¹ Edwards, , Matthew's Story of Jesus (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985)Google Scholar; Matera, , ‘The Plot of Matthew's Gospel', CBQ 49 (1987) 233–53Google Scholar; Kingsbury, , Matthew as Story (2nd ed.; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988).Google Scholar

² For a sampling of such concepts, see Abrams, M. H., A Glossary of Literary Terms (4th ed.; New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1981) 137–40Google Scholar; Brooks, P., Reading for the Plot: Design and Interpretation in Narrative (New York: Knopf, 1984) 3–38Google Scholar; Chatman, S., Story and Discourse: Narrative Structure in Fiction and Film (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, 1978) 43–95Google Scholar; Crane, R. S., ‘The Concept of Plot’, Approaches to the Novel: Materials for a Poetics (ed. Scholes, R.; San Francisco: Chandler, 1961) 159–69Google Scholar; Culler, J., ‘Defining Narrative Units’, Style and Structure in Literature: Essays in the New Stylistics (ed. Fowler, R.; Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, 1975) 123–42Google Scholar; Dipple, E., Plot (New York: Routledge, Chatman and Hall, 1970)Google Scholar; Egan, K., ‘What Is a Plot?’, New Literary History 9 (1978) 455–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Forster, E. M., Aspects of the Novel (New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich, 1927) 83–104Google Scholar; Friedman, N., ‘Forms of the Plot’, The Theory of the Novel (ed. Stevick, P.; New York: Free, 1967) 145–66Google Scholar; Genette, G., Narrative Discourse: An Essay in Method (trans. Lewin, J.; Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, 1980)Google Scholar; Goodman, P., The Structure of Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1954)Google Scholar; Kermode, F., The Sense of an Ending: Studies in the Theory of Fiction (London: Oxford University, 1967)Google Scholar; Muir, E., ‘Novels of Action and Character’, Approaches to the Novel, 173–89Google Scholar; Perrine, L., Story and Structure (4th ed.; New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich, 1974) 43–50Google Scholar; Perry, M., ‘Literary Dynamics: How the Order of a Text Creates Its Meaning’, Poetics Today 1 (1979) 35–64, 311–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Prince, G., Narratology: The Form and Functioning of Narrative (Berlin: Mouton, 1982) 62–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Rimmon-Kenan, S., Narrative Fiction: Contemporary Poetics (London: Methuen, 1983) 1–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Scholes, R. and Kellogg, R., The Nature of Narrative (London: Oxford University, 1966)Google Scholar; Sternberg, M., Expositional Modes and Temporal Ordering in Fiction (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University, 1978).Google Scholar

³ Matthew's Story of Jesus, 9.

⁴ Nature of Narrative, 12.

⁵ In language borrowed from structuralism, ‘paradigmatic’ relationships within a narrative are those that can be discerned at levels of meaning apart from the ‘syntagmatic’ (sequential) arrangement of the text. According to this notion, plot is likened to a musical score that must be read ‘up and down’ as well as from left to right. Cf. Levi-Strauss, C., ‘The Structural Study of Myth’, Journal of American Folklore 68 (1955) 432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁶ Story and Discourse, 3. Chatman defines ‘story’ in terms of what the narrative is about and ‘discourse’ in terms of how the narrative is told.

⁷ ‘What is a Plot?’, 470.

⁸ ‘Plot of Matthew's Gospel’, 240.

⁹ Matera also regards the elements of worship and confidence as significant, for they indicate the sort of ‘affective response’ that the narrative expects to produce in its reader.

¹⁰ ‘Plot of Matthew's Gospel’, 243.

¹¹ Story and Discourse, 46.

¹² Structure of Literature, 14.

¹³ Aspects of the Novel, 86.

¹⁴ See Chatman, Story and Discourse, 47; Crane, ‘Concept of Plot’, 165.

¹⁵ Chatman, Story and Discourse, 48.

¹⁶ See, e.g., S. Rimmon-Kenan's distinction between ‘backward’ and ‘forward’ causality (Narrative Fiction, 18). If Matthew's plot is teleologically determined, then the question is no longer ‘Does the Gospel pass to the nations as a consequence of Israel's rejection of Jesus?’ but ‘Does Israel reject Jesus so that the Gospel might pass to the nations?’ The narrative does not allow an affirmative response to this latter question.

