginning to end (Gen 2:9; Rev 22:2). God is the one who provides and invites his creatures to eat of his food. This is expected since food is necessary for life and God is the one who gives and sustains life. Conversely, it is not surprising to find a sin-ravaged world characterized by hunger and famine. It then makes sense that one of the characteristics of the reign of God is not only the end of hunger but the abundance of provision. The Jews were promised a land flowing with milk and honey, but in their rebellion forfeited that blessing. Even in the midst of judgment and exile, God promised them a new covenant, one that would enable them to obey and enjoy his blessings forever. In the picture of what was to come, the abundance of food played a prominent role. Food was present in the beginning and will be in abundance at the end, the bounty of which signified life and joy before God. Just as God invited Adam and Eve to eat of his fruit and live forever, God is pictured as giving a feast for all peoples on his mountain in the eschaton. As we consider this messianic banquet, it is important to remember that we are not interested in learning about the banquet itself, but rather how Matthew utilizes this rich image in his writing. We need to make some preliminary considerations before proceeding.First, what is the overall theme of Matthew? Can we identify just one? Whereas it might be possible to whittle 1 John down to assurance or even his gospel to evangelism and edification (which is so broad already), we too are hard pressed to find a single word/phrase that may capture the whole of Matthews gospel. Cognizant of this, France convincingly suggests, fulfillment. But might it also be kingdom? Certainly the preaching of John, Jesus, and the apostles were centered on the kingdom (3:2; 4:17; 10:7). We dont want to fall prey to reductionism by confining ourselves to one theme. But certainly the kingdom of heaven which reigns so prominently in Matthew is worthy of consideration, and it is not mutually exclusive from the other themes of Matthew. Whether it is the overarching theme is disputed, but it seems that the messianic banquet is situated mostly within the theme of the kingdom. Thus my claim is that consideration of the banquet leads us to greater understanding of the kingdom. This will be fleshed out below.Second, it is important to note that the messianic banquet seems to arise within the broader themes of table-fellowship in relation to God as host. Several works have addressed the issue of table-fellowship in the gospels, which is more prominent in Luke. McMahan wrote on the use of table fellowship in Luke, and insightfully begins by stating of all the means by which Jesus could have chosen to be remembered, he chose to be remembered by a meal. Craig Blombergs work Contagious Holiness is most helpful in tracing out Jesus table fellowship in the gospels, with comments on the messianic banquet. He also points out how the background to meal-sharing is more likely to be Ancient Near Eastern hospitality practices, rather than the Greco-Roman symposium. It is understood that table-fellowship was a ceremony richly symbolic of friendship, intimacy and unity. Indeed the significance of table-fellowship is shown in passages where Jesus eats with sinners (Matt 9:9-13), breaks bread with his disciples (Matt 26:26-29; Luke 24:30), and also for the meals of the early church (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:11). But references to the messianic banquet are not to be confined only to table-fellowship studies. The messianic banquet is no less than a shared meal, but is more because God is the one sharing the meal. We consider not just the question of table-fellowship at large, but specifically of the picture of God as provider or host. The God-hosted eschatological banquet is not a new idea, but one that develops from Genesis to Revelation, it can be said that eschatology recapitulates protology. In accord with Frances suggestion of fulfillment we will see that the eschatological banquet is an important aspect of OT expectation. In this study we will first survey the OT to see the developing theme of God as host, and the textual roots of the promised messianic banquet. The development of the eschatological banquet in the intertestamental period will also be noted, then specific instances in Matthew analyzed. It will be shown that Matthew utilizes the messianic banquet to foreground the Christ-centeredness of the kingdom, the international flavor of its participants, and also the abundant provision of what is to come.Banqueting In the Old TestamentWe will seek to explore how the greater theme of table-fellowship is presented in the OT, with a focus on the concept of God as host. Robert Stallman insightfully points out that Scripture often presents Gods actions as those of a host providing food for guests. The importance of food and satisfaction reach back to the beginning, when God placed Adam and Eve in the garden of paradise- to work its ground and eat freely of its fruit (Gen 1:29). God was like a host, inviting Adam to eat the food set before him, likely including the tree of life (2:9). Paradise was characterized by abundance, whether in the trees which bore fruit, the four great rivers, or the precious stones in the land (2:10-14). But there was a stipulation; man was not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. The consequence was certain death (2:17). Thus we see and note that divine provision should be greeted with human obedience. It seemed that Adam was to eat and live, and live forever but in an ironic twist Adam eats and dies, forfeiting paradise for all. But God had given a hint of hope (3:15, 21) that his provision would not end. Even though the sinfulness of man grieved the Lord (6:6), his compassion was displayed in saving Noah through the flood (8:15-19). He then promised that as long as the earth remains, seedtime and harvest shall not cease (8:22). Indeed Scripture portrays all creatures as looking to God for their provision (Ps. 104:27-28; 145:15-16). The host concept broadly conceived includes God providing for and sustaining all of his creation. But there is a more narrow level where God provides selectively and abundantly.

God as host is demonstrated in the OT through the abundance of provision to select peoples. In fact, abundant provision is seen to be closely linked with Gods favor. Job was a God-fearing man who possessed 7000 sheep, 3000 camels, 500 yoke of oxen, and 500 female donkeys, and very many servants (Job 1:3). This was not due to sheer human determination, but the blessing of God (1:10), and what God had given he could take away (1:21). God covenanted with Abraham and promised to provide him with land, seed, and blessing (12:1-3). It was clear that Abraham was rich in livestock, in silver, and in gold (Gen 13:2; cf. 24:1). Gods abundant provision continued through the patriarchs (26:4-5; 30:43) and through Josephs appointment as Pharaohs ruler over all the land of Egypt (41:41). Later as the Israelites labored in despair under a new Pharaoh God heard their cries (Ex 2:24-25) and delivered them. Notable references to food include the provision through the Passover lamb (12:1-28), manna from heaven (16:4-5), water from the rock (17:6), and eating and drinking while beholding God (24:11). God had chosen Israel, and distinctly promised to bless them with abundance, pointing them to a land flowing with milk and honey (3:8, 17; 13:5; 33:3). If they were faithful to God, they would receive abundance in provision. The trees of the field shall yield their fruit (Lev 26:4), they would eat bread to the full, and eat old store long kept (26:10). They would abound in prosperity, the Lord would open up the treasury of heaven, to give the rain to your land in its season and to bless all the work of your hands (Deut 28:11-12). Even the restrictions placed on the content of their meals reminded them of Gods holy presence in how they are to be set apart (Lev 11; 19:2). The sacrifices God required were all from God, and belonged to God (Ps 50:10). It became clear in the mind of the Israelite that an abundance of food indicated Gods presence and blessing, while famine indicated cursing and covenant disobedience. David and Solomons obedience led Israel to experience the greatest abundance in foodstuffs ever to mark Israels history, they ate and drank and were happy (1 Kgs 4:20). David drew upon the metaphor of Gods provision to praise the Lord even in the midst of trouble, you prepare a table before me in the presence of my enemies (Ps 23:5). Solomons table was never lacking, consisting daily of thirty cors of fine flour and sixty cors of meal, ten fat oxen, and twenty pasture fed cattle, a hundred sheep, besides deer, gazelles, roebucks, and fattened fowl (1 Kgs 4:22). God had made good on his promise and provided abundantly for all his people. But tragically, Solomons love for God turned to love for women (3:3; 11:1). He plunged Israel into a sea of idolatry and they never recovered. Solomons kingdom, glory, and fall serve typologically to point forward to the eschatological Son of David who would perfectly obey God, ushering in a period of eternal abundance. Indeed this was what the people of Israel longed for while they suffered for their disobedience. God as host does not always mean abundant provision, naturally this leads us to look at the other side of the coin.

