Matthew’s Gospel has for years been a whipping boy of scholars determined to distance themselves from Christian supersessionism. In Matthew we find the striking coincidence of what many have termed the most conservatively “Jewish” portrayal of Jesus (e.g., Mt. 5:17-20), some of the most scathing denunciations of authorities in Israel (e.g., Mt. 23:1-39), and a persistently happy portrayal of Gentiles (e.g., Mt. 8:11-12). Some interpreters have understandably chalked up the coincidence of these seemingly divergent strands, and the related disparity between an Israel-bounded Christian mission and a worldwide Christian mission, to disparate traditions in the layers of Matthew’s Gospel. This has freed interpreters to identify Christian supersessionism in Matthew without attempting to reconcile it with the other, apparently contradictory emphases of the Gospel. The paper proposed is based on a longer version submitted to Dr. Richard Hays of Duke University for a doctoral seminar on Matthew in the fall of 2007 and argues that the scope of Jesus’ mission extends from “only the lost sheep of the house of Israel” to “all the nations” not because Israel has been relativized but because Israel’s sins have been forgiven. The forgiveness of Israel’s sins inaugurates the awaited end of covenant curses and the commencement of eschatological covenant blessings which embrace all the nations under the rule of the Son of David. In support of this thesis, the paper briefly considers Mt. 10:5-6 and Mt. 15:21-28 in Matthew’s unfolding narrative. It then analyzes the theme of the judgment of Israel in relation to Gentiles in Matthew and defends the claim that the people of Israel is not set aside, relativized, or replaced in the course of the Gospel. As in the narrative progression of Isaiah 1-12 that is so important for Matthew, Israel, especially her shepherds, is indeed condemned for its unfaithfulness to the covenant, and much of Israel is burned away in judgment by death at the hands of Gentiles (i.e., Rome). But God has raised the Son of David to lead Israel in faithfulness through these fires of judgment into eschatological blessing. The salvation of Israel is thus not the evasion of judgment but passing through it to the other side, as Israel’s wounds and sins are thereby healed and forgiven and Gentiles drawn to its light. The kingdom of God is thus denied to the Israelite vinegrowers (i.e., rulers) and given to the people of Israel humbled through judgment, as its eschatological light (i.e., “the fruits of the kingdom of God”) begins to embrace those living far from the Promised Land, under the rule of the resurrected Son of David. Finally, the paper considers Mt. 28:16-20 and contends that the shift from a messianic mission directed exclusively to the lost sheep of the land of Israel in Mt. 10:5-6 and Mt. 15:24 to one directed to “all the nations” in Mt. 28:16-20 is not primarily an ethnic one. The shift is primarily a geographic one from the traditional land of Israel to the whole of the Son of David’s realm, such that both Gentiles and Israelites in the Diaspora are invited as disciples of Jesus to share in Israel’s redemption through suffering and eschatological blessing. Thus, Israel’s covenant blessings reach Gentiles only in and through the people of Israel. It is Israel’s covenantal drama of curse and blessing––cross and resurrection––that finally draws Gentiles into Israel’s own eschatological life under the rule of Jesus.