Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.

The Historic Faith
Sign in

Jumpstarter 3 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion
Question 3
He treats Matthew as the strategic “starting place” for Christianity and for understanding the Kingdom, citing early Christian testimony that it was likely the first written New Testament book—how would early Christians’ prioritizing of Matthew reshape what modern Christians assume is “central” (e.g., assurance language, grace emphasis, doctrinal summaries), and what would it cost to reorder our reading that way?
Another way to ask: If early Christians put Matthew first when learning the faith, how might that change what we think is most important today? What would be hard about changing our Bible-reading order and focus like that?

Direct Answer Based on the transcript, prioritizing Matthew would make Jesus’ kingdom teachings—especially the Sermon on the Mount and the call to “do” his sayings—feel central, not optional. The “cost” would be letting Jesus’ commands challenge comfortable doctrinal systems that minimize obedience or treat commandments as secondary.

Support from Transcript:

  • He says early Christians testified Matthew was “the first of the four Gospels to be written” and “probably the first New Testament book.”
  • He calls Matthew “the most important New Testament book” because it contains “more of the direct teachings of Jesus than any other.”
  • He says Matthew is where you learn “what Christianity is really all about,” especially “the Kingdom of God.”
  • He argues many Christians miss the Kingdom because they begin with Romans, not Matthew.
  • He points to Matthew’s ending of the Sermon on the Mount: those who hear and don’t do are on sand; those who do are on rock (Matt. 7:21–27).
  • He claims Luther resisted Matthew because it confronts readers with “many commandments.”
Discussion Follow-ups What would happen to your “center” if you began with Jesus’ commands rather than with later doctrinal summaries? What practices or assumptions would you have to unlearn to read Matthew without defensiveness?