Jesus Christ: The New Moses

Jesus Christ: The New Moses in the Gospel of Matthew

In many ways, the New Testament is a thumbnail version of the Old Testament. Many of the stories and ideas that are first presented in the Old Testament recur in the New Testament. This repetition reinforces the idea that Jesus is the promised Messiah for the Jews, not simply another prophet. In other words, through Christ the stories in the Old Testament find repetition and completion in the New Testament. Therefore, one finds that many elements of Jesus' story are foreshadowed in the Old Testament.

One of the more interesting ways that the New Testament repeats themes one finds in the Old Testament is the way that it links Jesus to Moses. While many modern Christians think of Jesus as a Christian figure, it is critical to realize that Jesus' Jewishness was a very important element in the early church. It was through his Jewishness that he was connected to the culture of his time period, and by being a Jew that he could claim legitimacy as the Messiah. In many ways, Jesus plays a similar role in the New Testament to the role that Moses played in the Old Testament. Moses was the central prophet and patriarch of Judaism. Therefore, in highlighting Jesus' similarities to Moses, one can show how Jesus is not the founder of a new religion, but the continuation of a deep and established religious tradition.

Matthew's Christology

A Christology is simply a study of the teachings of Jesus. Therefore, when discussing the Christology of the Book of Matthew, one is really focusing on how Matthew's treatment of Jesus differentiates itself from other descriptions of Jesus. What quickly becomes apparent when reading Matthew, especially in comparison to the other Gospels, is that Matthew focuses on Jesus' Jewishness. In order to understand why this is critical, one must understand historical Christianity. First, historical Christianity had not yet separated from Judaism; early Christians did not identify themselves as such, instead they identified themselves as Jewish. Moreover, Jesus was strongly identified as the Jewish Messiah, particularly in Matthew. The whole reason that many people, particularly in early Christianity, chose to follow Jesus was because he fulfilled the promises of a Messiah. Therefore, Matthew's Christology focuses on Jesus' Jewishness and how Jesus embodies the Messianic promises.

The goal in the book appears to be to demonstrate how following Jesus is entirely consistent with Judaism. More importantly, Matthew focuses on the fact that, while following Jesus may seem inconsistent with Judaism as it had come to be practiced during Jesus' lifetime and the period of time immediately following Jesus, Jesus practiced Judaism as it was meant to be practiced. In other words, Jesus represented traditional Judaism. In order to do this, Matthew needed to draw parallels between Jesus and the teachings of the Old Testament. While Jesus embodied Old Testament traditions in a number of ways, one of the most meaningful parallels between Jesus and the Old Testament is how Jesus acted in many ways as a new version of Moses, acting as a mediator between God and the people and bringing law to the nation of Israel.

Portrayal of Jesus & Moses in the Gospel

One of the interesting aspects of Matthew's portrayal of Jesus is how Jesus is described as self-identifying in the Gospel. Matthew may have been concerned with establishing that Jesus was the Messiah, but Jesus was not known for consistently identifying himself those terms. Instead, Jesus frequently identifies himself as a rabbi or a teacher.

Furthermore, he is seen by others as a teacher, as well.

This is an important referent to Judaic tradition, which has always placed an emphasis on the importance of the teacher / mentor role. However, throughout the Old Testament one sees the prophet or teacher whose teachings are rejected by the people, and Jesus has his teaching rejected by many, though not all of the people he sought to teach. This helps tie Jesus to Moses. Moses has become such a well-respected patriarch that people sometimes forget about how he was initially treated in the Bible. People did not want to hear his ethical teaching, and he was subject to some rather intense rejection when he attempted to impose ethical rules.

The comparisons between Jesus and Moses are not difficult to make; after all, Jesus repeatedly compares his own teachings to Mosaic Law.

He takes pains to distinguish his teachings from Mosaic Law, but he also stresses the importance of those laws. He uses them as a starting point or building block for his own teachings. In doing so, he stresses the continuity and connection between his message and between traditional Jewish teachings.

