Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 23:1
Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,
Mat 23:1-7
The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses seat.
Christs reproaches of Pharisees
There must be some just, reasonable, and great cause of our Lords indignation, and this we find was an accumulation of great wickedness in these men, which received aggravations
(1) from their pretences to greater sanctity than others;
(2) from their having greater opportunities of being better than others;
(3) because they, being many of them in public places, their practice must have a bad influence on their followers. For they who pretend holiness, and are wicked; they who are wicked, though they have great helps to be good; and by being wicked cause others to be so too, their sin is exceeding sinful.
The particulars for which our Saviour taxes them, were principally these:
1. Their great pride. Under the title of Rabbi they affected a greater authority than is compatible to men.
2. Their wretched covetousness, which showed itself in the instances of devouring widows houses, of esteeming the gifts and the gold above the altar and the temple.
3. Their abominable hypocrisy, shown in teaching others to do what they themselves would not do; in serving a carnal interest by a religious carriage. It might have been supposed that Christs disciples had been out of danger of these evils, that they would not have come near the place where their Pilot had set a sea-mark. But whoso takes a view of the Christian Church, as Erasmus hath represented it, hell say, that Pharisaism then lived and reigned as much as ever. (Hezekiah Burton.)
Origin of Pharisaism
There was a great religious revival among the Jews after their return from the captivity, which continued for a considerable time; and which, after they had rebuilt the temple, sent them back to the law with a sincere desire to honour God by keeping its commands. So long as the life remained, the obedience was the real outcome of an inward principle; but when the life died out, then the obedience became only a fossil, and was soon covered over with corruption, until it became what we see it to have been in the days of the Saviour upon earth. The same danger attends on every spiritual movement. A real devotion to Christ stimulates to reverent attention to the forms of worship, and so long as that is simply an expression of loyalty to Him, all is well; but by and by all thought of Him drops out, and then only the ritual remains, becoming the idol of the heart, and so the life departs. Thus what was a voice full of sincerity in one generation, is often only an empty echo in that which follows. (W. M. Taylor, D. D.)
Evil ministers better in speech than works
If ministers do well, it is their own gain; if they say well, it is thine. Take thou what thine own is, and let alone what is another mans. Sylla and King Richard III. commanded others, under great penalties, to be virtuous and modest, when themselves walked the clean contrary way. A deformed painter may draw a goodly picture; a stinking breath sounds a mighty blast; and he that hath but a bad voice may show cunning in descant. A blind man may bear a torch in a dark night, and a harp wake music to others, which itself is not sensible of. Posts set for directions of passengers by the highway side do point out the way which themselves go not; and sign-posts tell the traveller there is wholesome diet or warm lodging within, when themselves remain in the storms without. Lewd preachers are like spire-steeples, or high pinnacles, which point up to heaven, but press down to the centre. (J. Trapp.)
Ministerial inconsistency
They had tongues which spake by the talent, but their hands scarce wrought by the ounce; like that ridiculous actor at Smyrna, who, pronouncing, O coelum, O heaven, pointed with his finger toward the ground: so these Pharisees had the heaven commonly at their tongues end, but the earth continually at their fingers end. In a certain battle against the Turks, there was a bishop who thus encouraged the army: Play the men, fellow-soldiers, to-day: and I dare promise you, that if ye die fighting, ye shall sup to-night with God in heaven. Now after the battle was begun, the bishop withdrew himself; and when some of the soldiers inquired among themselves what was become of the bishop, and why he would not take a supper with them that night in heaven, others answered, This is fasting-day with him, and therefore he will eat no supper, no, not in heaven! (J. Trapp.)
Selfish religious pride
Thirty miles north-east of Sholapoor, at Toolazapoor, is the great temple of the goddess Bhowani, and twice in the year the place is thronged by men and women of every grade, who come to pay their vows and sacrifices to the idol. Besides this, at every full moon long trains of pilgrims may be seen flocking thither; and such is the faith of the people in the healing powers of the goddess, that the sick are resorting there constantly in the vain hope of some relief. The temple at Punderpoor is still more renowned. Not to speak of the myriads who go there at the great festivals, persons make a pilgrimage thither every month from a distance of fifty or a hundred miles; and the practice is kept up for many years. One man, who had apparently come from a distance, the writer saw near Barsee, making the journey by prostrations, measuring his length upon the ground. It was under the burning sun of noonday; and, hardly able to proceed, he seemed the very picture of despair. But a case still more remarkable was that of a man performing the journey by rolling himself upon the ground. We came up with him two miles east of Wairag, and asked him where he was going, and why he was thus torturing himself. He at first did not seem to hear; but at length stopping, he lay exhausted upon the ground, and answered in a faint voice that he was going to Punderpoor. After some further questions, as the writer remonstrated with him upon the folly of such a course, he raised his head from the ground, and half reclining, said that he had come so far already he could not desist now. He stated that his village was near Chandrapoor, 450 miles to the east from there, that he had spent fifteen months on the way thus far, and that it was forty miles more, and he wished to complete the pilgrimage. He was accustomed to go about a mile each day. He would then note the place where he had stopped, and walking back to the nearest village, would remain until the next day, receiving his food from the villagers. Then he would return, and from the place left the previous day would begin his toilsome pilgrimage. If he came to a river that could not be passed in this manner, he would go back a distance equal to this space, and roll over the ground a second time. He had for clothing only a coarse cloth bound tightly about his loins, and another about his head; and thus, almost naked, over roads extremely rough and stony, exposed to heat and cold, sometimes drenched with rain or covered with mud-for a year and three months this poor man had been rolling himself along towards the shrine of Vithoba. Yet it was not a sense of sin or a desire for pardon that induced him to undertake this painful journey. But it was evident, upon further conversation, that he was urged on by no higher motive than a selfish pride. He sought a reputation for holiness. (Bombay Times.)
Worthless ceremonies
When corn runs into straw and chaff, those who feed on it may well be thin and lean; but when it runs into ears and kernel, thou mayest expect such as eat of it to be fat and well-favoured. When religion runs into formalities and ceremonies, her followers can never be thriving spiritually. They may starve, for all the gaudy flowers wherewith several dishes on her table are decked and set forth. (Swinnock.)
Deceptive, religious obedience
The shops in the square of San Marco were all religiously closed, for the day was a high festival. We were much disappointed, for it was our last day, and we desired to take away with us some souvenirs of lovely Venice; but our regret soon vanished, for on looking at the shop we meant to patronise, we readily discovered signs of traffic within. We stepped to the side door, and found when one or two other customers had been served, that we might purchase to our hearts content, saint or no saint. After this fashion too many keep the laws of God to the eye, but violate them in the heart. The shutters are up as if the man no more dealt with sin and Satan; but a brisk commerce is going on behind the scenes. From such deceit may the Spirit of Truth preserve us. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
Best places at feasts
When Hanway was in Persia, a certain governor rose from his seat and left the room, because Hanway had inadvertently taken his seat higher than he, though at the opposite side of the table,
Pope and councils not infallible
There is no external supreme, infallible judge in the Church of God, to whom all Christians are obliged to submit their faith and consciences in all matters of religion. Argument
I. This authority which they pretend to is a greater authority than the apostles themselves did ever claim or exercise in the Church of God, as plainly appears from 2Co 1:24 -Not that we have dominion over your faith. This was very agreeable to the nature and person of Christ. Argument
II. Such an authority as they pretend to is contrary to that command of the trial of doctrines which is laid upon all Christians; for if there be an infallible judge to whom I ought to submit my falth and conscience in all matters of religion, what need I try doctrines?
1. Christians have ability to try things with.
2. They have a rule to try things by.
3. Christians have a promise of discovery upon trial. Argument III., against the supremacy and the infallible authority of the pope, is taken from the danger of following false guides. People may sin in following their guides and teachers. Argument IV., and last, against this doctrine is, from the want of a Divine appointment and promise. Inference
II. Forasmuch as there is no person upon earth that can infallibly guide you to salvation, it concerns you to have the greater care of your own salvation.
1. Study the Holy Scriptures.
2. Pray fervently for the guidance of Gods Spirit.
3. If you would discern and hold fast the truth, love and practise it. (M. Pool.)
A proud title the sign of usurped authority
But, indeed, there was a deeper and worse design than this in it; they did not only aim at splendid and glorious titles, but they did usurp authority and dominion over the consciences of the people, whereof this was but a sign: as amongst us the flag is a sign of the dominion of the seas, so.this title was an indication and sign of that authority which they usurped over the people. (M. Pool.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
CHAPTER XXIII.
The character of the scribes and Pharisees, and directions to
the people and the disciples to receive the law from them, but
not to follow their bad example, 1-7.
The disciples exhorted to humility, 8-12.
Different woes pronounced against the scribes and Pharisees
for their intolerance, 13;
rapacity, 14;
false zeal, 15;
superstition in oaths and tithes, 16-23;
hypocrisy, 24-28.
Their cruelty, 29-32.
Their persecution of the apostles, c. Their destruction
foretold, 33-36.
Christ’s lamentation over Jerusalem, 37-39.
NOTES ON CHAP. XXIII.
Verse 2. The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat] . – They sat there formerly by Divine appointment: they sit there now by Divine permission. What our Lord says here refers to their expounding the Scriptures, for it was the custom of the Jewish doctors to sit while they expounded the law and prophets, (Mt 5:1 Lu 4:20-22,) and to stand up when they read them.
By the seat of Moses, we are to understand authority to teach the law. Moses was the great teacher of the Jewish people; and the scribes, &c., are here represented as his successors.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Our Lord having now done with the Pharisees, turneth his discourse to the more docible people, who (as we heard before) heard him attentively and gladly, Mar 12:37; Luk 19:48. Our Saviour foresaw that some unwary hearers might make two ill uses of what he had spoke against the scribes and Pharisees.
1. Some might report him an enemy to the law, the interpreters of which the Pharisees were.
2. Others might contemn the authority of the law, because he had represented these men, in whose hand the interpretation of it at present was, so truly contemptible.
Whereas, on the other side, many might run into errors of practice, from the example of the scribes and Pharisees, their magistrates and teachers. Against all these mistakes he cautions them in this chapter, showing that he did not undervalue the law of Moses, nor would have his reflections on the Pharisees prejudice any thing which they taught them of it, and according to it; neither would he have his people take the copy of the law from their actions.
The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Mosess seat: these men were the ordinary readers and interpreters of the law of God. Moses is here put for the law, as Luk 16:31, If they hear not Moses and the prophets; and so Mat 23:29, They have Moses and the prophets. Mosess seat signifieth the seat appointed for those that gave the sense of the law, or judgment upon it; thus, Moses of old time hath in every city those that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day, Act 15:21; 2Co 3:15. Their way was, while they read the Scriptures they stood up: (paying a particular reverence to the pure word of God), Luk 4:16; when they had done reading, they sat down and opened it. Their sitting in the seat of Moses did not signify a succession to Moses, for he had no successor, being the Mediator of the Old Testament; but the delivering and interpreting the doctrine and law of Moses. Dr. Lightfoot thinks it is rather to be understood of the chair of magistracy than the doctrinal chair. The Pharisees being exercised in that, it may be understood of both, for the reading and interpreting the law chiefly belonged to the scribes.
All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; that is, whatsoever is in Moses which they bid you observe and do. The term all is to be understood restrainedly, with respect to the subject matter or persons spoken of, in multitudes of scriptures. Our Saviours cautioning his disciples so often against the leaven of these men, and their traditions, plainly showeth us that must be here the sense of it: Let not the law of God lose his authority with you because of those wicked men. He doth not command them to hear none but them, for then to what purpose did he himself preach, or send out the twelve, if none might hear them? All that can be concluded from this text is that the law of God, or word of God, is not to be despised, whoever reads or delivereth it. He goeth on,
But do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. We are naturally more led by example than by precept. Men had therefore need be cautioned against ill living teachers. Odi philosophum qui non sapit sibi. A man had need very well know the medicine which he taketh from a physician he seeth sick of the same disease, when he himself refuseth and abominates it. He that says and does not, may be heard, but not imitated. There may be a time when men can ordinarily hear no others, which was the present case.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
1. Then spake Jesus to themultitudeto the multitudes, “and to his disciples.”
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Then spake Jesus to the multitude,…. To the common people that were about him in the temple; the high priests and elders, Scribes, Pharisees, and Sadducees, having left him, being all nonplussed and silenced by him: and now, lest on the one hand, the people seeing the ignorance and errors of these men detected by Christ, should be tempted to conclude there was nothing in religion, and to neglect the word and worship of God, on account of the concern these men had in it; and on the other hand, because of their great authority and influence, being in Moses’s chair, lest the people should be led into bad principles and practices by them, he directs them in what they should observe them, and in what not: that they were not altogether to be rejected, nor in everything to be attended to; and warns them against their ostentation, pride, hypocrisy, covetousness, and cruelty; and, at the same time, removes an objection against himself, proving that he was no enemy to Moses, and the law, rightly explained and practised:
and to his disciples; not only the twelve, but to all that believed in him, and were followers of him.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
| The Scribes and Pharisees Condemned; Cautions against Pride. |
| |
1 Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, 2 Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat: 3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. 4 For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men’s shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. 5 But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments, 6 And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues, 7 And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi. 8 But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. 9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. 10 Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ. 11 But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant. 12 And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.
We find not Christ, in all his preaching, so severe upon any sort of people as upon these scribes and Pharisees; for the truth is, nothing is more directly opposite to the spirit of the gospel than the temper and practice of that generation of men, who were made up of pride, worldliness, and tyranny, under a cloak and pretence of religion; yet these were the idols and darlings of the people, who thought, if but two men went to heaven, one would be a Pharisee. Now Christ directs his discourse here to the multitude, and to his disciples (v. 1) to rectify their mistakes concerning these scribes and Pharisees, by painting them out in their true colours, and so to take off the prejudice which some of the multitude had conceived against Christ and his doctrine, because it was opposed by those men of their church, that called themselves the people’s guides. Note, It is good to know the true characters of men, that we may not be imposed upon by great and mighty names, titles, and pretensions to power. People must be told of the wolves (Act 20:29; Act 20:30), the dogs (Phil. iii. 2), the deceitful workers (2 Cor. xi. 13), that they may know here to stand upon their guard. And not only the mixed multitude, but even the disciples, need these cautions; for good men are apt to have their eyes dazzled with worldly pomp.
Now, in this discourse,
I. Christ allows their office as expositors of the law; The scribes and Pharisees (that is, the whole Sanhedrim, who sat at the helm of church government, who were all called scribes, and were some of them Pharisees), they sit in Moses’ seat (v. 2), as public teachers and interpreters of the law; and, the law of Moses being the municipal law of their state, they were as judges, or a bench of justices; teaching and judging seem to be equivalent, comparing 2Ch 17:7; 2Ch 17:9; 2Ch 19:5; 2Ch 19:6; 2Ch 19:8. They were not the itinerant judges that rode the circuit, but the standing bench, that determined on appeals, special verdicts, or writs of error by the law; they sat in Moses’s seat, not as he was Mediator between God and Israel, but only as he was chief justice, Exod. xviii. 26. Or, we may apply it, not to the Sanhedrim, but to the other Pharisees and scribes, that expounded the law, and taught the people how to apply it to particular cases. The pulpit of wood, such as was made for Ezra, that ready scribe in the law of God (Neh. viii. 4), is here called Moses’s seat, because Moses had those in every city (so the expression is, Acts xv. 21), who in those pulpits preached him; this was their office, and it was just and honourable; it was requisite that there should be some at whose mouth the people might enquire the law, Mal. ii. 7. Note, 1. Many a good place is filled with bad men; it is no new thing for the vilest men to be exalted even to Moses’s seat (Ps. xii. 8); and, when it is so, the men are not so much honoured by the seat as the seat is dishonoured by the men. Now they that sat in Moses’s seat were so wretchedly degenerated, that it was time for the great Prophet to arise, like unto Moses, to erect another seat. 2. Good and useful offices and powers are not therefore to be condemned and abolished, because they fall sometimes into the hands of bad men, who abuse them. We must not therefore pull down Moses’s seat, because scribes and Pharisees have got possession of it; rather than so, let both grow together until the harvest, ch. xiii. 30.
Hence he infers (v. 3), “Whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do As far as they sit in Moses’s seat, that is, read and preach the law that was given by Moses” (which, as yet, continued in full force, power, and virtue), “and judge according to that law, so far you must hearken to them, as remembrances to you of the written word.” The scribes and Pharisees made it their business to study the scripture, and were well acquainted with the language, history, and customs of it, and its style and phraseology. Now Christ would have the people to make use of the helps they gave them for the understanding of the scripture, and do accordingly. As long as their comments did illustrate the text and not pervert it; did make plain, and not make void, the commandment of God; so far they must be observed and obeyed, but with caution and a judgment of discretion. Note, We must not think the worse of good truths for their being preached by bad ministers; nor of good laws for their being executed by bad magistrates. Though it is most desirable to have our food brought by angels, yet, if God send it to us by ravens, if it be good and wholesome, we must take it, and thank God for it. Our Lord Jesus promiseth this, to prevent the cavil which some would be apt to make at this following discourse; as if, by condemning the scribes and Pharisees, he designed to bring the law of Moses into contempt, and to draw people off from it; whereas he came not to destroy, but to fulfil. Note, It is wisdom to obviate the exceptions which may be taken at just reproofs, especially when there is occasion to distinguish between officers and their offices, that the ministry be not blamed when the ministers are.
II. He condemns the men. He had ordered the multitude to do as they taught; but here he annexeth a caution not to do as they did, to beware of their leaven; Do not ye after their works. Their traditions were their works, were their idols, the works of their fancy. Or, “Do not according to their example.” Doctrines and practices are spirits that must be tried, and where there is occasion, must be carefully separated and distinguished; and as we must not swallow corrupt doctrines for the sake of any laudable practices of those that teach them, so we must not imitate any bad examples for the sake of the plausible doctrines of those that set them. The scribes and Pharisees boasted as much of the goodness of their works as of the orthodoxy of their teaching, and hoped to be justified by them; it was the plea they put in (Luk 18:11; Luk 18:12); and yet these things, which they valued themselves so much upon, were an abomination in the sight of God.
Our Saviour here, and in the following verses, specifies divers particulars of their works, wherein we must not imitate them. In general, they are charged with hypocrisy, dissimulation, or double-dealing in religion; a crime which cannot be enquired of at men’s bar, because we can only judge according to outward appearance; but God, who searcheth the heart, can convict of hypocrisy; and nothing is more displeasing to him, for he desireth truth.
Four things are in these verses charged upon them.
1. Their saying and doing were two things.
Their practice was no way agreeable either to their preaching or to their profession; for they say, and do not; they teach out of the law that which is good, but their conversation gives them the lie; and they seem to have found another way to heaven for themselves than what they show to others. See this illustrated and charged home upon them, Rom. ii. 17-24. Those are of all sinners most inexcusable that allow themselves in the sins they condemn in others, or in worse. This doth especially touch wicked ministers, who will be sure to have their portion appointed them with hypocrites (ch. xxiv. 51); for what greater hypocrisy can there be, than to press that upon others, to be believed and done, which they themselves disbelieve and disobey; pulling down in their practice what they build up in their preaching; when in the pulpit, preaching so well that it is a pity they should ever come out; but, when out of the pulpit, living so ill that it is a pity they should ever come in; like bells, that call others to church, but hang out of it themselves; or Mercurial posts, that point the way to others, but stand still themselves? Such will be judged out of their own mouths. It is applicable to all others that say, and do not; that make a plausible profession of religion, but do not live up to that profession; that make fair promises, but do not perform their promises; are full of good discourse, and can lay down the law to all about them, but are empty of good works; great talkers, but little doers; the voice is Jacob’s voice, but the hands are the hands of Esau. Vox et prterea nihil–mere sound. They speak fair, I go, sir; but there is no trusting them, for there are seven abominations in their heart.
2. They were very severe in imposing upon others those things which they were not themselves willing to submit to the burthen of (v. 4); They bind heavy burthens, and grievous to be borne; not only insisting upon the minute circumstances of the law, which is called a yoke (Acts xv. 10), and pressing the observation of them with more strictness and severity than God himself did (whereas the maxim of the lawyers, is Apices juris son sunt jura–Mere points of law are not law), but by adding to his words, and imposing their own inventions and traditions, under the highest penalties. They loved to show their authority and to exercise their domineering faculty, lording it over God’s heritage, and saying to men’s souls, Bow down, that we may go over; witness their many additions to the law of the fourth commandment, by which they made the sabbath a burthen on men’s shoulders, which was designed to be the joy of their hearts. Thus with force and cruelty did those shepherds rule the flock, as of old, Ezek. xxxiv. 4.
But see their hypocrisy; They themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. (1.) They would not exercise themselves in those things which they imposed upon others; they pressed upon the people a strictness in religion which they themselves would not be bound by; but secretly transgressed their own traditions, which they publicly enforced. They indulged their pride in giving law to others; but consulted their ease in their own practice. Thus it has been said, to the reproach of the popish priests, that they fast with wine and sweetmeats, while they force the people to fast with bread and water; and decline the penances they enjoin the laity. (2.) They would not ease the people in these things, nor put a finger to lighten their burthen, when they saw it pinched them. They could find out loose constructions to put upon God’s law, and could dispense with that, but would not bate an ace of their own impositions, nor dispense with a failure in the least punctilio of them. They allowed no chancery to relieve the extremity of their common law. How contrary to this was the practice of Christ’s apostles, who would allow to others that use of Christian liberty which, for the peace and edification of the church, they would deny themselves in! They would lay no other burthen than necessary things, and those easy, Acts xv. 28. How carefully doth Paul spare those to whom he writes! 1Co 7:28; 1Co 9:12.
3. They were all for show, and nothing for substance, in religion (v. 5); All their works they do, to be seen of men. We must do such good works, that they who see them may glorify God; but we must not proclaim our good works, with design that others may see them, and glorify us; which our Saviour here chargeth upon the Pharisees in general, as he had done before in the particular instances of prayer and giving of alms. All their end was to be praised of men, and therefore all their endeavour was to be seen of men, to make a fair show in the flesh. In those duties of religion which fall under the eye of men, none ere so constant and abundant as they; but in what lies between God and their souls, in the retirement of their closets, and the recesses of their hearts, they desire to be excused. The form of godliness will get them a name to live, which is all they aim at, and therefore they trouble not themselves with the power of it, which is essential to a life indeed. He that does all to be seen does nothing to the purpose.
He specifies two things which they did to be seen of men.
(1.) They made broad their phylacteries. Those were little scrolls of paper or parchment, wherein were written, with great niceness, these four paragraphs of the law, Exo 13:2-11; Exo 13:11-16; Deu 6:4-9; Deu 11:13-21. These were sewn up in leather, and worn upon their foreheads and left arms. It was a tradition of the elders, which had reference to Exod. xiii. 9, and Prov. vii. 3, where the expressions seem to be figurative, intimating no more than that we should bear the things of God in our minds as carefully as if we had them bound between our eyes. Now the Pharisees made broad these phylacteries, that they might be thought more holy, and strict, and zealous for the law, than others. It is a gracious ambition to covet to be really more holy than others, but it is a proud ambition to covet to appear so. It is good to excel in real piety, but not to exceed in outward shows; for overdoing is justly suspected of design, Prov. xxvii. 14. It is the guise of hypocrisy to make more ado than needs in external service, more than is needful either to prove, or to improve, the good affections and dispositions of the soul.
(2.) They enlarged the borders of their garments. God appointed the Jews to make borders or fringes upon their garments (Num. xv. 38), to distinguish them from other nations, and to be a memorandum to them of their being a peculiar people; but the Pharisees were not content to have these borders like other people’s, which might serve God’s design in appointing them; but they must be larger than ordinary, to answer their design of making themselves to be taken notice of; as if they were more religious than others. But those who thus enlarge their phylacteries, and the borders of their garments, while their hearts are straitened, and destitute of the love of God and their neighbour, though they may now deceive others, will in the end deceive themselves.
4. They much affected pre-eminence and superiority, and prided themselves extremely in it. Pride was the darling reigning sin of the Pharisees, the sin that did most easily beset them and which our Lord Jesus takes all occasions to witness against.
(1.) He describes their pride, Mat 23:6; Mat 23:7. They courted, and coveted,
[1.] Places of honour and respect. In all public appearances, as at feasts, and in the synagogues, they expected, and had, to their hearts’ delight, the uppermost rooms, and the chief seats. They took place of all others, and precedency was adjudged to them, as persons of the greatest note and merit; and it is easy to imagine what a complacency they took in it; they loved to have the preeminence, 3 John 9. It is not possessing the uppermost rooms, nor sitting in the chief seats, that is condemned (somebody must sit uppermost), but loving them; for men to value such a little piece of ceremony as sitting highest, going first, taking the wall, or the better hand, and to value themselves upon it, to seek it, and to feel resentment if they have it not; what is that but making an idol of ourselves, and then falling down and worshipping it–the worst kind of idolatry! It is bad any where, but especially in the synagogues. There to seek honour to ourselves, where we appear in order to give glory to God, and to humble ourselves before him, is indeed to mock God instead of serving him. David would willingly lie at the threshold in God’s house; so far was he from coveting the chief seat there, Ps. lxxxiv. 10. It savours much of pride and hypocrisy, when people do not care for going to church, unless they can look fine and make a figure there.
[2.] Titles of honour and respect. They loved greetings in the markets, loved to have people put off their hats to them, and show them respect when they met them in the streets. O how it pleased them, and fed their vain humour, digito monstrari et dicier, Hic est–to be pointed out, and to have it said, This be he, to have way made for them in the crowd of market people; “Stand off, here is a Pharisee coming!” and to be complimented with the high and pompous title of Rabbi, Rabbi! This was meat and drink and dainties to them; and they took as great a satisfaction in it as Nebuchadnezzar did in his palace, when he said, Is not this great Babylon that I have built? The greetings would not have done them half so much good, if they had not been in the markets, where every body might see how much they were respected, and how high they stood in the opinion of the people. It was but a little before Christ’s time, that the Jewish teachers, the masters of Israel, had assumed the title of Rabbi, Rab, or Rabban, which signifies great or much; and was construed as Doctor, or My lord. And they laid such a stress upon it, that they gave it for a maxim that “he who salutes his teacher, and does not call him Rabbi, provokes the divine Majesty to depart from Israel;” so much religion did they place in that which was but a piece of good manners! For him that is taught in the word to give respect to him that teaches is commendable enough in him that gives it; but for him that teaches to love it, and demand it, and affect it, to be puffed up with it, and to be displeased if it be omitted, is sinful and abominable; and, instead of teaching, he has need to learn the first lesson in the school of Christ, which is humility.
(2.) He cautions his disciples against being herein like them; herein they must not do after their works; “But be not ye called so, for ye shall not be of such a spirit,” v. 8, c.
Here is, [1.] A prohibition of pride. They are here forbidden,
First, To challenge titles of honour and dominion to themselves, <i>v. 8-10. It is repeated twice; Be not called Rabbi, neither be ye called Master or Guide: not that it is unlawful to give civil respect to those that are over us in the Lord, nay, it is an instance of the honour and esteem which it is our duty to show them; but, 1. Christ’s ministers must not affect the name of Rabbi or Master, by way of distinction from other people; it is not agreeable to the simplicity of the gospel, for them to covet or accept the honour which they have that are in kings’ palaces. 2. They must not assume the authority and dominion implied in those names; they must not be magisterial, nor domineer over their brethren, or over God’s heritage, as if they had dominion over the faith of Christians: what they received of the Lord, all must receive from them; but in other things they must not make their opinions and wills a rule and standard to all other people, to be admitted with an implicit obedience. The reasons for this prohibition are,
(1.) One is your Master, even Christ,Mat 23:8; Mat 23:10. Note, [1.] Christ is our Master, our Teacher, our Guide. Mr. George Herbert, when he named the name of Christ, usually added, My Master. [2.] Christ only is our Master, ministers are but ushers in the school. Christ only is the Master, the great Prophet, whom we must hear, and be ruled and overruled by; whose word must be an oracle and a law to us; Verily I say unto you, must be enough to us. And if he only be our Master, then for his ministers to set up for dictators, and to pretend to a supremacy and an infallibility, is a daring usurpation of that honour of Christ which he will not give to another.
(2.) All ye are brethren. Ministers are brethren not only to one another, but to the people; and therefore it ill becomes them to be masters, when there are none for them to master it over but their brethren; yea, and we are all younger brethren, otherwise the eldest might claim an excellency of dignity and power, Gen. xlix. 3. But, to preclude that, Christ himself is the first-born among many brethren, Rom. viii. 29. Ye are brethren, as ye are all disciples of the same Master. School-fellows are brethren, and, as such, should help one another in getting their lesson; but it will by no means be allowed that one of the scholars step into the master’s seat, and give law to the school. If we are all brethren, we must not be many masters. Jam. iii. 1.
Secondly, They are forbidden to ascribe such titles to others (v. 9); “Call no man your father upon the earth; constitute no man the father of your religion, that is, the founder, author, director, and governor, of it.” The fathers of our flesh must be called fathers, and as such we must give them reverence; but God only must be allowed as the Father of our spirits, Heb. xii. 9. Our religion must not be derived from, or made to depend upon, any man. We are born again to the spiritual and divine life, not of corruptible seed, but by the word of God; not of the will of the flesh, or the will of man, but of God. Now the will of man, not being the rise of our religion, must not be the rule of it. We must not jurare in verba magistri–swear to the dictates of any creature, not the wisest or best, nor pin our faith on any man’s sleeve, because we know not whither he will carry it. St. Paul calls himself a Father to those whose conversion he had been an instrument of (1Co 4:15; Phm 1:10); but he pretends to no dominion over them, and uses that title to denote, not authority, but affection: therefore he calls them not his obliged, but his beloved, sons, 1 Cor. iv. 14.
The reason given is, One is your Father, who is in heaven. God is our Father, and is All in all in our religion. He is the Fountain of it, and its Founder; the Life of it, and its Lord; from whom alone, as the Original, our spiritual life is derived, and on whom it depends. He is the Father of all lights (Jam. i. 17), that one Father, from whom are all things, and we in him, Eph. iv. 6. Christ having taught us to say, Our Father, who art in heaven; let us call no man Father upon earth; no man, because man is a worm, and the son of man is a worm, hewn out of the same rock with us; especially not upon earth, for man upon earth is a sinful worm; there is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not, and therefore no one is fit to be called Father.
[2.] Here is a precept of humility and mutual subjection (v. 11); He that is greatest among you shall be your servant; not only call himself so (we know of one who styles himself Servus servorum Dei–Servant of the servants of God, but acts as Rabbi, and father, and master, and Dominus Deus noster–The Lord our God, and what not), but he shall be so. Take it as a promise; “He shall be accounted greatest, and stand highest in the favour of God, that is most submissive and serviceable;” or as a precept; “He that is advanced to any place of dignity, trust, and honour, in the church, let him be your servant” (some copies read esto for estai), “let him not think that his patent of honour is a writ of ease; no; he that is greatest is not a lord, but a minister.” St. Paul, who knew his privilege as well as duty, though free from all, yet made himself servant unto all (1 Cor. ix. 19); and our Master frequently pressed it upon his disciples to be humble and self-denying, mild and condescending, and to abound in all offices of Christian love, though mean, and to the meanest; and of this he hath set us an example.
[3.] Here is a good reason for all this, v. 12. Consider,
First, The punishment intended for the proud; Whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased. If God give them repentance, they will be abased in their own eyes, and will abhor themselves for it; if they repent not, sooner or later they will be abased before the world. Nebuchadnezzar, in the height of his pride, was turned to be a fellow-commoner with the beasts; Herod, to be a feast for the worms; and Babylon, that sat as a queen, to be the scorn of nations. God made the proud and aspiring priests contemptible and base (Mal. ii. 9), and the lying prophet to be the tail, Isa. ix. 15. But if proud men have not marks of humiliation set upon them in this world, there is a day coming, when they shall rise to everlasting shame and contempt (Dan. xii. 2); so plentifully will he reward the proud doer! Ps. xxxi. 23.
Secondly, The preferment intended for the humble; He that shall humble himself shall be exalted. Humility is that ornament which is in the sight of God of great price. In this world the humble have the honour of being accepted with the holy God, and respected by all wise and good men; of being qualified for, and often called out to, the most honourable services; for honour is like the shadow, which flees from those that pursue it, and grasp at it, but follows those that flee from it. However, in the other world, they that have humbled themselves in contrition for their sin, in compliance with their God, and in condescension to their brethren, shall be exalted to inherit the throne of glory; shall be not only owned, but crowned, before angels and men.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
Mat 23:1
. Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes. This warning was highly useful, that, amidst contentions and the noise of combats, amidst the trouble and confusion of public affairs, amidst the destruction of proper and lawful order, the authority of the word of God might remain entire. The design of Christ was, that the people might not, in consequence of being offended at the vices of the scribes, (88) throw away reverence for the Law. For we know how prone the minds of men are to entertain dislike of the Law; and more especially when the life of their pastors is dissolute, and does not correspond to their words, almost all grow wanton through their example, as if they had received permission to sin with impunity. The same thing happens — and something worse — when contentions arise; for the greater part of men, having thrown off the yoke, give utterance to their wicked desires, and break out into extreme contempt.
At that time the scribes burned with covetousness and swelled with ambition; their extortions were notorious; their cruelty was formidable; and such was their corruption of manners, that one would think they had conspired for the destruction of the Law. Besides, they had perverted by their false opinions the pure and natural meaning of the Law, so that Christ was constrained to enter into a sharp conflict with them; because their amazing rage hurried them on to extinguish the light of truth. So then, because there was danger that many persons, partly on account of such abuses, and partly on account of the din of controversies, would come to despise all religion, Christ seasonably meets them, and declares that it would be unreasonable if, on account of the vices of men, true religion were to perish, or reverence for the Law to be in any degree diminished. As the scribes were obstinate and inveterate enemies, and as they held the Church oppressed through their tyranny, Christ was compelled to expose their wickedness; for if good and simple men had not been withdrawn from bondage to them, the door would have been shut against the Gospel. There was also another reason; for the common people think themselves at liberty to do whatever they see done by their rulers, whose corrupt manners they form into a law.
But that no man might put a different interpretation on what he was about to say, he begins by stating, that whatever sort of men the teachers were it was altogether unreasonable, either that on account of their filth the word of God should receive any stain, or that on account of their wicked examples men should hold themselves at liberty to commit sin. And this wisdom ought to be carefully observed; for many persons, having no other object in view than to bring hatred and detestation on the wicked and ungodly, mix and confound every thing through their inconsiderate zeal. All discipline is despised, and shame is trampled under foot; in short, there remains no respect for what is honorable, and, what is more, many are emboldened by it, and intentionally blazon the sins of priests, that they may have a pretext for sinning with less restraint. But in attacking the scribes, Christ proceeds in such a manner, that he first vindicates the Law of God from contempt. We must attend to this caution also if we desire that our reproofs should be of any service. But, on the other hand, we ought to observe, that no dread of giving offense prevented Christ from exposing ungodly teachers as they deserved; only he preserved such moderation, that the doctrine of God might not come to be despised on account of the wickedness of men.
To inform us that he spoke publicly about their vices, not to raise envy against their persons, but to prevent the contagion from spreading more widely, Mark expressly states that he spoke to them in his doctrine; by which words he means that the hearers were profitably warned to beware of them. Now, though Luke appears to restrict it to the disciples, yet it is probable that the discourse was addressed indiscriminately to the whole multitude; which appears more clearly from Matthew, and, indeed, the subject itself required that Christ should have his eye on all without exception.
(88) “ Offensé et scandalizé des vices qu’on voyoit és scribes;” — “offended and scandalized at the vices which they saw in the scribes.”
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
CHRISTS DEALING WITH HIS DEADLY CRITICS
Matthew 22, 23.
IN the further pursuit of our studies in Matthew, we see Jesus returning to the parable method of teaching and his major theme, the Kingdom of Heaven. In this case, the Kingdom is set forth under the figure of marriage, and the groom is none other than the kings son. This is not the parable of the great supper recorded in Luk 14:16-24, but another, and in fundamental features, a different figure. In Lukes parable, it was a certain man who made a great supper and bade many. In Matthew, it is a certain king which made a marriage for his son. Lukes parable presents Jesus as a host. Matthews parable presents Christ, Gods only Son, the royal heir to the throne. Jamieson, Faucett and Brown justly suggest that in Luke, the parable is rather of Old Testament history, and Jesus is the last and greatest of the line of its prophets and teachers, through whom God is demanding something from men; while in Matthew the parable is New Testament in its nature, reveals Gods grace toward men and suggests the honors that belong to Christ, His royal Son. The main point of the parable, however, is
THE NON-GARMENTED GUEST.
The sin of this individual is made to appear the more deep-dyed because it contrasts exceeding grace with ungrateful conduct.
The invitation guaranteed a garment for the guest. The first company to whom the invitation went revealed a stubborn indifference. Neither the joyousness of the occasion, the grace of the invitation, nor the expense of feast and proffered full-dress made any appeal. They would not come (Mat 22:3). The second and more urgent invitation recited the kings sacrifice in the abundant provision and expectant royalty.
But even this combination was treated with contempt. They made light of it and went their ways, one to his farm, another to his merchandise (Mat 22:5). But most amazing of all, indifference meets the urgency of grace with an inexplicable hatred, and the remnant took his servants, and entreated them spitefully and slew them (Mat 22:6).
How natural the next portion of the parable. When the king heard thereof, he was wroth: and he sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city (Mat 22:7). How unnatural and yet gracious the kings further conduct! Then saith he to his servants, The wedding is ready, but they which were bidden were not worthy. Go ye therefore into the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage. So those servants went out into the highways, and gathered together all as many as they found, both bad and good: and the wedding was furnished with guests (Mat 22:8-10).
To provide social equals with gay garments for a great occasionthat often occurs in human history; but to proffer such garments to social outcasts, that is a parable of the grace of God. Surely salvation is of grace; By grace are we saved. Only through the grace of God shall we finally come into friendly and everlasting converse with Him. Only by the grace of our God shall we sit at the kings table and feast on the heavenly provisions and be permitted to reflect the gladness that radiates from the face of the kings son. It is written, Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after righteousness, and the promise is, They shall be filled. This is of grace!
The guests were expected to be properly garmented. Thats clearly indicated in Mat 22:11, And when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment. The oriental custom of providing garments for guests is here suggested. That custom gives special meaning to many Scriptures. It is well understood by every student of Scripture that man has no merit of his own with which to clothe himself when he comes into the Kings presence. Our righteousness is from Him. The Prophet Isaiah, the Old Testament evangel, perfectly understood this great Christian truth, and he said,
I will greatly rejoice in the Lord; my soul shall be joyful in my God; for He hath clothed me with the garments of salvation, He hath covered me with the robe of righteousness, as a bridegroom decketh himself with ornaments, and as a bride adorneth herself with her jewels (Isa 61:10).
Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments (Rev 16:15).
When James, with the pen of inspiration, gave to us the definition of pure religion, he said, Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world (Jas 1:27).
It may seem to men who are in perfect health and to whom the appeals of pleasure and passion are beckoning, that purity is a matter of little moment, but it is doubtful if any immortal soul has ever consciously approached the gates of death that usher into the presence of God, without feeling a gripping fear lest the garments of character, when they are brought before His gaze, shall prove themselves spotted by the flesh (Jud 1:23).
The kings presence became an inspection of clothing.
And when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment:
And he saith unto him, Friend, how earnest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless.
Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall he weeping and gnashing of teeth.
For many are called, but few are chosen (Mat 22:11-14).
This result was not because the king desired to judge. It came in consequence of the occasion. Rags are out of place at royal banquets. Even the nonconformist in clothing is very uncomfortable on great occasions. How much more uneasy must the beggar be who finds himself and his tattered clothing the object of all observation! Once more, the great Prophet and evangelical Preacher, Isaiah, gives us a vision of ourselves if we shall ever stand before God on a character basis, for He says, We are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags (Isa 64:6).
The greatest single danger to which the Church of God is being subjected at this moment, and the spiritual peril of the people who make up its membership, is at this point. We have a new gospel now that is no gospel. It is a gospel of justification on the ground of character and conduct, of salvation through self-endeavor, and of self-justification, if not self-glorification, through social service. More and more false teachers are telling us that we are our own saviours; and outstanding teachers, retaining membership in evangelical churches and fellowship with evangelical denomination, have of late been repudiating the whole doctrine of the atonement, even declaring that men cannot be saved through the substitutionary sacrifice of Christ, but must go before God on the ground of personal merit, giving new occasion to Pauls words to the Galatians, I marvel that ye are so soon removed from Him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel; which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the Gospel of Christ (Gal 1:6-7). For as the same Apostle wrote to the Romans, If it be of works, then it is no more grace (Rom 11:6); and to the Ephesians, By grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God. Not of works, lest any man should boast (Eph 2:8-9).
Truly these reflections, and particularly these quotations from Scripture, give pith and point to the concluding words of this parable. Many are called, but few are chosen. The invitation of the king had been widespread indeed; the provisions of his grace were abundant, but men would not come. Of that invitation they made light. They not only refused to be present at the feast, but with fury they sought the lives of those who brought them the invitation; and with that disposition which belongs to the unregenerate man, some now say they accept all the provisions that God Himself has made for His own, yet reject the livery of Heaven and propose to push themselves into the heavenly house of God, wearing no other garments than those of their own character and conduct, spotted with the flesh. It will not work! Gods grace is exceeding great, but His Heaven has its orderly appointments. His house must retain its clean and unspotted character and His guests must be in every instance the subjects of His grace. Think not then to manage the matter somehow in the last day. Hope not to escape the Divine detection. We are not to appear in the Divine Presence in the filthy rags of our own righteousness. Consent to be clothed with the garment of God, which is the righteousness of Christ.
The turn these Scriptures take should create no surprise. Then went the Pharisees, and took counsel how they might entangle Him in His talk. And they sent out unto Him their disciples with the Herodians, saying, Master, we know that Thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest Thou for any man: for Thou regardest not the person of men (Mat 22:15-16).
They had properly interpreted the parable. They perfectly understood that these sentences were a Divine condemnation of their course and conduct. They knew full-well that Christ was not only talking to them, but speaking of them; and straightway they formed
THE UNION OF NATURAL ENEMIES.
The Pharisees, the religious bigots of the hour; the Sadducees, the natural skeptics of the time, and the Herodians, the state party in religionthese united. These three classes took their turn in the entangling attempt.
The Herodians were the State party in religion. They were Sadducees in faith, and they were the advocates of the Herod party, then in power. It would be very difficult to imagine a more perfect parallel in ecclesiastical history than that which existed between the Herodians and Sadducees of Christs day and that which exists between the rulers of present-day denominations and the skeptical modernists who now back the party in power, and in turn employ that party for purposes of their own propaganda. It is well known that Herod, the ruler, was a Sadducee, and the High Priest, whose consent was essential to the betrayal of Christ, held equally with the Sadducee party. So while there was a distinction made between the Herodians and the Sadducees, it was a distinction without a difference; in other words, in the language of present ecclesiastical controversy, the Sadducees of that day were the modernists of the time; and the Herodians were the officials in office, whose theological learnings were Sadduceean; and who in turn, looked to the Sadducee vote to retain them in their place of power.
The Pharisees, on the other hand, were the fundamentalists of the day; and they had at that time, exactly as we have it at this time, certain of their company who were willing to join forces with officials against Christ. In their hearts they despised the Herodians, and with the Herodian-theology they had little or no sympathy; but official Herodians were not to be disregarded and the power of the machine was not to be treated with contempt, not even if the teachings of Jesus were to be opposed and His deliverances were to be disregarded.
Between them they formulated a questionnaire. It had the potency of a dilemma and they hoped to have Him impale Himself on one horn or the other, Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar or not? If He said, It is, the opposer of Caesar were offended. If He said, It is not, He would bring the wrath of high officials upon His head.
Christ is today being opposed after a kindred manner. There are men, many of them professed ministers of His Gospel, who deny His Deity, deride His miracle-working power, name His resurrection from the grave a physical falsehood but a spiritual influence, and hold His promised return to be sufficiently fulfilled by His posthumas influence. Sad to say, those men find among the fundamentalists of the day office-lovers, who for the sake of station and salary, advise a cessation of theological discussion, an ignoring of theological differences and a co-operation in Kingdom interests. But when a definition of the Kingdom is demanded it is discovered that their Kingdom is not the Kingdom of Gods prophecy and promise; but, rather, a world-organization, with the world objective of international peace and a civilization somewhat softened by Christian concepts. To these men the Herodian organization is the thing to be kept at any price and its salaried officials will frankly tell you, We are no longer concerned in what you believe. We are not ordained to preach the Gospel; but, rather, to support the organization, and to lend loyalty to the party in power. It is a great program and it has in it as many elements of opposition to Jesus as did the combination of compromising Pharisees and Herodians. Through their influence every fundamental of the Christian faith has been flouted; and by their representatives, Christ Himself is daily denied.
The hope of the great evangelical denominations lies in one directionthe dethronement of modern Herodians. If that be not accomplished there is but one other possible interpretation of present-day conditions, namely, the final apostasy is on.
The Sadducees were the natural skeptics of that day. They flatly denied certain fundamentals of the faith, particularly the existence of spirit, the possibility of resurrection from the grave; and they were grossly ignorant of the teachings of Gods Word. When they saw the combination of certain Pharisees and Herodians set against Christ it suggested to them a further opportunity. The breech was made and they walked into it, for it was on the same day (Mat 22:23) that they attempted to further entangle Him in theological questions. Like present-day modernists whose predecessors they were, they proposed an unprobable case and affirmed it actual, involving a man, dying childless, and the marriage of his widow to six surviving brothers (Mat 22:24-32). Just exactly as the advocates of present hypotheses, they presented as possible a most improbable case. The unlikelihood of such an occurrence strangely suggests the hypothetical arguments in favor of evolution. They presented as possible a thing that had never been known to take place, and staked their whole question upon the circumstance that it might so occur. That is the identical procedure of modernists at this moment. You ask them for the proof of their hypothesis that spontaneous generation gave life its beginning, and they say, It might have occurred, that life began with the simple form and proceeded to a more complex one. Again they answer, In the far ages of the past it might have so occurred that one species evolved into another; and they tell you that nobody knows, but ten millions of years ago it might have occurred.
Meanwhile their error is absolutely the product of and identical with the error into which the Sadducees of Christs day fell, They know not the Scriptures; nor the power of God. Their ignorance of the plainest teachings of the Bible is proverbial; and their denial of the power of God raises a question of their professed Christian experience.
It is impossible for one to look on this bit of history here recorded without an instant reminder of the present-day procedure. Modernists do not come to the Bible to learn from it the solution of lifes problems; they approach it under the pretense of desiring to know whence it came, what right it has to speak at all, and why anybody should regard what it says. They come to it to argue the accuracy of its historical statements; to question its chronological order, and to criticize its antiquated decisions. And yet, exactly as the modernists of Christs time, they feign sincerity, but while they are apparently studying the Bible, they hold a stealthy knife in hand, determined to drive the same through its vitals; and while they hail Christ as Master, they stand ready to sell Him again, not for thirty pieces of silver, but for Rockefeller millions. Certainly history repeats itself.
But the questioners of Jesus have not yet finished.
There were some honorable Pharisees who came in quest of honest information. One of them, which was a lawyer, tested Him, saying, Master, which is the greatest commandment in the Law? Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets (Mat 22:37-40).
That this Pharisee belonged to the better company of Old Testament believers is evidenced in Marks report, for the lawyer who was a Scribe, said, Well, Master, Thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but He: and to love Him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love his neighbour as himself, is more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices. And when Jesus saw that he answered discreetly, He said unto him, Thou art not far from the Kingdom of God. And no man after that durst ask Him any question (Mar 12:32-34).
Thank God for open-minded men! Thank God for a man who is willing to test the Christ and willing that others should test Him; and when He has proven Himself capable, wise and all-sufficient, will say so. The Pharisees of Christs day were the fundamentalists of that time. Exactly now as then, there are fundamentalists who for political reasons and ecclesiastical preferments, will join the Herodian and Sadducee crowd; and there are other fundamentalists who will do nothing of the sort, but who with open mind will put their questions, and when they are adequately answered, will both justify and glorify the Christ. The increase of their company is the hope of the Church!
No question has yet been put to Jesus by ecclesiastical potentate, modernist, or sincere inquirer for which He was inadequate. His program is not capable of improvement; His Gospel knows no flaw; His answers are sufficient; His appeal to the Scriptures is unanswerable.
A silence falls upon His enemies and suddenly Christ turns spokesman Himself, but turns away from these pretentious quibblers to the multitude and to His own disciples
IN ACRIMONIOUS CHARGES.
He charges scribes and Pharisees with sound words but with offensive works. He reminds these Sadducees and Pharisees that they have taken Moses seat and have mouthed over Moses writings. He reminds the multitude that Moses writings are inspired and that when Scribes speak according to the Scriptures they should observe and do all that the Scriptures say. Never should they follow the example of these teachers, for while their precepts were Scriptural and hence sound, their practices were burdensome and even abominable, and their professions hypocritical. Their ambitions for ecclesiastical preferment and academic honors were selfish and unmanly. The whole procedure invited condemnation (see Mat 23:2-12).
He charged them with downright hypocrisy in conduct. We are not much disposed to emphasize the numerics of the Bible; but it is hardly debatable that seven is Gods number for perfection; and it is an interesting sidelight, to say the least, that He, seven times over, charges these Scribes and Pharisees with hypocrisy.
First, the hypocrites who shut up the Kingdom of Heaven against men (Mat 23:13); second, the hypocrites who devour widows houses and for a pretence make long prayer (Mat 23:14); third, hypocrites who compass sea and land to make one proselyte and when he is made, convert him into a child of hell (Mat 23:15); fourth, hypocrites who pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith (Mat 23:23); fifth, hypocrites who make clean the outside of the platter, but within are full of extortion and excess (Mat 23:23); sixth, hypocrites who are like whited sepulchres without, but within are full of dead mens bones, and of all uncleanness (Mat 23:27); seventh, hypocrites who build the tombs of prophets and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous but are the children of them which destroyed both (Mat 23:29-32).
One can scarcely read this text and forget that plea for peace made today on the part of men who openly deny the Lord, and whose chief argument is that we should not condemn anybody or anything or any opinion, but employ always and only the language of love. Will you show me anywhere in human speech the language of excoriation that exceeds that which fell that day from the lips of Christ? He not only called them hypocrites and gave the ground of His charge, but He named them blind guides, fools, whited sepulchres, prophet-murderers, and finally, serpents, and generation of vipers, and concluded with the question: How can ye escape the damnation of hell?
Christ was not a man of soft speech, and soft speech is more often the expression of pretence than of sincerity. Compliments for wrong-doing are never conceived in Heaven, nor indicted by the Holy Ghost. Why teach us in one breath to take Christ as our example in all things, and in the next, tell us we are never to speak against falsehood, excoriate hypocrisy or pronounce a curse upon false teaching?
Finally, He prophesied a judgment as terrible as certain. Speaking with tenderness of His own Prophets, He said, Behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes, and then with language that cut and uncovered, He added,
Some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:
That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.
Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.
O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the Prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not. Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
For I say unto you, Ye shall not see Me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is He that cometh in the Name of the Lord (Mat 23:34-39).
The amazing thing, and yet the thing that goes to prove His Deity, is the circumstance that He could combine such excoriation with such compassion. Never since man had a place on earth have lips parted to speak severer denunciations than are here recorded as coming from the ineffable lips of the Lord Jesus Christ; and yet, never in human history has any heart poured out the language of such compassion!
O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the Prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
For I say unto you, Ye shall not see Me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is He that cometh m the. Name of the Lord (Mat 23:37-39).
I have read the pathetic language of David as he went up in his chamber over the gate, crying as he walked, O my son Absalom, my son, my son Absalom! would God I had died for thee, O Absalom, my son, my son! (2Sa 18:33). Even that language does not hold the pathos found in this report, or voice the agony that tore the heart of Christ when He saw that men with wilful sinfulness had rejected Him and brought judgment upon themselves and their city.
Fuente: The Bible of the Expositor and the Evangelist by Riley
CRITICAL NOTES
Mat. 23:1. Then spake Jesus.The day of grace is over for the leaders of the people; but for the people themselves there may still be hope; so the Lord of the temple turns to the multitude, the general throng of worshippers, mingled with whom were several of His own disciples, and solemnly warns them against their spiritual guides. There is every reason to suppose that many of the scribes and Pharisees were within hearing; for when He has finished what He has to say to the people, He turns round and addresses them directly in that series of terrible denunciations which follow.(Gibson).
Mat. 23:2. In Moses seat.That is, as interpreters of the law given by Moses (Brown).
Mat. 23:3. Do, but do not.(See R.V.). His warning is couched in such a way as not in the least degree to weaken their respect for Moses, or for the sacred Scriptures, the exposition of which was the duty of their spiritual guides. He separates sharply between the office and the men who hold it (Gibson).
Mat. 23:5. To be seen of men.They did works, many works; but they did them theatrically (Morison). Phylacteries.Passages of the law upon leaves of parchment which the Jews at the time of prayer bound, one on the left arm, one on the forehead, to show that the law should be in the heart and in the head. At first, they were simply remembrancers of the law; the heathen notion, that they were personal means of defence against evil spirits, did not arise till afterward. It is probable that the perversion was not perfect at the time of our Lord; otherwise He would have done more than condemn their enlargement of these phylacteries, i.e. hypocrisy and boastfulness in matters of religion (Lange). The borders of their garments.The wearing of memorial fringes on the borders of the garments rested on a Divine ordinance (Num. 15:37-40; Deu. 22:12). In Scripture these fringes are prescribed to be of blue, the symbolical colour of the covenant; but the Mishnah allows them also to be white (Edersheim).
Mat. 23:6. Uppermost rooms.Chief place (R.V.). The Jews, like the Romans, reclined at meals on couches, called tricliniaeach seat containing three seats, and each seat having its special dignity (Carr). Chief seats in the synagogues.These were at the upper or Jerusalem end of the synagogue, where was the ark, or chest that contained the law. These were given, either by common consent, or by the elders of the synagogue, to those who were most conspicuous for their devotion to the law, and, as such, were coveted as a mark of religious reputation (Plumptre).
Mat. 23:7. Rabbi.The word Rabbi was just budding into common use about our Saviours time. It is a Hebrew word, properly meaning my Master, and was originally used not in speaking of a master, but, vocatively. in speaking to a master (Morison). The true teaching on this point is found in the Talmud, Love the work, but hate the title (Carr).
Mat. 23:8. Master.Teacher (R.V.). Even Christ.Wanting in best MSS. and omitted in R.V. Probably crept into the text from a marginal explanatory note, completing the sense as in Mat. 23:10.
Mat. 23:9. Father.Abba (father) is a name of honour corresponding to Rabbi (Juchasin, fol. 31, 2). To understand and follow such commands in the slavery of the letter, is to fall into the Pharisaism against which our Lord is uttering the caution (Alford).
Mat. 23:10. Masters.The word is not the same as in Mat. 23:8, and signifies guide or leader; the director of conscience rather than the teacher. Cf. Rom. 2:19 (Plumptre).
