Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 16:5
And when his disciples were come to the other side, they had forgotten to take bread.
5 12. The Leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees
Mar 8:14-21, where the rebuke of Christ is given more at length in stirring language; and Luk 12:1, where the context is different.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
The account in these verses is also recorded in Mar 8:13-21.
Mat 16:5
And when his disciples were come to the other side – That is, to the other side of the Sea of Galilee.
Mark says that he entered into a ship again, and departed to the other side. The conversation with the Pharisees and Sadducees had been on the western side of the Sea of Galilee. See the notes at Mat 15:39. They crossed from that side again to the east.
Had forgotten to take bread – That is, had forgotten to lay in a sufficient supply. They had, it seems, not more than one loaf, Mar 8:14.
Mat 16:6-11
Take heed … – That is, be cautious, be on your guard.
The leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees – Leaven is used in making bread.
It passes secretly, silently, but certainly through the mass of dough. See the notes at Mat 13:33. None can see its progress. So it was with the doctrines of the Pharisees. They were insinuating, artful, plausible. They concealed the real tendency of their doctrines; they instilled them secretly into the mind, until they pervaded all the faculties like leaven.
They reasoned … – The disciples did not understand him as referring to the doctrine of the Pharisees and Sadducees, because the word leaven was not often used among the Jews to denote doctrines, no other instance of this use of the word occurring in the Scriptures. Besides, the Jews had many particular rules about the leaven (yeast) which might be used in making bread. Many held that it was not lawful to eat bread made by the Gentiles; and the disciples, perhaps, supposed that he was cautioning them not to procure a supply from the Pharisees and Sadducees.
O ye of little faith! – Jesus, in reply, said that they should not be so anxious about the supply of their temporal wants. They should not have supposed, after the miracles that he had performed in feeding so many, that he would caution them to be anxious about procuring bread for their necessities. It was improper, then, for them to reason about a thing like that, but they should have supposed that he referred to something more important. The miracles had been full proof that he could supply all their wants without such anxiety.
Mat 16:12
Then understood they … – After this explanation they immediately saw that he referred to the doctrines of the Pharisees and Sadducees.
Erroneous doctrines are like leaven in the following respects:
- They are at first slight and unimportant in appearance, just as leaven is small in quantity as compared with the mass that is to be leavened.
- They are insinuated into the soul unawares and silently, and are difficult of detection.
- They act gradually.
- They act most certainly.
- They will pervade all the soul, and bring all the faculties under their control.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 5. Come to the other side] Viz. the coast of Bethsaida, by which our Lord passed, going to Caesarea, for he was now on his journey thither. See Mt 16:13, and Mr 8:22; Mr 8:27.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Mark saith, Mar 8:14-16, Now the disciples had forgotten to take bread, neither had they in the ship with them more than one loaf. And he charged them, saying, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, and of the leaven of Herod. And they reasoned among themselves, saying, It is because we have no bread. The disciples went into the ship without taking a due care for provision for their bodies, which they were sensible of when they came on shore on the other side. Christ happened in the mean time to give them a caution against the doctrine of the Pharisees, and Sadducees, and Herodians, which he properly expressed (though metaphorically) under the notion of leaven: this they understood not, but fancied that he had spoken this to them with reference to their want of bread, as if he had only given them warning, that for the making of bread to supply their necessity, they should not go to the Pharisees, or Sadducees, or Herodians, for leaven; or that they should not go to buy any bread of the Pharisees or of the Sadducees. So dull are we to understand spiritual things, and so soon had they forgot the doctrine which our Saviour had so lately taught them, Mat 15:17,18, that those things which are foreign to a man, and come not out of his heart, do not defile a man, but those things only which proceed out of his heart.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
When his disciples were come to the other side,…. Of the sea, as Munster’s Hebrew Gospel adds, to Bethsaida, Mr 8:22 as they were either in the ship, or going from the shore to the said place, they recollected themselves,
that they had forgotten to take bread: having but one loaf, as Mark says, in the ship; the seven baskets of fragments being either expended, or given away to the poor, of their own accord, or by Christ’s orders. It seems, it was usual with the disciples to buy food at places most proper, and carry with them; since Christ often went into deserts and mountainous places, where provisions could not be had. This their forgetfulness to act according to their wonted method, might arise either from their being intent upon Christ’s conversation with the Pharisees, and Sadducees, or from the suddenness of Christ’s departure.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
| Of the Leaven of the Pharisees. |
| |
5 And when his disciples were come to the other side, they had forgotten to take bread. 6 Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees. 7 And they reasoned among themselves, saying, It is because we have taken no bread. 8 Which when Jesus perceived, he said unto them, O ye of little faith, why reason ye among yourselves, because ye have brought no bread? 9 Do ye not yet understand, neither remember the five loaves of the five thousand, and how many baskets ye took up? 10 Neither the seven loaves of the four thousand, and how many baskets ye took up? 11 How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees? 12 Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.
We have here Christ’s discourse with his disciples concerning bread, in which, as in many other discourses, he speaks to them of spiritual things under a similitude, and they misunderstand him of carnal things. The occasion of it was, their forgetting to victual their ship, and to take along with them provisions for their family on the other side of the water; usually they carried bread along with them, because they were sometimes in desert places; and when they were not, yet they would not be burthensome. But now they forgot; we will hope it was because their minds and memories were filled with better things. Note, Christ’s disciples are often such as have no great forecast for the world.
I. Here is the caution Christ gave them, to beware of the leaven of the Pharisees. He had now been discoursing with the Pharisees and Sadducees, and saw them to be men of such a spirit, that it was necessary to caution his disciples to have nothing to do with them. Disciples are in most danger from hypocrites; against those that are openly vicious they stand upon their guard, but against Pharisees, who are great pretenders to devotion, and Sadducees, who pretend to a free and impartial search after truth, they commonly lie unguarded: and therefore the caution is doubted, Take heed, and beware.
The corrupt principles and practices of the Pharisees and Sadducees are compared to leaven; they were souring, and swelling, and spreading, like leaven; they fermented wherever they came.
II. Their mistake concerning this caution, v. 7. They thought Christ hereby upbraided them with their improvidence and forgetfulness, that they were so busy attending to his discourse with the Pharisees, that therefore they forgot their private concerns. Or, because having no bread of their own with them, they must be beholden to their friends for supply, he would not have them to ask it of the Pharisees and Sadducees, nor to receive of their alms, because he would not so far countenance them; or, for fear, lest, under pretence of feeding them, they should do them a mischief. Or, they took it for a caution, not to be familiar with the Pharisees and Sadducees, not to eat with them (Prov. xxiii. 6), whereas the danger was not in their bread (Christ himself did eat with them, Luk 7:36; Luk 11:37; Luk 14:1), but in their principles.
III. The reproof Christ gave them for this.
1. He reproves their distrust of his ability and readiness to supply them in this strait (v. 8); “O ye of little faith, why are ye in such perplexity because ye have taken no bread, that ye can mind nothing else, that ye think your Master is as full of it as you, and apply every thing he saith to that?” He does not chide them for their little forecast, as they expected he would. Note, Parents and masters must not be angry at the forgetfulness of their children and servants, more than is necessary to make them take more heed another time; we are all apt to be forgetful of our duty. This should serve to excuse a fault, Peradventure it was an oversight. See how easily Christ forgave his disciples’ carelessness, though it was in such a material point as taking bread; and do likewise. But that which he chides them for is their little faith.
(1.) He would have them to depend upon him for supply, though it were in a wilderness, and not to disquiet themselves with anxious thoughts about it. Note, Though Christ’s disciples be brought into wants and straits, through their own carelessness and incogitancy, yet he encourages them to trust in him for relief. We must not therefore use this as an excuse for our want of charity to those who are really poor, that they should have minded their own affairs better, and then they would not have been in need. It may be so, but they must not therefore be left to starve when they are in need.
(2.) He is displeased at their solicitude in this matter. The weakness and shiftlessness of good people in their worldly affairs is that for which men are apt to condemn them; but it is not such an offence to Christ as their inordinate care and anxiety about those things. We must endeavour to keep the mean between the extremes of carelessness and carefulness; but of the two, the excess of thoughtfulness about the world worst becomes Christ’s disciples. “O ye of little faith, why are ye disquieted for want of bread?” Note, To distrust Christ, and to disturb ourselves when we are in straits and difficulties, is an evidence of the weakness of our faith, which, if it were in exercise as it should be, would ease us of the burthen of care, by casting it on the Lord, who careth for us.
(3.) The aggravation of their distrust was the experience they had so lately had of the power and goodness of Christ in providing for them, Mat 16:9; Mat 16:10. Though they had no bread with them, they had him with them who could provide bread for them. If they had not the cistern, they had the Fountain. Do ye not yet understand, neither remember? Note, Christ’s disciples are often to be blamed for the shallowness of their understandings, and the slipperiness of their memories. “Have ye forgot those repeated instances of merciful and miraculous supplies; five thousand fed with five loaves, and four thousand with seven loaves, and yet they had enough and to spare? Remember how many baskets ye took up.” These baskets were intended for memorials, by which to keep the mercy in remembrance, as the pot of manna which was preserved in the ark, Exod. xvi. 32. The fragments of those meals would be a feast now; and he that could furnish them with such an overplus then, surely could furnish them with what was necessary now. That meat for their bodies was intended to be meat or their faith (Ps. lxxiv. 14), which therefore they should have lived upon, now that they had forgotten to take bread. Note, We are therefore perplexed with present cares and distrusts, because we do not duly remember our former experiences of divine power and goodness.
2. He reproves their misunderstanding of the caution he gave them (v. 11); How is it that you do not understand? Note, Christ’s disciples may well be ashamed of the slowness and dulness of their apprehensions in divine things; especially when they have long enjoyed the means of grace; I spake it not unto you concerning bread. He took it ill, (1.) That they should think him as thoughtful about bread as they were; whereas his meat and drink were to do his Father’s will. (2.) That they should be so little acquainted with his way of preaching, as to take that literally which he spoke by way of parable; and should thus make themselves like the multitude, who, when Christ spoke to them in parables, seeing, saw not, and hearing, heard not, ch. xiii. 13.
IV. The rectifying of the mistake by this reproof (v. 12); Then understood they what he meant. Note, Christ therefore shows us our folly and weakness, that we may stir up ourselves to take things right. He did not tell them expressly what he meant, but repeated what he had said, that they should beware of the leaven; and so obliged them, by comparing this with his other discourses, to arrive at the sense of it in their own thoughts. Thus Christ teaches by the Spirit of wisdom in the heart, opening the understanding to the Spirit of revelation in the word. And those truths are most precious, which we have thus digged for, and have found out after some mistakes. Though Christ did not tell them plainly, yet now they were aware that by the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees, he meant their doctrine and way, which were corrupt and vicious, but, as they managed them, very apt to insinuate themselves into the minds of men like leaven, and to eat like a canker. They were leading men, and were had in reputation, which made the danger of infection by their errors the greater. In our age, we may reckon atheism and deism to be the leaven of the Sadducees, and popery to be the leaven of the Pharisees, against both which it concerns all Christians to stand upon their guard.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
Came (). Probably= “went” as in Lu 15:20 (, not ). So in Mr 8:13 .
