¹ The only exception is the textually uncertain John 3.5, where kingdom of heaven appears in a handful of witnesses, including .

² For a discussion of the textual uncertainty regarding ὴ βασιλεία το θεο in 19.24 cf. O'Callaghan, J., ‘Examen critico de Mt. 19.24’, Bib 69 (1988) 404–5.Google Scholar

³ Allen, W. C., The Gospel according to S. Matthew (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1912) lxviii.Google Scholar

⁴ Allen, Matthew, lxvii.

⁵ Allen, Matthew, 135. Cf. also Allen's discussion on lxvii-lxviii and 232.

⁶ Pamment, M., ‘The Kingdom of Heaven according to the First Gospel’, NTS 27 (1981) 211–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁷ Pamment, ‘Kingdom of God’, 232.

⁸ Albright, W. F. and Mann, C. S., Matthew (Garden City: Doubleday, 1971) c–cv and 155.Google Scholar

⁹ Albright and Mann, Matthew, 233.

¹⁰ Mann, C. S., Mark (Garden City: Doubleday, 1986) 153 and 206.Google Scholar

¹¹ Patte, Daniel, The Gospel according to Matthew: A Structural Commentary on Matthew's Faith (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987) 177.Google Scholar

¹² Patte, Matthew, 177.

¹³ For this position cf. the following: Schlatter, A., Der Evangelist Matthäus: Seine Sprache, sein Ziel, seine Selbständigkeit (Stuttgart: Calwer, 1929) 57Google Scholar; Schniewind, J., Das Evangelium nach Matthäus (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1936) 23Google Scholar; Michaelis, W., Das Evangelium nach Matthäus (Zurich: Zwingli, 1948) 109–10Google Scholar; Filson, F. V., A Commentary on the Gospel according to St Matthew (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1960) 32Google Scholar; Walker, W. O., ‘The Kingdom of the Son of Man and the Kingdom of the Father in Matthew’, CBQ 30 (1968) 574Google Scholar; Goppelt, L., Theology of the New Testament 1 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1981) 44Google Scholar; Schnackenburg, R., Matthäusevangelium 1,1–16,20 (Würzburg: Echter, 1985) 41Google Scholar; Beare, F. W., The Gospel according to Matthew (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1987) 33Google Scholar and many others.

¹⁴ For this suggestion cf. the following: Grant, F. C., The Gospel of Matthew 1 (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1955) 23Google Scholar; Gaechter, P., Das Matthäus-Evangelium (Innsbruck: Tyrolia, 1962) 678 and 686Google Scholar; Bonnard, P., L'Évangile selon Saint Matthieu (Neuchâtel: Delachaux et Niestlé, 1963) 181 n. 2Google Scholar; Grundmann, W., Das Evangelium nach Matthäus (Berlin: Evangelische, 1968) 463Google Scholar; Hill, D., The Gospel of Matthew (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972) 301Google Scholar; Schweizer, E., The Good News according to Matthew (trans. by Green, D. E.; Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1975) 287 and 410Google Scholar; Carson, D. A., ‘Matthew’, The Expositor's Bible Commentary 8 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984) 289Google Scholar; and Mounce, R., Matthew (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1985) 117.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Dunn, J. D. G., Jesus and the Spirit (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1975) 45Google Scholar. For similar suggestions cf. McNeile, A. H., The Gospel according to St Matthew (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1980) 280 and 306.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Davies, W. D. and Allison, D. C., The Gospel according to Saint Matthew 1 (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1988) 390–2.Google Scholar

¹⁷ Cf. McNeile, Matthew, 176; Grundmann, Matthäus, 329 n. 5; Stagg, F., ‘Matthew’, Broadman Bible Commentary (Nashville: Broadman, 1969) 149;Google ScholarMaier, G., Matthäus-Evangelium 1 (Stuttgart: Hänssler, 1979) 48Google Scholar; Meier, J. P., Matthew (Wilmington: Michael Glazier, 1980) 135;Google Scholar Carson, ‘Matthew’, 289; Gnilka, J., Das Matthäusevangelium 1 (Freiburg: Herder, 1986) 458–9Google Scholar; and Smith, R., Matthew (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1989) 165.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Gundry, R. (Matthew: A Commentary on His Literary and Theological Art [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982] 389–90Google Scholar) states that Matthew uses the rarer term for the sake of variation, while Fenton, J. C. (Saint Matthew [Baltimore: Penguin, 1966] 316)Google Scholar remarks that the substitution is designed to place emphasis on God's power in v. 26.