Mat. 23:11. Shall be your servant.This plainly means, shall show that he is so (greatest) by becoming your servant; as in Mat. 20:27, compared with Mar. 10:44 (Brown).
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Mat. 23:1-12
The rights of enemies.In the temporary confusion which follows that overthrow of His enemies which we described in our last, how does Jesus behave Himself towards them? In what language does He speak concerning them to those that stand by? This we are told in the verses before us. He speaks, on the one hand, in the language of testimony. He speaks, on the other hand, in the language of caution.
I. In the way of testimony.Testimony which is not a little striking regarded in itself. The scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses seat (Mat. 23:2). Their duty is to explain and enforce that which Moses has taught. To obey them, therefore, when they do this faithfully, is to obey Moses himself. It is also, He implies, and that with much emphasis, to do what is pleasing to Him. Whatsoever they bid you in this manner, that do and observe (Mat. 23:3, R.V.). Testimony which is still more striking when taken in connection with certain previous words and actions of His own. Long before He had made the announcement, I am not come to destroy the law, but to fulfil it (Mat. 5:17). Here He upholds the authority of those undertaking to explain it. Some time before He Himself had shown respect to this kind of authority by directing Peter to pay for both of them the temple-tribute at Capernaum (Mat. 17:24-27). Now He goes farthest of all and openly enjoins on all who listen to Him to pay similar deference too. Most striking of all is this testimony when considered in connection with what has just been spoken to Him. What a juncture is that chosen by Him for this declaration of His will! Just after these scribes and Pharisees have been most unscrupulously plotting against His authority, He is thus scrupulous about theirs! Just when they have most disgraced their office, He honours it most! In the time of their confidence He had withstood them. In this time of their discomfiture He upholds them. What forbearancewhat mercywhat meekness, are here!
II. In the way of caution.While it is thus important to both the multitude and the disciples alike (Mat. 23:1) that they should honour every one to whom honour is due, it is equally important that they should not be seduced thereby into the commission of sin. Hence the counsels which follow. Counsels to all (apparently) about these teachers. Distinguish carefully between their teaching and their example. Their practice is faulty, even when their precepts are right. On the one hand, they say and do not (Mat. 23:3). The more onerous and irksome the precepts of Moses, the greater their eagerness in laying these requirements, not on themselves, but on others. On the other hand, in all such outward obedience as they themselves render to Moses there is an evil motive at work. To appear pious before men in their dress and demeanour, and to receive honour from men when appearing before them, are the real aims they pursue. Hence, even when they attain to success, their success is a loss. Special counsels next, on account of these things, to the disciples themselves. Do you who wish to be My disciples indeed, look to yourselves on these points. Look on one another only as brethren in Me (Mat. 23:8). Call no man your father (except in a subordinate sense) upon earth (Mat. 23:9). To you there must be but one ultimate Object of trust and source of command (Mat. 23:8-10). Amongst yourselves let your great object be not to be great. Pride, in short, is the object of those teachers. Humility must be yours. Wisely so, too (Mat. 23:12).
How insidious a thing is the love of human applause! This seems the great lesson to be learned here by ourselves. Our Saviour had dwelt on this much, at the beginning of His ministry, in the Sermon on the Mount (Mat. 6:1-18). And here again, towards its close, when arrived at Jerusalem, and not far from the cross, He does the same thing. This love of mens praisethis desire to be seen (Mat. 23:5)this anxiety to be chief (Mat. 23:6)was the thing which lay at the root of all the evil traceable in those teachers who were now seeking His death. It was to be specially avoided, therefore, by those other teachers who were about to go forth in His Name. What had ruined those who sat in Moses seat would be equally ruinous, if not avoided, to those who should stand in His place. It would be so because of the insidious and subtle manner in which it wrought on mens minds. One principal peril of physical stimulants is to be found in the fact that they create a thirst for themselves. The more a man takes, the more he desires. The more, also, he thinks he requires. The like is true of that spiritual intoxicantthe love of distinction and praise. Therefore it is that the wise man has said, as in Pro. 27:21. Equally mischievous is it also in shutting out the love of that which is better (Joh. 5:44). There are few things, therefore, which the true follower of Jesus must be more careful to avoid.
HOMILIES ON THE VERSES
Mat. 23:1-3. The attitude to be taken towards the Pharisees.Our Lord, having put His adversaries to silence, endeavours to save His people from their ways.
1. The people must be warned to beware of the contagion of corrupt teachers, when they will not amend their doings; for this is the course which Christ taketh about the Pharisees and scribes.
2. Albeit the faults of teachers must not be spared, yet their authority and office must be guarded, lest the message of God by their mouth be marred; their office must be defended, albeit their persons be corrupt. Therefore saith He, They sit in Moses seat, i.e. they succeed to Moses in the ordinary office of teaching the Word of God.
3. What Moses successors teach, as Moses successors, must be obeyed; that is, the truth which from the warrant of Gods word is recommended unto us from corrupt teachers, clad with lawful authority to teach, we ought to obey, because the message is the doctrine of God, albeit the messenger be corrupt.
4. People are in danger of following the example of the evil life of corrupt teachers rather than the command of God delivered in their doctrine, and therefore have need to be warned. After their works do not.
5. Whatsoever commanded works a man doth, and not for the commanded ends before God, it is as good as no doing; therefore, albeit the Pharisees did many works commanded in the law, yet because they did them to be seen of men, and as works meritorious to oblige God, and were more careful of the outward ceremonies of the law than to observe the moral duties of justice and mercy; therefore what they did was counted as if they did it not. They say and do not.David Dickson.
Official relation to the law.I. It is possible to know the law, and not obey it.
II. It is possible to teach, and not obey; hence:
III. Our duty is to be decided by the law, and not by the example of its teachers.
IV. In Jesus alone is perfect harmony between the teacher and the teaching.J. C. Gray.
Mat. 23:4-7. Dead traditionalism.
I. Its hardness.
II. Its falsehood. III. Its selfishness.J. P. Lange, D.D.
Mat. 23:5. Phylacteries.If the practice of wearing borders with fringes had Scriptural authority, we are well convinced that no such plea could be urged for the so-called phylacteries. The observance arose from a literal interpretation of Exo. 13:9, to which even the later injunction in Deu. 6:8 gives no countenance. This appears even from its repetition in Deu. 11:18, where the spiritual meaning and purport of the direction is immediately indicated, and from a comparison with kindred expressions, which evidently could not be taken literallysuch as Pro. 3:3; Pro. 6:21; Pro. 7:3; Son. 8:6; Isa. 49:16. The very term used by the Rabbis for phylacteriestephillin, prayer-filletsis of comparatively modern origin, in so far as it does not occur in the Hebrew Old Testament. The Samaritans did not acknowledge them as of Mosaic obligation, any more than do the Karaite Jews, and there is, what seems to us, sufficient evidence, even from Rabbinical writings, that in the time of Christ phylacteries were not universally worn, nor yet by the priests while officiating in the temple. Although the words of our Lord seem only expressly to condemn the making broad of the phylacteries for purposes of religious ostentation, it is difficult to believe that He Himself had worn them. At any rate, while any ordinary Israelite would only put them on at prayer or on solemn occasions, the members of the Pharisaic confraternity wore them all day long. The tephillin were worn on the left arm, towards the heart, and on the forehead. They consistedto describe them roughlyof capsules, containing, on parchment (that for the forehead on four distinct parchments), these four passages of Scripture: Exo. 13:1-16; Deu. 6:4-9; Deu. 11:13-21. The capsules were fastened on by black leather straps, which were wound round the arm and hand (seven times round the former, and three times round the latter), or else fitted to the forehead in a prescribed and mystically significant manner. The wearer of them could not be mistaken. But as for their value and importance in the eyes of the Rabbis, it were impossible to exaggerate it. They were reverenced as highly as the Scriptures, and, like them, might be rescued from the flames on a Sabbath, although not worn, as constituting a burden! It was said that Moses had received the law of their observance from God on Mount Sinai; that the tephillin were more sacred than the golden plate on the forehead of the high-priest, since its inscription embodied only once the sacred name of Jehovah, while the writing inside the tephillin contained it not less than twenty-three times; that the command of wearing them equalled all other commands put together; with many other similar extravagances. How far the profanity of the Rabbis in this respect would go, appears from the circumstance, that they supposed God Himself as wearing phylacteries (Ber., 6 a).A. Edersheim, D.D.
Mat. 23:8. Christ Lord: Christians brethren.
I. The Lordship of Christ.
1. Why is Christ our moral Master? His is no arbitrary pre-eminence, but in harmony with Reason, Conscience, Fact. Recall:
(1) What He is.His nature is Divine, His character perfect, His teaching complete.
(2) What He has done.He has ransomed us. He has renewed us.
2. How is Christ our moral Master?
(1) He regulates our conduct.
(2) He enlightens our intellect.
(3) He controls our affections.
II. The brotherhood of Christians.
1. Why are Christians brethren? Not alone on the ground of mere humanity. Nor merely through acceptance of a common creed. Nor merely through union with a common society. Common relationship to Christ creates, and constant communion with Christ sustains, the brotherhood of Christians.
2. How do Christians show that they are brethren? Among the members of a home there is:
(1) A family interest.
(2) A family likeness.
(3) A family life.U. R. Thomas, B.A.
True churchmanship.The principles of church organism, arising from the two facts of the Lordship of Christ and the brotherhood of Christians are:
I. The church must consist of Christian men.Membership cannot consist in:
1. Local residence.He only is a Christian man who calls Christ Master, and who feels a brother to Christs disciples.
2. Ceremonial observance.The passing through any form of church membership fails to unite to the true church.
3. Any money relationship.
II. The church must promote the brotherhood of Christians.There are three great errors at whose root our Saviours words here lay an axe; errors that seem greatly to hinder the brotherhood of Christians.
1. The social error of caste and class feeling.
2. The sectarian error of denominationalism.
3. The ecclesiastical error of hierarchism.
Here is a protest on behalf of Christian brotherhood.
(1) To those who might be tempted to haughtiness. To all such as claim infallibility, or the exclusive right of teaching, or absolute power of discipline, Christ says, Be not called masters; all ye are brethren. None by office or precedence is nearer to God than another, none stands between his brother and God (Alford).
(2) To those in danger of servility. Lest the spiritual Israel should repeat the error of their great type and cry Give us a king, Christ enjoins Call no man master. The gospel promotes social freedom, mental independence, spiritual liberty.
III. The church must testify to the supremacy of the living, personal Christ.To the churches still, in authority, oversight, discipline, this one Master remains; for did He not say, I am with you alway? etc.Ibid.
Christ the Master of life.On the walls of the chapel in Yale College, America, there is the following inscription about Christ: Dux, Lux, Lex, RexLeader, Light, Law, King.
Jesus is absolute Master in the sphere of religion, which is a science dealing, not with intellectual conceptions, but with spiritual facts. His ideas are not words, they are laws; they are not thoughts, they are forces. He did not suggest, He asserted what He had seen at first sight. He did not propose, He commanded as one who knew there was no other way. One of His chief discoveries was a new type of character, His greatest achievement its creation. It is now nineteen centuries since He lived on earth, but to-day in every country of the Western world there are men differing from their neighbours as Jesus did from His contemporaries. Jesus was a type by Himself, and they are of the same type. He presented to the world a solitary ideal, and in innumerable lives has made it real.John Watson, M.A., in Expositor.
Mat. 23:8-10. Titles of honour.Not that deserved honour is to be disesteemed and eschewed. Far from that. We are expressly commanded to render honour to whom honour is due (Rom. 13:7). We are to honour the king (1Pe. 2:17). And in whomsoever we find any true kingliness of soul, him assuredly we should honour. We are to honour all men (1Pe. 2:17), for when we consider the Godlike make of man (see Psa. 8:5 in the Hebrew), and how God Himself has crowned him with glory and honour, we cannot but find, even underneath a mass of most dishonouring wickedness, much to honour. And in the more honourable of men, there will be still more that is worthy of honour. Nevertheless, the mind is bent in a totally wrong direction when it is preponderatingly ambitious of honour. It should be far more ambitious of doing honour, than of getting it. And, as to honorary titlesif a man loves them for their own sake, or for the sake of thereby strutting before his fellow-men, or of uplifting himself above his peers, he is altogether unworthy of them, and will be injured, not benefited, by receiving them. In so far as they are coveted, or sought for, and especially if sought for as means of self-glorification, and very especially if sought for by means that are dishonourable, they are to be utterly deprecated. But if they be modest and truthful in their import, on the one hand, and meted out impartially, on the other, then they will but express facts of inward conviction, which facts must have names of one kind or another. If a man is really worthy of being honoured, not merely as a man, but in some particular outcome or effort of his manhood, and if he is in fact honoured according to his worthiness, then there can be no harm in giving expression to the fact in a name. The name, however, ought to be truthful and modest. And hence there was reason to object to Rabbi, My great One, Your Highness, as it were. No wonder that our Saviour, at the time of which He spokewhen the title was just pushing its way into currencyproscribed its use among His disciples. It should never have been used. But it has now lost, we presume, its original immodesty of import, and is tantamount to a mere designation of office. We must ever bear in mind that there are conventionalisms in words, and that these conventionalisms may change; so that, in a living language, the associations and acceptations of a word may change. Barnes objects to the title Doctor of Divinity, and thinks that the spirit of our Saviours command is violated by the reception of it. But he overlooks the fact that the title is modest in its meaning, Teacher of Theology; and he also fails to note that, if it be really deserved, there is no reason why men should not think so, and say so.J. Morison, D.D.
Mat. 23:9. Pope and Father.It would seem to be almost in open defiance of His (the Saviours) injunction, that, within the limits of the Roman Catholic Church, this designation is universally given to their chief bishopthe Pope. The word Pope is our corrupted way of pronouncing what the French call Pape, and the Italians Papa, or Father. How strange the designation, as given to the Roman bishop! Strange, when we look at the subject in the light of our Saviours injunction! It is strange, too, that every priest, or parish minister, in the Greek Church, is called Papa, or Pope, or Father (). There are, besides, in the Roman Catholic Church, many professed or professional Fathers under the one great Papa. In some other churches, likewise, there are too many of these professional Fathers; for, as Bishop Wilkins observes, Father is a title which assuming priests of all religions have greatly affected (see Doddridge in loc.). And now, though the designation has in great measure got rubbed down into a mere discriminative appellation, marking out a definite ecclesiastical position or office, still its use is unhappy, and has something to do with a wide-spread confusion of ideas on things moral and spiritual. Already, in our Saviours time, an element of popery was stealthily lurking, and vigorously germinating, in the use of the designation; and it was, we doubt not, because of this element that the title was greedily courted on the one hand, and too readily accorded on the other, while at the same time, and in the third place, it was earnestly repudiated by our Saviour. It is our Father in heaven who alone has an absolute paternal authority in all things sacred.Ibid.
Mat. 23:10. Christ our Master.
1. There is no need of any other dominion over conscience than Jesus Christ exerciseth.
2. The exercise of this Christian liberty cannot possibly be an injury to other Christians.
3. Free inquiry in religion is essential to the virtue of a character.
4. A Christian, who takes Christ for his only sufficient Governor, in religion, is supported by the examples of all genuine Christians, from the days of Christ.Anon.
Mat. 23:12. Self-exaltation.A certain king had a gifted minstrel whom he commanded to play before him; and while the cups were flowing with merry wine, the harp was tuned to its sweetest melodies. But the vain minstrel celebrated his own exploits; and when, at the end of the feast, he asked the king for his reward, the stern answer was, Thine own praises were thy theme; let these by thy paymaster! And so, if our good works are done that we ourselves may have praise of men, they will count no more in Gods sight than utter barrenness and neglect.J. N. Norton.
The humble exalted.Whosoever shall humble himself shall be exalted. By Me, and by My Father, and, in the end, by the intelligent universe at large. The lowliest will be the loftiest. But he who seeks to be the loftiest will be the lowest. The way up leads down. The way down leads up. Jesus Himself ascended by a descending way.J. Morison, D.D.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
SECTION 59
JESUS ATTACKS THE SIN OF THE RIGHTEOUS
(Parallels: Mar. 12:38-40; Luk. 20:45-47)
TEXT: 23:14
1 Then spake Jesus to the multitudes and to his disciples, 2 saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses seat: 3 all things therefore whatsoever they bid you, these do and observe: but do not ye after their works; for they say, and do not. 4 Yea, they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on mens shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with their finger.
THOUGHT QUESTIONS
a.
Although much of this sermon is directed to the scribes, Pharisees, hypocrites, Matthew affirms that the message is initially spoken to the multitudes and to His disciples. What do you think is Jesus purpose for this kind of approach? Do you think that there were some scribes and Pharisees present among the crowds to hear Him say this? If His purpose is largely to criticize the scribes and Pharisees, why does Jesus bring the multitudes and His disciples into a question that directly involves others?
b.
What do you think is the crucial importance of mentioning Moses in this context?
c.
After all that Jesus has suffered at the hands of the scribes and Pharisees, and in view of how He condemns them, how can He possibly recommend that the nation do and observe all things that they bid? Is not this a self-contradiction? Do you think He approves the traditions of the elders as taught by these religious leaders?
d.
What arguments do you believe the religious leaders could have used to justify their creation of their heavy burdens, grievous to be born? What do you think they were trying to accomplish this way?
e.
What arguments could these same religious leaders have offered for stedfast refusal to help people struggling under these religious burdens? In fact, how were they being perfectly consistent with their system by refusing to lighten these burdens?
f.
If the burdens placed upon people represented the conscientious thinking of the theologians, what motives should have convinced the latter that their own conscience had been wrongly educated or formed? Jesus thinks that they SHOULD have been ready to help people. What over-riding considerations could Jesus have cited to sustain this conclusion?
g.
What fundamental principle(s) are at the base of Jesus argumentation in this section?
h.
When is it ever right to follow hypocrites? Jesus called the scribes and Pharisees hypocrites, yet He pointed out one area in which it was absolutely obligatory service to God to follow their lead. What was this area? Do you agree with Jesus?
PARAPHRASE AND HARMONY
In the hearing of all the people Jesus then addressed His disciples, Beware of the theologians. They and the Pharisees represent the legitimate authority of Moses, sitting as teachers of his Law. So practice and observe what they tell you, but stop being guided by their lives. They do not practice what they preach. They enslave mens conscience with unbearable moral responsibilities. They themselves, however, make no exceptions for the hardship cases to which their casuistry leads.
SUMMARY
Whereinsofar the theologians speak Gods Word, follow them. However, beware of the hypocritical example that betrays their inconsistency and unfaithfulness to His Word. They make Gods Word harder to practice than God Himself made it! Yet they do not help people to keep it.
NOTES
I. CONTRAST BETWEEN SPIRITUAL LEADERS
Is Matthew Collecting Again, or Is This One Sermon?
Mat. 23:1 Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to his disciples. Admittedly, Matthew definitely signals the beginning of a new discourse. However, these words do not necessarily disavow all connection with the controversies of the preceding chapter. They may simply suggest that Jesus resounding victory over the enemies had prompted a murmur of enthusiastic approval that swept the gathered throng. Many listeners, loyal to popular leaders and parties, may have muttered tense disagreement. Others perhaps created an informal intermission by turning His answers over in their mind or by discussing them aloud with people nearby. Jesus, however, was not through with the Pharisean leadership of the nation. He must expose their hypocrisy and disabuse the public regarding its false heroes and effect their disaffection. So, He formally begins again to speak.
Some commentators confidently assert that Matthew has merely collected together here as one discourse some declarations Jesus made on various occasions. (Cf. Plummer, Matthew, 313.) Evidence offered for this conclusion involves the supposition that Matthew has done so elsewhere (i.e. chaps. 57, 10 and 13) and the fact that much of Matthews material is also found in Luk. 11:39-52; Luk. 13:34 f; Luk. 14:11; Luk. 18:14. Ironically, Plummer undermines his own theory by surmising (ibid., 315), It is not impossible that Christ may have made the charge on two separate occasions, and in both places the context is suitable, a true observation that may also be applied to the other supposed collections!
Further, the absence of any notice of change in the scene of Jesus activities, beginning from the moment He entered the temple (Mat. 21:23) until He left (Mat. 24:1), argues that there is an uninterrupted connection between the wide-ranging debates with the Pharisees, Sadducees, Herodians, chief priests and elders (Matthew 21, 22) and this divine counter-attack so very relevant and opportune under the circumstances Additional corroboration comes from Mark (Mar. 12:37 f.) and Luke (Luk. 20:45) who report the presence of a great, eager throng in whose presence Jesus spoke the words quoted by Matthew.
Another connection is the substance of Jesus sermon put succinctly by Mark and Luke: Beware of the scribes! (Mar. 12:38 = Luk. 20:46). It was to the assembled crowds who had just witnessed the scribes inability to answer a plain question that they, of all people, must know (Mar. 12:35), to whom Jesus directed this warning. The crowds had already begun to sense their leaders theological incompetence. They must now also learn of their hypocrisy and wickedness, all of which had long been hidden under a veneer of pious respectability and idle, disputatious speculation that passed for serious reflection on Gods Word, Matthew 23 is the sort of message to be expected in this context. Jesus timely repetition of accusations here that He had made earlier (i.e. Luk. 11:39-52; Luk. 13:34 f.) should not surprise anyone, since the hypocrisy and presumption He targeted were widespread and needed repeated condemnation. The surprise, rather, is that Jesus should have repeated this discourse so seldom!
So, this verse is not merely literary device, but the necessary historical framework which introduces the sermon following. Those who doubt this must furnish valid textual or historical criteria for distinguishing what is here offered as the factual beginning of a single message, from any other objectively historical fact that Matthew records, like the resurrection.
Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to his disciples. Shocking, indeed, at first glance is the fact that our Lord should publicize the weaknesses of the religious leaders rather than discuss them with them privately (cf. Mat. 18:15). After all, what need did the multitudes and his disciples have, or what good could be served, that others sins should be paraded this way and then criticized? . . .
1.
The multitudes and his disciples, most of whom were not from Jerusalem, but from Galilee and foreign countries, all too often followed these bigoted leaders, hence needed warning. His frank denunciations of the scribes aim at undermining the undeserved confidence that people placed in them. So long as others naively herded together behind those saintly men, they would be torn between Jesus revelations of truth and the slavery of conscience proclaimed by the Pharisees.
2.
The multitudes and his disciples would be sorely tempted to imitate the human bibles their teachers so notoriously displayed. By setting His criticisms in a neutral setting, i.e. by condemning the scribes conduct, Jesus did not attack the sins of His potentially savable audience directly. Rather, He objectified truth by applying it to others first, furnishing clear examples of what not to be or do. The prevalence of Judaizing tendencies in the early Church renders this major position statement imperative (Act. 15:5; Gal. 2:1-5).
3.
The conscience of the nation was at stake. Must the Righteous One be silent while the wicked freely strut about and when what is vile is honored among men (Psa. 12:8)? The moral order is turned upside down, when men call evil Pharisees good, but call humble, repentant publicans and harlots bad! Should not Gods Prophet cry out against it?!
4.
Just as the world needed to hear the Sermon on the Mount describe the ideal citizen of Gods Kingdom, so it must now face the Christians perfect opposite, the hypocrite. Jesus must decisively pronounce sentence upon the deadliest type of wickedness any age can produce: religious pretense. Disciples must learn not to confuse for Christianity a merely up-to-date copy of the same theological system or mentality that Jesus Himself unsparingly refused to tolerate. The inability of the modern Christian unfalteringly to identify with Jesus anti-Pharisaic polemic gauges his own degree of sympathy more with those who murdered Him, than with Christ Himself. (Cf. Bruces eloquent defense of this discourse against those who criticize Jesus. Training, 318ff.)
5.
This sermon is no mere expos of uniquely Pharisean sins. Jesus is hammering at real, universally human problems produced by self-righteousness, sectarianism, evasion of responsibility, indifference to social justice, exaggerated emphasis on religious trivia, self-glorification, etc. in short, by selfishness and sin in any age. To conceive of Matthews major concern behind his inclusion of this major anti-Pharisaic polemic in his gospel as mainly to meet the danger of the Pharisean sects influence in his local area or congregation(s), is to miss the far broader human temptation Pharisaism represents for every century and culture Although the SECT of Pharisees has no appreciable influence on the Church of Jesus Christ today, the SPIRIT behind Pharisaism, its attitudes and poisonous fruits are anything but dead and gone!
6.
Because this was to be Jesus last public address, it was His final opportunity to admonish the Jewish leadership personally. They had just demonstrated themselves incorrigibly closed to His truth (chap. 22). There was no winning them right now. So, as a class, their leadership is in question and on trial. Should not the Judge of all earth do right?! Jesus is JUDGE (Joh. 5:22; Joh. 5:27; Joh. 5:30; 1Co. 4:3 ff.; 2Co. 5:10). Not only can He infallibly expose the thoughts of mens hearts (Joh. 2:25; Rev. 2:18; Rev. 2:23), but also His sense of right timing for exposing hypocrites to others gaze is unquestionable.
7.
Those who allege that Jesus failed to be true to His own ethic by failing to love His enemies and by exposing the Pharisees and scribes to this scathing denunciation, forget that this exposure of hypocrisy and adulteration of godliness is no evidence of personal; enmity or personal bitterness. Rather, what stirred Jesus righteous indignation was the monstrous debasement of true religion and the gross misrepresentation of His Fathers Word. His wrath is not motivated by personal bitterness gone amok. This is godly anger against evil. Had our Lord NOT been deeply stirred by the evils He uncovered here, or had He toned down their seriousness, His would have been a faithless, courageless betrayal of Gods truth! Because Christians too are sometimes called to this painful task (cf. Act. 20:29; 2Co. 11:13; Gal. 2:14; Php. 3:2; 1Ti. 5:20), we would do well to study His motives and His methods.
The multitudes, by contrast, who had already gravitated to Jesus side and eagerly drank in His message (Mar. 12:37), unlike His critics, had heard His commendation of the wise Pharisee (Mar. 12:34) and they would hear His sad lament over Jerusalem (Mat. 23:37 ff.), and so were in a better position to sense that He loved people as dearly as He loved truth and hated iniquity and what it did to both. There is no evidence that these multitudes were disappointed by Jesus attitude, no suspicion that He withheld love from the Pharisees or were treating them with inhumanity.
For months Jesus enemies had attempted without success to expose Him as unfit to lead the nation. Now, with a few swift strokes that sketch typical Jewish scholarship at its best as hypocritical, Jesus masterfully unseated His opposition. Mingled with indignation and heartbreak, His charges warned Israel that its apparently most pious men were fakes, and that truth and godliness must be found elsewherein Himself alone.
Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to his disciples. Luke has: in the hearing of all the people, He said to His disciples. . . .All heard, but His specific objective was to instruct His own followers. Were the scribes present to hear Jesus introduction?
1.
How could they escape and return for the second part (cf. Mat. 23:13 ff.).
2.
Jesus addressing the disciples and crowds does not exclude the scribes being present to face Jesus disapprobation implied in the first part (Mat. 23:1-12). Just because He did not address them directly does not prove they were not there.
3.
By addressing the crowds, rather than the scribes first, Jesus achieved a precious, psychological advantage. The crowds would press in to hear teaching addressed specifically to them, and, by their massive interest in what He had to say, would stymie any counter planning the muttering scribes still present might attempt.
Mat. 23:2 The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses seat. Moses seat is his cathedra, his Bible Chair from which his doctrine is read and expounded. In Malachis day it was the priests who had the magisterial responsibility (Mal. 2:7 ff.), a duty as old as the priesthood itself (Lev. 10:17; Deu. 17:9-13). But with Ezra the priest and scribe (Neh. 12:26) the function began shifting onto professional scribes (Neh. 8:4; Neh. 8:7-9; Neh. 8:13; Neh. 8:18; cf. Ezr. 7:1-6; Ezr. 7:10). Many such scribes were still within the priesthood, a phenomenon still reflected in the New Testament where scribes of the Pharisees are mentioned (Mar. 2:16; Luk. 5:30; Act. 23:9), a fact that implies there were also scribes of the Sadducees, the priestly party. The scribes, because of their familiarity with Moses Law, were recognized as the authorized theologians and seminary professors in Israel. Moses seat, in Jesus day, could be found throughout Israel, wherever from early generations Moses has in every city those who preach him, for he is read every sabbath in the synagogues (Act. 15:21). The Pharisees come under Jesus fire, because their party zeal strenuously applied the theologians legalistic conclusions to everyday life with a rigor that required everyone to fall in lock-step behind them. In this sense, the Pharisees, too, were Israels teachers, even if unofficially. As a reform movement in Judaism, they aimed to keep the nation pure, truly a people of God, obedient to the Law, living out its requirements in everyday life. Personally determined to root out laxness and restore Gods Word, Pharisees won Israels praise and respect for their diligence and conscientiousness. Where they went wrong Jesus will point out. But here He must mention them, because, despite their faults, they uphold Moses, as opposed to the paganizing leadership of the Sadducean priesthood. So, although the scribes were really the official teachers, the addition of Pharisees here is not a mistaken embellishment by Matthew.
Moses Law was yet in force, therefore to be obeyed by those subject to it. At Christs death, the Mosaic dispensation officially expired. But until it did, that Law was Gods Word to Israel, and, for most people in Israel, the scribes remained the chief, if not the only, accessible source of information regarding the Law. His implication is clear: whatever comes from Moses is from God and to be received with full confidence and submission, Merely because Jesus must undercut the unjustified pretensions of the Jewish magisterium does not mean that Moses must go too. So, before beginning His condemnation of the unfaithfulness and sinful conduct of the religious leaders, He calls for sincere reverence for Gods Law.
So, by saying, the scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses seat, Jesus merely states the fact, without necessarily praising or blaming them. The question now, however, is where do we go from here? This He answers next.
Lack of Sincere Earnestness and Personal Consistency
Mat. 23:3 All things therefore whatsoever they bid you, these do and observe. Therefore (on) introduces, not a justification of Pharisean occupation of the teaching chair, but information: Given the present situation, you should act as follows. And yet, when this apparently unqualified statement is weighed in the light of the general New Testament picture of these scholars unrelenting opposition to Jesus, His words are shocking and appear quite mistaken. How could He justify this encouragement to follow those whom He must characterize elsewhere as thieves and robbers and against whose deadly, insidious influence He had warned His followers (Joh. 10:1; Mat. 16:12)? Several reasons for this admonition might be:
1.
He does not intend their human traditions. Because Jesus publicly and resolutely repudiated all that is inconsistent with Gods Law (Mat. 15:1-20), it is clear that He means all that they bid you that is in strict harmony with Moses Law, not their multitudinous technicalities, frivolous traditions and other rules that are contrary both to its letter and its spirit. It is rather when they sit on Moses seat that they are to be heard, i.e. when they teach the Law itself. His criticism is that they say (what is recognized as divine truth) and do not. Jesus present accusation is not that they do not preach Moses at all, but that they do not practice what Moses demands. So, He draws a sharp distinction between the office and the men who hold it. The office is to be respected for its lawful teaching and exposition of the Law, because it carries out Moses function in Israel, i.e. that of teacher of Gods will.
We must not abolish authority structures in the Church merely because some office holders abuse their powers. Rather, we must raise up better men who will do honor to their position and thereby honor God, not self. Jesus did not eliminate Moses seat merely because it was temporarily occupied by hypocrites. Rather, He sent Israel some NEW prophets, wisemen and scribes filled with Gods spirit and message (Mat. 23:34).
What a time for Jesus to express Himself like this! On the very day when these hard-nosed legalists and scholars had shown no reluctance to question His authority, our Lord shows no reluctance to uphold what is legitimate in theirs! No sooner had they most severely brought their high position into disrepute by attacking Him, than He holds their position in highest repute! When they were cocksure, He defeated them. Now that they have crumbled, He sustains their right to teach!
2.
This order to listen to the scholars as they taught Moses Law is absolutely essential in Jesus thought, because Moses teaching was intended to prepare men for Christ (Gal. 3:24; Joh. 5:45 ff.). Jesus could not undermine the authority of Moses without destroying the basis upon which He intended to establish His own. (See notes on Mat. 5:17.)
3.
Further, He refused to throw out the precious with the worthless, the Old Testament along with the traditions. With even-handed moderation He could distinguish between the true message of the Old Testament and the corrupt and corrupting interpretations and practice by these scholars. Unfortunately, those who admire Jesus have not always followed His lead. They reject not only a corrupt Church but also the Churchs Bible which could yet lead them back to truth.
4.
Nor would Jesus have these Hebrews reject conscience. Since early childhood they had been led to believe that their leaders traditional interpretations and public practice were as much a part of the truth of God as His very revelations. Until the majority of Jesus followers grew into greater maturity through an increased knowledge of Gods new revelation, they would not be in an adequate position to distinguish the true gold of the Old Testament from the fools gold of human tradition. (Consider Act. 11:1-3 as illustrating how slowly traditions were overcome.) However wrong their present habits might have been in the light of the Old Testament, these convictions had been arrived at more or less conscientiously. Jesus would re-educate their conscience through the Gospel, but until then, He would not for an instant encourage unconscientiousness, even though this behavior represented enthusiasm for His movement. (Cf. Rom. 14:14; Rom. 14:23; 1Co. 8:7.)
These do and observe (polsate ka terte). If Jesus intends to distinguish doing and observing, perhaps the tenses (aorist and present imperative, respectively) indicate the difference:
1.
Do: perform each duty as the opportunity presents itself.
2.
Observe: Make habitual observance your regular manner of life and practice.
For the Hebrews before the cross, to obey the scribes is to obey Moses, and to submit to Moses is to please Jesus. Jesus could have agreed with much of the Pharisean exposition of Moses Law. In fact, in general, many of His own views were mirrored in Pharisean tenets (cf. Act. 23:6; Act. 23:8). He only opposed what in their system contradicted Gods intentions in the Old Testament. But, in the main, Pharisees were extremely conservative. So, when they preached what Moses said and meant, Israel was to pay attention.
But do not ye after their works. The rest of this chapter will amply illustrate which Pharisean works Jesus rejects and are not to be considered normative for Gods people. Their works are the natural outgrowth of a broad, fundamental failure:
1.
They say and do not: i.e. lack of personal consistency. Although they preach Moses truth, they vitiate it by their habit of not obeying its plain import themselves. They either flagrantly violated what he taught or by their twisted interpretations that broke the force of Gods commands, they excused their not doing what was required by the plain force of Moses precepts.
The painful truth is that not even the practice of the most orthodox and conscientious of preachers today is absolutely consistent with all the truth they know and believe. Therefore, Jesus warns, the revealed will of God remains the standard under whose judgment everyone standsteachers and taught alike. None can excuse himself for failure to practice what he knows of Gods will, merely because he never saw anyone doing it. Each is to be judged on his own grasp of the Word, not on the malpractice of others, be they leaders or not. This makes everyone responsible, not for his teachers practice, but for his own and for whether or not it mirrors Gods will correctly stated by even the worst of preachers. We must not misjudge or fail to receive and practice Gods truth, merely because it is preached by bad men!
2.
They say and do not. Although the Pharisees actually observed hundreds of things commanded by Moses, they did not do them with the motives, in the spirit and for the purpose God intended. Rather, they acted for human applause and to put God in debt to them. Again, they scrupulously followed the external regulations rather than develop the inward character that would fulfill their moral duty to be just, merciful and trustworthy. So, regardless of how many works they did, their motives kept erasing them from Gods record. So, God counted none of their works as ever having been done.
3.
They say and do not. Though they are most demanding that others bend their will to obey God, they reserve to themselves a freedom to disobey which they deny to others. The fact that they say proves that they do know. Otherwise, how could they repeat Gods will for others? They do not, then, means that they are substituting knowledge for practice. Often this overemphasis on the intellectual part of Christian knowledge is paired with a corresponding deficiency in morally lax conduct. (Study 1 Corinthians 8.) This kind of hypocrisy tempts believers in any age, because Gods will is easier to talk about than to do.
4.
They say and do not. Lenski (Matthew, 895) is right to remind us of the broad, fundamental principles of Old Testament religion that Pharisaism generally garbed in their transmitting it and bungled in their practice. Gods plan of salvation has always been the same: consciousness of sin, repentance, faith in His grace and obedience to whatever He commands, all out of love and gratitude toward God. (See notes on Mat. 7:21-23; Mat. 21:30; Mat. 23:23.) Unquestionably, Pharisean doctors read and commented upon the Old Testament texts that uplift these grand concepts, but, by a slavish system of self-justification, they muddled and consequently did not practice what God intended to save them. Remember Pauls commentary in Romans 2! (Cf. Rom. 9:30 to Rom. 10:3; Rom. 11:6 f.)
But who is Jesus to pass sentence on Israels leaders failure to measure up, unless He too says and does Gods will perfectly (Joh. 5:19-47; Joh. 6:45-51; Joh. 6:68 f.; Joh. 7:16-18; Joh. 8:26; Joh. 8:29; Joh. 8:46 f.; Joh. 10:25; Joh. 10:37 f.; Joh. 12:44-50; Joh. 14:6). Is this censure merely another manifestation of superficial holiness and greater pride, or, rather, an expression of His true moral perfection that is the highest imaginable qualification for judging? (Study Lukes sentence: Jesus began (1) to do and (2) teach, Act. 1:1.)
Harshness and Lack of Human Sympathy
Mat. 23:4 Yea, they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on mens shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with their finger. Freely reworked by Jesus, this rabbinic allusion to the binding of doctrines on peoples conscience (see notes on Mat. 16:19, binding and loosing) pictures someone tying loads to be carried by a bearer. Although he makes them too heavy for the man to carry, the indifferent leader offers no assistance, but stolidly continues to insist that the load be borne as is. But what are the heavy burdens?
1.
The Law merely? Because the Jewish scholars are scored for saying but not doing (v. 3), Alford (226) and Plummer (Luke, 312) argue that the heavy burdens cannot be human rules, but the rigorousness of Moses Law, because they would not neglect their own traditions. Lenski (Luke, 664) adds that these lawyers force others to carry the Old Testament requirements but would not themselves even pretend to observe them. These views, however, fail to grasp the spirit of Pharisaism that could cheat both on the rabbinical traditions and on Mosaic legislation whenever convenient or supposedly necessary.
2.
The Law and its interpretations? Although Jesus says, they bind, he does not necessarily limit the heavy burdens to traditions in antithesis to the Law, because Pharisees considered both as binding. In fact, to the Pharisean mind, the Law and its traditional interpretations, taken together, became one divine entity, one divine Law, from which nothing could be omitted.
a.
Heavy burdens is decidedly the right word! Their earnest legalism produced one dismal result: they turned the piety expressed in the Mosaic ordinances into the observance of a myriad of minute traditions and rabbinical decisions that touch all of life. So doing, they turned what was intended to be a joyous help to bring man to God, into an unbearable, depressing deadweight that must be borne without any hope of succeeding perfectly.
b.
The Law itself was heavy enough (Act. 15:10), without innumerable additions besides, not to mention those subterfuges whereby a Pharisee could excuse himself for any lack of strictness in keeping what he did not want to. (Cf. the Corban rule, Mat. 15:4-6 = Mar. 7:9-13; special ways of hand-washing, Mar. 7:3; and oath formulas, Mat. 23:16 ff.)
How, then, did their system lead to the evil results Jesus denounces? Beginning from Moses Law, the scholastics in Judaism had created a total legal system that closed up all the loopholes God intentionally left open in His system. By creating laws where God made none, they took away human freedom to think responsibly and to make free decisions where God intended to develop this very maturity. (See How to Avoid Becoming a Pharisee in my Vol. III, 375ff. where this problem is discussed at length.) Generally interpreting the unclear issues on the side of greater rigor, they tended to make the Law severer than originally intended by God. They only succeeded in producing a sterner, more impossible law that must necessarily condemn all those who lived under it, but could not observe it perfectly. They had never learned I desire mercy and not sacrifice. (See on Mat. 9:13; Mat. 12:7.) Not understanding grace, they turned everything else into more LAW. How closely do modern legalists follow this pattern?
But they themselves will not move them with their finger. It misunderstands the main thrust of legalism to suppose that Pharisees could have seen the need to get these exasperating restrictions abolished. For the legalistic mentality can have no such intention, because it aims at inventing even more rules to cover every imaginable exigency. So, naturally, they could never think of removing them! Their sin lies elsewhere, but how did Jesus intend His criticism? Does He mean (1) move them (the burdensome laws) by obeying them personally, or (2) move them by assisting the burdened people to bear them by taking their life situation into account or by mercifully coming to the aid of unprosperous, adversely affected people?
1.
Is it that they are severe with others, but indulgent toward themselves? If so, they do not even try to observe the very rules they themselves make, while justifying their own real evasions of duty. If so, then Jesus means they must be consistent with their teaching. The fact that they say but do not do (v. 3) seems to support this conclusion. However, by supposing that Jesus meant they never kept their own rules, Bruce (Expositors Greek Testament, 279) must take this verse with reservations, since teachers who absolutely disregarded their own laws would soon forfeit all respect.
2.
The leaders callously offered no help to the burdened people of God, mercilessly demanding that each bear his own load without any help from them. Edersheim (Life, I, 101) taught that these burdens could be laid on, or moved away, according to the varying judgment or severity of a Rabbinic College, decided by whether or not a majority of the congregation is able to bear it. So, the precedent had already been established for deciding issues in line with humane considerations, but Pharisees tended to make the requirements as rigorous as possible! Their interpretations led to impossible legal demands so time-consuming that only people of means and free time really hope to observe them all. The net result of this policy was to produce a proud elite, capable of doing these exceptional, difficult rules, an exclusive group of insiders who alone were the pure and holy.
Contrast their attitude with the yoke and burden of Jesus (Mat. 11:28-30), or with the attitude of the early Christians (Act. 15:28; 1Co. 7:28; 1Co. 9:12) and the burdens laid upon believers by their leaders! Here, then, is one striking difference between Jesus and legalists and between their respective approaches to human problems. Pharisees care more about their rules than they do about people, but Jesus keeps God and people at the center of His concern. Programs and procedures, laws and institutions are made to help people obey God. But when they become more important than people, or when they damage or harrass them, then they have become an obstacle to God and people. According to Jesus, then, men may and must remove these burdensome accretions to Gods Word, lightening the load on peoples conscience and restoring their moral energy to do the things that bless.
Criterion of False Religion
When irrational, inhumane demands that God did not make are multiplied supposedly to render possible total legalistic obedience to God, this is not the Christianity Jesus has in mind. When people submit to authority God did not authorize and obey anything else in addition to His Word, this is not true religion, but an undiscriminating slavery to human opinions. Mere proclamation of Gods truth, unaccompanied by practical submission to its ethical demands, is also false religion.
FACT QUESTIONS
1.
To whom is the message of this chapter addressed, according to Matthew?
2.
What is Moses seat? Where was this seat located? How could so many people sit on it?
3.
What unusual order did Jesus give His disciples with reference to the teaching of the scribes and Pharisees? Why did He require this?
4.
What is meant by the expression, whatever they tell you: the law of God? the traditions of the scribes and Pharisees? or both?
5.
What, according to Jesus, is the reason for not learning proper conduct from the religious leaders example?
6.
What are the heavy burdens, grievous to be borne laid upon mens shoulders?
7.
In what way are the religious leaders particularly guilty for not moving them with their finger? That is, how SHOULD these leaders move (the burdens) with their finger?
8.
In what way does Jesus defend the high importance of the Old Testament in this section?
9.
In what way does the teaching of this section compare with the teachings in the Sermon on the Mount?
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
XXIII.
(1) To the multitude.Now, as in Mat. 15:10, but here more fully and emphatically, our Lord not only reproves the hypocrisy of the Pharisees, but warns the multitude against them. He appeals, as it were, to the unperverted conscience of the people, as against the perversions of their guides. In some points, as, e.g., in Mat. 23:16-21, it presents a striking parallel to the Sermon on the Mount (Mat. 5:33-37). Our Lord closes His public teaching, as He began, by a protest against that false casuistry which had substituted the traditions of men for the commandments of God.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
Chapter 23
SCRIBES AND PHARISEES ( Mat 23:1-39 ) If a man is characteristically and temperamentally an irritable, ill-tempered and irascible creature, notoriously given to uncontrolled outbursts of passionate anger, his anger is neither effective nor impressive. Nobody pays any attention to the anger of a bad-tempered man. But when a person who is characteristically meek and lowly, gentle and loving, suddenly erupts into blazing wrath, even the most thoughtless person is shocked into taking thought. That is why the anger of Jesus is so awe-inspiring a sight. It is seldom in literature that we find so unsparing and sustained an indictment as we find in this chapter when the wrath of Jesus is directed against the Scribes and Pharisees. Before we begin to study the chapter in detail, it will be well to see briefly what the Scribes and Pharisees stood for.
The Jews had a deep and lasting sense of the continuity of their religion; and we can see best what the Pharisees and Scribes stood for by seeing where they came into the scheme of Jewish religion. The Jews had a saying, “Moses received the Law and delivered it to Joshua; and Joshua to the elders; and the elders to the prophets; and the prophets to the men of the Great Synagogue.” AH Jewish religion is based first on the Ten Commandments and then on the Pentateuch, the Law.
The history of the Jews was designed to make them a people of the Law. As every nation has, they had their dream of greatness. But the experiences of history had made that dream take a special direction. They had been conquered by the Assyrians, the Babylonians, the Persians, and Jerusalem had been left desolate. It was clear that they could not be preeminent in political power. But although political power was an obvious impossibility, they none the less possessed the Law, and to them the Law was the very word of God, the greatest and most precious possession in the world.
There came a day in their history when that preeminence of the Law was, as it were, publicly admitted; there came what one can only call a deliberate act of decision, whereby the people of Israel became in the most unique sense the people of the Law. Under Ezra and Nehemiah the people were allowed to come back to Jerusalem, and to rebuild their shattered city, and to take up their national life again. When that happened, there came a day when Ezra, the Scribe, took the book of the Law, and read it to them, and there happened something that was nothing less than a national dedication of a people to the keeping of the Law ( Neh 8:1-8).
From that day the study of the Law became the greatest of all professions; and that study of the Law was committed to the men of the Great Synagogue, the Scribes.
We have already seen how the great principles of the Law were broken up into thousands upon thousands of little rules and regulations (see section on Mat 5:17-20). We have seen, for instance, how the Law said that a man must not work on the Sabbath day, and how the Scribes laboured to define work, how they laid it down how many paces a man might walk on the Sabbath, how heavy a burden he might carry, the things he might and might not do. By the time this scribal interpretation of the Law was finished, it took more than fifty volumes to hold the mass of regulations which resulted.
The return of the people to Jerusalem and the first dedication of the Law took place about 450 B.C. But it is not till long after that that the Pharisees emerge. About 175 B.C. Antiochus Epiphanes of Syria made a deliberate attempt to stamp out the Jewish religion and to introduce Greek religion and Greek customs and practices. It was then that the Pharisees arose as a separate sect. The name means The Separated Ones; and they were the men who dedicated their whole life to the careful and meticulous observance of every rule and regulation which the Scribes had worked out. In face of the threat directed against it, they determined to spend their whole lives in one long observance of Judaism in its most elaborate and ceremonial and legal form. They were men who accepted the ever-increasing number of religious rules and regulations extracted from the Law.
There were never very many of them; at most there were not more than six thousand of them; for the plain fact was that, if a man was going to accept and carry out every little regulation of the Law, he would have time for nothing else; he had to withdraw himself, to separate himself, from ordinary life in order to keep the Law.
The Pharisees then were two things. First, they were dedicated legalists; religion to them was the observance of every detail of the Law. But second–and this is never to be forgotten–they were men in desperate earnest about their religion, for no one would have accepted the impossibly demanding task of living a life like that unless he had been in the most deadly earnest. They could, therefore, develop at one and the same time all the faults of legalism and all the virtues of complete self-dedication. A Pharisee might either be a desiccated or arrogant legalist, or a man of burning devotion to God.
To say this is not to pass a particularly Christian verdict on the Pharisees, for the Jews themselves passed that very verdict. The Talmud distinguishes seven different kinds of Pharisee.
(i) There was the Shoulder Pharisee. He was meticulous in his observance of the Law; but he wore his good deeds upon his shoulder. He was out for a reputation for purity and goodness. True, he obeyed the Law, but he did so in order to be seen of men.
(ii) There was the Wait-a-little Pharisee. He was the Pharisee who could always produce an entirely valid excuse for putting off a good deed. He professed the creed of the strictest Pharisees but he could always find an excuse for allowing practice to lag behind. He spoke, but he did not do.
(iii) There was the Bruised or Bleeding Pharisee. The Talmud speaks of the plague of self-afflicting Pharisees. These Pharisees received their name for this reason. Women had a very low status in Palestine. No really strict orthodox teacher would be seen talking to a woman in public, even if that woman was his own wife or sister. These Pharisees went even further; they would not even allow themselves to look at a woman on the street. In order to avoid doing so they would shut their eyes, and so bump into walls and buildings and obstructions. They thus bruised and wounded themselves, and their wounds and bruises gained them a special reputation for exceeding piety.
(iv) There was the Pharisee who was variously described as the Pestle and Mortar Pharisee, or the Hump-backed Pharisee, or the Tumbling Pharisee. Such men walked in such ostentatious humility that they were bent like a pestle in a mortar or like a hunch-back. They were so humble that they would not even lift their feet from the ground and so tripped over every obstruction they met. Their humility was a self-advertising ostentation.
(v) There was the Ever-reckoning or Compounding Pharisee. This kind of Pharisee was for ever reckoning up his good deeds; he was for ever striking a balance sheet between himself and God, and he believed that every good deed he did put God a little further in his debt. To him religion was always to be reckoned in terms of a profit and loss account.
(vi) There was the Timid or Fearing Pharisee. He was always in dread of divine punishment. He was, therefore, always cleansing the outside of the cup and the platter, so that he might seem to be good. He saw religion in terms of judgment and life in terms of a terror-stricken evasion of this judgment.
(vii) Finally, there was the God-fearing Pharisee; he was the Pharisee who really and truly loved God and who found his delight in obedience to the Law of God, however difficult that it might be.
That was the Jew’s own classification of the Pharisees; and it is to be noted that there were six bad types to one good one. There would be not a few listening to Jesus’ denunciation of the Pharisees who agreed with every word of it.
Making Religion A Burden ( Mat 23:1-4)
23:1-4 Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples, “The Scribes and Pharisees sit on Moses’s seat. Therefore do and observe everything they tell you; but do not act as they act; for they speak, but they do not do. They bind burdens that are heavy and hard to bear, and place them on men’s shoulders; but they themselves refuse to lift a finger to remove them.”
Here we see the lineaments of the Pharisees already beginning to appear. Here we see the Jewish conviction of the continuity of the faith. God gave the Law to Moses; Moses handed it to Joshua; Joshua transmitted it to the elders; the elders passed it down to the prophets; and the prophets gave it to the Scribes and Pharisees.
It must not for a moment be thought that Jesus is commending the Scribes and Pharisees with all their rules and regulations. What he is saying is this, “In so far as these Scribes and Pharisees have taught you the great principles of the Law which Moses received from God, you must obey them.” When we were studying Mat 5:17-20 we saw what these principles were. The whole of the Ten Commandments are based on two great principles. They are based on reverence, reverence for God, for God’s name, for God’s day, for the parents God has given to us. They are based on respect, respect for a man’s life, for his possessions, for his personality, for his good name, for oneself. These principles are eternal; and, in so far as the Scribes and Pharisees teach reverence for God and respect for men, their teaching is eternally binding and eternally valid.
But their whole outlook on religion had one fundamental effect. It made it a thing of thousands upon thousands of rules and regulations; and therefore it made it an intolerable burden. Here is the test of any presentation of religion. Does it make it wings to lift a man up, or a deadweight to drag him down? Does it make it a joy or a depression? Is a man helped by his religion or is he haunted by it? Does it carry him, or has he to carry it? Whenever religion becomes a depressing affair of burdens and prohibitions, it ceases to be true religion.
Nor would the Pharisees allow the slightest relaxation. Their whole self-confessed purpose was to “build a fence around the Law.” Not one regulation would they relax or remove. Whenever religion becomes a burden, it ceases to be true religion.
The Religion Of Ostentation ( Mat 23:5-12)
23:5-12 They perform all their actions to be seen by men. They broaden their phylacteries; they wear outsize tassels. They love the highest places at meals, and the front seats in the synagogues, and greetings in the market-place, and to be called Rabbi by men. You must not be called Rabbi; for you have only one teacher, and you are all brothers. Call no one upon earth father; you have one Father–your Father in Heaven. Nor must you be called leaders; you have one leader–Christ. He who is greatest among you will be your servant. Anyone who will exalt himself will be humbled; and whoever will humble himself will be exalted.”
The religion of the Pharisees became almost inevitably a religion of ostentation. If religion consists in obeying countless rules and regulations, it becomes easy for a man to see to it that everyone is aware how well he fulfils the regulations, and how perfect is his piety. Jesus selects certain actions and customs in which the Pharisees showed their ostentation.
They made broad their phylacteries. It is said of the commandments of God in Exo 13:9: “It shall be to you as a sign on your hand, and a memorial between your eyes.” The same saying is repeated, “It shall be as a mark on your hand, or frontlets between your eyes” ( Exo 13:16; compare Deu 6:8; Deu 11:18). In order to fulfil these commandments the Jew wore at prayer, and still wears, what are called tephillin or phylacteries. They are worn on every day except the Sabbath and special holy days. They are like little leather boxes, strapped one on the wrist and one on the forehead. The one on the wrist is a little leather box of one compartment, and inside it there is a parchment roll with the following four passages of scripture written on it– Exo 13:1-10; Exo 13:11-16; Deu 6:4-9; Deu 11:13-21. The one worn on the forehead is the same except that in it there are four little compartments, and in each compartment there is a little scroll inscribed with one of these four passages. The Pharisees, in order to draw attention to himself, not only wore phylacteries, but wore specially big ones, so that he might demonstrate his exemplary obedience to the Law and his exemplary piety.
They wear outsize tassels; the tassels are in Greek kraspeda ( G2899) and in Hebrew tsiytsith ( H6734) . In Num 15:37-41 and in Deu 22:12 we read that God commanded his people to make fringes on the borders of their garments, so that when they looked on them they might remember the commandments of God. These fringes were like tassels worn on the four comers of the outer garment. Later they were worn on the inner garment, and today they are perpetuated in the tassels of the prayer-shawl which the devout Jew wears at prayer. It was easy to make these tassels of specially large size so that they became an ostentatious display of piety, worn, not to remind a man of the commandments, but to draw attention to himself.
Further, the Pharisees liked to be given the principal places at meals, on the left and on the right of the host. They liked the front seats in the synagogues. In Palestine the back seats were occupied by the children and the most unimportant people; the further forward the seat, the greater the honour. The most honoured seats of all were the seats of the elders, which faced the congregation. If a man was seated there, everyone would see that he was present and he could conduct himself throughout the service with a pose of piety which the congregation could not fail to notice. Still further., the Pharisee liked to be addressed as Rabbi and to be treated with the greatest respect. They claimed, in point of fact, greater respect than that which was given to parents, for, they said, a man’s parents give him ordinary, physical life, but a man’s teacher gives him eternal life. They even liked to be called father as Elisha called Elijah ( 2Ki 2:12) and as the fathers of the faith were known.
