The Song of Moses and Divine Begetting in Matt 1,20 53 the gospel. These are: (i) Jesus as the obedient Son of God, in contrast to (ii) disobedient Israel (41). Matthew clearly portrays Jesus’ obedient sonship in light of Israel at other points in his gospel, and this passage may be one more indication of this tendency (42). Of course, this passage would be only a veiled reference to Jesus’ filial obedience, but it lies squarely in the trajectory that becomes clearer as the first few chapters of Matthew unfold. Jesus’ obedience is also be highlighted by the pronouncement in 1,21 that he will save his people from their sins (43). Whatever one’s view regarding who Matthew intends by the phrase to;n lao;n aujtou' in 1,21, a probable allusion to Ps 130,8 (129,8 LXX), which speaks of Israel’s redemption, and the lengths to which Matthew has gone in the genealogy to link Jesus with Israel’s history, suggest 1,21 refers in some way to Israel (44). If it is correct to see in Jesus’ divine begetting an allusion to Israel’s begetting in Deut 32,18, this would link Jesus anaphorically to Israel’s failures in the exile (1,11-12.17), and cataphorically to Israel’s need of redemption (1,21). Indeed, the sin in view in 1,21 includes Israel’s exile mentioned in the genealogy (45), which was a primary curse of Deuteronomy in general (Deut 28,36-38), and the Song of Moses in particular (Deut 32,21). Thus, the application of a text that speaks of Israel’s divine begetting from the Song of Moses to Jesus would both closely identify him with Israel and distinguish him from them as their Deliverer who will be seen to “fulfill all righteousness” (3,15). (41) Matthew’s treatment of Israel is notoriously complex. For the present purposes, the comments of J.R.C. COUSLAND (The Crowds in the Gospel of Matthew [NTS 102; Leiden 2002] 22) will serve as a general framework. Cousland observes that the Jewish people are represented both as a lost flock who are instinctively drawn to Jesus, their true Shepherd, and as the obdurate people of God who have perennially and consistently rejected God’s messengers. Cousland’s study, which focuses on the crowds, suggests that the paradox of the crowds is the paradox of the Jewish people. The present article focuses particularly on the obduracy of Israel, which is also a major emphasis of the Song of Moses. (42) Cf. Matt 4.1-11. On Jesus’ obedience in Matthew, see DAVIES – ALLISON, Matthew, I, 263-264; R. BEATON, Isaiah’s Christ in Matthew’s Gospel (SNTSMS 123; Cambridge 2003) 176; D.J. VERSEPUT, “The Role and Meaning of the ‘Son of God’ Title in Matthew’s Gospel”, NTS 33 (1987) 542; R.N. LONGENECKER, “The Foundational Conviction of New Testament Christology: The Obedience/Faithfulness/Sonship of Christ”, Jesus of Nazareth. Essays on the Historical Christ and New Testament Christology (eds. J.B. GREEN – M. TURNER) (Grand Rapids, MI 1994) 485; T.L. DONALDSON, “The Vindicated Son: A Narrative Approach to Matthean Christology”, Contours of Christology in the New Testament (ed. R.N. LONGENECKER) (Grand Rapids, MI 2005) 117; D.P. SENIOR, The Passion Narrative according to Matthew. A Redactional Study (BETL 39; Leuven 1975) 4; LUZ, Theology of Matthew, 36. (43) M.A. POWELL (“The Plots and Subplots of Matthew’s Gospel”, NTS 38 [1992] 195) observes that Matt 9,13 identifies God’s people as sinners. Also see 4,17 where the call to repentance assumes the problem of sin. (44) LUZ (Matthew 1–7. A Commentary [trans. J.E. CROUCH] [Hermeneia; Minneapolis, MN 2007] 95) believes “his people” refers to Israel. FRANCE (Matthew, 53) suggests Israel is the primary referent, but the phrase has universal implications. Similarly, DAVIES – ALLISON (Matthew, I, 210) believe the church comprised of both Jews and Gentiles is in view. TURNER (Matthew, 67-68) suggests the concept of a remnant of “true Israel”. (45) So B. REPSCHINSKI, “‘For He Will Save His People from Their Sins’ (Matthew 1:21): A Christology for Christian Jews”, CBQ 68 (2006) 253.