Gods provision carries an aspect of judgment because it must be met with human obedience. If abundant provision was a sign of Gods favor, then famine, hunger, and lack were signs of Gods judgment. This is most poignantly seen when the ground was cursed and man was separated from God because of Adams sin (Gen 3:24). Also, when God brought the Israelites to the land of milk and honey, he warned them not to forget him when they eat and are full (Deut 6:11). The relationship God forged with Israel was mediated through a covenant which promised blessings dependent on obedience (Deut 28:15-68; Lev 26:14-45). Some of the curses for disobedience included sowing seed in vain (Lev 26:16), heavens like iron and earth like bronze (26:19), and the strength of men would be spent in vain, for your land shall not yield its increase, and the trees of the land shall not yield their fruit (26:20). Livestock would be destroyed (26:22), the bread supply broken (26:26), and in a gruesome twist Israel would eat its own children (26:29). Indeed, all these curses came to pass upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1, 7; 2 Kgs 6:28-29; 17:7-23). On a deeper level, even with apparent blessing Israel ate but was not satisfied (Prov 10:3; Micah 6:14).

A helpful example of this obedience/blessing disobedience/cursing paradigm is in the locust invasion of Joel. The Lord vividly illustrated their spiritual depravity through physical deprivation, when a locust swarm devoured every green thing and left the land scorched (Joel 1:4-12; 16ff). The aftermath had disastrous implications for an agrarian society, Is not the food cut off before our eyes, joy and gladness from the house of our God? (Joel 1:16). If they did not repent, an even worse judgment was coming (2:1-11). In a temporary turn of events, Judah repents (2:12-14; 18-19) and God showers his people with grain, wine, and oil, and satisfies them (2:19). In fact, as illustrated via Joel 2:14, the abundant blessing God provides is to be fuel for Israels worship, thus resulting in Gods praise and glorification. The provision of God was designed to lead to the worship of God. But Israel would fail to render God praise, and suffered greatly. This pattern of feasting versus famine was clearly tied to their obedience to the covenant.

As one surveys the OT it seems that the idea of God as host seems to result only in death and judgment. Man makes an unworthy guest. This only highlights the compassion and grace of God all the more, for he continually called his people to eat, drink, and live (Isa 55:1-2). Additionally, Lady Wisdom is pictured inviting the simple to eat of her banquet, and live (Prov 9:6). God sent prophets like Joel to call his people back to his banqueting table. The continued failure of Israel left its people longing for the day of restoration, which God had promised in the form of a new covenant (Jer 31:31-40; Ezek 36:22-32). One component of this restoration was a picture of abundant provision, in light of the new covenant God promised, I will summon the grain and make it abundant and lay no famine upon you (Ezek 36:29). Thus the picture of abundance in foodstuffs was fixed in the mind of the Israelite with the eschatological promises (Isa 65:13, 21; 66:11; Jer 33:6, 12-13; Ezek 36:30, 35ff; Joel 2:26; 3:18; Amos 9:13-14; Mic 4:4; Zech 8:12; 9:17; 10:1). This will add a deeper significance to our later discussion of the Lords Supper. The very food Christians are to eat in celebration point both to abundance of provision in the Savior, and also of what is promised to come. The OT expectation of eschatological abundance is fulfilled in the provision of Jesus. Naturally, then, when it comes to the NT those who do not accept Jesus will not participate in the abundant provision of God.

We now turn our attention to the specific messianic banquet which seemed to embody this restoration of abundance. God as host surfaces most prominently in Isaiah 25:6-8, the primary reference in the OT to the eschatological banquet:

On this mountain the LORD of hosts will make for all peoples

a feast of rich food, a feast of well-aged wine,

of rich food full of marrow, of aged wine well refined.

And he will swallow up on this mountain

the covering that is cast over all peoples,

the veil that is spread over all nations.

He will swallow up death forever;

and the LORD God will wipe away tears from all faces,

and the reproach of his people he will take away from all the earth,

for the LORD has spoken. (ESV)This banquet will take place on that day (24:21; 25:9), the eschatological day of the LORD. The context of the banquet is the judgment of Gods enemies and the exaltation of his people. In the previous chapter Isaiah described judgment upon the whole earth (Isa 24:1). He speaks of the earth being defiled by its inhabitants (24:5). They have transgressed the laws, violated the statutes, broken the everlasting covenant. This parallels Pauls use of the law being transgressed by the gentiles in Romans 1:18ff, and the earth groaning under sin in Romans 8. But on that day the LORD will bring all to judgment (24:21-22) and reign over the earth on Mount Zion (24:23). Therefore God will judge the earth, establish his kingdom and the feast ensues. Notably, the mention of Gods glory being before the elders (24:23) hearkens back to the establishment of the Mosaic Covenant in Exodus 24:9-11 where the elders of Israel beheld God, eating and drinking. The allusion is strengthened all the more with the banquet in view (Isa 25:6). Motyer notes that Isaiah sees this Zion-to-be as the fulfillment of all that the covenant implied. These allusions may also come into play at the last supper (Matt 26:26-29).

We note two observations pertinent to our discussion. First, the banquet is characterized by a feast of food, indeed the choicest of foods, indicating abundance for Gods people. Second, accompanying this blessedness is the aspect of judgment for others. Death is swallowed up forever in the kingdom of God (25:7-8), Israels reproach is taken away, and the enemies of God are punished. Is it solely Israel that experiences the blessings? The primary referents in mind are Israelites (25:9 Behold, this is our God; we have waited for him, that he might save us.). But there is a clear universal nature to the banquet, indicated by the references to all peoples (25:6a, 7b) all nations (25:7c), and all faces (25:8b). The notion of blessing for the Gentiles is not absent from the OT, especially Isaiah (2:1-4; 9:1; 11:10-12; 18:7; 19:18-25; 42:6; 49:6). The messianic banquet characterizes the abundant blessings to come for the people of God, over and against the judgment of the wicked. Steffen insightfully points out that though the banquet is metaphorical, it does represent actual physical blessings in the final days for all people. We now turn to see how this concept develops in Judaism into the first century (A.D.).Banqueting in the Intertestamental Literature

The apocrypha and pseudepigrapha contain numerous references to the messianic banquet, especially in the apocalypses, which led D. S. Russell to conclude the idea of an eschatological banquet is, of course, a familiar one in the apocalyptic tradition. G. F. Moore notes that the banquet was evidently part of the popular expectation, and states that the imagery of the banquet has been taken up and embellished with new traits, discovered by ingenious midrash in other parts of the Scriptures. A listing of the many passages is indexed by R. H. Charles, and various overviews have been written since then. Well consider the most commonly discussed texts (1 En 62:12-16 and 2 Bar 29:1-8), and then consider the Qumran community.

The context of the passage found in 1 Enoch is of end-time judgment, when all shall stand before the Son of Man on his throne (1 Enoch 62:8-9). The righteous and His elect end up rejoicing upon the judgment of the wicked (labeled as the exalted ones, the kings, and those who rule over the earth) and they eat with the Son of Man forever and ever (1 Enoch 62:14). We see how the themes of rejoicing and judgment are present, with abundance implied (forever and ever).

In the Syriac Baruch we witness some of the embellishing Moore mentioned. The setting is the consummation of the times (2 Bar 27:15), and at the revelation of the Messiah the great creatures Behemoth and Leviathan are brought out to be feasted upon (2 Bar 29:4). Then a description is given highlighting the expectation for foodstuffs of monumental proportions. For example, the earth also shall yield its fruit ten thousandfold and on each vine there shall be a thousand branches, and each branch shall produce a thousand clusters, and each cluster produce a thousand grapes, and each grape produce a cor of wine (2 Bar 29:5-6). There is also a reversal of fortunes, those who hungered will rejoice (29:7). 2 Baruch is a theodicy for Gods people, promising that the world to come is reserved for the righteous. The banquet was a sign of the end of oppression.

In light of these accounts, it can be seen that the messianic meal plays a continuing role in the expectation of the people. Priest surveyed a variety of texts and concludes that two overall themes are present the meal is an occasion of joy for the redeemed, while judgment and destruction of Gods enemies is stressed. To this we add the notion of abundance, and also that one of the noticeable developments was the exclusivity of the Jews. There were writings which demonstrated Gentile inclusion, but the Israel-exclusive nature is seen both in the more popular writings and especially in the sectarian community of the Essenes.