Jesus insists that the Christian should remember that he has one teacher only–and that teacher is Christ; and only one Father in the faith–and that Father is God.
The whole design of the Pharisees was to dress and act in such a way as to draw attention to themselves; the whole design of the Christian should be to obliterate himself, so that if men see his good deeds, they may glorify not him, but his Father in Heaven. Any religion which produces ostentation in action and pride in the heart is a false religion.
Shutting The Door ( Mat 23:13)
23:13 “Alas for you, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, for you shut the door to the Kingdom of Heaven in the face of men! You yourselves are not going into it; nor do you allow those who are trying to get into it to enter it.”
Mat 23:13-26 form the most terrible and the most sustained denunciation in the New Testament. Here we hear what A. T. Robertson called “the rolling thunder of Christ’s wrath.” As Plummer has written, these woes are “like thunder in their unanswerable severity, and like lightning in their unsparing exposure.. . . They illuminate while they strike.”
Here Jesus directs a series of seven woes against the Scribes and Pharisees. The Revised Standard Version begins every one of them: “Woe to you!” The Greek word for woe is ouai ( G3759) ; it is hard to translate for it includes not only wrath, but also sorrow. There is righteous anger here, but it is the anger of the heart of love, broken by the stubborn blindness of men. There is not only an air of savage denunciation; there is also an atmosphere of poignant tragedy.
The word hypocrite occurs here again and again. Originally the Greek word hupokrites ( G5273) meant one who answers; it then came to be specially connected with the statement and answer, the dialogue, of the stage; and it is the regular Greek word for an actor. It then came to mean an actor in the worse sense of the term, a pretender, one who acts a part, one who wears a mask to cover his true feelings, one who puts on an external show while inwardly his thoughts and feelings are very different.
To Jesus the Scribes and Pharisees were men who were acting a part. What he meant was this. Their whole idea of religion consisted in outward observances, the wearing of elaborate phylacteries and tassels, the meticulous observance of the rules and regulations of the Law. But in their hearts there was bitterness and envy and pride and arrogance. To Jesus these Scribes and Pharisees were men who, under a mask of elaborate godliness, concealed hearts in which the most godless feelings and emotions held sway. And that accusation holds good in greater or lesser degree of any man who lives life on the assumption that religion consists in external observances and external acts.
There is an unwritten saying of Jesus which says, “The key of the Kingdom they hid.” His condemnation of these Scribes and Pharisees is that they are not only failing to enter the Kingdom themselves, they shut the door on the faces of those who seek to enter. What did he mean by this accusation?
We have already seen ( Mat 6:10) that the best way to think of the Kingdom is to think of it as a society on earth where God’s will is as perfectly done as it is in heaven. To be a citizen of the Kingdom, and to do God’s will, are one and the same thing. The Pharisees believed that to do God’s will was to observe their thousands of petty rules and regulations; and nothing could be further from that Kingdom whose basic idea is love. When people tried to find entry into the Kingdom the Pharisees presented them with these rules and regulations, which was as good as shutting the door in their faces.
The Pharisees preferred their ideas of religion to God’s idea of religion. They had forgotten the basic truth that, if a man would teach others, he must himself first listen to God. The gravest danger which any teacher or preacher encounters is that he should erect his own prejudices into universal principles and substitute his own ideas for the truth of God. When he does that he is not a guide, but a barrier, to the Kingdom, for, misled himself, he misleads others.
Missionaries Of Evil ( Mat 23:15)
23:15 “Alas for you, Scribes and Pharisees, for you range over the sea and the dry land to make one proselyte, and, when that happens, you make him twice as much a son of hell as yourselves!”
A strange feature of the ancient world was the repulsion and attraction which Judaism exercised over men at one and the same time. There was no more hated people than the Jews. Their separatism and their isolation and their contempt of other nations gained them hostility. It was, in fact, believed that a basic part of their religion was an oath that they would never under any circumstances give help to a Gentile, even to the extent of giving him directions if he asked the way. Their observance of the Sabbath gained them a reputation for laziness; their refusal of swine’s flesh gained them mockery, even to the extent of the rumour that they worshipped the pig as their god. Anti-semitism was a real and universal force in the ancient world.
And yet there was an attraction. The idea of one God came as a wonderful thing to a world which believed in a multitude of gods. Jewish ethical purity and standards of morality had a fascination in a world steeped in immorality, especially for women. The result was that many were attracted to Judaism.
Their attraction was on two levels. There were those who were called the god-fearers. These accepted the conception of one God; they accepted the Jewish moral law; but they took no part in the ceremonial law and did not become circumcised. Such people existed in large numbers, and were to be found listening and worshipping in every synagogue, and indeed provided Paul with his most fruitful field for evangelization. They are, for instance, the devout Greeks of Thessalonica ( Act 17:4).
It was the aim of the Pharisees to turn these god-fearers into proselytes; the word proselyte is an English transliteration of a Greek word proselutos ( G4339) , which means one who has approached or drawn near. The proselyte was the full convert who had accepted the ceremonial law and circumcision and who had become in the fullest sense a Jew. As so often happens, “the most converted were the most perverted.” A convert often becomes the most fanatical devotee of his new religion; and many of these proselytes were more fanatically devoted to the Jewish Law than even the Jews themselves.
Jesus accused these Pharisees of being missionaries of evil. It was true that very few became proselytes, but those who did went the whole way. The sin of the Pharisees was that they were not really seeking to lead men to God, they were seeking to lead them to Pharisaism. One of the gravest dangers which any missionary runs is that he should try to convert people to a sect rather than to a religion, and that he should be more concerned in bringing people to a Church than to Jesus Christ.
Premanand has certain things to say about this sectarianism which so often disfigures so-called Christianity: “I speak as a Christian, God is my Father, the Church is my Mother. Christian is my name; Catholic is my surname. Catholic, because we belong to nothing less than the Church Universal. So do we need any other names? Why go on to add Anglican, Episcopalian, Protestant, Presbyterian, Methodist, Congregational, Baptist, and so on, and so on? These terms are divisive, sectarian, narrow. They shrivel up one’s soul.”
It was not to God the Pharisees sought to lead men; it was to their own sect of Pharisaism. That in fact was their sin. And is that sin even yet gone from the world, when it would still be insisted in certain quarters that a man must leave one Church and become a member of another before he can be allowed a place at the Table of the Lord? The greatest of all heresies is the sinful conviction that any Church has a monopoly of God or of his truth, or that any Church is the only gateway to God’s Kingdom.
The Science Of Evasion ( Mat 23:16-22)
23:16-22 “Alas for you, Scribes and Pharisees! Blind guides! You who say, ‘If any one swears by the Temple, it is nothing; but whoever swears by the gold of the Temple is bound by his oath.’ Foolish ones and blind! Which is the greater? The gold? Or the Temple which hallows the gold? You say, ‘If anyone swears by the altar, it is nothing; but if anyone swears by the gift that is on it, he is bound by his oath.’ Blind ones! Which is greater? The gift? Or the altar which hallows the gift? He who swears by the altar, swears by it and all that is on it. He who swears by the Temple, swears by it, and by him who inhabits it. And he who swears by heaven, swears by the throne of God, and by him who sits upon it.”
We have already seen that in matters of oaths the Jewish legalists were masters of evasion ( Mat 5:33-37). The general principle of evasion was this. To the Jew an oath was absolutely binding, so long as it was a binding oath. Broadly speaking, a binding oath was an oath which definitely and without equivocation employed the name of God; such an oath must be kept, no matter what the cost. Any other oath might be legitimately broken. The idea was that, if God’s name was actually used, then God was introduced as a partner into the transaction, and to break the oath was not only to break faith with men but to insult God.
The science of evasion had been brought to a high degree. It is most probable that in this passage Jesus is presenting a caricature of Jewish legalistic methods. He is saying, “You have brought evasion to such a fine art that it is possible to regard an oath by the Temple as not binding, while an oath by the gold of the Temple is binding; and an oath by the altar as not binding, while an oath by the gift on the altar is binding.” This is rather to be regarded as a reductio ad absurdum of Jewish methods than as a literal description.
The idea behind the passage is just this. The whole idea of treating oaths in this way, the whole conception of a kind of technique of evasion, is born of a fundamental deceitfulness. The truly religious man will never make a promise with the deliberate intention of evading it; he will never, as he makes it, provide himself with a series of escape routes, which he may use if he finds his promise hard to keep.
We need not with conscious superiority condemn the Pharisaic science of evasion. The time is not yet ended when a man seeks to evade some duty on a technicality or calls in the strict letter of the law to avoid doing what the spirit of the law clearly means he ought to do.
For Jesus the binding principle was twofold. God hears every word we speak and God sees every intention of our hearts. In view of that the fine art of evasion is one to which a Christian should be foreign. The technique of evasion may suit the sharp practice of the world; but never the open honesty of the Christian mind.
The Lost Sense Of Proportion ( Mat 23:23-24)
23:23-24 “Alas for you, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you tithe mint, and dill, and cummin, and let go the weightier matters of the Law–justice and mercy and fidelity. These you ought to have done without neglecting the others. Blind guides who strain out a gnat and swallow a camel!”
The tithe was an essential part of Jewish religious regulations. “You shall tithe all the yield of your seed, which comes forth from the field year by year” ( Deu 14:22). “All the tithe of the land, whether of the seed of the land, or of the fruit of the trees is the Lord’s; it is holy to the Lord” ( Lev 27:30). This tithe was specially for the support of the Levites, whose task it was to do the material work of the Temple. The things which had to be tithed were further defined by the Law–“Everything which is eatable, and is preserved, and has its nourishment from the soil, is liable to be tithed.” It is laid down: “Of dill one must tithe the seeds, the leaves and the stalks.” So, then, it was laid down that every man must lay aside one-tenth of his produce for God.
The point of Jesus’ saying is this. It was universally accepted that tithes of the main crops must be given. But mint and dill and cummin are herbs of the kitchen garden and would not be grown in any quantity; a man would have only a little patch of them. All three were used in cooking, and dill and cummin had medicinal uses. To tithe them was to tithe an infinitesimally small crop, maybe not much more than the produce of one plant. Only those who were superlatively meticulous would tithe the single plants of the kitchen garden.
That is precisely what the Pharisees were like. They were so absolutely meticulous about tithes that they would tithe even one clump of mint; and yet these same men could be guilty of injustice; could be hard and arrogant and cruel, forgetting the claims of mercy; could take oaths and pledges and promises with the deliberate intention of evading them, forgetting fidelity. In other words, many of them kept the trifles of the Law and forgot the things which really matter.
That spirit is not dead; it never will be until Christ rules in the hearts of men. There is many a man who wears the right clothes to church, carefully hands in his offering to the Church, adopts the right attitude at prayer, is never absent from the celebration of the sacrament, and who is not doing an honest day’s work and is irritable and bad-tempered and mean with his money. There are women who are full of good works and who serve on all kinds of committees, and whose children are lonely for them at night. There is nothing easier than to observe all the outward actions of religion and yet be completely irreligious.
There is nothing more necessary than a sense of proportion to save us from confusing religious observances with real devotion.
Jesus uses a vivid illustration. In Mat 23:24 a curious thing has happened in the King James Version. It should not be to strain at a gnat, but to strain out a gnat as in the Revised Standard Version. Originally that mistake was simply a misprint but it has been perpetuated for centuries. In point of fact the older versions–Tyndale, Coverdale, and the Geneva Bible–all correctly have to strain out a gnat The picture is this: A gnat was an insect and therefore unclean; and so was a camel. In order to avoid the risk of drinking anything unclean, wine was strained through muslin gauze so that any possible impurity might be strained out of it. This is a humorous picture which must have raised a laugh, of a man carefully straining his wine through gauze to avoid swallowing a microscopic insect and yet cheerfully swallowing a camel. It is the picture of a man who has completely lost his sense of proportion.
The Real Cleanness ( Mat 23:25-26)
23:25-26 “Alas for you, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you cleanse the outside of the cup and the plate, but inside they are full of rapacity and lust. Blind Pharisee! cleanse the inside of the cup and the plate first, that the outside of it also may be clean.”
The idea of uncleanness is continually arising in the Jewish Law. It must be remembered that this uncleanness was not physical uncleanness. An unclean vessel was not in our sense of the term a dirty vessel. For a person to be ceremonially unclean meant that he could not enter the Temple or the synagogue; he was debarred from the worship of God. A man was unclean if, for instance, he touched a dead body, or came into contact with a Gentile. A woman was unclean if she had a haemorrhage, even if that haemorrhage was perfectly normal and healthy. If a person who was himself unclean touched any vessel, that vessel became unclean; and, thereafter, any other person who touched or handled the vessel became in turn unclean. It was, therefore, of paramount importance to have vessels cleansed; and the law for cleansing them is fantastically complicated. We can quote only certain basic examples of it.
An earthen vessel which is hollow becomes unclean only on the inside and not on the outside; and it can be cleansed only by being broken. The following cannot become unclean at all–a flat plate without a rim, an open coal-shovel, a grid-iron with holes in it for parching grains of wheat. On the other hand, a plate with a rim, or an earthen spice-box, or a writing-case can become unclean. Of vessels made of leather, bone, wood and glass, flat ones do not become unclean; deep ones do. If they are broken, they become clean. Any metal vessel which is at once smooth and hollow can become unclean; but a door, a bolt, a lock, a hinge, a knocker cannot become unclean. If a thing is made of wood and metal, then the wood can become unclean, but the metal cannot. These regulations seem to us fantastic, and yet these are the regulations the Pharisees meticulously kept.
The food or drink inside a vessel might have been obtained by cheating or extortion or theft; it might be luxurious and gluttonous; that did not matter, so long as the vessel itself was ceremonially clean. Here is another example of fussing about trifles and letting the weightier matters go.
Grotesque as the whole thing may seem, it can happen yet. A church can be torn in two about the colour of a carpet, or a pulpit-fall, or about the shape or metal of the cups to be used in the Sacrament. The last thing that men and women seem to learn in matters of religion is a relative sense of values; and the tragedy is that it is so often magnification of matters of no importance which wreck the peace.
Disguised Decay ( Mat 23:27-28)
23:27-28 “Alas for you, Scribes and Pharisees! for you are like white-washed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside, but inside are full of the bones of dead men, and of all corruption. So you, too, outwardly look righteous to men, but inwardly you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness.”
Here again is a picture which any Jew would understand. One of the commonest places for tombs was by the wayside. We have already seen that anyone who touched a dead body became unclean ( Num 19:16). Therefore, anyone who came into contact with a tomb automatically became unclean. At one time in particular the roads of Palestine were crowded with pilgrims–at the time of the Passover Feast. For a man to become unclean on his way to the Passover Feast would be a disaster, for that meant he would be debarred from sharing in it. It was then Jewish practice in the month of Adar to whitewash all wayside tombs, so that no pilgrims might accidentally come into contact with one of them and be rendered unclean.
So, as a man journeyed the roads of Palestine on a spring day, these tombs would glint white, and almost lovely, in the sunshine; but within they were full of bones and bodies whose touch would defile. That, said Jesus, was a precise picture of what the Pharisees were. Their outward actions were the actions of intensely religious men; their inward hearts were foul and putrid with sin.
It can still happen. As Shakespeare had it, a man may smile and smile and be a villain. A man may walk with bowed head and reverent steps and folded hands in the posture of humility, and all the time be looking down with cold contempt on those whom he regards as sinners. His very humility may be the pose of pride; and, as he walks so humbly, he may be thinking with relish of the picture of piety which he presents to those who are watching him. There is nothing harder than for a good man not to know that he is good; and once he knows he is good, his goodness is gone, however he may appear to men from the outside.
The Taint Of Murder ( Mat 23:29-36)
23:29-36 Alas for you, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you erect the tombs of the prophets, and adorn the memorials of the righteous, and say, ‘If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partners with them in the murder of the prophets.’ Thus you witness against yourselves that you are the sons of those who slew the prophets. Fill up the measure of your fathers. Serpents, brood of vipers, how are you to escape being condemned to hell fire? For this reason, look you, I send you the prophets and the wise men and the scribes. Some of them you will kill and crucify; and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues, and pursue them with persecution from city to city, that on you there may fall the responsibility for all the righteous blood shed upon the earth from the blood of Abel, the righteous, to the blood of Zacharias, the son of Barachios, whom you murdered between the Temple and the altar. This is the truth I tell you–the responsibility for all these crimes shall fall on this generation.”
Jesus is charging the Jews that the taint of murder is in their history and that that taint has not even yet worked itself out. The Scribes and Pharisees tend the tombs of the martyrs and beautify their memorials, and claim that, if they had lived in the old days, they would not have slain the prophets and the men of God. But that is precisely what they would have done, and precisely what they are going to do.
Jesus’ charge is that the history of Israel is the history of the murder of the men of God. He says that the righteous men from Abel to Zacharias were murdered. Why are these two chosen? The murder of Abel by Cain everyone knows; but the murder of Zacharias is not nearly so well known. The story is told in a grim little cameo in 2Ch 24:20-22. It happened in the days of Joash. Zacharias rebuked the nation for their sin, and Joash stirred up the people to stone him to death in the very Temple court; and Zacharias died saying, “May the Lord see and avenge!” (Zacharias is called the son of Barachios, whereas, in fact, he was the son of Jehoiada, no doubt a slip of the gospel writer in retelling the story.)
Why should Zacharias be chosen? In the Hebrew Bible Genesis is the first book, as it is in ours; but, unlike our order of the books, 2 Chronicles is the last in the Hebrew Bible. We could say that the murder of Abel is the first in the Bible story, and the murder of Zacharias the last. From beginning to end, the history of Israel is the rejection, and often the slaughter, of the men of God.
Jesus is quite clear that the murder taint is still there. He knows that now he must die, and that in the days to come his messengers will be persecuted and ill-treated and rejected and slain.
Here indeed is tragedy; the nation which God chose and loved had turned their hands against him; and the day of reckoning was to come.
It makes us think. When history judges us, will its verdict be that we were the hinderers or the helpers of God? That is a question which every individual, and every nation, must answer.
The Rejection Of Love’s Appeal ( Mat 23:37-39)
23:37-39 “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, killer of the prophets, stoner of those sent to you, how often have I wished to gather your children together, as a bird gathers her nestlings under her wings–and you refused. Look you, your house is left to you desolate, for I tell you from now you will not see me until you will say, ‘Blessed in the name of the Lord is he that comes.'”
Here is all the poignant tragedy of rejected love. Here Jesus speaks, not so much as the stern judge of all the earth, as the lover of the souls of men.
There is one curious light this passage throws on the life of Jesus which we may note in the passing. According to the Synoptic Gospels Jesus was never in Jerusalem after his public ministry began, until he came to this last Passover Feast. We can see here how much the gospel story leaves out, for Jesus could not have said what he says here unless he had paid repeated visits to Jerusalem and issued to the people repeated appeals. A passage like this shows us that in the gospels we have the merest sketch and outline of the life of Jesus.
This passage shows us four great truths.
(i) It shows us the patience of God. Jerusalem had killed the prophets and stoned the messengers of God; yet God did not cast her off; and in the end he sent his Son. There is a limitless patience in the love of God which bears with men’s sinning and will not cast them off.
(ii) It shows us the appeal of Jesus. Jesus speaks as the lover. He will not force an entry; the only weapon he can use is the appeal of love. He stands with outstretched hands of appeal, an appeal which men have the awful responsibility of being able to accept or to refuse.
(iii) It shows us the deliberation of the sin of man. Men looked on Christ in all the splendour of his appeal–and refused him. There is no handle on the outside of the door of the human heart; it must be opened from the inside; and sin is the open-eyed deliberate refusal of the appeal of God in Jesus Christ.
(iv) It shows us the consequences of rejecting Christ. Only forty years were to pass and in A.D. 70 Jerusalem would be a heap of ruins. That disaster was the direct consequence of the rejection of Jesus Christ. Had the Jews accepted the Christian way of love and abandoned the way of power politics, Rome would never have descended on them with its avenging might. It is the fact of history–even in time–that the nation which rejects God is doomed to disaster.
-Barclay’s Daily Study Bible (NT)
Fuente: Barclay Daily Study Bible
Tuesday of Passion Week.
116. JESUS, vv. IN HEARING OF HIS DISCIPLES AND THE MULTITUDE, vv. REPROVES SCRIBES AND PHARISEES WITH A DIVINE ELOQUENCE, Mat 23:1-39 .
1. To the multitude, and to his disciples His active enemies have each made their assault and departed. He now turns to his own disciples and the multitude, warns them of the wickedness and danger of these his enemies, (1-12,) pronounces the approaching woes of Jerusalem, (13-36,) and closes with a strain of melting tenderness over the guilty city, (37-39.)
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘Then spoke Jesus to the crowds and to his disciples,’
Sitting teaching in the crowded Temple courtyard, filled as it would be with pilgrims and worshippers, Jesus directs His first words at the eager crowds who, along with His own disciples, gathered round Him as potential disciples (compare Mat 5:1; Mat 7:28; Mat 8:1; Mat 9:36 etc), although He will then turn on the Scribes and Pharisees, who are standing there glowering at Him in the foreground and no doubt heckling and using their influence to seek to turn the crowds against Him. We have His words spoken to them from Mat 23:13 onwards. But in both cases He no doubt said a lot more than we have here.
He was well aware that these were His last days, and one of His purposes in being there was clearly in order to make one last appeal to the Scribes and Pharisees in the sternest words possible, in the same way as Jonah had made such a strong appeal to Nineveh (see Jon 3:4, and compare Mat 12:39-41). Such offerings of a last final chance are typical of the Old Testament (compare Isaiah 6. Jesus was no more severe than Isaiah). But at the same time He would want to ensure that the hovering crowds and the disciples interpreted His words to the Scribes and Pharisees correctly. He does not want them to think that by condemning the Scribes and Pharisees He is condemning the Law of God. He thus first prepares His disciples and would be disciples for what He is about to say, by warning them against similar behaviour. And at the same time He gives them a vitally important and unforgettable object lesson that they would never forget, for His scathing words would not be easily forgotten, and they too would in the future be in equal danger of becoming exactly like the Pharisees (as many Christian leaders did in later centuries), something which He had constantly striven to guard against (Mat 18:1-10; Mat 19:14; Mat 20:25-28 compare Luk 22:24-28). We must not therefore see these as just introductory comments. They are making the position clear and giving a dire warning that they too must take heed not to become like the worst of the Pharisees, as they so easily might, and His words are complete in themselves.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Exhortation to His Disciples and The Crowds Not To Be Like the Scribes and Pharisees, But to Be Doers and Not Hearers Only, and Rather to Be Humble and Lowly, Treating Each Other As Being As Good If Not Better Than Themselves (23:1-12).
The chapter begins with an exhortation to His disciples, and to the crowds gathered round Him in the Temple courtyard. He wants them to be clear that in indicting the Scribes and Pharisees as He is about to do He is not condemning the Law for which they claimed to stand. Rather He wants His disciples and the crowds to respect and fulfil that Law more faithfully than the Scribes and Pharisees have (compare Mat 5:17-20). And He especially warns His disciples against succumbing to the dangers revealed in what the Scribes on the whole had become, men who were inward looking and filled with a sense of superiority, of arrogance and of their own importance. Thus He wants to warn the disciples on their part against the danger of feeling superior to, and lording it over, others. When they shortly sit in Jerusalem on their ‘thrones of David’ ministering to the new Israel (Mat 19:28), they are to do it as equal to equal, brother to brother, and servant to servant, and not as a ‘great one’ might do to inferiors, or as a father might do to sons, or as a master might do to servants. He had seen what it had done to the Scribes whom as a little boy He had admired so much, and He recognised how necessary it was to warn His disciples against it
Analysis.
a
b “All things therefore whatever they bid you, these do and observe, but do not you after their works, for they say, and do not” (Mat 23:3).
c “Yes, they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves will not move them with their finger” (Mat 23:4).
d “But all their works they do to be seen of men (Mat 23:5 a).
e “For they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments, and love the chief place at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues, and the salutations in the marketplaces, and to be called of men, Rabbi” (Mat 23:5-7).
e “But as for you, do not you be called Rabbi, for one is your teacher, and all you are brothers” (Mat 23:8).
d “And call no man your father on the earth, for one is your Father, even he who is in heaven” (Mat 23:9).
c “Neither be you called masters, for one is your master, even the Christ” (Mat 23:10).
b “But he who is greatest among you shall be your servant” (Mat 23:11).
a “And whoever shall exalt himself shall be humbled, and whoever shall humble himself shall be exalted” (Mat 23:12).
Note that in ‘a’ the Scribes and Pharisees proudly sit on Moses’ seat, but in the parallel the disciples are rather to humble themselves. In ‘b’ His disciples and the crowds are to do what the Scribes teach, but not what they do, and in the parallel they themselves are to be as servants when they teach and do. In ‘c’ the Scribes and Pharisees lay heavy burdens on people (as masters do to their slaves) and do not seek to alleviate them, while in the parallel His disciples are not to see themselves as masters, but to recognise that only Christ is their Master. In ‘d’ The Scribes and Pharisees desire to be seen of men, and in the parallel the disciples are to look to their Father in Heaven so as to be seen of Him. Centrally in ‘e’ and its parallel His disciples are not to glorify themselves or to desire to be called ‘Rabbi’, seeing themselves as great Teachers. They are rather to remember to walk in all humility.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Jesus Passes Judgment On The Scribes And Pharisees And Describes the Devastations Coming On The World Prior To His Coming Again And The Judgment That Will Follow (23:1-25).
Having made clear that He has come to establish a new ‘congregation’ and a new ‘nation’ Jesus will now reveal what is to happen to the old nation that has rejected Him, and why. In chapter 23 He brings His severe indictment on ‘the Scribes and the Pharisees’. While His words appear to be fierce they are nothing less than we should expect in view of the situation (see below), and we must remember that in fact the Rabbis themselves later said equally fierce things about many of the Pharisees. They also were not unaware of their faults.
But such a huge change as the rejection of a people who are to be replaced by a remnant from among them (‘the congregation’) who would form a ‘new nation’ (Mat 21:43), required justification, even though it was in fact simply a repetition of their previous history (see Num 14:28-32; Deu 1:35; Deu 2:14-15) and was in line with what the prophets had forewarned (Isa 4:3-4; Isa 6:11-13; Hos 1:9; Zec 13:8-9). Thus here in chapter 23 we have Jesus official indictment on those who were seen by the majority of Jews as the cream of the people of Israel, so as to explain why the change is being made, and why He Himself has rejected them. He wants them to know without any doubt that those religious leaders, to whom supremely they had looked for the truth about God, have failed and therefore will have to be replaced (Mat 21:33-44). And all would have agreed that if these were doomed, Israel also was doomed, for religiously they were the most respected men in Israel. This doom is what Jesus will reveal in chapters 24-25.
This combination of discourses falls into the following pattern;
Final Words in the Temple. Jesus’ Indictment against those who represent the people, explaining what is to result from their attitude and behaviour (Mat 23:1-39).
Words after leaving the Temple and on the Mount of Olives as He announces the coming destruction of the Temple, and His own coming in Judgment and final Triumph (Mat 24:1 to Mat 25:46).
This may be further analysed in detail as follows:
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Words in the Temple (23:1-39).
a
b Seven woes/alases (compareMat 23:37) directed at the Scribes and Pharisees (Mat 23:13-33).
b A promise to send to the Scribes and Pharisees witnesses, whom they will maltreat and put to death, bringing on themselves inevitable judgment within their generation (Mat 23:34-36).
a A wail over what was to happen to Jerusalem with, however, a promise of hope for those who respond (Mat 23:37-39).
This is followed by:
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Words in the Temple: Exhortation to His Disciples And Indictment of The Scribes and Pharisees (23:1-39).
It is an open question as to whether chapter 23 should be seen as part of the ‘fifth dissertation’ made up of chapters 23-25 (see introduction), or whether it should be seen as a connecting passage between 19-22 and 24-25 made up of secondary dissertations on their own (compare chapter 11; Mat 16:17-28 for similar dissertations). The fact that it forms a separate chiasmus on its own might be seen as favouring the latter view. But if so that demonstrates that it does stand on its own, for it is not included in the previous Section chiasmus. Yet its importance cannot be doubted for it contains Jesus’ final verdict on the failure of the Scribes and Pharisees to acknowledge Him, and His indictment of them which explains why they are judged and found wanting. It is an explanation to those who will hear Him as to why the righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees is not sufficient (compare Mat 5:20).
But why should He select out the Scribes and Pharisees? It is because they pre-eminently were looked up to by the people as their Teachers and guides, a task in which they had failed. From the point of view of religious teaching they were the heart of the nation. But by taking on themselves such a status they had therefore also taken on themselves a great responsibility, and the result was that when they went wrong, as they had, they carried the people with them.
Analysis of Chapter 23.
a
b Seven woes/alases (compareMat 23:37) directed at the Scribes and Pharisees (Mat 23:13-33).
b A promise to send to the Scribes and Pharisees witnesses, whom they would maltreat and put to death, bringing on themselves inevitable judgment within their generation (Mat 23:34-36).
a A wail over what was to happen to Jerusalem with, however, a promise of hope for those who respond (Mat 23:37-39).
Note how in ‘a’ He speaks to the disciples and the crowds, while in the parallel His final words are addressed to the whole people of Jerusalem. In ‘b’ He declares woes/alases on the Scribes and Pharisees, and in the parallel He illustrates why the Scribes and Pharisees are deserving of them because they have and will be responsible for the persecution His messengers.
Many find Jesus’ words here difficult because they do not fit in with their picture of Jesus. But there is actually nothing here that Jesus has not said previously. The reason that we are brought to a sudden halt when we read it is because it is all portrayed as spoken at the same time, and therefore seems overwhelming. But that is what it is intended to be. It is God’s final break with the old nation.
We are used to His fiercest words coming in short bursts. But we should note in spite of that, that Jesus has in fact continually made clear throughout His teaching, in terms equally as fierce as this, the future that awaits the unbelieving and unresponsive, that is, ‘those who claim but do not do’. There is nothing ‘meek and mild’ about His earlier descriptions of what is to come on those who refuse to believe in and respond to His teachings. He has stated that they are fit only to be cast out and trodden under the foot of men (Mat 5:13); they are in danger of the Gehenna of fire (Mat 5:22); they will be cast into prison without hope (Mat 5:26); their whole body will be cast into Gehenna (Mat 5:29-30); they are headed for Destruction (Mat 7:13); they will be cast into the fire (Mat 7:19); their fall will be great (Mat 7:27); they will weep and gnash their teeth as they see what they have lost (Mat 8:12); it will be less tolerable for them in the day of judgment than for even Sodom and Gomorrah (Mat 10:15, compare Mat 11:21-23); their souls and bodies will be destroyed in Gehenna (Mat 10:28); they will remain unforgiven in the world to come (Mat 12:32); they will be cast into the furnace of fire where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth (Mat 13:42; Mat 13:50); they will be cast into the eternal fire (Mat 18:8), the Gehenna of fire (Mat 18:9); they will be broken and scattered as dust (Mat 21:44); they will be destroyed (Mat 22:7). And it will be noted that these warnings are well distributed throughout His ministry and appear imbedded in every large discourse, being especially well represented in the Sermon on the Mount (seven references). It was just that now things were coming to a head.
Furthermore in the light of the above descriptions of judgment He had already previously declared such a doom on the Scribes and Pharisees for His words in Mat 5:20 can only be seen as themselves clearly guaranteeing their condemnation, unless of course they repented and sought a better righteousness, which they had on the whole shown no signs of doing. And He had even later warned them that they were in grave danger of blaspheming against the Holy Spirit because of their refusal to see the truth that lay behind His miracles, to say nothing of His having declared them to be a part of ‘an evil and adulterous generation’ (Mat 16:4). In fact when we turn to Luke’s Gospel we learn from Luke that He had already proclaimed ‘ouai’ (woe, alas) against such as these in his equivalent to the Sermon on the Mount (Luk 6:24-26). Here, therefore, we find Jesus’ detailed justification for, and bringing together of, the meaning behind all these previous statements that He has uttered, and it is all the more emphatic in the light of the fact that these men are persuading many who sympathised with them not to listen to the truth as revealed in Jesus. Nothing would have grieved Him more than to see ‘almost disciples’ being put off by the activities and words of the Scribes and Pharisees. No wonder that He felt that He had to totally expose them.
Furthermore had we not had what follows we may well have ended up feeling that the Scribes and Pharisees had been a little harshly treated in His previous descriptions of them (Mat 21:33-42), for all that they had outwardly appeared to do on the surface was to subject His teaching to criticism. (Although compare how He has previously exposed them in Mat 6:2; Mat 6:5; Mat 6:16; Mat 7:6; Mat 7:15; Mat 15:3-9; Mat 15:14).
We should also perhaps notice to who these words were spoken. They were spoken to those rather fanatical Scribes and Pharisees, some of whom were probably to some extent notorious even among the people, who were gathered there with the crowds, and were there with the sole purpose of bringing Jesus down. With the typical fervour of the Middle Easterner their eyes were filled with anger and hate, as they bristled with almost uncontainable fury, trying by every means to discredit Him (passions ran high in Palestine in that era and there would be much more to all this than we find written down in the Gospels). This in itself made it necessary for Him to discredit them, not for His own sake, but for the sake of those who heard them, for He was well aware that soon they would no longer have Him with them, and would themselves have to face up to and combat these same Scribes and Pharisees, for whom they had previously had such huge respect.
But while these Scribes and Pharisees no doubt to some extent represented the majority of their kind, who had after all almost certainly consented to their coming to oppose Jesus, we do know from elsewhere that there were some who were not like them at all. There was Nicodemus (see Joh 3:1-6) who was not there, and would not have agreed with their attitude, there was Gamaliel (see Act 5:33-40) who was also not there, and of whom we can probably, without putting words on his lips, reasonably say the same, and there were certainly other Pharisees who had recently believed, who were also not there, unless as His followers and supporters (Joh 11:45). And there were no doubt others. But while these we have mentioned, of whom we only know because of brief references, represented the better type of Pharisee, they were not sufficient to buck the trend, and by their teaching they were still tending to buttress the wrong attitude of the Pharisaic ideas. They still placed too much emphasis on ritual observance. Jesus is not, however, to be seen here as condemning all Scribes and Pharisees without exception, but rather as condemning heir whole system and as especially condemning those who fitted in with His criteria, which sadly made up the large majority. In fact many of those who stood there would, in their bitter zeal for what they believed in, and in their heedlessness of what God really wanted, perish in the invasion of Palestine and the fall of Jerusalem, while others would come through it very much changed.
We must remember that most of what we know of the Pharisees at this period, apart from what is found in the Gospels, is from later external sources. It is found in the descriptions given of Pharisees by the later Rabbis, which were undoubtedly biased in their own favour. And yet even there a good majority of the Pharisees came under scathing criticism by the Scribes for their folly, and were at times described in similar terms to these used here by Jesus. The other source was the writings of Josephus, and he too tended to favour them because he had once considered becoming a Pharisee, and we must always remember when we read Josephus that he wrote in order to put Judaism in the best light in the eyes of his Roman master. Nor must we see the later Rabbis as necessarily being similar to these men, for the later Rabbis were inevitably humbled, at least for a time, by what had happened to Jerusalem, and had to rethink their position and strive to build up a new foundation for Judaism. That would undoubtedly have given them a new perspective and a new zeal, accompanied by a greater sense of responsibility. The acceptance of the people had suddenly become crucial. However, even then we must note that many of them would also evince a similar hatred towards Christians. Nevertheless, even so, to some extent their sufferings would have purged them of some of the worst qualities revealed here. And they had also learned very forcefully that their hopes of God’s deliverance, resulting from their fanatical observance of the covenant, had not come to fruition. Clearly a new and more dedicated approach was necessary. (There is nothing like a disaster for forcing a rethink. Compare how the Reformation in Europe resulted in a rethink by the Catholic church resulting in the counter-Reformation and a considerable cleaning up of the worst excesses in the church, even if it was only partially satisfactory. And there is no doubt that most Catholics today who know of the mediaeval excesses of Alexander VI and Julius II would equally condemn their behaviour, even if they do make excuses for them and for dogmatic reasons do not reject them completely).
Nor would we be correct to see in Jesus’ demeanour here an unrelenting condemnation of even these men. We must see Him as aware of the crisis that was about to come on Him, and on them, and as rather taking this last opportunity of making His final desperate plea to these hardened men, as He spoke to them with prophetic fervour. For ‘ouai’ (woe, alas) can equally as well betoken words spoken from a broken heart, as from a remorseless one. Furthermore we must remember that people expected orators to speak forcefully to each other in those days, and certainly expected such forcefulness from a prophet. There is nothing here, however much His words shocked them, that would have caused a frown about the way in which He said them. They expected prophets to speak like this.
Nor must we judge His words by our own reactions. He spoke as the sinless One Who would one day judge all the world from His throne of glory (Mat 25:31), not as a hurt sinner, upset and disoriented. And we can be sure that He Who would later calmly pray under even greater pressure, ‘Father forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing’ (Luk 23:34), and would bend in mercy, even on the cross, towards a repentant evildoer who had previously cursed Him (Mat 27:44; Mar 15:32, compared with Luk 23:42-43), would also have in His heart, even while He spoke these words, a yearning that some of even these might repent before it was too late. So all in all there are sound reasons for Jesus speaking as He did here.
A further question that does arise for us is as to whether we are to see chapter 23 as a finalising of the section from Mat 21:1 onward (compare Mat 21:9 with Mat 23:39, and the portrayal of the failing Temple (Mat 21:12-16), and the warning that followed (Mat 21:18-21), with the picture of its final destruction in Mat 23:37-38), or whether we are to see it as a part of the ‘final discourse’ seen as consisting of 23-25, all of which consists of judgment one way or another. The chiastic structure suggests that it rather lies between them both as a kind of connecting link, leading from one to the other. It can both be seen as a final vivid comment on the attempts by the Jewish leaders to bring Him down revealed in Mat 19:1 to Mat 22:46, and why they had done it, and as a necessary explanation for the descriptions that will follow in 24-25. It can be seen as explaining what lies at the heart of the first, and what it is that will trigger the second. For there can be no question that without chapter 23 chapters 24-25 in Matthew would come as something of an unexpected shock. Mark on the other hand has prepared for it in Mark 11 by carefully indicating the connection between the withered fig tree and the condition of the Temple, resulting in the necessity for its final destruction. But Mark is mainly writing to Gentiles to whom the Temple was not precious. Matthew’s Jewish Christian readers would be reeling at the thought of the Temple being destroyed and would require a much fuller explanation, and it is therefore given here in the revelation in Mat 23:13-36 which reveals that the very men to whom the Jews looked as the cream of their religion were on the whole totally rotten within (like the fig tree).
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
The Criminal Offence: False Humility Jesus begins denouncing the Jewish leaders by revealing their criminal offense, contrasting their false humility with true humility. Jesus concludes this explanation with the statement, “But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant, and whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.” (Mat 23:11-12) In this statement, He reveals the secret of promotion in the Kingdom of God. The Pharisees had obtained their positions of leadership through corruption and deceit. They then covered their faces with false humility in order to hide their motives. This is the world’s system of promotion. The Kingdom of God works differently: for it is those who truly walk in humility with a servant’s heart that are given promotions, offices and anointings by the Lord. Man may create his own religious system of promotion, but only the promotions that God gives really counts.
Mat 23:2 Comments – Moses’ seat is the seat of judgment, leadership and instruction in interpreting of the Word of God. The seat of Moses is referred to in the book of Exodus.
Exo 18:13, “And it came to pass on the morrow, that Moses sat to judge the people : and the people stood by Moses from the morning unto the evening.”
Exo 18:24-26, “So Moses hearkened to the voice of his father in law, and did all that he had said. And Moses chose able men out of all Israel, and made them heads over the people, rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens. And they judged the people at all seasons: the hard causes they brought unto Moses, but every small matter they judged themselves.”
Mat 23:12 Comments – In the context of this passage, Jesus is rebuking the practice of the scribes and Pharisees who heap to themselves titles and honors. In my years as a missionary to Africa, I have found that titles are very important to people. They use titles such as “Honorable, Bishop, Apostle, Doctor” and any other title to recognize their achievements. Unfortunately, these titles hide the corruption that it in many hearts, especially by those who insist on being called by their titles. It is the prideful heart that Jesus is rebuking in this passage, and not the titles themselves.
Scripture Reference – Note:
1Pe 5:6, “Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God, that he may exalt you in due time:”
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
A Revelation of Divine Judgment against the Jews ( Mar 12:38-40 , Luk 11:37-52 ; Luk 20:45-47 ) In Mat 23:1-39 Jesus delivers an indictment against the Jewish leaders and the city of Jerusalem for rejecting Him because of the pride of their hearts. Just as the fourth narrative section ends with a revelation of Himself to His closest disciples on the Mount of Transfiguration (Mat 16:21 to Mat 17:27), the fifth narrative section concludes with a revelation of divine judgment upon those who reject Jesus (Mat 23:1-39). Jesus will first state the crime, that of the Jewish leaders exalting themselves (Mat 23:1-12). He will then offer testimony to this crime in the form of seven woes (Mat 23:13-36). He will conclude with the verdict of guilty, punishable by divine judgment upon the city of Jerusalem (Mat 23:37-39).
Here is a proposed outline:
1. The Criminal Offense: False Humility Mat 23:1-12
2. Seven Woes as Evidence to the Crime Mat 23:13-36
3. Judgment Predicted upon Jerusalem Mat 23:37-39
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
Narrative: Jesus Prepares to Depart In Mat 19:1 to Mat 23:39 we have the narrative section that precedes the fifth and final discourse. This section of material emphasizes the future glorification of the Church. However, each subsequent narrative section becomes increasingly complex as it carries forward the previous themes while developing the next redemptive theme for the discourse that follows.
The central theme of Mat 19:1 to Mat 23:39 is that many are called into the Kingdom of Heaven, but few are chosen (Mat 22:14). While God extends His call to everyone, many try to enter the kingdom based upon good works; however, God chooses those who yield to Him in utter dependence upon His grace, realizing that there is nothing good in them deserving of His divine blessings and eternal life. For example, while the Pharisees had obtained vast knowledge of the Law, often gathering to dispute various interpretations, they failed to be recipients of God’s grace (Mat 19:3-12). In contrast, the children had very little knowledge of the Law, yet Jesus said that the Kingdom of Heaven was for such who come to Him in simple faith and trust (Mat 19:13-15). The rich, young ruler had every opportunity to fulfill the Law, with his youthful zeal and financial strength; yet, he fell short of God’s grace (Mat 19:16-22). In contrast, the disciples forsook everything in life to follow Jesus, becoming recipients of His divine grace and eternal life (Mat 19:23-30). James and John and their mother failed to understand the sacrifice that would be made by Jesus, demanding a similar sacrifice from themselves; thus, the mother’s request for grace was denied (Mat 20:17-28). In contrast, the two blind men were heard in that they utterly depended upon God’s mercy, following Jesus after their healing as an expression of their sacrifice (Mat 20:29-34). While the multitudes received Jesus as their Messiah and King, becoming recipients of God’s grace has He healed the blind and lame (Mat 21:1-14), the Pharisees fell short of divine grace because they denied the office and ministry of Jesus (Mat 21:15-17).
Outline: Here is a proposed outline:
1. Introduction Mat 19:1-2
2. The Testimony of Scripture Mat 19:3 to Mat 20:16
3. The Testimony of Jesus Mat 20:17 to Mat 21:17
4. The Testimonies of John the Baptist & God the Father Mat 21:23 to Mat 22:40
5. A Revelation of Divine Judgment against the Jews Mat 23:1-39
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
Preparing for the King’s Departure and Second Coming Mat 19:1 to Mat 25:46 records the fifth major division of the Gospel of Matthew. The narrative material in this division (Mat 19:1 to Mat 23:39) emphasizes the need to serve the Lord after His departure while awaiting His expected Second Coming. [507] For example, the Parables of the Wicked Vinedressers and the Wedding Feast, which are found in this passage, teach on working in the kingdom while waiting for the return of the Master. We must await His Second Coming by doing the Father’s will. Jesus also teaches on key issues that affect our lives most dramatically regarding our readiness for His Second Coming, such as marriage and riches. The cares of this world that most hinder our sanctification are marriage (Mat 19:1-12) and the pursuit of this world’s goods (Mat 19:16 to Mat 20:16). Those who do not heed His calling will perish if no fruit is shown. Jesus carries this theme of readiness and Christian service into His discourse with the Parables of the Virgins and the Parable of the Talents. Five virgins remained ready for the bridegroom. Two of the three servants were faithful with their master’s goods, but one foolish virgin and the man who kept his one talent were cast into outer darkness. A key verse for this narrative material is Mat 22:14, “For many are called, but few are chosen.” This narrative passage ends with Jesus giving a final woe to the scribes and Pharisees as well as to the city of Jerusalem.
[507] Benjamin Bacon identifies the theme of the fifth narrative-discourse section of Matthew’s Gospel (Matthew 19:1 to 25:46) as apocalyptic. He believes this theme follows a natural progression from the previous theme of Matthew’s fourth narrative-discourse, saying, “It was inevitable that Mt’s fourth Book should lead up to a great Discourse on the Consummation as the climax of his Gospel.” See Benjamin W. Bacon, Studies in Matthew (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1930), 412-413.
The discourse that follows (Mat 24:1 to Mat 25:46) teaches on the Second Coming of Jesus. Thus, He prepares His disciples for His departure and Second Coming. Much of this material can be found in the book of Revelation, which also deals with the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. Note that both narrative and discourse material contain warnings against being caught up with the cares of this world and exhortations to readiness for His Second Coming and to Christian service while waiting for His Return.
As with all of the narrative material, Matthew includes one Old Testament Scripture that is introduced with “that it might be fulfilled.” In Mat 21:4-5 we find a quote from Zec 9:9 which sets the underlying theme of this division of Matthew on eschatology, which is the coming of the King.
Mat 21:4-5, “All this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, Tell ye the daughter of Sion, Behold, thy King cometh unto thee, meek, and sitting upon an ass, and a colt the foal of an ass.”
Zec 9:9, “Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.”
Glorification: Deuteronomy Versus Fifth Discourse Which Establishes a Future Hope In the book of Deuteronomy, Moses gives the children the prophetic vision of their future hope for those who obey the Law and of future judgment for those who are disobedient. In like manner, the fifth discourse on Eschatology gives the prophecy of the future hope of the Church and judgment upon sinners.
The next narrative passage (Mat 19:1 to Mat 23:39) emphasizes the need to serve the Lord after His departure while awaiting His expected return. For example, the parables of the Wicked Vinedressers and the Wedding Feast teach on working in the kingdom while waiting for the return of the Master. This passage ends with Jesus giving a final woe to the scribes and Pharisees as well as to the city of Jerusalem. The discourse that follows (Mat 24:1 to Mat 25:46) teaches on His Second Coming. Thus, Jesus prepares His disciples for His departure. This reminds us of the purpose of the book of Deuteronomy, which was to prepare the children of Israel for the Promised Land. Both this passage in Matthew and the book of Deuteronomy give promises of blessings to those who obey the Lord and both give severe warnings of divine judgments to those who do not serve the Lord.
The one Old Testament prophecy found in this division in Matthew’s Gospel is Mat 21:4-5, which quotes Zec 9:9 and simply prophesies of the coming of the Messiah and supports the theme of this division of Matthew on eschatology.
Mat 21:4-5, “All this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, Tell ye the daughter of Sion, Behold, thy King cometh unto thee, meek, and sitting upon an ass, and a colt the foal of an ass.”
Zec 9:9, “Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.”
Outline Here is a proposed outline:
A. Narrative: Jesus Prepares to Depart Mat 19:1 to Mat 23:39
B. Fifth Discourse: The King’s Second Coming Mat 24:1 to Mat 25:46
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
The Inordinate Ambition of the Pharisees.
Hypocrisy in high places:
v. 1. Then spake Jesus to the multitude and to His disciples,
v. 2. saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat.
v. 3. All, therefore, whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do ye not after their works; for they say, and do not.
v. 4. For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men’s shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. The evangelist has here recorded the most relentless, scathing denunciation from the mouth of Jesus of which we have knowledge. It is an arraignment of spiritual wickedness in high places, a treatise on the use and abuse of the Law, which is without equal in the gospels. Jesus addressed this discourse to the people and to His disciples, although the scribes and Pharisees were present. He had definitely turned from these hopeless enemies, in whose case every new effort to win their love only resulted in greater hatred. He defines their position. The scribes and Pharisees formerly sat in Moses’ seat by God’s appointment; they now sit in the place of the teachers of the people by divine permission. Although many of their explanations of the Old Testament were insufficient, inadequate, sometimes even false, yet they held their office as teachers for the time being. “For God had instituted the office of the Levitical priesthood and ministry of the Word, in order that the people might learn the Ten Commandments given by Moses. The entire tribe of Levi was ordained for that purpose, to wait upon Holy Scriptures. That is what the Lord calls the seat of Moses, that is, the ministry of the Word, that they should preach Moses. He says: If you hear the preaching, This the Law and Moses have commanded, then do and observe it, for it is not the word and work of the Pharisees, but that of God and Moses. ” If in this sense they enjoin and bid the people something which is plainly stated in the Word of God, if they use their official position and authority in a proper, legal manner, teaching and expounding the Law and the prophets, then the people should do exactly according to their doctrine, make the observance of their precepts a regular habit. But the people should beware of following their example, of patterning their lives after the hypocritical works of these leaders. For they were far from practicing what they preached and exhorted. They bound together, like fagots in a big bundle, grievous burdens, and laid them upon the backs of other people, but they themselves had no desire to touch them with so much as a single finger. They were very severe over against others, but very lenient and indulgent with themselves. The manifold precepts and commands which they added to the Law of Moses, with the expressed or implied order that they were to be placed and regarded as being on a level with the written injunctions of the lawgiver, were an intolerable burden, which they were very careful to omit from their own private life.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
EXPOSITION
Mat 23:1-39
Denunciation of the scribes and Pharisees, and lamentation over Jerusalem which followed their guidance to her own destruction. (Peculiar to St. Matthew.)
Mat 23:1
Then spake Jesus. Some small portion of this discourse, the close of our Lord’s public teaching, is found in Mar 12:38-40 and Luk 20:45-47 (comp. also Luk 11:1-54., 13.). It is here addressed to the multitude, and to his disciples, and seems to have been designed to comfort the former under the difficulty of having accredited teachers who were proved to have misunderstood Scripture, and were incapable of interpreting it aright. He willed to show how far they were to follow these instructors, and where it was necessary to draw a line beyond which they were not to be obeyed. Some modern critics have suggested that this discourse was not spoken at this time, but that St. Matthew has here collected into one body certain sayings of our Lord uttered at different times and places. It is far more natural to suppose that St. Matthew’s statement of the occasion of this discourse is historically true, and that Christ here repeated some parts of the censure he had already, in the course of his ministry, found it necessary to pronounce. The unity of this utterance in form and essence, its logical sequence and climactic character, prove that it was delivered at one time, and was intended to form the Lord’s farewell address to the wayward people who would not come unto him that they might have life. The discourse may be divided into three parts.
Mat 23:2-12
The moral character of the scribes and Pharisees, and warning to Christ‘s disciples.
Mat 23:2
The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’seat. In the seat of the great judge and lawgiver. This is stated as an undoubted fact (), with no idea of blame attached. Literally, sat on the seat of Moses from time immemorial. These (meaning not individuals, but the collective body) are the authorized expounders and teachers of the Law; their position is assured; they are not to be displaced. The scribes were the party chiefly denoted; they were of the Pharisaical sect; hence the addition, “and the Pharisees,” by which is intimated, not that these latter, qua Pharisees, had any teaching office, but that the former shared their religious opinions. The Sadducees seem to have had no popular influence, and were never recognized as leaders. The Levitical priests never appear in the Gospels as teachers or expositors of the Mosaic system; this function of theirs had devolved upon scribes and lawyers.
Mat 23:3
All therefore. It is because of their official authority as appointed teachers and expositors of the Law that Christ gives the following injunction. That observe and do. Many manuscripts and versions invert the order of the verbs, reading, do and observe. The received text seems most logical. Observe; , present imperative, continue to observe as a rule of conduct. Do; , aorist, do immediately, whenever the occasion arises. All that they taught or commanded out of the Law, or in due accordance therewith, was to be observed and obeyed. The statement is made in general terms, but was conditional and restricted by other considerations. It was only their official injunctions, derived immediately from Scripture, not their glosses, evasions, and interpretations, that were to be regarded with respect. The Lord had already taken occasion to warn against these errors (see Mat 16:6, Mat 16:11, Mat 16:12, etc.). As inheritors of the authority of Moses, and speaking ex cathedra, they were so far worthy of respect. This principle laid down, Christ proceeds to denounce their evil practices. After their works. You must distinguish between their preaching and their practice; the latter is to be shunned with all care. The scribes are never accused of corrupting the sacred text, which, indeed, was scrupulously guarded, and kept pure and unaltered. It was their treatment of the doctrines thereof that was censured. Our Lord shows their evil example in two particularstheir principle was “words, not deeds” (Mat 23:4), and ostentation in religion (Mat 23:5-7). They say, and do not. They enunciated the Law, they enjoined obedience to it in the minutest particulars, and yet they themselves continually, in the most important points (Mat 23:23), infringed, neglected, evaded it. St. Paul, himself a strict Pharisee, denounces in stern language such inconsistent professors (Rom 2:21-23).
Mat 23:4
Bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne; : importabilia (Vulgate). The last epithet, which is very uncommon (Luk 11:46), is omitted by some manuscripts and versions, but it is probably genuine here. The burdens are the minute regulations and prescriptions, the vexatious restrictions, the innumerable traditional observances with which these teachers had garbled and defaced the written Law. We have noticed some of these glosses in the matter of the sabbath and ceremonial purification; and these are only specimens of a system which extended to every relation of life, and to all details of religious practice, binding one rule to another, enforcing useless and absurd minutiae, till the burden became insupportable. Alford considers that not human traditions and observances are signified by the “burdens,” but the severity of the Law, the weighty duties inculcated therein, which they enforce on others, but do not observe. It may, however, well be doubted whether Christ would ever have termed the legitimate rites and ceremonies of the Law unbearable burdens, though their rigorous enforcement by men who regarded only the letter, while they had lost the spirit, would naturally deserve censure. (If the epithet is not genuine, of course this remark does not apply.) What Christ denounced was not the Law itself, however severe and grievous to human nature, or even immemorial tradition, but the false inferences and deductions therefrom, leading to injunctions insupportable and impracticable. Will not move them with one of their fingers; with their finger. This does not imply (and it would not be true) that the rabbis themselves were all hypocrites, and broke or evaded the Law with impunity. We know that they scrupulously attended to all outward observances. What is meant is that they take no trouble to lighten (, “to move away”), to make these burdens easier by explanation or relaxation, or to proportion them to the strength of the disciple. They impose them with all their crushing weight and severity upon others, and uncompromisingly demand obedience to these unscriptural regulations, putting “a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear” (Act 15:10; Gal 5:1). Contrast with this the Christian’s service: “My yoke is easy,” says Christ, “and my burden is light” (Mat 11:1-30 :33).
Mat 23:5
For to be seen of men. The second bad principle in their religion was ostentation and vanity. Acts done professedly in the honour of God were animated by self-seeking and ambition. They never penetrated beyond externalism. See this spirit reproved in the sermon on the mount (Mat 6:1, Mat 6:2, etc.). “They loved the glory of men more than the glory of God” (Joh 12:43). Christ then gives proofs of this spirit of ostentation in religion and in private life. Phylacteries; : literally, preservatives; equivalent to “amulets;” the translation of the Hebrew word tephillin, “prayer fillets.” These were either strips of parchment or small cubes covered with leather, on or in which were written four sections of the Law, viz. Exo 13:1-10; 11-16; Deu 6:4-9; Deu 11:13-21. They were worn fastened either to the forehead, or inside the left arm, so as to be near the heart. Their use arose from a literal and superstitious interpretation of Exo 13:9; Deu 6:8; Deu 11:18. Their dimensions were defined by rabbinical rules, but the extra pious formalists of the day set these at naught, and increased the breadth of the strips or of the bands by which they were fastened, in order to draw attention to their religiousness and their strict attention to the least observances of the Law. These phylacteries are still in use among the Jews. Thus in a ‘Class Book for Jewish Youth’ we read, “Every boy, three months before he attains the age of thirteen, commences to make use of the tephillin, which must be worn at least during the time of the morning prayers. The ordinance of the tephillin is one of the signs of the covenant existing between the Almighty and ourselves, that we may continually bear in mind the miracles God wrought for our forefathers.” Enlarge the borders of their garments; , the fringes of their outer garments. The best manuscripts have merely their fringes. So the Vulgate, magnificant fimbrias. These fringes or tassels (zizith, zizijoth) were fastened to the corners of the garments, in accordance with Num 15:38-41, and were composed of white and blue threads. They were intended to remind the wearers of the commandments of the Lord, and were regarded as peculiarly sacred (see Mat 9:20). Christ condemns the ostentatious enlargement of these fringes as a badge of extraordinary piety and obedience. We quote again from the Jewish ‘Class. Book:’ “Every male of the Jewish nation must wear a garment [not usually an undergarment] made with four corners, having fringes fixed at each corner. These fringes are called tsetsis, or, memorial fringes. In the synagogue, during the morning prayers, a scarf with fringes attached to it is worn, which is called tollece, ‘scarf or veil.’ These memorial fringes typically point out the six hundred and thirteen precepts contained in the volume of the sacred Law. They are also intended to remind us of the goodness of the Almighty in having delivered our forefathers from the slavery in Egypt.”
Mat 23:6
The uppermost rooms; : primos recubitus; chief place (Luk 14:7). The custom of reclining on cushions set in horseshoe fashion at three sides of the table was now prevalent, the old custom of squatting round a low table, as at present practised in the East, having been long abandoned. The place of honour is said to have been at the upper end of the right side, the president being placed, not in the centre of that end of the table which faced the opening, but at the side. The most honoured guest would be at his right hand (but see on Mat 26:23). There was often much manoeuvring to obtain this post, and many petty squabbles about precedence arose on every festal occasion (see Luk 14:1, Luk 14:7, etc.). The chief seats in the synagogues. The usual arrangement of the synagogue is given by Dr. Edersheim. It was built of stone, with an entrance generally on the south, and so arranged that the worshippers might direct their prayers towards Jerusalem. In the centre was placed the lectern of the reader; the women’s gallery was at the north end. “The inside plan is generally that of two double colonnades, which seem to have formed the body of the synagogue, the aisles east and west being probably used as passages. At the south end, facing north, is a movable ark, containing the sacred rolls of the Law and the prophets. Right before the ark, and facing the people, are the seats of honour, for the rulers of the synagogue and the honourable.” These were the places for which the Pharisees contended, thinking more of gaining these, where they could sit enthroned in the sight of the congregation, than of the Divine worship which nominally they came to offer (comp. Jas 2:2, Jas 2:3).
Mat 23:7
Greetings in the markets. They loved to be denoted as superiors by respectful salutations in public places. To be called Rabbi, Rabbi; “My Master” (compare the French Monsieur, used not only vocatively, but absolutely); the term addressed by scholars to their teacher, and repeated for ostentation’s sake, of course implying superiority in those thus called. Christ himself was thus addressed by those who desired to denote his authority and preeminence (Mat 22:16, Mat 22:24, Mat 22:36; comp. Joh 1:38). These greetings and salutations were enjoined on scholars and inferiors, under pain of ecclesiastical censure and loss of salvation.
Mat 23:8
Be not ye called Rabbi. After stating the customs of the Pharisees, Christ proceeds (Mat 23:8-12) to give his own disciples a lesson in humility. The pronoun is emphatic, “But ye, be not ye called.” They are not to be eager for such distinctions, indicative of spiritual superiority. The prohibition must be understood in the spirit, and not in the letter. Our Lord does not forbid respect for teachers or different grades in his Church (see 1Co 12:28; Eph 4:11-13); that which he censures is the inordinate grasping at such personal distinctions, the greedy ambition which loves the empty title, and takes any means to obtain it. One is your Master, even Christ. The received text gives . Many good manuscripts read , Teacher (so Revised Version) instead of , Leader, [and omit . Both these variations seem reasonable and warranted. “Leader” has probably been introduced from Mat 23:10, where it occurs naturally; it is out of place here, where, for the sake of concinnity, “Teacher” is required in both parts of the sentence. And it is unlikely that Jesus should hero expressly mention himself. He is speaking now of their heavenly Father; to himself he refers in Mat 23:10. In support of the allusion to the Father, Bengel cites Mat 16:17; Joh 6:45; Act 10:28, etc. The Vulgate has, Unus est enim Magister vester; and yet Roman Catholic commentators interpret the clause of Christ, in spite of the purposed indefiniteness of the expression. Jesus points to the inspiration of the Father or the Holy Spirit as that which teaches his disciples. They were to follow no earthly rabbi, but the heavenly Teacher. All ye are brethren. And therefore, so far, equal. They were disciples of our Lord, and to them appertained equality and fraternity.
Mat 23:9
Your father. This was the title given to eminent teachers and founders of schools, to whom the people were taught to look up rather than to God. It was also addressed to prophets (2Ki 2:12; 2Ki 6:21). In Mat 23:8 Christ said, “be not called;” here he uses the active, “call not,” as if he would intimate that his followers must not give this honoured title to any doctor out of complaisance, or flattery, or affectation. Upon the earth. In contradistinction to heaven, where our true Father dwells. They were to follow no earthly school. They had natural lathers and spiritual fathers, but the authority of all comes from God; it is delegated, not essential; and good teachers would make men look to God, and not to themselves, as the source of power and truth.
Mat 23:10
Neither be ye called masters; : leaders, guides. This is just what the Pharisees claimed to be (see Mat 23:16 and Rom 2:19, Rom 2:20). One is your master (, Leader), even [the] Christ. Hero Jesus announces himself, not only as their Teacher, but as the Messiah, their Ruler and Guide. He is censuring that sectarian spirit which began in the primitive Church, when one said,” I am of Paul; another, I of Apollos,” etc. (1Co 1:12), and has continued to this day in the division of the one body into innumerable sects and, parties, ranged under various leaders, and generally bearing their founder’s name. “What then is Apollos? and what is Paul? Ministers through whom ye believed; and each as the Lord gave to him” (1Co 3:5). How mournful to think that Christ’s great prayer for unity (Joh 17:1-26.) is still unfulfilled, frustrated or delayed by man’s self-will!
Mat 23:11
But he that is greatest your servant; : minister (see Mat 20:26, Mat 20:27). It was there said to the apostles alone; here it is spoken more publicly to emphasize the contrast between Christian humility and Pharisaical pride and vanity.
Mat 23:12
Whosever shall exalt himself shall be abased (, shall be humbled); and he that shall humble () himself shall be exalted. It is not clear why the rendering of the verb is not uniform in this verse. The antithesis certainly requires it. The gnome, so often repeated (see references), seems to be, as it has been called, “an axiom in the kingdom of God.” It is indeed a universal law in God’s dealings with men. Olshausen quotes a saying! of Hillel to the same purport, “My humility is my exaltation, and my exaltation is my humility.” The first clause was prophetic of the speedy overthrow of the haughty Pharisees; the second is grandly illustrated in the example of Christ, who humbled himself to the death of the cross, and is now highly exalted; who “for the joy that was set before him, endured the cross, despising shame, and hath sat down at the right hand of the throne of God” (Heb 12:2). St. Peter draws the lesson, “Humble yourselves under the mighty hand of God, that he may exalt you in due time” (1Pe 5:5, 1Pe 5:6).
Mat 23:13-32
Eight woes pronounced on the Pharisees for their conduct and teaching. (Comp. Luk 11:42-52.)
Mat 23:13
Some authorities transpose Mat 23:13 and Mat 23:14a variation attributable to the circumstance that the commencing clauses are the same. As Christ inaugurated his public teaching by pronouncing eight benedictions in the sermon on the mount, so here he closes his ministry by imprecating or prophesying eight woes on the perverse and unbelieving Pharisees. In Lange’s commentary there is proposed a scheme of antithesis between the benedictions and the woes, but it is not very successful, being often forced and unnatural; and it is better to regard the contrast in a general view, and not to attempt to press it in particulars. Jesus here pours forth his righteous anger on those whose obstinate infidelity was about to bring ruin on the Jewish city and nation. Woe unto you! (Mat 11:21). These terrible “woes” are not only evoked by indignation, and pronounced as a solemn judgment, they are also expressive of the profoundest pity, and are prophetic of the future. They have, indeed, a twofold referencethey refer first to temporal judgments and visitations, now ready to fall; and secondly to the retribution in the eternal world. That the meek and lowly Jesus should utter such awful denunciations shows how greatly he was moved how he left nothing untried to turn these hard hearts to introspection and repentance. Scribes and Pharisees (see on Mat 23:2), hypocrites (Mat 6:2). Christ uses this word seven times in these denunciations. It is applied to the Pharisees as deceiving themselves and others, under the mask of godliness hiding polluted hearts, persuading themselves that formal externalism was real piety and devotion, and practically teaching this fatal delusion. Ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men; : before men; ante homines (Vulgate. This is the first woeagainst perverse obstructiveness. They prevent men from accepting Christ, and so entering God’s kingdom, by their false interpretation of Scripture, by not allowing that it testified of Christ, and by making the path impassable for the poor and ignorant. And this is done “in the face of men,” when they are, as it were, thronging round and wishing to enter. “Ye have taken away the key of knowledge,” he says, in another place (Luk 11:52). Neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in. The kingdom of heaven is here metaphorically regarded as a banqueting hall, where are celebrated the espousals of Christ and his Church. The Pharisees watched the access thereto. They stood at the door to bar all entrance. If any showed signs of yielding to honest conviction, they sternly forbade them to proceed; they repelled them with violence, as by excommunication (Joh 9:22, Joh 9:34), or by calumniating the Teacher (Mat 9:34, etc.). There was many a time when 34, people were ready to acknowledge Christ and to follow him as Messiah. A word from their authorized leaders would have turned the scale in his favour; but that word was never spoken. The weight of authority was always placed on the opposite side, and naught but prejudice, animosity, and slander befell the cause of Jesus.
Mat 23:14
Second woeagainst rapacity and hypocrisy. There is some doubt about the genuineness of this verse, and our Revisers have expunged it from their text, relegating it to the margin. It is omitted by , B, D, L, Z, some copies of the Vulgate and some versions; on the other hand, it is found in E, F, G, H, K, M, and other later uncials, and in the received Vulgate and Syriac Versions. Critics reject it as a supposed interpolation from Mar 12:40; Luk 20:47. At any rate, whether spoken now or at another time, it is undoubtedly an utterance of Christ, and to be received with all reverence. Ye devour widows’ houses. Women who have lost their natural protector become their prey. To these they attach themselves, winning them over by flattery and fraud, and persuading them to assist them with their substance to the ruin of their fortunes. God had always defended the cause of widows, and had urged his people to deal gently and mercifully with them (see Deu 10:18; Deu 27:19; Psa 68:5; Isa 1:17; Luk 18:3-7). This woe is followed in St. Luke by the episode of the widow’s mite (Luk 20:47; Luk 21:1-4). And for a pretence make long prayer; or, and that, making long prayers for a pretence. They put on an appearance of extraordinary devotion, that they might more easily secure the favour of the widows; or else they exacted large sums of money, engaging to offer continual prayers for the donors (compare St. Paul’s words in 2Ti 3:6). Thus these hypocrites made a gain of godliness at the expense of the most helpless members of the community. Greater (, more abundant) damnation. No condemnation in this world or the next can be more justly awarded than to him who adds hypocrisy to covetousness, and makes religion a cloke for cruel rapacity. The comparative may refer to “the lengthened hypocritical prayers which went before” (Lange).
Mat 23:15
Third woeagainst evil proselytizing. Ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte. The word is used in the Septuagint to signify “a stranger” or “sojourner” (Exo 12:48, Exo 12:49, etc.), and at this time was applied to a convert to Judaism (Act 2:10; Act 6:5), whether circumcised, “a proselyte of righteousness;” or uncircumcised, “a proselyte of the gate.” To compass sea and land is a proverbial expression, denoting the employment of every means, the exercise of the utmost effort. One might have thought that, in its proud isolation and exclusiveness, Judaism would not have exposed itself to this reproach. But what says Josephus? In more than one passage of his histories he testifies to the zealous propagation of the Jewish religion, and in some cases the enforcement of circumcision on vanquished enemies (see ‘Ant.,’ Mat 18:3. 5; Mat 20:2. 4; ‘Bell. Jud.,’ Mat 2:17. 10; ‘Vita,’ 23). Tacitus (‘Hist.,’ Mat 5:5) gives a most unfavourable account of the numerous converts which Hebrews made throughout the Roman provinces; and St. Augustine (‘De Civit.,’ Heb 6:11) quotes Seneca saying, “Cum interim usque eo sceleratissimae gentis consuetudo convaluit, ut per omnes jam terras recepta sit, victi victoribus leges dederunt” (Edersheim). For similar testimony, we may refer to Horace, ‘Sat.,’ 1.4. 142, 143; and Juvenal, ‘Sat.,’ 6.541, etc. But it was not proselytizing in itself that the Lord censured. As possessing revelation and the only true religion in the world, the Jews might well have deemed it their business to enlighten the gross darkness of heathenism, and to endeavour to shed abroad the pure light which was confided to their care to tend and cherish. That they were not expressly commanded to do this, and that little blessing attended their efforts in this direction, was dependent upon the transitory and imperfect character of the old covenant, and the many evils which would be consequent upon association with alien peoples. In making converts, the Pharisees sought rather to secure outward conformity than inward piety, change of external religion than change of heart. There was no love of souls, no burning zeal for the honour of God, in their proselytism. They were prompted only by selfish and base motivesvain glory, party spirit, covetousness; and if they converted men to their own opinions, with their false tenets, gross externalism, and practical immorality, they had far better have left them in their irresponsible ignorance. When he is made; when he is become a proselyte. Twofold more the child of hell; a son of Gehenna; i.e. worthy of hell fire. So we have 2Sa 12:5, “a son of death;” Joh 17:12, “the son of perdition”. The converts became doubly the children of hell because, seeing the iniquities of their teachers, they learned an evil lesson from them, “engrafted the vices of the Jews on the vices of the heathen,” distrusted all goodness, discarded their old religion and disbelieved the new, making utter shipwreck of their moral life. “Ita natura comparati sumus,” says an old commentator, “ut vitia potius quam virtutes imitemur, et in rebus malis a discipulis magistri facile superentur.”
Mat 23:16
Fourth woeagainst evasive distinctions in oaths. Ye blind guides. They were by profession leaders and guides, and yet by their literalism and externalism they lost the true significance of the Scriptures which they taught, and the ritual of which they were the exponents. The Lord repeats the epithet “blind “(Mat 23:17, Mat 23:19, Mat 23:24). Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing. Our Lord seems to refer more especially to oaths connected with vows, of which he had already spoken (Mat 15:5, Mat 15:6). The arbitrary distinction between oaths was indeed an instance of moral blindness. An oath by the temple was not binding; it might be broken or evaded with impunity. By the gold of the templei.e. by the sacred treasure and ornaments thereinhe is a debtor (); he is bound by his oath. The casuistry employed by the Jews in this matter was well known, and had become proverbial among the heathen. F.M. quotes Martial, 11:94
“Ecce negas, jurasque mihi per templa Tonantis,
‘Non credo: jura, verpe, per Anchialum.'”
“Anchialum” is equivalent to am chai aloh, “as God liveth,” the Jew (verpus, “circumcised”) being bound by no oath but one that contained some letters of the Divine name or some attribute of God.
Mat 23:17
Ye fools. Jesus adds to “blind” the epithet “fools,” which implies not only the irrationality and absurdity of their practice, but also its moral delinquency, the fool in sapiential language being the sinner. The temple that sanctifieth the gold. Our Lord shows the absurdity of this sophistical distinction. It was because the temple was the place of God’s presence that what was therein was consecrated. The gold was nothing without the temple; the temple, the originally holy, is superior to the gold, the derivatively holy, and an oath that calls the temple to witness is surely obligatory.
Mat 23:18
By the altar. The great altar of burnt offerings, according to the Mosaic ritual, was consecrated and dedicated with most remarkable solemnities, as the centre of sacrificial worship (see Exo 29:36, etc.; Exo 30:28,Exo 30:29; Num 7:10, etc.). The gift that is upon it. The victim, which, as being offered by themselves, was counted more worthy than the altar of God which sanctified the gift. This is, indeed, an instance of sight blinded by self-righteousness. He is guilty; : he is a debtor, as Mat 23:16. Others see here the principle that the validity of oaths was differentiated by the nearness to the Person of God of the things by which they were taken. This, too, opened up large opportunities of evasion.
Mat 23:19
Our Lord repeats the unanswerable argument of Mat 23:17. That sanctifieth the gift. Exo 29:37. “It shall be an altar most holy; whatsoever toucheth the altar shall be holy” (comp. Eze 41:22). The offering is one with the altar.
Mat 23:20
Sweareth by it, etc. One can see what an inveterate evil our Lord was denouncing, when he takes such pains to point out its absurdities, which seem to us self-evident. The oath by the altar involves the notion of the victim as well as the altar; one cannot be separated from the other; and, of course, implies him to whom the offering is made.
Mat 23:21
By him that dwelleth therein. In fact, it comes to this: to swear by temple or altar is to swear by Godan oath most solemn, which may not be evaded. “That dwelleth” is in some manuscripts the aorist participle, , implying that God once for all took up his abode in the temple, and filled it with his ineffable presence (see Kings Mat 8:13; Psa 132:14). From such passages we learn that God sanctifies things and places to be devoted to his service, and to be accounted by men holy and separated from all common uses. The Authorized Version translates the received text, , which has good authority, the past participle being, perhaps, a correction by some scribe who thought that the day of Judaism was past when Christ spoke.
Mat 23:22
By heaven. The Talmndists affirm that an oath “by heaven” or “by earth” was not binding, on the ground, probably, that these were mere creatures. Christ again dissipates such sophistries. To swear by the creature is virtually to swear by the Creator. A brute, inanimate thing cannot be witness to an oath; he alone can be appealed to who owns all. Thus we “kiss the book,” calling God to witness our words. Christ had already given a lesson to his followers on this subject in the sermon on the mount (Mat 5:34-37). He inculcates true reverence, that fear and awe of God’s dignity and God’s presence which constrains a man to avoid all profaneness and carelessness in regard to things that are concerned with God.
Mat 23:23, Mat 23:24
Fifth woeagainst scrupulosity in trifles and neglect of weighty duties (Luk 11:42). Ye pay tithe of (, ye tithe) mint and anise and cummin. Practically, the law of tithe was enforced only in the case of the produce mentioned in Deu 14:23corn, wine, and oilbut the Pharisees, in their overstrained scrupulosity, applied the law of Le 27:30 (“all the tithe of the land, whether of the seed of the land or of the fruit of the tree, is the Lord’s”) to the smallest pot herbs, even to their leaves and stalks. “Mint” (). Of this well known plant several species grow in Palestine; it was one of the ingredients of the sauce of bitter herbs eaten at the Paschal feast (Exo 12:8), and was hung up in the synagogue for its fragrance. “Anise” () is known to us as “dill,” and is much used in medicine and for seasoning. “Cummin” () (Isa 28:25, Isa 28:27), an umbelliferous plant, with seeds something like caraways, and used, like them, as a condiment and medicine. Have emitted the weightier matters of the Law. The Pharisees were very far from treating important duties with the same scrupulosity which they observed in little matters. Christ particularizes these weighty duties: Judgment, (and) mercy, and faith. Three are named, in contrast to the three petty observances mentioned above. Christ seems to refer to the words of Mic 6:8, “What doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?” (see also Hos 12:6; Zec 7:9, Zec 7:10). Worthless are all outward observances when the moral precepts are neglected. “Judgment” ( ) means acting equitably to one’s neighbour, hurting nobody by word or deed; as in Jer 5:1 a man is sought “that exerciseth justice.'” Such impartiality is specially enjoined in the Law (Deu 16:19, etc.). “Mercy,” loving kindness in conduct, often taught in the Pentateuch, as in the case of the widow, the stranger, and the debtor, and very different from the feeling of those who “devour widows’ houses.” “Faith” may mean fidelity to promises: “He that sweareth unto his neighbour and disappointeth him not, though it were to his own hindrance” (Psa 15:4); but it is more probably taken as that belief in God without which it is not possible to please him, and which should underlie and influence all moral action (Heb 11:6). These () the other (). “These last” are judgment, mercy, and faith; these it was your duty to have done. “The other” refers to the tithing mentioned above. Christ does not censure this attention to minutiae. He would teach conformity to regulations made by competent authority, or conscientiously felt to be binding, even though not distinctly enjoined in Scripture (see Jer 5:2, Jer 5:3); his blame is reserved for that expenditure of zeal on trifles which stood in the place of, or left no strength for, higher duties. It was a very elastic conscience which tithed a pot herb and neglected judgment. Strain at a gnat; . “At” is supposed to be a misprint for “out.” Thus Revised Version, and early English versions, which strain out the gnat; Vulgate, excolantes culicem. Alford thinks the present reading was an intentional alteration, meaning “strain (out the wine) at (the occurrence of) a gnat”which seems more ingenious than probable. If “at” be retained, it must be taken as expressive of the fastidiousness which had to make a strong effort to overcome its distaste at this little insect. The wine, before drinking, was carefully strained through linen to avoid the accidental violation of Le Jer 11:20, Jer 11:23, etc.; Jer 17:10-14, by swallowing an unclean insect. The practice, which was in some sense a religious act, is found among the Buddhists in Hindostan and Ceylon, either to avoid pollution or to obviate the danger of taking life, which their code forbids. A (the) camel. The gnat and the camel, which were alike unclean, stand at the extremities of the scale of comparative size. Our Lord uses a proverbial expression to denote the inconsistency which would avoid the smallest ceremonial defilement, but would take no account of the gravest moral pollution.
Mat 23:25
The sixth woeagainst merely external purification (Mar 7:4; Luk 11:39). Ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter. Thus the Lord typically denotes the Pharisees’ external ceremonialism, their legal purity. They looked, so to speak, to the cleanliness of the outside of the cup that contained their drink, and the platter that held their food. Such cleansing would, of course, have no effect on the drink or meat itself. They are full of ( , are full from) extortion and excess (). For this last word the manuscripts offer many variations, arising, probably, from its uucommoness. It seems, however, to be genuine. But we find it altered into “unrighteousness,” “impurity,” Vulgate, immunditia, “intemperance,” “covetousness,” “wickedness.” The vessels are conceived as filled with contents acquired by violence and used without self-control.
Mat 23:26
Thou blind Pharisee. The address is in the singular number, to give vividness and personal effect, and the epithet accentuates the absurdity censured. Cleanse first that which is within. They must learn to reverse their practice. If you wanted to have your food pure, you would clean the inside of your vessel more carefully than the outside. The external purity should proceed from and be a token of the internal. So in the case of the moral agent, the ceremonial purity is a mockery and hypocrisy unless it be accompanied by holiness of the heart. That the outside of them may be clean also. However fair to see, the man is not pure unless his soul is clean; he cannot be called pure while the higher part of his being is soiled and foul with sin. And inward saintliness cannot be hidden; it shines forth in the countenance; it is known by speech and action; it sheds sunshine wherever it gees. “Keep thy heart with all diligence; for out of it are the issues of life” (Pro 4:23).
Mat 23:27, Mat 23:28
Seventh woeagainst another form of the same hypocrisy (Luk 11:44). Whited () sepulchres. Once a year, about the fifteenth of the month Adar, the Jews used to whitewash the tombs and the places where corpses were buried, partly out of respect for the dead, but chiefly in order to make them conspicuous, and thus to obviate the risk of persons incautiously contracting ceremonial defilement by touching or walking over them (Num 19:16). To such sepulchres our Lord compares these Pharisees, because their outwardly fair show concealed rottenness within (comp. Act 23:3). Indeed, it might be said that their seeming exceptional purity was a warning of internal corruption, a sign post to point to hidden defilement. Obtrusive religiousness, emphatic scrupulosity, are marks of pride and self-righteousness, utterly alien from real devotion and holiness.
Mat 23:29-32
Eighth woeagainst hypocritical honour paid to departed worthies (Luk 11:47).
Mat 23:29
Ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous; or, adorn the monuments of the just. In the last woe Christ had spoken of sepulchres; he speaks of them here again, giving an unexpected view of the seeming honours paid to departed saints. The sumptuous mausoleums and tombs found e.g. round Jerusalem, and bearing the names of celebrated men (such as Zechariah, Absalom, Jehoshaphat), sufficiently attest the practice of the Jews in this matter. But the Pharisees’ motives in acting thus were not pure; they were not influenced by respect for the prophets or repentance for national sins, but by pride, hypocrisy, and self-sufficiency. The present was a great age for building; witness Herod’s magnificent undertakings; and probably many gorgeous tombs in honour of ancient worthies were now erected or renovated.
Mat 23:30
And say. They boasted that they were better than their fathers; they disavowed their crimes, and endeavoured, by honouring the prophets’ graves, to deliver themselves from the guilt of those who persecuted them. Fair show, with no reality! They professed to venerate the dead, but would not receive the living; they reverenced Abraham and Moses, but were about to murder the Christ to whom patriarch and prophet bore witness. Commentators quote the old adage, herein exemplified, “Sit licet divus, dummodo non vivus.” The only practical way of delivering themselves from the guilt of their forefathers was by hearkening to those who now preached the gospel of salvationthe very last thing which they were purposed to do.
Mat 23:31
Ye be witnesses unto yourselves. By busying yourselves about adorning the tombs of the prophets slain by your ancestors, you show your descent and the spirit which animates you. Ye are the children; ye are sons. They were true sons of their fathers, inheriting their murderous instincts, following their steps. Like father, like son. They inherited and put in practice the same false principles which led their ancestors astray.
Mat 23:32
Fill ye up then; : do ye also (as well as they) fill up. An imperative, expressive of Divine irony, containing virtually a prophecy. Complete your evil work, finish that which your fathers began (comp. Joh 13:27). The measure. There is a certain limit to iniquity; when this is reached, punishment falls. The metaphor is derived from a full cup, which a single drop more will make overflow. This added drop would be the death of Christ and the persecution of his followers. Then vengeance must follow (comp. Gen 15:16; 1Th 2:16).
Mat 23:33-39
Declaration of the sentence on these Pharisees and their generation.
Mat 23:33
Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers; : offspring of vipers. Our Lord repeats the Baptist’s denunciation (Mat 3:7). They were of devilish nature, inherited from their very birth the disposition and character of Satan. So Christ said on another occasion, “Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father it is your will to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and stood not in the truth” (Joh 8:44). How can ye escape? ; the deliberative conjunctive, How shall ye escape? Quo mode fugietis? (Vulgate). There is no emphasis on “can” in the Authorized Version. What hope is there now of your repentance? Can anything soften the hardness of your hearts? The Baptist had spoken more hopefully, “Who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?” But now the day of grace is past; the sin against the Holy Ghost is committed; there remaineth only the fearful looking for of judgment. The damnation of hell; literally, the judgment of Gehenna; judicio Gehennae (Vulgate); i.e. the sentence that condemns to eternal death (Mat 5:22). The phrase is common in the rabbinical writings (see Lightfoot). “Before sinning, we ought to fear lest it be the filling up; after sinning, we should trust in a truly Christian hope that it is not, and repent. This is the only means to escape the damnation of hell; but how rare is this grace after a pharisaical life!” (Quesnel). Hypocrisy is a bar to repentance.
Mat 23:34
Wherefore; . Because ye are resolved on imitating your forefathers’ iniquities, you will also reject the messengers that are sent to you, and shall suffer righteous condemnation. I send ( ) unto you. The sending had already begun. In the parallel passage of St. Luke (Luk 11:49) we read, “Therefore also said the wisdom of God, I will send.” Christ is the Wisdom of God, and by his own authority gives mission to his messengers. “As the Father hath sent me, even so send I you” (Joh 20:21), he says to his apostles; and to such he is referring in the words which follow. Prophets. The apostles were of like character, inspiration, and influence as the prophets under the old dispensation, and succeeded in their place as exponents of God’s will and heralds of the covenant. Wise men. Men full of the Holy Ghost and heavenly wisdom. Scribes. Not in the then Jewish sense, but instructors in the new law of life, the law of Christ’s religion (Mat 13:52). All the means of teaching and edification employed aforetime were abundantly and more effectually supplied under the gospel. St. Luke has, “prophets and apostles.” Kill; as Stephen (Act 7:59), James (Act 12:2). Crucify; as Peter (Joh 21:18, Joh 21:19; 2Pe 1:14); Simeon (Eusebius, ‘Hist. Eccl.,’ 3:32); and probably Andrew. Scourge (see Act 5:40; Act 22:19 Act 26:11; 2Co 11:24, 2Co 11:25). Persecuted (see Act 13:50; Act 14:5, Act 14:6, Act 14:19, Act 14:20; Act 26:11; and compare Christ’s prediction, Mat 10:17, Mat 10:18). The passage in the Second (Fourth) Book of Esdras 1:32, which is strikingly parallel to our Lord’s denunciation, may possibly be a Christian interpolation, “I sent unto you my servants the prophets, whom ye have taken and slain, and torn their bodies in pieces, whose blood I will require of your hands, saith the Lord.”
Mat 23:35
That upon you may come ( ). This phrase does not express a simple consequence, neither can it mean “in such a way that”explanations which have been given by some commentators to avoid a seeming difficulty in the final sense; but it is to be translated, as usually, in order that, ut veniat. God, foreseeing the issues of their evil heart, puts in their way occasions which will aid his vengeance and accelerate the time of their punishment. He lets them work out their own destruction by committing an unpardonable sin. He does not force them into this course of conduct; they can resist the opportunity if they will; but he knows they will not do so, and the visitation becomes judgment. To have a man’s blood upon one’s head is to be held guilty of the crime of murder, and to be liable to make the required atonement for it. So in their blind fury, taking the punishment on themselves, the Jews a little later cried, “His blood been us, and on our children!” (Mat 27:25). Righteous blood. So in the Old Testament we often find such expressions as “innocent blood” (2Ki 21:16; 2Ki 24:4; Jer 26:15); “blood of the just” (Lam 4:13); comp. Rev 6:10 and Rev 18:24, where it is written that in Babylon “was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all them that were slain upon the earth.” Righteous Abel. The first of the murdered, the prototype of the death of Christ and of all good men who have died for truth, religion, and justice (Gen 4:8; 1Jn 3:12). The catalogue of such is long and terrible. Our Lord assigns a period to its dimensions, commencing with the first death mentioned in the Bible, and ending with the murder of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple ( , the sanctuary) and the altar. Our Lord is speaking of a past event well known to his hearers; but who this Zacharias was is much disputed. Origen mentions a tradition, otherwise entirely unsupported, that Zachariah, the father of John the Baptist, was the son of Barachiah, and was murdered in the temple. But the story looks as if it was made to relieve the difficulty of identification; neither, as far as we know, was he a prophet. Zechariah, the minor prophet, was the son of Berechiah; but we read nothing of his being slain in the temple or elsewhere. It is true that Josephus (‘Bell. Jud.,’ 4.5. 4) tells how a “Zacharias, son of Baruch,” an honourable man, was slain by the zealots in the temple. But this murder took place A.D. 68, and our Lord could not number it among past crimes, or speak of it as an event familiar to those who heard him. The only other prophet of this name in the Bible is one mentioned in 2Ch 24:20-22, as stoned by the people at the command of Joash, in the court of the house of the Lord. “And when he died,” it is added, “he said, The Lord look upon it, and require it.” This makes his case correspond to that of Abel, the voice of whose blood cried unto God from the ground. He is also the last prophet whose death is recorded in the Old Testament, and the guilt of whose murder, the Jews say, was not purged till the temple was burned under Nebuchadnezzar. It seems to be a kind of proverbial saying which the Lord here uses, equivalent to “from the first murdered saint to the last,” taking the arrangement of the Hebrew canon of Scripture, and regarding the Books of Chronicles as the conclusion of Jewish history. This (though it would exclude the murder of other prophets, e.g. Jeremiah, Ezekiel, etc.) would all be plain enough and quite appropriate to the context were it not that the Zechariah thus referred to was the son of Jehoiada, not of Barachias. But there are two solutions of this difficulty suggested; and, allowing either of these, we may confidently assert that the above-named prophet is the personage intended.
(1) The words, “son of Barachias” may be an early interpolation, introduced by a copyist who was thinking of the minor prophet. They are omitted by the first correcter of the Sinaitic Manuscript, are not found in the parallel passage of St. Luke (Luk 11:51), and Jerome remarks that in the ‘Gospel of the Nazarenes’ was read “son of Joiada.”
(2) There may have been family reasons, unknown to us, why Zechariah was thus designated (see the commentators on our Lord’s genealogy in St. Luk 3:1-38., especially on Luk 3:23, “son of Hell,” Luk 3:27, “son of Salathiel,” and Luk 3:36, “son of Cainan”). Or Jehoiada may have had two names, as so many Jews had. Indeed, the two appellations are not altogether dissimilar in meaning, Jehoiada signifying “Jehovah knoweth,” and Barachiah, “Jehovah blesseth.” Or again, Barachiah may have been the father of Zechariah, and Jehoiada the more famous grandfather. It has been suggested (by Morison, in loc.) that one of the monuments recently erected in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem was dedicated to Zacharias. Such a one still bears his name. Hence Christ’s allusion is very natural after his statement in verse 29. The scene of the murder was the open space in the priests’ court, between the holy place and the great altar of sacrifice. The sanctity of this spot made the crime abnormally atrocious.
Mat 23:36
An these things. All the crimes committed by their forefathers shall be visited upon this generation by the destruction of the Jewish city and polity, which took place within forty years from this time. The blood of the past was required from the Jews of the present time, because they and their evil ancestors were of one family, and were to be dealt with as a whole. In spite of the teaching of history and example, in spite of the warnings of Christ and his apostles, they were bent on repeating the acts of their forefathers, and that in an aggravated form and against increased light and knowledge. The punishment here announced is the temporal award. Christ here says nothing of the final judgment.
Mat 23:37
O Jerusalem, Jerusalem! Pathetic iteration! As he approached the city on another occasion Christ had used the same words (Luk 13:34, Luk 13:35); he repeats them now as he takes his final farewell He speaks with Divine tenderness, yet with poignant sorrow, knowing that this last appeal will be in vain. It has been remarked that, whereas St. Matthew elsewhere names the capital city, the theocratic centre, Hierosolyma, which is the Greek equivalent, he here calls it Hierousalem, which is Hebrew, as though, while recording the words used by Jesus, he desired to reproduce the actual sound of the Saviour’s affecting address. Killest…stonest. Such is thy wont, thy evil practice. So Christ says elsewhere, “It cannot be that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem” (Luk 13:33). “Stonest” was particularly appropriate after the reference to Zechariah (2Ch 24:20). Sent unto thee. The received Greek is, sent unto it or her ( ), though some manuscripts and the Vulgate give “thee.” But the change of persons is not uncommon. Alford quotes Luk 1:45; Luk 13:34; Rev 18:24. How often! Some would confine Christ’s allusion to his own mission in Judaea, and the efforts made by him to win disciples; but it surely applies to all the doings and visitations of God towards Israel during the whole course of their history, which showed his gracious desire that all should be saved, if they only had willed with him. He hereby asserts himself as one with the God of the Old Testament. Christ’s ministry in Jerusalem and Judaea is mentioned by St. John. Gathered wings. A tender similitude, which is found in the Old Testament and in classic authors. It implies love, care, and protection. Thus the psalmist prays, “Hide me under the shadow of thy wings;” “In the shadow of thy wings will I take refuge, until these calamities be overpast” (Psa 17:8; Psa 57:1); comp. Deu 32:11; Isa 31:5, etc. So Euripides, ‘Herc. Fur.,’ 72
“The children whom I cherish ‘neath my wings,
As a bird cowering o’er her youthful brood.”
The metaphor is peculiarly appropriate at the time, when, as Lange puts it, the Roman eagles were hovering near, and there was no hope of safety but under the Lord’s wings. And ye would not. Unmoved by warning and chastisement, impenetrable to long suffering love, ungrateful for mercies, the Jews repulsed all efforts for their amendment, and blindly pursued the course of ruin. It was always in their power to turn if they willed, but they wilfully resisted grace, and must suffer accordingly (comp. Isa 30:15).
Mat 23:38
Your house. The temple or Jerusalem, no longer God’s habitation. This betokens not only Christ’s solemn departure from the sacred precincts; but the withdrawal of God’s Spirit from the Jewish Church and nation. Unto you. Henceforward ye shall have it all to yourselves; my Father and I forsake it; we give it up altogether to you. Desolate. The word is omitted by some few uncials, but retained by , C, D, etc., most cursives, the Vulgate, etc. The protecting wing is withdrawn, the Divine presence removed, and the house is indeed deserted (); (comp. Psa 59:1-17 :25; Jer 12:7).
Mat 23:39
Ye shall not see me henceforth. Christ explains the denunciation just given. In a few days he will be separated from them by death and burial; and, though he appeared to certain chosen witnesses after his resurrection, he was seen no more by the people (Act 10:41); their house was deserted. Some take the word “see” in the sense of know, recognize; but it seems rather weak to say, “Ye shall not know me till ye acknowledge me as Messiah,” as the knowing and acknowledging are practically identical or simultaneous. Till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord! The words which had greeted his triumphal entry a few days before (Mat 21:9). The clause, “till ye shall say,” does not shut the door of hope forever; it looks forward to a happier prospect. The time intended is that when Israel shall repent of its rejection of the Messiah, and in bitter contrition look on him whom it pierced, owning and receiving Jesus with glad “Hosannahs!” Then shall they behold him coming in power and glory, and shall regain their old position as beloved of God (see Hos 3:4, Hos 3:5; Zec 12:10). Then “all Israel shall be saved” (Rom 11:26). Thus this terrible chapter, so dark and menacing, closes with a glow of hope and a promise, indefinite but certain, of final restoration.
HOMILETICS
Mat 23:1-12
The scribes and Pharisees.
I. THEIR CHARACTER.
1. Their position. “They sit in Moses’seat.” The scribes were the recognized teachers of the Law. The Pharisees exercised the greatest influence in the council and among the nation at large. Moses sat to judge the people (Exo 18:18); now the scribes taught and expounded the Law. Therefore the Lord enjoined obedience to their precepts. But we must mark the word “therefore.” They were to be obeyed because they sat in Moses’seatas the successors, in some sense, to his authority, as the expounders of his Law. So far they were to be obeyed; but not, the Lord himself elsewhere cautions us, in their misinterpretations, in their contrivances for evading the plain meaning of the Law, in their many quibbles and their endless distinctions. We see here that the Lord bids us obey constituted authorities in all things lawful. Those who are set over us may not always be orthodox in their opinions; their characters may not always command our respect; but the very fact that they are set over us makes it our duty to treat them with respect and to obey their directions, whenever such obedience is not inconsistent with our duty to God. Submission to our superiors, even if they are unworthy of their position, is an exercise of humility, and agreeable to the will of God; for “the powers that be are ordained of God: whosoever therefore resisted the power, resisteth the ordinance of God.” We observe that the Lord does not here condemn the priests. They do not seem, as a body, to have taken a prominent place in the opposition to his teaching. The chief priests, who were Sadducees, did so. But we are told, early in the history of the Acts of the Apostles, that “a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith.” “The priests’ lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the Law at his mouth.” But in our Lord’s time a separation had been made between the duties of the teacher and the priest. The scribes taught the people; the priests ministered in the temple. The scribes, puffed up with their minute knowledge of the letter of the Law, were intensely antagonistic to the holy Teacher who brought out its spiritual meaning. The priests, excepting always their Sadducean leaders, do not seem to have been so hostile. They were occupied with their temple ministrations; they were, as a body, not recognized as public teachers, and were probably not so influential as the scribes, not brought so prominently before the eyes of the people. The Lord came to fulfil the Law. He attended the great festivals; he bade the leper whom he healed to show himself to the priest, and offer the gift which Moses commanded. He did not interfere with the ministrations of the priests, nor does he here censure their life and conduct. The chief priests were hostile to him, probably because he exercised authority in the temple which they regarded as their own domain, and diminished their revenues by expelling the traffickers from the sacred precincts. The scribes opposed the Lord, so did the chief priests; in both cases from selfish motives. Let us beware of selfishness, and fight against it. It poisons the very life of the soul; it sets men against the Lord; it leads them to say in their hearts, “Not thy will, but mine be done.”
2. Their conduct.
(1) “They say, and do not,” the Lord said. They made the Law a heavy burden, a yoke which men were not able to bear, by their practice of “making a fence round the Law.” Such were their rigid and wearisome regulations about the observance of the sabbath, and the minute rules concerning the washing of vessels mentioned by St. Mark (Mar 7:4). But they themselves would not help to move that burden with one of their fingers. The teacher who lives a holy, self-denying life helps men by his example to bear the burden which he lays upon them. His conduct proves the reality of his convictions; it shows the strength of the motives which he enforces, the power of that grace which he preaches. Preaching, without practice, as in the case of the scribes, has little sanctifying influence, cannot much help men to deny themselves and lead a godly life. A life of real self-denial is the most convincing sermon.
(2) All their works they did “for to be seen of men.” They did not care for that inward purity of heart which does not win human praise. They strove to catch the eyes of men by the outward show of devotion. They delighted in phylacteries larger than usual, in borders and fringes more conspicuous than those commonly worn. There was no harm in wearing the phylactery or the fringe; the one was certainly ordered by the Law, probably also the other. The harm lay in the desire to attract attention, in the craving for display, in the tendency to exalt these outward things above inner spiritual religion.
(3) They coveted pre-eminence; they eagerly desired the chief places at feast or at synagogue; they liked to hear themselves called “Rabbi, Rabbi.” Their religion was outside show; they had no real love for God, no desire for spiritual holiness.
II. THE CONTRAST.
1. The disciples of Christ must not seek for titles of honour. “Be not ye called Rabbi,” the Lord said. There is one Teacher, one Father, one Master. The Lord’s people must not seek for distinctions, for pre-eminence; they are all brethren. We are not to take the words literally. To do so would be to follow the Pharisees. They were slaves of the letter; the Lord’s lessons are spiritual. St. Peter speaks of Mark as his son; so does St. Paul of Timothy and Titus; he describes himself as the spiritual father of his Corinthian converts (1Co 4:15). St. John addresses some to whom he writes as “fathers” (1Jn 2:13). In the Epistle to the Hebrews (Heb 13:7, Heb 13:17) we are bidden to obey them that have the rule over us, where the Greek verb is that from which the word rendered “master” in verse 10 is derived. But Christian men are not to seek after these and such-like titles; they are not to set store by them. If they come to us in the course of God’s providence, we may accept them. To reject them might be no true humility, but only the affectation of it. The difficult lesson is to be humble in heart, in lowliness of mind to esteem others better than ourselves.
2. They must be truly humble. The greatest, the most advanced Christians, will readily consent to be last of all and servants of all; forevery advance in holiness brings us nearer to him who took upon him the form of a servant, and came not to be ministered unto, but to minister. It is a first principle in Christ’s religion that “whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased, and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.” The Lord uses these words again and again (Luk 14:11; Luk 18:14). His apostles echo them (Jas 4:6; 1Pe 5:5). The Lord Jesus had taught the blessedness of humility in the first of the Beatitudes. He illustrated his lesson in his own holy character, in the meekness and lowliness of his life. But the lesson is very high and difficult, hard for human nature to learn. Therefore it is enforced constantly in Holy Scripture, that this frequent repetition may help us to feel its deep importance, and urge us to cultivate that precious grace of lowliness without which we can make no real progress in the narrow way that leadeth unto life. The Pharisees exalted themselves. They loved sounding titles, high place, the praise of men. The Christian must learn of Christ to abase himself. Self-exaltation leads to spiritual ruin; for “God resisteth the proud.”
LESSONS.
1. Obey in all things lawful those who are set over you, not only the good and gentle, but also the froward.
2. Better to do and say not, than, like the Pharisees, to say and do not.
3. Flee from the love of display; it poisons the life of the soul.
4. Pray earnestly for constant growth in humility.
Mat 23:13-31
Condemnation of their hypocrisy.
I. THE EIGHT WOES.
1. The first. The reiterated “Woe unto you!” is an expression of holy indignation. Christ, the righteous Judge, denounces the hypocrisy of the Pharisees. He knew the hardness, the impenitence of their hearts, and in his awful justice he pronounces their condemnation. Yet those very woes are also utterances of holy sorrow. The word is thrice rendered “alas!” in Rev 18:1-24. (see also Mat 24:19). The Lord grieves over the sinners (see verse 37) while he condemns them. The woe must come upon the impenitent; the Lord knew it in his Divine foreknowledge; he foretells it now. His words are stern, very terrible; but it is the sternness of holy love. He cared for the souls of those scribes and Pharisees; he had wept over them as he drew near to the city two days before; he closes this awful denunciation of the Divine wrath with the most touching outburst of grief. He spoke in tones of warning, if so be that even now these hard-hearted men might learn to know the terrors of the Lord, might repent and be saved. “Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!” The awful words come again and again, like the refrain of a dirge of intense sadness. It was this hypocrisy that was killing their souls. God requireth truth in the inward parts; he searcheth the hearts; he knoweth all things; he is the God of truth; he hateth falsehood. These men were acting a part; their whole life was a lie; they eared only for the appearance of piety; they had no wish to be really holy. They said their prayers; they did not wish to have the things for which they prayed; they did not even try to live as they prayed. They read their Bibles; they pretended to honour them and to believe in them; they had no real faith; they made no attempt at all to regulate their lives according to God’s Holy Word. Nothing is more hateful in God’s sight than hypocrisy; it is unbelief; the hypocrite does not really believe in God’s omniscience, that he readeth the hearts of men. Hypocrisy is an acted lie, and it is the devil who is the father of lies. God loveth truth. These hypocrites, the Lord said, shut up the kingdom of heaven against men. The kingdom of heaven was the Christian Church which the Lord had come to establish upon earth. There were multitudes willing to listen to the gospel of the kingdom, ready to enter in. But the Pharisees closed the way; they brought all their great influence to bear upon the work of obstruction. They would not enter into the kingdom themselves; they were like the guests first bidden in the parable of the marriage supper. And they hindered them that were entering in, who were on the point of becoming Christ’s disciples. When the people were amazed at his mighty works, and said, “Is not this the Son of David?” the Pharisees interfered with their envious and malicious suggestions, and dared to attribute the miracles of the blessed Saviour to the agency of Satan. They agreed that if any man did confess that he was the Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue. So they shut up the kingdom of heaven against men. They set themselves in direct opposition to the gracious will of God, to the Saviour’s work of love, opposing him now, as afterwards they opposed his apostles”forbidding us,” says St. Paul (1Th 2:16), “to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins alway: for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost.” Upon those who fight against God, who hinder the work of his servants, who try to check the progress of the gospel, the woe must come, the heavy wrath of God must surely fall upon them.
2. The second woe. Rev 18:14 has apparently been inserted here from Mar 12:40 and Luk 20:47, where it is certainly genuine. The scribes were like those false teachers described by St. Paul in 2Ti 3:6. They made a profit of their reputation for knowledge and sanctity, imposing upon weak women. They were not what the Lord bade his apostles to be, fishers of men’s souls, but they fished for their money. They made long prayers, but their prayers were mere acting; they were addressed in reality not to God, but to men, to those widows and others whose favour they sought for filthy lucre’s sake. Therefore, the Lord said, they should receive greater condemnation. They were not only hypocrites; they were covetous, dishonest. The condemnation of the hypocrite would fall upon them, and the condemnation of the thief. The affectation of piety for the sake of selfish gain is awful guilt in the sight of the all-holy Lord. We were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, but with the precious blood of Christ. That tremendous ransom ought to give depth, reality, zeal, to our religion. It is grievous sin to substitute earthly motives for that one only Christian motive, grateful love for our Redeemer.
3. The third woe. The Pharisees were not without zeal; they had zeal enough; they were fanatics; they would compass sea and land to make a single proselyte. But their zeal was party zeal. Party spirit had taken the place of religion in their hearts; they would work hard for their party; they would not deny themselves to please God. Their missionary zeal, such as it was, brought no glory to Almighty God, saved no souls. The proselyte, once made, became twofold more the child of hell than his teachers, more bigoted, more devoted to party, narrower and more exclusive, prouder of the privileges of Judaism than even those who had been born Jews. They should have been children of the kingdom; alas! they were children of hell; for there is no place in the kingdom of heaven for hypocrites, but only for the true worshippers, who worship God in spirit and in truth. The devil is the father of lies; those whose worship is a lie must have their place with him.
4. The fourth woe. They were blind guides, fools and blind. They professed to be teachers; they despised the untaught. “This people,” they said, “who knoweth not the Law are cursed” (Joh 7:49). But they were ignorant themselves; they did not understand the very ritual which they prized so highly. Their teaching was full of puerile and false distinctions. An oath by the temple, they said, was not binding, neither an oath by the altar; but he was a debtor who swore by the gold of the temple or by the gift that lay upon the altar. They who taught such untruth, such folly, were fools and blind indeed. They did not understand the order of consecration; the gold was sacred only because it belonged to the temple, which was the house of God; the gift was sacred only because it was offered upon the altar, which was the table of the Lord. The gold derived its sacredness from the temple, the gift from the altar. The Lord recognizes the reverence which is due to consecrated things and places. We may find God everywhere; we may worship him everywhere, not only at Jerusalem or on Mount Gerizim; but in the present limitations and conditions of our human nature it is necessary for us that special places should be dedicated to his service, and associated in our thoughts with his presence and his worship. The sacredness of things or places is derived entirely from that association with God’s presence and service. Then to swear by themby the altar, or by the temple, or by heaven his dwelling place, is to swear by him whose presence alone giveth consecration even to the heavens. Every oath is in reality an appeal to God; the omission of his name does not avoid the awfulness of reference to him. Then the Lord’s disciples may not swear, save under those solemn circumstances when an oath is required by the magistrate and sanctioned by Holy Scripture. No evasions, no pitiful distinctions, like those of the scribes, no substitution of less sacred words, can make the ordinary use of oaths lawful, or even harmless.
5. The fifth woe. Their religion consisted in small outward observances; it had no inner truth; they affected a scrupulous conscientiousness in things infinitely little, while they omitted the weightier matters of the Law. Scrupulous exactness in the payment of tithes and in Levitical purifications were the distinguishing characteristics of the Pharisaic fraternity. It was well enough to pay the insignificant tithe on common garden herbs; but ostentatious carefulness about this and such-like trifles, combined with carelessness about the great inner realities of personal religion, showed the hollow hypocrisy of their lives. They would strain out the gnat, the small ritual offence, and swallow the camel, the huge uncleanness of soul-defiling sin. Judgment, mercy, and faith were the weightier matters of the Law, unspeakably more important than the details of outward ordinances. To do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with God, were, the prophets said, better than thousands of burnt offerings. The Lord Jesus Christ enforces the teaching of the Law and of the prophets. Obedience in small things is right; obedience in great things is necessary for salvation. The exactest ritual and the strictest orthodoxy are of no value without justice and mercy and faith. “Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.” “Being justified by faith, we have peace with God, through our Lord Jesus Christ.” This is the precious fruitthe fruit of the Spirit; without this, the husk, the rind, are worthless.
6. The sixth woe. The Pharisees were especially scrupulous in avoiding all occasion of Levitical defilement; they heeded not the uncleanness of their hearts. It profits little to cleanse the outside of a cup or platter, if the inside is filthy and pollutes the food. A fair outside may hide the evil heart from the sight of men, but the eye of God sees through; to that all-seeing eye the wicked soul lies open in awful clearness. The Pharisees were blind. Be our prayer, “Lord, that I may receive my sight.” We want to see the condition of our souls, to know the whole truth, the whole sad wretched truth. Then we shall begin with that which most needs cleansingthe inside, the inner life of thought and feeling and motive. God desireth truth there. “Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean: wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.” If that is clean, made white in the blood of the Lamb, the outward life will be clean also. “Blessed are the pure in heart.” But the outward show of purity without the inner truth is vain, worthless, contemptible.
7. The seventh woe. They were like the sepulchres around Jerusalem, which, according to Jewish custom, had been whitened a month ago, and still looked bright and clean in the sunlight; within they were full of all uncleanness; their very whiteness was a warning, that men might avoid defilement. So was it with the Pharisees; they made a great show of religion; but that outward show, like the whiteness of the sepulchres, spoke of inward corruption. The true man is humble in heart; he knows his own shortcomings; he makes no display of religion; he walks humbly with his God. Much talk, much show, is an evil sign; it is often an index of an unclean, unconverted heart.
8. The eighth woe. They built and garnished the tombs of the prophets and the righteous. The Lord may possibly have pointed to some of the conspicuous sepulchres which lay before him on the Mount of Olives. They condemned their fathers’ crimes; but they owned that they were the children of them which killed the prophets. And, the Lord said, they were like their fathers, they had inherited their fathers’spirit. They would have slain the prophets, had they lived in their time, as now they were about to slay the Christ of God. They honoured the prophets in the distance; they would have hated them in the present. Stier quotes a striking passage from the Berlenberger Bibel: “Ask in Moses times, ‘Who are the good people?’ They will be Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; but not Moses,he should be stoned. Ask in Samuel’s times, ‘Who are the good people?’ They will be Moses and Joshua, but not Samuel. Ask in the times of Christ, and they will be all the former prophets with Samuel, but not Christ and his apostles.” May the Lord save us from this spirit of unworthy jealousy, and teach us to honour goodness, not only in the remote distance, which is easy, but in immediate proximity to us, which is sometimes, alas for our miserable selfishness! very hard indeed. “Charity envieth not:” follow after charity.
LESSONS.