¹⁷ On the different functions of narrative endings, see Parsons, M., The Departure of Jesus in Luke–Acts: The Ascension Narratives in Context (Great Britain: Sheffield, 1987) 66–72Google Scholar. Cf A. Berlin's comments on Ruth in Poetics and Interpretation of Biblical Narrative (Sheffield: Almond, 1983) 107–10.Google Scholar

¹⁸ ‘The Plot of Matthew's Gospel’, 246–52.

¹⁹ Matthew as Story, 3.

²⁰ Ibid., 4.

²¹ Ibid., 8–9.

²² Ibid., 115, 129.

²³ Hawkins, J., Horae Synopticae (rev.; Oxford: Clarendon, 1909) 168Google Scholar. The major such compositional study is Kingsbury, J., Matthew: Structure, Christology, Kingdom (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1975).Google Scholar Cf. Matthew as Story, 40.

²⁴ Narrative Discourse.

²⁵ Further clarification of this point is provided by 26.28, where it becomes evident that the shedding of Jesus' blood brings forgiveness of sins.

²⁶ Numerous events in Matthew's Gospel are ultimately linked through the principle of causation to the event of Jesus' death. Jesus' claim to be ‘lord of the sabbath’ and seeming disregard for sabbath laws results in the religious leaders plotting his murder (12.1–14). Similarly, his teaching causes people to take offence at him (13.53–7) and his mighty works lead to accusations that he is demonic (9.34; 12.24). At other times, Jesus' words and deeds cause people to be impressed by his authority (7.28–9; 9.8, 33), but this too is connected to the passion insofar as we are later informed that the religious leaders deliver Jesus to Pilate ‘out of envy’(27.18).

²⁷ The great commission also provides further definition of just who the ‘his people’ of 1.21 really are: they are people of all nations who are made disciples through baptism and the teaching of Jesus' commands. This identification of the people whom Jesus saves as inclusive of the nations rather than as exclusive to Israel does mark the resolution of a theme that has been foreshadowed (2.1–12), predicted (8.11–12), and discussed (15.21–8) elsewhere in the narrative, but this theme is subsidiary to the major motif of how God's salvation is accomplished through the ministry and death of Jesus.

²⁸ Note Abram's definition of ‘subplot’ (Glossary, 138): ‘a second story that is complete and interesting in its own right’. A subplot ‘serves to broaden our perspective on the main plot and to enhance rather than to diffuse the overall effect’.

²⁹ Kingsbury, J., ‘The Figure of Jesus in Matthew's Story: A Literary-Critical Probe’, JSNT 21 (1984) 3–36Google Scholar; ‘The Figure of Jesus in Matthew's Story: A Rejoinder to David Hill’, JSNT 25 (1985) 61–81.Google Scholar In other words, God's standards represent the norm by which truth and untruth are evaluated in this story.

³⁰ The points of view of other characters are revealed to be aligned with that of God or with that of Satan according to the attitude they hold toward Jesus as God's Son (disciples: 14.33; 16.16; demons: 8.29; religious leaders: 21.33–46; 26.63–4; 27.41–3).

³¹ Both 4.3 and 4.6 utilize a ‘first-class condition’. See also 8.29.

³² It is generally recognized that in Matthew's narrative, all of the religious leaders of Israel function as a cohesive ‘character group’. Differences between Pharisees, Sadducees, chief priests, elders, and scribes are minute and representatives of these various groups are frequently lumped together. See, e.g., van Tilborg, S., The Jewish Leaders in Matthew (Leiden: Brill, 1972) 1–6.Google Scholar

³³ Cf. 4.4, 7,10 with 9.13; 12.7; 15.3–9.

³⁴ Cf. 4.9 with 7.29; 9.6–8; 12.6–8.

³⁵ Also as ‘the twelve’ and, once, as ‘the apostles’ (10.2). On the terminology, see Wilkins, Michael J., The Concept of Disciple in Matthew's Gospel (Leiden: Brill, 1988).Google Scholar