Space does not permit us to fully explore the literature of the Qumran community, but it is far more exclusive and nationalistic. A relevant passage is found in The Rule of the Congregation (1QSa) which outlines the rules for celebrating a meal which anticipated the end-time banquet. In fact, there is good evidence to suggest that the meals of the Essenes in general are set forth as a liturgical anticipation of the Messianic banquet. The meals involved ritual purity, bread and wine, and benedictions. In the eschatological utopian outlook of the community, participation in communal meals was a central ritual, in which these meals were a foretaste of the world to come. Their meals uniquely correlate in many ways with the early churchs celebration of the Eucharist. James Vanderkam describes the relationship in this way, both had a lively expectation that the end of days would come soon and ordered their communal beliefs and practices according to this article of faith. The Qumran community saw themselves as the true people of God, and anticipated themselves as the New Covenant community of the last days. The link between Qumran and Christianity is tenuous, perhaps the most popular hypothesis being John the Baptist. Nonetheless, the activities of this community showcase the important role the eschatological banquet played in their daily life. Lawrence Schiffman writes that there can be no question that this idea was widespread when the Qumran texts were composed.

The literature surveyed allows us to understand with greater depth the importance of the messianic banquet in the expectation of the Jews. In many ways the extravagance of the banquet must have embodied the kingdom expectation. We also see the themes of rejoicing and judgment, with a focus on the overthrow of the nations and the exaltation of the Jewish nation. Since the time of the OT, Jewish nationalism developed and influenced the expectations on the feast to come. The sectarian practice of separation and ritual purity was not limited to the Essenes. Jacob Neusner notes that that the Pharisees during the time of Jesus held that Jews should eat their everyday meals in a state of purity, as if one were a Temple priest. Thus the table of every Jew in his home was seen to be like the table of the Lord in the Jerusalem Temple. Considering the practice of the Essenes, it is quite possible that Jesus table-fellowship with sinners anticipates the banquet. We imagine Jesus actions were a surprise to the Pharisees, but linked with the messianic banquet, this was almost a complete reversal of their expectations. To summarize, the intertestamental literature demonstrates: (1) the banquet with its abundance was part of popular expectation, (2) it was accompanied with the joy of the righteous over against the judgment of the wicked, and (3) the nationalistic tendencies led to the righteous being identified as Jews.Banqueting in MatthewCommentators have made many passing remarks on references to the messianic banquet in Matthew, but any developed discussion is rare. The more recognized passages containing allusions are: the faith of the centurion (8:5-13), the miraculous feedings (14:13-21; 15:29-38), the parable of the wedding feast (22:1-14), parable of the virgins (25:1-12), and the last supper (26:26-29). Less recognized, these passages have also been identified: The satisfaction of the beatitudes (5:6), Jesus table fellowship with sinners (9:9-13), Jesus referring to himself as the bridegroom (9:15), the Canaanite woman (15:21-28), and the parable of the talents (25:21, 23). The first set of passages likely refer to the banquet, while the connection is more tenuous if at all present for the latter. More careful study needs to be done. This study will examine the faith of the centurion (8:5-13), the miraculous feedings (14:13-21; 15:29-38), and the last supper (26:26-29). A connection to the messianic banquet will be determined, then its significance explored.Faith of the Centurion (8:5-13)One of the clearest references to the messianic banquet is when Jesus expresses amazement at the faith of the centurion and then makes the following statement:

Truly, I tell you, with no one in Israel have I found such faith. I tell you, many will come from east and west and recline at table with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven, while the sons of the kingdom will be thrown into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth (Matt 8:11-12, ESV).

Many scholars have noted the allusion to the eschatological banquet without much explanation, assuming its evident connection. Many elements signal this connection, among those are its future orientation and heavenly location. The future indicative (), and references to kingdom of heaven, the patriarchs, and eschatological judgment (cf. 13:42, 50; 22:13; 24:51; 25:30) all point to the future orientation of this banquet. Moreover, the kingdom of heaven is where the banquet will take place, and it is evident that it is not yet present but coming (cf. 26:29). As Pennington argues, the genitive is most likely attributive and/or source indicating the heavenly kingdom or the kingdom from heaven. The two options are not mutually exclusive. Likely it points us to the eschatological kingdom which is to come from heaven, and it is indeed a heavenly kingdom unlike any earthly kingdom. Thus the feast described is the eschatological feast. But who will participate in this messianic banquet?There is a distinction between two groups of people, the many who will come from east and west, and the sons of the kingdom. First, we need to establish to whom sons of the kingdom refers, then explore the phrase many will come from east and west. Matthew utilizes son of language in reference to someone who closely identifies with the kingdom (cf. 5:9; 5:45; 12:27; 13:38; 17:25-26; 23:15; 23:31; 27:9). It is those who think they belong to the kingdom, in this context specifically by ethnicity. It is similar to Johns charge against the Pharisees and Sadducees who thought themselves to be children of Abraham by virtue of their lineage (3:7-10). These sons of the kingdom evidently do not repent (3:2, 4:17), and do not bear good fruit (contra 13:23, 38). In contrast to the Gentile centurion, they do not have faith. Consequently they are consigned to judgment (3:10; 7:19). Thus Jesus pits Israelites who rely on their ethnicity against the faith of many who will come.

The identity of the many who will come from east and west is widely understood to be in reference to Gentiles. But the apparent allusion to Psalm 107:3 and Isaiah 43:5 implicates Jewish referents. It is best to see Matthew as alluding back to the banquet in Isaiah 25:6-9 where it already pictures the presence of all peoples, and also factor in the OT texts which anticipate Gentile worship (Isa 2:2-3; 45:6; 59:19; 60:3-4; 62:7; Mic 4:1-2; Zech 8:20-23; Amos 9:12). Thus Matthew pictures Jesus utilizing allusions to Psalm 107:3 and Isaiah 43:5 to affirm the inclusion of Gentiles eschatologically. The many, then, is in reference to Gentiles who come by faith. This is especially clear juxtaposed with the faith of the Centurion. This would be shocking to the prevailing Judaism of the day, which was highly exclusive and expected a Jewish guest-list. As seen especially in the sectarian community of Qumran, even those among them could participate in the meals if not ritually pure. The more popular Pharisees did not wish to even eat with Jewish sinners (Matt 9:10-13). This universality of salvation, where unclean Gentiles would be co-equal with even the Patriarchs in the kingdom of heaven was a paradigm-shifting truth. Does this indicate Gentile inclusion at the exclusion of Jews? Certainly not. Davies and Allison notes that not all the sons of the kingdom are cast out. Note also the presence of the Jewish patriarchs, and the disciples themselves who are Jews. Also the early church was initially comprised of Jews (Acts 2:41). Thus it does not spell certain doom for Israel, but for those who would seek entrance based on their tie to the kingdom rather than faith in Jesus.