In addition, both Jesus and Moses had no intention of being the sole teachers or rabbis. Instead, they both intended that their students take what they had learned and go out and spread the word. Moses specifically instructed Joshua to observe the commandments, thus spreading Judaism. Likewise, when Jesus knew that death was imminent, he instructed his disciples to go out into the world and spread his teachings. In a way, both men were evangelical in their approach to ministry and teaching.

Jesus as the Jewish Messiah

Jesus is so frequently referred to as the Messiah that many people fail to consider the historical and religious origins of Jesus' unique role first in Judaism. In fact, modern day Christians sometimes view Judaism and Christianity as two distinct entities, without a full recognition of the fact that, without Judaism, there would be no Christ, no Christianity, because Jesus was the Messiah that had been promised to the Jews.

The Historical Component

One of the important components of the Messiah is that he is going to be a descendant of Abraham. Therefore, Matthew focuses on Jesus' lineage, being certain to establish that he is a descendant of David. This is interesting, of course, because Jesus' lineage is not traced through Joseph, his earthly father, but through his mother, Mary, a convention that reflects Jewish tradition, though not necessarily religious law. It is important that Jesus be identified as a descendant of David, not because that would have been required of a Christian Messiah; simply being a son of God would have sufficed for that role, but because Jewish Messianic traditions predicted that the Messiah would be a descendant of David.

Jesus' Davidic heritage is very important because of the interrelated ideas of the Messiah and the kingdom of heaven. Modern Christians think of the idea of a kingdom as something heavenly, but the Jews had a tradition of actual kings and the kingdom on earth was intrinsically related to God's kingdom. Therefore, if someone was to be the promised king of kings, it would only be logical for that person to be able to trace lineage to the actual patriarchal kings of Israel. Jesus could do that because he was a descendant of David.

However, while the earthly kingdom of the Jews was connected to the spiritual kingdom of heaven, it would be wrong to suggest that there was no disconnect between the two. Jesus served as a link to bring the heavenly kingdom to the earth. One way that Matthew demonstrates Jesus' heavenly abilities is by demonstrating his abilities as a miracle worker. He is capable of doing things that are supernatural because Jesus is not strictly of the natural. Therefore, he can perform miracles, such as the routine healings and other minor miracles depicted throughout Matthew.

Perhaps the most critical association that Matthew makes between Jesus and the Old Testament is in his referrals to Isaiah 53. Isaiah 53 is often referred to as the Suffering Servant, and Matthew highlights those ways in which Jesus is reminiscent of the Suffering Servant described in Isaiah 53. Even those who are unfamiliar with the Old Testament but familiar with the idea of Jesus would find startling similarities between the Suffering Servant described in that passage, and Jesus as described throughout the Gospels, particularly in Matthew. It is in Isaiah that one first gets the notion of the Servant as the lamb of God, to be sacrificed for the sins of others. In fact, several passages in Isaiah discuss the poor treatment that this Suffering Servant will experience, and they are the same trials that Jesus endures, particularly in Matthew's Gospel. Though not by all, Jesus was despised and rejected by men, just as the Suffering Servant is in Isaiah 53:3. Moreover, Isaiah foreshadows some of how Jesus died; "he was pierced for our transgressions."

While the Suffering Servant passage in Isaiah 53 may not overtly encompass the word Messiah, it is clearly a depiction of a Messiah-type person. The descriptions of this Suffering Servant differ from actual depictions of the faithful who have suffered, like Job. Job's suffering was personal to him; he did not take on symbolic or actual suffering for a group of people. Moreover, his suffering was not globally redemptive; for the Suffering Servant, "upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace," a condition that did not occur for Job.

Furthermore it is with Isaiah that one first becomes acquainted with the idea that the Messiah would die. "And they made his grave with the wicked and with a rich man in his death, although he had done no violence, and there was no deceit in his mouth."

The passage clearly predicts a Messianic figure who dies, in order to bring peace to the multitudes. "Out of the anguish of his soul he shall see and be satisfied; by his knowledge shall the righteous one, my servant, make many to be accounted righteous, and he shall bear their iniquities."

