this possibility but dismisses it by saying:
Orchard and Goulder both believe that Luke's differences from Matthew are caused by the fact that he was writing for Gentile Christians whereas Matthew was concerned with a more Jewish-Christian community. Such a view, however, is not easily upheld. . . . there was unlikely to have been a very great difference—if any at all—in the ethnic situations of the two communities linked, albeit in different ways, to them. Both were mixed (1994:311).3
Bosch would disagree with Franklin on his understanding of the sitz im leben of the New Testament authors. Instead of writing to the same audience, Matthew and Luke are thought to address the group from which they came from and who they were best acquainted with. In this regard Matthew "was probably a Jewish Christian writing for a predominantly Jewish Christian community" whereas Luke "was perhaps the only Gentile author of a New Testament book and wrote for Christians who were predominantly of Gentile origin" (1991:84-85).
Bosch goes on to say that Matthew’s purpose for writing to the mostly Jewish Christian community was both pastoral and missionary. The church was first of all facing a crisis of identity from physical persecution by Roman rule and theological attacks from the Pharisees. Matthew uses the historical replaying and fulfillment of the Old Testament Scriptures in the genealogy, birth and life of Jesus in order to counteract the claims made by the Pharisees that their Lord was not the Messiah and their community was not the church.
In addition to addressing pastoral concerns, Matthew’s gospel was written to explain the incorporation of Gentile Christians into the body of believers and to embolden the Jewish Christians to see the “opportunities for witness and service around them” (Bosch 1991:59).
Whereas Bosch thinks Matthew’s wrote to “a predominantly (perhaps even exclu-sively) Jewish Christian community” (1991:85), Raymond Brown sees Matthew’s church as being more mixed and facing the challenges of an increasing number of Gentile believers. "In this situation of a mixed community with dominance now shifting over to the Gentile side, Matthew is concerned to show that Jesus has always had meaning for both Jew and Gentile” (1993:47).
3 Elsewhere in his book, Franklin sounds a little less dogmatic that Matthew and Luke wrote for the same audience: “It ends with a possibility, no more indeed than a probable possibility, by suggesting that Luke’s work could have been written out of, or at least to, the same church from and for which Matthew wrote” (Franklin 1994:38).