So what is Matthews point in referencing the messianic banquet? It is clear that he draws upon the well-known expectation of the messianic banquet primarily to denote that those who will participate in the kingdom of heaven are not necessarily Jews, but those who come to Jesus by faith. The context of the passage also affirms this. This passage is set within the inclusio of 4:23 9:35. This section includes the Sermon on the Mount (chs. 5-7) followed by ten miracles (chs. 8-9) which depict the authority of Jesus. Matthew is also developing the theme of discipleship throughout (8:18-22; 9:9-17; cf. esp. 8:10 Jesus said to those who follow him). It is important for the disciples to learn what Jesus is showing them. The first three healings are usually taken as a unit (8:1-17), and they highlight the fringes of Jewish society. A leper (8:1-4), a Gentile (8:5-13), and a woman (8:14-17) are healed. Turner identifies 8:5-13 as the featured story because of its length, stress on authority, and Gentile faith. Indeed the story of the centurion is most pointed because of the allusion to the messianic banquet. Shockingly, the participants of the kingdom of heaven are not by default sons of the kingdom or children of Abraham! Rather, it is the sons of the kingdom who are judged while Gentiles like the centurion will sit at table and enjoy the feast of God. Inherent in the allusion is the abundant provision of God, but the focus seems to be on the question of who will participate. It is interesting to see that thus far in Matthew Jesus hasnt faced much Jewish opposition, though there have been hints (2:4; 3:7-10). This statement by Jesus awakens the suspicion that later the Gentiles will come to the God of Israel, while Israel will remain on the outside. It contributes to the unfolding conflict which Luz identifies as pushing towards 9:25 and 12:22ff. Smit indicates this passage contributes to the theme of Jesus universal significance. Matthew uses the messianic banquet to highlight the paradigm shift taking place, the true sons of the kingdom will prove themselves not by ethnicity but by relationship to Jesus.

The Miracle Feedings (14:13-21; 15:29-38)

Many have also recognized the two miraculous feedings of Jesus to foreshadow the messianic banquet. It is one of the few miracles to have a four-fold gospel witness (Mark 6:30-43; John 6:1-14; Luke 9:10-17). The overarching point is likely Christological, giving further revelation to the identity of Jesus as a theophany (cf. Mark 6:30ff where this is especially highlighted). This is not to say that simple theophany explains these miracles. They do not simply reveal Jesus as God, but the theophany reveals something about Jesus as God. He is moved by compassion in both feeding accounts (14:14; 15:32), but there are also deeper meanings to be plumbed within the narrative. These are not unattached to Jesus compassion, but rather highlight Jesus compassion differently. Several possible allusions arise. From reaching back into Jewish history, recalling Moses and Elisha, it can also telescope forward into the international eschatological banquet through the last supper (26:26-29). It can also evoke the image of a shepherd (Ps 23 or Ezek 34:23). Whether this miracle serves to primarily highlight his authority yet again, or points to Jesus as the eschatological prophet, the Davidic shepherd, or the heavenly king (in contrast to Herod) it seems that the point is clear: he is compassionate. What about the possible allusion to the messianic banquet? France understands the messianic banquet to be in sight through the connection to the last supper. Blomberg thinks the presence of fish makes the allusion to the last supper less likely, but that it may bring to mind 2 Baruch 29:3-8 where Leviathan is offered up for the eschatological feast (cf. also 4 Ezra 6:52). Davies and Allison notes the similarities between 14:13-21 and 26:20-9 and concludes there is a close relationship between the two passages. The connection is tenuous, but seems to intimate a foreshadowing of the last supper (cf. John 6:56). It is there that Jesus points to his own body as the bread which will be broken, and his own blood which will be spilled for the forgiveness of sins. The feedings may very well point to Jesus as the all-sufficient provider who ultimately gives of himself as the bread of life for the ransom of many. Perhaps through the last supper the eschatological banquet is also in view. We cannot be dogmatic. As the implications of the allusion will be discussed, we must keep in mind that it does not seem to be a central aspect to the narrative, though it may serve to deepen and nuance the interpretation.

What might the allusion to the messianic banquet contribute to our understanding of the kingdom? First, it highlights the compassionate host of the banquet through his indiscriminate provision. The offer of food to all present, whether Jew or Gentile (14:13-21; 15:32-38) reveals the participants of the banquet to come, and thus elevates the gracious character of the host. Once again, the expectation the Jews may have had of an exclusive Jewish feast is shattered. Blomberg points out that with such a large crowd, one must describe this gathering as ritually impure. This would be similar to Jesus table fellowship with sinners and tax collectors (9:10-13). Poon notes in reference to the table-fellowship of Jesus, the abundant provision at these shared meals is symbolic of the joy of Gods uncalculating forgiveness, and a pointer to the eschatological messianic banquet (emphasis his). Whereas the story of the centurion highlighted that participation in the banquet is by faith, the miraculous feeding highlights the compassion of Jesus. Second, there is also the emphasis on the abundant provision of Gods kingdom. The miraculous multiplication of food satisfied all who were present, which could have been upward of fifteen thousand. This basic meal foreshadows the rich, unending provision of God in the age to come. Indeed it is good news that the kingdom of heaven has drawn near. The banquet host is a compassionate king.

Both the compassionate host and the abundant reward fits the Matthean context. The trumpeted King (3:1-12) comes and calls simple fishermen to be his disciples (4:18-22), and even a tax collector (9:9). Jesus sees the crowds and has compassion for them (9:35) What enrages the Pharisees the most is the indiscriminate compassion of Jesus (9:10-13). Though we will not be examining the table-fellowship of 9:9-13, if an allusion to the end-time banquet is present, it deepens the indictment against the Pharisees. For Jesus is not merely extending mercy to sinners, he is anticipating who will participate in the eschatological banquet, where sinners and prostitutes go in before the unmerciful Pharisees (21:31). Matthew also highlights the heavenly reward for those who follow the king. The kingdom of heaven belongs to the poor in spirit and the persecuted (5:3, 10). Those who practice righteousness before God will be rewarded by him (6:1, 4, 6, 18). Jesus calls everyone to lay up treasure in heaven (6:19), and the faithful servants will enter into the masters joy (25:21, 23). The messianic banquet adds to the compelling picture of heavenly rewards. The Last Supper (26:26-29)The last supper is probably the most important reference to the eschatological banquet. The pattern of joyful participation, abundance, and judgment are all present, but with a unique Christological twist. This meal is so loaded with significance that we will attempt to focus only on the aspects relevant to the foreshadowing of the banquet.

Jesus makes the connection to the messianic banquet explicit, I will not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Fathers kingdom (26:29). The import of Jesus forward-looking statement can only be understood by reaching back into the past. Several allusions will be considered, and then their significance summarized. First, the last supper points back to the exodus. The last supper depicts Jesus and his disciples reclining at table, celebrating the Passover (26:17-19). The Passover meal was instituted in the deliverance of the Jews from Egypt, to remember that the Lord struck down all the firstborn of Egypt while the Jews were saved by means of a blood sacrifice (Ex 12:1-14). The Lord did this to make a distinction between Egypt and Israel (Ex 11:7), and the stress of the event was on the remembrance of the sacrifice (Ex 12:26-27).

Second, the last supper points back to the inauguration of the Mosaic Covenant. Jesus words this is my blood of the covenant echoes Exodus 24:8. After Israel was led out into the wilderness, God covenanted with his people through Moses and they agreed to do all that the LORD has spoken (Ex 19:8, 24:3, 7). To inaugurate this covenant, animals were slain and sacrificed. Moses took the blood of the animals and threw it on the people and said, Behold the blood of the covenant that the LORD has made with you (24:8). The disciples eating and drinking with Jesus at the Passover also echoes the inauguration of the Mosaic Covenant, where a select group of Israels leaders saw the God of Israel they beheld God, and ate and drank (Ex 24:9, 11).

Third, the last supper points back to the promise of the new covenant. The mention of covenant in tandem with forgiveness of sins brings to mind Jeremiah 31. The allusion is strengthened all the more when considering the promise of drinking wine with the Messiah in the Fathers kingdom. It must be noted that the Lord promised the new covenant over and against the Mosaic covenant, which Israel was unable to keep (Jer 31:32).

Fourth, the last supper points back to the promise of the messianic banquet. This happens through the future anticipation of Jesus in his concluding statement (Matt 26:29). Drinking new the fruit of the vine in the Fathers kingdom cranks the catapult arm back, launching us into texts such as Isaiah 25:6 where God hosts a banquet for his people.