1. Christ is an awful Judge, as well as a most loving Saviour. Take we heed unto ourselves.
2. His wrath must fall on those who oppose his blessed work. Let us help it with all our might.
3. Christ hates hypocrisy. Seek above all things to be real.
4. Party spirit is a poor substitute for true religion. Seek to save souls.
5. Is your outward life blameless? It is well. But it is a small thing in comparison with the infinite preciousness of purity of heart.
Mat 23:32-39
Prophecy of their future.
I. THEIR CONTINUANCE IN THE SINS OF THEIR FATHERS.
1. Prediction of their treatment of Christ‘s disciples. They would fill up the measure of their fathers; the Lord knew it in his Divine foreknowledge. They were still what John the Baptist had once called themserpents, “a generation of vipers.” How were such as they to escape from the condemnation of Gehenna? For hypocrisy hardens the heart. The state of the hypocrite is hopeless, perhaps, beyond that of most other sinners; self-satisfied as he is, he will not repent and come to Christ. “Wherefore,” the Lord said, “I send unto you prophets.” Mark the majestic “I send;” it asserts his authority, his equality in the truth of his Divine nature with God the Father. Mark the solemn “wherefore;” it contains a depth of inscrutable meaningmeaning full of mercy on the one side, full of awful mystery on the other. He would send his messengers unto them. Then even now he cared for their souls, even now he sought to save them. But he knew in his Divine omniscience how they would treat his servants; they would persecute them, and scourge them in their synagogues; some they would kill and crucify. The mission of the apostles would increase the guilt of the Jews; the good tidings of salvation would be to them, not life, but death. The Divine foreknowledge is not inconsistent with human free will. The Pharisees had the power to choose or to reject the Saviour. He would not have mocked them with the offer of an unattainable salvation, an inaccessible heaven. Yet he knew that they would reject him, for he was God, infinite in knowledge as in all other Divine attributes. That knowledge did not destroy their free agency; it did not remove their guilt. Here is one of those deep mysteries which human thought cannot penetrate; hereafter it shall be revealed.
2. The consequence to themselves. On them would come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth. It must be so; for they had inherited the guilt of their ancestors, and that accumulated inheritance of evil had hardened their hearts into very stone. It must be so; for it was in the course of God’s awful justice. As he hardened the heart of Pharaoh, who first hardened his own heart; so now he sent his messengers to the hardened Pharisees, that upon them might come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth. It is the ordinance of God, the law of that human nature which is his work, that wilful sin wilfully persevered in should lead on to guilt deeper yet. It would be so in the case of these hard-hearted Jews. Their obstinate unbelief would soon lead to a crime greater than any which the world, wicked as it was, had seen from the very beginning. That awful crime would fill up the measure of the long catalogue of deeds of blood. It would all fall upon that generation, from the first murder that ever was to the last recorded in the Hebrew canon; for all the accumulated blood guiltiness of mankind would be summed up in the tremendous guilt of those who were so soon about to cry, “His blood be on us, and on our children!” “Verily I say unto you, All these things must come upon this generation.” We feel it must be so. We hear the dread sentence, and we bow in silent awe before the judgment of God. And yet we know and feel that Christ cared even for those hard-hearted sinners, and would have saved them in his tender pity. But, alas! they would not come to him, that they might have life.
II. THE LAMENT OVER JERUSALEM.
1. The Lord‘s love. The stern language of most awful condemnation changes. We hear the tenderest accents of Divine pity, the sad wailing of disappointed love. The Lord had wept over Jerusalem. Now again his sacred heart yearns with mighty compassion for the city which he loved so well tie sorrows over the whole city, not only for the scribes and Pharisees whose hypocrisy he had denounced; his glance takes in the whole population, the poor and ignorant as well as the rich and learned; the deceived as well as the deceivers. His glance takes in all times, not only the present rejection of his grace, the awful guilt that was close at hand; but also their past offences, their past refusals of his offered mercies. Again and again he had wished to gather them together into his little flock, into his holy Church; again and again during his ministry upon earth, again and again before his incarnation, when he sent his warnings from heaven, he would have gathered them together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings. A most touching simile, expressive of yearning affection, of tender solicitude, expressive too of the Lord’s power and knowledge, wide-reaching in its range, all-embracing in its individual tenderness. Jerusalem, with its great population, was as a brood of chickens in his sight; he knew all, he cared for all; he would have sheltered all under his wings. But alas! they would not. He wished to gather them together; they did not wish to be gathered under the shelter of the Saviour’s love. The Lord clearly asserts the great mystery of man’s free will. He willeth that all men should be saved; but he doth not force the will of man. He would draw us to himself by the constraining attraction of love. He does not use his almighty power to compel our obedience. Enforced obedience is without value; enforced love is not love; the very phrase is a contradiction in terms, for love is essentially free and spontaneous. He calls us, he invites us; he warns, he threatens, he chastens; he manifests his love, that the sight of that great love may kindle tire flame of love in our unloving hearts; he came down from heaven for us men and for our salvation; he, the eternal Son of God, became a Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief; he gave himself to die in the mysterious depth of his exceeding great love; he declares his love by the unanswerable eloquence of the cross. But he leaves us free. Man was made in the image of God. The human will is a sacred thing; it must not be forced, or moral distinctions are lost, and love is annihilated and holiness is impossible. We know it is so, though we cannot solve the perplexing mystery. Let us try to yield up our will to him; to pray the deep holy prayer which he prayed in his agony, “Father, not my will, but thine be done.”
2. The consequence of the rejection of his love. “Your house is left unto you desolate.” The Lord is about to depart from the temple. It is no longer what it had beenthe house of God. He calls it “your house.” It had been long without the ark, without the Shechinah; now it would be without the presence of Christ, without the favour of God. It was left desolateleft to them; for God was leaving the temple, the city, the nation. Tacitus and Josephus tell us that, before the fall of Jerusalem, the awful voice of departing Deity was heard, “Let us depart hence.” Christ was leaving the temple now. “Ye shall not see me henceforth,” he said, “till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.” They would see him, indeed, once again in his sufferings on the cross. They would see, and yet not see, for their eyes were holden. Yet these last words were words of mercy and hope. He looked on through the ages, through the long period of Israel’s unbelief and banishment, to the great restoration that is to come, when they shall look on him whom they have pierced, and mourn for him; “and so all Israel shall be saved” (Rom 11:26).
LESSONS.
1. As a man lives, so, as a rule, he will die. “Remember thy Creator in the days of thy youth.”
2. Sin leads on to sin, guilt to yet deeper guilt. Take heed betimes.
3. The Lord weeps over the hard hearted. “There is joy in heaven over one sinner that repenteth.” May he soften our hearts and give us true repentance!
HOMILIES BY W.F. ADENEY
Mat 23:4
Needless burdens.
The faults of the scribes and Pharisees were not confined to their own private lives. Not only were they formal and unreal themselves, and blameworthy on that account; they were harsh and tyrannical in their treatment of the people. They showed their sanctity in constructing an artificial standard of holiness for other persons to follow. This is a not uncommon fault of professional religionists, and it leads to the imposition of needless burdens of many forms.
I. THE CREATION OF NEEDLESS BURDENS.
1. Their character. These burdens are of various kinds.
(1) Vexatious observances. Rites of religion have been multiplied and elaborated, until, ceasing to serve their true end as instruments of devotion, they have checked the worship they could not sustain.
(2) Difficult doctrines. Notions which were not involved in the scriptural revelation have been added by speculation and handed down by tradition, and belief in them insisted on as essential to salvation.
(3) Fancied duties. An unwholesome casuistry, which neglected the weightier matters of the Law, has been busy in multiplying the petty details of correct conduct.
2. Their origin. These needless burdens were not imposed by God. He is reasonable and merciful. We must look lower for their origin.
(1) From men. Without any Divine authority, though insolently claiming that authority, men have assumed to bind needless burdens on their fellows.
(2) In hypocrisy. The authors of the burdens would not so much as move them with their finger. Inwardly lax, they were externally rigorous. Hypocrites lack the grace of Christian charity.
II. THE CREATION OF NEEDLESS BURDENS. This is one of Christ’s happy works.
1. The grounds of the removal of them.
(1) Their needlessness. Christ is practical. He is too real to tolerate artificialities in religion.
(2) Their oppression. The sympathy of Christ was called forth, and his indignation was roused as he saw simple folks tyrannized over by hypocrites.
(3) Their hindrance of necessary duty. Jesus did not desire to see a lax style of living. He himself brought high claims and made great demandsonce bidding a rich young man renounce the whole of his wealth (Mar 10:21). Needless burdens would distract the attention and absorb the energy of people to the neglect of important duties. While they are given up to the pursuit of little, insignificant, useless performances, they forget and omit great and weighty obligations.
2. The method of their removal.
(1) On the authority of Christ. He has a right to direct our conduct. Let us go to him and not to man for our “Christian Directory.”
(2) By the exposure of the character of the needless burdens. The timid conscience is often scrupulous, just in proportion to the smallness of the fancied duties with which it troubles itself. What it wants is a clear perception of the needlessness of its supposed obligations. Christ was daring in breaking bands which never should have been bound. He who receives the Spirit of Christ receives the Spirit of liberty.
(3) With the revelation of true duty. We are called to leave the slavery of law and of casuistry, that we may have power to accept the great obligations of Christian service; and the realization of these obligations is a means of attaining the desired liberty. They who have taken Christ’s yoke cannot allow themselves to be encumbered with the Pharisees’ burdens.W.F.A.
Mat 23:8-10
Christian equality.
Our Lord does not wish to see the distinctions of Judaism, which had become so odious in his day, repeated in Christianity. He does not desire the dogmatism of the rabbis to be copied by the Christian teachers, or the authority of the rulers to be transferred to the Christian pastors. He does not want his people to think that they can best show their humility by losing their self-respect and cringing before ecclesiastical superiors. In opposition to all such tendencies, he enunciates his principles of Christian equality.
I. THE NATURE OF CHRISTIAN EQUALITY. Christianity is essentially democratic. Jesus Christ was a Man of the people, the greatest Tribune of the people the world has ever seen. He took the side of the oppressed against their oppressors, that of the “dim multitude,” not that of the privileged few. His aim in this matter was to bring about a condition of brotherhood. There is a measure of inequality which no arrangements of men can set aside. One man is not always as good as another. People differ enormously in character, in ability, in energy. Therefore absolute equality is impossible. It is impossible according to the constitution of nature, and it is doubly impossible in face of the great variation of human conduct. But there is an equality to be striven for. The equality of Christian brotherhood is to be observed among Christians. Christ’s words do not directly apply to the larger society of mankind. This equality should involve an equivalent in religious privileges which are meant to be freely offered to all. It should discourage any artificial distinctions.
II. THE GROUNDS OF CHRISTIAN EQUALITY.
1. The Fatherhood of God. We have one Father in heaven, and undue deference to men in religion obscures the honour due to God.
2. The Lordship of Christ. This is the specifically Christian principle, while the former one is a general religious principle. The Church is not a republic; it is a kingdom with Christ as its Head. Christians are bound to see that they put no one in the place of Christ. He has direct dealings with each of his people. He wants no grand vizier, no local satrap, no intermediate lord. He is the Master of each individual Christian, and every one can go to him personally for instructions.
III. THE VIOLATION OF CHRISTIAN EQUALITY. The words of Christ are ominous of coming dangers. They have a profound significance in the light of subsequent events. It is wonderful that their plain meaning should have been so egregiously disregarded as to permit of the construction of a monstrous ecclesiastical hierarchy in one direction and the creation of a system of dogmatic orthodoxy in another. Forgetting Christ and the privilege of closest relationship with him, Christian people have bowed their necks to the tyranny of various ecclesiastical masters and theological fathers. Order requires the appointment of officers in the Church, and truth demands respect for knowledge and for the capacity to teach. But it is a mistake, a wrong to God and Christ, to show such deference to human authorities as shall be false to Christian liberty.W.F.A.
Mat 23:13
The woe of the hypocrites.
A most important part of the work of Christ was to expose the utterly false and worthless character of the venerated religious leaders of his day. It was a thankless task, one that brought odium on the head of its Author. A weaker man would have shrunk from it, and a less sensitive man might have enjoyed the humiliation it inflicted on his enemies. But Jesus was neither cowardly nor censorious. Therefore he rebuked the venerated religionists, and yet we know the necessity of doing so must have been most repulsive to him.
I. THE CHARACTER OF THE HYPOCRITES.
1. Speciously religious. There was an appearance of sanctity in the Pharisees and a pretence of orthodoxy in the scribes that won for both a reputation of religious superiority. The world has never been without persons of brilliant external appearances in religion, and these persons have always had “their reward” (Mat 6:2).
2. Inwardly false. Our Lord saw that the religion was unreal, that it was only worn as a garment for show. This is the characteristic of the hypocrite. He is more than a pretender; he is consciously false to his pretences; he is a living lie.
3. Acting a part. The hypocrite is an actor. He dresses his character and poses so as to win the admiration of other people. His very course in life is planned and carried out with a theatrical intention. This intention is the explanation of the glaring contradiction between the mask and the real countenance.
II. THE WICKEDNESS OF THE HYPOCRITES. This is twofold.
1. The hindrance of others. The scribes and Pharisees prevented simpler people from entering the kingdom of heaven. This they did partly by confusing their minds with false notions, and partly by discouraging their efforts in setting before them vexatious precepts and needless, impossible requirements. It is a mark of hypocrisy to represent religion as a very difficult attainment, and to lay claim to superior sanctity by the easy method of setting up a high, or rather a false and unattainable, standard for other people.
2. Their own failure. These hypocrites behaved like the dog in the manger. Their harshness to other people did not help their own cause. No one enters the kingdom of heaven by keeping other people out of it. Religious selfishness is doomed to disappointment.
III. THE DOOM OF THE HYPOCRITES.
1. Its exposure. For a time these people live in honour, and their skilful arts of deception seem to secure them against any discovery of their hollow and unreal characters. But this calm security cannot last long. Even if it is maintained till the end of the present life, it must vanish like smoke in the great apocalypse of the future judgment. God knows all from the beginning, and if he does not at once reveal the wicked falsehood, it cannot be because this ever imposes upon him. In his own time he will unveil it.
2. Its punishment. God hates lies, and he is angry against those who put stumbling blocks in the way of children and humble persons (Mat 18:6, Mat 18:7). The hypocrites who are guilty of both of these faults are doubly culpable in the sight of Heaven. Their condemnation is just.W.F.A.
Mat 23:24
The gnat and the camel.
It was characteristic of the scribes and Pharisees to strain out the gnat and yet to swallow the camel. They would be very careful in avoiding minute formal improprieties, while they committed great sins without compunction.
I. THE EVIL HAUNT. This is seen in many forms today.
1. In moral conduct. People are found to be very scrupulous about points of politeness, and very negligent of real kindness. They will not offend an acquaintance with a harsh phrase, and yet they will ruin him if they can outwit him in a business transaction. There are persons of strict Puritanism, who forbid even innocent forms of amusement for their children, and yet who are self-indulgent, ill-tempered, uncharitable, and covetous. Such people swallow many a huge camel, while sedulously straining the gnats out of their children’s cup of pleasure.
2. In religious observances. The greatest care is taken for the correct observance of ritual, while the spirit of devotion is neglected; a rigid standard of orthodoxy is insisted on, but living faith is neglected; a punctual performance of Church ordinances is accompanied by a total disregard for the will of God and the obligations of obedience.
II. THE SOURCE OF THIS HABIT.
1. Hypocrisy. This was the source in the case of the scribes and Pharisees, as our Lord himself indicated. It is easier to attend to minutiae of conduct than to be right in the great fundamental principles; to rectify these a resolution, a regeneration of character, is required; but to set the superficial details in a certain state of decency and order involves no such serious change. Moreover, the little superficial points are obvious to all people, and, like Chinese puzzles, challenge admiration on account of their very minuteness.
2. Small-mindedness. In some cases there may be no conscious hypocrisy. But a littleness of thinking and acting has dwarfed the whole area of observation. The small soul is able to see the gnat, but it cannot even perceive the existence of the camel. It is so busy with the fussy trivialities on which it prides itself, that it has no power left to attend to weightier matters.
III. THE CURE OF THE HABIT.
1. By the revelation of its existence. When the foolish thing is done in all simplicity and good faith, it only needs to be seen to be rejected. When it is the fruit of sheer hypocrisy, the exposure of it will, of course, make it clear that the performance will no longer win the plaudits of the crowd; and then, as there will be no motive to continue in it, the actor will lay his part aside. But this does not imply a real cure. For that we must go further.
2. By the gift of a larger life. We are all of us more or less cramped by our own pettiness, and just in proportion as we are self-centred and self-contained shall we give attention to small things. We want to be lifted out of ourselves, we need the awakening of our higher spiritual powers. It is the object of Christ to effect this grand change. When he takes possession of the soul he sets all things in their true light. Then we can strive for great objects, fight great sins, win great victories, and forget the gnats in the magnitude of the camels.W.F.A.
Mat 23:29
Building the tombs of the prophets.
In the rather vulgar architectural restoration which went on during the days of the Herods, it might often be seen that old, venerated, but ruinous tombs were being rebuilt and decorated afresh. The process was significant of behaviour which is often repeated in other places and in other ages.
I. GOOD MEN, ILL TREATED DURING THEIR LIFETIME, ARE HONOURED AFTER THEIR DEATH. The world venerates its own martyrs. In course of time, it comes to lavish extravagant honours on the men whom it treated as the very scum of the earth during their lifetime. Most conspicuous has this been in the case of Jesus Christ himselfdespised, rejected, insulted, crucified while on earth, yet now at least respected, even by those who have not learnt to love him. No doubt this admits of explanation. There are characters which men do not quickly understand or appreciate. A life is not complete until it is finished, and the whole meaning of it cannot be read until we can see it as a whole. A great man is in advance of his age, and only the later age, which has been in some measure educated up to him by the very influence of his life and teaching, is in a position to comprehend him. But while all this is natural, it is not the less unfortunate. What is the use of honours heaped on the grave of the silent dead? The laurels we pile on their tombs cannot bring joy to those who are no longer with us. There is a grim irony in the common custom of waiting for their death before recognizing the merits of the best men. The applause that, bursts out so rapturously after they have left the stage is of no comfort to them now. It would have been better to have shown them more kindness during their lifetime. In homelier regions much heartbreaking might be spared, and many bitter regrets avoided, if we would take care to show the affection and forbearance for our dear ones in their lifetime which we shall vainly yearn to render them when it is too late.
II. THEY WHO HONOUR THE DEAD MAY BE UNGENEROUS TO THE LIVING. The Jews venerated their ancient prophets, and yet they persecuted contemporary prophets. The very qualities which made the great dead so glorious in their eyes were seen in John the Baptist and Jesus, only to be treated with contempt or even with anger. In the Christian Church it has been the fashion to look back with semi-adoration on “the Fathers;” but possibly men as good and great have been living in our own day. Descendants of the Puritans, who were the champions of freedom a century or two ago, have been most repressive towards those who have inherited the liberty-loving spirit of the Puritans. But in commemorating the deeds of Christian heroism of the past, we condemn ourselves if we will not give every encouragement to the true heroes of the present. Now it must never be forgotten that the prophets were unpopular in their day; that they protested against prevalent beliefs and fashionable practices; that they denounced the sins of social and religious leaders. The disposition to honour such men should justify itself by allowing a larger liberty to the advanced thinkers and the earnest reformers of our own times.W.F.A.
Mat 23:37
The lament over Jerusalem.
These are among the most touching words ever uttered by our Lord. They reveal his strong patriotism, his deep human affection, the greatness of the salvation he brought, and at the same time the frustration of the hopes which these things naturally raise, owing to the stubborn self-will of the Jews. Here is a lesson for all time.
I. THE GUILTY CITY.
1. No city was more privileged. Jerusalem was the favoured city of a favoured land. David, the great singer, celebrated her praises; David, the great king, raised her fortunes. But better than royal fame was her religious glory. Great prophets, such as Isaiah and Jeremiah, taught in her streets. More than once signal Divine providences helped her in direst necessity. Here was the temple of the Divine Presence. Finally the city was honoured by the coming of Christ.
2. No city was more sinful. When account is taken of her privileges, Jerusalem excels in guilt as she excels in favour. The most favoured people prove to be the most ungrateful and rebellious. She murders her best friends. She crowns her guilt by delivering her Christ up to death.
II. THE PITYING SAVIOUR. Jesus is grieved and loth to think of the doom of the wicked city.
1. It was his own city. Not his native city, but the capital of his land, and the royal city, to which he came as King (Jer 21:4, Jer 21:5). Jesus was a patriot.
2. It was the city of God. Its ruin was like the ruin of God’s own daughter. They who have once known God touch the heart of Christ with peculiar compassion when they lose their happy privilege.
3. It was a doomed city. Already with prophetic eye Jesus saw the Roman legions compassing it about. It lay as the prey ready for the eagle. The heart of Jesus grieves over the sinner’s doom.
III. THE WONDERFUL SALVATION. By a homely and yet most touching illustration Jesus tells what he has longed to do for the city in its peril.
1. He comes to save. This is his great mission, and his salvation begins with “the house of Israel” (Mat 15:24).
2. He is able to save. Jesus speaks with the utmost confidence. He can save a whole city; nay, we know he can save a whole world. No doubt, if Jerusalem had accepted Christ and his teaching, the mad revolt which called down the vengeance of Rome would have been prevented. But in his deeper work, as our Lord has redeemed many of the worst profligates, he has shown himself able to save all men.
3. He offers to save. The pathos of this wonderful utterance of Jesus lies in his own heartfelt desire and its disappointment. With long suffering patience he repeats his often-rejected offer. He stands at the door, and knocks.
IV. THE FINAL DOOM. The house is to be left desolate at last.
1. There is an end to the opportunity for escape. This has lasted long. Many were the occasions when Jesus would have welcomed the people of Jerusalem, and have extended to them his saving grace. But at last the end has come. The day of grace must be followed by the day of judgment.
2. Even Christ‘s desire to save may be frustrated. It is not enough to know that he yearns to save. Men may be lost now, as Jerusalem was lost.
3. Obstinate rejection of Christ will lead to ruin. Man’s will may thus frustrate Christ’s desire. Note: It was not for stoning the prophets, but for rejecting Christ’s salvation, that Jerusalem was ultimately doomed. Christ can save from the worst sin; but none can be saved who wilfully reject him.W.F.A.
HOMILIES BY MARCUS DODS
Mat 23:2-33
Pharisees and Sadducees.
The Pharisees first appear under this name in Jewish history about the year B.C. 160. There had been Separatists, or Puritans, as far back as the Captivity, but it was alter the return to Palestine that events gave an impulse to the Separatist idea so strong as to consolidate what might otherwise have remained a tendency. The Jews had learned the value of commerce, and it was found impossible, in dealing with foreign merchants, to observe the minute regulations prescribed by the more zealous. The minority, who even pretended to this, were obliged to become Separatists, not only from the Gentiles, but from their own less scrupulous coreligionists. Hence their frequent connection with the scribes. There had always been scribes in Israel, men who could draw state or legal documents. But after the influence of Ezra had stimulated, if it had not created, a desire to know the Law, synagogues were to be found in every town. And a synagogue implied a copy of the Law and a person who could read it. The scribes therefore necessarily became a profession, with just such a curriculum for pupils and candidates as distinguish professions among ourselves. It was inevitable that they should acquire great influence among the people. For in their best days they were the guardians of the Law, and strove unceasingly to make it supreme over every act of every person. Not only did the scribe discharge all the functions of a modern lawyer, but he was appealed to in all circumstances where the application of the law might seem obscure. They were both the makers of the law and its administrators, and they did not scruple, sitting apart; from active life, to enforce on men engaged in it all the wire drawn and fantastic distinctions which their minds, imbecile with attention to the letter of the Law and with unpractical pedantry, could contrive. It was this inconsiderate exercise of their authority which provoked our Lord’s rebuke. But burdensome as was the teaching of the scribes, two causes operated to make them the most popular members of the community.
1. To them was committed the key of the kingdom of heaven; they had power to bind and loosethey alone could give a man assurance that he had actually attained to the righteousness required by the Law.
2. The people were at one with them in their grand aim to give the Law absolute sway over the life of every Jew. The Pharisees who did live as the scribes enjoined, were in the eyes of the people the true Israel, the pattern Jews. The scribes and Pharisees, then, though not identical, were closely related, so closely that our Lord subjects them to one common rebuke. The Zealots, who repudiated any king but Jehovah, and refused to pay tribute to Caesar, were the natural result of Pharisaic teaching. And indeed the Pharisees did themselves refuse to swear allegiance to Herod. They may be looked on, therefore, as the national party. Their influence was not solely and throughout evil, for to them and to the scribes was due the knowledge of the Law to which our Lord so often appealed. But the grave defects of their teaching, and its ruinous influences on the religious character, are so distinctly enounced in the Gospels that they need not be dwelt on. The origin of the Sadducees explains their position in the state. It is generally agreed that they take their name from Zadok, who was elevated to the high priesthood by Solomon. It was the same line which inherited the office after the Exile, and through all the changes in the Hebrew state the high priests maintained great influence, and in our Lord’s time we find them still sitting as presidents in the highest court, the Sanhedrin. Still, also, there were grouped round them the Sadducees! It was to this party that men of wealth, men in office, and men of pure priestly descent, attached themselves, although many of the priests leant more to the Pharisees. They lived in luxury, and their morality was not high. At the same time, whether from envy of the popularity of the Pharisees, or from common sense, they resisted the Pharisaic additions to the Law. Thus they refused to accept the doctrine of the resurrection, not being able to find it in the Books of Moses. They are rarely mentioned in the Gospels, because they were mostly in Jerusalem, and their ideas had found no acceptance with the people. From the leaven of Pharisaism, or ultra-legalism, three mischievous results follow.
1. The minute regulations which are extended to the whole of life leave no room for conscience to exercise itself, and accordingly it pines and dies.
2. Minute observances obtain a magnified importance.
3. The bare performance of the duty enjoined is reckoned everything, while the state of heart is overlooked. We shall escape the leaven of the Pharisee if we learn to pay more attention to the heart than to the conduct; if we have so true a delight in pleasing the Lord that we do not consider what men think of us. The leaven of the Sadducees is perhaps even more certainly fatal to true religion. The Pharisee has sincerity, though it is quite superficial; he has zeal, though misdirected; but the Sadducee has neither. He is all for this world, and, save to forward him in it, religion is an encumbrance. His heart is not gladdened with any loving thoughts of God, nor his spirit refreshed by fellowship with the unseen world. If we escape these influences we shall do what few have done. For all men are under the temptation either to make too much of the observances of religion or to make them a mere form. Worldliness deadens a man’s spirit to spiritual impressions, and gradually saps his faith till he ceases to believe in anything but the palpable world with which he has now to do. On the other hand, if the leaven of the Pharisee prevails to the extent of making us fear God more than we love him, and do by constraint what we ought to do because we delight in it, we are in as unwholesome a state as the Sadducee we reprobate.D.
HOMILIES BY J.A. MACDONALD
Mat 23:1-12
Ethics of authority.
After Jesus had put the Jewish sectaries to silence, he addressed his disciples and the people, who had witnessed his encounters, as to how they should deport themselves in respect to the scribes and Pharisees.
I. SECULAR AUTHORITY SHOULD BE RESPECTED.
1. Jewish magistrates were to be obeyed.
(1) “The scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses’seat.” Moses is figuratively represented as then still sitting to deliver his oracles (cf. Act 15:21). Note here the lessons of posthumous influence.
(2) The Law of Moses was the municipal law of the state. The scribes and Pharisees, being members of the Sanhedrin and inferior councils, “sat in Moses’seat,” viz. as magistrates. As expounders of the municipal law, they did not travel out of their depth, and were therein sufficiently learned to give them weight and reputation.
(3) Evil men occupy good places. The seat of Moses must not be overturned because its occupants dishonour it. It must rather be upheld to make them ashamed.
2. Pagan rulers are to be obeyed.
(1) Any regular government is better than none. The tyranny of a monarch is more tolerable than the anarchy of a mob.
(2) Christ submitted to the rule of Caesar, and to that of the inferior Roman magistrates. This he did purely for our example.
(3) His inspired apostles encouraged obedience to existing authorities as being “ordained of God.” They were therefore to be held in reverence. They were to be supported. Taxes were to be paid to them. Prayer was to be made for them.
II. THE EXAMPLE OF EVIL RULERS MUST BE AVOIDED.
1. As inconsistent teachers.
(1) The scribes and Pharisees did not fill the chair of Moses as theologians with the sanction of Christ. On the contrary, he showed that they made void the Law by their traditions. He warned his followers to beware of their doctrine (see Mat 16:6).
(2) They might be obeyed in what they read from the Law and the prophets. The “therefore” limits the application of the “all things whatsoever” to precepts of inspiration as distinct from the traditions of the elders. We may not reject sound teaching because of the unworthiness of the teacher.
(3) Yet must we be suspicious of the teaching of the wicked. People must be warned of wolves and dogs and deceitful workers (cf. Act 20:29, Act 20:30; Php 3:2; 2Co 11:13).
2. As inconsistent workers.
(1) “They say, and do not.” The study of the hypocrite is to seem religious in the sight of men, rather than to be religions in the sight of God.
(2) They would aggravate the burden of the Law, which was sufficient in itself (see Act 15:10), by the addition of traditional imposts.
(3) The burden they imposed upon the people they would not touch with a finger themselves. They were the priests who fasted upon wine and sweetmeats, while they forced the people to fast upon bread and water!
(4) How different the example of Christ, who took upon himself our heaviest burden, to make all easy for his people!
3. As examples of pride and ostentation.
(1) The scribes and Pharisees literally interpreted Exo 13:16 and Deu 6:8, and wore scrolls of paper or parchment with texts of Scripture written on them, bound round their wrists and foreheads. The fringes on their garments, which God enjoined upon the Israelites to remind them of doing all the commandments (see Num 15:38), they wore broader and longer than other men. They paraded their piety “at feasts,” and “in synagogues” and “in markets,” where they might be seen.
(2) In all this ostentation there was superstition. They looked upon their phylacteries as preservatives in the sense of amulets.
(3) Such aspirants must be jealousy watched. “Mark and Luke have selected from our Lord’s discourses, handed down in full in Matthew, the sins of pride, avarice, and hypocrisy, as those most suited to show why they should ‘beware of the scribes'” (Harmer).
III. CHRIST MUST BE EXALTED EVERMORE.
1. By refusing the arrogance of his enemies.
(1) The scribes and Pharisees would set aside the claims of Christ. They affected to be called “Rabbi,” “Father,” “Master,” in an unwarrantable sense. The Talmud pretends that “King Jehoshaphat used to salute the wise men with the titles, Father, Father; Rabbi, Rabbi; Master, Master!” This claim purported that, as the “wise men,” they should be implicitly believed in what they affirmed, without asking any further question. It purported, moreover, that they should be implicitly obeyed in what they enjoined without seeking further authority.
(2) But here they must be resisted. The Christian has but one infallible Teacher. So has he but one absolute Fatherthe heavenly. So has he but one supreme MasterChrist. None but Christ has ever fully illustrated his doctrine in his life.
2. By cultivating true humility.
(1) In this is Christian greatness. Love is greatness. The heart is at once the most important and most laborious organ; the servant, yet the ruler of all. Self-love is purified and dignified by being subordinated to the love of God and our neighbour.
(2) The Christian will not exalt himself. He must not covet the titles affected by the scribes, nor must he assume the authority and dominion implied in these names. When self-love is exalted, self itself becomes abased.
(3) The Christian will not unduly exalt his fellow. “All ye are brethren.” Ministers are to each other brethren. They are brethren to the people. Christ himself is the “Firstborn among many brethren” (Rom 8:29). What an example to his disciples!
(4) The Christian loses himself in exalting Christ. “Call no man,” etc., i.e. ascribe infallibility to none (see 1Co 3:5, 1Co 3:6). The whole passage (verses 3-7), like Mat 20:25, may justly be regarded as a prophecy and warning to the Christian Church. “Among Christians there is none to sit in Christ’s seat” (Alford). It was George Herbert’s habit, when he mentioned the name of Christ, to add, “my Master.”
3. Christ will abase the proud, and exalt the humble.
(1) “Whosoever shall exalt himself shall be humbled.” “All the world cannot exalt a proud man, because God will pull him down” (Anon.).
(2) “Whosoever shall humble himself shall be exalted.” No sentence of our Lord’s is so often repeated. It occurs in the evangelists, with little variation, at least ten times. Pride is as natural to man as it is hateful to God.
(3) “Honour is like the shadow, that flees from those who pursue it, but follows those who flee from it” (Henry).J.A.M.
Mat 23:13-15
The credit of the Church.
The Church of God is a unity throughout the ages. It is more proper to speak of the Christian dispensation of the Church than of the Christian Church as opposed to the Jewish. This unity exists, not only through the ages, but also throughout the universe. While its headquarters are in heaven, there has ever been a visible representation upon the earth. This is sometimes called “the Church;” in the Gospels it is distinguished as “the kingdom of heaven.” In this sense we now speak of it. Note, then
I. THAT THE CHURCH IS TROUBLED BY THE INTRUSION OF HYPOCRITES.
1. They enter it for selfish ends.
(1) What care the hypocrites for God’s glory? They are simply stage players in religion.
(2) They affect the glory of human applause. They transfer to themselves what should be given to God.
(3) By pretending to extraordinary piety, they insinuate themselves into the confidence of unprotected and unsuspecting persons, to rob them of their property (cf. 2Ti 3:6; Tit 1:11). The extreme of avarice is to devour the house of the widow, who should be specially spared (cf. Exo 22:22, Exo 22:23; Pro 15:25; Isa 10:1, Isa 10:2). “While they seemed to soar heavenward upon the wings of prayer, their eye, like the kite’s, was all the while upon their prey on the earth, some widow’s house” (Henry).
(4) Some think it probable that the scribes and Pharisees sold their “long prayers,” as the Romish priests sell their Masses. Through sympathy for their deceased husbands, widows might fall easy victims to the avarice of those who “make merchandise of souls.”
2. In it they are obstructive to good.
(1) The scribes and Pharisees would not enter the kingdom themselves. They did not use “the key of knowledge” to see what Scripture said about Messiah.
(a) In Jacob’s departing sceptre of Judah.
(b) In Moses’ Prophet.
(c) In Daniel’s weeks. They shut their eyes.
(2) They hindered those who were entering. The people were on the point of entering into the privileges of the new dispensation preached by John Baptist and Jesus, but were hindered by the scribes and Pharisees.
(a) They were hindered by their example (see Joh 7:48).
(b) By their doctrine, in cavilling against Christ (see Mat 12:24; Joh 9:16).
(c) By their authority, in the threat of excommunication (see Joh 9:22).
(d) Therefore only the violent could force an entrance into the kingdom (see Mat 11:12; Luk 16:16).
3. They promoted evil.
(1) They were infernally zealous. They spared no pains to make proselytes, not, however, with a view to benefit them, but for sectarian ostentation. For the scribes and Pharisees made proselytes to the schools of particular rabbins.
(2) Their victims they made even more the sons of hell than themselves. Note:
(a) Hypocrisy is itself the offspring of hell, for it originates with the “father of lies.”
(b) “Twofold more.” The Hellenist Jews, who were mostly proselytes, were the bitterest enemies of the apostles (see Act 13:45; Act 14:2, Act 14:19; Act 17:5; Act 18:6). Truth falsified is worse than simple falsity. Half-truths are the most vicious lies.
(c) The proselytes were trained by the Pharisees in wicked sophistry, which palliated vice and substituted ceremony for piety. They were also taught to practise evil with less remorse and greater subtlety than they had been accustomed to in their former condition.
II. THAT IT IS UNFAIRLY CHARGED WITH THEIR VICES.
1. Unbelief seeks to fasten their scandal upon it.
(1) Sons of Belial are never weary of denouncing the hypocrisy of the Church. If they can find any rascality in a professor of religion, they cry exultingly, “There’s your Christianity!”
(2) They delight in favourably contrasting themselves with the hypocrites of the Church. What is more common than for sons of Belial to say, “I don’t profess to be religious, but I am better than many of your Christians”?
2. But this is manifestly unfair.
(1) Christ does not recognize hypocrites as Christians. On the contrary, he repudiates them with the strongest abhorrence.
(2) They are only tolerated in the Church because of the difficulty of finding them out. For want of infallible judgment, the tares have to grow with the wheat until the harvest.
(3) Hypocrites are not Christians. The “hypocrisy of the Church” is a misnomer. There is a clear distinction between the true members of the Church and those hypocrites who intrude into its visible corporation. In all fairness this should be recognized.
(4) Instead of contrasting themselves with hypocrites, let them compare themselves with Christ, and see then where they stand in the judgment.
(5) Let them compare themselves with the Christ-like. These are the only true Christians, the only true Church membersmembers approved by its laws, and permanently belonging to its corporation. Hypocrites are neither.
III. GOD WILL VINDICATE THE CREDIT OF HIS CHURCH.
1. By separating the hypocrites from it.
(1) They fairly belong to the world. Their spirit is of the world.
(2) Their connection with the Church is unnatural. It is like themselves, a deception.
(3) Their connection with the Church is transient. Like the tares among the wheat, the bad fish among the good in the net, the goats among the sheep, in the final judgment.
2. By dooming them to perdition.
(1) Hypocrites will be found with worldlings in the damnation of hell. Let the sons of Belial, then, contrast themselves with their own if they will. They will scarcely call the hypocrites Christians in damnation.
(2) The greater damnation. Note:
(a) There are degrees of damnation
(b) Pretences of religion will aggravate the torments of the lost.
(c) The gospel curses are the sorer (cf. Heb 10:29).
Who can entreat for him against whom the great Intercessor pleads? A “woe” from Christ has no remedy. No such wrath as that of the Lamb! “Three woes are made to look very dreadful (Rev 8:13-9:12); but here are eight woes, in opposition to the eight Beatitudes (Mat 5:4)” (Henry).
3. By rebuking their accomplices. The open sinner is an accomplice with the very hypocrite he affects to scorn, in rejecting and crucifying the Just One. All sinners will have “their portion with the hypocrites” (see Mat 24:51).J.A.M.
Mat 23:16-22
Swearing.
From the doings of the scribes and Pharisees the Lord passes to their teaching; and he commences with their refinement in respect to oaths. There is no reference here to judicial swearing, or deposing upon oath before a magistrate in the interests of public justice. The whole argument goes to show that the swearing here referred to is the voluntary and gratuitous.
I. SWEARING ORIGINATES IN FALSEHOOD.
1. Simple assertion, is the sufficient bond of a true man.
(1) By volunteering more, a man reflects upon his own honour, tie that will not trifle with his word has no need to swear.
(2) By requiring more, he reflects upon the character of his neighbour.
(3) An oath is no increased guarantee for truth. He that can trifle with his word will trifle with an oath.
2. More than affirmation is from an evil source.
(1) It comes from the spirit of falsehood. This is the spirit of the devil. He is the father of lies.
(2) The spirit of falsehood will make lies as black as possible by calling in sacred things to witness them.
II. IT TENDS TO EQUIVOCATION.
1. The Pharisees invented evasive distinctions.
(1) “An oath for confirmation is the end of all strife,” because it is an appeal to God as witness to the truth.
(2) But the Pharisees made it “nothing,” i.e. the oath has no force, or may be violated with impunity, to swear by the temple, provided the gold of the temple was left out of the question. So they made it “nothing” to swear by the altar, provided the gift upon the altar was excepted. Thus their swearing tended to lying.
2. These distinctions were false in fact.
(1) They inverted the order of importance. They preferred the gifts to the altar, and the gold to the temple. They preferred their own righteousness to the righteousness of God, in holding their gifts to be of greater consequence than God’s appointment.
(2) The altar which sanctifies the gift is greater than the gift; so for the same reason is the temple greater than the gold. Note: Gold that touches the altar is more than gold, for it is consecrated to the Divine service. Things are great in proportion to their sacredness. Therefore seek first the kingdom of God.
(3) The value of material things is determined by their uses. A fortune coming to a sot is but a death warrant to him.
3. They are demoralizing.
(1) The object of attaching superior sanctity to the gifts of the altar and gold of the temple treasury was to heighten the idea of meritoriousness in presenting them.
(2) The scribes and Pharisees also probably derived pecuniary advantage from those gifts.
III. IT INJURES REVERENCE.
1. It is a breach of the commandments.
(1) It offends against the first and second. An oath is an appeal to God; to make this appeal to a creature is to put that creature in his place (see Deu 6:13). To swear by anything lower than God is to set aside the Author of truth and faith in favour of a creature.
(2) It offends against the third. It vulgarizes the most sacred things. Too much familiarity with them brings them into contempt. This is an offence which God will not lightly pass over (see Exo 20:7).
2. It is a violation of the gospel law.
(1) Our Lord is most emphatic in his inhibition of swearing (see Mat 5:33-37).
(2) Swearing is now, therefore, no longer a thing sacred, but, on the contrary, most profane.
IV. IT DECEIVES AND ENSNARES.
1. The guides are blind.
(1) It is bad when the leaders of the people cause them to err (see Isa 9:16; Isa 56:10). It is bad for the people. When the conscience, by casuistry, is made the ally of vice, the condition of the dupe is hopeless.
(2) If it is bad for the people, it is worse for the guides. Their blindness is worse than ignorance. It is the blindness of a wilful, perverting casuistry.
(3) However keen sighted a man may be about his temporal interests, he is blind indeed if he be unable to discern what concerns his eternal welfare.
2. But God is not deceived.
(1) He will be no party to the fictitious distinctions of men by which they would fain release themselves from the obligation of their oaths. He holds the swearer by the temple to swear by the God of the temple.
(2) “By him that dwetleth,” perhaps dwelt, in allusion to the Shechinah, which was the chief glory of the temple once, but was then wanting in the second temple. Taken in the present, the temple with the Shechinah was the body of Christ (see Joh 2:21). This is the greatest and most durable of templesthe “house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.” Note: Every Christian is a living temple; so common things are sanctified. to him (cf. 1Co 7:14; Tit 1:15).
(3) “By all things thereon.” The substitution of this phrase here for the gold suggests a reference to the sacred fire, and to the ministration of the priests. Appurtenances pass with the principal (cf. Psa 26:6; Psa 43:4).
(4) All forms of oaths are by God reduced to the true intent of an oath. A man should never take advantage of his own fault. God will be his own witness, and will make the swearer answerable for his oaths.J.A.M.
Mat 23:23, Mat 23:24
Monstrous trifling.
Our Lord proceeds to pronounce upon the hypocrite the woe of his other evils. Note
I. THE LAW HAS ITS “WEIGHTIER MATTERS.”
1. These are its moral precepts.
(1) “Judgment.” This implies:
(a) Justice in principle.
(b) Justice in practice.
(2) “Mercy.” This must harmonize with justice. The gospel gloriously brings out this harmony.
(3) “Faith.” This implies:
(a) Faith in the sense of creed, or truth in belief. A true creed is of great importance.
(b) Faith in the sense of sincerity, in opposition to the hypocrisy of the Pharisees. Those called hypocrites are otherwise described as unbelievers (cf. Mat 24:51; Luk 12:46; 1Ti 4:2, 1Ti 4:3).
(c) Faith in the sense of fidelity or faithfulness, viz. to God first, then also to man (cf. Mic 6:8; Luk 11:42).
(4) There must be the judgment of intelligence in the understanding; the mercy of love in the heart; the works of faith or truth in the life.
2. Its ceremonies are for the sake of its morals.
(1) Distinction in animals, clean and unclean, was to show the differences between good and bad men.
(2) Distinction in meats was to teach discrimination in fellowships.
(3) Laws respecting the treatment of creatures was to show how men should be treated. “Doth God take care for oxen?” (cf. Deu 25:4; 1Co 9:9; 1Ti 5:18). They that are taught in the Word, and do not communicate to them that teach themloving a cheap gospelcome short of the Pharisee, who tithed pot herbs.
(4) Purifications which terminated in the flesh taught the need of the “answer of a good conscience toward God.”
II. THE HYPOCRITE INVERTS GOD‘S ORDER.
1. He is punctilious to trifles.
(1) He is scrupulous to the tithing of mint, dill, rue, cummin (see Le Mat 27:30). The Talmud says, “The tithing of corn is from the Law; the tithing of herbs is from the rabbins.” He will “strain out the gnat.” The stricter Jews were extremely particular in straining their liquors before drinking, lest they should inadvertently swallow some unclean insect, and so be defiled. The wine-gnat is easily caught in a strainer.
(2) Scrupulousness in the abstract is not blameworthy. “These things ought ye to have done.” Eminent virtue may display itself in the smallest matters. The morality is imperfect that neglects detail.
2. He misses important things.
(1) The scrupulous Pharisee, in his minute attention to the letter, missed the spirit of the Law, which was of far greater importance. The gnat and the camel are both unclean, though of very different magnitude. The Pharisee was scrupulous over the ceremonial, unscrupulous as to the moralthe greater. He unblushingly practised the greatest iniquities. The Law is fulfilled more in the spirit than in the letter. The gospel is the spirit of the Law.
(2) We strain out the gnat and swallow the camel when we are scrupulous about trifling errors and unscrupulous about great evils. The Pharisee is like the customer that is punctual in paying small debts that he may get deeper into the tradesman’s books and defraud him of a greater sum. They swallowed the camel when they gave Judas the price of innocent blood; they strained out the gnat when they scrupled to put the money in the treasury (Mat 26:6).
(3) Things should be taken in God’s order, which is the order of their importance. The things of God come before those of men (see Mat 16:23). Those only who attend to the “weightier matters” are qualified to judge as to the lighter ones. The formal may exclude the essential, but the essential does not exclude the formal. There may be piety without religion; there cannot be religion without piety.J.A.M.
Mat 23:25-28
Fatal blindness.
Our Lord continues to denounce woes against hypocrites, both for what they do and for what they are. The relation between doing and being is constant. These things are written for our learning.
I. THE HYPOCRITE IS WOEFULLY GUILTY.
1. He is guilty of heart wickedness.
(1) Under the utmost ceremonial strictness, like the garnished tomb enclosing “dead men’s bones and all uncleanness,” is concealed the greatest moral laxity. Thus
“Nature, like a beauteous wall,
Doth oft close in pollution.”
(Shakespeare.)
(2) As an adorned tomb is but the garniture of death and corruption, so is the external sanctity of the Pharisee in disgusting contrast to his inward turpitude.
(3) The meat and drink in the platter and cup, externally so scrupulously cleansed, are the nourishment and refreshment of the hypocrite. His luxuries are procured by means nefarious and corrupt (see Mat 23:14). The hypocrite is selfish to cruelty.
(4) The nourishment and refreshment of the Pharisee is, in the estimation of Christ, filth and poison. Luxury punishes fraud, feeding disease with fruits of injustice. The disease and death thus nourished are moral more than physical.
2. He is guilty of deceiving others.
(1) The cleansed outside of the cup and platter, and the whiting on the sepulchre, are intended to be seen; and so is the piety of the hypocrite. The purpose is to divert attention from the filth and rottenness within.
(2) The success is often too well assured. Man surveys surfaces. His vision does not search substances. To do this requires experiment which he is too lazy to institute.
(3) Hence the professed belief in human nature.
(a) Unconverted men must be hypocrites to be endured. Society would be intolerable but for its veneer.
(b) The children of nature are readily deceived in a world of hypocrites. Their pride and self-conceit leads them to credit themselves with virtues; and the Pharisee deceives them.
(c) But that religious persons should “believe in human nature” only shows how successfully the hypocrite may even “deceive the very elect.”
(d) The believers in human nature are liable to trust in it instead of Christ for their salvation, and perish in their delusion.
3. He is guilty of insulting God.
(1) He ignores God. While he strives after the praise of men, he leaves God out of the account. Is God to be treated as nobody with impunity!
(2) He degrades God. Affecting the praise of men rather than the praise of God, he treats the Creator as inferior to his creatures. Will this insolence be endured forever?
(3) As the whitening of the sepulchre was intended to warn passengers to avoid its defiling contact, so should the sham piety of the Pharisee warn honest men away from the sphere of his moral infection (see Luk 11:44).
(4) Let the sinner be alarmed at the formidableness of the impending woe. Let him repent, amend, and sue for mercy.
II. THE HYPOCRITE IS CRIMINALLY BLIND.
1. God requires truth in the heart.
(1) He is himself essentially holy. This means that his nature must repel from him everything that is unholy. God must needs wage eternal war against sin.
(2) But his grace has made possible his reconciliation to the sinner.
(a) In the provision of the atonement.
(b) In the gift of the Holy Spirit.
(c) Through faith the righteousness of the Law may not only become “imputed to us,” but also “fulfilled in us.”
(3) The life will be holy when the heart is clean. “The heart may be a temple of God or a grave; a heaven or a hell” (Slier). The cleansing of the inside affects the outside, but not contrariwise. “Cleanse first the inside of the cup and of the platter, that the outside. thereof may become clean also.”
(4) There is a cleansing that is external even after the heart is clean. This our Lord evinced when he washed the feet of his disciples.
2. The hypocrite imposes upon himself.
(1) He is criminally blind to the folly that avoids those scandalous sins which would spoil his reputation with men, while he allows the heart wickedness which renders him odious to God (see Psa 5:9). Jesus saw the filth within the cup and platter, and the rottenness within the sepulchre.
(2) He is criminally blind to the fact that in imposing upon his fellows he does not impose upon his Maker. The same Jesus who showed the Pharisee the extortion and excesses of the heart will show these things to him again in the day of woe.
(3) The hypocrite is criminally blind to the fact that the life is cleansed in the heart. Those only are externally clean who are inwardly pure. Christ views the profession in relation to the state of the heart. In this light he will judge the works of men at the last great day.J.A.M.
Mat 23:29-39
Judgment and mercy.
We come now to the eighth and last of this series of woes denounced by Christ against the wicked, which stands in striking contrast to the eighth and last of the Beatitudes (cf. Mat 5:10-12). Note
I. THAT INSTEAD OF THE FATHERS COME UP THE CHILDREN OF THE WICKED.
1. The fathers of the wicked were the persecutors of the good.
(1) The older Pharisees were guilty of the blood of the more ancient prophets. Rulers, civil and ecclesiastical alike, were persecutors. Note:
(a) Rulers are generally what the people will have them. “Like people. like priest” (cf. Isa 24:2; Jer 5:30, Jer 5:31; Hos 4:9).
(b) So contrariwise, people are demoralized by their rulers.
(2) They slew the righteous because of their righteousness. So it was in the case of Abel (cf. 1Jn 3:12). And for having reproved the iniquity of the people, Zechariah was slain by order of King Joash (see 2Ch 24:20, 2Ch 24:21).
2. The children of wickedness confess while they denounce their fathers.
(1) By building the tombs of the prophets, and garnishing the sepulchres of the righteous, the Pharisees disavowed the deeds of their fathers who had persecuted them. But this was precisely what their fathers did with the tombs of the prophets whom the grandfathers had slain. Note: It is a sign of a hypocrite to profess veneration for all good men excepting those among whom he lives.
(2) The cases of Abel and Zechariah are cited as belonging to a series destined to be continued. By sending his prophets and scribes, apostles and evangelists (cf. Mat 13:52; Luk 11:49), Jesus gave these hypocrites the opportunity to prove themselves by the very deeds they professed to abhor, the children of their wicked fathers. Accordingly, as he predicted, they “killed” the two Jameses; “crucified” Andrew and Peter; “stoned” Stephen and Paul; “scourged” Peter, John, and Paul; and others they “persecuted from city to city” (see Act 8:1; Act 9:2). Being the “offspring of vipers,” they were “serpents,” and, together with their fathers, the brood of the original serpent (cf. Mat 3:7; Mat 12:34; Joh 8:44). Note: The same providence of God is an opportunity for a man to prove himself a hero or a rascal.
(3) “Ye build,” etc. Note: Hypocrites incur guilt in matters not wrong in themselves. Building the sepulchres of the righteous is a cheap affectation of righteousness. The dead Pharisee was burying his dead when he honoured the dead messenger and dishonoured the living message.
II. THAT THE SINS OF AGES MAY BE VISITED UPON A SINGLE GENERATION.
1. Judgment is provoked by persistent impenitence.
(1) There is a measure of iniquity which provokes judgment. As when the “fourth” transgression is added to the third (see Amo 1:3, etc.).
(2) Wickedness may be so encouraged as to render repentance and reformation utterly hopeless (see Jer 13:23).
(3) Judgment is deferred until the measure of iniquity which provokes it is full (see Gen 15:16).
(4) The measure is full when that point is reached beyond which it is inconsistent with the character of a wise and righteous government, though founded in mercy, to extend impunity.
(5) He who commits any sin is partaker with all who have committed the same. So the iniquity of the fathers is visited upon their children.
2. Its severity follows in the wake of mercy.
(1) The hen clucking her chickens under her wing when the hawk is overhead is a fine figure to set forth the merciful protection which Jesus would extend to Jerusalem against the Roman eagle, did her children but know the day of their visitation (cf. Psa 91:4; Mal 4:2).
(2) That sinners are not gathered to Christ is owing wholly to their wickedness (of. Psa 81:11, Psa 81:12). “Fill ye up,” etc., is a word of permission, not a command; as if he had. said, “I contend with you no longer: I leave you to yourselves.”
(3) “The tears of Jesus are the last issues of defeated love, and tell sinners,” Thou hast despised my blood that would have saved thee; thou shalt yet have my tears that do only lament thee lost'” (Howe).
(4) Punishment equal to the accumulated woes brought upon men for resisting the truth and persecuting its preachers in all past ages, came upon this generation for putting to death One infinitely greater than all the prophets.
III. THAT A CHRISTLESS HORSE IS A WOEFUL DESOLATION.
1. So it proved in the days of the fathers.
(1) The blood of Zechariah, like that of Abel, cried for vengeance. The last words of Zechariah were, “The Lord see, and require it” (of. Gen 4:10; 2Ch 24:22).
(2) Vengeance came when “the host of Syria came to Judah and Jerusalem, and destroyed all the princes of the people from among the people.” A people deprived of princely rulersprincely in the moral senseis in a sorry case.
(3) But the temple was not desolated by the Babylonians until after the sins of the people had provoked God to take away the glory of his own blessed presence.
2. So it proved in the days of their children.
(1) As the blood of Jehoiada returned upon the head of his murderers in the Babylonian invasion, so did that of Jesus return upon their children in the Roman invasion.
(2) As the Babylonians did not demolish the first temple until after the Shechinah had abandoned it, so neither did the Romans destroy the second temple until after Jesus had left it.
(3) It is remarkable that, in leaving the temple, he followed the course indicated by the Shechinah (Eze 10:1-22.). It stood first upon the threshold. So did Jesus when he uttered his pathetic lamentation. Then it removed to the east of the city to the Mount of Olives. So did Jesus. From the Mount of Olives it ascended into heaven. After the ascension of Jesus came the abomination of desolation spoken of by the Prophet Daniel.
(4) “Your house.” So the temple is now termednot “God’s house” any longer (cf. Exo 32:7, where God says to Moses, “Thy people”). “Is left unto you”to the Jews especially”desolate,” since they can no longer seek salvation there.
