Matthew 28: 16-20 – Holy Trinity
Introduction
In my Independent Study, I wrote a reflection on the final chapter of Matthew that I really enjoyed. I am going to use a lot of that here because I think it’s important to look at this incredibly familiar and overused text within the Matthean context and not just through a lens of our baptismal doctrine.
So, come on a journey with me as we remember the Gospel of Matthew (after having been in John for so long).
Matthew’s Post-Resurrection
We are mere days (maybe even the same day) from the resurrection. Although we are 50 some-odd days from Easter and have been in John for 7 weeks, this is an Easter text for Matthew.
For a Gospel with so much detail and so many encounters, Matthew’s resurrection is abruptly short. Whereas John and Luke have a few resurrection appearances, Matthew has maybe one and a half. But I think this is intentional. But as I referenced way back in Advent, this is not the final judgment. The final judgment, in Matthew, is when Jesus returns. And so, if this is not the final judgment then there is no reason to linger. Now that the ritual sacrifice is no longer necessary, there is nothing tying discipleship to Jerusalem.[1] This is about the transition of ministry to the disciples who have been taught all they need to know and have received the authority they need. And so, the next leg of work must begin. We are in the final transition of prophetic authority.
John and Luke emphasize this next era of faith being driven by the Holy Spirit but that is not explicitly Matthew’s claim. This next era of faith, for Matthew, is the prophetic witness and evangelism of the church. The great commission is that final transition.
The Great Commission
The Great Commission does not take place in Jerusalem but is instead on the mount, the place of God’s imparting of law and blessings. The Great Commission is also a kind of benediction that recalls the commissions and blessings of Moses to Joshua and Elijah to Elisha.
- When Moses was dying, the LORD told him to summon Joshua so that “I [God] may commission him (Deut. 31:14).” God’s commission to Joshua: “Be strong and bold, for you shall bring the Israelites into the land that I promised them; I will be with you (Deut. 31:23).”
- Culpepper writes, “Jesus’ last word are a promise, an assurance, that echoes the Lord’s promise to Joshua, “I will be with you” (Deut. 31:23) and “As I was with Moses, so I will be with you; I will not fail or forsake you” (Josh 1:5).[2]
- When Elijah was set to be taken in heaven from Elisha, Elijah kept repeating the phrase, “As the LORD lives, and as you yourself live, I will not leave you (cf. 2 Kings 2:2,4,6).” When Elijah was set to be taken up, he asks what he can do for Elisha. Elisha asks for a double portion of his spirit. Elijah responds, “You have asked a hard thing; yet, if you see me as I am being taken from you, it will be granted you; if not, it will not (2 Kings 2:10).”
Maybe I’m reading too far into this, but I think this transition of prophetic authority makes a lot of sense as Matthew’s motive. Maybe not as deliberately as I’m suggesting, BUT Matthew is not making the same move with the Holy Spirit as Luke and John. With the language, “I will be with you always to the end of the age,” we are hearing similar language to God’s promise to the prophets of old, and we are hearing the language of spirit being given to another (Elijah to Elisha). We can see and hear it as Holy Spirit, but it’s not the same imparting as in John or Luke.
This commission to the disciples, who hold the keys to the kingdom (16:19) and will be judges of the nations (19:28), is to continue the prophetic witness with a mandate to go into all the world (the Gentile lands) and “make disciples of all nations.” In Jesus’ sacrifice[3], he is eliminating one of the components of the forgiveness of sins. His death, through the blood that is shed on the cross, eliminates the need for ritual sacrifice at the temple altar (incredibly important once the temple is destroyed). BUT, repentance, as per the Law of the covenant, is still needed for the forgiveness of sins. And if repentance is still needed (since we are not in the time of judgment as that comes at the end times), then there is still need for prophets who help to guide the people of God back into right relationship. The disciples and the church are the next prophets that continue this prophetic message to the world that needs to repent and turn back towards God.
For Matthew, it’s not baptismal imagery like we think of it.
Culpepper and others make a lot of connections to baptismal liturgy and baptizing under the Triune God.[4] I think this is good scholarship and important conversation for our liturgical and theological practices. However, I am not certain that Matthew was making a liturgical or theological claim. I think the baptismal language may very well be connected to the baptisms we have experienced in this Gospel. With language of baptism, we hear are hearing a connection to John’s prophetic witness which will be to call for repentance (3:7-10) and to “prepare the way of the Lord (3:3)” for the “end of the age” and the final judgment. Thus, this adds to the “readiness” language that we heard in the chapters leading to the crucifixion. To “be ready (24:44)” and to “keep awake (25:13),” does not mean to be staring at the sky and waiting for the return. To be ready and to keep awake means to continue in the prophetic witness and living lives worthy of repentance and bearing fruit for the world. The call for baptism, is a continued call for repentance in the world and turning toward right relationship with God and neighbor.