We now attempt to string together some of these allusions to paint the picture. Drawing from the rich color of OT tradition, Jesus is presenting himself as the antitypical Passover lamb, who transcends the inauguration of the Mosaic Covenant by inaugurating the New Covenant. The bread and wine symbolized his body and blood, the breaking and pouring of which symbolized his crucifixion and death. Whereas in the past judgment fell upon the lamb and upon Israels enemies for both the vindication of Gods name and the setting apart of his people now Jesus undergoes divine judgment upon himself. Just as the exodus proved to be an identity-forming event for Israel, this new exodus will be the identity-forming event for a new people of God. Allusions to Isaiah 53 are also present, indicating both typological and literal fulfillment of the Old Testament. In short, Jesus is pointing to himself as the fulfillment of all OT expectation.

How does the foreshadowing of the messianic banquet deepen our understanding of the kingdom? We detect four ways. First, in the context of the new exodus, it points the disciples to where Jesus is ultimately leading them. God as host comes full circle, Jesus is leading his people into the promise land of Gods provision, where they will eat and live forever. Second, it is a reminder that the kingdom of heaven is still an eschatological reality. Though Jesus inaugurates the New Covenant with the shedding of his blood and brings forgiveness of sins, the consummation of the kingdom (characterized by the feast to come) is not yet. The expected coming of the Messiah, the Son of David is now broken into two comings, and there will be aspects that are already, and other aspects not yet. The best is yet to come, here is but a foretaste. Third, the reference to the eschatological feast demonstrates that it is the judgment upon Christ which allows his people to banquet in joy. As we observed in the OT and intertestamental literature, the banquet is accompanied by joy and judgment. In a Christological twist the present meal showcases the judgment which will come is to be on Christ for the joy of his people. Only then can people participate in the eschatological banquet to come.

The crucial and fifth contribution is that the kingdom of heaven is centered on Jesus. If their eating and drinking now foreshadows the banquet later, Jesus is implicitly saying they participate in the banquet by participating in him. Matthew doesnt give the institutionalizing verses as does Luke so explicitly, so this may not be as much a Matthean emphasis as a Eucharistic emphasis. But it can be understood by the disciples that participation in the heavenly banquet is granted to them because they are now here, in front of the Messiah, participating in him (symbolically through the bread and drink, as Jesus instructed). Jesus is not merely the gateway to abundance, but he himself is the abundance they must feed on. This is key to understanding the Christological import in regards to the messianic banquet. To summarize Matthews use of the banquet in this passage, the forward-looking reference implies: (1) the destination of the new exodus, (2) the feast of the kingdom is not yet consummated, (3) the judgment of Christ is what allows for the joy of his people, and (4) the kingdom of the Father is centered on Jesus himself. Reaching outside the Matthean context, the Messiah is not only to be their host, but their joy. Johns gospel helps, whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life (6:54), this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent (17:3). Jesus body broken, his blood poured out, is symbolized through the bread and wine to make clear that they must receive him for the forgiveness of sins, and to participate in the banquet of the Fathers kingdom.Conclusion

A rich understanding develops from surveying the messianic banquet allusions in Matthew. Detecting these allusions dont radically alter the interpretation of the passages, but grants further clarity to Matthews overall message. Recalling the original question, what do we gain by looking at Matthew with messianic banquet lens? The kingdom of heaven looks more clearly to be a colorful mixture of Gentile and Jewish participation, joyful, abundant participation at that. And both of these elements lead to the last. Our concluding thoughts must see that what shines most brilliantly is the Christ-centered nature of the kingdom. The eschatological banquet is inextricably bound up in the Messiah, it is rightly a messianic banquet. The expectation of the OT Israelite to feast on the mountain of God comes to fulfillment in the Messiah, but not merely at his coming, but at his self-giving. Only those who feast on him will feast with him. There are other passages in Matthew yet to be surveyed in detail, but the ones studied demonstrate that the messianic banquet brings out the centrality of Christ in an exceptional way. The story of the centurion shows that Jesus is the door to the banquet; one must have faith in him to participate. The miracle feedings demonstrates Jesus to be the compassionate host/provider, the one who invites Jews and Gentiles alike and promises abundant satisfaction. Last, and in no way the least, the last supper shows Jesus himself to be the provision. When the lens of the messianic banquet is applied to Matthew, the glory of Jesus is clearly seen. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books

Blomberg, Craig. Contagious Holiness: Jesus Meals with Sinners. New Studies in Biblical Theology 19. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2005.

_________. Matthew. New American Commentary 22. Nashville, TN: Broadman Press, 1992.

Carson, D. A. Matthew. In vol. 8 of The Expositors Bible Commentary. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein and J. D. Douglas, 1-599. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984.

Charles, R. H., ed. The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament in English. 2 vols. London, UK: Oxford University Press, 1914.

Cross, Frank M. The Ancient Library of Qumran. 3rd ed. Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995.

Dahood, Mitchell. Psalms I:1-50. Anchor Bible Commentary 16. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1965.Davies, W.D. and Dale C. Allison. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to Saint Matthew. 3 vols. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1988.France, R. T. The Gospel of Mark: A Commentary on the Greek Text, New International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 2002.

_________. Matthew: Evangelist and Teacher. Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 1989.

Hagner, Donald A. Matthew 1-13. Word Biblical Commentary 33A. Dallas, TX: Word Books, 1993.

Jeremias, Joachim. Jesus Promise to the Nations. Translated by S. H. Hooke. Studies in Biblical Theology No. 24. Naperville, IL: Alec R. Allenson, Inc., 1958.

Koenig, John. The Feast of the Worlds Redemption: Eucharistic Origins and Christian Mission. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 2000.

Luz, Ulrich. Matthew: A Commentary. 3 vols. Trans. by James E. Crouch. Hermeneia. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2001-.

Marcus, Joel. Mark: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary 2 vols. Anchor Bible. New York: Doubleday, 2000.McMahan, Craig T. Meals as Type-Scenes In the Gospel of Luke. Ph.D. diss., Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1987

Moo, Douglas J. The Old Testament in the Gospel Passion Narratives. Sheffield, UK: Almond Press, 1983.

Moore, George F. Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era the Age of the Tannaim. 3 vols. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1927.

Morris, Leon. Jesus is the Christ: Studies in the Theology of John. Grand Rapids: InterVarsity Press, 1989.

Motyer, J. A. The Prophecy of Isaiah: An Introduction and Commentary. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1993.

Neusner, Jacob The Idea of Purity in Ancient Judaism: The Haskell Lectures 1972-73. Studies in Judaism in Late Antiquity, vol. 1. Lieden, Netherlands: E. J. Brill, 1973.

Nolland, John. The Gospel of Matthew: A Commentary on the Greek Text. New International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 2005.

Osborne, Grant. Matthew. Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the NT, vol. 1. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2010.

Oswalt, John. The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 1-39. New International Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmnas, 1986.

Pennington, Jonathan T. Heaven and Earth in the Gospel of Matthew. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2009.

Russell, D. S. The Method and Message of Jewish Apocalyptic: 200 BC AD 100. The Old Testament Library. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1964.

Sanders, E. P. Jesus and Judaism. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985.

Schiffman, Lawrence H. The Eschatological Community of the Dead Sea Scrolls: A Study of the Rule of the Congregation. Society of Biblical Literature Monograph Series 38. Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press, 1989.Smit, Peter-Ben. Fellowship and Food in the Kingdom: Eschatological Meals and Scenes of Utopian Abundance in the New Testament. Wissenshcaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2. Reihe 234. Tbingen, Germany: Mohr Siebeck, 2008.

Smith, Dennis E. From Symposium to Eucharist: The Banquet in the Early Christian World. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2003.

Steffen, Daniel. The Messianic Banquet as a Paradigm for IsraelGentile Salvation in Matthew. Ph.D. Diss., Dallas Theological Seminary, 2001.Turner, David L. Matthew, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008.

Wallace, Daniel B. Greek Grammar: Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996.

Wenham, Gordon. The Book of Leviticus. New International Commentary on the Old Testament Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1979.

Young, Edward J. The Book of Isaiah: The English Text, with Introduction, Exposition, and Notes. 2 vols. New International Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1969.Articles

Allison, Dale C. Who Will Come from East and West? Observations on Matt. 8.11-12 Luke 13.28-29. Irish Biblical Studies 11 (October 1989): 158-70.