(5) The Jews still carry the curse of Cain the murderer of Abelthe “mark” of the “fugitive and vagabond.”
3. The children of wickedness are not exclusively Jewish.
(1) For the blood of the martyrs of Jesus shed by the pagan Romans desolation was poured upon Daniel’s “desolator” (see Dan 9:27). The barbarians were the instruments of retribution.
(2) The mystical Babylon revived in the papacy is reserved for retribution for the blood of the martyrs which is found in her (see Rev 6:11; Rev 17:6; Rev 18:24; Rev 19:20).
(3) Individual offenders are reserved to the judgment of the last day. “So terrible is God’s judgment that when he punishes a sinner he seems to punish all sin in him” (Quesnel).
IV. THAT THE LONG SUFFERING OF CHRIST IS SALVATION.
1. The Jews will yet see Christ in his glory.
(1) This they have clamoured for.
(2) The contrast to his first coming in humiliation will be great.
2. They will all acknowledge him then.
(1) Formerly the babes perfected praise when the rulers refused it (see Mat 21:9).
(2) The rulers then will cry, “Hosanna!” The words, “Blessed is he!” are a confession of the Messiahship of Jesus (see Rom 11:26, Rom 11:27).
(3) If they do not say, “Blessed is he!” in penitence then, they will say it by constraint in perdition.J.A.M.
HOMILIES BY R. TUCK
Mat 23:3
The sin of inconsistency.
“For they say, and do not.” To our Lord the supreme offence was contradiction between saying and doing, appearance and fact, outside and inside, show and reality. A man who is himself consciously sincere is always keen to detect, quick to revolt against, insincerity in others. But if inconsistency is mischievous in any man, it is doubly mischievous in religious teachers, and in persons occupying prominent positions of influence. Probably the reference of our Lord to “scribes and Pharisees” is intended to limit his denunciation to particular classes of Phariseesthose who were learned in the Law, and professed to teach the Law. It really means “those Pharisees who were also scribes.” And when Jesus adds the word “hypocrites,” he really limits his denunciation to such as were hypocrites.
I. INCONSISTENCY IS THE PERIL OF OFFICIALS. Whatever is done regularly as a duty is in danger of being done perfunctorily. The heart may go with the act at first, but the constancy and the outwardness soon involve the failing of heart interest, and presently the heart is occupied with one thing and the hands with another; and even the desire for harmony between the interests of heart and hand can easily be lost. This is the common peril of all officialspriests, clergy, statesmen, teachers, secretaries; and the peril is never so great as in cases of religion. Cases of open inconsistency may happily be infrequent in the Christian ministry, but the fear of inconsistency should always be present to the mind of those who hold office, and make them watchful and zealous concerning their own integrity. A teacher never has his true power unless heart and hand go well together.
II. INCONSISTENCY IS THE PERIL OF DISCIPLES. Our Lord was anxious concerning the influence of the model teachers of his day on the men who were to teach his truth after he ascended. So his words are intended to be a solemn warning to them. What scribes said was more worthy and more important than what they did. What our Lord’s disciples were and did was always much more important than what they said. To do Christ’s work in the world, our words must always precisely utter our hearts. But show the danger of overstating religious feeling and experience, and so weakening our force by the suggestion of inconsistency.
III. INCONSISTENCY IS THE PERIL OF THE PEOPLE. For if they see it in their teachers, they readily take up the idea that it is permissible in themselves, and so Christ’s truth is dishonoured and his service misconceived.R.T.
Mat 23:5
The fascination of human praise.
“All their works they do for to be seen of men.” It is right for us to desire acceptance and favour with our fellow men. The desire for human praise is a proper incentive and inspiration, which no moralist can afford to underestimate. But in relation to it, we must apply the ever-working law of Christian moderation. The love of praise very readily becomes an absorbing mania, and, like all manias, it implies mental and moral deterioration. A man may come to live for praise, and make a life aim of getting his fellows’ admiration. If he does, he will drift ever downward, until he even tries to get praise for the cut of his garments, the grace of his bow, and the politeness of his speech. He will even be pleased when ignorant street people gape at his phylacteries and the wide borders of his garments; and everywhere he will be asserting himself, and pushing into the chief places; making himself disagreeable by trying to make himself admirable.
I. HUMAN PRAISE AS AN INSPIRATION. It is not the highest and best inspiration. It is only an inspiration. The loyal-hearted and high-toned man seeks Divine acceptance. “Study to show thyself approved unto God.“ But men can help others by kindly approvals. And the hope of gaining approval does worthily influence grown men as well as young children. Show
(1) that the praise of men may translate God’s approval to us;
(2) that we need never be puffed up, if we take men’s praise to God, and thank him for letting us have the cheer of it;
(3) that we need not make the desire for men’s praise shape our conduct and relations. We can do right because it is right, and accept men’s praise if it comes. It is always well to remember that God approves the quality of a thing, but men are usually caught by the appearance of things. There is never any reason why a good thing should not also be a good looking thing.
II. HUMAN PRAISE AS A SNARE. In the case of these scribes we see that it made them untrue to themselves. They soon found out what men stared at and admired, and then set themselves to provide it, heedless as to whether it expressed their real selves or not. Human praise cultivates vanity, a meaner vice than pride. Vanity differs from pride partly in thisthe proud man generally has something to be proud about; the vain man is vain concerning just himself, and wants flattery, yearns for it, lives on it, will demean himself if only he can get it, feeds his vanity on praise, and never minds though the praise is worthless in its insincerity.R.T.
Mat 23:8
The equality of believers.
“And all ye are brethren.” The kindliness and mutual helpfulness of brotherhood are not prominent in our Lord’s mind at this time. He was rather thinking of the equality of the brothers in one family. All are sons. No one of them is any more than a son. No one of them has any rights over his brother. The variety of gifts, talents, and dispositions in no way affects the equal rights of the brotherhood. All who push themselves into chief places, bid for special greetings, or claim to be mastersif they presume to call themselves Christ’s disciplessin against the equality of the Christian brotherhood.
I. THE EQUALITY OF THE BROTHERHOOD IS BASED ON THE COMMON SONSHIP. If our standing in Christ depended on the Divine recognition of peculiarities in us; or if we gained it upon superior merit or upon special endeavour, there might be orders and gradations in the Christian discipleship. But brothers are just born into families; they are brothers because they are sons, and for no other reason; the bond uniting them is the common family life. So we are born of God; made sons apart from all effort of our own; quickened with a Divine life whose operations we cannot control. And we are all quickened and saved and made sons in just the same way. Rich or poor, there is for all the one “laver of regeneration.” We are brothers because we are sons; and as we are nothing but sons, so we are nothing but brothers.
II. THE EQUALITY OF THE BROTHERHOOD ADMITS OF VARIETIES IN ABILITY. The diversity of character and of gifts in a family is the subject of constant remark. It is a commonplace. But noble natures never make such diversity a reason for claiming superiority. The most talented members are often the most brotherly. The family bond is not affected by personal peculiarities. There are diversifies of gifts in God’s redeemed family. We always go wrong when, on account of some gift, we assert ourselves and break the brotherhood.
III. THE EQUALITY OF THE BROTHERHOOD IS SEEN IN MUTUAL SERVICE. It is not that some one member is served by the rest, but that each is ready to serve the other. Each holds his gift at the command of the other. True, a brother’s gift may put him in some office; but he is there to serve, not to rule. This idea is preserved, in idea at least, in every section of Christ’s Church. The highest offices are never other than brotherly places of service. Our ministers are our brethren.R.T.
Mat 23:11
Greatness finding expression in service.
This setting of truth was repeated by our Lord again and again, and variously illustrated by parable and by example (as in our Lord’s washing the disciples’ feet). He must have been much impressed by the unreadiness to serve which distinguished the prominent religionists of his days. The Pharisee class was always scheming to getto get wealth, to get praise, to get credit. He never saw them giving, or trying to do anything for anybody. They were always standing on their dignity. They loved “salutations in the market places,” everybody paying special deference to these learned and holy men. Even the little boys pulling off their turbans, and bowing low as the great man passed. It was in the mind of Christ to set a complete contrast to all this before the people; and he would have his disciples continue his example. But it should be clearly shown that our Lord’s example was in no sense put on; it was the natural and proper expression of his principles and spirit.
I. A MAN IS IN NO SENSE GREAT WHO THINKS CHIEFLY ABOUT HIMSELF. This is what Christ teaches. This is not what the world teaches. If a man is to “get on,” the world says he must take care of “number one.” Christ says he may get on, that way, but he will never get up. The inspiration is low which a man gives himself. The old-world idea of greatness was summed up in the ideas of position and achievement. In connection with our text, set out before you a self-centred Pharisee, and say whether that man is, in any sense at all, great. What can you admire in him? No doubt he thinks himself great; but is he? Evidently Christ has raised our standard of judgment, and we find we only despise the man whose life circles round himself.
II. A MAN IS GREAT WHO THINKS CHIEFLY ABOUT WHAT HE CAN DO FOR OTHERS. Christ has recovered “ministry,” and ennobled it forever. Recovered it, because:
1. It was God’s primal idea for the human race. When he made man male and female, he established the law of mutual service. When he made parents and children, he glorified the law of mutual service, and lifted motherhood into the first human place. When he permitted sickness, trouble, and poverty in his world, he called for a brotherhood of sympathizing service.
2. It was man’s mischief making to interfere with God’s dignity of service. This man did when, in his wilfulness, he organized society, built cities, made offices, and set one man above another. Then everybody soon began to think what advantage he could get over his brother, instead of what he could do to serve him.R.T.
Mat 23:13
The woe of the hypocrite.
The word “woe” is repeated again and again in this chapter, and yet the reader of it fails to realize what the woe denounced precisely was. The suggestive word is left by Christ. It is enough to tell these men that they are surely heaping up woe for themselves in the latter day. Some hint of the coming woe may be given in the closing verses of the chapter, which indicate a time of sorest humiliation, of hopeless ruin. Jewish literature gives quite as bad a picture of them as Jesus did. “Fear not true Pharisees, but greatly fear painted Pharisees,” said a Jewish ruler to his wife, when he was dying. “The supreme tribunal,” said another, “will duly punish hypocrites who wrap their talliths around them to appearwhat they are nottrue Pharisees.”
I. WHAT THINGS WERE HEAPING UP WOE FOR THESE HYPOCRITES. Our Lord marks several things in which their hypocrisy was especially manifest.
1. Their professing to be spiritual teachers, yet keeping the people from receiving spiritual truth (Mat 23:13).
2. They joined devout prayers for desolate widows with a grasping covetousness that seized the widows’ property and ruined them.
3. They made proselytes, so to say, to righteousness, but compelled them to be as bitter, base, and uncharitable as themselves.
4. They made foolish distinctions, which they took care did not hinder themselves.
5. They appeared to be most delicately scrupulous, but in their conduct they allowed the grossest and most abominable licence.
6. They were supremely anxious about the look of things; they were wickedly indifferent about the real condition of things.
7. They wanted men to admire them in public, but they dare not let any one see their private lives. It is easy enough to see that, for such men, a revealing day must come, and, when it came, it would prove humiliation and woe indeed. It is woe for such men to be found out. It was a beginning of woe for Jesus thus to show them up before the people, and make them objects of scorn and detestation.
II. WHAT PERSONS SUFFERED WOE BECAUSE OF THE HYPOCRITE. For the religious hypocrite is a woe-maker. And this point may be opened out with some treshness. Every religiously insincere man:
1. Makes woe for himself. He has no enemy like himself.
2. He makes woe for the religious community to which he belongs. He prays against their prayers; he brings disgrace on them when he is found out.
3. He makes woe for society, which learns, by his failure, the misery of mutual mistrust.
4. He even brings dishonour on the name and cause of God.R.T.
Mat 23:15
The peril of making proselytes.
The term “proselytes” is used, and not “converts” or “disciples.” it is employed when the idea to be conveyed is “persuasion” to accept some particular opinion or hobby, or to join some particular system or party. “Conversion” suggests an inward change and renewal; “proselyting” suggests outward association with a party. “Conversion” is full of hope; “proselyting” is full of peril. The word was used by the Jews for persons who had been heathen, but had accepted Judaism, and they distinguished between
(1) proselytes of the gate, who received the teachings of the Old Testament, but not the ceremonial Law; and
(2) proselytes of righteousness, who conformed to the whole Law. Our modern term “pervert” conveys something of the idea our Lord attached to “proselyte.” Dean Plumptre gives an historical reference, which skilfully brings out the point of our Lord’s reproof. “The zeal of the earlier Pharisees had shown itself in a propagandism which reminds us rather of the spread of the religion of Mahomet than of that of Christ. John Hyrcanus, the last of the Maccabean priest rulers, had offered the Idumaeans the alternative of death, exile, or circumcision. When the government of Rome rendered such measures impossible, they resorted to all the arts of persuasion, and exulted when they succeeded in enrolling a heathen convert as a member of their party. but the proselytes thus made were too often a scandal and proverb of reproach. There was no real conversion, and those who were most active in the work of proselytizing were for the most part blind leaders of the blind. The vices of the Jew were engrafted on the vices of the heathen.The ties of duty and natural affection were ruthlessly snapped asunder. The popular Jewish feeling about them was like that of the popular Christian feeling about a converted Jew.”
I. THE PERIL OF MAKING PROSELYTES FOR THOSE WHO MAKE THEM. Open such points as these:
1. A man must exaggerate sectarian differences before he can try to win proselytes to an opinion.
2. A man must make more of the outward form than the inward spirit.
3. A man is only too likely to use bad means in gaining such an end.
4. A man who makes proselytes honours himself rather than God.
5. And such a man is only too likely to be deceived in the result he attains.
II. THE PERIL OF MAKING PROSELYTES FOR THOSE WHO ARE MADE. Open these points:
1. Men may be overpressed to accept opinions on which they have really formed no judgment.
2. Perverts notoriously exaggerate the formalities of the new creed they adopt, and become bitterest partisans.R.T.
Mat 23:24
The scruples of the formalist.
“Strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.” The proverbial character of this sentence is manifest, but the precise form is disputed. Trench thinks “straining out a gnat” is better; and he suggests reference to the scrupulous anxiety shown in drinking water. A traveller in North Africa reports that a Moorish soldier who accompanied him, when he drank, always unfolded the end of his turban, and placed it over the mouth of his bota, drinking through the muslin, to strain out the gnats, whose larvae swarm in the water of that country. The “camel” is only used in the proverb as the representative of something big. The Hindoo proverbial saying is, “Swallowing an elephant, and being choked with a flea.” Reference must be kept to the class of persons that may be regarded as represented by hypocritical Pharisees.
I. HE WHO PRESERVES THE SPIRIT CAN ADAPT THE FORMS. No man may say that the forms of religion are unimportant. They have their place, and only need to be kept in their right place. But life comes before expression of life; and spirit comes before form. Being “born from above” is more important than any religious rite., even the most sacred. Only the man who has the spirit can bear right relations to the forms. He will use them. He will not be mastered by them. He understands that forms were made for him, and he was not made for the forms. They must, therefore, be adjusted to him and to his needs. To him all forms are servants. Authority in the forms of religion may be voluntarily recognized; but a man’s own quickened life is the supreme authority to him.
II. HE WHO UNDULY ESTIMATES THE FORM WILL SOON BE ENSLAVED BY THE FORM. The student of human nature, who considers the sense-conditions under which we are set, will argue that it must always be so. He who observes Christian life, or skilfully reads personal experience, will declare that it is so. Once let religious forms and ceremonies control conduct, break bounds of the restraint of soul life, and they will run as does loosened fire; they will overlay the spiritual feeling; they will absorb all the powers; and become supreme interests; and when the spirit is thus overlaid, the result too often follows which we see in these Phariseesexaggerated scruples about exact and minute forms going along with a demoralizing indifference to moral purity.R.T.
Mat 23:28
Appearance and reality.
“Ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.” This is the revelation, not of a mere observer of men, but of a Divine Heart searcher, a Divine Thought reader.
I. MAN JUDGES BY THE OUTWARD APPEARANCE, AND MAKES MISTAKES. When Samuel saw the handsome eldest son of Jesse, he said, “Surely the Lord’s anointed is before him.” But he was reproved. “The Lord seeth not as man sooth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart” (1Sa 16:7).
1. Man can only judge by the help of appearances, because he cannot read the heart.
2. Man is disposed to judge of religion by appearances, because he is daily judging everything in this way.
3. Man is always liable to make mistakes, because appearances often accidentally, and more often intentionally, fail to present realities. The peril of trusting to appearances may be illustrated by the way in which goods are dressed up to attract sale. The same thing is found in religious spheres. Credit is gained by the show of piety; and the hypocrite is ever over-anxious about his external observances. Our Lord’s figure of the cup is common to every age; his figure of the “whited sepulchres” belongs to the East. Sepulchres were whited so that Jews might not unconsciously walk over them, seeing that this involved ceremonial defilement. The outsides of burial places were whitewashed once a year. It is not enough to see a man’s devoutness at church. See him at home. See him in business. See him in private prayer. See him as God sees him.
II. GOD JUDGES BY THE INWARD REALITY, AND MAKES NO MISTAKE. He looks inside the cup. He knows what is inside the sepulchre. He reads the secret life of the fastidiously devout Pharisees. He finds David right hearted, and chooses him rather than his handsome brother. St. Paul intimates that the Christian man should be so absolutely sincere and true, that he could readily stand out in the sunshine, and let it look him through and through, and round and round. See how the good man comes altogether to prefer the Divine appraisement, and to say, “Search me, O God, and know my heart.” Impress that when the man is heart right with God, he is properly anxious about his appearance before men. He wants that to tell, as fully as possible, the truth of his inner life.R.T.
Mat 23:33
Holy denunciation.
Revised Version, “Ye serpents, ye offspring of vipers, how shall ye escape the judgment of hell?” margin, “Gehenna.” It is neither right nor wise to attempt any mitigations or modifications of this intensely severe sentence. Let the words stand precisely as we find them; and let the sentence be the sternest, severest, intensest sentence that ever passed the Divine lips of our blessed Lord. Capable of being misunderstood and misrepresented, they are capable also of most rational and most reasonable explanation. All we have to do is to inquire whether the persons referred to, and the circumstances under which the words were uttered, would justify a noble-minded man in speaking so intensely. If they would. then Jesus is justified.
I. THESE DENUNCIATIONS, READ IN THE LIGHT OF THE PERSONS DENOUNCED. Explain that they would have been unsuitable for the Pharisees as a class. They would have been over-intense if applied to the formalist and hypocritical sections of the Pharisee class. But they are strictly appropriate to those few men who, for months past, had been resisting every witness that favoured Christ’s claim; had been plotting, dodging, scheming, to destroy Christ; had come fawning upon him, with malice, hatred, and all uncharitableness in their hearts. Defeated in argument, they would not admit defeat. Humiliated by our Lord s answers, they were still bent on effecting their shameless purpose. What did such men deserve? What was left to be done with them? They had to be shown up, as men are shown up when withering denunciations are heaped upon them, under which they cower, conscience smitten. Jesus was doing the best thing possible for those wretched men, by these holy enunciations, the mere form of which must be judged by Eastern, not Western, models.
II. THESE DENUNCIATIONS, READ IN THE LIGHT OF THE PERSON DENOUNCING. Those who so readily accuse Christ of over-severity would be the very first and loudest in accusing him of moral weakness, inability to recognize or respond to sin, if such instances of severity had not been recorded. The true man, the Divine man, feels adequately in response to every situation; and we may unhesitatingly affirm that this was a time to be sublimely indignant, and that burning words of wrathterrible as thesewere the fitting thing for the occasion.R.T.
Mat 23:37
Lost opportunities become judgments.
One writer observes that converts to Judaism were said to come “under the wings of the Shechinah.” This familiar metaphor may have suggested to our Lord’s mind the figure of the hen and her brood. “Many times by his prophets Christ called the children of Jerusalem to himselfthe true Shechinahthrough whom the glory of the latter house was greater than that of the former.” Whedon well says, “The beautiful tenderness of this verse shows that the warnings of the previous verses are the language, not of human anger, but of terrible Divine justice.” It is quite probable that our Lord’s visits to Jerusalem, and his prolonged labours in that city, are not fully detailed in the Gospels. He may refer to his own efforts to win the people to full allegiance to Jehovah, as represented in his own mission. Jerusalem had its opportunities. They were multiplied until it seemed almost overweighted with privilege. Those opportunities had been neglected and despised again and again, and now they were growing into heavy, overwhelming judgments.
I. OUR OPPORTUNITIES ARE PROVISIONS OF THE DIVINE MERCY. We say of those who try us beyond endurance, “Well, we will give him one more chance.” And we think this a great sign of our pitifulness and mercy. Then what was God’s mercy in patiently bearing with his wayward people, and renewing their chance, their opportunity, age. after age? Trace the opportunities by following the line of prophets, special Divine messengers, up to the mission of John, and then of the Lord Jesus. The figure of the text is a specially tender one, viewed in the light of Eastern associations. Birds of prey abound, and chickens are in momentary danger, and hens have to be keenly watchful. But what can a hen do, if her chickens are wilful, and will not respond to her call?
II. OUR OPPORTUNITIES DESPISED MUST TURN INTO DIVINE JUDGMENTS. God’s dealings with us must have issues. We cannot play with them as we like. If God acts in mercy, he does not forego his claim. But it may be also shown that the treatment of our opportunities becomes a revelation of our character, and it reveals bad things. God’s judgments really come on character, and on acts only because they reveal character. Jerusalem sinners thoroughly needed and deserved their judgment.R.T.
Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary
Mat 23:1-2. Then spake Jesus, &c. Because our Saviour had mentioned the final conquest and destruction of his enemies, who were to be made his footstool, he turned towards his disciples, and in the hearing of all the people solemnly cautioned them to beware of the Scribes and Pharisees; by which he insinuated, and that not obscurely, who the enemies were, whose end he had hinted at. The name of Pharisees being the appellation of a sect, it cannot be supposed that our Lord meant to say of all the party, that they sat in Moses’ chair; such a character was applicable to none but the doctors of the sect; for which reason we may suppose that the phrase Scribes and Pharisees, is a Hebraism for the Pharisean Scribes. Some think there is an allusion, Mat 23:2 to those pulpits which Ezra made for the expounders of the law, Neh 8:4 and which were afterwards continued in the synagogue, from which the rabbies delivered their discourses sitting. It is probably called Moses’ Chair, because it was that from which the books of Moses were read and explained; so that he seemed to dictate from thence. It is strange that Lightfoot and others should explain this of a legislative authority, since the Scribes andPharisees, as such, had no peculiar authority of that kind. See Doddridge, and Lightfoot.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Mat 23:1 . After the Pharisees have been thus silenced , there now follows the decisive and direct attack upon the hierarchs, in a series of overwhelming denunciations extending to Mat 23:39 , and which, uttered as they are on the eve of His death, form a kind of Messianic through which Jesus seeks to testify against them. Luke has inserted at ch. 11 portions of this discourse in an order different from the original; but he has given in the present connection, like Mar 12 , only a few fragments, so that, keeping in view that a collection of our Lord’s sayings was made by Matthew, and considering the originality in respect of matter and arrangement which characterizes the grand utterances now before us, the preference must be accorded to the report furnished by this apostle (in answer to Schleiermacher, Schulz, Schneckenburger, Olshausen, Volkmar). The entire discourse has so much the character of a living whole, that, although much that was spoken on other occasions may perhaps be mixed up with it, it is scarcely possible to disjoin such passages from those that are essentially original. Ewald thinks that the discourse is made up of passages that were probably original, though uttered on very different occasions; Holtzmann has recourse to the hypothesis that the evangelist has derived his account from a supposed special source, the same as that on which ch. 5 is based; in answer to the latter, see Weiss, 1864, p. 114. Observe that the are mentioned first, because the first part of the discourse on to Mat 23:7 is directed to them, then the are addressed in Mat 23:8-12 , whereupon in Mat 23:13 ff. we have the withering apostrophe to the Pharisees who were present, and that for the purpose of warning the and the to beware of them; and finally, the concluding passage, Mat 23:37 ff., containing the pathetic exclamation over Jerusalem. The glance, the gesture, the attitude, the matter and the language, were such that there could be no doubt who were immediately aimed at in the various sections of the discourse. We may imagine the scene in the temple to have been as follows: in the foreground , Jesus with His disciples ; a little farther off , the ; more in the background , the Pharisees, who in Mat 22:46 are spoken of as having withdrawn.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
SEVENTH SECTION
FINAL JUDJEMENT OF CHRIST UPON THE PHARISEES AND SCRIBES. CHRIST OF HIS OWN ACCORD LEAVES THE TEMPLE
2324:1
( Mat 23:34-39, Scripture Lesion for St. Stephens Day.)
1Then spake Jesus to the multitude [multitudes, ], and to his disciples,
A. The Reproof generally. Mat 23:2-7. (The law, Mat 23:3; the inconsistency and falsehood, Mat 23:3 : but do not; the traditional statutes, Mat 23:4; the hypocritical sanctimoniousness and unholy ambition, Mat 23:5-7.)
2Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit [sat down]1 in Moses seat []: 3All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe,2 that observe and do [do and observe];3 4but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. For [But]4 they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne,5 and lay them on mens shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers [with their finger, ]. 5But all their works they do for to be seen of [by] men: they make broad their phylacteries [protectives], and enlarge the borders [fringes, ] of their garments,6 6And love the uppermost rooms [first place, ] at feasts, and the chief seats 7[] in the synagogues, And [the, ] greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi. 7
Its Application. Mat 23:8-12
8But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master [Leader, ; better: Teacher, ],8 even Christ;9 and all ye are brethren. 9And call no man your [spiritual] father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which [who] is in heaven [the 10one in heaven, or, the heavenly, ]. Neither [Nor] be ye called masters [leaders, ] for one is your Master [Lender], even Christ [the Christ, ]. 11But he that is greatest among you [the greater of you, ] shall he your servant. 12And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.
B. The Particular Reproof: the Seven Woes. Mat 23:13 to Mat 24:1. (Avarice and hypocrisy, Mat 23:13; unbelief and fanaticism, Mat 23:14; fanatical proselyting, Mat 23:15; casuistry, Mat 23:16-22; hypocritical legalism, yen. 2326; spiritual deadness, Mat 23:29-32; the judgment, Mat 23:33-36; Jerusalems guilt and doom, Mat 23:37-39; Christs exodus from the temple, Mat 24:1.) .
13But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for [because, , as in Mat 23:29] ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither 14[nor] suffer ye them that are entering to go in. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites I for [because] ye devour widows houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation.10 15Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for [because] ye compass [go about] sea and land to make one proselyte; and when he is made [becomes so, ], ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves. 16Woe unto you, ye blind guide?, which [who] say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold 17of the temple, he is a debtor []! Ye fools and blind! for whether [which] is greater, the gold, or the temple that sanctifieth the gold? 18And, Whosoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing; but whosoever sweareth [shall swear] by the gift that Isaiah 19 upon it, he is guilty [a debtor, ]. Ye fools and11 blind: for whether [which] is greater, the gift, or the altar, that sanctifieth the gift? 20Whoso therefore shall swear [He therefore that sweareth, ] by the altar, sweareth by it, and by all things thereon. 21And whoso shall swear (lie that sweareth, by the temple, sweareth by it, and by him that dwelleth [did dwell]12 therein. 22And he that shall swear [sweareth, ] by heaven, sweareth by the throne of God, and by him that sitteth thereon. 23Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of [the] mint and anise [the dill] and [the] cummin,13 and have omitted the weightier matters [things, ] of the law, judgment, [and, ] mercy, and faith:[14] 24[but]15 these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone. Ye blind guides, which [who] strain at [out]16 a [the] gnat, and swallow a [the] camel. 25Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for [because] ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion [rapacity, ] and 26excess.17 Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within [the inside of, ] the cup and [the] platter, that the outside of them may be clean also. 27Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for [because] ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within [which outwardly indeed appear beautiful, but within are] full of dead mens bones, and of all uncleanness. 28Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are fall of hypocrisy and iniquity. 29Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous, 30And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. 31Wherefore ye be [are] witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which [that] killed the prophets. 32Fill ye up18 then the measure 33of your fathers. Ye serpents, ye generation [brood] of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation [judgment, ] of hell? 34Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall [will] kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye [ye will] scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: 35That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias [Zachariah] son of Barachias 36[Barachiah], whom ye slew between the temple and the altar. Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation. 37O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which [that] are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! 38Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.19 39For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.
Mat 24:1 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
The Great Denunciatory Discourse against the Pharisees and Scribes, addressed to the People.This crisis is analogous to that of Mat 15:10, when Jesus turned away from the Galilean Pharisees, after an annihilating rebuke, and turned toward the people. The provincial example must have its wider consummation in the temple. But the permanent significance of the present crisis is this: Christ turns from the self-hardening hierarchy, and speaks immediately to the people. The unity of this discourse has been denied by Schleiermacher, Schulz, Schneckenburger, and others, on the ground of Luke having given some parts of it on a previous occasion in Matthew 11. Ewald thinks that the discourse was compounded out of a large variety of original elements. But de Wette and Meyer for good reasons are strenuous supporters of the original unity of the whole discourse. De Wette: It is very appropriate that Jesus should now first utter Himself so fully and comprehensively against His enemies. Meyer: The whole composition has a character of such living force and unity, that it is hardly possible to deny its originality and genuineness.20 Heubner: It is not an invective, or utterance of scorn, as many have called it: for instance, Ammon (Life of Jesus, 3:229), who thinks that on that very account it never could have been thus delivered by Jesus. The condemnation naturally included the Sadducees, so far as they were found among the scribes, and belonged to the dominant hierarchy. In themselves, and as a party, they were of no importance; nor were they ever recognised as leaders of the people.
[Dr. Nast: Although the Sadducees were also included among the scribes, yet our Lord in His terrible condemnation singles out the Pharisees, who for the last one hundred and fifty years had enjoyed the highest respect of the people for their zeal and rig d observance of the law. During His whole ministry He had been making pharisaic formalism the constant object of reproof, while almost ignoring the unbelief of the Sadducees.It is certainly remarkable that the severest language which Christ ever used, was directed, not against the people, of whom He rather spoke with pity and compassion, nor against the Sadducees, with whom He came less in contact, but against the orthodox, priestly, sanctimonious, hypocritical Pharisees, the leaders of the hierarchy, and rulers of the people. Let ministers and dignitaries in the Church never forget this! Nevertheless the Pharisees with all their wickedness had more moral and religious earnestness and substance, than the Sadducees, and when once thoroughly converted, they made most serious and devoted Christians, as the example of St. Paul abundantly shows. No such convert ever proceeded from the indifferent, worldly, and rationalistic Sadducees.M. Baumgarten in his History of Jesus (as quoted by Dr. Nast in loc.) makes the following striking remark on this denunciatory discourse: As Christ once commenced His Sermon on the Mount in Galilee with pronouncing eight beatitudes, so He closes His last public address with pronouncing eight woes on Mount Moriah, declaring thereby most distinctly that all manifestation of His divine love and meekness had been in vain, and must now give way to stern justice. Of that awful delusion which has done at all times so much harm in the Churchnamely, that the office sanctifies the officer, at least before the peoplethere is here not the most distant trace [not even Mat 23:2-3], but the very opposite. The office held by the scribes and Pharisees Jesus fully recognizes; but the sacredness of the office, instead of furnishing any apology for their corrupt morals, increases only their guilt, and He, therefore, exposes with the utmost severity the wickedness of their lives. Never did any prophet deliver such a discourse as this. We see here turned into wrath the holy love of Jesus, which is unwilling to break the bruised reed or to quench the smoking flax ( Mat 12:19), which seeks and fosters what is lost, which casts out none, but attracts all that show themselves in the least degree susceptible.This fearful denunciation of the dignitaries and representatives of the Jewish theocracy, which must shake every sensitive reader to the very foundation of his moral nature, could only proceed from one who knew Himself free from sin and clothed with divine authority and power. Having exhausted, in the intensity of His love for sinners, high and low, rich and poor, every effort to bring them to repentance and a better mind, Jesus now speaks, at the close of His earthly ministry and in full view of the approaching crucifixion, with all the dignity and stern severity of a judge, yet without any passion or personal bitterness. This awful saverity is as much a proof of His divine mission and character as the sweet tenderness of His invitation to the sinner to come to Him for rest and peace.P. S.]
Mat 23:2. Sit in Moses seat.The question arises, whether Moses sea! means his whole vocation and office, or only a part of it. De Wette: His seat as judge and lawgiver. But Moses as lawgiver, or organ of revelation, did not speak from his seat, but from Mount Sinai; and in this capacity he could be succeeded21 only by prophets, or conclusively by Christ Himself. The seat of Moses is described Exo 18:13. Moses sat in the function of judge and administrator; and in this he might and did allow others to represent himself, who were to judge and rule according to the law of revelation. We have the more formal establishment of the office of elders in Num 11:16. The rule of the scribes and Pharisees was the rule of the Sanhedrin. But between the prophetic rule of Christ, and the political rule of the Romans, there only remained to them the Old Testament ecclesiastical function of explaining the law and administering discipline. , they sat down and sit. Among the Rabbins, the successor of a Rabbi was called the representative of his school, ; Vitringa, Syn. Meyer.
Mat 23:3. All therefore.The therefore, emphatic, as Meyer correctly urges. It alludes to the established order and office. All whatsoever.Chrysostom and others say that the ceremonial system, and everything false and immoral, were to be excepted; since all this could not have been taught . De Wette and Meyer: Jesus had in view only the contrast between their teaching and their life; and left the perversion of the office itself, as it existed in praxi, out of the question. But their doctrine was corrupt, not only in accidental practice, but in essential principle. We must limit the , which is used by Matthew throughout in its full significance, to the official utterance. Thus it means: Act according to their words in relation to the theocratic order of the Jewish church, but not in relation to the way of salvation. It was in harmony with the heavenly prudence of Jesus, and with the spirit of all His teaching, that He should express the fullest acknowledgment of the official authority of the Pharisees and scribes, even while He was preparing to unmask and spiritually to annihilate them. He did not on this account impose upon His hearers a permanent subjection to the rule of the scribes and Pharisees. They could, however, be free only in Him and through Him: they must through the law die to the law. He whom the law has slain and excommunicated, is alone free from its claims.22
Mat 23:4. But they bind.See Luk 11:46. The binding together of individual things into a mass, has reference here rather to burdens of wood than to burdens of grain. Thus they compact their traditionary statutes into intolerable burdens. A fourfold rebuke: 1. they make religion a burden; 2. an intolerable burden; 3. they lay it upon the shoulder of others; 4. they leave it untouched themselves, i.e., they have no idea of fulfilling these precepts in spirit and in truth. [Alford refers the heavy burdens?, , not to human traditions, as most interpreters do, but to the severity of the law, which they do not observe (Rom 2:21-23); answering to the of Mat 23:23. The irksomeness and unbearableness of these rites did not belong to the Law in itself as rightly explained, but were created by the rigor and ritualism of these men who followed the letter and lost the spirit Similarly Stier and Nast who refer for analogy to our modern moralists who preach duty, duty! and nothing else.P. S.]
Mat 23:5. But all their works.Luk 11:43.Their phylacteries, , remembrancers and preservatives.Literal application of the figurative expressions of Exo 13:9; Exo 13:16; Deu 6:8-9; Mat 11:18. Thence arose the , containing passages of the law upon leaves of parchmentExo 13:1-16; Deu 6:4-9; Deu 11:13-22which the Jews at the time of prayer bound, one on the left arm, one on the forehead, to show that the law should be in the heart and in the head. Buxtorf, Syn. Matthew 9 p. 170; and Rosenmller, Morgenland, 5:82. The term phylactery was doubtless formed from the , Exo 13:10. It is not right, therefore, with de Wette and Meyer, at once to explain them as preservatives or amulets, having magical power. At first, they were simply remembrancers of the law; the heathen notion, that they were personal means of defence against evil spirits, did not arise till afterward. It is probable that the perversion was not perfect at the time of our Lord; otherwise He would have done more than condemn their enlargement of these phylacteries, i.e., hypocrisy and boastfulness in matters of religion. It is probably a result of this rebuke, that at the present day the size of these phylacteries is limited.The borders or fringes, . Mat 9:20; comp. Num 15:38. These zizith were fastened with blue ribands to the garments (see Bhr: Symbolik des Mos. Cultus, vol. 1 p. 329.) Blue was the symbolical color of heaven, the color of God, of His covenant, and of faithfulness to that covenant The tassels themselves signified flowers, or birds; probably pomegranates, and therefore crimson, and not blue, as the ribands were. Thus they were remembrancers that fidelity to the covenant should flourish; or they were tokens that the flower of life was love, and that love must spring from faithfulness to the covenant.
Mat 23:6. The chief seat, .The first place at table; that is, according to Luk 14:8 (comp. also Joseph. Antiq. xv. 2, 4), the highest place on the divan, as among the Greeks. The Persians and Romans held the middle place to be the seat of honor. The word is not preserved, except among the Synoptists and the Fathers. Suid.: . Meyer.
Mat 23:7. Rabbi, RabbiThe teacher was called by his title, not by his name. My master, my master,the customary repetition of greeting on the part of the scholar among the Jews. was more honorable than , i.e., much, great, amplissimus.23 Buxt. Lexic. Talm. Matter () is more than Rabbi. The Rabbi was the teacher in a synagogue. Master was the head of a whole section, a leader who might be followed by many Rabbis ( ,, rector, princeps). The proud spirit of the Rabbis has crept into the Christian Church. The Reformers protested against it. Heubner.
Mat 23:8. But ye.
Mat 23:8-12 contain a warning application to the disciples of what had been said. The emphasis is on and , placed first. Properly: over you one it Matter.
Mat 23:9. Father.Father, , the supreme title of a teacher.On earth.With allusion to the antithesis of the Father in heaven. The earth has, however, in the New Testament a symbolical meaning also in opposition to the sea, the fluctuating world of the nations (see Rev 13:11, comp. Mat 23:1; Joh 3:12; Joh 3:31; Mat 16:19), as being the cultured world, the civil and ecclesiastical order.
Mat 23:10. Master, better: Leader, in the spiritual sense,, not to be confounded with :. The third denomination has a special importance among the three: the first points mainly to the Jewish, the second to the Romish, hierarchy. No one should seek the distinction of being the founder of a church or sect.
[Albert Barnes, in his Notes, understands the prohibition of titles by our Saviour literally, and hence opposes (and personally always rejected) the title Doctor of Divinity the Christian equivalent of the Jewish Rabbi, as contrary to the command of Christ, to the simplicity of the gospel, and the equality of ministers, and as tending to engender pride and a sense of superiority. But to be consistent, the title Reverend, Mr. and Mrs., etc., should likewise be abolished, and the universal thou of the Quakers and Tunkers be introduced. And yet Paul called himself the (spiritual) father of the Corinthians, 1Co 4:15, and Timothy his son in the faith, 1Ti 1:2, and Titus likewise, Tit 1:4; Peter uses the same term of Mark (probably the evangelist), 1Pe 5:13. It is plain, therefore, that the Saviour prohibits not so much the titles themselves, as the spirit of pride and ambition which covets and abuses them, the haughty spirit which would domineer over inferiors, and also the servile spirit which would basely cringe to superiors. In the same way Christ does not forbid in Mat 23:6 to occupy the first seats, for some one must be uppermost (as Matthew Henry remarks)but to seek and love them. Alford: To understand and follow such commands in the slavery of the letter, is to fall into the Pharisaism against which our Lord is uttering the caution.P. S.]
Mat 23:9-12.Comp. Mat 18:1; Mat 20:20; Luk 14:11; Luk 18:14. Meyer: These prohibitions of Jesus refer to the hierarchical spirit which practically attached to the titles named at that period. Titles of teachers cannot be dispensed with, any more than the class of teachers; but the hierarchy, as it was re-introduced in the Romish Church, is quite contrary to the spirit and will of Christ. Well observes Calvin on Mat 23:11 : Hac clausula ostendit, se non sophistice litigasse de vocibus, sed rem potius spectasse.24 We must mark the distinction: Ye shall call no man father, and shall not be called by any, master, nor leader (, , and . The worst corruption is the calling any man father; that is, to honor in any man an absolute spiritual authority. This religious homage is a contradiction to the absolute authority of the Father in heaven. Grotius; Deus dogmatum auctor. Jer 31:34; Isa 54:13; Joh 6:45, ; 1Th 4:9, . Sed alio sensu patres recte vocantur, qui nos in Christo per Evangelium genuer int, 1Co 4:15.The title of Rabbi referred to a constrained honor, which took away the brotherly equality of the faithful; or, in other words, the stamping of humanscholastic teaching with the dignity of law. That both these errors touched too closely the authority of Christ, is asserted in the third exhortation: They should not be called spiritual guides, founders, etc., because One only had that dignity, Christ. See 1Co 1:12. It can scarcely be denied that the designation of an ecclesiastical community by the name of a man, is inconsistent with this express prohibition, although much depends upon the origin of the name and the spirit with which it is used. Names of reproach have frequently become names of honor in the history of the church. The expression, , Mat 23:16 and Mat 15:14, Rom 2:19-20, is not quite so strong as .
[Alford, following a hint of Olshausen (Christus der einige Master), refers the three titles to the three persons of the Holy Trinity, viz., , Mat 23:9 to God the Father, , Mat 23:8 (according to the true reading, instead of the of the text, rec., see my Crit. Note 8, p. 408) to the Holy Spirit (comp. Joh 14:26; Jer 31:33-34; Eze 36:26-27), not named here, because his promise was only given in private to the disciples, and to Christ. If this be so, we have God, in His Trinity, here declared to us as the only One, in all these relations, on whom they can rest or depend. They are all brethren, all substantially equalnone by office or precedence nearer to God than another; none standing between his brother and God. Nast adopts this interpretation, which he thinks throws a flood of light upon the passage. But it is rather far-fetched, and the position of the Teacher (the Holy Spirit) between the Father and the Leader, instead of being mentioned last, is decidedly against it.P. S.]
Mat 23:13. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees.There are seven woes according to general reckoning: the first, therefore, might seem superfluous; and this recommends, again, the omission of Mat 23:13, which is also critically contested. But, if we compare this discourse with the seven beatitudes of the Sermon on the Mount, we observe that the eighth woe is a summary of the seven in a concrete form, just as is the case with the eighth and ninth beatitudes. There, the concrete unity of all the benedictions is the being persecuted for righteousness sake, for Christs sake, as the prophets were persecuted in old time. But here, the eighth woe has the same force with respect to the Pharisees, who adorned the graves of the prophets, and yet showed that they themselves were no better than murderers of the prophets. This, therefore, leads to the supposition of a sustained antithesis between the benedictions and the woes:
1. Poverty In spirit.
Devouring widows houses, and for a pretence making long prayers (being spiritually rich).
2. The mourners.
The kingdom of heaven shut against others, while they go not in themselves. Fanaticism as opposed to repentance.
3. The meek.
Zeal of proselytism.
4. Hungering and thirsting after righteousness
Casuistical morality, which after corrupts the doctrine of sin, and raises the human above the divine. Swearing by the gold of the temple, by the offering.
5. The merciful.
Tithing mint and anise; and leaving out righteousness, mercy, and faith,
6. The pure in heart.
Cleansing the outside of the platter, the inside being full of uncleanness and covetousness.
7. The children of peace (mossengers of life).
Sepulchres, fill of hypo risy and lawlessness.
Summary of the Seven.
Persecuted for righteousness sake as the prophets were persecuted
Murderers of the prophets
Persecuted for Christ sake
The ninth woe is wanting and this is very significant. Instead of it we hear the lamentation of Christ over Jerusalem. (see the Doctrinal Thought below.)
Mat 23:14. Ye devour.We put Mat 23:14 before Mat 23:13 (see the different readings). It is to be remarked that our Lord here establishes precisely the same connection between the worldly care and covetousness of the Pharisees, and their hypocritical formality, as in Mat 6:1; Mat 6:19; but in that passage the order is inverted, as the Lord there proceeds from the hypocrisy to its rootworldliness of mind and covetousness. The gives the reason; because.Devour widows houses, i.e., to obtain them unrighteously. This was damnable in itself, but much more when it was done under the cloak of piety, or . The mechanically brought from Mark. It marks an advancement in the guilt. The we refer, as a prolonged sentence, to the lengthened hypocritical prayers which went before. At a very early date this avarice in securing legacies crept into the Christian Church; and therefore Justinian passed ordinances forbidding the clergy to inherit possessions. Heubner.
Mat 23:13. Ye shut up.The kingdom of heaven, appearing with Christ, is represented as a palace, or, more precisely, a wedding-hall, with open doors. The hypocrites shut the kingdom of heaven before the people, .For ye neither go in yourselves.The shutting up is therefore twofold: 1. by their own guilt and wicked example; 2. by the actual keeping back of those who are entering, who not only would go in, but have their feet already on the threshold. So was it with Israel. The people were on the point of believing, when their hierarchical authorities drew them back into unbelief.
Ver.I5. Ye compass sea and land.Fanatical proselytism. Danz: De cura Hebroram in conquirendis proselytis in Meuschenii N. T. ex .Talm. illust. p. 649. That the Pharisees undertook actual missionary journeys, cannot be inferred with certainty from Joseph. Antiq. xx. 2, 4 (not 3 and not 1); for this passage speaks of a Jewish merchant who made proselytes, and the remnant of the Ten Tribes were very abundant in Adiabene. But we may suppose that there were such missions, and, indeed, that a proselyting impulse generally drove the Jews through the world. The real Pharisee did not make proselytes from heathenism to Judaism merely, but also from Judaism to Pharisaism.The child of hell.One who is doomed to perish or at least in great danger.Twofold more than yourselves., according to Valla, must be taken as an adjective, and not, as is customary, adverbially. But how was the proselyte worse than the Pharisee? Olshausen: Because the proselytes were without the spiritual substratum of the Mosaic economy, which was an advantage the Pharisees still possessed. That is, the latter were Jews and Pharisees, while the proselytes were only a caricature of Pharisaism. De Wette: Error and superstition are doubled by communication. Meyer: Experience proves that proselytes become worse and more extreme than their teachers. Thus the proselyte is a Pharisee of a higher degree. We might point to the Idumeans as examples, who converted John Hyrcanus (not till afterward a Sadducee) by force in their Or Petra. The house of Herod afforded a striking illustration of the character of such proselytes, in whom the dark elements of heathenism were blended with the dark elements of Judaism. The proselyte Poppa probably urged Nero to the persecution of the Christians. But that the misleader is generally worse than the misled, is a fact which does not here come into view; it is a wicked conversion or perversion that is spoken of, and the intensification of Pharisaism with the course of time. De Wette rightly observes, that Jesus does not here mean the endeavor to convert the Gentiles to Judaism generally. Meanwhile Judaism as Judaism was not called to the work of heathen missions except in the way of mere preparation. The law can only make proselytes; the gospel alone can convert. See Heubner on Proselytes and Proselytizing, p. 346. Cardinal Dubois, under the regency in France, convertisseur en chef. Several Jewish proselytes of modern times.25
Mat 23:16. Woe unto you, ye blind guides!Casuistry as the lax perversion of the fundamental laws of religion and morality. The mark common to both the examples given is this, that the divine institution, imposing holy obligation, is counted for nothing; and that, on the other hand, the human work which requires sanctification through the divine is placed in its stead. The Pharisees distinguished oaths, in respect to their validity, according to external, superficial [or rather fundamentally wrong] notes, only in the interest of unscrupulousness. De Wette.By the temple.The oath is very frequent, by this dwelling, . (Wetstein and Lightfoot).By the gold of the temple.By its golden adornments and vessels of gold; or by the temple-treasure. Jerome and Maldonatus are in favor of the latter. When we distinguish between the essential house of God, and the house of God as ceremonially adorned with gold, then Pharisaism swears only and always by the gold of the temple: it cannot swear by the temple itself. The outer manifestation is to it the reality itself: that is, for example, a church with naked walls is no church. Meanwhile it is probable that the pharisaic and hierarchical covetousness preferred the oath by the treasure of the temple, as that by the sacrifice. De Wette.It is nothing.It has no significance, and imposes no obligation (the Italian peccadiglio): the reservatio mentalis of Jesuitical morality.He is a debtor.Bound to observe the oath.
Mat 23:17. For which is greater?Superiority of the originally holy, the divine, to that which is derivatively holy, the human, which is made holy only by the divine. The same relation which the gold bears to the divine house, the human offering bears to the divine fire which makes the altar an altar.
Mat 23:18. Whoso shall swear by the altar.To any living view of the altar, the offering is one with the altar. Casuistry cuts asunder the living relations of religion, kills its life, denies its spirit and idolizes its body.
Mat 23:21. And whoso shall swear by the temple.We expect to hear, he sweareth also by the gold of the temple. But this is self-understood; and therefore Christ returns back to the Lord of the temple, who makes the temple what it is, and makes heaven, the great temple, what it is. The oath has its significance generally in this, and in this only, that it is a confirmation by God, a declaration uttered as before God.
Mat 23:22. And he that shall swear by heaven.Meyer: The contrary of Mat 23:22 is found in Schevuoth, f. 35, Matthew 2 : Quia prter Deum, cli et terra creatorem, datur etiam ipsum clum et terra, indubium esse debet, quod is, qui per clum et terram jurat, non per eum juret, qui ilia creavit, sed per illas ipsas creaturas.
Mat 23:23. For ye pay tithe.The ordinances concerning tithes (Lev 27:30; Num 18:21; Deu 12:6; Deu 14:22-28) placed the fruits of the field and of the trees under the obligation; but tradition applied the law to the smallest produce of the garden, to the mint, the dill, and the cummin (Babyl. Joma, f. 83, 2. Lightfoot, Hottinger: De decimis Judor.)The weightier things: .De Wette: Those things which were harder, difficiliora. Meyer: The more important, graviora. It is very probable that Jesus referred to the analogy of the prapta gravia () et levia () among the Jewish teachers. (See Schttgen, p. 183.) But there is no need to distinguish things so closely connected: the important supposes the difficult. Pharisaism is led into legalism and ceremonialism by its aversion to the difficult requirements of internal spiritual religion.Judgment, , .See Isa 1:17. Thus, not righteousness itself, but fidelity in the discharge of duties according to the principles of righteousness. The mark of this care for right is, that it is one with mercy; and this mercy cannot be replaced by a hypocritical appearance, the almsgiving of the Pharisees (Mat 6:1).Faith, .Luther, faith; de Wette and Meyer, fidelity, as in Rom 3:3; Gal 5:22. The opposite is . Scriptural language does not distinguish between the two ideas, as ours does. Faith and fidelity are one in the principle of trust. But here ethical, subjective faith, or fidelity, is meant. Christ marks the moral development of the law in three stages: 1. The faithfulness of the Mosaic position: rigid care of law and right (Elijah). 2. The prophetic position: mercy to sinners, and even to the heathen, as the internal principle of legality. 3. Messianic fidelity as the fulfilment of the whole law. True fidelity is identical with this fidelity. Heubner: , conscientiousness: , sincerity. It presupposes a blunted moral feeling to show much concern about little faults, but to care nothing for great ones. (Luther, Works, 10: 1986, applies the same passage to the papal laws.)
These ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.Reverse order. True and internal adherence to law places the great matter first, without being lax in the less.
Mat 23:24. Blind guides, comp. Mat 23:16.The term implies that they not only acted as hypocrites, but also taught as hypocrites. Mat 23:16 pronounces a separate woe against all casuistry. But here the words, and what follows them, explain the woe of Mat 23:23 rather in its dogmatic side. The appellations, Ye fools and blind, Mat 23:17; Mat 23:19, represent them as self-blinded and in voluntary delusion.
Strain out26a gnat.Ye strain (the wine) in order to separate off the gnats. The liquare vinum had among the Greeks and Romans only a social significance; but to the Pharisees it was a religious act. It was supposed that the swallowing of the gnat would defile them; and therefore the Jews strained the wine, in order to avoid drinking an unclean animal. (Buxtorf, Lex. Talm. Wetstein, from Chollin, fol. 67, culices pusillos, quos percolant.) The actual custom is here a symbol of the highest Levitical scrupulosity; and the opposite, the swallowing of camels, which of course could only signify the most enormous impurities in the enjoyment of life and its earthly pleasures, was the symbol of unbounded and unreflectingly stupid eagerness in sin. The expression is of a proverbial type. The camel was in the law unclean, because it had no divided hoof, Lev 11:4; and, moreover, this hypothetical swallowing of the camel would involve a thorough violation of the Noachic prohibition of eating blood and things strangled.
Mat 23:25. The outside of the platter.Figurative description of the legal appearance of gratification. Cup and platter: meat and drink, or the enjoyment of life in all its forms.But within.Here we have the internal and moral side of gratification.They are full of extortion and excess.That of which they are full, wine and food, was the produce of robbery and incontinence (, a later form of ). Meyer. See Isa 28:7 sqq.
Mat 23:26. Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first.The rebuking adjective blind points here also to the absurdity of their practice.Cleanse the inside. Sanctify thy enjoyment by righteousness and temperance.That the outside may be clean.Fritzsche: May be able to be cleansed. Meyer, better: That the purity of the externals may follow. External purity is not here declared useless (de Wette); but it is declared not to be true holiness, which implies the preceding purification of the inner man. It is here presupposed that all their adorning of the outside must fail to make even that clean, so long as the inside is full of defilement: that is, Levitical purity without moral purity is itself defilement. (Bengel, in a gentler expression, non est mundities.)
Mat 23:27. Whited sepulchres.The graves were every year, on the 15th Adar, whitened with a kind of chalk ()a practice derived by the Rabbins from Eze 39:15; not merely for the sake of appearance, but also that these places, the touch of which was defilement (Num 19:16), might be more easily seen and avoided. (See the rabbinical passages in Lightfoot, Schttgen, and Wetstein.) Thus they always had a pleasant outward appearance. Meyer. But thus also they were adorned. Luk 11:44 is a similar thought, not, however, the same.
Full of dead mens bones.Dead bodies were unclean according to the law, and the touch of them defiled (Num 5:2; Num 6:6): this was specially the case with the bones of the dead and the odor of decay from the grave. Impurity has a deadly effect. Spiritual death exerts a deadly influence (1Jn 3:14-15); and thus what follows, the murder of the prophets, is introduced.
Mat 23:28. Hypocrisy is here the wicked disguise; and iniquity, , is not simply immorality, but consummate theocratical lawlessness.
Mat 23:29. Ye build the tombs of the prophets.Construction of sepulchral graves, stones, and monuments, with various designs and inscriptions on consecrated burial ground. The antithesis is delicate: And garnish the sepulchres of the righteous (canonized saints). The latter are acknowledged at once, and receive their monuments; the prophets, on the other hand, often lay long in unknown and even dishonored graves. Later generations then began to become enthusiastic about them, and make their common graves elaborate monuments. The custom of building monuments to ancient and celebrated persons, has existed among all peoples and in all ages. Comp. Wetstein, Lightfoot, Jahn, Arch. Mat 1:2. De Wette. Consult Robinsons Researches on the remarkable sepulchres around Jerusalem, and the so-called sepulchres of the prophets.
