Charles H. Talbert, «Indicative and Imperative in Matthean Soteriology», Vol. 82 (2001) 515-538
It is usually thought that Matthew emphasizes the imperative at the expense of the indicative, demand over gift. Identifying Matthew’s indicative is difficult because in chapters 5–25, insofar as disciples are concerned, the narrative is told in terms of ‘omnipotence behind the scenes’. In Matt 5–25 four techniques appropriate to such a method of narration speak of the divine indicative in relation to the imperative. They are (1) I am with you/in your midst, (2) invoking the divine name, (3) it has been revealed to you/you have been given to know, and (4) being with Jesus. They show Matthew’s soteriology is by grace from start to finish.
It was the association with the teacher that gave the disciples their benefits and made them better people.
These statements about the benefits disciples received from ‘being with’ a philosopher do not refer to the disciples’ imitation of their teacher but rather to their being enabled by their association with him. This is a philosophic variation on the general Mediterranean belief that one’s being in the presence of a deity causes transformation of the self54. Pythagoras, for example, declared that ‘our souls experience a change when we enter a temple and behold the images of the gods face to face’ (Seneca, Ep. 94.42). This conviction was widespread in antiquity (e.g., Corpus Hermeticum 10.6; 13.3; Philo, Moses 1.158-159; 2 Cor 3,18; 1 John 3,6; Ep. Diognetus 2.5). In all such cases it is a matter of human transformation by vision. In the case of the philosopher, the vision is not of a god but of a god-like man. The effects are the same: human transformation.
The benefits, it was believed, were not limited to being with the philosopher in person. Recollection had its impact. Xenophon, Memorabilia 4.1.1, speaks about the recollection of Socrates by his disciples when they were separated as an aid to virtue. ‘The constant recollection of him in absence brought no small good to his constant companions and followers’. Books and the use of the imagination also played a part. Seneca, Ep. 52.7 and 11.8-10, advocates looking to the ancients for models with whom to associate. In Ep. 25.6, he says that if one cannot be in a philosopher’s presence, one should come to know him through books, acting as if he were constantly at one’s side. Epistles 25.5, 11.10, and 11.8, advocate using the imagination to picture one’s teacher as ever before him and himself as ever in the teacher’s presence. The presence of the disciples with their master through books and imagination was regarded, however, as second best. Seneca, Ep. 6.5, writes: ‘The living voice and the intimacy of a common life will help you more than the written word’. The point of all this is that disciples’ being with their teacher was an aid to personal transformation. Being with him conveyed benefits in their moral progress. Being with him enabled them to do good and to be better people. Plutarch captured part of why that is so. In De prof. virt., 84d, he says that one’s being in the presence of a good and perfect man has the effect: ‘great is his craving all but to merge his own identity in that of the good man’.
Matthew used the idea of disciples being with their teacher to