17 is also parallel but the verb form is an infinitive, which cannot communicate number.

Hagner, M atthew 1-13, xlviii, notes that “It is estimated that 80 percent o f Jesus’ sayings are in the fonn o f

6:19-20 Mf| GTiaccuptCeTe Ù|Ilv Ôqoaupoùç èirl tf^ç ynq . . . GqoaupLCeTe ôè ùpîy GqoaupoÙQ kv oùpayco

Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth. . . but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven. (RSV)

18:18 ’Apqy A-eyco upXy boa kkv ôqoriTe èirl xf\ç yfjG eom i ôeôepéva kv oùpayw,

Kal boa èày XuoTixe èirl ifjç Yhg eoxai ÀeA,upéya kv oùpaycô.

Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. (RSV)

23:9 Kal ïïaiepa \xx]KaÀéorjTe ùpwy èirl xfiG YftG, yap eoiLV opwy 6 Trairip 6

oùpaytoç.^®

And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. (RSV)

And the antithetic implied pairs include:

11:23 Kal ou, Kat|)apyaoup, pq ecoç oupavoû ùi(fwGT]OT|; 'ecjç aôou KaxaPqoiri

And you, Capernaum, will you be exalted to heaven? You shall be brought down to Hades. (RSV)

21:25 TO panTLopa to Tcoayyou iroGev fjy; k^ oupayoO q k^ ayGpwirwy The baptism of John, whence was it? From heaven or from men? (RSV)

One can see that in each of these cases, some antithesis, comparison, tension or contrast is present in the conjunction of the two terms. The exact nature of this antithesis and the degree of distinction can vary somewhat depending on context. For example, in

11:23 the combination of heaven and Hades is idiomatic and hyperbolic more than a reference to two specific places, but the usage is not merismatic; the two poles are contrasted. Similarly, 5:34-35 compares heaven as God’s throne and the earth as his footstool. In this expression from Isaiah 66:1 there is a close connection between heaven and earth, but the usage is not a simple merism; a contrast between God’s dwelling place and the lower place of the earth is communicated, even though God’s rulership over both is declared. Similarly, in 18:18, although heaven and earth are obviously organically related, the two different realms of heaven and earth are in view here. Most of the antithetic pairs, however, have a much stronger sense of contrast. Whether the text concerns where to lay up treasures (6:19-20), the source of John the Baptist’s teachings (21:25), or the prayer for

Notice that here the adjective oupavLog is used instead o f oûpayôç, but the sense is the same. Interestingly, most o f the English translations render this expression as “Father, who is in heaven,” rather than “heavenly Father,” probably stemming from a sense o f the contrast apparent here with “father on earth.”

the consummation of God’s kingdom (6:10), a contrast of the two realms of heaven and earth is present.

We can also observe that the antithetic pairs stand out from the merismatic by their structure. Apart from 17:25+18:1 and 16:17 - the loosest of the heaven and earth

combinations - each occurrence of the antithetic word pair is rendered in Matthew using prepositional phrases, most often in the form of kv (tc5 ) oupavw . . . è ir l (T fjç) yho, but also with other words. As Schneider notes, this prepositional form of the heaven and earth pair does not refer to the created sphere, “but to the heavenly world and the angels on the one hand, and the earthly world of men on the other.”^^

We also observed above that all of the thematic pairs are unique to Matthew. The fact that the thematic pairs are consistently antithetic and often put into a particular

grammatical structure shows Matthew’s emphasis on the contrastive relationship of heaven and earth. Commenting on the heaven and earth pair in 24:30, Gundry states, “the phrase also sets up a contrast between heaven, where the sign of the Son of Man will appear, and earth, where all the tribes will mourn. This contrast typifies Matthew’s composition.”^^ Kari Syreeni’s view of heaven and earth throughout Matthew is similar: “The emphasis [of heaven and earth] is primarily not on the total universe with its two parts, but on the

dichotomy, the innate separateness of the heavenly and mundane spheres.”^®

3. A Fitting Climax - 28:18

Rudolf Schnackenburg is one of the few commentators to make mention of the two different senses of the heaven and earth pairs in Matthew. Commenting on the phrase “on earth as it is in heaven” (6:10), he writes, “ ‘Heaven and earth’ can stand for the whole world (5:18; 11:25; 24:35; 28:18), but it can also counterpoise the divine and human realms (5:34-35; 16:19; 18:18; 23:9).””

These uses correspond with what I am terming the merismatic and antithetic categories in Matthew. But Schnackenburg classifies four of Matthew’s occurrences as

W. G. Thompson briefly observes the heaven and earth pairs in his monograph, ’s Advice to a

D ivided Community: M att 17:22-18:35 (Analecta Biblica 44; Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1970). He states

that heaven and earth at times signifies totality, but “in expressions o f place the nouns are separated, and some contrast is always implied” (189). N. T. Wright remarks that in mainline Jewish thought the heavenly and earthly realms are “distinct but closely intertwined” as contrasted to their total separation in

Epicureanism or their fusion in pantheism. N. T. Wright, The New Testament and the People o f God

(London: SPCK, 1992), 290.

Schneider, “Im Himmel - auf Erden,” 294.

Gundry, Matthew, 488. Unfortunately, these insightful remarks are not developed.

Kari Syreeni, “Between Heaven and Earth: On the Structure o f Matthew’s Symbolic Universe,” JSNTAQ

(1990), 3.

merismatic (“stand[ing] for the whole world”) rather than three as I have listed above. He agrees in identifying 5:18,11:25, and 24:35 in this category, but he also includes 28:18: “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.” Most, if not all, commentators would agree, even though few put it in those terms. That is, while most scholars do not even consider the difference between the merismatic and antithetic senses, nearly all understand 28:18 to be a reference to Jesus’ universal authority. However, this standard interpretation is in need of re-examination.

In fact, it is difficult to decide whether to place the statement èôoGïi [ioi TT&oa

k^OMoia kv oùpaycô Kal èirl [Tf)ç] yhc into the merismatic or antithetic group. It evinces elements of both categories. Like the other merismatic occurrences, oùpayoç precedes yfj and they are closely connected with Kal. Additionally, the heaven and earth phrase is obviously connected to the universal statement “all authority.” On the other hand, the phrase occurs in Matthew’s standard antithetic form using èy oùpaycô in comparison with eirl [Tfiç] yfjç. Thus, how are we to classify this final occurrence of the heaven and earth pair?

It is best to categorize 28:18 as primarily antithetic, all the while acknowledging that this does not eliminate the aspect of the universality of Jesus’ authority communicated by the phrase. That is, because the two different realms of heaven and earth are being spoken of (see on Schneider below), it is best to classify this text as primarily antithetic. Yet, at the same time, as observed above, the exact nature of this antithesis varies by text: sometimes the tension or contrast is stronger than at other times, even while the close relationship between heaven and earth is not denied. Such is the case in 28:18. Also, the recurrence of the standardized prepositional phrase usage as well as the frequency of the contrastive pairs throughout Matthew makes the antithetic usage most likely. Corroborative evidence of this interpretation comes from BDAG. Under the entiy for oùpayoç, two classes of the combination of heaven and earth are given: a) forming a unity as the totality of creation; and b) standing independently beside the earth or contrasted with it. Notably,

28:18 is listed under the second c a t e g o r y . I

!

But the most compelling piece of evidence that 28:18 is antithetic rather than | merismatic comes from Gerhard Schneider. Schneider makes perceptive remarks about |

t