Mat 23:30. And say.First of all, by the fact of adorning their sepulchres.If we had been in the days of our fathers. Not: if we were (Meyer), which here gives no sense.Of our fathers.Primarily, by natural lineage, but also in the sense of fellowship: Sons of the murderers, in a spiritual sense; which de Wette, without any reason, opposes.
Mat 23:31. Ye be witnesses unto yourselves.How this? De Wette: By virtue of the guilt transmitted to you. Meyer: When ye thus speak of your fathers, ye give testimony against yourselves, that ye belong to the kin of the murderers of the prophets. But the meaning is rather, the opposite of this: Since ye repute the fathers, in spite of their murderous spirit against the prophets, as being in the fullest sense of the word, in your traditions, your fathers; and explain the ancient blood-guiltiness, which has been transmitted to you, only as accidental evils into which they fell, or as the product of a barbarous age. Just as in these days the horrors of the inquisition are excused on account of the barbarism of the Middle Ages, although they had their essential root in the fanaticism of the principle of tradition. The continued acknowledgment of those old false principles, from which those murders sprang, establishes the community of guilt, and the propagation of the old guilt to consummate judgment. Heubner quotes: Sit licet divus, dummodo non vivus.27
Mat 23:32. Fill ye up then the measure.Chrysostom says that this was spoken prophetically; Grotius, permissively. De Wette and Meyer make it an ironical imperative. De Wette: The presupposes the ability and willingness in the mind of the Pharisees which merely needs encouragement. (!) The difficult analogon of this difficult passage is the word of Jesus to Judas, Joh 13:27 : What thou intendest to do, do quickly. The last means to scare the wicked from their gradually ripening iniquity is the challenge: Do what ye purpose at once! If this is irony, it is divine Irony, as in Psa 21:4.28Fill ye up.The ancient crime of the prophet-murdering spirit ran on continuously through the ages, (See Isaiah 6; Mat 13:14; Act 28:26.) Its consummation was the murder of Christ.Fill up then, even ye, . The emphasis, however, falls upon the . Ye, who condemn the murderers of the prophets, will even fulfil the measure of their guilt.The measure of guilt. The expression was, according to Wetstein, current among the Rabbins. With the full measure of guilt, judgment begins. The passage, Exo 20:5, which de Wette quotes, describes the generic nature of guilt in the reduced sphere of a single house; and the guilt of a community, of a church, of an order, is to be distinguished as an enlarged measure of the more limited family guilt.
Mat 23:33. Serpents.Comp. Luk 3:7. . The Conj. delib. supposes the matter to be inwardly decided. The judgment of hell, . The sentence which condemns to hell. The expression, judicium Gehenn was used by the Rabbins (Wetstein).
Mat 23:34. Wherefore I send, etc.Fearful teleology of judgment. The messengers of salvation must hasten the process of doom for the hardened. Sin, which will not be remedied, must be drawn out into its full manifestation, that it may find its doom and destruction in the judgment.Behold, I send unto youThis is difficult, inasmuch as Jesus seems to bring down into the present, as His own sending, the sending of the prophets who had appeared in earlier times. (I) Van Hengel: The quotation of an old prediction. (2) Olshausen refers to Luk 11:49, Jesus speaking here as the essential Wisdom. (3) De Wette: Jesus utters this with the feeling of His Messianic dignity; these prophets and wise men are His own messengers, the Apostles, etc. But here it is not merely the New Testament martyrdoms that are meant; the whole history of the persecutions of the prophets appears Ideologically, i.e., as judgment. Hence Jesus speaks out of the central consciousness of the theocratical wisdom, and in unison with the consciousness of the Father: comp. Mat 11:19. As the last who was sent of God, He was the moving, actuating principle of all the divine missions: comp. Joh 1:26. But as the Old Testament times were not excluded, so the New Testament times are included.29 The futures are prophetic, as is the whole passage. Hence in the Jesus thought assuredly of Himself. Meyer refers to the crucifixion of Simeon, bishop of Jerusalem and Pella: Euseb. Hist. Ecc 3:22.The expression is very strong. They will be no better than brands for the fire of your fanaticism.
Mat 23:35. That upon you may come.The common expression for judgment, Eph 5:6, as intimating its inevitableness, suddenness, power, and grandeur.The righteous (innocent) blood, ; that is, the punishment for it, comp. Mat 27:25, but such as the righteous blood has awakened. Innocent blood appears as the leader of avenging powers: comp. Gen 4:10; Heb 12:24; Rev 6:10. Certainly the blood of Christ speaketh better things than the blood of Abel; but that blood has also its condemning character, and indeed in the shedding of that blood the judgment of the world was completed. The righteous blood is here emphatic: the consecrated, sanctified blood of the prophets. Bengel: , ter hoc dicitur uno hoc versu magna vi. , in the present tense. The blood is a continuous stream, which still flows and will flow, being present especially in its spiritual influence. Rev 6:10,
Zachariah, son of Barachiah.See 2Ch 24:20. Zachariah, the son of the high-priest Jehoiada, stoned in the court of the temple by command of the king. There are difficulties here:1. He was not the last of the martyrs of the Old Testament: the murder of Urijah, Jer 26:23, was of a later date. But besides the order of the Hebrew canon, there was something pre-eminently wicked in the destruction of the former. Zachariah was the son of a high-priest of the greatest merit; he was murdered between the temple and the altar, and died crying, The Lord seeth, and will avenge it. And, moreover, his destruction was always vividly in the remembrance of the Jews. See Lightfoot on this passage, and Targum Thren. Mat 2:20. 2. The father of Zachariah was Jehoiada, here called Barachiah. Different explanations: (a) Beza, Grotius, al.: his father had two names; (b) van Hengel, Ebrard: Barachias was the father, Jehoiada the grandfather; (c) Kuinoel supposes that the words, son of Barachiah, are a gloss, (d) de Wette, Bleeck, Meyer [and Al-ford] decide that an error in the name has crept in. Probably Jesus Himself did not mention the name of the father (Luk 11:51), and it was added from an original tradition: the error being the result of confounding the person of Zachariah with the better known Zechariah the prophet, whose father was named Barachiah (Zec 1:1). This tradition was followed by Matthew; but in the Gospel of the Hebrews the error was not found (according to Jerome, the name there was Jehoiada). Meyer, (e) According to Hammond and Hug, the Zachariah meant was the son of Baruch, who was killed in the temple after the death of Christ (Joseph. Bell. Judges 4, 6, 4). Hug thinks that Jesus spoke in the future, but that the Evangelist, after the event had taken place, put it in the preterite. But this is an untenable notion, even apart from the difference between Baruch and Barachiah. Ammon, who also refers the words to the Zachariah of Josephus, explained them as interpolation. (f) Chrysostom quoted an ancient opinion, according to which it was the last but one of the lesser prophets, Zechariah. (g) Origen, Basil, and others, thought it was Zacharias, the father of John the Baptistfollowing a mere legend; to which the objection holds good, that if Jesus had come down to such recent times, he would doubtless have mentioned John the Baptist Himself. The Lord moreover speaks not of the blood-guiltiness of the present generation, but of the guilt of former times, which came upon the present generation because they filled up the iniquities of their fathers. (Comp. art. in Studien und Kritiken for 1841, p. 20, and Pharmaci des, . Athens, 1838.) We prefer the solution sub (b). But if there was an error of name (see (d)), we might ascribe it, with Amnion and Eichhorn, to the translator of St. Matthew rather than the primitive evangelical tradition, as de Wette and Meyer do. It is very difficult to determine whether Matthew, in his familiarity with the genealogies, had a more correct account than that of the Book of Chronicles, or whether his translator made the change. It is in favor of the second supposition of Jehoiada being the grandfather, that he died at the age of 130, and that Zechariah, who is called his son, was laid hold on by the Spirit at a later time, and appeared as a prophet.30
Mat 23:37. Jerusalem, Jerusalem (Luk 13:34, where it is placed earlier for pragmatic reasons).Language of the more mighty emotion of compassion after the stern language of judgment. But with the change of feeling there is also a change of subject, and of the exhibition of the guilt. In the place of the Pharisees and scribes, it is Jerusalem; that is, the centre of the hierarchy, but also of the people, and this name combines the poor misled and the blind misleaders,the present, also, and the past. In the place of the punishment of ancient blood-guiltiness spoken of before, Jerusalems own personal guilt is denounced now as justifying this condemnation.Thou that killest.The expressions and are emphatic in two ways: first, through the participial form, and, secondly, through the present tense,the habitual murderess of the prophets, the stoner of the messengers of God.How often would I have gathered!The Lord still speaks out of the theocratic and prophetical consciousness which embraces in one the Old and New Testaments; yet the how often presupposes a frequent operation of the Lords grace in Jerusalem, and visits which the Evangelist was acquainted with, but which did not fall within his plan. Comp. here the Gospel of John. Thy children.That is, thy inhabitants. But, in a wider sense, all Israelites were children of Jerusalem.As a hen.Allusion to the destruction which impended over Jerusalem, in a figure which signifies that He would have taken Jerusalem under the protection of His Messianic glory, if it had turned to Him in time. The figure of the hen was often used by the Rabbins concerning the Shechinah, as gathering the proselytes under the shadow of its wings.But ye would not.The one guilt of Jerusalem was unfolded in the guilt of her individual children. Jesus knew that with the obduracy of the authorities the obduracy of the city and its inhabitants was decided. Hence He used the preterite, not the present tense. Jerusalems children had made their choice. The crucifixion of Jesus and the fall of the city were decided. It is quite an independent question, how many of the individual inhabitants of Jerusalem were saved by apostolical preaching. Historical notices on the later deplorable condition of Jerusalem, see in Heubners Com. p. 349.31
Mat 23:38. Behold, your house.No longer My Fathers house. According to Grotius, Meyer etc., the city; according to de Wette and others, temple and city. But the only true interpretation is that of Theophylact, Calvin, Ewald, the temple. For the word marks the moment at which Jesus leaves the temple, and leaves it for a sign that it was abandoned by the Spirit of the theocracy. Indeed, the leaving of the temple intimated that not merely the city, but also the land, was forsaken of the Spirit; for the temple is referred to in its symbolical meaning. We retain the addition desolate, i.e., a spiritual ruin. It was omitted in some copies, probably because it was thought that the word would open up some prospect of a restoration of the temple. But the prospect of the restoration of Israel involves only the spiritual rebuilding of Israels temple in the Spirit of Christ.
Mat 23:39. For I say unto you.Most solemn declaration.Ye shall not see Me henceforth:In My Messianic work and operation. From that, as among the Jews, He now entirely withdrew. See Joh 12:37 sq. After the resurrection, He showed Himself only to His own people.Till ye shall say.Neither at the destruction of Jerusalem (Wetstein), nor at the advent of Christ (Meyer), but in the future general conversion of Israel (Romans 11; Zec 12:10; Isa 66:20, etc.).Blessed be He that cometh, Psalms 118See the notes on the entry into Jerusalem, Mat 21:9-10. Jerusalem itself had not met the Redeemer with these words of greeting, but had asked, Who is this (Mat 21:10)? Thus it is an intimation of a future conversion. Not tragic and judicial, as Meyer explains it.
Matthew 24 : Mat 23:1. And Jesus went out.It is not merely a local and temporary departure from the temple that is meant. It is true that He had overcome all the assaults of His enemies in the temple; but still they had declined to give Him their faith, and at length had declined it by their absolute silence. And as the Lord of the temple, the temple had rejected Him, in the person of those who had legal authority in it. That was the fall of the temple; and it was then decided that it was no more now than a den of robbers, in which allthe Messiah, and the Spirit, and the hope of the Gentiles, and the blessing of Israelwas as it were murdered. He takes farewell of the temple; and from that time forward it became no better than a hall of desolation, a dreary and forsaken ruin. According to a Jewish legend in Joseph. Bell. Jdg 6:5; Jdg 6:3, the guardian angels of the temple deserted it at a much later period. At the Pentecost, when the priests for the night went into the temple to perform the divine service, they heard a great and rushing sound, and then the cry, .Tacitus, Hist. Mat 5:13 : Expresses repente delubri fores et audita major humana vox. Excedere deos; simul ingens motus excedentium. In the fortieth year before the destruction of Jerusalem, the lamp in the temple was extinguished of itself, according to Jewish accounts (see Lightfoot, Hor. Heb. ad Mat 26:3). The synagogue is still a place void of God, because it knows not Christ. Heubner. Indeed, this departure of Christ was not absolutely the last; for, after the resurrection, He solicited His enemies there, in the person of His Apostles. For the last time He left it when Paul was condemned in it (Act 21:33; Act 22:22), and James the son of Alphus was slain (Joseph. Antig. xx. 9, 1).
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL
1. See the preceding Exegetical Notes.
2. The seven benedictions of the Sermon on the Mount were summed up in an eighth: Blessed are all who are persecuted for righteousness sake. And this benediction has here its counterpart in a comprehensive woe, the eighth, upon the murderers of the prophets. But the ninth benediction, Blessed are ye, if ye be scorned and persecuted for My sake, has no counterpart among the woes, but the cry of distress over Jerusalem. True, that the Jews themselves afterward cried: His blood be on us and on our children ( Mat 27:25); but Jesus Himself knew that His blood would speak better things than the blood of Abel. Hence the change of the ninth woe into the lament over Jerusalem.
3. The guilt of the scribes and Pharisees became now, to the Lords view, the guilt of Jerusalem, and then the guilt of the nation itself. For Jerusalem was the representative of the spirit of the Pharisees and of the national genius. But Jerusalem represents also32 the life and the honor, the fathers and the glory, the youth and the hope of the nation. Jerusalem represents the children of the nation, so often threatened by tempests of ruin, and now threatened by the saddest of all. Therefore the Lord mourns and laments over His own ruined Jerusalem. All the missions and messages of God which had been sent to Jerusalem, and which formed the ground of Israels judgment, to Him appeared now rather as so many efforts and impulses of God to save them. His own compassionate desire to save them had been active throughout all those ages of divine mission; but especially had it been active during the time of His own labors and ministry. His whole pilgrimage on earth was troubled by distress for Jerusalem, like the hen who sees the eagle threatening in the sky, and anxiously seeks to gather her chickens together under her wings. With such distress, Jesus saw the Roman eagles approach for judgment upon the children of Jerusalem, and sought with the strongest solicitations of love to save them. But in vain! They were like dead children to the voice of maternal love!
4. Stier, ii. Matt 527: Jehovah represented His dealing with His people, first, as that of an eagle, hovering over her young and bearing them on her wings (Deu 32:11); but at last, as that of a hen which strives to extend her wings over her imperilled chickens. Antithesis between the fidelity of ruling power, and the fidelity of suffering mercy.
5. Behold, your house.Words which were sealed even by the vain attempt of Julian to build the temple again, as well as by its whole subsequent fate. Comp. Rauschesbusch (sen.): Leben Jesu, p. 327.
6. Till ye shall say, Blessed.sepp, Life of Christ 3:31: The Jewish rulers failed in this greeting in the day of the Palm-entry, and the people owe it to Christ to this day. This word contains, however, a definite promise of the national restoration of Israel, as it is set forth in Romans 11, and in many passages of the prophets. See Alfred Meter: der Jude, Frankfort 1856; where, however, there is too much intermin gling of Jewish Christian expectations.
7. Jesus, after departing from the temple, still remained quietly in the court of the women, and blessed the widows gift: thereby blessing true and simple piety, in the midst of debased and degraded ceremonialism. Comp. Mar 12:41; Luk 21:1; and the authors Leben Jesu, ii. 3, p. 1249.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
1. The Preface (vers.13) and the Discourse as a whole.The preaching of the truth must, according to the repeated example of the Lord, turn from priests and teachers who persistently scorn it, to the common people.The great condemnation pronounced by Jesus in the temple upon the Pharisees and the scribes.The Lord vindicates and protects appointed ordinances, even while vehemently condemning those who administered them.High esteem for the office never excludes free condemnation of the abuses of those who hold it.Hypocrites condemn their own works by their own words.
2. The General Rebuke (vers.47).Dead traditionalism : 1. Its hardness; 2. its falsehood; 3. its selfishness.Despotism in holy apparel and in the domain of the conscience: 1. Doubly fearful; 2. doubly ruinous; 3. doubly impotent.The Lord holds up to His disciples the image of spiritual ambition and pride for an everlasting warning.The power of faith disposes of the pretensions of spiritual ambition: faith in the only Teacher: faith in God as the only Father; faith in Christ as the only Lord and Guide. (Thus the Apostles Creed, rightly understood, is threefold Protestant.)Out of the humility of fidelity springs the courage of freedom.
3. Specific Rebuke: the seven woes (vers.1337).The seven benedictions and the seven woes.The eighth woe as the summary of the seven: like the eighth benediction.The ninth woe is changed into a lamentation over Jerusalem.First woe: Spiritual avarice and greediness for securing legacies; petitioners changed into beggars.The long prayers of the hypocrites, and the long sentence of judgment.Second woe; Those who shut the kingdom of heaven to others, and exclude themselves. Third woe: Proselytism; soul-winners and soul-ruiners.33Fourth woe: The work of man up, the work of God down: the inward nothing, the outward everything.The true oath always by the living and true God.The blindest ignorance connected with a conceit of keenest insight into the laws of the kingdom of God.Fifth woe: Legality in little things; lawlessness in great Straining out gnats; swallowing camels.Sixth woe. The outside and the inside of the cup and the platter; or, the feast of the religious and moral hypocrite: 1. In the outward form, consecrated or adorned; 2. in the inner character, abominable and reprobate.Seventh woe: The whited sepulchres: 1. Like pleasant abodes outwardly; 2. caves of bones, diffusing death, within.Spiritual death, in the guise of spiritual bloom: 1. Captivating; 2. destructive.The eighth woe: The murderers of the prophets.How the garnishing the sepulchres of the prophets may be auspicious: 1.When it bears witness to a diseased hanging on to antiquity [false and morbid medievalism.P. S.]; 2. when it robs the prophets of the present of their rights.To persecute Christ in His saints is to persecute Christ Himself.He who would free himself from the blood-guiltiness of olden times, must, free himself from the principles which created it then.Ancient guilt finds its sure consummation in terrible judgment, however long delayed.The sinners inherited guilt becomes his own only through his own personal guilt.Jerusalem, Jerusalem!How often.
4. The Departure from the Temple.The temple desecrated by obduracy: 1. A house of men, forsaken of God; 2. a house of desolation, forsaken of the Spirit; 3. a house of misery and death, forsaken of Christ.The golden sunset after the evening storm; or, the prospect of the restoration of Israel.The departure of Christ from the temple of the Jews: 1. The close of a mournful past; 2. the sign of a miserable present; 3. the token of a sad futurity.The last word of the Lord to His people, the announcement of His first royal advent to punish His people (in the destruction of Jerusalem).
Starke:All hypocrites are severe toward others, but very indulgent toward themselves.Canstein: A faithful teacher uses severity toward himself, but he rules those who are under him with gentleness.By thy words wilt thou be condemned.They would fain have men believe that there was a special sanctity in the habit of their order.Canstein: Pharisaic folly; elegant Bibles and books of prayer, and no devotion in the heart.One is our Master, Christ.Quesnel: Gods word and truth is an inheritance common to all the brethren. He who would glory in being its lord, and keep his brethren from the use of it, is a robber of the Churchs inheritance.The Church of Christ is a family, of which God alone is the Father.[Quesnel on Mat 23:1 : Let us always look with respect on Christ and His authority, even in the most imperfect of His ministers. The truth loses nothing of its value by the bad lives of its ministers. The faith is not built upon the lives of pastors, but upon the visible authority of the Church (? rather upon Christ and His word).P. S.]Hedinger: Let no man vaunt himself of his position and office.The gifts by which we are useful to others are from Christ, and they are the gifts of grace.Humility is the true way to abiding dignity.Hypocrites would convert others, while they are themselves unconverted; hence their converts generally go from worse to worse.It is not God, but gold, not the altar, but what is on it, that they are concerned with.Swearing by the name of the great God, is, Indeed, a matter of tremendous importance.Sins reproduce one another; when one has wasted what he has robbed, he robs again that he may waste.The unconverted man is like a sepulchre, in which man lies in his corruption.Quesnel: Many are Christians in name and appearance; few in spirit and in truth.Canstein: At last the whited mask drops off, and the hypocrite is naked and discovered.Garnishing the graves of the old martyrs, and making new martyrs.When men in their wickedness receive no more exhortation, but make a mock of God and His servants, the measure of wrath is very near being filled up.Wherefore I send unto you. Rom 2:4 : The goodness and long forbearance of God.God remembers all the blood-guiltiness of the history of mankind: woe to them who become partakers of the guilt!
Verily I say unto you. Gods threatenings are not in sport.Jerusalem, Jerusalem: the fatherly heart of God is earnest in calling men to salvation.The cause of ruin is the evil will of man.Osiander: Contempt of Gods word is followed by the downfall of all rule, authority, and good institutions, Dan 9:6; Dan 9:11-12.Canstein: There is a time of grace; there is also a day of judgment.
Gerlach:
Mat 23:6. Notwithstanding these solemn prohibitions, how much of these sins have been found in all churches and sects, from the highest to the least!
Mat 23:16 sq. These rules of the Pharisees about swearing were doubtless designed, first, to relax the strict obligation of certain oaths of common life; and then to enrich the temple-treasure, by attributing a greater sanctity and more rigid obligation to the gold which was ordained for the temple, and the sacrifices which were ordained for the altar, and which were partly the perquisite of the priests. Comp. Mat 15:5; Mar 7:11.
Mat 23:36. Every sinner who, in spite of the divine warnings, walks in the footsteps of his fathers, draws down upon his own head the punishment which was in their times mercifully deferred and suspended.
Lisco:The condemnation of Jesus affects all who are contented with appearing that which they should be.The woe is upon their deceiving of souls; their hypocritical covetousness; their hypocritical proselyting; their hypocritical trafficking with oaths; their hypocritical pedantry; their hypocritical righteousness; their hypocritical respect for the saints of God.
Heubner:The dignity of the ministry is to be honored for its own sake.The ordinances of men always a burden; the commandments of God and of Christ are always a gentle yoke.Spiritual pride and ambition always one of the chief temptations and dangers of ministers.Christ does not forbid the title, but the ambition for it. Application to the Romish Church, and the name Papa universalis. Pater.Not ruling, but serving, makes greatness.Great difference between zeal for conversion and ambition for conversion [or missionary spirit and selfish proselyting.P. S.].Hypocrisy in vows, reservatio mentalis.Ask whether anything impure clings to your enjoyment: the tears and sighs of the poor.It is a base reverence for the great of olden time, which will not seek to imitate them.Every generation should be improved by the preceding; if not, it is made worse.The great design of Jesus is to gather in poor, wandering, and scattered children of men into one family of God.Desolate. Every Christian temple, in which Christ is not preached, is empty; so is every heart in which He does not live.
Footnotes:
[1] Mat 23:2.[ (aorist), seated themselves; Coverdale: are sat down; Conant: have sat down (with the Implication of continuance); Ewald: liessen sich nieder; Luther, de Wette, Lunge: sitzen. The phrase does not necessarily convey blame for usurpation, but states a matter of fact, the act and its result: having seated themselves they sit, and we invested with official authority as teachers and judges.P. S.]
[2] Mat 23:3. is omitted by B., D., L., Z., al., [Cod. Sinait.], Lachmann, Tischendorf, etc.
[3] Mat 23:3.Codd. D., L., D.: , do and observe. The reverse order [ in the text. Rec. is explanatory.
[4] Mat 23:4. (is better supported than [which seems to be substituted as more suitable].
[5] Mat 23:4.Tischendorf omits without sufficient cause. [Lachmann retains it, Alford omits it, so also Cod. Sinait.]
[6] Mat 23:5.Of their garments, , seems an explanatory addition to the text, but necessary in the translation. [They are wanting in the best authorities, including Coil. Sinait.]
[7] Mat 23:7.[Some of the best authorities, including (Cod. Sinait., and the critical editions of Lachmann and Tregelles read: (or ) only once; but Tischendorf and Alford retain the text, rec.P. S.]
[8] Mat 23:8.[Dr. Lange, in his Version (Meister), retains with Meyer the text rec.: . But Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles, Alford, and even Wordsworth, who generally adheres to the received text, react with the best ancient authorities: , teacher, and this is preferable also on account of Mat 23:11, to avoid repetition.P. S.]
[9] Mat 23:8.O is an addition from Mat 23:10, and omitted in the critical editions.
[10] Mat 23:14[ Mat 23:14, from , is omitted in the oldest MSS., including Cod. Sinait., versions, and seems to be inserted from Mar 12:40 and Luk 20:47. See the critical summaries in Lachmann, Tischendorf Tregelles, and Alford. But Griesbach. Scholz, and Fritzsche, according to Codd. E., F., G., H., etc., assume a transposition of Mat 23:13-14. So also Dr. Lange in hi3 German Version, who regards it as very improbable that Matthew should have omitted such an important feature.P. S.]
[11] Mat 23:19. is wanting in D., L., Z., [and In Cod. Sinait. which reads simply ], omitted by Tischendorf [and Alford], and enclosed in brackets by Lachmann. [The words may have been Inserted from Mat 23:17, where they are genuine.P. S.]
[12] Mat 23:22.Text. Rec. (retained by Lachmann on the authority of Cod. B.): , but Tischendorf, with nearly all the uncial MSS., reads . [So also Tregelles and Alford. The latter suggests that the aorist implies that God did not then dwe1 in the temple, nor had He done so since the Captivity. But in the cleansing of the temple Christ evidently treated it as the house of God, Mat 21:13.P. S.]
[13] Mat 23:23.The definite article before these petty items, as in the Greek ( ) and in the German Versions of Lange and others, should be retained, as it adds emphasis.P. S.]
[14] Mat 23:23.[Lange translates : die (mosaische) Rechtspflege und das (prophetische) Erbarmen und die (messianische) Glaubenstreue. See his Exeg. Notes.P. S]
[15] Mat 23:23.After is to be inserted according to Codd. B., C, etc., and the critical editions.
[16] Mat 23:24.[The word at before strain was originally a printing error for out, which first appeared in King Jamess revision in 1611, and was faithfully copied ever after. All the older English Versions, from Tyndale to the Bishops Bible (except the N. T. of Rheims, of 1562, which renders: strain a gnat, omitting out), correctly translate : strain out, etc. Alford, however, thinks that the phrase in the Authorized Version was no typographical blunder, as is generally supposed, but a deliberate alteration, meaning strain (out the wine) at (the occurrence of) a gnat But this is rather far-fetched, and Bishop Lowth is certainly right when he remarks: The Impropriety of the preposition (at) has wnolly destroyed the meaning of the phrase. The phrase refers to the use of a strainer, and is plain enough with out. The Jews carefully strained their wine and other beverages, from fear of violating Lev 11:20; Lev 11:23; Lev 11:41-42, as do now the Buddhists in Ceylon and Hindustan.P. S.]
[17] Mat 23:25.For Griesbach and Scholz read , unrighteousness. But B., D., L. speak for the former reading.
[18] Mat 23:32., implete, is the correct reading. H., al.) and (B., al.) originated in the desire to soften the sense.
[19] Mat 23:38.Codd. B., L., al., and Lachmann omit , but it must be retained as essential.
[20][Comp. Alford: There can, I think, he no doubt that this discourse was delivered, as our Evangelist here relates it. all at one time, and in these the. last days of our Lords ministry.It bears many resemblances to the Sermon on the Mount, and may be regarded as the solemn close, as that was the opening, of the Lords public teaching.P. S ]
[21][The Edinb trsl. has here: relaed, perhaps a printing error, for released, abgelst.]
[22][Alford: The here is very significant,because they sit in Moses sent, and this clears the meaning, a d shows it to be, all things which they, as successor of Moses, out of his law, command you to observe, do; then being a distinction between their lawful teaching ns expounders of the law, and their frivolous traditions superadded thereto, and blamed below.P. S.]
[23][The title was used in three forms: Rab, master, doctor; Rabbi. my master; Rabboni, my great master.P. S.]
[24][Comp. the remark of Alford on Mat 23:11 : It may serve to show us how little the letter of the letter of a precept has to do with Its true observance, if we reflect that he who of all the Heads of sects has most notably violated this whole command, and caused others to do so, calls himself serous servorum DeiP. S.]
[25][Comp. here some excellent remarks quoted from an English periodical, the Homilist. in Nasts Commentary, p. 520, on the great difference between the genuine missionary and the proselyting spirit, the godly zeal, and the sectarian zealP.S.]
[26][Not: at, which Is In all probability originally a typographical error for out. See the critical note above, No. 16, p. 408. Another striking example of the tenacity of a typographical blunder which found Its way Into many editions of the English Bible, is vinegar for vineyard in Mat 20:1. Hence the term: The Vinegar-Bible.P. S.]
[27][Dr. Crosby, Explanatory Notes or Scholia in, loc, in view of the parallel passage in Luk 11:47, where the word for makes a connection between building the tombs and approving their fathers crimes, suggests the conjecture that there was a proverb among the Jews asserting complicity in crime, like One kills him, and another digs his grave. Stier and Alford: The burden of this hypocrisy is, that they, being one with their fathers, treading in their steps, but vainly disavowing their deeds, were, by the very act of building the sepalehres of the prophets, Joined with their fathers wickedness. See Luk 11:47-48. Instead of the penitent confession: We have Binned, we and our fathers, this last and worst generation in vain protests against their participation In their fathers guilt, which they are meanwhile developing to the utmost and filling up Its measure.The Pharisees called the murderers of the prophets rightly their fathers: they are even worse than their fathers, because they add hypocrisy to impiety,P.S.]
[28][Psalms 20 contains no trace of irony, and there must be tome error here, probably for Psa 2:4.P. S.]
[29][The Edinb. trsl. has here again just the reverse: the New Testament times were not Included. Lange says: So wenig die altleslamentliche Zeit ausgeschlossen ist, so wenig die neutestamentliche.P. S.]
[30][Wordsworth in an elaborate note assigns a mystic reason for the use of the patronymic viz., it refers to Christ Himself as the true Zachariah=Remembrancer of God (from reoordatus fuit, and “, Jehovah), and the true Son of Barachiah, i.e., the Son of the Blessed (from benedixit, and ), who had been typified by all the martyrs of the Old Testament from Abel to Zachariah, the ton of Jehoiada. And ho sees in , Mat 23:39, an allusion to the name in Mat 23:35. But be omits the circumstance that Zechariah the prophet was the son of Barachiah, Zec 1:1.P.S.]
[31][The words: , ye would not, are important for the doctrine of the freedom and responsibility of man which must not be sacrificed to, but combined with, the opposite, though by no means contradictory doctrine of the absolute sovereignty and eternal decrees of God. Alford in loc.: The tears of our Lord over the perverseness of Jerusalem are witnesses of the freedom of mans will to resist the grace of God.P. S.]
[32][The Edinb. Version rends: Jerusalem was the sole representative; mistaking the German allein (=aber, [illegible] before (not after) Jerusalem (Allein Jerusalem reprsentive auch), and thus destroying the necessary antitheeil to the preceding sentence.P. S.]
[33][In German: Seelenwerber und Seelenwerber:P.S.]
Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange
CONTENTS
In this Chapter the Lord Jesus is engaged in exhorting his disciples, and the multitude, against the doctrine of the Scribes and Pharisees. The Chapter closeth with Christ’s pathetic lamentation over Jerusalem, as a City given up to destruction.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
“Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, (2) Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat: (3) All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. (4) For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men’s shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. (5) But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments, (6) And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues, (7) And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi. (8) But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. (9) And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. (10) Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ. (11) But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant. (12) And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.”
This chapter, if there were no other in the whole book of God, to alarm the mind on the awful consequence of Pharisaical righteousness, is enough, in itself, to awaken the most serious apprehensions on that account. Jesus, who knew what was in man, and to whose divine knowledge every heart was open, beheld in those men such false sanctity, that no language appeared sufficiently strong, to mark his severe displeasure at their conduct. everything done by them was done, the Lord said, with a view to the approbation of men. And the strong images of whited sepulchres, blind guides, and the like, which the Lord represented them by, may serve to shew in what a light he considered them. In these first verses of the chapter, the Lord Jesus cautions his hearers against the imitation of their conduct. In the following he pronounceth the most awful woes upon them.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Mat 23:5
Old Samuel Johnson, the greatest soul in England in his day, was not ambitious. ‘Corsica Boswell’ flaunted at public shows with printed ribbons round his hat: but the great old Samuel stayed at home. The world-wide soul wrapt up in its thoughts, in its sorrows what could paradings, and ribbons in the hat, do for it?
Carlyle.
Reference. XXIII. 5. C. Jerdan, Pastures of Tender Grass, p. 291.
Mat 23:8
The passage before us presents us with the true foundation on which all Christian teaching in God’s Church rests, and with the consequent guard against the most dangerous of the perversions to which it may be exposed.
I. Christ the Sole Teacher in His Church. They shall all be taught of God, was the Old Testament promise which described in the highest way the glory of the New Testament times. The universal prerogative of all Christian men is the possession of direct teaching from Christ Himself.
Then we have to consider the characteristics of this teaching of Christ’s, and we shall best do so by keeping in view the tacit contrast between the limitations of ours, and the perfections of His.
II. Christ’s Teaching is Inward. We can only appeal to men by words which may move their hearts or clear their understandings. We can only present motives which may have power or not. Conviction by the force of truth, persuasion by the weight of motives that is all we can do at the best for one another. We stand outside. But Christ can put His Hand into the secrets of the heart and touch the will. He uses His instruments, He blesses the word, He uses the discipline of life; but over and above all these, there is a teaching deeper than them all, when the soul in direct communication with Christ learns of Him.
III. Christ’s Teaching is Original. It is the impartation of Himself, and He is the Truth.
A. Maclaren.
References. XXIII. 8. D. M. Ross, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xliii. 1893, p. 364. A. H. Bradford, ibid. vol. xliv. 1893, p. 193. Lyman Abbott, ibid. vol. xlix. 1896, p. 264. H. Hensley Henson, ibid. vol. lxvi. 1904, p. 58. G. Philip, Home in the World, Beyond, p. 114. J. J. Tayler, Christian Aspects of Faith and Duty, p. 150.
Christ Our Master
Mat 23:8-10
I. Christ claims to be the supreme, and ultimately the sole, Teacher and Master of all Christian men. His first work was teaching: His followers were His disciples or scholars.
This is an aspect of Christ’s work which is apt to be obscured. We think of Christ more in relation to faith than in relation to conduct; as the Redeemer of men rather than as their Teacher. And even when we do think of Him in relation to conduct, it is perhaps His example rather than His words that we think of. But Christ claims to be a teacher, with a definite body of teaching as to what we should believe and what we should do.
II. Christ claims to be our only Master and Teacher. What are the forces that prompt and guide and limit our activity? In many cases we shall confess the influence of maxims gathered from our own experience, or learned from the masters of worldly policy. How much, when we look into it, comes from other sources than Christ?
III. Let us begin to seek out and to apply His precepts to our whole life; to test by them all influences that govern us.
1. We shall find much that conforms to Christ’s law, in so far as our civilization is Christian. Let us verify all this as from Christ, and follow it now as part of our obedience to Him.
2. We shall find precepts in Christ’s teaching which, in what at least seems to be their plain meaning, we have not acted on. Such cases, where we seem to disregard, or diverge from, the precepts of the Master, call for careful examination. No doubt wisdom is needed for their interpretation.
3. We shall find in our application of Christ’s precepts that there are still with us actions and feelings at variance with our Master’s teaching.
4. We may find that our whole scale of moral values differs from Christ’s: the scale of honour in which we range the virtues, the order of detestation in which we place the vices.
IV. Let it be said, too, that the disciple must carry his Master’s teaching into all spheres, not only into his private life, but also into his business and his politics. It is in our own lives that we have the nearest and freest field for acting as disciples of Christ. Those only rightly obey Christ who believe on Him, who acknowledge Him as Master because they trust Him as Saviour.
P. J. MacLagan, The Gospel View of Things, p. 40.
Mat 23:8-10
To be throned apart, like a Divine being surrounded by the bought homage of one’s fellows, and possessed of more power than a man can decently use, was a condition which excited in Delafield the same kind of contemptuous revolt that it would have excited in St. Francis. ‘Be ye not called master;’ a Christian even of his transcendental and heterodox sort, if he were a Christian, must surely hold these words in awe at least so far as concerned any mastery of the external or secular kind. To masteries of another order, the saint has never been disinclined.
Mrs. Humphey Ward in Lady Rose’s Daughter chap. XXIII.
References. XXIII. 8-10. T. G. Selby, The Strenuous Gospel, p. 314. J. Clifford, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xliii. 1893, p. 280; see also vol. xlvi. 1894, p. 216. G. Campbell Morgan, ibid. vol. lxxi. 1907, p. 99. XXIII. 13-15. T. G. Selby, The Lesson of a Dilemma, p. 319. XXIII. 15. H. Hensley Henson, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lx. 1901, p. 337.
Mat 23:15
The proselytizing agency of the Roman Church in this country I take to be one of the worst of the religious influences of the age. I do not mean as to its motives, for these I do not presume to touch, nor feel in any way called upon to question. But I speak of its effects, and they are most deplorable…. With this pernicious agency I for my own part wish to have nothing whatever to do; although I am one who thinks lightly, in comparison with most men, of the absolute differences in our belief from the formal documents of Rome.
Gladstone in 1863.
More than thirty years later, in the Nineteenth Century, Mr. Gladstone remarked that he ‘would define the spirit of proselytism as a morbid appetite for effecting conversions, founded too often upon an overweening self-confidence and self-love’.
The Visible Temple
Mat 23:17
A Temple there has been upon earth, a spiritual Temple, made up of living stones, a Temple, as I may say, composed of souls; a Temple with God for its Light, and Christ for the High Priest, with wings of angels for its arches, with saints and teachers for its pillars, and with worshippers for its pavement; such a Temple has been on earth ever since the Gospel was first preached. This unseen, secret, mysterious, spiritual Temple exists everywhere, throughout the kingdom of Christ, in all places, as perfect in one place as if it were not in another. Wherever there is faith and love, this Temple is; faith and love, with the name of Christ, are as heavenly charms and spells, to make present to us this Divine Temple, in every part of Christ’s kingdom. This Temple is invisible, but it is perfect and real because it is invisible, and gains nothing in perfection by possessing visible tokens. There needs no outward building to meet the eye in order to make it more of a Temple than it already is in itself. God, and Christ, and angels, and souls, are not these a heavenly court, all perfect, to which this world can add nothing? Though faithful Christians worship without splendour, without show, in a homely and rude way, still their worship is as acceptable to God, as excellent, as holy, as though they worshipped in the public view of men, and with all the glory and riches of the world…. King’s palaces are poor, whether in architecture or in decoration, compared with the shrines which have been reared to Him. The invisible Temple has become visible. As on a misty day the gloom gradually melts, and the sun brightens, so have the glories of the spiritual world lit up this world below. The dull and cold earth is penetrated by the rays. All around we see glimpses or reflections of those heavenly things which the elect of God shall one day see face to face. The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord and of His Christ; ‘the Temple has sanctified the gold,’ and the prophecies made to the Church have been fulfilled to the letter.
J. H. Newman.
Reference. XXIII. 19. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xiv. No. 831.
The Details of Life
Mat 23:23
I. The efficiency of some great men has been seriously impaired by their neglect of the uninteresting parts of life and duty. Disraeli confessed of himself, ‘I want energy in those little affairs of which life greatly consists’. This hatred of the trivial, even in cases where detail was of the essence of statesmanship, was acknowledged by his friends to be a cause of his weakness as a minister. On the other side, the greatest men who brought their work to splendid perfection, and whose lives were veritable triumphs, considered no detail of their task too trivial, no uninteresting portions of it too insipid, the truth being, the modest and monotonous details were so scrupulously wrought out that glorious success seemed to flower magically.
II. Life cannot be all interesting; much that it involves is necessarily stale and flat. In this contempt of triviality we suffer loss. We miss the essential discipline of the trivial, and missing that are not prepared for the greater situations and seasons; ignoring the grandeur of the minute, we defraud ourselves of one of the chief delights of existence; and having neglected insignificant particulars, we have certainly more or less marred the whole result in character and destiny, which is made up of insignificant particulars.
III. Detail is of the essence of life, and he is great and shall be great who knows it. There is teaching, discipline, and blessing of the highest order in faithfulness in monotonous days and things. ‘And the hand of the Lord was there upon me; and He said unto me, Arise, go forth into the plain, and I will there talk with thee. Then I arose, and went forth into the plain: and, behold, the glory of the Lord stood there’ (Eze 3:22-23 ). On the flat, dull, monotonous stretches of life does God speak with men and show them His glory.
W. L. Watkinson, Themes for Hours of Meditation, p. 185.
The Doctrine of Proportion
Mat 23:23
This is the doctrine of proportion, perspective, relativity, in things spiritual, religious, pious, and practically good. One matter is of so much consequence, and the other matter is of so much less consequence; they are both important, but one is lighter than the other and ye have omitted the weightier matters.
I. Here are men who are deeply concerned about a creed. Are they concerned about the right thing? Only a man of superficial mind would speak disrespectfully of forms of faith. They are useful, helpful, sometimes they approach the very point of essential necessity. What is greater than creed? Faith, faith is larger in all its inclusiveness and suggestiveness than any creed can ever be. Many men cannot put faith within the limits of credal form. Are we then to make infidels of them? Shall we not recognize that they are attending to the weightier matters of the law, and approach them, and recognize what measure of sincerity and earnestness may be obvious in all their spirit and action.
II. This line of reasoning might be fitly applied to the Bible itself. No man is going to be so fatuous and impious as to deny the great importance of many aspects of the controversy raging around the Bible; let us, however, be careful that we do not diminish the authority of the Bible by misunderstanding the purpose of the Bible itself. How did Jesus Christ Himself use the Bible? By the Bible, of course, I mean the Old Testament. His will be the right way. What did He go to the Old Testament for? For Himself, this is the whole necessity: to find the Son of God should be the object of every Biblical student and reader.
III. Apply the matter to the question of the Sabbath. Here are men who believe that the Sabbath begins at twilight of one day and goes on to evening twilight of another day. They keep Sabbath by the clock: up to five minutes within the time they can be buying and selling and getting gain, but now it is Sabbath Day, because a bell has been struck. Another man says, ‘I go the length of admitting that one in seven should be a day of rest’. That is the weightier matter; he is a Sabbatarian, in the truest, widest, noblest sense of the term.
IV. Apply this also to service. Some men can render one kind of service and some another; let every man be distinctive in his mission, and be most himself because he attends to the weightier matters which he is peculiarly constituted to carry out to completeness of fruition.
Joseph Parker, The Gospel of Jesus Christ, p. 28.
Illustration. I go to the Great Northern Railway to go to Scotland. The man who is in charge of the place insists on being fundamental; he is a man of culture. When I approach him, he says, ‘Let us begin at the beginning,’ my reply is, ‘I want to go to Edinburgh’. ‘By no means begin at that end of the business,’ he will reply; ‘let us be at once elementary, fundamental, and complete.’ I look at the man with a feeling of vacuity, for either he is out of his head or I am. He says, ‘This is the Great Northern Railway’. I reply, ‘I never doubted that’. ‘But do you understand it?’ ‘I think so.’ ‘Let me explain it to you,’ he continues. ‘Consider’ the importance of the word “the,” a little word, an article, and a definite one; in all languages the article plays a most important part. “Great,” a word you might apply to kings, to empires, to the heavens themselves. “Northern,” not North-Eastem mark that; and not North-Western, be on your guard; this is an age of sophistry; not the North-Western. Not the Southern, but the Northern. Stand in front of a map, where is the North? At the top mark that.’ I thank him for his lecture, and feel that it must have cost him a great many hours of anxiety to prepare it, and I say now to a porter, ‘Where is the train to Edinburgh’? He says, ‘It is gone, sir!’ Gone! Will this man who has been lecturing to me on the Great Northern bring it back? Never; he has befooled mo. So it will be with many at the last. Whilst you have been talking about matters of absolutely insignificant importance, or of merely relative importance, the train will have gone.
Joseph Parker, The Gospel of Jesus Christ, p. 41.
Mat 23:23
Writing in 1826 upon the prospects of reform within the Church of England, Dr. Arnold, of Rugby, observes: ‘The difficulty will always be practically, who is to reform it? For the clergy have a horror of the House of Commons, and Parliament and the country will never trust the matter to the clergy. If we had our general assembly, there might be some chance; but, as it is, I know no more hopeless prospect, and every year I live, this is to me more painful. If half the energy and resources which have been turned to Bible societies and missions, had steadily been applied to the reform of our own institutions, and the enforcing the principles of the Gospel among ourselves, I cannot think but that we should have been fulfilling a higher duty, and with the blessing of God might have produced more satisfactory fruit. ‘These things ye ought to have done, and not to have left the other undone.’
References. XXIII. 23. W. J. Butler, What is Our Present Danger, Sermons, 1870-93. J. Parker, The Gospel of Jems Christ, p. 32. F. B. Cowl, Straight Tracks, p. 13. XXIII. 23, 24. H. Hensley Henson, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lx. 1901, p. 360. D. Eraser, Metaphors in the Gospels, p. 181.
Mistaken Magnitudes
Mat 23:24
It was one great complaint of our Lord against the Pharisees, that they had lost the relative magnitude of things.
I. One of the great arts of worthy living is to see things in their relative importance. It is a great thing to know a trifle when you meet it. It is equally great, when the decisive moment comes, to seize it and use it with every power of manhood. It is such swift distinguishing between the great and little, such vision of the relative magnitude of things, that is one secret of a quiet and conquering life.
1. The failure to see things in their true proportions is often seen in relation to our grievances. When a man has a grievance he is almost certain to have distorted vision. You can block out the sun by the smallest coin if you hold the coin near enough to the eye. And we have a way of dwelling on our grievances, till we lose sight of the blue heaven above us.
2. Of course, I am aware that the failure to see things in their true proportions has sometimes got physical and not moral roots. We are so apt to be jaundiced and think bitter things, when all that we want is a little rest and sunshine.
Of all the secondary ministries of God for helping us to see things as they are, there is none quite so wonderful as sleep. We go to rest troubled, perplexed, despondent. We cannot see how we shall get through at all. But when we waken, how different things are! Jesus loved to speak of death as sleep. Our ‘death,’ for Christ, was sleep, and sleep is the passage to a glad awaking. There will be no mistaken magnitudes in heaven. There will be no errors in proportion there. We shall no longer be blind to the relative importance of things that confused us when we fell asleep.
II. What are the Gospel powers that help a man to see things as they are?
1. Remember that the Gospel which we preach puts love at the very centre of our life. When anything else than love is at the centre, the gnats and camels are certain to get mixed. For love alone sees purely, clearly, deeply. Take away God, and things are chaos to me. And without love, I never can know God. You understand, then, the wisdom of Jesus Christ in putting love at the centre of our life It focuses everything. It links the little and the great with the Creator, and brings things to their relative importance.
2. And then the Gospel takes our threescore years and ten and lays them against the background of eternity. It is because Christ has brought immortality to light that the Christian sees things in their true proportions. The efforts and strivings of our threescore years are not adjusted to the scale of seventy, they are adjusted to the scale of immortality.
3. And then the Gospel brings us into fellowship with Christ, and that is our last great lesson in proportion. The heart that takes its measurements from Jesus is likely to be pretty near the truth.
G. H. Morrison, Sun-Rise, p. 32.
Illustration. Mr. Froude, in his Spanish Story of the Armada, makes a significant remark about the Spanish king. He is showing the incompetence of Philip II, and he says: ‘The smallest thing and the largest seemed to occupy him equally’. That was one mark of Philip the Second’s incompetence. That gave the worst of all possible starts to the Armada. And for the equipping of nobler vessels than these galleons, and the fighting of sterner battles than they fought, that spirit spells incompetency still.
G. H. Morrison, Sun-Rise, p. 33.
Formalism
Mat 23:25
I. What is the explanation of this unwonted severity of our Blessed Lord? Why was the whole tone of His ordinary addresses so entirely altered? The answer is given in the words of the text In that solemn sentence the verdict of God Almighty is recorded upon the whole race of Pharisees, ‘Ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter’. The heart of these professors was not right with God. They responded to the calls of public charity, but no true love for God and man reigned in their souls.
From this hypocrisy our Lord revolted with the united strength of His human and Divine nature. He made one last effort to save them from themselves, to reveal the truth to their blinded hearts, to snatch them back from the abyss which was already opening to receive them.
II. How was it that these Pharisees could descend to such depths of iniquity?
There was, no doubt, a time in the lives of these Pharisees when they were conscious of heavenly aspirations a blessed spring-tide of the soul when refreshing showers descended from on high to quicken the good seed which had been sown in their hearts. They shrank, however, from the sacrifices by which real holiness could be attained. They held back from the free surrender of their heart to God. They were afraid of the answer which might be returned if they inquired of their Father in heaven, ‘Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?’ So Satan took advantage of their indecision, and suggested an easier method by which the favour of heaven could be attained. Under the guidance of this master-teacher of deceit they renounced the rugged pathway of inward self-denial, and turned into the smoother road of external obedience.
III. The temptation of compounding for inward sin by correctness of outward conduct will press most heavily upon those who, without any real change of heart, have come to be considered religious. They have great doubts whether they are really religious, whether they are ready to die and appear before the judgment seat of Christ Yet they shrink from so humbling themselves as to acknowledge the false foundation on which their spiritual fabric has been raised. Their character for godliness is too precious a possession to be lightly abandoned. So, instead of falling down on their knees and praying God Almighty to create in them a clean heart and renew a right spirit within them, they direct all their efforts to preserving the appearance of goodness, are mere miserable counterfeits, so the process goes on very easily and very surely under the crafty guidance of the master-spirit of deceit Conscience is soothed, the still small voice is silenced, and unless the Spirit of God arrest their downward course they become at last like whited sepulchres all is well on the outside; they are fair and spotless in the eye of man. But within there is no love for God, no warmth of self-sacrifice, no sorrow for sin, no enthusiasm for their Lord, no growing religious life only the cold chill of death, the second death the death of the soul!
Bishop G. H. Wilkinson, The Invisible Glory, p. 62.
Illustration. Just as in some foreign capital the crown and the sword of a giant king are preserved, though for centuries no head has been found large enough to wear the crown, no hand of strength sufficient to wield the sword, so was it with those poor Pharisees. In the thronged street, the crown of righteousness was borne before them, and men cried ‘Rabbi, Rabbi’ but theirs were not the heads on which its jewels were first intended to sparkle, they were not the Godlike heroes for whom its massive robes had been moulded.
On their foreheads and on the folds of each gorgeous robe might be observed the texts of Scripture ostentatiously displayed, but their puny hands were powerless to wield that sword of the spirit, their feeble wills were impotent to wage a Godlike warfare against man’s triple foe the world, the flesh, the devil. In this alone had they succeeded that they had made clean the outside of the cup and of the platter.
Bishop G. H. Wilkinson, The Invisible Glory, p. 66.
Mat 23:26
‘This,’ says Matthew Arnold, ‘was the very ground-principle in Jesus Christ’s teaching. Instead of attending so much to your outward acts, attend, He said, first of all to your inward thoughts, to the state of your heart and feelings. This doctrine has perhaps been overstrained and misapplied by certain people since; but it was the lesson which at that time was above all needed. It is a great progress beyond even that advanced maxim of pious Jews: “To do justice and judgment is more acceptable than sacrifice”. For to do justice and judgment is still, as we have remarked, something external, and may leave the feelings untouched, uncleared, dead. What was wanted was to plough up, clear, and quicken the feelings themselves. And this is what Jesus did.’
Respectable Sin
Mat 23:27
The imagery of this denunciation would appeal powerfully to a Jewish audience. These whited sepulchres, gleaming in the sun, were a familiar feature in the landscape. You are not to think of them as separate buildings, like the mausoleums of the Romans. They were just caverns cut in the limestone rock, with a great stone set up to close the opening. And once a year these stones were whitewashed, not for the purpose of making them look beautiful, but to warn people that a grave was there, lest they should touch it, and touching, be defiled. Many a time our Lord had wondered at them, when He rambled among the hills at Nazareth. You know how the darkness and the dead men’s bones would stir the imagination of a boy. And now in the glow of His anger at the Pharisees, He sees again that haunting of His youth, ‘Ye are like unto these whited sepulchres, beautiful outwardly, but full of all uncleanness’.
Now we cannot have a moment’s doubt as to the spiritual meaning of that figure. That figure is enshrined in common speech as perfectly expressive of the hypocrite. The man who is one thing inwardly, another outwardly who is not really what he seems to be of such hypocrisy in its most general aspect, I might textually speak tonight. But I want to get nearer to the text even than that; to seize upon its characteristic feature; to show how it stands apart amid the many figures of the hypocrite. Now this, I think, is the emphatic thing here that the Pharisee never shocked nor startled people. He never outraged the feelings of society; never broke through its unwritten laws. Whatever he might be in the sight of God, in the sight of men there was no fault to find. The Pharisee was eminently guilty: he was also respectable. I want then to speak upon the subject of respectable sin.
I. Respectable sin is not just secret sin. I do not mean by respectable sin that sin of which others have got no suspicion. It is true that so long as a man’s sin is secret, he may still keep the respect of the community. If he is cunning enough to hide his shame, he may still pass as a reputable citizen. But the point to note is that that respectability depends upon the keeping of the secret. The moment the sin is trumpeted abroad, the man becomes an alien and an outcast. It is not such sin that is respectable. It is sin that, when known, carries no social stigma. It is sin that a man may openly commit, and yet not forfeit his place in the community. It is sin that is tolerated in general opinion; that is not visited with social ostracism; that does not shut the door in a man’s face of the society in which he loves to move.
II. Now when we study the earthly life of Jesus, there is one thing that we soon come to see. It is with what terrible and dread severity He judged those sins we call respectable. There is often an element of unexpectedness in the moral judgments of our Saviour. He is sometimes severe where we should have been lenient; He is often lenient where we should be severe. And nowhere is this more remarkable than in His attitude towards actual sins, as He saw them in the streets of Galilee, and in the homes and in the market-place. All sin was hateful to Jesus Christ, because all sin was rebellion against God. He never condoned sin in any form; never thought of it as the other side of goodness. And yet undoubtedly the sins that stirred Him most were not the sins of passion or of weakness. They were the cold and calculating sins which masqueraded as respectable. Think for example of the Temple traders. Did anyone think the less of them for trading so? Was not that traffic a general convenience, acquiesced in by society without protest? Yet never in all his life was Christ so angry so filled with a passion of tumultuous scorn as when He knit His scourge, and drove them forth, and hurled the charge of robber in their teeth. It was not in that way that He spoke to Peter. It was not thus that He had addressed the Magdalene. Towards them, in the whole conduct of the Saviour, there is the throb of unutterable tenderness. But towards the Pharisees and towards the traders I look for any such tenderness in vain. Christ hurled His bitterest and sternest judgments upon the sins of respectability.
III. Sin that is respectable has an unequalled power of deadening the conscience. In the mirror of the society he moves in, a man sees nothing to alarm or terrify.