Mission to the Gentiles
Next, we have Matthew’s giant leap toward the inclusion of Gentiles. As I noted in Advent, Matthew builds to this moment:
Matthew 1:3-15: Matthew’s inclusion of the four women in the genealogy (all of whom may have been Gentiles or were connected to Gentiles); 8:5-13 – Healing the Roman centurion’s servant; 12:21: Quoting Isaiah, “And in his name the Gentiles will hope.”; 15:21-28: The healing of the Canaanite woman’s daughter). All of these points allude to where Matthew is going, but they also give a precedence that great faith comes out of Gentile people. The final occurrence that really seals this is at the cross. The one and only person to recognize everything that is happening as Jesus dies is the centurion who says, “Truly this man was God’s Son (27:54)!” I don’t think the Great Commission clearly suggests whether Matthew’s community/congregation was mostly Jewish or mixed. But it is very clear that he is giving emphasis that that is the direction they are heading (a mission to the Gentiles).
Transition of Authority
Finally, this is the final transition of authority. Culpepper writes,
Matthew first emphasized the fulfillment of Scripture (chaps. 1-2), next its continuing authority (5:17-20), then Jesus’ interpretation of the Scriptures (esp. 5:21-48; 22:34-40), and now Jesus’ authority. The law will never pass away, but the disciples are commanded to teach, not the law, but what Jesus has taught. Moreover, because Jesus’ words have “all authority,” and because Matthew has collected Jesus’ teachings, Matthew’s Gospel doubtless functioned as Scripture for the Matthean community; it contained “the words of the Lord” that were recited in worship, taught, and obeyed.[5]
But, to disagree with Culpepper, the last supper in Matthew does not contain a “new covenant.” The Law is still established. Repentance is still called for. Matthew is not calling for us throw away the Law. Jesus has only ever fulfilled and reinterpreted the law. When we teach what Jesus taught, we are teaching the wealth of history, tradition, and learning that come with all of the law and the prophets. The prophetic tradition continued with Jesus and now it continues with us. By following Jesus, we follow the prophetic tradition. By teaching what Jesus taught us, we continue to teach the law and the prophets. Let’s not go full blown supercessionist here.
Culpepper then nuances this slightly at the very conclusion of this section (and book), “Following this promise, Matthew cannot conclude with the ascension or Jesus’ departure, as Luke does. The commission is a “non-farewell” address. Because the law and Jesus’ words will stand until heaven and earth pass away (5:18, 24:35), the Lord will be with his disciples, all who read or hear this Gospel, until the end of the age (13:39, 40, 49; 24:3). Immanuel.”[6]
Preaching Possibilities
What, if anything, can we preach on with all of this?
It’s a Commission
I have seen so many congregations who have used this text as their outright mission statement. I have heard so many preachers use this as a call for baptism. I have heard many pastoral approaches about God being with us always. But at the heart of this, is a sending. Ready or not, Jesus sends the disciples into the world. Ready or not he gives them authority to teach what they have been taught. And it’s not just for them, it’s for us.
Ready or not, we are being sent out into the world. And if we take Matthew’s prophetic message to heart, then it is for the purposes of calling this world into account. We are to call for repentance for ourselves and for others around us. We are to call our Christian siblings, who are causing harm to others with their hatred and bigotry, to repentance. We are to call our politicians and leaders to serve the people and not themselves. We are to call corporations and CEO’s to do justice when they line their pockets with profits while claiming that they don’t have enough to pay their workers or lower their prices.
Matthew wants the church to use our voice. Calling this world to do better. Because we need to do better.
Nuance Your Baptism Sermon
I know it’s easy to jump right to baptism but I’m asking you to nuance here. Matthew is not looking at baptism the same way that we look at baptism. Matthew is really emphasizing repentance and turning toward God.
We talk a big game about dying to sin in baptism. But what do we really mean by that? Well, if we’re serious, then every time we remember our baptism, we engage in repentance. Repenting for the things we’ve done and the things we’ve left undone. For not loving God with our whole heart. For not loving our neighbors as ourselves.
One thing I’ve always wanted to do, was to incorporate a confession and forgiveness into a remembrance of baptism. Hearing the forgiveness through the lens of the cleansing waters. Asperging the congregation so they feel the tangible presence of forgiveness through an act of repentance.