It speaks directly to the fact that he will die and that this death is necessary. "Because he poured out his soul to death and was numbered with the transgressors; yet he bore the sin of many, and makes intercession for the transgressors."

The Old and the New Covenants

The Old Covenant and the New Covenant both explain how the Jews can align themselves with God's will, and they spell out God's law. Many people think of the New Covenant as a substantial change from the Old Covenant, but that is a misconception. Instead, the New Covenant focuses on the intent of the Old Covenant, making it clear that following the intent of the law is a more critical component than following the law without regard to intent.

Perhaps the most obvious similarity between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant is the role that blood plays in both covenants. Moses is a mediator of the Old Covenant through blood, in that he used blood sacrifices in his communication and worship of God. Specifically, Moses sacrifices oxen to the Lord.

He uses blood from those oxen to consecrate the altar.

Then, "Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, 'Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD hath made with you concerning these words.'"

Jesus' mediation of the New Covenant is also explicitly through the blood. At the last supper, which is Jesus' last meal with his disciples, he passes around a cup of wine, which is a symbol of his blood, telling the disciples, "Drink ye all of it; for this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins."

Jesus' Supremacy and Authority

There are allusions to Jesus' supremacy and authority throughout the Gospel of Matthew. Anytime that Matthew is connecting Jesus with Moses, he is making it clear that Jesus has taken over Moses' role as the law giver, and, thus, the supreme authority on Jewish law. However, Jesus authority is only partially dependent upon his connection to traditional Jewish culture and religious tradition. He is the Messiah, but that role, while predicted in Jewish tradition, stands both within and without Jewish cultural tradition. Moreover, while Matthew refers to Jesus as the Son of God, the Gospel of Matthew does not contain a significant number of instances where Jesus is asserting his own supremacy. The main exception to this is in the Sermon on the Mount. It is in this sermon that Jesus makes his most sweeping assertion about his role. "In the sermon on the mount Jesus states that he has come to 'fulfil' the law of Moses, from which no smallest fragment shall pass away until the end of the age ([Matthew]5:17-18)."

He makes it clear in the sermon that he is laying claim to being the Messiah, and not simply allowing others to draw that conclusion about him.

Jesus the New Moses

When one considers that Moses was the mediator of the first covenant between God and the Jews and Jesus was the mediator of the second covenant between them, it should come as no surprise that there are similarities between the two men. However, the similarities extend far beyond their chosen roles as religious emissaries and seem to reflect the fact that Matthew was consciously linking Jesus to older Jewish traditions. Taken as a whole, they show a connection between why these two particular men were chosen to fulfill their roles. In a historical context, the similarities may have helped make Jesus appear legitimate by strengthening his connection to the Old Testament. In more modern times, when the Christian focus has turned to the New Testament at the risk of ignoring the Old Testament, the relationship works the other way, lending greater legitimacy to Moses' and the promises and obligations conveyed in the Old Covenant.

One of the striking similarities between Moses and Jesus is that they were both hunted as babies. Looking back at Moses' infancy, one recalls that Pharaoh, the king of Egypt, had ordered that all Hebrew male infants be killed.

However, Moses' mother and sister contrived a plan that allowed Moses to live, though not in their care. Ironically, Moses grows up in Pharaoh's household, not an actual king, but a symbolic heir to a kingdom, which lends him a royalty that he would have lacked had he simply been permitted to grow up as Hebrew boy. Similarly, Herod orders all of the male babies in Bethlehem be slaughtered.

However, angel had warned Joseph that Herod would do so, and Joseph and Mary had been able to flee with Jesus before Herod's decree, so that he was the only male baby to survive Herod's plan.

Another interesting connection between the two men is that they both take flight, and the flight that they take is a similar, but opposite path. As a baby, Moses does not flee to save his life; he is set adrift, but is actually safe in the heart of danger. However, later in life, when Moses' life is threatened, he flees from Egypt to Israel.