Bartchy, S. Table Fellowship. In Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels. Edited by Joel B. Green and Scot McKnight. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1992Behm, Johannes. . In Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel, Geoffrey W. Bromiley and Gerhard Friedrich. Vol. 3. Electronic ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1964-.

Blomberg, Craig. Matthew. In Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, ed. G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson, 1-109. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007.Clifford, Richard J. Isaiah 55: Invitation to a Feast. In The Word of the Lord Shall Go Forth: Essays in Honor of David Noel Freedman in Celebration of His Sixtieth Birthday, ed. Carol L. Meyers and Michael OConnor, 27-35. American Schools of Oriental Research Special Volume Series 1. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1983.

Deterding, Paul E. Eschatological and Eucharistic Motifs in Luke 12:35-40. Concordia Journal (May 1979): 85-94.

King, Philip. J. Commensality in the Biblical World. In Hesed ve-Emet: Studies in Honor of Ernest S. Frerichs, ed. Jodi Magness and Seymour Gitin, 53-61. Brown Judaic Studies 320. Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press, 1998.

Luz, Ulrich. The Miracle Stories of Matthew 8-9. In Studies in Matthew, trans. by Rosemary Selle, 221-42. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 2005.

Pennington, Jonathan T. The Lords Last Supper in the Fourfold Witness of the Gospels. In The Lords Supper: Remembering and Proclaiming Christ until He Comes, ed. Thomas Schreiner and Matthew Crawford, 31-67. New American Commentary Studies in Biblical Theology Vol. 10. Nashville, TN: B & H Publishing, 2010.

Pitre, Brant. Jesus, the Messianic Banquet, and the Kingdom of God. Letter and Spirit 5 (2009): 135-62.Poon, Wilson, Superabundant Table Fellowship in the Kingdom: The Feeding of the Five Thousand and the Meal Motif in Luke. Expository Times 114 (2003): 224-30.

Priest, J. A Note on the Messianic Banquet. In The Messiah: Developments in Earliest Judaism and Christianity. The First Princeton Symposium on Judaism and Christian Origins, ed. James H. Charlesworth, 222-38. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1992.

_________. The Messiah and the Meal in 1QSa. Journal of Biblical Literature 82 (1963): 95-100.

Smith, Dennis E. The Messianic Banquet Reconsidered. In Future of Early Christianity: Essays in Honor of Helmut Koester, ed. Birger A. Pearson, 64-73. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1991.

_________. Messianic Banquet. In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Edited by David Noel Freedman. New York: Doubleday, 1992.

Stallman, Robert C. Divine Hospitality and Wisdoms Banquet in Proverbs 9:1-6. In The Way of Wisdom: Essays in Honor of Bruce K. Waltke, ed. J. I. Packer and Sven K. Soderlund, 117-33. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000.

Steffen, Daniel. The Messianic Banquet and the Eschatology of Matthew. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society, November 1999.

Vanderkam, James C. The Dead Sea Scrolls and Christianity. In Understanding the Dead Sea Scrolls: A Reader from the Biblical Archaeology Review, ed. Hershel Shanks, 181-202. New York: Random House, 1992.

Wise, M. O. Dead Sea Scrolls: General Introduction. In Dictionary of New Testament Background, ed. Craig A. Evans and Stanley E. Porter, 252-66. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2000. I use the terms messianic banquet and eschatological banquet interchangeably.

David L. Turner identifies no less than seven themes in Matthew, BECNT (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008), 17-47; as does Donald A. Hagner, Matthew 1-13, WBC 33A (Dallas, TX: Word Books, 1993), lix-lxiv.

R. T. France, Matthew: Evangelist and Teacher (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 1989), 166.

Some articles include Wilson Poon, Superabundant Table Fellowship in the Kingdom: The Feeding of the Five Thousand and the Meal Motif in Luke, in ET 114 (2003): 224-30; Paul E. Deterding, Eschatological and Eucharistic Motifs in Luke 12:35-40, in Concordia Journal (May 1979): 85-94.

Craig T. McMahan, Meals as Type-Scenes In the Gospel of Luke (Ph.D. diss., Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1987), 1.

Craig Blomberg, Contagious Holiness: Jesus Meals with Sinners, New Studies in Biblical Theology 19 (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2005).

Contra Dennis E. Smith, From Symposium to Eucharist: The Banquet in the Early Christian World (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2003). See Blombergs strong stance against symposium being the primary background in Contagious Holiness, 78, 86-96, 99, 101, 104-105, 107, 114, 128, 166-67.

S. Bartchy, Table Fellowship, in Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, ed. Joel B. Green and Scot McKnight (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1992), 796.

Some recent detailed studies of the messianic banquet include Peter-Ben Smit, Fellowship and Food in the Kingdom: Eschatological Meals and Scenes of Utopian Abundance in the New Testament, Wissenshcaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2. Reihe 234 (Tbingen, Germany: Mohr Siebeck, 2008); Daniel Steffen, The Messianic Banquet as a Paradigm for IsraelGentile Salvation in Matthew (Ph.D. diss., Dallas Theological Seminary, 2001); shorter articles include J. Priest, A Note on the Messianic Banquet, in The Messiah: Developments in Earliest Judaism and Christianity, The First Princeton Symposium on Judaism and Christian Origins, ed. James H. Charlesworth (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1992), 222-38; Dennis E. Smith, The Messianic Banquet Reconsidered, in Future of Early Christianity: Essays in Honor of Helmut Koester, ed. Birger A. Pearson (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1991), 64-73; Brant Pitre, Jesus, the Messianic Banquet, and the Kingdom of God, Letter and Spirit 5 (2009): 135-62. Dennis Smith traces the banquet to ANE mythological roots in Messianic Banquet, in Anchor Bible Dictionary, ed. David Noel Freedman (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 4:788-91.

Robert C. Stallman, Divine Hospitality and Wisdoms Banquet in Proverbs 9:1-6, in The Way of Wisdom: Essays in Honor of Bruce K. Waltke, ed. J. I. Packer and Sven K. Soderlund (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000), 120.

See Philip. J. King, Commensality in the Biblical World, in Hesed ve-Emet: Studies in Honor of Ernest S. Frerichs, ed. Jodi Magness and Seymour Gitin, Brown Judaic Studies 320 (Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press, 1998), 53-61, for an excellent summary of hospitality and shared meals in the OT.

Stallman, Divine Hospitality and Wisdoms Banquet in Proverbs 9:1-6, 121.

It may even be that Solomons banqueting table serves as a type for the eschatological banquet.

Gordon Wenham notes, Instead of rain he gives drought and crop failure. This vivid image, [describes] the effect of a merciless sun which makes the ground too hard for ploughing, The Book of Leviticus, NICOT (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1979), 331.

The context is of God calling his people to repent because he may turn and leave a blessing rather than judgment. The blessing consisted of a grain offering and a drink offering for the LORD your God, implying the restoration of foodstuffs indicated a restoration of worship and covenant relationship.

Richard J. Clifford Isaiah 55: Invitation to a Feast, in The Word of the Lord Shall Go Forth: Essays in Honor of David Noel Freedman in Celebration of His Sixtieth Birthday, ed. Carol L. Meyers and Michael OConnor, American Schools of Oriental Research Special Volume Series 1 (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1983), 30.

Blomberg notes that Psalm 22:26-29 may provide precedent to Isaiah 25:6-9, Contagious Holiness, 49-50; and M. Dahood points out Psalm 36:8-9 as a source for the messianic banquet in inter-testamental literature and the NT, Psalms I:1-50, Anchor Bible Commentary 16 (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1965), 222.