Forgot (). Perhaps in the hurry to leave Galilee, probably in the same boat by which they came across from Decapolis.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Mat 16:5
. And when his disciples came. Here Christ takes occasion from the circumstance that had just occurred (432) to exhort his disciples to beware of every abuse that makes an inroad on sincere piety. The Pharisees had come a little before; the Sadducees joined them; and apart from them stood Herod, a very wicked man, and an opponent and corrupter of sound doctrine. In the midst of these dangers it was very necessary to warn his disciples to be on their guard; for, since the human mind has a natural inclination towards vanity and errors, when we are surrounded by wicked inventions, spurious doctrines, and other plagues of the same sort, nothing is more easy than to depart from the true and simple purity of the word of God; and if we once become entangled in these things, it will never be possible for the true religion to hold an entire sway over us. But to make the matter more clear, let us examine closely the words of Christ.
Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees. Along with the Pharisees Matthew mentions the Sadducees Instead of the latter, Mark speaks of Herod Luke takes no notice of any but the Pharisees, (though it is not absolutely certain that it is the same discourse of Christ which Luke relates,) and explains the leaven to be hypocrisy In short, he glances briefly at this sentence, as if there were no ambiguity in the words. Now the metaphor of leaven, which is here applied to false doctrine, might have been employed, at another time, to denote the hypocrisy of life and conduct, or the same words might even have been repeated a second time. But there is no absurdity in saying, that those circumstances which are more copiously detailed by the other two Evangelists, in the order in which they took place, are slightly noticed by Luke in a manner somewhat different, and out of their proper place or order, but without any real contradiction. If we choose to adopt this conjecture, hypocrisy will denote here something different from a pretended and false appearance of wisdom. It will denote the very source and occasion of empty display, which, though it holds out an imposing aspect to the eyes of men, is of no estimation in the sight of God. For, as Jeremiah (Jer 5:3) tells us that the eyes of the Lord behold the truth, so they that believe in his word are instructed to maintain true godliness in such a manner as to cleave to righteousness with an honest and perfect heart; as in these words,
An now, O Israel, what doth the Lord require from thee, but that thou shouldst cleave to him with all thy heart, and with all thy soul? (Deu 10:12.)
On the other hand, the traditions of men, while they set aside spiritual worship, wear a temporary disguise, as if God could be imposed upon by such deceptions; for to whatever extent outward ceremonies may be carried, they are, in the sight of God, nothing more than childish trifles, unless so far as they assist us in the exercise of true piety.
We now perceive the reason why hypocrisy was viewed by Luke as equivalent to doctrines invented by men, and why he included under this name the leavens of men, which only puff up, and in the sight of God contain nothing solid, and which even draw aside the minds of men from the right study of piety to empty and insignificant ceremonies. But it will be better to abide by the narrative of Matthew, which is more copious. The disciples, after having been reproved by our Lord, came at length to understand that he had charged them to be on their guard against certain doctrine. It was plainly, therefore, the intention of Christ to fortify them against prevailing abuses, by which they were attacked on all sides. The Pharisees and Sadducees were expressly named, because those two sects maintained at that time a tyrannical sway in the Church, and held opinions so utterly subversive of the doctrine of the Law and the Prophets, that almost nothing remained pure and entire.
But Herod did not in any way profess to teach; and a question arises, why does Mark class him with false teachers? Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, and Of The Leaven Of Herod. I reply: he was half a Jew, was mean and treacherous, and availed himself of every contrivance that was within his reach to draw the people to his side; for it is customary with all apostates to contrive some mixture, for the purpose of establishing a new religion by which the former may be abolished. It was because he was laboring craftily to subvert the principles of true and ancient piety, and thus to give currency to a religion that would be exceedingly adapted to his tyranny, or rather because he was endeavoring to introduce some new form of Judaism, that our Lord most properly charged them to beware of his leaven. From the temple of God the scribes disseminated their errors, and the court of Herod was another workshop of Satan, in which errors of a different kind were manufactured.
Thus in our own day we find that not only from Popish temples, and from the dens of sophists and monks, does Antichrist vomit out her impostures, but that there is a Theology of the Court, which lends its aid to prop up the throne of Antichrist, so that no stratagem is left untried. But as Christ opposed the evils which then prevailed, and as he aroused the minds of his followers to guard against those which were the most dangerous, let us learn from his example to make a prudent inquiry what are the abuses that may now do us injury. Sooner shall water mix with fire than any man shall succeed in reconciling the inventions of the Pope with the Gospel. Whoever desires to become honestly a disciple of Christ, must be careful to keep his mind pure from those leavens; and if he has already imbibed them, he must labor to purify himself till none of their polluting effects remain. There are restless men, on the other hand, who have endeavored in various ways to corrupt sound doctrine, and, in guarding also against such impostures, believers must maintain a strict watch, that they may keep a perpetual Passover
with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth, (1Co 5:8.)
And as on every hand there now rages an impiety like that of Lucian, (433) a most pernicious leaven, or rather a worse than deadly poison, let them exercise this very needful caution, and apply to it all their senses.
(432) “ Ici Christ prenant occasion des propos precedens;” — “here Christ taking occasion from the former discourse.”
(433) “ L’mpiete des Lucianistes et des Atheistes;” — “the impiety of the Lucianists and Atheists.” Lucian, a celebrated Greek writer, of the second century of the Christian era, author of Dialogues of the Dead, is here alluded to as the type of scoffers and Atheists. His subject naturally led him to treat with sportive humor the solenmities of death and the future judgment; and the wit and elegance of his pen, had it been guided by ordinary caution, would have been readily — far too readily — sustained as an apology for the tone of his work. But in defiance of the ordinary feelings of mankind, he attacked so fearlessly the most sacred truths, and offended the ear of modesty by such indecent allusions, that his character as a man has been stamped with infamy. Modern times have scarcely produced so daring an infidel, with the exception perhaps of Voltaire, who took no pains to conceal his intense hatred of Christianity and of good men. Had he appeared earlier, his name might perhaps have been substituted for that of Lucian, as the representative of his class. — Ed.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
CRITICAL NOTES
Mat. 16:9-10. Baskets.See notes on Mat. 14:20, Mat. 15:37.
Mat. 16:12. Doctrine.Teaching (R.V.). Not so much the formulated dogmas of the sect as its general drift and tendency (Plumptre).
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Mat. 16:5-12
Unlearned learners.When the Saviour has left His enemies, as He appears to have done somewhat abruptly and with a good deal of decision (Mat. 16:4), He is in the company of His friends (Mat. 16:5). His thoughts were with them as well; and He has that, in consequence, which He feels it important to say to them when they arrive at the other side. What this was, in the first place; how it was misconceived, in the second; and how that misconception was put right, in the third placeare the points we have to consider.
I. What the Saviour said.It is the language, on the one hand, of agitation and distress. Evidently His mind is still full of His late encounter with His enemies. Evidently He is much impressed with the secret hypocrisy of their conduct (cf. Mat. 16:6 with Luk. 12:1). The description given of Him in Mar. 8:12 applies to Him still. The sight of such wickednessthe sight of such follyhas left a deep mark on His soul. It is the language, also, of apprehension and fear. This leaven-like insincerity of theirs was a thing much to be dreaded. Corrupt in itself it tended inevitably to produce corruption in turn. It tended to do this, also, in a peculiarly dangerous and insidious way, after the manner of leaven. He Himself, it is true, had only just now withstood and exposed it. Would the same be true of those disciples whom He had chosen to speak in His name? It was the language, therefore, in the third place, of earnest entreaty and warning. Take heed, and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mat. 16:11). St. Mark has it (Mar. 8:15) a little differently in appearance. Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of Herod. The difference is not a discrepancy but rather a proof of agreement. For Herod himself is believed to have been a Sadducee, and may very well, therefore, have had something to do with the movements of the Sadducees at this time and in that part of Palestine which was subject to him (see above Mat. 14:1; Mat. 14:13; Luk. 13:31-32). Anyway, there was that about the men referred to which made them a danger indeed. Take heed and bewaretake note of and avoidthat which I mean by their leaven.
II. How the disciples misunderstood Him.Looked at from their point of view this was an exceedingly natural thing. Partly, it may be, in consequence of the abruptness (end of Mat. 16:4) with which they seem to have left the other side of the lake, the disciples had forgotten to take bread. It was found, indeed, when they came to inquireor else came out in some other waythat they had only with them one little loaf (Mar. 8:14)little, i.e. compared with such as we are accustomed to see. This being so, it was not unnatural, when they hear mention of leaven, that they should bethink them of loaves. When their Master had spoken of sowing seed He had meant preaching the word
(13). When He had spoken of a dead child as only sleeping, He meant that she could be recovered from death (Mat. 9:24). May there not, then, be something similar in this mention of leaven? Something other and further meant than that which is said? To us, in these days, it may be, with all that we have further learned of this Teacher of teachers, such a way of reasoning may appear almost like that of a child. But it is highly probable, had we been in the place of those disciples, that we should have done the same thing. We should have thought that the Master must be referring to that which was at that time in our thoughts (cf. Mat. 9:4; Mat. 12:25; Joh. 2:25, etc.).
III. How this misconception was put right.This does not, at first sight, seem quite easy to follow. There seems, indeed, at first sight, something like inconsistency in the Masters language. At one time He seems to reprove His disciples on the score of their unbelief. O ye of little faith. At another time He seems to point rather to the obtuseness of their understandings. How is it ye do not perceive? Perhaps the explanation lies in supposing one deficiency to lie at the root of the other. Perhaps they did not understand for the simple reason that they did not believe as they ought. And how this might come about in their case is not difficult to imagine. Evidently the thought which was pressing on them was that of deficiency of supply. What was that one loaf among more than a dozen? Full of this thought they had no room for the thought of what the Saviour had done already in two cases of far greater necessity and far less comparative supply; still less for that far remoter meaning which the Saviour then had in His mind. A view this which appears to be strongly confirmed by two other considerations. One is that the Saviour, in correcting their thoughts, sets Himself to do so not only by reminding them of the two occasions in question, but of certain also of their most striking and characteristic distinctions; such as the relative numbers and needs, and the precise kind of basket employed in each particular case (Mat. 16:9-10). The other is that, having done this, He does nothing beside. How is it, He asks, that ye do not understand that I was not speaking to you about bread? What He was speaking of He leaves them to find out for themselves. In other words, having driven out the wrong thought in this manner He makes room for the right. Having shown that One who had supplied those far greater deficiencies could hardly have been referring to this very much smaller one now in the way of complaint, there is at once an opening, as it were, for what He was thinking of to come in (see Mat. 16:12).
Here are lessons of much importance:
1. With regard to ourselves.What need we have to pray that we may come with unbiassed minds to the study of Scripture! How little can be learned from the words of Jesus Himself unless this is the case. Be the wells of salvation as deep as they may, we shall taste none of their waters if the vessels we bring to them are already otherwise filled.
2. With regard to others.Some candid minds are greatly disturbed sometimes by the way in which they find other minds misusing the Scriptures of truth, and by noting how they seem to overlook that in them which is as plain to them as the day. We seem to be taught here that this is not to be wondered at even amongst true disciples of Christ. The eye sees what it brings the power of seeing, says Thomas Carlyle. It is no argument against the writings of Paul, says a still higher authority, that they are wrested by some (2Pe. 3:15-16). There are those whom the sunshine itself only lights to their death. Let us not, on that account, refuse to enjoy it ourselves.
HOMILIES ON THE VERSES
Mat. 16:5-12. The Master and His disciples.
I. The foresight of the Master and the negligence of the disciples.
II. The freedom from care of the Master and the anxieties of the disciples.
III. The calmness of the Master and the excitement and distress of the disciples.J. P. Lange, D.D.
Mat. 16:6. The souls hunger for truth.Let us look at some thoughts arising out of this passage.
I. That the profoundest energies and most urgent appetites of life are those of the moral and spiritual nature.They had forgotten to take bread. How was this? A more urgent hunger was at their heart; a profounder appetite was craving for satisfaction. The expulsive power of this more potent principle had banished hunger from their thoughts. Has not the history of the growth and expansion of spiritual truth in the worldreligious progressillustrated this principle ten thousand times? The Divine Masters ministry began with its assertion. Fasting forty daysignoring bodily wants, forgetting physical appetites. The Master had bread to eat that the tempter knew not of. Man shall not live, etc. So the Great Teachers searching words aroused the dormant inner life of His disciples, and leaving fishing nets, etc., all the sources of bodily revenue, they cling to this poor Nazarene. There are epochs in life in which the higher nature of the man transcends the earthly appetites; he breathes a Diviner air, hungers and thirsts after righteousness.
II. That those truths, therefore, which deal with the spiritual nature of man take the deepest hold upon his life.All doctrines that touch the moral and spiritual in man are leaven like:
1. In the subtlety of their operation.Not with observation.
2. In their progressive effect.A little leaven leaveneth, etc.
3. In their assimilative power.The leaven makes the mass like itself.
III. That hence it is imperative to guard against the inroads of erroneous doctrine.Beware, etc. Life can not be right if those beliefs that are the basis of its moral character be wrong. What was the Pharisees life? What the Sadducees? Why? Their lives were the direct result of their doctrine.Nevison Loraine.
Caution against false doctrines.
I. Of Sadducees.Materialism, no soul, no hereafter.
II. Of Pharisees.Human righteousness a sufficient ground of hope.
III. With each false doctrine was held some truth.Hence the danger.
IV. Respectability of sects and moral uprightness of some individuals holding false doctrine, increase the danger.J. C. Gray.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Section 40
JESUS WARNS DISCIPLES AGAINST INFLUENCE OF POPULAR LEADERS AND PARTIES
(Parallel: Mar. 8:13-26)
TEXT: 16:512
5 And the disciples came to the other side and forgot to take bread. 6 And Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees. 7 And they reasoned among themselves, saying, We took no bread. 8 And Jesus perceiving it said, O ye of little faith, why reason ye among yourselves, because ye have no bread? 9 Do ye not yet perceive, neither remember the five loaves of the five thousand, and how many baskets ye took up? 10 Neither the seven loaves of the four thousand, and how many baskets ye took up? 11 How is it that ye do not perceive that I spake not to you concerning bread? But beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees. 12 Then understood they that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees.
THOUGHT QUESTIONS
a.
How do you harmonize the apparently conflicting reports that the disciples forgot to take bread, (Matthew) and they had only one loaf with them in the boat (Mark)?
b.
What was there that was so dangerous about the influence of the Pharisees, the Sadducees and Herod that Jesus needed to make so specific and so stern a warning to His disciples against it? Deal with the influence of each group separately.
c.
What leaven did Herod have? (cf. Mar. 8:15) He was no religious teacher! Or was he, in a certain sense, one whose views affected the religious tenor of the Jews? If not, why not? If so, what religious influence did Herod wield?
d.
Because of their constant exposure to the contradictory and openly antagonistic views of the religious leaders, Jesus disciples ran the risk of discouragement. Why do you think Jesus was willing to let His own disciples run that risk? Was not Jesus Himself risking the loss of some of His Apostles either to the Pharisees, Sadducees, Herod, or some other force active in Palestine at that time?
e.
If you feel that there was great risk in the constant exposure to the harassing tactics of the enemies of Jesus, then what measures do you see in Jesus method that were calculated to strengthen and protect the disciples against the psychological drumming on their minds that these attacks must necessarily cause?
f.
How are we leavened in our world? Are there leavens in our world about which the Lord would probably warn us today? If so, what are the measures in Jesus method of dealing with us, His disciples, that strengthen and protect us against the insidious dangers of these influences? If you feel there are no leavens, then perhaps you have already been leavened!
g.
What are some expressions used in the twentieth century for the same idea meant by Jesus when He warned against the leaven of certain leaders and parties? Think of the working and effect of yeast in dough as you answer. Why does Jesus compare doctrine to leaven?
h.
Can you explain why the Apostles, having heard Jesus somber warning, did not discuss the question immediately and directly with Jesus, but rather talked it over among themselves?
i.
Can you see the apparent reasonableness in their (mistaken) conclusion that He was discussing food when He made that serious warning? Show the rationality of their conclusion, from a Jewish, human point of view, even if their conclusion is mistaken. They were reasonable men, even though wrong.
j.
Was it possible for the Apostles, of all people, to have hardened hearts? How?
k.
Why do you suppose Jesus brought up the two miraculous feedings, in order to deal with the Apostles confusion of His meaning?
PARAPHRASE AND HARMONY
Jesus turned on His heel and left the Pharisees and Sadducees that had tried to put Him to the test by demanding that He show them a supernatural sign from God. He and His disciples reboarded the boat and sailed for the other side of the Sea of Galilee. When the disciples sailed, they forgot to bring along any bread with them. There was only one loaf in the boat.
Jesus began cautioning the men, Keep your eyes open: watch out for the yeast of the Pharisees, the Sadducees and Herod!
Because they had brought no bread, they then began discussing Jesus enigmatic words among themselves.
Jesus knew about it, so He asked them, Men, where is your faith? Why all this discussion about the fact that you forgot to bring the bread? Dont you have the slightest idea about what I meant? Are you so slow to grasp it? You have eyes to see with, but can you not see? You have ears to hear with, but cant you hear? Have you already forgotten how many baskets of left-overs you men gathered up when I broke the five barley loaves of bread for the five thousand?
Someone replied, Twelve baskets.
And how many baskets were there when there were but seven loaves to feed four thousand people?
Seven, Lord.
Do you not understand it yet? How could you miss my point then? I was not talking about BREAD at all. I said, Be on your guard against the LEAVEN of the Pharisees. Sadducees and Herod.
Then the Apostles realized that He had not been talking about literal yeast for bread at all. Rather, He meant the psychological influence of the Pharisees, Sadducees and Herod.
SUMMARY
Jesus and the Twelve left the sign-seeking Jewish leaders and sailed northeast across the Galilean Lake. Under way, Jesus warned the Apostles about the leaven of popular leaders and parties. They took His word literally, hence misunderstood Him by thinking He referred to yeast and/or bread contaminated by contact with the proscribed leaders and parties. Since they had only one loaf, which they had already in the boat and had bought none from any of the offending parties, whence any of the danger of contamination supposedly would come, they could not understand His point. They apparently also thought that the one loaf was insufficient to feed the entire group, because Jesus then rebuked them for their insufficient faith and their short memory that forgot the great miraculous multiplication of food for huge crowds on two occasions, facts that should have permanently removed any further worry about food! Then Jesus explained that His warning concerned the influence, views and opinions of those religious and political parties.
NOTES
A. SITUATION (16:5)
Mat. 16:5 And the disciples came to the other side and forgot to take bread. Came to the other side (elthntes . . . es t pran) need not mean more than when they went to the other side, since the verb translated came means either to come or go, depending on the point of view of the user. In fact, Mark connects to the other side with Jesus departure.
If they had just sailed from Magadan-Dalmanutha, presumably on the western or south-western shore of Lake Galilee in the general vicinity of Tiberias, then they are sailing toward the eastern shore. Matthews next geographical notice is in the district of Caesarea Philippi, north and east of the Galilean lake. Mark (Mar. 8:22-26) records the intervening event of the healing of a blind man at Bethsaida, which may easily have been the famous Bethsaida Julias located near the northeastern end of the lake and right on Jesus route north toward Caesarea Philippi. (Cf. Luk. 9:10 and Joh. 6:1)
They had sailed hurriedly, as appears from the detail that they had left without purchasing a sufficient supply of bread. It is probable that the disciples entire attention had been focused on the clash between Jesus and the clergy, causing them to forget to take bread. Mark, however, adds that they had only one loaf with them in the boat. (Mar. 8:14) Although the chronological connections are not as tight as would be desired to make the conclusion certain, would that one loaf be a remainder from the miraculous feeding of the 4000? (Study Mat. 15:37 Mar. 8:8; Mat. 15:39 = Mar. 8:10; Mat. 16:4 f = Mar. 8:13 f) If so, the particularly vigorous scolding Jesus gave the Twelve (Mar. 8:17 f) becomes so much more comprehensible. (See on Mat. 16:8.) They forgot to take bread: was it their normal practice to furnish themselves with picnic baskets full of provisions for their journeys? If so, at least part of the baskets used to collect the leftovers after the miraculous feedings may have belonged to the Apostles themselves. Further, since the Apostolic group had been only recently travelling through Gentile country (Phoenicia) or through more sparsely settled areas (Decapolis), and since they had deliberately sought privacy for study, it is quite likely that they had grown accustomed to providing their own food supply during this time. So, for these reasons and that given below, we conclude that the disciples literally were so distracted by the debate as to forget to refurnish their dwindled supply at Magadan-Dalmanutha.
Foster (Middle Period, 212) sees the consternation among the Apostles caused by Jesus withdrawal from His enemies as the psychological explanation of this section: It must have been with a heavy heart that the apostles saw Jesus retreat again from another encounter with His foes. Of course, as we have already seen, Jesus did NOT retreat out of fear or failure, but His disciples, longing for more decisive victories, must have interpreted His hasty departure in this way. Accordingly, Foster then connects Jesus warning (Mat. 16:6) with whatever unwholesome thoughts they might have had about it, whether bitter disappointment over broken dreams, frustration and retreat. He imagines a venomous Pharisean sneer levelled at some Apostle: I suppose you men will be disappearing again? Why does not your Master stand His ground? And, because the Apostles had been embarrassed by His apparent indifference to the Pharisees reactions in the debate over traditions (Mat. 15:12 f), He was now compelled to rebuke their kowtowing to those bigots.
B. JESUS CRYPTIC WARNING (16:6)
Mat. 16:1 And Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees. This rebuke is intended to counterbalance the negative effects of the recent encounter over signs, Leaven: see on Mat. 13:33. Matthew explains the figurative meaning of yeast at Mat. 16:11-12 as teaching. Take heed and beware of the leaven . . . What is the main thrust of this warning?
1.
Does He mean: Beware of the corrupting influence the doctrine of these leaders exerts in your own lives and thinking? In the sections which follow, the disciples amply demonstrate how deeply affected they were by what would be thought acceptable to others or beneficial to themselvesan attitude which would have certainly guaranteed them some relative calm away from the tempests that would be hurled at them by the unbelieving clergy. But this attitude, arising out of compromise with Jesus enemies, could only mean the loss of their eternal life, since it meant the end of their discipleship.
2.
Or does He mean: Beware of the deadly influence these leaders will exert in others to turn them against you, i.e. recognize who your real enemies are. Hitherto, as leaders of Israel, they have been religious guides far more dependable than any outside the circle of true religion. Now, however, you must consciously beware the secret and devious ways these politicians operate. Whereas the Twelve finally understood that He referred to the teaching of these popular groups and leaders, it would seem that it is not merely their official doctrines that were directly under fire from Jesus here. In fact, if leaven connotes every expression of their influence, then He is warning everyone to look beneath the doctrine itself to see the disparity between official pronouncements and real practice, and the hypocrisy of public doctrine in contrast with secret strategies.
Either way, He warns against their general drift and tendency that sways mens thinking.
The leaven of the Pharisees: hypocrisy in all its forms (Luk. 12:1), i.e. traditional religion that emphasizes outward purity regardless of the hearts condition, and substitution of human regulations for Gods requirements, often involving outright cancellation of Gods. (Cf. Mat. 15:1-20) They were notoriously greedy lovers of money. (Luk. 16:14 f) They clung to their confidence in human righteousness as an adequate basis for Gods approval.
The leaven of the Sadducees: a rationalism that refused to believe reliable testimony to the supernatural authentication of Gods prophets, resulting in a materialistic philosophy in practice. (Cf. Act. 4:1-6; Act. 23:8) A mockery of all that was holy, all the high priestly family was Sadducean. From a comparison of the parallel text (Mar. 8:15), some have supposed that the Herodians were merely Galilean Sadducees, since Matthew repeatedly speaks of Pharisees and Sadducees, whereas Mark, after Pharisees, says not Sadducees, but Herod. If they are to be identified with each other, then they may have been Sadducees religiously, but Herodians politically, which, considering the this-worldly concerns of each group, is not at all an unlikely combination. So we may have here a question of dominant emphasis, rather than one of real distinction. Barclay (Matthew, II, 146) comments:
(Sadducees) were wealthy and aristocratic, and they were deeply involved in politics. So Jesus may well have been saying, Take care that you never identify the kingdom of heaven with outward goods, and that you never pin your hopes of bringing it in with political action. This may well be a warning against giving material things too high a place in our scheme of values, and against thinking that men can be reformed by political action. Jesus may well have been reminding men that material prosperity is far from being the highest good, and that political action is far from producing, the most important results. The true blessings are the blessings of the heart; and the true change is not the change of outward circumstances but the change of the hearts of men.
The leaven of Herod (Mar. 8:15), if we should distinguish it from that of the Sadducees, then, may refer to the doctrine of Hellenism with its paganizing tendency to compromise pure Judaism with its faithfulness to Javeh and its necessary separation from paganism. The influence of the Herods was one of conscious innovation, intentionally attempting to make Jews over according to Greek models. Also, the Herodians, as a party, would reflect something of the Roman influence filtered through their puppet-kings, the Herods. Did Jesus also mean to expose the political maneuvering, the jockeying for power, so often characteristic of Herodian family politics? The disciples certainly proved themselves prime targets for this kind of influence, as they fought to decide who among them should consider himself the greatest, who should have the prime seats in the Kingdom, etc. This spirit renders partial judgments and vitiates the persuasiveness of men whose ostensible goal is to make all men holy and godly regardless of their former background or relative position or stature.
However, regardless of their superficial differences, they represent just one deadly influence, because there is one fundamental characteristic common to all: they were all obstinately hostile to the Kingdom of God. Their entire thinkingas this was revealed in their practicewas geared to this world. They were insensitive to truth. Bruce (Training, 154) scores their ungodliness, blindness and deadness of heart to the divine. They did not know the true and the good when they saw it; and when they knew it, they did not love it, They all demonstrated a common disgust for and distrust of anyone who sincerely dedicated himself to truth and righteousness. One common trait, shared by all these divergent philosophies, has just been illustrated in the previous section. Neither the Pharisees, Sadducees nor Herod could bring themselves to relinquish their pride, position, power and personal opinions long enough to admit the obvious significance of Jesus Messianic signs. (Mat. 16:1-4; Mat. 14:1 and par.) Their unwillingness to submit to the testimony of the evidence, if ever admitted as a norm by the disciples, would become a creeping, skeptical disease that would wither the spontaneous enthusiasm of true belief. (Have any of the authorities or of the Pharisees believed in him? (Joh. 7:48) There is always danger of being shifted into line with false principles and philosophies so subtle and so pervasive that we are unaware of their sway.
C. THE DISCIPLES MISUNDERSTANDING (16:7)
Mat. 16:7 And they reasoned among themselves, saying, We took no bread. Jesus words were taken literally: He must be talking about the leaven of bread. (Cf. Mat. 16:12) In this sense, their discussion may have gone something like this: If bread is pure or unclean on the basis of the yeasts contact with contaminating objects or persons, then He is warning us against buying bread from the parties mentioned, due to its possible ceremonial defilement by them. If this correctly reconstructs their conversation, then we took no bread may mean:
1.
At least we are safe from contamination by the leaven of unfriendly leaders and parties, since we brought none of their bread with us.
2.
Or, in the light of Jesus further argument, this is their expression of anguished realization that, because of their preoccupation with His clash with the clergy, they had neglected to make the purchases necessary for their sustenance during their journey. It is almost as if, when Jesus mentioned yeast they thought of bread, because they realized it was too late to provide themselves any.
3.
Worse still, they deemed the one loaf they had with them in the boat to be insufficient for their total need. (Cf. Mar. 8:14) And, if there were danger that any bread they should buy in the future be polluted by contact with the above-mentioned parties, then, by Jesus warning (as they understood it), they would be forced to do without bread entirely.
Since apparently nothing had been said during the embarkation that would have linked His present warning with the previous clash with the hierarchy, the Twelve, themselves concerned with the mechanics of getting the boat under way, see no immediate connection between the Pharisees and Sadducees who asked for a sign and the Pharisees and Sadducees whose leaven is to be avoided. Hence, because they were on a different wavelength than Jesus, they did not receive His meaning.
D. JESUS REBUKE (16:811)
1. The indignant accusation of inadequate faith.
Mat. 16:8 And Jesus perceiving it, said, O ye of little faith, why reason ye among yourselves, because ye have no bread? Had it been true that Jesus really meant literal bread yeastas the disciples had supposed, they still demonstrated a gross lack of genuine trust in the power of One who could turn stones into bread or multiply food endlessly for thousands! Little faith: although in Mat. 16:9 and Mat. 16:11 He scolds them for their inability to understand, there is no inconsistency involved, since their obtuseness is caused by their lack of faith. They did not understand, simply because they lacked the confidence in Him they should have had.
2. The reproach for limited spiritual insight. (Mat. 16:9 a)
Mark (Mar. 8:17 f) reports Jesus battery of questions as follows:
Why do you discuss the fact that you have no bread?
Do you not yet perceive or understand?
Having eyes do you not see, and having ears do you not hear?
And do you not remember?
When I broke the . . . loaves, how many baskets did you take up? . . .
And the seven for the four thousand, how many baskets . . .?
Do you not yet understand?
Their lack of spiritual perception lay in thinking that the one presumably kosher loaf remaining in the boat should somehow be thought inadequate to feed them indefinitely, although Jesus was present to multiply it if He so willed, Even if they could not fathom His creative power to turn even stones into bread, they should have at least reasoned: With Jesus along, all we need is the one loaf we have here in the boat! Thus, even their confusion about literal yeast should never have blinded them to Jesus true meaning about the leaven of the Jewish leaders. That Matthew should have ignored the one available loaf, does not argue that he knew nothing about it, because, while Marks reader might deduce the reasoning pattern suggested above, Matthews reader, on the other hand, unaided by the notice of even one loaf, is led by its absence to imagine that Jesus could have sustained His men by creating food out of nothing! Either way, therefore, the readers are inexorably led to see Jesus power as Creator.
Bruce (Training, 156) blames the disciples confusion on their treating . . .
. . . the incident on the other side of the lake too lightly, and . . . their neglect to provide bread too gravely. They should have taken more to heart the ominous demand for a sign, and the solemn words spoken by their Master in reference thereto; and they should not have been troubled about the want of loaves in the company of Him . . . Their thoughtlessness in one direction, and their over-thoughtfulness in another, showed that food and raiment occupied a larger place in their minds than the kingdom of God and its interests.
Another motive for their hardness of heart (Mar. 8:17), or closed-mindedness, is the fact that their mind was still bemoaning His refusal of the Messianic crown and His stedfast refusal to baffle and wipe out His opposition by some majestic display of supernatural fire-power. With this kind of mentality in the disciples, it is understandable that they would not arrive at spiritual solutions that reflect a believers heart and comprehension.
3. The reminder of two stupendous miracles in the very area of their doubts. (Mat. 16:9 b, Mat. 16:10)
This reminder is significant for the following reasons:
1.
Both miracles had taken place in Herods territory (see on Mat. 14:13 b and on Mat. 15:29). So, the disciples concern not to buy Herods leaven would be ill-founded, since Jesus could have sustained them indefinitely at any place in Herods realm without recourse to bread made impure by that king, had that been Jesus real intent when speaking about Herods leaven. And by reflection, the same could also be true of the leaven of the other parties.
2.
This reminder serves also to distinguish the two great miracles for all future ages that might tend to confuse the two and doubt both. (See The Critical Importance of This Account before Mat. 15:29 where some differences between the two miraculous feedings are noted.) Beyond the obvious differences in numbers of people, bread, fish and baskets, the kind of baskets is different. The 12 baskets (kfinos, Mat. 16:9) would have been of any size, but were considered typical of the Jews, i.e. suitable for carrying kosher food. The 7 baskets (spris, Mat. 16:10) were large hampers for edibles and other purposes.
3.
How many baskets did you take up? By pushing them to provide these numbers, He is impressing upon them the liberality of His supernatural ability when the occasion for its display requires. It really mattered not how many, because ANY left-over fragments is proof enough of His power. What mattered now was that YOU took up so many baskets, and yet you now worry that you have no bread?!
4. Jesus repeats His statement about leaven. (Mat. 16:11)
Lest the result of these statements of Jesus come as a surprise to the unwary reader, to whom Mat. 16:12 seems not to follow from Mat. 16:11, let it be noticed that Jesus does not merely repeat His former statement about leaven. (Mat. 16:6) Rather, the two sentences in Mat. 16:11, taken together, form an antithesis: NOT BREAD, BUT LEAVEN!, an antithesis confirmed by thee disciples conclusion. (Mat. 16:12) So, if leaven, according to Jesus, stands in contrast to bread which is usually made with leaven, then leaven must be understood in its figurative sense, rather than literally, as the Twelve had done earlier.
Jesus repeated His metaphor, because leaven conveys His meaning a bit better than does the literal word teaching, since it carries the nuance of a corrupting spirit and example so subtle that the damage would be done before it could be recognized for what it was. Bruce (Training, 155) defines it:
The spirit of unbelief which ruled in Jewish society Jesus described as leaven, with special reference to its diffusiveness; and most fitly, for it passes from sire to son, from rich to poor, from learned to unlearned, till a whole generation has been vitiated by its malign influence. Such was the state of things in Israel as it came under His eye, Spiritual blindness and deadness, with the outward symptom of an inward malady,a constant craving for evidence,met Him on every side. The common people, the leaders of society, the religious, the skeptics, the courtiers, and the rustics, were all blind and yet apparently all most anxious to see, ever renewing the demand, What sign showest Thou, that we may see and believe Thee? What doest Thou work?
E. THE DISCIPLES FINALLY UNDERSTAND (16:12)
Now they are doubly sure they needed His warning to realize that they are in a world which could so easily influence them as to leave them useless to Jesus.
1.
In fact, they had been so blinded by their own thinking which had arisen out of their associations with Pharisean thought and practice, that this kept them from grasping instantly the simplest metaphor Jesus lay before them! Their hypothetical conversation reconstructed at Mat. 16:7, assumes this Pharisean mentality and ambient at every turn. Ironically, from this standpoint, then, they actually proved their deep need for His warning, even as they discussed its meaning! The leaven of the Pharisees was even then at work in their midst, because they argued like Pharisees!
2.
He had patiently led them to the correct understanding not only of His warning, but also of their own blundering logic about bread. Sadducean unbelief in the supernatural had reared its ugly head in their little faith to trust Him to multiply food miraculously if necessary.
Since this verse indicates that the Twelve should have understood the teaching from the first, and not the leaven of bread, is McGarvey (Fourfold Gospel, 408) correct in thinking that Jesus had resorted to metaphor because the word leaven better expressed his idea than did the word teaching? Should we conclude that the disciples still missed something of His meaning, since they concluded that He meant the teaching, and not the influence? No, because, as all great teachers know, the power of influence, spirit and example is as truly teaching, or doctrine, as all the dogmatic formulas pronounced in official, formal instruction. Although such is not taught, it is caught, just as truly and surely as if it had been taught.
APPLICATIONS
THE SUBTLE INFLUENCE OF EVIL
1.
We too can be influenced by men of influence in our society who have such a subtle sway over our thinking that we may be unconscious of it at all.
a.
Perhaps they never sit in the official seats of learning to diffuse their doctrines, but their corrupting power is nevertheless real. Life cannot be lived aright, if the beliefs which lie at the base of its moral character are mistaken, misleading or false. But these beliefs are none the less doctrines, regardless of their origin or method of propagation.
b.
Again, there are other reputable gentlemen who are too clever to commit themselves publicly on the side of immorality or in favor of ideas tending toward apostacy from the living God. Yet, the spirit and essence revealed in their way of expressing themselves, and the imperceptible spell of their personal example, seduces the unaware into infidelity.
c.
The persuasiveness of the peril is greater than it seems, because there is usually just a grain of truth in every mistaken concept which seems to depend upon it, just enough truth to make the whole mistake palatable.
d.
The pressure to embrace the false or wrong-headed thinking is further enhanced by the prestige and apparent rectitude of those who hold such opinions.
2.
Like the Apostles, we too can place such an emphasis upon the physical cares and concerns of this life, that the most solemn words of our Master upon problems of vastly greater importance fade into insignificance, be misunderstood and wrongly applied.
3.
Now, as then, it will always be tempting to follow the modern religio-political scholarship and modes and moods popularized by men of note:
a.
By supposing that the right rites, the correct phrases, and the proper traditions can please God and bless mankind, b, By identifying the Kingdom of God with material wealth or by promoting its advancement by political activism, hoping to reform men by substituting social change for personal conversion, c. By not caring about the paganizing propaganda that bombards us daily, threatening our separation from the world for Gods use.
4.
What is our salvation and protection from the ascendancy of these insidious inducements?
a.
We must never forget that it is JESUS who admonishes us against these infernal masteries. It is HIS word that defines the danger.
(1)
Therefore, let His sure word penetrate every part of our being, so that His will might be the only power active in our lives. His truth in us can empower us to take the offensive against the malignant sway of evil. Look what His Word did to the early Christians as they launched their counterattack against all the leavens in their day!
(2)
Let us choose our most intimate friends with great care, since even our own loved ones exercise an influence upon us that is not always edifying. (1Co. 15:33; cf. Mat. 16:22 f!) Choose friends that love Jesus; let His Word be the norm by which our close companions are chosen.
b.
It is the patience of Jesus Himself that can save us! Morgan (Matthew, 207) says it so well:
He Who turned His back in satirical scorn upon the Pharisees and Sadducees who had come for no other purpose than to tempt Him was very patient with the blundering disciples and waited for them. Oh He is a wonderful Master! He will say it again if we do not understand it the first time. If you are a Pharisee or a Sadducee with your animosity, and your criticism and your cleverness, He will laugh at you in high heaven, and He will turn His back upon you, But if you are a weak, trembling, foolish, frail child, thinking about loaves when you ought to be thinking about spiritual things, He will say it again . . .
c.
But we too must watch, standing guard against every influence in our life that could compromise our position in Christ and our usefulness in His hands!
5.
WE CAN BE LEAVENED:
a.
By the attitudes of the church in which we grew up without ever realizing that its attitudes were not always necessary expressions of true Christianity. This is not to undermine the ancient merely because of its antiquity, but to challenge us to examine the positions and attitudes of fallible human beings, because they are human.
b.
By the atmosphere of the world which we absorb like the air we breath. The moral pollution is as real as the material sort, and often we are just as unconscious of the effect of the one on our spirit as we are unaware of the damage to our body of the other.
c.
By OURSELVES! Blessed is the man who is so alert that he cannot be fooled by the falsehoods he is tempted to believe true about himself! Blessed is the man who can not be deceived by his own self-righteousness!
d.
By men who walk with God: look at Moses and Abraham, David and Isaiah, Daniel and John the Baptist, Peter and Paul. They knew more about heaven than most, because they knew God. (Cf. 1Co. 11:1; Php. 4:9!)
e.
By the God who is the final, real satisfaction of the soul. When God who created a world full of so many satisfactions, calls us to what He says is far better, We must be willing to sacrifice all of earths satisfactions for one day with Him. We must never compare the paltry interests of earth with the glories of a heaven we have never seen or have only heard about.
FACT QUESTIONS
1.
What is leaven? Explain its literal and figurative uses. How is it used in our text?
2.
State all the similarities and differences between the feeding of the 5000 and the 4000. Show how these two separate miracles become important in the context of this discussion about the Apostles misunderstanding of certain words of Jesus.
3.
Regarding the provision of bread for the traveling group of Jesus, what was their usual method of operation? How did they generally procure food on their evangelistic tours? Did this trip differ from their usual practice? If so, how? If not, why not?
4.
How many loaves of bread were in the boat? Who tells us this? Of what importance is this fact?
5.
When did the disciples discover that they had forgotten to buy bread for the trip?
6.
Define the leaven of the Pharisees. Why was this dangerous to the Apostles?
7.
Define the leaven of the Sadducees. Why was this dangerous to the Apostles?
8.
Define the leaven of Herod. Why was this dangerous to the Apostles?
9.
Explain why Jesus gave this warning at this particular time. What events led up to and called for this warning? What actions and attitudes in the Apostles lives shortly after this proved the timeliness of this warning?
10.
List three other retreats before this one, where Jesus deliberately left a public ministry to take His Apostles away for awhile.
11.
From what and to what was Jesus withdrawing each time?
12.
In what sense does Jesus intend the expression: Are your hearts hardened? Is this the same sort of hard heart found in a determined sinner? If so, explain how the Apostles themselves could be in danger of this condition. If not, explain how Jesus words are to be otherwise interpreted.
13.
Why did Jesus make reference to the two miraculous multiplications of food for the multitudes? What connection is there with Jesus warning about leaven?
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(5) They had forgotten.Better, they forgot. St. Mark, with his usual precision in detail, states that they had but one loaf with them. Either the suddenness of their Lords departure had deprived them of their customary forethought, or, it may be, they were beginning to depend wrongly on the wonder-working power, as though it would be used, not as before, to supply the wants of the famished multitude, but as rendering that forethought needless for themselves.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
5. Disciples were come to the other side Our Lord had already gone to the other side. He had now passed again from the government of Herod Antipas to that of Herod Philip.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘And the disciples came to the other side and forgot to take bread.’
With typical Matthaean abbreviation he sums up the situation in few words. ‘The disciples’ came to the other side and found that they had not taken supplies of ‘kosher’ bread. Jesus is not mentioned simply because He is not involved in the subsequent early discussions. Mark tells us that in fact the discovery was made en route that they had only one loaf, which would not last them long (Mar 8:14). This clearly caused some consternation among them. They had forgotten Jesus’ words about not being anxious about what they should eat (Mat 6:25-34), and that He had fed crowds in a far worse situation than this. The idea may well be in fact that ‘the disciples’ were trying to hide from Jesus what they were talking about as He sat or lay in the rear of the boat. But if so they could not keep it hidden.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
The Failure Of The Disciples To Take Kosher Bread with Them When Going To Gentile Territory Raises the Question of ‘The Leaven of the Scribes and Pharisees’ (16:5-12).
Arriving back ‘on the other side’ in Gentile territory, the disciples become aware that they have forgotten to bring ‘kosher’ bread in their provisions baskets. (‘Kosher’ is not strictly the correct word but we signify by it here bread baked by a Jewish baker in accordance with Jewish principles of cleanness and uncleanness). They might have difficulty in finding a Jewish baker in that remote area. Their concern about the situation secretly amuses Jesus in view of what He has done in the past and He warns them rather to be worried about the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees. Thinking that He is talking about literal bread they begin to discuss the matter between themselves, only to be interrupted by Him as He points out that He does not really mean literal bread. Rather He is warning them against the evil and sinister influence of the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees with whom He has just had to do.
Analysis.
The disciples came to the other side and forgot to take bread, and Jesus said to them, “Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees” (Mat 16:5-6).
And they reasoned among themselves, saying, “We took no bread”. And Jesus perceiving it said, “O you of little faith, why do you reason among yourselves, because you have no bread?” (Mat 16:7-8).
“Do you not yet perceive, nor remember the five loaves of the five thousand, and how many baskets you took up? Nor the seven loaves of the four thousand, and how many baskets you took up?” (Mat 16:9-10).
“How is it that you do not perceive that I did not speak to you about bread? But beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees” (Mat 16:11).
Then they understood that he bade them not to beware of the leaven of bread, but of the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mat 16:12).
Note that in ‘a’ they were thinking of bread but Jesus told them to beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees, and in the parallel they understand that He is not talking about bread but of the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees. In ‘b’ He questions why they are thinking about bread, and in the parallel asks the same question and goes on to point out that He means the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees. Centrally in ‘c’ He draws their attention to the miracles of provision and their significance.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
The Leaven of the Pharisees.
v. 5. And when His disciples were come to the other side, they had forgotten to take bread. The departure of Jesus after His encounter with the Pharisees and Sadducees was hurried. From the neighborhood of Dalmanutha, on the western shore of the sea, He crossed over to the other side, probably into some section of Gaulanitis. His greatest concern was for His disciples, how they would behave under the present circumstances, how their faith would hold out against the schemes of the Pharisees. So absorbed was He in this problem that He paid no attention to the minor matters of the body. The fact that His disciples, in the excitement of the quick embarking, had forgotten, neglected, to take bread with them, did not enter His consciousness.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
Mat 16:5. And when his disciples were come, &c. This would be rendered more properly, Now the disciples, going to the other side, had forgotten to take bread; for it is more agreeable to the nature of the thing to suppose, that this conversation happened as they sailed, than when they were come to the other side, where they might easily have been supplied with bread. The version of 1729 renders it, Now at their departure to go to the other side, &c. And with it, Dr. Heylin and the Prussian editors agree. It seems Jesus and the disciples had remained so long in Dalmanutha, that they had consumed the seven baskets of fragments which they had taken up after the late miraculous dinner. Our Saviour hence took occasion to give his disciples a solemn charge to beware of the doctrine of the Pharisees and Sadducees, which he called leaven, because of its pernicious influence to sour men’s tempers with pride and other evil passions. For as these hypocrites chiefly enjoined the observation of frivolous traditions, their doctrine was a great enemy to the principles of true piety, and puffed men up with a high conceit of their own sanctity. The slowness of the disciples’ understanding shewed itself on this occasion, as it had done on many others. As they had forgotten to take bread with them, and had often heard the doctors prohibit the use of the leaven of heathens and Samaritans, they thought that he forbade them to buy bread from bakers of either sects, lest it might be made with impure leaven; and so they looked on the advice as an indirect reproof of their carelessness.
Our Saviour, after properly reproving them, soon gave them to understand his meaning. See Mat 16:12. Mac-knight and Calmet.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Mat 16:5 . This, according to Fritzsche, is the voyage mentioned in Mat 15:39 , so that the disciples are supposed to have come shortly after “in eum ipsum locum, quem Jesus cum Pharisaeis disputans tenebat.” Unjustifiable deviation from the very definite account in Mar 8:13 . After disposing of the Pharisees and Sadducees, Jesus crossed over again to the east side of the lake along with His disciples; but Matthew mentions only , because they alone happen to form the subject of , though Mat 16:6 shows, beyond all doubt, that Jesus crossed along with them .
] is neither to be taken (Erasmus, Calvin, Paulus, Hilgenfeld) as a pluperfect (see, on the other hand, note on Joh 18:24 ), nor as equivalent to “ viderunt se oblitos esse ” (Beza, Kuinoel, Fritzsche), but thus: after the disciples had reached the east side, they forgot to provide themselves with bread (to serve them for a longer journey). After coming on shore they should have obtained a supply of provisions in view of having a further journey before them, but this they forgot . According to Mar 8:14 ff., which in this instance also is the more authentic version, the following conversation is not to be understood as having taken place in the boat (Keim, Weiss), but in the course of the further journey after going on shore.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
2. The Leaven. Mat 16:5-12
5And when his disciples were come to the other side, they had forgotten to take bread. 6Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees [and S.].2 7And they reasoned among themselves, saying, 8It is because we have taken [we took, ] no bread. Which when Jesus perceived,3 he said unto them, O ye of little faith, why reason ye among yourselves, because ye have brought [ye took, ]4 no bread? 9Do ye not yet understand, neither [nor] remember the five loaves of the five thousand, and how many baskets 10[travelling-baskets]5 ye took up []? Neither [Nor] the seven loaves of the four thousand, and how many baskets [provision-baskets] ye took up? 11How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread [spake not to you of loaves],6 that ye should [but] beware7 of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees 12[and S.]8? Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees [and S.].7
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
Mat 16:5. The circumstance that the disciples forgot to take bread with them forcibly illustrates their excitement, and the haste with which they had left the western shore. According to Mark (8:14), they had not more than one loaf in the ship with them. The event here recorded took place during the passage across the lake.
Mat 16:6. The leaven. , . Euth. Zigab. On the analogous application of by the Rabbins (to every contagious influence of and for evil), see Buxtorf, Lexic. Talm. p. 2303; Lightfoot on the passage. Differently, 13:33. So Meyer. According to Schneckenburger and de Wette, our Lord here referred to the hypocrisy, not to the teaching of the Pharisees, which the Lord commends, comp. Mat 13:4 But Meyer rightly insists that the expression refers not to their teaching in general (including their agreement with the law), but only to their sectarian peculiarities.9 The (15:9), however, constitute only one part of the leaven. Applying to the two sects (the Sadducees as well as the Pharisees), the expression must refer to the corruptness of their teaching, arising from their secularism, which, like leaven, had infected and poisoned the whole people, and from which even the disciples were not quite free; more especially Judas, in whose heart this leaven was probably already beginning to operate. On the significance of the leaven, compare our remarks on Mat 13:33.With the usual superficiality of rationalism, von Ammon (ii. 285) supposes that domestic requirements or business engagements may have rendered the return to the eastern shore necessary, entirely overlooking the deep import of this event. In point of fact, it was a virtual banishment. As such the disciples also felt it. But a short time before they had traversed the length and breadth of the lake under peculiarly trying circumstances. Now they returned in the opposite direction by the same track. A second time they saw Capernaum at a distance, and they felt as if their home there were already lost. The Master read these feelings, and understood their sorrow. With brave determination, but as yet only partially renouncing the world, they followed Him; but their hearts still clung to the scene of their affections and hopes. Under these circumstances, Jesus addressed to them the solemn warning, Take heed, and beware, etc. When the children of Israel went out of Egypt, they were commanded to put away the leaven, and to leave it behind them (Exo 12:15-17). At the time, the expression referred to the spirit of Egypt as an infectious principle, most powerful for evil. They were not to take to Canaan any of the infectious corruptions of Egypt (comp. 1 Corinthians 5; Stier, 2:158). This journey of the Lord with his disciples resembled the passage of the children of Israel out of Egypt; like them, they now left behind the heathenism of the Pharisees and Sadducees. The Saviour felt that the great Paschal feastnot symbolically, but in realitywas at hand. Withal, He was deeply affected by the thought that, unconsciously, His disciples still carried with them some of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees. Hence the warning (see the authors Leben Jesu, ii. 2, 878).
And Sadducees.Mark has instead: . If the Sadducees had enlisted the sympathies of Herod in demanding a sign from heaven, the situation of matters had become even more critical. But this does not necessarily follow from the text. There was a twofold kind of leaven, which might be designated as hypocritical secularism, and distinguished, as assuming in the one case the garb of exclusiveness, in the other that of liberalism. Here we have for the first time an indication of another offence than that of pharisaical exclusiveness, in the shape of the worldly policy of Herod coquetting with the Roman authorities of the land. We see, as it were, the germ of the later calumny, that Jesus claimed to be a king, and must therefore be an enemy to Csar.
How many baskets.From Act 9:25, Bengel rightly infers that a was larger than a .
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL
1. The false exegesis of the disciples on the words of the Saviour may be regarded as the prototype of many a later miserable performance of the same kind. At first they probably tried to understand them literally, and therefore as meaning: Beware of partaking of the bread of the Pharisees and Sadducees, or have no further communion with them. But this would have implied that they would have had to make a separate provision for themselves, as the whole country was divided between the parties of the Pharisees and Sadducees, and hence any provision which they might have got from without would have been impure.These thoughts were succeeded by the recollection that they had no bread, and by cares which drew down upon them the rebuke of the Lord about the littleness of their faith.
2. Do ye not yet understand? The expressions are the same as before in connection with the washing of the hands. Now that the separation had actually commenced, it was high time that they should have better understanding. The Gospel of Mark gives a fuller outline of this rebuke.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
The threefold retirement of the Lord across the lake.Resemblance between the passage of the Lord across the lake and that of the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt.Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees: 1. Its designation: a twofold kind of leaven, and yet in reality only one leaven (exclusive bigotry and lax universalism,after all only secularity under the guise of piety). 2. The warning: (a) Beware; (b) so that, while avoiding one of these errors, ye fall not into the other.To cross with Jesus to the other side implies and requires complete renunciation of the world.It matters little that we outwardly leave Egypt, if we carry its corruption in our hearts.The feelings of the Master and those of His disciples on leaving the realm of the Pharisees: 1. The foresight of the Master, and the negligence of the disciples; 2. the freedom from care of the Master, and the anxieties of the disciples; 3. the calmness of the Master, and the excitement and distress of the disciples.Connection between the memory and the heart: 1. Excitement the spring of forgetfulness; 2. calmness and peace the surest means of presence of mind.The circumstance that the disciples had so frequently misinterpreted the meaning of the Lord, recorded for our warning.Principal causes of false interpretations of the word of God: 1. Slavish literality; 2. personal interests; 3. fear; 4. arbitrary perversions.How the Lord had to repeat to His disciples, and to question them on, the history of the twofold feeding of the multitude.The anxiety of the disciples after the miraculous feeding of the multitude itself a mournful wonder.Although the Lord ever performs new miracles, yet faith in Him still continues a miracle.Then understood they ( Mat 16:12): when error is removed, truth finds an entrance.The Lord emphatically reiterates: Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees.The leaven of Jewish legalism and of heathen secularism in the Church of Christ.
Starke:Quesnel: We do not lose by following Christ so closely as for a time to forget every earthly consideration, since, after all, we have the best part, Psa 73:25.Majus: Let us not mix up different creeds.Beware of heretics and false teachers.Cramer: As leaven pervades the whole mass, so will a single error on any fundamental doctrine corrupt all our other views, depriving them of their spiritual value, 2Ti 2:17.Zeisius: Hearers are apt to suppose that certain sermons are aimed against them, while this may be due to the voice of their own conscience, not to the words of the preacher.Majus: The mistakes of disciples, and their consequences.Canstein: How often does anxiety for daily bread take the place of anxiety for the soul!Jesus searching the heart.Christ bearing with the weakness of our faith, and giving more grace.Cramer: Frequent meditation on the past gracious and wonderful provisions of our God an approved remedy for unbelief.How frequently is it thus that they who ought to have been teachers have need to be taught again the first principles of divine truth!
Gerlach:The words of Jesus may be misinter preted or forgotten simply from weakness of faith.Accordingly, the Lord rebukes not so much their ignorance, as their weakness of faith and their carnality, which was the source of that ignorance.
Heubner:Pharisaism: appearance of piety hypocritical ostentation of faith. Sadducism: appearance of a spirit of inquiry, concealment of faith from fear of men.On Mat 16:7 : Similarly we might say, Simple-minded Christians do not understand the arts and plans by which unbelief undermines Christianity.
Mat 16:8-10 : A clear evidence this that the Apostles were neither credulous, nor on the watch for miracles.
Footnotes:
[2] Mat 16:6.[Without the article, which is wanting in the Greek before Sadducees.P. S.]
[3] Mat 16:8.[Better: And when Jesus perceived it, he said, or: And Jesus knowing it said to them, .P. S.]
[4] Mat 16:8.For , B., D., Vulgata, etc., read , ye have. So Lachmann. Meyer favors it. Tischendorf [and Alford] adhere to the Recepta, which accords best with the connection. [Codex Sinaiticus reads: , and omits the words in the following verse.P. S.]
[5] Mat 16:9.[ , as distinct from in Mat 16:10. The was proverbially the Jewish travelling-basket; comp. Juv. Sat. iii. 15: Judis, quorum cophinus fnumque supellex. Robinson, Gr. and E. Lex. of the N. T. () is a round plaited basket for storing grain, bread, fish, and other provisions; comp. Mat 15:37; Mar 8:8; Mar 8:20; Act 9:25. The Vulgate translates the one cophinos, the other sportas; Ewald uses: Krbe and Handkrbe; Lange, better: Reisekrbe and Speisekrbe (travelling-baskets and provision-baskets); Wiclif: cofyns and lepus; the Rheims Vers.: baskets and moundes; Campbell likewise: baskets and mounds; but all other Engl. Vers. which I compared, use baskets in both cases.P. S.]
[6] Mat 16:11.Tischendorf, following Griesbach and the majority of witnesses, reads the plural . [So also Lachmann, and Alford, who regards the lect. rec. as an emendation to express the sense better. Codd. Sinaiticus, Vaticanus. and Ephrmi Syri, the three eldest extant, unanimously sustain the plural, but Cod. Alexandrinus (as published by B. H. Cowper) reads the singular, and so the Lat. Vulgate (pane). Lange translates Brode, loaves.P. S.]
[7] Mat 16:11. , according to B., C, L, al., Lachmann, Tischendorf. against . Hence a repeated admonition, not simply a narrative. See Meyer against Fritzsche. [Cod. Sinaiticus, and the English critical editors of the Greek Test, Tregelles and Alford, likewise read the imperative , but beware, instead of the infinitive , to beware, or that ye should beware.P. S.]
[8] Mat 16:11-12.[Omit of the, as in Mat 16:6; the article not being repeated in the Greek.P. S.]
[9][The Edinb. translator, who never seems to have referred to Meyer, so often quoted in this Commentary, makes him and Lange say here the exact reverse, viz.: Meyer insists that the expression applied not merely to their own teaching, but also to those points in which they agreed with the law itself. In this case Christ would have warned the disciples against the law of God! But Meyer says, p. 316 (note), after opposing Schneckenburgers and de Wettes reference of the leaven to the hypocrisy of the Pharisees: Aus dem Bilde des Sauerteigs erhellt von selbst, dass nicht die Lehre jener Secten berhaupt und im Ganzen (such ihre Uebereinstimmung mit dem Gesetze mit eingeschlossen) gemeint gewesen sei, sondern ihre charakteristische Secten-Lehre, ihre die Moralitt verderbendem (15:9), daher Er such die Lenre beider zusammen als darstellen konnte, so verchioden auch ihre beider-Mettgen Principien waren.P. S.]
Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange
“And when his disciples were come to the other side, they had forgotten to take bread. (6) Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees. (7) And they reasoned among themselves, saying, It is because we have taken no bread. (8) Which when Jesus perceived, he said unto them, O ye of little faith, why reason ye among yourselves, because ye have brought no bread? (9) Do ye not yet understand, neither remember the five loaves of the five thousand, and how many baskets ye took up? (10) Neither the seven loaves of the four thousand, and how many baskets ye took up? (11) How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees? (12) Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.”
The caution the Lord gave to his disciples then; of a leaven in their doctrine, I venture to believe, was generally intended as a caution to all his disciples, in every age of the church. And never was there a period where the caution was more needful than now. Oh! what a leaven mixes in the present hour with the pure doctrines of Christ, and even in churches calling themselves Christian? Freewill, self-righteousness, improvements of grace, and conditional salvation with some, and the denial of the Holy Spirit’s agency, with the work of regeneration, and the justifying righteousness of the Lord Jesus Christ with others, to say nothing of numberless other corruptions which have crept, in among men, to the great injury of the faith once delivered unto the saints, these too plainly prove that the precept of Christ, to beware of the leaven of deception and error in doctrine, is highly seasonable in the present day of the Church.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
5 And when his disciples were come to the other side, they had forgotten to take bread.
Ver. 5. They had forgotten to take bread ] As wholly transported with fervour in following Christ, the bread of life. This is the fault of but a few today: worldly cares eat up heavenly desires, as the lean kine in Pharaoh’s dream did the fat.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
5 12. ] WARNING AGAINST THE LEAVEN OF THE PHARISEES AND SADDUCEES. Mar 8:13-21 .
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
5. ] This crossing of the lake was not the voyage to Magadan mentioned in ch. Mat 15:39 , for after the dialogue with the Pharisees, Mark adds ( Mar 8:13 ), .
. ] not for a pluperfect: After they had come to the other side, they forgot to take bread; viz. on their land journey further . This is also to be understood in Mark ( Mar 8:14 ), who states their having only one loaf in the ship, not to shew that they had forgotten to take bread before starting, but as a reason why they should have provided some on landing.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Mat 16:5-12 . The one important thing in this section is the reflection of Jesus on what had just taken place. The historical setting is not clear. Jesus left the sign seekers after giving them their answer. The disciples cross the lake; in which direction? With or without their Master? They forget to take bread. When? On setting out or after arrival at the other side? . ., Mat 16:5 , naturally suggests the latter, but, as Grotius remarks, the verb in the Gospels sometimes means ire not venire ( vide , e.g. , Luk 15:20 ). Suffice it to say that either in the boat or after arrival at the opposite side Jesus uttered a memorable word.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Mat 16:5-12
5And the disciples came to the other side of the sea, but they had forgotten to bring any bread. 6And Jesus said to them, “Watch out and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” 7They began to discuss this among themselves, saying, “He said that because we did not bring any bread.” 8But Jesus aware of this, said, “You men of little faith, why do you discuss among yourselves that you have no bread? 9Do you not yet understand or remember the five loaves of the five thousand, and how many baskets full you picked up? 10Or the seven loaves of the four thousand, and how many large baskets full you picked up? 11 How is it that you do not understand that I did not speak to you concerning bread? But beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” 12Then they understood that He did not say to beware of the leaven of bread, but of the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees.
Mat 16:6; Mat 16:11 “the leaven” It is possible that the Aramaic term “legal severity” was meant here (remember Jesus and the Jews of His day spoke Aramaic). The two words are similar in Aramaic; however, Mat 16:12 demands the term “yeast” or “leaven.”
SPECIAL TOPIC: LEAVEN
Mat 16:8 Jesus often referred to the Twelve as having little faith (cf. Mat 6:30; Mat 8:26; Mat 14:31; Mat 16:8). Those who heard Him and lived with Him did not always understand or have faith. Mat 16:7-10 are parenthetical. Jesus wanted to talk about the false faith of the Pharisees (cf. Mat 5:20-48), but the disciples got mentally sidetracked over the lack of “bread.”
Mat 16:9 The disciples had the advantage of hearing Jesus speak and minister to the crowds and also the private the private discussions and interpretation afterward, but still they, like most of the hearers (cf. Mat 13:13-15 [Isa. Mat 6:9-10; Mat 6:19]), did not understand (i.e., Mat 15:17; Mat 16:11; Luk 2:50; Luk 18:34; Joh 10:6; Joh 12:16). Jesus’ message was so unique and different from the Jewish religion (i.e., “the leaven of the Pharisees”) they had grown up with that it took a supernatural Spirit-led opening of their minds to perceive (i.e., Luk 24:45). This occurred slowly during Jesus’ time with them (i.e., Mat 16:13-28), but not fully until
1. after the resurrection
2. in the upper room (cf. John 20)
3. by the seashore in John 21
4. Acts 1 when He ascended into heaven
Mat 16:12 It was their legalism and lack of love that caused Jesus’ sternest words of condemnation! Often, religiosity can be a barrier instead of a bridge!
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
to = unto. Greek. eis.
take = bring.
bread = loaves.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
5-12.] WARNING AGAINST THE LEAVEN OF THE PHARISEES AND SADDUCEES. Mar 8:13-21.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
The King misunderstood by his own
Mat 16:5. And when his disciples were come to the other side, they had forgotten to take bread.
They had forgotten to victual their boat. This they seem to have found out for themselves as soon as they “were come to the other side.” They seldom forgot such temporal matters. Possibly they trusted each other, and what was every man’s business was nobody’s business. They did not notice the omission while they were crossing the sea; but mealtime came, and their minds were quickly brought to think of the loaves. Controversy had for a while engrossed their minds with religious matters; but lack of bread, and consequent hunger soon recalled them to the things of earth.
Mat 16:6. Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.
He used a parabolic expression, which they would readily have understood, had not their minds been already absorbed by their lack of bread. He saw that in them, too, there would soon be a desire for a sign, now that they needed bread; and he feared the influence of both the Ritualism of the Pharisee, and the Rationalism of the Sadducee upon his little church. Hence his double word, “Take heed and beware.” The warning is needed today as much as in our Lord’s time: possibly it is even more required, and will be less regarded. “Pharisees and Sadducees” are both leavening the churches, and the spirit of the one is as bad as that of the other. Everywhere we see the one evil force, operating in two opposite ways, but rapidly leavening the meal of nominal Christendom. Lord, save thy people from this souring and corrupting influence!
Mat 16:7. And they reasoned among themselves, saying, It is because we have taken no bread.
Their thoughts ran along the low material level from leaven to bread. Did they imagine that he forbade their borrowing leaven from the Pharisees when they began to make a batch of bread? How could they have found any meaning in the literal sense of leaven as applied to Sadducees? They were earthbound by anxiety, or they could not have blundered so foolishly. When a number of hungry men are together, is it not very natural that they should look at everything with hungry eyes? Yes, it is natural; and it is not natural to men to be spiritual. We need to pray that we may not reason among ourselves after the same grovelling fashion, when we come into a little need.
Mat 16:8-10. Which when Jesus perceived, he said unto them, 0 ye of little faith, why reason ye among yourselves, because ye have brought no bread? Do ye not yet understand, neither remember the five loaves of the five thousand, and how many baskets ye took up? Neither the seven loaves of the four thousand, and how many baskets ye took up?
