6. (How?) should we read, study and interpret Matthew’s gospel?

There is no reading of Scripture that is not- to some degree, also an attempt at interpreting the Scripture. This becomes obvious once we realize the Bible does not provide its own commentary (or study notes). As such, the question which must be considered before endeavoring to study any of its books is, “What hermeneutical (interpretive) principles and presuppositions must be applied?” As it relates to the Matthew’s gospel the following are most relevant:

6.2. Possessing the same view of the Bible as Jesus and its human authors. 

Bibliology (the study of the Scriptures) is as much a category within hermeneutics (the discipline of interpretation) as it is within Systematic Theology (a discipline of Christian Theology). In other words, what we believe about the Bible – or more importantly, what Jesus and its human authors believed, provides valuable help in our attempt to understand its message. The list below represents their view on the Bible/Scriptures[1]:

6.2.1. They believed every word God chose to use in writing the Scripture was deliberate and therefore critical to not only proper interpretation but also our salvation!.

(Dan 9:1-3; Mat 5:18-19, 22:31-32; 1Ti 4:16; Even the Pharisees understood this –Joh 9:16)

How this helps us in our understanding of the Bible (or more specifically, the gospel of Matthew) =

It encourages us to not be sloppy in our analysis of Scripture (2Ti 2:15-19; e.g. Mat 5:27-28)

6.2.2. They knew the task of determining orthodoxy (right doctrine/interpretation) has been given to the covenant community (most esp. her leaders).

(In re: to the NC Church = Mat 16:19, 18:18; Joh 20:22-23; Act 15:1-28; 1Co 14:28-29; 1Jo 4:6; Gal 2:1-2, 9 w/1Ti 3:15; In re: to the OC Church = Rom 3:1-2).

How this helps us in our understanding of the Bible (or more specifically, the gospel of Matthew) =

We realize our need for the covenant community in this process (IOW: no “solo Scriptura”!). This includes also our need to look back through history to see where the Holy Spirit has led the church in her understanding of a particular text of Scripture or doctrine. Hence, DRC’s slogan, “Biblical, Historical and Reformed”[2].

6.2.3. They saw the Scripture itself as the greatest key to interpreting other Scripture and the necessity of continuity between the Covenants in order for that to be possible.

(As it re: to Scripture interpreting other Scripture = Mat 12:1-7; Heb 1:5-8, 5:5-6; As it re: to continuity between the covenants = Mat 13:52, 23:23; Luk 3:18 w/16:16; Luk 16:17-31; Joh 5:39, 46 w/Deu 18:18; Joh 7:14-19; Act 6:11-7:53, 24:14-16, 25:8, 28:23; Rom 3:31; 2Ti 3:15)

How this helps us in our understanding of the Bible (or more specifically, the gospel of Matthew) =

We avoid the use of Dispensational commentaries/commentators or the consideration of any interpretation that does not find consistency/support with the rest of Scripture (most esp. the Old Testament! e.g. Mat 18:15-20).

6.2.4. They accepted that everything written was not only true but also meant to establish authoritative doctrine/instruction/precepts.

(As it re: to it all being true = Joh 17:17; Pro 30:5; Psa 12:6, 19:7, 9, 119:86, 142; this includes historical data since oftentimes the doctrine Jesus or biblical author is attempting to establish is dependent upon the validity of such information – e.g. Mat 12:40-42; Luk 4:27; Joh 3:14; Heb 7:1-2; Heb 12:16-17; As it re: to everything est’g authoritative doctrine/instruction/precepts = Rom 15:4; 1Co 9:9-10; This includes the narrative portions and paradigms – e.g. Mat 19:3-6; Rom 4:10; 1Co 10:1-11)

How this helps us in our understanding of the Bible (or more specifically, the gospel of Matthew) =

We read asking the question, “What timeless doctrine/instruction/precept is being established by this text that God wants me to submit my life to? (2Ti 3:16).

[1] By using the term “Bible” or “Scriptures” what is being referred to are the 66 books which make up the Protestant corpus beginning with Genesis and ending with Revelation.

[2] (e.g.) DRC’s view that obedience is necessary to salvation is not original/unique to us, but a key doctrine within the historical and Reformed Church. The great 17^th century theologian Francis Turretin speaking in defense of the Reformed Churches of his day, writes, “Are good works necessary for salvation? We affirm. Are they required as a means and way for possessing salvation? This we hold. Although the proposition concerning the necessity of good works to salvation can be misunderstood and misapplied, it can be retained without danger if properly explained.” (Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology)