Matthew Chapter 3 — The Temptation and John's Imprisonment

Overview

UPDV chapter 3 covers the temptation of Jesus in the wilderness (3:1-11), his withdrawal to Galilee after John's arrest (3:12), and the circumstances of John's imprisonment by Herod (3:13-15). The temptation narrative is drawn from the Q source (the sayings tradition shared by Matthew and Luke), the transition from Mark, and John's imprisonment is relocated here from canonical Matthew 14:3-5 to restore the chronological sequence.

The Temptation (3:1-11)

The temptation narrative is one of the strongest Q passages in the Gospel. Davies and Allison identify five points of agreement between Matthew and Luke against Mark that confirm a common written source beyond Mark's brief two-verse account (Mark 1:12-13). Mark provides only the framework — Jesus driven into the wilderness, forty days, with wild beasts and angels — while Q supplies the three-part dialogue between Jesus and the devil, structured around quotations from Deuteronomy 6-8.

The narrative recapitulates Israel's wilderness testing. Where Israel failed during forty years in the wilderness, Jesus succeeds during forty days. Each of the three temptations corresponds to a specific Israelite failure, and Jesus answers each with a quotation from Deuteronomy: "Man will not live by bread alone" (Deut 8:3) answers the complaint about food, "You will not make trial of Yahweh your God" (Deut 6:16) answers the demand for signs, and "You will worship Yahweh your God and serve only him" (Deut 6:13) answers the temptation to idolatry. Davies and Allison describe this as "a haggadic tale spun largely out of Deuteronomy 6-8 and akin to rabbinic disputations," citing a close parallel in the Babylonian Talmud (Sanhedrin 89b) where Satan debates Abraham using Scripture.

Davies and Allison think there is a dominical core behind the haggadic elaboration — "if Jesus did speak, in a parabolic fashion, of a time of testing and fasting in which he believed he had gained a victory over the devil" — but the narrative form itself is "clearly the work of a Christian scribe working with Deuteronomy 6-8." The two early sources (Mark's Adam typology in the wilderness and Q's Israel typology with the Deuteronomy quotations) "ultimately derive from two different interpretations of the same story or parable." This double attestation in independent sources strengthens the case that the temptation tradition goes back to Jesus himself, even if the literary form is a later scribal composition.

Editorial Trimming in 3:4

The UPDV preserves "Man will not live by bread alone" but omits the second half of the Deuteronomy 8:3 quotation found in the canonical text: "but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God." Davies and Allison confirm this extension is a Matthean editorial addition: "This was probably the extent of the quotation in Q. In accordance with his interest in obedience to the Torah, Matthew has added 'but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.'" Luke 4:4 likewise has only the shorter form, confirming that Q quoted only the first half. The compiler expanded the citation to reinforce his Torah-obedience theology — a characteristic editorial concern that appears throughout the Gospel.

The "Exceedingly High Mountain" (3:8)

Davies and Allison note that the "exceedingly high mountain" from which the devil shows Jesus all the kingdoms of the world is "probably redactional" — Luke's parallel has no mountain. This connects to the compiler's broader mountain theology: major revelatory events in canonical Matthew occur on mountains (the Sermon in chapter 5, the Transfiguration in 17, the Great Commission in 28). The UPDV retains the mountain detail. While Luke's parallel lacks the specific noun "mountain," it states the devil "led him up" (ἀναγαγών, anagagōn) to view the kingdoms — implying an elevated vantage point. Because the shared Q tradition clearly involves elevation, the UPDV retains Matthew's specific geographic rendering, even though the compiler likely amplified the description with his characteristic "exceedingly" (λίαν, lian) to fit his broader mountain theology.

Withdrawal to Galilee (3:12)

"Now when he heard that John was delivered up, he withdrew into Galilee." This transitional verse comes from Mark 1:14, which the compiler reshaped editorially. The verb παρεδόθη (paredothē, "was delivered up") is a divine passive — the same verb used for Jesus' own passion — highlighting the theological parallel between John's fate and Jesus'. Davies and Allison note that the compiler's word ἀνεχώρησεν (anechōrēsen, "withdrew") echoes 2:22 where Joseph withdraws from danger, but the core historical notice — that Jesus began his Galilean ministry after John's arrest — is from Mark and is retained.

The canonical text continues with a formula quotation (Matt 4:13-16, citing Isaiah 9:1-2 to provide scriptural warrant for Jesus' move to Capernaum), which is omitted. The formula quotation follows the compiler's standard editorial pattern — a redactional sentence transfers Jesus to Capernaum (4:13), then the characteristic ἵνα πληρωθῇ (hina plērōthē, "that it might be fulfilled") formula introduces the Isaiah citation.

Canonical 4:17 — "From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand" — is retained as UPDV 4:1, opening the next chapter. Davies and Allison note that the compiler deliberately shaped this declaration to be identical to John's preaching at 3:2, dropping Mark's "the gospel of God," "the time is fulfilled," and "believe in the gospel" (from Mark 1:15) to create a parallel between the two preachers. This is the same phrase the UPDV deleted from John the Baptist's introduction in chapter 2 — but the logic is consistent. Placing it in John's mouth was an editorial fabrication, creating a parallel that did not exist in the source; placing it in Jesus' mouth is an editorial condensation of his authentic Markan preaching. The methodological question is: if the phrasing is the compiler's editorial work, why retain it rather than restoring Mark's fuller form? The answer lies in the distinction between editorial additions and editorial abbreviations. The UPDV strips material the compiler added to his sources — formula quotations, proof texts, transitional framework — and corrects the order he rearranged. But when the compiler condenses a Markan pericope without inserting new content, the shorter version still represents traditional material, not editorial invention. Mark 1:15 and Matthew 4:17 convey the same core proclamation; the compiler abbreviated rather than fabricated.

John's Imprisonment (3:13-15)

The chapter closes with the circumstances of John's arrest: "For Herod had laid hold on John, and bound him, and put him in prison for the sake of Herodias, his brother Philip's wife. For John said to him, It is not lawful for you to have her. And when he would have put him to death, he feared the multitude, because they counted him as a prophet."

In the canonical Gospel, this material appears at Matthew 14:3-5 as a flashback — Herod hears about Jesus, and the narrative pauses to explain why John is in prison. This flashback structure originates with Mark (6:17-29), who inserted John's imprisonment and death between the sending of the Twelve (Mark 6:7) and their return (Mark 6:30). The compiler of Matthew faithfully followed Mark's arrangement, abbreviating the account but preserving the flashback placement.

The UPDV relocates this material here, immediately after the notice of John's arrest (3:12), adopting the strict chronological framework preserved by Luke. Luke is the evangelist who rejected Mark's dramatic flashback device, placing John's imprisonment at Luke 3:19-20 — immediately before the baptism and temptation, in its natural chronological position. The UPDV follows this Lukan chronological instinct, untangling Mark's narrative device to restore the historical sequence.

The information itself — Herod's arrest of John over the Herodias marriage — is independently confirmed by Josephus (Antiquities 18.5.2), who provides historical corroboration of the arrest, the Herodias marriage conflict, and the political context, securely anchoring the tradition in first-century Galilean history. Davies and Allison confirm the material is Markan with no evidence of a non-Markan source.

References

Davies, W. D. and Dale C. Allison Jr. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel according to Saint Matthew. 3 vols. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1988–1997.
Josephus, Flavius. Antiquities of the Jews.