He later returns to Egypt from Israel, and Egypt is the location where he must take many critical steps as a religious leader.

In contrast, Jesus spends much of his childhood and young adulthood in Israel. When his life is threatened, he flees from Israel to Egypt and then returns to Israel, which is the site of many of his critical steps as a religious leader.

Moses and Jesus also both engage in a type of ritual/spiritual fast. Fasting was not as unusual during ancient times as it is in modern times, so the fact that both men engaged in fasting is not, in and of itself, a noteworthy similarity. However, they both engaged in a 40 day long fast, which was unusual during that time period. Moses fasted for 40 days while he was on Mount Sinai.

Likewise, Jesus fasted for 40 days when he was in the desert being tempted by Satan.

These little details revealing similarities between the two patriarchal figures helps highlight the transition from Old Testament and Old Covenant to New Testament and New Covenant without requiring a delineation or break with ancient Judaism.

While this is not explicit, there is another, more tenuous connection between Jesus and Moses. Moses is believed to have written the first five books of the New Testament, although authorship has never been conclusively established. Jesus is not believed to have written any books in the Bible. However, his core teachings are thought to be contained in five speeches in the book of Matthew.

He is not considered the author of these passages, but the passages are considered to encapsulate the core of his teachings. Therefore, both men are believed to have five significant and distinct teachings.

The final similarity between Moses and Jesus is apparent at their deaths. Moses' death was unique in several different ways. First, Moses knew that his death was forthcoming. God has informed Moses that he will die in the Mountains after he has seen the Promised Land, but before he has the chance to enter it.

Jesus is also aware that he is going to die; he knows that he is going to tried and executed, even though he has committed no actual crime. Next, Moses died with regrets with the understanding that is was his behavior contributed to his failure to enter the Promised Land. One might even suggest that he died with regrets. While it might be a stretch to say that Jesus died with regrets, but Matthew presents strong evidence that Jesus died with something akin to regret. "Around the ninth hour, Jesus shouted in a loud voice, saying, 'Eli lama sabachthani?' which is, 'My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?'"

Finally, both of their physical deaths were temporary, and Moses' resurrection was connected to Jesus. The night of Jesus' transfiguration, Moses came and walked with him. Finally, the very earth seemed to respond to Moses' death and Jesus' death in similar ways. At Moses' death, the world was said to storm and the angels to mourn, and at Jesus death several cataclysmic events occurred, including the sun going dark, the temple veil being rent, the earth quaking, and the dead rising up.

The Sermon on the Mount

One of the clearest similarities between Moses and Jesus occurs with Jesus' Sermon on the Mount. First, the location is important. Moses was a leader in Israel prior to his receiving the Ten Commandments on Mount Sinai, but he was not a significant leader. There was nothing about him that made him stand out as a religious leader prior to that point in time. In fact, even when Moses received the revelation in the burning bush, he still lacked credibility as a religious leader. He had received the message, but had not yet been able to transmit that message. Furthermore, his message was one that people did not want to receive. He was speaking about ethics to a group of people that had, to that point, not been acting with any specific positive ethical guidelines. That moment when Moses goes up to the top of Mount Sinai to receive the law, particularly the Ten Commandments, from God is a transformative moment in his ability as a religious leader.

Likewise, when Jesus chooses to give a new law to the people, he does so from a mountain.

Furthermore, in Matthew, the Sermon on the Mount is presented as a springboard.

It is not a series of commandments or laws, like those that Moses brought down from Mount Sinai. Instead, with the Beatitudes, Jesus is seeking to assure those who are weak and oppressed that they will have a place in Heaven.

In fact, while Jesus may not be advocating the strict adherence to Mosaic Law that was seen as a necessary part of daily life for Jews during that time period, it would be erroneous to suggest that Jesus is advocating ignoring those laws or rules. On the contrary, Jesus actually urges his followers to adhere to the law, but he wants them to focus on the spirit of the law rather than the letter of the law. The spirit of the law is love, which is what Jesus emphasizes.