¹⁹ Gundry (Matthew, 423) assigns this change to ‘… the need for the personal emphasis in God's name’, while France, R. T. (Matthew [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985] 307Google Scholar) notes that perhaps it was ‘… to emphasize the personal nature of … [the religious leaders'] response to and relationship with God in which they had failed’. In contrast, Lagrange, M.-J. (Évangile selon Saint Matthieu [Paris: Gabalda, 1948] 412Google Scholar) notes that one finds ‘… το θεο, et non, “des cieux” comme à l'ordinaire, parce que le royaume est déjà commencé’. Lagrange (418) makes similar comments on 21.43.

²⁰ Gundry (Matthew, 430) observes, ‘As in v 31, the use of God's name is determined by the contextual need for the personal term….’

²¹ Goulder, M. D., Midrash and Lection in Matthew (London: SPCK, 1974) 332 n. 64.Google Scholar

²² McNeile, Matthew, 312.

²³ Hill, Matthew, 301.

²⁴ Trilling, W., Das wahre Israel: Studien zur Theologie das Matthäus-Evangeliums (Munchen: Kösel, 1964) 85.Google Scholar

²⁵ Scott, J. J. Jr, ‘The Synoptic Gospels’, The Expositor's Bible Commentary 1 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1979) 508.Google Scholar

²⁶ Of course, if Matthew were the first gospel written, then it would be extremely difficult to demonstrate that Matthew's occasional use of kingdom of God is attributable to his sources.

²⁷ As McNeile [Matthew] and Dunn [Jesus] state.

²⁸ Cf. Walvoord, J. F., ‘The Kingdom of Heaven’, BibSac 124 (1967) 198–9.Google Scholar

²⁹ Cf. Schweizer, E., ‘Observance of the Law and Charismatic Activity in Matthew’, NTS 16 (1969/1970) 213–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Schweizer, E., ‘Matthew's Church’, in The Interpretation of Matthew (ed. by Stanton, G.; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983) 129–55Google Scholar; Martin, J. P., ‘The Church in Matthew’, Int 29 (1975) 41–56;Google ScholarMontague, G. T., The Holy Spirit: Growth of a Biblical Tradition (New York: Paulist, 1976) 302–10Google Scholar; Dunn, J. D. G., Unity and Diversity in the New Testament (London: SCM, 1990) 249Google Scholar; Holman, C., ‘A Lesson from Matthew's Gospel for Charismatic Renewal’, in Faces of Renewal (ed. by Elbert, P.; Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1988) 48–63Google Scholar; France, R. T., Matthew: Evangelist and Teacher (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1989) 118–19Google Scholar; and Smith, R. H., ‘Matthew's Message for Insiders: Charisma and Commandment in a First-Century Community’, Int 46 (1992) 229–39.Google Scholar

³⁰ Cf. Hengel, M., The Charismatic Leader and his Followers (trans. by Greig, James; New York: Crossroad, 1981).Google Scholar

³¹ Since the Gospel nowhere describes the disciples as fulfilling the charismatic dimensions of their commission given in chapter ten, one must assume that such a commission was fulfilled later.

³² Cf. Marx, W. G., ‘Money Matters in Matthew’, BibSac 136 (1979) 148–57.Google Scholar

³³ Cf. Mealand, D. L., Poverty and Expectation in the Gospels (London: SPCK, 1980)Google Scholar and Schmidt, T. E., Hostility to Wealth in the Synoptic Gospels (Sheffield: JSOT, 1987) 121–34.Google Scholar

³⁴ Cf. also the discussion of Smith, R. H., ‘Were the Early Christians Middle Class? A Sociological Analysis of the New Testament’, Currents in Theology and Mission 7 (1980) 260–76.Google Scholar

³⁵ Mealand, Poverty, 16.

³⁶ Mealand, Poverty, 92.

³⁷ Therefore, rather than regarding Mealand's argument as overly subtle, as Schmidt [Hostility to Wealth, 122] charges, the hostile attitude toward wealth exhibited by Matthew might very well be a sign of the church's growing affluence.

³⁸ It is noteworthy that in three of the six passages where tax collectors are mentioned, they are either in the company of Jesus (9.9–13; 11.18–19) or they are described as having believed in John the Baptist (21.32), while one of the other texts states that a tax collector was one of the Twelve (10.3).

³⁹ Cf. Brown, R. E. and Meier, J. P., Antioch and Rome (New York: Paulist, 1983) 65–72.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Of the many works that discuss this issue cf. Meier's discussion in Antioch and Rome, 45–72, and Brown, S., ‘The Matthean Community and the Gentile Mission’, NovT 22 (1980) 193–221.Google Scholar