Holy Trinity
This is the one you’ve all been waiting for, right? How to preach the Trinity in this text?
For a long time, most scholars figured that this Trinitarian formula was added later than the original manuscripts of Matthew. However, there is some questioning about that now. The Didache 7.1 contains the Triune formula, and it dates closely with the Gospel of Matthew. So, it’s possible that this was original to Matthew. So, leaning into this hypothetical, why would it be beneficial for Matthew include the Triune formula?
Forget the mathematical jokes for a second. Forget the plethora of heresies for a moment. Why do we need these three figures of God? As the role of prophet is passed to the church, why does Jesus remind us that we need the guidance of three persons to move us rightly?
Maybe we need to remember from God, the parent, that there are things much larger than us. Maybe we need to be reminded to open our spheres to see the larger picture of this world.
Maybe we need to remember from Jesus, that we have a part to play. When things feel too large, or when we narrow our focus too much, Christ reminds us of how we can live in this world and live in community. The Sermon on the Mount after all, points us to live in our Christian community and care for one another. We are not entering into all of this without precedent. There are things that Jesus has taught us: love, service, inclusion, and care for our neighbors. Are we willing to listen?
Maybe we need the Holy Spirit to remind us when we are sitting back on our heels. We are the prophetic witness in this world. Maybe we need the Holy Spirit, the Spirit that was with Moses, Elijah, Samuel, and Isaiah. The Spirit that picked up Ezekiel and set him down in the Valley of Dry Bones. Maybe we need this prophetic Spirit to remind us when it’s time to speak and act. It can be easy to hold back thinking that it is not for us to say something. “No, not me, Lord.” But it is us, each one of us, who have been given the Spirit of God to go out into the world and be of good courage.
Let me know if any of this was helpful.
[1] R. Alan Culpepper has a great argument about Jesus’ crucifixion in Matthew being for the purpose of dismantling the need for ritual sacrifice. This way repentance is enough for the forgiveness of sins. For Matthew, Jesus is not the lamb who was slain. Jesus’ prophetic death, like the Maccabean martyrs, is for the forgiveness of sins now that the temple will no longer stand. Culpepper writes about “the cup” in the Last supper:
The text in Exodus provides the primary context for understanding Jesus’ words: “Moses took the blood and dashed it on the people, and said, ‘See the blood of the covenant that the Lord has made with you in accordance with all these words’” (24:8)…In Matthew and Mark, Jesus does not speak of a “new covenant” – nor does Matthew say that the covenant with Israel has been nullified. Jesus has declared that the temple will be destroyed, “not one stone left on another” (24:2). Because forgiveness of sin required repentance and offering a sacrifice, the question confronting Jews following the destruction of the temple was how sins could be forgiven when sacrifices could no longer be offered on the temple altar. In response, Jesus says, proleptically, “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins” (26:28). The covenant remains, but Jesus’ blood is now the sacrifice that effects forgiveness of sins. Matthew has prepared readers for this pronouncement: first, by commenting on Jesus’ name, “For he will save his people from their sins” (1:21); then, by omitting the phrase “for the forgiveness of sins” from Mark’s description of John’s baptism (cf. Mark 1:4; Matt 3:1-2; cf., however 3:6), thereby reserving it exclusively for Jesus’ death. Interpretation of the words of institution as inaugurating a new covenant, anticipated by Jeremiah (31:31-34), lies further along the road of the church’s interpretation of this scene and stands in some tension with Matthew’s understanding of Jesus’ death. Because the sprinkling of blood effected the entry of Israel into the covenant at Sinai, it was natural that Jesus’ provision of his blood would be understood as the creation of a new covenant (cf. Luke 22:20, 1 Cor 11:25; 2 Cor 3:6; Heb 8:8; 9:15); but for Matthew, Jesus’ sacrificial death does not bring an end to the law (5:17-18) or replace God’s covenant with Israel (Gen 12:3): “The Matthean Jesus’ task is, indeed, to make sure that the Sinaitic covenant is restored after the defilement of the temple and before the coming final judgment [Runesson 2016, 42].” In this respect, Jesus’ death is also an important aspect of his fulfillment of the law and the prophets.
R. Alan Culpepper, Matthew, 515-516.
[2] Culpepper, 585.
[3] See quote above in footnote 1.
[4] Culpepper, 583-584.
[5] Culpepper, 584.
[6] Culpepper, 585.
Micah Krey 
Leave a comment