52 Brandon D. Crowe b) Thematic Link: Divine Sonship Second, the concept of divine sonship serves as a thematic link between Deut 32 and Matt 1 (34). As noted above, one of the references to Israel’s identity as God’s children comes in Deut 32,5. Significantly, Matthew alludes to the second half of this same verse in 12,39. Thus, Matthew alludes to a portion of the Song of Moses (32,5b) that immediately follows explicit mention of Israel’s sonship (32,5a). Similarly, Matt 17,17 draws upon Deut 32,5.20, both of which mention Israel’s filial identity. It thus appears that Matthew, although he has likely taken these references over from his sources (35), has strategically included portions of Deut 32 in his gospel that deal explicitly with Israel’s divine sonship. However, the widespread knowledge of the Song of Moses and the thematic similarities between Deut 32 and Matt 1 suggest that Matthew’s familiarity with Deut 32 was not limited to what he found in his sources. Just as Israel is portrayed as God’s son in the Song of Moses, so is the divine sonship of Jesus in view in Matt 1. This, however, is a contested point (36). Some have argued that Matt 1 primarily concerns Jesus’ Davidic sonship rather than his divine sonship (37). However, the motif of Jesus’ Davidic sonship, while clearly a concern of the opening chapter and entire Gospel of Matthew, does not eclipse Jesus’ divine sonship. Matthew’s purposes here are complex, so it would be a false dichotomy to suggest that Matthew has either Davidic or divine sonship in view. Instead, both are key themes throughout the gospel (and Matt 1), and it is not possible to divorce one from the other (38). However, if one must press the relationship between the two, Jesus’ divine sonship appears to be the basis for his Davidic sonship. In the words of David Bauer: “Matthew indicates that Jesus is able to function as son of David precisely because he is also the Son of God who has been conceived by the Holy Spirit (1:18, 20)” (39). It is also instructive that Novakovic, whose work focuses on Jesus as the Son of David, similarly argues that Jesus’ divine sonship is in view in Matt 1 (40). c) Obedience versus Disobedience This leads to the third observation: a reference to Deut 32 in Matt 1 anticipates two interrelated themes that are developed more fully throughout (34) It should also be noted that Deut 22,20-24 is assumed in Matt 1,18-23. (35) See the parallels in Mark 9,19; 11,29; Luke 9,41. (36) Among those who posit Son of God Christology in Matt 1 are R. PESCH, “Der Gottessohn im matthäischen Evangelienprolog (Mt 1–2): Beobachtungen zu den Zitationsformeln der Reflexionszitate”, Bib 48 (1967) 397; O. CULLMANN, The Christology of the New Testament (trans. S.C. GUTHRIE – C.A.M. HALL) (Philadelphia, PA 21963) 296; D.A. HANGER, Matthew 1–14 (WBC 33A; Dallas, TX 1993) 17. (37) So, e.g., J. NOLLAND, “No Son-of-God-Christology in Matthew 1:18-25”, JSNT 62 (1996) 11. (38) Cf. M.D. JOHNSON, The Purpose of the Biblical Genealogies. With Special Reference to the Setting of the Genealogies of Jesus (SNTSMS 8; Cambridge 21988) 224- 228. (39) D.R. BAUER, “The Kingship of Jesus in the Matthean Infancy Narrative: A Literary Analysis”, CBQ 57 (1995) 308-309 (italics added). (40) NOVAKOVIC, Messiah, 46-47, 63.