Treasures, New and Old - Matthew 13:51-52

[Ed Walsh]

Greetings, to you smarter people than me,

A quick and easy question on the passage below.

Matthew 13:51‭,52 ESV

52 Have you understood all these things?” They said to him, “Yes.”​

52 And he said to them, “Therefore every scribe who has been trained for the kingdom of heaven is like a master of a house, who brings out of his treasure what is new and what is old."​

Whatever additional teachings this passage may contain aside, Do you think that Jesus has in mind the Old Testament as the things old, and His teaching, and what would follow, being taught by the Spirit as the things new?

I have always thought so. If correct, I wonder if it is significant that Jesus mentions the new first, as (we believe) a priority over the old? The natural order is to say the old and then the new in that order.

Thoughts?

 

[Jeri Tanner]

I'm just throwing out a quick thought, but since he is speaking of "every scribe who has been trained for the kingdom of heaven,' who is "like the master of the house' and will be "bringing forth out of his treasure what is old and what is new," I'd think he is speaking of ministers-- trained and spiritual men-- expert and wise in setting forth the gospel with both those things that continue from the old administration into the new, and those things that are truly "new" (a better covenant, better blood, better mediator).

 

[Ed Walsh]

I'm just throwing out a quick thought, but since he is speaking of "every scribe who has been trained for the kingdom of heaven,' who is "like the master of the house' and will be "bringing forth out of his treasure what is old and what is new," I'd think he is speaking of ministers-- trained and spiritual men-- expert and wise in setting forth the gospel with both those things that continue from the old administration into the new, and those things that are truly "new" (a better covenant, better blood, better mediator)

All very good, thanks.
I wasn't going very deep by asking just one simple question, but I did a lot more reading this am on the passage. I liked this quote from Lenski. (Richard Lenski, though Lutheran, has become my go-to commentator on the four Gospels. His exposition on John 13-17 is wonderful almost beyond words)

vs. 52) And he said to them, For this reason every scribe, trained as a disciple of the kingdom of the heavens, is like to a houselord who brings forth out of his treasure things new and old.​

With διὰ τοῦτο Jesus refers to what he has accomplished in his disciples, having brought them to the understanding they have just acknowledged. In effect Jesus says, “This is what makes each of you like a houselord who,” etc. But he states it in the third person and thus objectively—perhaps he was thinking of Judas. The title “scribe,” used to designate rabbis who were educated in the law in the peculiar Jewish fashion, is here used in a broad sense to designate anyone who is versed in the Word. This is made evident by the specification “trained as a disciple of the kingdom,” etc. The passive μαθητεύομαι with the dative means to become someone’s disciple, and the aorist participle one who has graduated as such a disciple (B.-P. 763), gone through the school of the kingdom and imbibed its full spirit. Variant readings with ἐν or εἰς should not lead us to think the dative is locative, as R. 521 supposes. To be “discipled to the kingdom” makes the kingdom the teacher, which is not strange when we know that the kingdom centers in the King.​

Lenski, R. C. H. (1961). The Interpretation of St. Matthew’s Gospel (pp. 550–551). Augsburg Publishing House.

 

[Jeri Tanner]

Do you think that Jesus has in mind the Old Testament as the things old, and His teaching, and what would follow, being taught by the Spirit as the things new?

I guess this is what I wonder about... I would have a problem setting the OT against the New in this way? I see a lot of continuity from the OT to the New, except of course for those certain ceremonial laws. I wouldn't say that Jesus taught anything contrary to OT teaching; I'm sure that's not what you're saying, though. We are having an excellent sermon series on the Sermon on the Mount right now, and our pastor has showed that when Jesus said, "You have heard it said... but I say..." he was correcting the wrong teaching of the Pharisees on the OT, not introducing new ways of obeying or thinking about the Law. (Is this related to what you have in mind?)

 

[Ed Walsh]

I guess this is what I wonder about... I would have a problem setting the OT against the New in this way? I see a lot of continuity from the OT to the New, except of course for those certain ceremonial laws. I wouldn't say that Jesus taught anything contrary to OT teaching; I'm sure that's not what you're saying, though. We are having an excellent sermon series on the Sermon on the Mount right now, and our pastor has showed that when Jesus said, "You have heard it said... but I say..." he was correcting the wrong teaching of the Pharisees on the OT, not introducing new ways of obeying or thinking about the Law. (Is this related to what you have in mind?)

Man, I blew that one. I agree with everything you said. If what you wrote was your take on what I meant, you were far too gentle with me. I know you are a lady, and you always act like one, but I deserved both barrels if I meant what you thought. I'll bet I believe in an even grander continuity between the Testaments than the way you put it. I consider the "treasures" of the OT as equally important as the NT. And in some ways, superior. Wow, did I blow that one!

Thanks for not just shaking your head and allowing the blind to lead the blind.

 

[Jeri Tanner]

I'll bet I believe in an even grander continuity between the Testaments than the way you put it.

That's what I've always seen you express!

 

[Jemand]

All very good, thanks.
I wasn't going very deep by asking just one simple question, but I did a lot more reading this am on the passage. I liked this quote from Lenski. (Richard Lenski, though Lutheran, has become my go-to commentator on the four Gospels. His exposition on John 13-17 is wonderful almost beyond words)

vs. 52) And he said to them, For this reason every scribe, trained as a disciple of the kingdom of the heavens, is like to a houselord who brings forth out of his treasure things new and old.​

With διὰ τοῦτο Jesus refers to what he has accomplished in his disciples, having brought them to the understanding they have just acknowledged. In effect Jesus says, “This is what makes each of you like a houselord who,” etc. But he states it in the third person and thus objectively—perhaps he was thinking of Judas. The title “scribe,” used to designate rabbis who were educated in the law in the peculiar Jewish fashion, is here used in a broad sense to designate anyone who is versed in the Word. This is made evident by the specification “trained as a disciple of the kingdom,” etc. The passive μαθητεύομαι with the dative means to become someone’s disciple, and the aorist participle one who has graduated as such a disciple (B.-P. 763), gone through the school of the kingdom and imbibed its full spirit. Variant readings with ἐν or εἰς should not lead us to think the dative is locative, as R. 521 supposes. To be “discipled to the kingdom” makes the kingdom the teacher, which is not strange when we know that the kingdom centers in the King.​

Lenski, R. C. H. (1961). The Interpretation of St. Matthew’s Gospel (pp. 550–551). Augsburg Publishing House.

The copyright page in my 1964 reprint of Lenski’s volume on Matthew shows the following information,

Copyright, 1943
The Wartburg Press
Copyright Assigned 1961 to Augsburg Publishing House

(We lost Richard Lenski on August 14, 1936)