Some commentators link the everlasting covenant to the Noahic covenant, but do not limit it to such. Most agree in the context of gentiles it refers not to the Mosaic law but the implicit covenant between Creator and creature, in which the Creator promises abundant life in return for the creatures living according to the norms laid down at Creation, John Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 1-39 NICOT (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmnas, 1986), 446. See also J. A. Motyer, Isaiah: An Introduction and Commentary (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1993), 198-99; E. J. Young, The Book of Isaiah: The English Text, with Introduction, Exposition, and Notes, NICOT (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1969), 2:156-58.

Motyer, Isaiah, 206.

Daniel Steffen, The Messianic Banquet and the Eschatology of Matthew (paper presented at the annual meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society, November 1999), 5.

D. S. Russell, The Method and Message of Jewish Apocalyptic: 200 BC AD 100, The Old Testament Library (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1964), 322.

George F. Moore, Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era the Age of the Tannaim, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1927), 2:365.

Ibid., 2:363.

R. H. Charles, ed. The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament in English (London, UK: Oxford University Press, 1914), 2:859.

J. Priest, A Note on the Messianic Banquet, 222-227; Dennis Smith, The Messianic Banquet Reconsidered, 64-73; Blomberg, Contagious Holiness, 65-86; Pitre, Jesus, the Messianic Banquet, and the Kingdom of God, 134-39.

The dating of this particular section of 1 Enoch is disputed, because chs. 37-71 are not found in the scrolls of Qumran. M. O. Wise notes that Milik, who first published the book on the fragments, thought that it was likely pre-Christian, but was not included among the Qumran deposits either fortuitously or because some of its ideas were unacceptable, in Dead Sea Scrolls: General Introduction, in Dictionary of New Testament Background, ed. Craig A. Evans and Stanley E. Porter (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2000), 258; Blomberg thinks chs. 37-71 are pre-70 A.D. in Contagious Holiness, 74. We cannot be too sure.

Russell, The Method and Message of Jewish Apocalpytic, 65.

Priest, A Note on the Messianic Banquet, 227.

As Blomberg states about the pseudepigraphal literature, Far more common is the Jews hope of vindication from their oppression, restoration to their paradise, the vanquishing of their enemies, and the re-establishment of a thoroughly nationalistic and perhaps even ethnocentric theocracy, Contagious Holiness, 78.

Frank M. Cross, The Ancient Library of Qumran, 3rd ed. (Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995), 77. The description in 1QSa of the messianic meal ends stating that the instruction given is to be followed at every me[al when] at least ten men are gathered (1QSa 2:22). This implies that it is in reference to a recurring meal, like the parallel in The Rule of the Community 1QS. John F. Priest previously maintained a strong distinction between the two passages in his article The Messiah and the Meal in 1QSa, JBL 82 (1963): 97, but has since reversed his position in A Note on the Messianic Banquet, 228-29.

Lawrence H. Schiffman, The Eschatological Community of the Dead Sea Scrolls: A Study of the Rule of the Congregation, Society of Biblical Literature Monograph Series 38 (Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press, 1989), 70.

James C. Vanderkam, The Dead Sea Scrolls and Christianity, in Understanding the Dead Sea Scrolls: A Reader from the Biblical Archaeology Review, ed. Hershel Shanks (New York: Random House, 1992), 196. He concludes his study with two points: (1) the early church grew upon Jewish soil to a far greater extent than previously supposed; and (2) a larger number of the early Churchs beliefs and practices than previously suspected were not unique to it, 201.

Cross, The Ancient Library of Qumran, 69.

Schiffman, The Eschatological Community of the Dead Sea Scrolls, 56n33.

Jacob Neusner, The Idea of Purity in Ancient Judaism: The Haskell Lectures 1972-73, Studies in Judaism in Late Antiquity, vol. 1 (Lieden, Netherlands: E. J. Brill, 1973). E. P. Sanders strongly dissents, stating that the Pharisees didnt have as much influence as claimed, and that these particular Pharisees were just a small sect in society. Sanders doesnt give much prominence to the witness of the biblical text, Jesus and Judaism (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985), 187-99.

In this study I use the concept of allusion to refer both to explicit intra-textual connections, or theological/conceptual connections.

Joachim Jeremias, Jesus Promise to the Nations, trans. by S. H. Hooke, Studies in Biblical Theology No. 24, (Naperville, IL: Alec R. Allenson, Inc., 1958), 63.

Blomberg. Contagious Holiness, 101; see also R. T. France, The Gospel of Mark: A Commentary on the Greek Text, NIGTC (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 2002), 132.

Smit, Fellowship and Food in the Kingdom, 216-29.

Steffen, The Messianic Banquet and the Eschatology of Matthew, 10.

Jeremias, Jesus Promise to the Nations, 63; also John Koenig, The Feast of the Worlds Redemption: Eucharistic Origins and Christian Mission (Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 2000), 177. Koenig also makes a strange connection with the presence of Jesus at table with Matthew 18:20, indicating the presence of Jesus with the two or three indicate table-fellowship and may allude to the Eucharist.

Turner, Matthew, 232-33; W. D. Davies and Dale C. Allison, Commentary on Matthew 8-18, vol. 2 of A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to Saint Matthew (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1988) 30; France devotes some space to making the connection, The Gospel of Matthew, 316-17.

William Arndt, Frederick W. Danker and Walter Bauer, eds. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000). s.v. . BDAG suggests the translation dine in style in ref. to the messianic banquet. It may not denote the banquet on the verb alone, there is no theological or symbolic significance in the act itself, see D. A. Carson, Matthew, in vol. 8 of The Expositors Bible Commentary, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein and J. D. Douglas (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984), 241n11.

France indicates that the setting of the kingdom of heaven as the main connection to the eschatological banquet, in 13:41, 43 the kingdom of the Son of Man and of the Father denotes the state of final blessedness from which the wicked are excluded and in which the righteous shine, in The Gospel of Matthew, 316-17.

Priest noted that heroes of the past, Adam and the Patriarchs are participants of the banquet in some intertestamental texts, A Note on the Messianic Banquet, 227; see also France, The Gospel of Matthew, who points out that Jewish tradition gave Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob leading roles at the messianic banquet (b. Pesah. 119b; Exod. Rab. 25:8), 317.

They will be thrown () into the outer darkness. A divine passive expressing Gods agency, Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar: Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 435-38. Outer darkness, weeping, gnashing of teeth point to separation and anguish, and gives a decisive twist because those are similar descriptions reserved for Gentiles in Jewish literature, France, The Gospel of Matthew, 316. Osborne notes the outer darkness denotes final punishment and is in complete contrast with the light and joy of the banquet scene, Matthew, Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the NT, vol. 1 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2010), 293.

Jonathan T. Pennington, Heaven and Earth in the Gospel of Matthew (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2009), 294-96.

In contrast to 13:38 where sons of the kingdom is used again, Nolland notes the reference here is to the natural heirs of the kingdom; in 13:38 it is to the actual heirs of the kingdom, The Gospel of Matthew: A Commentary on the Greek Text, NIGTC (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 2005), 357.

It is clear that being children of Abraham is dependent on repentance and faith and not on ethnicity, as John rebuked them saying, God is able from these stones to raise up children for Abraham (Matt 3:8).

France, The Gospel of Matthew, 317; Donald A. Hagner, Matthew 1-13. WBC 33A (Dallas, TX: Word Books, 1993), 206; Turner, Matthew, 233; Ulrich Luz, Matthew 8-20, trans. by James E. Crouch, vol. 2 in Matthew: A Commentary, Hermeneia (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2001-), 11.

For these allusions and other factors, Allison asserts the many are Diaspora Jews. Dale C. Allison, Jr. Who Will Come from East and West? Observations on Matt. 8.11-12 Luke 13.28-29, IBS 11 (October 1989): 158-70. His arguments are ultimately unconvincing, especially due to the neglect of Matthean context. See Blomberg for a brief point-by-point response, Contagious Holiness, 112-113.

France notes that it was not suggested they come in as proselytes, but that they are accepted simply as Gentiles, on equal terms with the patriarchs, The Gospel of Matthew, 319.

