Purchase instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
This essay seeks to offer a contribution to the ongoing discussion about the relationship between Matthew and Paul. I reject the usual juxtaposition of the law-observant Matthew with the law-free Paul and propose that they differ only with regard to the extent of Torah observance that they expect from their respective audiences. More specifically, I argue that the main difference between Matthew and Paul pertaining to Torah observance is whether the commandments that function as Jewish identity markers are applicable to non-Jewish Christ-followers. I conclude that viewing Matthew’s Gospel as an un-Pauline composition not only offers the most satisfactory explanation of their different views on Torah observance in ethnically mixed Christian communities but also reflects their different visions of how Gentiles will join Israel in the end time. Unlike Paul, who presumes that Jews and non-Jews will participate in universal salvation by preserving their specific identities, Matthew envisions the inclusion of Gentiles into the chosen people through proselytism.