Want of faith made them thus dull and carnal. Want of bread would not have troubled them if they had possessed more grace. Our Lord as good as says to them, “Why begin raising questions as to what can be done under this small difficulty? Have I not dealt with far greater necessities? Have not your own personal wants been richly supplied? Has your store been exhausted even when all your thoughts have gone out towards the multitude, and all your store of bread and fish has been given up to them? What occasion can there be for anxiety in my presence, when I have always supplied your wants?”
How foolish they were, but how like we are to them! We seem to learn nothing. After years of experience, our Lord has to say, “Do ye not yet understand, neither remember? “Two stupendous miracles had not lifted those disciples to that plane of thought which is becoming in believers; and after all our experiences and deliverances, we, alas! are much as they were. How our mind dwells on the bread which we are wanting, and how readily it forgets former times when all such wants were abundantly supplied! The many baskets which were so amply filled by former providences were the disciples’ own share and store, and therefore they ought not to have forgotten the miraculous festivals. Even the empty baskets should have refreshed their memories, and reminded them of how they had twice been filled. If it were not for our wretched little faith, and our reasoning among ourselves, the memory of our former deliverances would lift us beyond all tendency to mistrust our God.
O sacred Spirit, teach us, or we shall never learn! Make us wise, or we shall still continue in the folly of carnal reasoning!
Mat 16:11. How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that you should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees?
At bottom it was unbelief which clouded their understanding. Jesus may well say to doubters, “Ye do not understand.” Truly, nothing more effectually blunts spiritual perception than an overpowering anxiety for the bread which perisheth. When a doctrine is not understood, it may not always be the fault of the teacher. Very plain speaking is frequently misunderstood when the mind is absorbed in pressing needs. It was sad to see apostles taking our Lord literally, and failing to see the obvious parable of his words. How could “the leaven of the Pharisees “be a term used concerning bread?
Mat 16:12. Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees,
The doctrine of these sectaries had a secret, insinuating, and souring influence; and the disciples must carefully watch lest even a little of its spirit and teaching should get into their minds, and then spread throughout their whole nature. Both these leavens may be at work at once in the same community; in fact, they are only one leaven. The two sets of opponents assailed the Lord Jesus at the same time, for they had a common ground of opposition against him. To this day these two forms of evil are ever working, either secretly or openly, and we have need to beware of them at all times. It is well to understand this, and both purge out the old leaven of Pharisaism, and keep out the new leaven of Sadduceeism. Self-righteousness and carnal reasoning must alike be cast out. Faith will find them both to be her deadly foes. Many are amusing themselves with the evil leaven; and before they are aware, the unhallowed thing will defile them. To be evangelical, and yet to be superstitious or rationalistic at the same time, is next to impossible. Certain of our contemporaries are trying to bake with this leaven, but their bread will be sour. Be wake!
Fuente: Spurgeon’s The Gospel of the Kingdom
Mat 15:39, Mar 8:13, Mar 8:14
Reciprocal: Luk 24:3 – General
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
16:5
The preceding verse says that Jesus departed from the multitude. He and his disciples had been in the vicinity of Magdala which is on the western shore of the Sea of Galilee. They then crossed over the sea, and verses later in the chapter show that, they were to spend some time in an uninhabited territory where there would be no opportunity to purchase provisions. Jesus knew the disciples had forgotten to attend to that matter (Mar 8:14 says they had one loaf), and decided to use the fact as a basis for a test of their faith in him as one who could and would care for them.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Mat 16:5. And the disciples coming to the other side. To the eastern shore. It is improbable that this conversation took place during the voyage (see below).
Forgot to take bread. Provisions were not indispensable for so short a voyage. The original suggests that the neglect occurred after they landed. They had but one loaf in the boat (Mar 8:14), and started on a land journey to Cesarea Philippi (Mat 16:13), through a region comparatively desolate, without making provision for it. The visit to Bethsaida on the way (Mar 8:22), at a time when our Lord was avoiding public notice, may have been for the purpose of obtaining a supply.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Observe here, 1. How dull the disciples of Christ were under Christ’s own teaching, how apt to put a carnal sense upon his words; they apprehended he had spoken to them of the leaven of bread, what he intended of the leaven of the Pharisee’s doctrine.
Observe, 2. The smart and sharp reproof which Christ gave his disciples, for not understanding the sense and signification of what he spake. The Lord Jesus Christ is much displeased with his own people, when he discerns blindness and ignorance in them after more than ordinary means of knowledge enjoyed by them; How is that ye do not yet understand?
Observe, 3. The metaphor which Christ sets forth the corrupt doctrine of the Pharisees and partly for its diffusiveness. Leaven is a piece of sour dough, that diffuses itself into the whole mass or lump of bread with which it is mixed.
From whence our Saviour intimates, that the Pharisees were a sour and proud sort of people; and their doctrine like themselves, poisonous and pernicious in their consequences; the contagion of which our Lord warns his disciples to avoid and shun.
Whence learn, That error is as damnable as vice; persons erroneous in their judgments are to be avoided, as well as those that are lewd and wicked in their conversations. He that has a due care of his soul’s salvation, must as well beware of erroneous principles as of debauched practices.
Observe, 4. Our Saviour does not command his disciples to separate from communion with the Pharisees, and oblige them not to hear their doctrine; but only to beware of the errors that they mixed with their doctrine. We may and ought to hold communion with a church, though erroneous in doctrine, if not fundamentally erroneous. Separation from a church is not justifiable upon any other ground than that which makes a separation between God and that church: which is either the apostacy of that church into gross idolatry; or in point of doctrine into damnable heresy, or imposing sinful terms of communion.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Mat 16:5-12. When his disciples were come to the other side Namely, of the sea of Tiberias, see Mar 8:13; they had forgotten to take bread They had tarried so long in Dalmanutha, or Magdala, that they had consumed the seven baskets of fragments which they had taken up at the late miracle, recorded Mat 15:32-39, and had no more than one loaf with them in the ship, Mar 8:14. Then Jesus said, Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees That is, of their false doctrine; elegantly called leaven, for it spreads in the soul, or the church, as leaven does in meal. And they reasoned among themselves What must we do then for bread, since we have taken no bread with us? Thus the slowness of their understanding showed itself on this occasion, as it had done on many others. As they had forgotten to take bread, and had often heard the doctors prohibit the use of the leaven of heathen and Samaritans, they thought he forbade them to buy bread from bakers of either sect, lest it might be made with impure leaven, and so they looked on the advice as an indirect reproof of their carelessness. Which when Jesus perceived As he knew all the secret workings of their minds; he said, O ye of little faith, why reason ye? Why are ye troubled about this? Why should your neglecting to bring bread with you make you put such an interpretation upon my words? Am I not able, if need so require, to supply you by a word? Observe, reader, to distrust Christ, and disquiet our own minds, when we are in straits and difficulties, is an evidence of the weakness of our faith, which, if it were in exercise as it should be would deliver us from the burden of care, by enabling us to cast it on the Lord, who careth for us. Do ye not understand After having been so long with me, are ye still ignorant of my power and goodness? neither remember the five loaves of the five thousand, and how many baskets, &c. Certainly you are very stupid, if you have forgotten how that with five loaves I fed five thousand men, who, after being fully satisfied, left a great deal more than the quantity that was at first set before me to divide among them. Neither the seven loaves of the four thousand An instance of a merciful and miraculous supply which happened so lately. How is it that ye do not understand? How came ye not to know that he, who on those different occasions fed such multitudes with such a little quantity of food, can never be at a loss to provide a meal for twelve? The experience which they had so lately had of the power and goodness of Christ in providing for them, was a great aggravation of their distrust. Though they had no bread with them, they had Him with them who could provide bread for them. Gods people may well be ashamed of the slowness and dulness of their apprehensions in divine things; especially when they have long enjoyed the means of grace. As Christs disciples well deserved the sharp rebuke which their Master gave them on this occasion, so it had the designed effect; for it brought the disciples to understand that he designed to caution them against the corrupt doctrines of the Pharisees and Sadducees; the pernicious nature and tendency of which may be learned from many instances taken notice of and condemned by Jesus himself, in the course of his ministry.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Mat 16:5-12. The Blindness of the Disciples Rebuked (Mar 8:14-21*, Luk 11:53 f., Luk 12:1).Note how Mt avoids the idea that Jesus had forgotten the bread. The Sadducees are mentioned again in 6. The detached saying about leaven in Mar 8:15 probably refers to plots of the Pharisees and Herod, but Mt. (Matthew 12) interprets leaven as teaching, and so has to substitute Sadducees for Herod, and carries the substitution back to Mat 16:1. He makes Jesus read the disciples thoughts (Mat 16:8) instead of simply overhearing their conversation (Mk.). Then, after giving Mk.s statement that the disciples need never worry about a shortage of food, he adds words of Jesus that the point at issue is not food at all, but erroneous teaching. Mat 16:11 f. is an attempt to give Mar 8:15 a context and explanation.
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
Verse 5
Had forgotten, &c. This and similar passages indicate that a regular and systematic, arrangement was made for supplying the wants of Jesus and his disciples when on their journeys, (see Matthew 15:34; John 12:6,) although the pecuniary means by which the supplies were obtained, were probably the gifts of friends. (Luke 8:3.) A different system was adopted for the twelve and the seventy who were sent out. (Matthew 10:9-11.) They went only two and two; and there was, therefore, a greater propriety in their relying upon the hospitality of friends, than in the case of the larger company that attended the Savior. We see, therefore, in the different arrangements made in the two cases, a delicate regard, on the part of Jesus, to the ordinary us usages and proprieties of life.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
16:5 {2} And when his disciples were come to the other side, they had forgotten to take bread.
(2) False teachers must be taken warning of.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Jesus’ teaching about the doctrine of the Pharisees and Sadducees 16:5-12 (cf. Mar 8:13-26)
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
The NIV translation of Mat 16:5 is clearer than that of the NASB. "When they went across the lake" pictures what follows as happening either during the journey, probably by boat, or after it. Jesus was still thinking about the preceding conflict with the Pharisees and Sadducees, but the disciples were thinking about food. Leaven or yeast is primarily an illustration of something small that inevitably spreads and has a large effect (cf. Mat 13:33). Often it stands for the spread of something evil, as it does here (cf. Exo 34:25; Lev 2:11; 1Co 5:6-8). The disciples may not have understood what Jesus meant because they were thinking in literal terms, but He was speaking metaphorically. Perhaps they were still thinking about Jesus’ instructions for their mission in Mat 10:9-11. [Note: France, The Gospel . . ., p. 609.] Another possibility follows.
"They thought the words of Christ implied, that in His view they had not forgotten to bring bread, but purposely omitted to do so, in order, like the Pharisees and Sadducees, to ’seek of Him a sign’ of His divine Messiahship-nay, to oblige Him to show such-that of miraculous provision in their want. The mere suspicion showed what was in their minds, and pointed to their danger. This explains how, in His reply, Jesus reproved them, not for utter want of discernment, but only for ’little faith.’" [Note: Edersheim, The Life . . ., 2:71.]