Jeremias, Jesus Promise to the Nations, on the significance of the patriarchs, The fact that the Gentiles participate with the patriarchs in the Messianic feast indicates that they have been incorporated into the people of God they stand on an equal footing, and to sit at table with them no longer causes defilement; earthly distinctions have disappeared, 63.

Davies and Allison, Commentary on Matthew 8-18, 31.

France insightfully notes: This saying sums up Matthews theology of the people of God: the membership has been both widened and narrowed (by the exclusion of some Jews); there is both continuity and discontinuity; and the key to membership has been clearly indicated in the preceding verse as a faith in Jesus which may be found in a Gentile as well as (or better than!) in Israel, Matthew: Evangelist and Teacher, 233.

Turner indicates that the stories Matthew includes in chs. 8-9 are not presented haphazardly, but rather carefully as key examples of Jesus authoritative deeds, Matthew, 227.

Note I tell you, ( ) which indicates emphasis and solemnity to this teaching, also 6:29; 12:6, 36; 17:12; 19:9; 26:29, see Turner, Matthew, 232n11.

Davies and Allison, Commentary on Matthew 8-18, 8.

Turner, Matthew, 229.

Luz, Matthew 8-20, 11.

Ulrich Luz, The Miracle Stories of Matthew 8-9, in Studies in Matthew, trans. by Rosemary Selle (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 2005), 227-30.

Smit, Fellowship and Food in the Kingdom, 215.

Carson, Matthew, 388; also Davies and Allison, Commentary on Matthew 8-18, 481; Turner, Matthew, 370; France, The Gospel of Matthew, 558-59. Nolland makes no comment in relation to the messianic banquet, The Gospel of Matthew, 587-94. In addition, Davies and Allison points to the use of as referencing the Leviathan which is offered up for the feast in intertestamental literature (2 Bar. 29:3-8; 4 Ezra 6:52) and views eschatologically, linking back to Matthew 5:6, Commentary on Matthew 8-18, 491. Nolland sees as an echo of Elishas account (2 Kgs 4:44), though not discounting the link to Matthew 5:6, The Gospel of Matthew, 591, 594.

This is evident in Marks editorial comment on the disciples reaction to Jesus walking on the water and the ceasing of the wind (Mark 6:52), indicating that the two miracles should be understood as a unit. Jesus intentionally sought to pass by them (language of OT theophany), and said I am followed by Do not be afraid (6:50). Also relevant is the allusion to Job 9:8 where God is spoken of as walking on the sea. Both miracles serve as pointers to Jesus identity, it is likely similar for Matthew in correspondence to Matthean emphases.

Verbal echoes have been detected in correspondence to the miracle of Elisha in 2 Kgs 4:42-44, see Davies and Allison, Commentary on Matthew 8-18, 482; also Nolland, The Gospel of Matthew, 591, 593; France, The Gospel of Matthew, 559. For a connection to Moses and manna, cf. John 6:25ff. Some Jewish writings indicated that when the Messiah came the miracle of the manna would be renewed (2 Bar. 29:8; Sib. Or., Frag. 3:49), Leon Morris, Jesus is the Christ: Studies in the Theology of John (Grand Rapids: InterVarsity Press, 1989), 31.

France, The Gospel of Matthew, 559-60.

Ibid., The Gospel of Matthew, 558-59; also Blomberg, Contagious Holiness, 103; cf. also Joel Marcus, Mark 1-8, vol. 1 of Mark: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, Anchor Bible (New York: Doubleday, 2000), 411.

Davies and Allison notes no less than 9 lexical connections between the two passages, Commentary on Matthew 8-18, 480-81. Contra Carson who sees the connections due to common Jewish household practice, and sees no Eucharistic significance, Matthew, 391.

Carson notes the audience here was apparently composed of Gentiles, Matthew, 409. Note also the context of 15:32-39; Jesus came from the district of Tyre and Sidon and continued on beside the Sea of Galilee, likely still in Gentile territory (15:21, 29ff). There may also be symbolic significance in the number of loaves, twelve leftover in 14:20 and seven leftover in 15:37,twelve calling to mind the tribes of Israel, while the number seven is more universal, Craig L. Blomberg, Matthew, NAC 22 (Nashville, TN: Broadman Press, 1992), 246.

Blomberg, Contagious Holiness, 106.

Wilson Poon, Superabundant Table Fellowship in the Kingdom: The Feeding of the Five Thousand and the Meal Motif in Luke, Expository Times 114 (2003): 226.

Note also the possible contrast with King Herod (14:1-12) who also threw a feast.

Jonathan T. Pennington provides a helpful discussion on the many rich ideas within the gospel accounts of the last supper, and identifies five interconnected nodes of meaning, (1) an enacted parable of Jesus impending sacrificial death, (2) the fulfillment of the Passover and the new exodus, (3) the inauguration of the new covenant, (4) community/identity formation, and (5) appetizer of the eschatological banquet, in The Lords Last Supper in the Fourfold Witness of the Gospels, in The Lords Supper: Remembering and Proclaiming Christ until He Comes, ed. Thomas Schreiner and Matthew Crawford, NAC Studies in Biblical Theology Vol. 10 (Nashville, TN: B & H Publishing, 2010), 43-58.

Craig Blomberg provides a concise summary of additional allusions, Matthew, in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, ed. G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007), 90-91.

This is understood to be the primary allusion, see Carson, Matthew, 602; also France, The Gospel of Matthew, 994.

Some manuscripts and patristic citations have inserted the word new to make the connection even more explicit, but it is likely an addition influenced by Luke or Paul. See France, The Gospel of Matthew, 987n10.

Carson states, the passage from Jeremiah was almost certainly in Jesus mind, and refers to Matthews use of Jeremiah in Matt 2:18 to show that Matthew interprets the coming of Jesus as the real end of the exile and the inauguration of the new covenant, Matthew, 602.

Osborne, Matthew, 968; also Luz, Matthew 21-28, 382; France, The Gospel of Matthew, 995; Johannes Behm sees the word new often used in connection with the messianic fulfillment and ultimate salvation, , in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel, Geoffrey W. Bromiley and Gerhard Friedrich, vol. 3, electronic ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1964-), 449. Nolland notes the proximity of chs. 24-25 and the wedding banquet of 25:1-13, The Gospel of Matthew, 1085.

Carson writes, The exodus becomes a type of a new and greater deliverance; and as the people of God in the OT prospectively celebrated in the first Passover their escape from Egypt, anticipating their arrival in the Promised Land, so the people of God here prospectively celebrate their deliverance from sin and bondage, anticipating the coming kingdom, Matthew, 603.

For a short summary on the history of interpretation on the issue of varying interpretations of is, see Luz, Matthew 21-28, 374-78.

Luz indicates the blood poured out is indicative of a violent death, referencing LXX usage and Matt 23:35, Matthew 21-28, 380. Douglas J. Moo takes that into consideration but points out in conjunction with is best understood as a conscious allusion to Isaiah 53:12 in The Old Testament in the Gospel Passion Narratives (Sheffield, UK: Almond Press, 1983), 130-31.

It is important to note the context where the disciples are not celebrating with their families, but with Jesus and one another.

Moo, The Old Testament in the Gospel Passion Narratives, 127-32; see also comments on note 79.

Osborne, Matthew, 969.

Pennington points out the continuity and discontinuity, Jesus is not merely another prophet or even another Moses who is calling Gods people back to Sinai. He is taking up the foundational story and identity of Israel and drawing it (and them) into His person and work as the eschatological fulfillment of all God promised, The Lords Last Supper in the Fourfold Witness of the Gospels, 50-51.

This of course, does not rule out future judgment before the eschatological banquet. Because of what Jesus has done, those who reject him will be judged with finality while those who come to faith participate in the marriage supper of the Lamb (Rev 19:9).

The last reference to the messianic banquet is understandably in Revelation, where it is called the marriage supper of the Lamb (Rev 19:9). Unthinkably, but amazingly, the Lamb who hosts is the very Lamb that was slaughtered so that there could be a marriage supper.