Is this not true of respectable sin, that of all sin it is most pernicious in its influence? I think that Jesus Christ condemned it so, because He was the lover of mankind. He saw its untold power to allure. He saw how mightily it would appeal to natures that would turn in loathing from coarse vice. And therefore did He terribly denounce it, out of His great love for foolish men, who are so ready to think that anything is right when they can do it without social censure.
G. H. Morrison, The Return of the Angels, p. 77.
Mat 23:27
Compare the sentences inserted by Charlotte Bront in her preface to the second edition of Jane Eyre: ‘Conventionality is not morality. Self-righteousness is not religion. To attack the first is not to assail the second. To pluck the mask from the face of the Pharisee, is not to lift an impious hand to the Crown of Thorns…. The world may not like to see these ideas dissevered, for it has been accustomed to blend them; finding it convenient to make external show pass for sterling worth to let whitewashed walls vouch for clean shrines. It may hate him who dares to scrutinize and expose to rase the gilding and show base metal underneath it, to penetrate the sepulchre and reveal charnel relics; but hate as it will, it is indebted to him.’
How much among us might be likened to a whited sepulchre; outwardly, all pomp and strength; but inwardly full of horror and despair and dead men’s bones 1 Iron highways, with their wains fire-winged, are uniting all ends of the firm Land; quays and moles, with their innumerable stately fleets, tame the ocean into our pliant bearer of burdens; Labour’s thousand arms, of sinew and of metal, all-conquering everywhere, from the tops of the mountain down to the depths of the mine and the caverns of the sea, ply unweariedly for the service of man: yet man remains unserved…. Countries are rich, prosperous, in all manner of increase, beyond example; but the Men of those countries are poor, needier than ever of all sustenance outward and inward; of Belief, of Knowledge, of Money, of Food.
Carlyle.
References. XXIII. 27, 28. D. Fraser, Metaphors in the Gospels, p. 191. XXIII. 27-39. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture St. Matthew XVIII.-XXVIII. p. 139.
Mat 23:29-30
I saw the state of those, both priests and people, who, in reading the Scriptures, cry out much against Cain, Esau, and Judas, and other wicked men of former times, mentioned in the Holy Scriptures; but do not see the nature of Cain, of Esau, of Judas, and those others in themselves. These said, it was they, they, they, they, that were the bad people; putting it all from themselves; but when some of them came, with the light and spirit of truth, to see into themselves, then they came to say I, I, I, it is I myself, that have been the Ishmael, and the Esau, etc. George Fox.
‘It is trite,’ says Professor Seeley, ‘that an original man is persecuted in his lifetime and idolized after his death, but it is a less familiar truth that the posthumous idolaters are the legitimate successors and representatives of the contemporary persecutors…. The second half of the original man’s destiny is really worse than the first, and his failure is written more legibly in the blind veneration of succeeding ages than in the blind hostility of his own. He broke the chains by which men were bound; he threw open to them the doors leading into the boundless freedom of nature and truth. But in the next generation he is idolized, and nature and truth are as much forgotten as ever; if he could return to earth, he would find that the crowbars and files with which he made his way out of the prison-house have been forged into the bolts and chains of a new prison called by his own name. And who are those who idolize his memory? Who are found building his sepulchre? Precisely the same party which resisted his reform; those who are born for routine and can accommodate themselves to everything but freedom; those who in clinging to the wisdom of the past suppose they love wisdom, but in fact love only the past, and love the past only because they hate the living present.’
Speaking of adherents of theological creeds, the late Mr. R. H. Hutton once observed that ‘the greater the glow of trust with which they formerly held possession of their past, the more sullenly do they fortify the empty sepulchres…. It was a saying of Luther’s that the very people who, in his lifetime, would not touch the kernel of his teaching, would be greedy after the husks of it when he was once dead.’
The only valuable criticism is that which turns what is latent in the thought of a great writer against what is explicit, and thereby makes his works a stepping-stone to results which he did not himself attain. It was those who stoned the Prophets that built their sepulchres. Those who really reverenced them, showed it by following the spirit derived from them to new issues.
E. Caird, preface to Philosophy of Kant.
And, while we fools
Are making courtesies and brave compliments
To our rare century, and courtierly
Swaddling our strength in trammels of soft silk,
The rotten depths grow rottener.
Augusta Webster.
References. XXIII. 29-32. A. Orrock Johnston, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xl. 1891, p. 420. XXIII. 29-39. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xl. No. 2381. XXIII. 33. J. Baldwin Brown, The Divine Treatment of Sin, p. 155.
Mat 23:34
Generation after generation of insurgent Poles, or Italians, or whatnot, may bleed and die, and seem to leave nothing to show for it all. But who are we that we should presume to judge how much expenditure of blood the keeping alive of an idea is worth?
Memoirs of Henry Holbeach.
References. XXIII. 34 H. C. G. Moule, Christ’s Witness to the Life to Come, p. 120. XXIII. 34, 35. R. E. Hutton, The Crown of Christ, vol. ii. p. 329. XXIII. 37. A. G. Mortimer, The Church’s Lessons for the Christian Year, part iv. p. 203. ‘Plain Sermons’ by contributors to the Tracts for the Times, vol. viii. p. 151. John Watson, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xlviii. 1895, p. 56. J. M. Neale, Sermons Preached in Sackville College Chapel, vol. ii. p. 243. C. Stamford, Symbols of Christ, p. 263. D. Fraser, Metaphors in the Gospels, p. 209. C. Jerdan, Pastures of Tender Grass, p. 360. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xl. No. 2381; vol. xlv. No. 2630. XXIII. 37, 38. E. E. Smith, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lix. 1901, p. 228. XXIII. 38. C. Jerdan, Pastures of Tender Grass, p. 110. XXIII. 41. H. P. Liddon, Some Elements of Religion, p. 201. XXIV. 1-21. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xlix. No. 2381. XXIV. 1-35. R. W. Dale, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xlviii. 1895, pp. 60, 104. XXIV. 3. D. Heagle, That Blessed Hope, p. 62. S. H. Kellogg, The Past a Prophecy of the Future, pp. 321, 339. XXIV. 6. J. Addison Alexander, The Gospel of Jesus Christ, p. 275. XXIV. 6, 14. H. Scott Holland, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lx. 1901, p. 216. XXIV. 7. F. E. Paget, The Redemption of War, p. 1. J. B. Mozley, Sermons Preached Before the University of Oxford, p. 97. H. J. Coleridge, The Return of the King, p. 116. XXIV. 11. G. St. Clair, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xl. 1891, p. 339.
Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson
Chapter 82
Prayer
Almighty God, thou givest the Holy Spirit unto men, that they may be enlightened and sanctified and made like thyself. If men being evil know how to give good gifts unto their children, how much more will our Father which is in Heaven give the Holy Spirit unto them that ask him. We come to ask for the outpouring of the Holy Ghost upon the Church of the redeemed, bought not with corruptible things as silver and gold, but with the precious blood of the Lamb of God. He promised us another Paraclete, that should abide with the Church forever, even the Holy Spirit that should lead men into all truth, making them quiet with divine peace, beautiful with divine holiness, inspiring them every day with the love of truth and with the spirit of devotion to the highest service of mankind. We now look for the pentecost, we are gathered together with one accord in one place; withhold not thou the gift for which we have come, but multiply it unto every one of us the great gift of thy love. Holy Spirit, baptize us as with fire, Spirit of the living God, descend upon us, consuming all evil, encouraging all goodness, strengthening within us every vow that is made with an honest purpose and with a good hope, and granting unto us such communications of divine grace as shall give us nourishment and comfort in the day of trial and distress.
Withhold not thy Spirit from us, grant him unto us in such measure as we are able to receive the gift, and may we prove that the Spirit has been given unto us by the newness of our speech, by the nobleness of our behaviour, and by such manifestations as shall put to silence the gainsaying of foolish men. Thou dost not keep back from those who seek it, this great gift of the Holy Spirit: we pray for it with one consent, and look for it with one eager expectation. Give this unto us, and behold we shall be made anew, we shall be born again, we shall enter into thy service with a new consecration, our life shall be made glad by a new hope, and all the outgoing of life shall be in the direction of Christ’s own beneficence.
We bless thee for the Saviour who promised this Holy Spirit: he is our one Priest and Lord and King, the only wise God, who only hath immortality. Potentate over all, the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world the Saviour of all men. May we read his character more clearly, apprehend his purpose more completely, and live in his spirit with more entireness of sympathy. We would grow in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ; we would be no more children, tossed to and fro with every wind of doctrine, but men, strong, simple, true in heart, honest in purpose, ever striving with all the devotion of love, to become the sons of God in very deed, that by the manifestation of good purpose and good work, we may help to overthrow him who is the evil one. Hear us in these desires, and cause thine answers to be multiplied unto us that we may rejoice in the Lord and have renewal of every sacred hope.
We bless thee for all thy patience, tenderness, and continual goodness of intention towards us. The goodness of God should lead us to repentance, yet do we take thy gifts and set our feet upon them, nor do we understand their value yea, we have trampled under foot the blood of the everlasting covenant. God be merciful unto us sinners, and give us to feel that all the dispensations of providence are meant to lead us up to the completer dispensation of grace. In thy goodness may we see thy mercy, in thy mercy may we behold thy love of thine own image in every human creature; thus may we be led to the cross, which gathers up in one ineffable expression of tenderness the infinite love of thine heart.
Thou hast led us by ways that we knew not, but all thy leading has been good. When thou hast made us poor we have been rich, when the darkness has been of thy sending, it has been full of stars, when thou hast brought us low thou hast spoken unto us the gospel of future exaltation. Wherein we have brought all mischief and distress upon ourselves, we would mourn the sin which caused the grief, and seek in one unanimous prayer the forgiveness which it is thine alone to exercise. Thou knowest each life, its pain, its want, its heavy load, the aching of every heart, the tears that blind our eyes, the sudden darkness that falls upon our way regard us in thy tender pity, let the messages of thy truth to us be according to the strain that is put upon us. Regard with Fatherly tenderness all for whom we ought to pray the sick, the dying, the hearts that are ill at ease those who are travelling for the good of their health or for the extension of honourable commerce; the young who are full of blessedness and new hope and a song of gladness they never sung before; the prodigal, the wanderer far beyond any prayer of ours, lying as it were barely within the sweep of thine own infinite love, bring home and restore to sonship.
The Lord hear us, the God of Jacob put around us his everlasting arms, the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ comfort us with some new degree of grace. Amen.
Mat 23
1. Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,
2. Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat:
3. All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works; for they say, and do not.
4. For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men’s shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.
5. But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments,
6. And love the uppermost rooms (first places) at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues (Jerusalem end),
7. And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi.
8. But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.
9. And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
10. Neither be ye called masters (directors of conscience): for one is your Master, even Christ.
11. But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.
12. And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.
13. But woe unto (for) you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.
14. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows’ houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation.
15. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte (proselytes were regarded as the leprosy of Israel, and hindered the coming of the Messiah), and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell (worthy of hell) than yourselves.
16. Woe unto you, ye blind guides, which say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor!
17. Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gold, or the temple that sanctifieth the gold?
18. And, Whosoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing; but whosoever sweareth by the gift that is upon it, he is guilty.
19. Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gift, or the altar that sanctifieth the gift?
20. Whoso therefore shall swear by the altar, sweareth by it, and by all things thereon.
21. And whoso shall swear by the temple, sweareth by it, and by him that dwelleth therein.
22. And he that shall swear by heaven, sweareth by the throne of God, and by him that sitteth thereon.
23. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.
24. Ye blind guides, which strain at (out) a gnat, and swallow a camel (an unclean beast, Lev 11:4 ).
25. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess.
26. Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup, and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also.
27. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness.
28. Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.
29. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets (four of which were then visible at the base of the Mount of Olives), and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous (actions good in themselves become wrong in the hands of hypocrites).
30. And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.
31. Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets.
32. Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers.
33. Ye serpents, ye generation (brood or progeny) of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?
34. Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:
35. That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.
36. Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.
37. O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
38. Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
39. For I say unto you. Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.
A Fourfold Aspect of Christ
Jesus Christ had just received a deputation of the Pharisees and the Herodians. The same day he had received a deputation of Sadducees, and the same day it would appear he had answered a tempting question put to him by a lawyer, “Master, which is the great commandment in the law?” We have seen that Jesus Christ utterly humiliated all the men that came to him with questions that were meant to tempt him and to ensnare him in his talk. He inflicted upon them the most desperate chastisement. According to the statement of the text, he gagged them. We read, “he put them to silence,” literally he put the gag in their mouths, and made them quiet because they could not answer his great expositions.
It might be thought, therefore, that he had cleanly swept out the whole church of his time, had dismantled it and had visited it with complete and perpetual disinheritance, so that he stood before his age as a mere image-breaker, an iconoclast, a man who smote all existing things of a religious kind, and poured upon them and upon their teachers all manner of severe and destructive contempt. Yet how he spreads himself over the whole occasion; he will not allow that inference to be drawn; knowing that in every crowd there is a preponderance of foolish and unreasonable men, he instantly takes up an affirmative and constructive attitude, and says, ere the great throngs break up, “Whatsoever the scribes and Pharisees bid you observe, that observe and do: but do not ye after their works, for they say and do not.” Still he is consistent with himself: not one good word will he bestow upon the scribes and Pharisees as such, but he says the law must not suffer because its interpreters are weak or vile men. The law is an eternal quantity, a perpetual dignity that can never be impaired even by the vilest behaviour of those who interpret it and enforce it; that law must stand.
You will see therefore that he was not a mere destructionist: it was not Christ’s purpose to dishonour the law or to enfeeble its application in any sense. He is saying in these latter chapters of the gospel, precisely what he said in the sermon on the mount, “Think not that I am come to destroy the law and the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle of the law shall in no wise pass away.” Yet he rebukes with no stinted reproach those who had fallen below the dignity and holiness of their sacred vocation. The line he draws is broad, palpable, never to be confused indeed, and in drawing that line he displayed, if we may speak humanly of him, one of the finest qualities of his spirit and character.
He did more. This was not local talk, this was not a speech spoken to a few people now dead and gone. In this exhortation Christ touches and refutes a sophism that has found its utterance in all ages of civilized history. What is that sophism? That if a man shall do anything bad, everything good that he touches is to be condemned along with himself. Is not that the sophism of today? A man who reads the Bible has been found to do something wrong: instantly there are persons who say, “This comes of your Bible-reading, then no more Bible-reading for me.” Such is the witless assault that is made on the eternal Book! The Bible reader is bad, therefore the Bible is bad such the dishonest logic, the corrupt and consciously corrupt reasoning of men who want to escape Bible morality and Bible discipline.
A man who goes to church has been found to defraud his creditors, to speak profane words, to do some deed accounted bad by social critics, be that deed what it may, and instantly the criticism falls upon the church within whose walls no bad man ever heard one word of encouragement. Put it to yourselves and say whether we may not have sometimes been tempted to say, “If these are your Christians, no more Christians for us.” Observe the vacant reasoning, the poor, incoherent, insane form of argument, without the substance or the power thereof. You have found a counterfeit coin, and therefore you give up the currency of the realm. Some man has forged the signature of another, and therefore you will not believe a single letter which your child writes to you. There is falsehood, therefore there is no truth. Who would accept statements so palpably and intolerably absurd? Yet these statements are considered sufficient to pick up sharp stones and throw at the mouth of the Son of God; when he speaks the great gospel of truth and love and redemption, any fist will do to smite that mouth, any staff will do to strike that Teacher. It is because we want to strike him dumb that we avail ourselves of arguments so unsound as to be not lies only but blasphemies.
It may have been so in your house let me localise the appeal, yea personalize it, after the manner of the Master in this very chapter. When the one professing Christian in your house there is but one, poor speckled bird did something wrong, through that wrong-doer you sought to thrust a dagger into his Master’s heart. Remember your taunt, your bitter sneer, your ungenerous and ignoble word: it was not the individual before you that you wounded only, but through that individual you sought to put your sword’s sharp point into the heart of the Son of God.
Let us now passing from this part of the subject look at Christ as the centre of the great multitude of scribes and Pharisees whom he addressed in the eloquent maledictions which are recorded in this chapter. It may assist the imagination and may bring the whole scene with its moral suggestions more vividly around us, if we think of Christ standing today in any Christian community, surrounded by men who have been playing falsely with his name. The scribes and Pharisees were present: he was not hurling maledictions upon the absent. When did Jesus Christ ever address persons who were not actually before him? See the great throng of false men, scribes, Pharisees, hypocrites, blind leaders of the blind, all around him, and then hear this terrible speech. It was a day of judgment in very deed. There was great lightning and thunder that day, the earth palpitated to the resounding eloquence, and the heavens vibrated as the eloquent tones fell from the lips divine. The men could not run away, he fastened them to the earth: they could not lift their fingers to put into their ears, for he held them down, and that day he spoke as he had never spoken before in fulness and breadth and fierceness of moral indignation. The men were fascinated, spellbound a subtle wizardry held them fast in positions from which they would most gladly have extricated themselves, but not until He who was the Master willed it, were they permitted to lift a foot from the ground and to pass away to their occupations and their homes.
Hearing Christ’s great speech, what do we learn about him? We see in him a devotion to truth which clothed him with sublimest fearlessness. How he talks, how he insults the men, how he beards them, how he lays his great grip upon them and shakes them, and they cannot answer him a word. What is the explanation of this mighty mastery over the leading spirits of his time? Is he speaking resentfully? No, for the men who speak resentfully are weak; strong only for one little moment, but it is a strength of desperation, to be succeeded by most pitiful reaction. Account for that fearlessness. You will find no suggestion that covers the whole occasion but the suggestion now named devotion to truth, so complete, so profound, as to lift the man above all fear. See if there be not a deep philosophy in that fact Men are not continuously and coherently strong except in proportion to their devotion to truth: such men are sublimated by their devotion, they are lifted up into a new and larger self-hood: it is no longer they that speak, but God that speaketh in them. The action is not to be measured by their personality, they stand as representatives of the majesty and grandeur of truth, they are the heroic expressions of a heroic principle. You will only be strong in proportion as the truth not some side, point, or aspect of it, but the truth is in you.
How is it that we have so much breaking down in Christian testimony, so much ambiguity and equivocation and uncertainty? How is it that we have so much paltering with vow and oath and high resolution? Simply because the complete truth is not in us, or our devotion to truth is merely to some side or aspect of it. Jesus Christ could say that he was Himself the truth. The Truth never blushed, never stammered, never apologised, never asked for leave to be. The tone of truth cannot change, it is royal, commanding: if audacious, simply because complete and infallible. We should be on our guard lest we seize only some points of truth, and take, as we sometimes ignorantly phrase it, our stand upon particular doctrines. There are no particular doctrines, in the sense of separate and isolated doctrines, in truth. Truth is one. We call the bigot a strong man simply because he is a narrow one and moves in a special direction, and we call the devotee of truth sometimes a latitudinarian, because he does not live under a ceiling but under a sky; he is not bounded by walls ecclesiastical, but by the infinite horizon drawn by the infinite hand.
Do not be strong on particular doctrines and seek to develop special virtues, and to have pet graces: live in truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. When we touch that high region of perfect devotion to complete truth, we shall not know what fear is. This is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith. The true man does not know when the clouds gather or when the storm roars around him; he says the storm will cry itself to rest, the tornado will blow itself out in silence, and “truth must stand when all things fail.”
Looking at Jesus Christ again, standing in the midst of that great seething multitude of scribes, Pharisees, hypocrites, and blind teachers, I see in him an insight into truth which gave him infinite pre-eminence as a Teacher. How he destroys the sophisms of the blind men! He says, “Ye blind guides which say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor! Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gold, or the temple that sanctifieth the gold? And, Whosoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing; but whosoever sweareth by the gift that is upon it, lie is guilty. Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gift, or the altar that sanctifieth the gift?”
His all-piercing insight into truth lifts him above all competing teachers. Here we see somewhat of his intellectual breadth and grandeur coupled with a moral indignation, that becomes impatient in the very tones which it utters. How he must have said these words: again and again are they repeated: “Ye fools and blind, how is it that you do not see the right relation and proportion of things? How is it that you mistake the near for the great, the temporal for the eternal? What has become of your common sense, or ordinary natural reason, that you set all things in a row without attention to perspective and distance and light and shadow and expressive and interpreting colour? What has fallen upon you, what dementation is this, what sudden insanity, what moral obliquity? Why, you have lost the first conception of truth, and you have betaken yourselves to metaphysical quibbles and puzzles unworthy of the intellect with which God endowed you.”
This is the inevitable course of wrong thinking in religious matters. Men make vain distinctions, they create a series of puzzles, they have so much leisure that it becomes a temptation to them. This is the danger of the church today. We are so overfed with gospel, we are so churched and preached to death, that men are now beginning to turn into mechanical puzzles the immeasurable, impalpable, infinite truth of God. We are now creating sects, schools, denominations, and so-called churches and communions. I would God that some fire of persecution should break out amongst us to force us back to great principles, to a proper distinction between the temple and the gold, the altar and the gift, that we may not be inverting things and putting them into false relations and proportions. If the wolf would come back, the old grey wolf that barked at our heroic fathers, watched for them, showed its gleaming teeth whenever they came in sight, sprang upon them, sucked their blood we should get back to right ideas of inspiration, truth, prayer, missions, evangelisation, and should cease the small talk about mechanism and fine distinctions and the distribution of labour so diffuse as to lose its intensity and divest itself of the force that makes wicked kingdoms tremble.
What is our insight into truth? Do we see it the word that Amos saw? We have only heard it in trembling and fading echoes. The word that Hosea saw, that sight turns a poor man into a rich one, that sight turns a herdman into a prophet, that sight marks the critical point in all human history. Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall… SEE God.
Let us consider are we wood-splitters, are we puzzle-makers in the church, or are we inspired men? Are we the frightened, the timid, the conventional, and those who live only on the surface? The church has lost inspiration. The church poor, poor fool she has allowed every thief to take from her what he liked. The felon has taken from her miracles and tongues and prophesyings and gifts of healing, and inspiration and Christ except as a great historical genius and the cross, except as it represents a heroic but vain sentiment. And the felon is now cozening her with a view of lifting off her GOD. Poor church! Only insight into truth will bring back her possessions.
Do not be clever on points: do not give yourselves to a kind of nisi prius sharpness. If Burke was right when he said that no man understood the English constitution so little as a merely nisi prius lawyer, surely we are giving legitimate extension to the truth when we say that no man understands Christ so little as the man who makes sects in his name. Christ is not here, nor there, nor yonder, he is not to be localised, he is the breath, the life of all things. There be men who say, ‘Lo, Christ is here, and lo, Christ is there,” and if another man should arise amongst us to say, “Christ is everywhere Christ is in Hindooism, Christ was in the Pagan philosophy, Christ has been in every civilisation that has rolled its particular course over all languages and nations,” he would be accounted latitudinarian. Be it mine to see in every flower a child of the sun, and in every noble deed and heroic impulse an inspiration of the Son of God.
Looking again at that wondrous Speaker as he fastens his hearers around him, I see in him a grasp of truth which enabled him to represent its continuity through the ages. Observe how he goes backward and how he goes forward. He says, “Ye say, if we had been in the days of our fathers we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. Ye would ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, ye would! Do you suppose that this kind of conduct depends on climate, on particular details of time and space? If you had lived in the days of Zacharias you would have killed him on the very spot where he fell under your fathers’ hand. Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, ye progeny of hell, ye would!” So does he grasp the truth! He would have pleased the people better if he had said, “You would not have done what your fathers did, you are much better men, much nobler and kinder persons: it would never have occurred to you surely to have imbrued your hands in the righteous blood of Abel: it would never have occurred to your refined sentiment to have had anything to do murderously with Zacharias the son of Barachias.” He might have bought himself a cheap popularity by such vulgar lies, but looking at them, piercing them, seeing all history in one grand continuity, he said, “Ye blind guides, evil never changes; a serpent is always a serpent: you have the serpent spirit in you, and until you are born again you would have done just what your fathers did. Fill up the measure of their iniquity they filled the cup nearly to the brim, pour it full up, till the drops fall on your feet, and when your mission is fulfilled, God will find a place for you in his Gehenna.”
We have then to deal with a Man who knows all things, who is not to be betrayed into small sophisms and into narrow deductions, who looks around the horizon. What think ye of the Christ of his eloquence? How it rolls and scorches like floods of lava. We teach our boys at school the Philippics of Demosthenes, and say, “Look at his interrogations: the mark of interrogation is the chief point of punctuation upon his eloquent pages. How he hurls his questions, how every question sharpens itself like a dagger that is seeking the blood of the accused one.” There is nothing, by the common consent of men who are entitled to judge upon the matter, in all eloquence, ancient or modern, to compare, for grandeur of malediction, for moral nobleness, for intellectual insight, with the eloquence of this denunciation of Christ’s.
Then I see in it, last of all, an experience of truth, which made Christ the greatest of evangelists. He would not conclude with objurgation. The truth does not make him stiff, imperious, self-involved: his love of the truth, his experience of it in his own heart, is such that he wants every living man to feel it as he does. “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings!” Why? Because he would have all men know the truth as he knew it, feel the truth as he felt it, enjoy the truth as he enjoyed it. That is the secret of evangelisation. Tell me to go and propagate a community, a sect, a denomination, and I may probably tire on the road. There are inspirations that will last but for a period of days. Let me on the other hand feel in my heart that men are dying for want of the gospel of Christ, let me feel what it is to enjoy the grace of Christ in my own heart, let me really feel that Christ can be one with me, in purpose and sympathy and desire, and then the rest will come.
No words suggest themselves to me sharp enough, terrible enough, with which to condemn and blast the sophism which is being taught by some men today, namely, that if we could offer more money, more young men would come forward and offer themselves to the service of the Son of God. I can find no words that will enable me to smite that awful blasphemy as it ought to be struck. We hear it from our Christian platforms that if our churches could offer larger incomes we should have what is called a better class of young men coming forward to give themselves to the ministry. God forbid! God’s own damnation fall upon any man who touches this ministry that he may live by it. That is how the poor church is being divested, impoverished, depleted, ruined a young man considering whether he will take this sum of money to preach Christ or that sum of money to follow a commercial pursuit debating or betraying. If he would turn to the pulpit, my prayer would be that God might strike him dumb on the road, and blind and deaf, and lay his hand upon him like a burden. A man must say, “Woe is me if I preach not the gospel, necessity is laid upon me to preach the gospel,” but we are making ministers now, tempting them, encouraging them to come forward. Let a man be driven forward, thrust out, impelled. It is not permitted to us to boast or to glorify oneself, but it is permitted to a man to glorify God in any impulse which may have driven him forward to this work.
Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker
XVIII
ANOTHER QUESTION AND ITS ANSWER; HIS LAST PUBLIC DISCOURSE; OVER AGAINST THE TREASURY
Harmony, pages 155-159 and Mat 22:34-23:39
This section commences on page 155 of the Harmony and consists of the last question of Christ’s enemies, differing bitterly among themselves, yet led by a common interest, conspired to test, tempt, and ensnare him by hard questions. He had answered the question concerning his authority, the question concerning paying tribute to Caesar, and the resurrection question. The Pharisees, seeing that he had muzzled the Sadducees, rapidly held a council, selected with great care the form of a final question and a representative to propound it. It will be understood that this representative is a better man than those he represents, but he speaks representatively. And the word “tempt” is used in its usual bad sense. They consulted first as to what question should be propounded. Second, who should propound it. The querist was a lawyer. The word “lawyer” in the Bible does not mean altogether what our word “lawyer” means. A lawyer in the time of Moses and after, and especially in mediaeval ages, was one who was an expert in both civil and canon law, or ecclesiastical law. The first business of a scribe was to copy the text, then expound it. And after a while they became authorities both on text and exposition, and from them originated the meaning of the degree LL. D., the word “laws” being plural, that is, one being skilled in both civil and canon law. In all countries where there is a union of church and state there are two forms of law, one applying to ecclesiastical matters and the other to civil matters. Oftentimes the two blend. A matter can be both civil and ecclesiastical.
It is quite important here to note the precise form of the question they propound. Following the Greek literally this is the question: “What sort of commandment is great?” We usually understand that the question seeks to find a distinction between the various commandments of the moral law, as to relative importance. This seems not to have been their idea. There would not have been a snare in such a question. Let us see if we can find just what was the snare. They themselves continually distinguished between a commandment that was written and a commandment that was oral or traditional. And they were accustomed to put the traditional law above the written law. One of themselves had said, “The commandments of the written law are sometimes weighty, and sometimes little, but the commandments of the scribes are always weighty.” So when they put the question in this form, “What sort of commandment is great?” they want to commit him either for or against the oral law. If he decides against the oral or traditional law they hope to make capital out of it before the people, who were very much devoted to the traditional law. Now, from the very beginning there had been a marked difference between them and him on the meaning of law. When he says law he means only the written law. When they say law they mean both the written and the oral law. All through the Sermon on the Mount we see how he magnifies the written law, and throws contempt upon their traditional law. He shows that in their construction of traditional law they oftentimes set aside the written law entirely. We have considered a case already where they set aside the commandment, “Honor thy father and thy mother,” by following the traditional law, to the effect that if a man said to himself that the money with which he ought to help the aged, feeble parents was in his mind consecrated to something else, that would exclude him from piety toward his father and mother, that is, relieve him from the burden of taking care of them. All along he has been setting aside their conception of law. Now their hope is that if he takes his old ground, that only written law is great, it would turn away from him the people who believed in the oral law. We have a passage in Mark often quoted in baptismal controversies showing how punctilious they were in their observance of their traditional law, the diligent washing of their hands and, when they returned from the market, the dipping of themselves lest they had contracted ceremonial defilement by touch with unclean people. And even the dipping of their tables and beds, and anything that might by a possibility have become ceremonially defiled. Hence the form of this question: “What sort of commandment is great?” In other words, “Do you say that only the written law is great, or do you agree with us that the traditional law is even greater?” He replies by a quotation from the Pentateuch. The first part of his answer is from Deu 6:4 , the second part from Lev 19:18 . He says, “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength. This is the great and first commandment. The second like unto it is this, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” Here he accepts the condensation of all the first table of the law by Moses into one commandment and his condemnation of the second table of the law into another commandment.
Spurgeon, while seeming to misapprehend the precise point of this question propounded to Christ, has a great sermon on the text, “The first and the great commandment.” To love God supremely is first in order of position in the Ten Commandments. It is first in order of importance. It is first and greatest because it includes the second. That is to say, unless we love God supremely we can never obey the second commandment to love our neighbor as ourself. Some magnify the first table of the law and disregard the second. They think that if they pray and pay tithes to God, and do not worship images) and keep the sabbath day, it makes little difference how they do toward their neighbors. They may refuse to honor their parents, steal, lie, commit adultery, if only they comply with what they think is the .First Commandment. On the other hand it is the custom of the world to utterly disregard the First Commandment and magnify the Second. Businessmen on the streets conceive of law simply as it relates to our fellow man. They think if we kill nobody, do not wrong our neighbor in any respect, we are all right. Their stress is on morality, but our Lord shows an indissoluble connection between the two commandments: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and thy neighbor as thyself. He conceives of no sound morality apart from supreme love of God.
This representative LLD who propounded this question was much interested in our Lord’s answer. It becomes evident that he is a better man than those who loaded him with the question. He expresses hearty approval of Christ’s answer, and our Lord said that he was not far from the kingdom.
As usual, our Lord follows up his victory. He puts a question before the Pharisees are scattered. They still stand grouped where they had consulted to determine what question should be propounded to him. So he propounds a counter question. “What think ye of Christ? Whose son is he?” They readily answered as any Jew would have answered, “The Son of David.” Then he puts a question with a barb on it: “If he is only the Son of David, how is it that David, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, calls him Lord, in Psa 110 , to wit: The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand?” The object of his question is to correct their limited conception of the Messiah. They were disposed to look at him as a mere human Jewish king establishing an earthly government and raising the throne of David so as to bear reign over the whole Gentile world. His object is to convince them that the Messiah foretold in their Old Testament was not merely a man, and to prove it by David: “The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand.” He wants to bring out the thought which he himself later expressed to John in Revelation: “I am the root as well as the offspring of David.” In the divine sense he is the source of David; in the flesh he is the offspring of David. This statement of our Lord is of incalculable value in its bearing on the radical criticism. They do not hesitate to say that David never wrote Psa 110 . Jesus says that he did. He explicitly ascribed that psalm to David. They say the psalms are not inspired. Jesus says that David wrote that psalm in the Spirit. They deny any reference to a coming One in that psalm. Jesus shows that there is a reference to himself, the coming Messiah. It is a little remarkable that this particular psalm is quoted oftener in the New Testament as messianic than any other passage in the Old Testament. Our Lord himself quotes it more than once. Peter quotes it in his great address recorded in Act 2 , and yet again in his first letter. Paul quotes it expressly in his first letter to the Corinthians, and again in the letter to the Ephesians and four times in the letter to the Hebrews, and all of them say that David wrote it; that David wrote it by inspiration; and that David wrote it with reference to the coming Messiah. And so we come to the end of the great catechism. It has been a duel to the death.
THE LAST PUBLIC DISCOURSE OF OUR LORD
We do not mean to intimate that Christ will not hereafter speak to his disciples. We mean that this discourse that we are now to consider ends his public ministry to the Jews. He considers the battle ended. They have rejected him, and now he makes the most serious indictment against the nation and its rulers known in the annals of time. It is the sharpest arraignment and the deepest denunciation to be found in the whole Bible.
This discourse consists, first, of a great indictment; second, the denunciation of a great penalty; third, the suggestion of a great hope. Let us see then what is the indictment.
We have already learned from the preceding discussion that the chief item of the indictment is their rejection of the Messiah and their purpose to murder him. Then follows the other items of the indictment relating particularly to the leaders: First, sitting in the seat of authority, they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne upon the people, which they themselves will not move with their finger. Second, all their works are done to be seen of men, hence they make broad their phylacteries, enlarge the borders of their garments, love the chief places at feasts and the chief seats in the synagogues, and salutations in the marketplaces to be called rabbi. Third, they shut up the kingdom of heaven against men, themselves not entering nor suffering those to enter who would enter. Fourth, they compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is become so, he is made twofold more a son of hell than themselves. Fifth, they swear by the lesser things, disregarding the greater, swearing by the gift on the altar as more than the altar which sanctifies the gift, swearing by the gold of the Temple as more than the Temple itself. Sixth, they tithe mint and anise and cummin and ignore the weightier matters of the law judgment, mercy, and faith strain out a gnat and swallow a camel. Seventh, they cleanse the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within are full of extortion and excess, as whited sepulchres, outwardly appearing beautiful, while inwardly they are full of dead men’s bones and all uncleanness, so they outwardly appear righteous unto men, but inwardly are full of hypocrisy and iniquity. Eighth, they are as monument-builders garnishing the tombs of the righteous, as if they thus said, “We would never have been partakers in the blood of the prophets.” All the time they are sons in spirit, as well as in flesh, of them that slew the prophets. In this way they fill up the measure of their fathers. And now comes
THE PENALTY
“Upon you shall come all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of Abel, the righteous, unto the blood of Zachariah, son of Barachiah. . . . Your house is left unto you desolate.” It has long been a puzzle to the thinker how the blood of Abel should came on the Jewish people, who, in their father Abraham, originated so many years subsequent to Abel. The answer to the puzzle is this: Abel and all subsequent martyrs believed in salvation by a coming Messiah. This doctrine was the hope of the whole world. And when the Jewish nation was established they were made the custodians of this doctrine. To them were committed the oracles of God. If, therefore, when the Messiah comes, to whom Abel and every martyr had looked forward, and the Jews rejected and killed that Messiah, they sin, not only against the Messiah, and not only against themselves, but they sin against the whole world. They sin against the hope of the world. If their attitude toward the Messiah is true, then Abel died in vain. If they alone of all the nations were entrusted with the doctrine of Abel’s saving faith, and they repudiate that doctrine, on them comes the blood of Abel. The penalty denounced is not merely the destruction of the Holy City and the sacred Temple, and the dispersion of the Jewish nation, but it is a desolation a tribulation that shall last through all the ages until the coming of the Gentiles be fulfilled. Therefore, as we learn later, it is called a trouble such as the world had never known before and would never know again. It is surprising that commentators, in discussing “the great tribulation” set forth in our Lord’s great prophecy, make it a general tribulation bearing upon Gentile nations. It is exclusively a Jewish tribulation, which has already lasted about 1900 years. Nor is the end yet in sight. They were on probation twenty centuries as the bearers of the oracles of God. Their tribulation has already lasted nearly twenty centuries.
THE GREAT HOPE The great hope is suggested in this final word of his discourse, “Ye shall not see me henceforth till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.” (Mat 23:39 ). So, that the last word to the Jews, the last public message, touches the second advent of our Lord.
Following this discourse we have an account of Jesus seated over against the treasury and beholding how men put money into the treasury. What a lesson is here! Christ watching the contributions, noting the amount, noting the motive, measuring the relative importance of the contributions, not by the amount, but by the unselfish sacrifice in the donation.
In my young days I preached a sermon to the Waco Association on this text, on the theme, “The Treasury of God’s People, and Christ’s Observation of the Contributions to This Fund.” The association called for its publication. The discussion was an epoch in the history of the association. From that time on enlargements in both spirituality and gifts, and broader fields came to Waco Association. Always before God’s people should be this picture of Christ sitting over against the treasury watching how men put money into the treasury. (The author’s sermon to which references are here made will be found in his first book of sermons.)
QUESTIONS
1. What was the Pharisees’ last effort to entangle Christ by questioning him, how did they proceed and what two points upon which they consulted?
2. What is the meaning and usage of the words “lawyer” and “doctor”?
3. What was the form of the question they propounded to Christ and why important to note its form?
4. What difference between the Pharisees’ use of the word “law,” and Christ’s use of it and in what did the trap here set for our Lord consist?
5. What was Christ’s attitude toward their oral law, what example of their setting aside the written commandment cited, and what example of their punctiliousness in the observance of their oral law given?
6. State clearly the question as they propounded it to him and give his answer verbatim.
7. What sermon cited on this passage, what is the substance of it, and what application of this interpretation to our own generation?
8. What evidence here that this lawyer was better than those whom he represented?
9. How does Christ follow up his victory in this instance?
10. What was their answer to his question, what his second question and what the purpose of our Lord in these last questions?
11. What is the value of this statement of Christ in its bearing on radical criticism and what is the fallacy of the position of the radical critics in this case?
12. Of what does our Lord’s last public discourse consist?
13. What items of the indictment?
14. What penalty denounced and its meaning and application?
15. What great hope suggested and its far-reaching meaning?
16. What great lesson of Christ and the treasury?
Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible
1 Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,
Ver. 1. Then spake Jesus to the multitude, &c. ] Christ having confuted and confounded the Scribes and Pharisees, turns him to the people and to his disciples; and that he might do nothing to the detriment of the truth, he here cautioneth that they despise not the doctrine of the Pharisees so far as it was sound and sincere without leaven; but try all things, holding fast that which was good. Be advised, and remember to search into the truth of what you hear, was the counsel of Epicharmus. , Videas cui fidas. Deligas quem diligas. To whom may you seem faithful. Let you chose what you like.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
1 39. ] DENUNCIATION OF THE SCRIBES AND PHARISEES. Peculiar to Matthew .
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
1. ] Much of the matter of this discourse is to be found in Luk 11:1-54 ; Luk 13:1-35 . On its appearance there, see the notes on those passages. There can, I think, be no doubt that it was delivered, as our Evangelist here relates it, all at one time, and in these the last days of our Lord’s ministry. On the notion entertained by some recent critics, of St. Matthew having arranged the scattered sayings of the Lord into longer discourses, see Prolegomena to Matthew. A trace of this discourse is found in Mar 12:38-40 ; Luk 20:45-47 . In the latter place it is spoken to the disciples, in hearing of the crowd: which (see Mat 23:8 ff.) is the exact account of the matter. It bears many resemblances to the Sermon on the Mount, and may be regarded as the solemn close, as that was the opening, of the Lord’s public teaching. It divides itself naturally into three parts: (1) introductory description of the Scribes and Pharisees, and contrast to Christ’s disciples ( Mat 23:1-12 ): (2) solemn denunciations of their hypocrisy ( Mat 23:14-33 ): (3) conclusion, and mournful farewell to the temple and Jerusalem.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Mat 23:1-12 . Introduction to the discourse .
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Mat 23:1 . . : the discourse is about scribes and Pharisees, but the audience is conceived to consist of the disciples and the people. Meyer describes the situation thus: in the foreground Jesus and His disciples; a little further off the ; in the background the Pharisees.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Matthew Chapter 23
They were all silenced, those who pretended to most light! Not believing in Christ, they were destitute of the only key to Scripture; and Psa 110 , bright as its testimony is to their own Messiah, was a thick cloud, not only to Egyptians now as of old, but to Israel. They saw not His glory, and were therefore hopelessly puzzled how to understand that David, speaking by the Spirit, should call his son his Lord.
In this chapter the Lord pronounces the doom of the nation, and most of all – not those whom man would chiefly denounce; not the openly lawless, licentious, or violent; nor the ease-loving, sceptical Sadducees, but – of those who stood highest in general esteem for their religious knowledge and sanctity. Conscience, man, the very world, can with more or less exactness judge of immoral grossness. God sees and eschews what looks fair to human eyes and is withal false and unholy. And the word of God is explicit that so it is to be. The heaviest woes yet in store for this world are not for heathen darkness, but, as for rebellious Judaism, so for corrupt Christendom, where most truth is known and the highest privileges conferred, but, alas, where their power is despised and denied. .Not that, when God arises to judge, the pagan nations will go unpunished. They too shall drink of the cup. Yet, “Hear this word that the Lord hath spoken against you, O children of Israel, against the whole family which I brought up from the land of Egypt, saying, You only have I known of all the families of the earth: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities.” Even so with professing Christendom: the fuller the light bestowed, the richer the grace of God revealed in the gospel, so much the graver reasons for unsparing judgments on hypocritical profession, when the knell of divine vengeance tolls for those “who know not God and obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.” The Lord sees not as man seeth, whether in grace or in judgment; for man looks on the outward appearance, but the Lord looks on the heart. Thus did Jesus speak in the scene before us.
It is remarkable, however, that in the first instance He spoke “to the multitudes and to His disciples.” They were yet to a great extent viewed together – this till the death and resurrection of Christ; and even then the Holy Ghost slowly breaks one old tie after another, and only utters His last word to the Jewish remnant (then Christian, of course) by more than one witness not long before the destruction of Jerusalem. But separation there was not, nor could be, till the cross.
It was, then, part of our Lord’s Jewish mission to say that “the scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat: all therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do” (vers. 2, 3). But there was the careful warning against making the scribes and Pharisees in anywise personal standards of good and evil. “Do not ye after their works; for they say, and do not.” They were in themselves beacons, patterns of wrong, not of right (vers. 3-7). Still, not only were the disciples classed with the multitude, but in the very strongest denunciations of these religious guides they were bound as yet by the Lord to acknowledge those who sat in Moses’ seat. There they were in fact, and the Lord maintains, instead of dissolving, the obligation to own them and whatever they set forth, not of their own traditions, but from the law. This was to honour God Himself, spite of the hypocrites who only sought man’s honour for themselves, and it affords no warrant for false apostles or their self-deceived successors now. For the apostles had no seats like that of Moses; and Christianity is not a system of ordinance or formal observance like the law, but, where real, is the fruit of the Spirit through life in Christ, which is formed and fed by the word of God.
It has been urged, confidently enough of late, and in quarters where one might have hoped for better things, that as the saints in Old Testament times looked for Christ, and eternal life was theirs by faith, though they were under the law, so we who now believe in Christ are nevertheless, and in the same sense, under the law like them, though, like them, we are justified by faith. Plausible, and even fair, as this may seem to some, I have no hesitation in pronouncing it extremely evil. It is a deliberate putting souls back into the condition from which the work of Christ has extricated us. The Jews of old were placed under the law for the wise purpose of God, till the promised Seed came to work a complete deliverance; and the saints in their midst, though they rose above that position by faith, were all their lifetime subject to bondage and the spirit of fear. Christ has set us free, by the great grace of God, through His own death and resurrection; and we have thereon received the Spirit of sonship whereby we cry, Abba, Father. And yet, spite of the plainest testimony of God to the momentous change brought about by the coming of His Son, and the accomplishment of His work, and the gift of the Holy Ghost, it is openly, seriously proposed, as if it were part of the faith once delivered to the saints, that this wondrous working and display of divine grace should be set aside, with their results to the believer, and that the soul should be replaced under the old yoke and in the old condition! Doubtless ‘this is precisely what Satan aims at, an effort to blot out all that is distinctive of Christianity by a return to Judaism. Only one maybe amazed to find so barefaced an avowal of the matter in men professing evangelical light.
The true answer, then, to such misunderstandings of Mat 23 and the misapplications of similar portions of Holy Writ, is that as yet our Lord was adhering (and so He did to the last moment) to His proper Messianic mission; and this supposed and maintained the nation and the remnant under the law, and not in the delivering power of His resurrection. Which of the disciples could yet say, “Henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we Him no more. Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to Himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation.” Now, on the contrary, this is the normal language of the Christian. It is not a question of special attainment nor of extraordinary faith, but of simple present subjection to the full Christian testimony in the New Testament. Even were we Jews, the old tie is dissolved by death, and we are married to another, even to Christ raised from the dead. Thus to have the law as well as Christ for our guide and rule is like having two husbands at one time, and is a sort of spiritual adultery.
Surely also we can and ought to take the moral profit of our Lord’s censure of the scribes and Pharisees: for what is the heart! We have to beware of imposing on others that which we are remiss to observe ourselves. We have to watch against doing works to be seen of men. We have to pray against the allowance of the world’s spirit – the love of pre-eminence, both within and without (vers. 4-7). Hence the word is, “Be not ye called Rabbi; for One is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. And call no one your father upon the earth; for One is your Father, which is in heaven. Neither be ye called masters; for One is your Master, even Christ.” The question here is not of the various gifts which the Lord confers by the Holy Ghost on His members in His body the Church, but of religions authority in the world and a certain status and respect by virtue of ecclesiastical office or position. But the great moral principle of the kingdom (which is always true) is enforced here: “He that is greatest among you shall be your servant. And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted” (vers. 8-12). The cross and the heavenly glory would but deepen the value and significance of these words of the Saviour; but even before either, and independently of the new order of things in the Church, they bore His stamp and were current for the kingdom.
In marked contrast with this pattern of true service for the disciples were the scribes and Pharisees, on whom the Lord next proceeds to pronounce eight solemn woes (vers. 13-33).* What else could He say of men who not only entered not the kingdom of heaven, but hindered those disposed to enter? What else could be due to those who sought religious influence over the weak and defenceless for gain? Granted that their proselyting zeal was untiring, what was the fruit in souls before God? Were not the taught, as usual, the truest index of such teachers, as being more simple and unreserved as to their ways and aim and spirit? Then the Lord lays bare their hair-splitting distinctions, which really made void the authority of God, insisting, as they did, on the pettiest exactions to the neglect of the plainest everlasting moral truths. Next is detected the effort after external look, whatever might be the impurity within; and this both in their labour and in their lives and persons, which were full of guile and self-will, crowned by affected great veneration for the prophets and the righteous who had suffered of old, and no longer acted on the conscience. This last gave them the more credit. There is no cheaper nor more successful means of gaining a religious reputation than this show of honour for the righteous who are dead and gone, especially if they connect themselves with them in appearance, as being of the same association. The succession seems natural, and it sounds hard to charge those who honour the dead saints in this day with the same rebellious spirit which persecuted and slew them in their own day. But the Lord would put them to a speedy and decisive test, and prove the real bent and spirit of the world’s religion. ‘I Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes; and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar” (vers. 34, 35). It was morally the same race and character all through. In righteous judgment the Lord adds, “Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.” Thus should be judged in the full measure what was begun by their fathers and completed by themselves. Hypocrites and serpents, how could such escape the judgment of hell?
*Verse 14 is generally omitted by the editor’s as having no sufficient MSS. authority here, though found in Mark and Luke. The “woes” here pronounced upon the scribes and Pharisees therefore are seven, not eight. – [Ed.
But, how touching! Here is the Lord’s lament over the guilty city – His own city: “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! Behold, your house is left unto you desolate” (vers. 37, 38). His glory shines out more than ever; the rejected Messiah is in truth Jehovah. He would have gathered (and how often 1) but they would not. It was no longer His house nor His Father’s, but their’s, and it is left unto them desolate. Nevertheless, if it he a most solemnly judicial word, there is hope in the end: “For I say unto you, Ye shall not see Me henceforth till ye shall say, Blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord.” Israel are yet to see their King, but not till a goodly remnant of them are converted to welcome Him in Jehovah’s name.
Fuente: William Kelly Major Works (New Testament)
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Mat 23:1-12
1Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to His disciples, 2saying: “The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the chair of Moses; 3therefore all that they tell you, do and observe, but do not do according to their deeds; for they saythings and do not do them. 4They tie up heavy burdens and lay them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves are unwilling to move them with so much as a finger. 5But they do all their deeds to be noticed by men; for they broaden their phylacteries and lengthen the tassels of their garments. 6They love the place of honor at banquets and the chief seats in the synagogues, 7and respectful greetings in the market places, and being called Rabbi by men. 8But do not be called Rabbi; for One is your Teacher, and you are all brothers. 9Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, he who is in heaven. 10Do not be called leaders; for One is your Leader, that is, Christ. 11But the greatest among you shall be your servant. 12Whoever exalts himself shall be humbled; and whoever humbles himself shall be exalted.
Mat 23:1 “Jesus spoke to the crowds” This was a public denunciation of the religious leaders. Although the following words do not describe every member of the Pharisees, they do characterize the prevalent attitude of the group.
Mat 23:2 “scribes” These were experts in the Written Law (OT) and the Oral Law (Talmud) of Israel and were available to make local practical applications. In effect they replaced the traditional OT functions of the local Levites. See Special Topic at Mat 12:38.
“Pharisees” This was a group of committed Jews which developed during the Maccabean Period. They accepted all of the written Old Testament and Oral Tradition as binding. Not all scribes were Pharisees, but most were. For a full discussion of the origin and theology of the Pharisees see Special Topic at Mat 22:15.
“the chair of Moses” This referred to a teaching position in the local synagogue or in the local Jewish community.
Mat 23:3 “all that they tell you, do and observe” Jesus uses two commands.
1. ” do,” aorist active imperative
2. ” keep,” present active imperative
Jesus was saying that if they could show you truth in the Law, then you should act on it. The Word of God is true no matter who proclaims it!
“but do not do according to their deeds” Their lifestyles and attitudes revealed their character. In a sense they are the false teachers described in Mat 7:15-23. They have not acted on God’s truth (cf. Mat 7:24-27), but human tradition (cf. Isa 6:9-10; Isa 29:13)!
Mat 23:4 “they tie up heavy burdens” This was a cultural metaphor which referred to the overloading or improper loading of domestic animals (cf. Mat 11:28-30). The religious leaders did not show any compassion for the common person (cf. Luk 11:46; Act 15:10). They themselves could not keep their own rules (cf. Rom 2:17-24).
There is a Greek manuscript variation in this verse. It is uncertain whether the phrase “difficult to carry” is original or assimilated from Luk 11:46.
Mat 23:5 “they do all their deeds to be noticed by men” They were religious exhibitionists (cf. Mat 6:2; Mat 6:5; Mat 6:16).
NASB”they broaden their phylacteries”
NKJV, NRSV”they make their phylacteries broad”
TEV”Look at the straps with scripture verses on them which they wear on their foreheads and arms, and notice how large they are”
JB”wearing broader phylacteries”
NJB”wearing broader headbands”
These black leather boxes contained the OT texts of Exo 13:3-16, Deu 6:4-9, or Deu 11:13-21. They were worn on the forehead just above the eyes. This was an over literalization of Exo 13:9 and Deu 6:8; Deu 11:18. These texts were to be the guiding light of believers lives, not black boxes on their foreheads!
NASB”lengthen the tassels of their garments”
NKJV”enlarge the borders of their garments”
NRSV”their fringes long”
TEV”how long are the tassels on their cloaks!”
NJB”longer tassels”
These were blue ornaments on their robes or prayer shawls which reminded them of the Torah (cf. Num 15:38 and Deu 22:12).
Mat 23:6 This was the same temptation related to James and John in Mat 20:20-28.
Mat 23:7 “Rabbi” This Aramaic term was an honorific title (” my teacher”). These titles (rabbi, father, leader) are criticized because of the pride and arrogance connected with them in first century Judaism. The leaders loved to be called by these honorific titles.
The NKJV following the Textus Receptus doubles the word “Rabbi.” This was a cultural way of (1) adding solemnity or (2) showing affection (cf. Mat 23:37). However the early Greek texts ( and B as well as the Vulgate) have it only once.
Mat 23:8-10 Note the repeated use of “One.” Jesus (and Matthew) did not see a contradiction of monotheism. See the second paragraph at Mat 22:37-38.
1. One is your Teacher (could be the Father or the Son, matt Mat 22:36)
2. One is your Father (twice)
3. One is your Leader, that is Christ
Mat 23:8 “you are all brothers” Believers are equal in God’s sight (i.e., Gen 1:26-27), therefore, we must be careful of ranks or titles! There is no “clergy” vs. “laity” distinction in the NT. There are also no other distinctions, note Rom 3:22; 1Co 12:12-13; Gal 3:28; Col 3:11.
Mat 23:11 “the greatest among you shall be your servant” This is discussed in Mat 20:25-28 and Mar 10:42-44. What a shocking statement! This is markedly different from the world’s attitudes. However, this is the sign of true greatness in the new age.
Mat 23:12 “whoever exalts himself shall be humbled” This is a recurrent biblical theme (cf. Job 22:29; Pro 29:23; Luk 14:11; Luk 18:14; Jas 4:6; 1Pe 5:5).
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
multitude = crowds. Note the Structure (p. 1857).
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
1-39.] DENUNCIATION OF THE SCRIBES AND PHARISEES. Peculiar to Matthew.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Matthew’s gospel twenty-three. Jesus has been at the temple and He was challenged as to His authority by these priests, and then He was asked questions by the scribes, the Pharisees, the Sadducees. And then Jesus finally asked them a question. “What do you think of Christ, whose son is He?” And when they said, “the son of David.” He said, “How can He be the son of David, when David by the spirit called Him Lord?” And no father would ever call his son “lord”. That’s just so totally against the culture. It’s just not done. So they couldn’t answer Him. And neither did they dare ask Him anymore questions after that ( Mat 22:42-46 ).
Now still there in the temple, as we go into chapter twenty-three, we are still there within the temple precinct. Then Jesus turns from these questions and counter questions with the scribes and Pharisees, and He turns to the multitude that is gathered around Him, and to His disciples that are there. And the first part, the first twelve verses of chapter twenty-three are addressed to His disciples and the assembled multitude. And then beginning with verse thirteen, He turns to the scribes and the Pharisees, and really begins to lay a heavy one on them.
But first of all notice,
Jesus then spake to the multitude, and to his disciples, saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat [or in Moses’ chair] ( Mat 23:1-2 ):
The Greek word is “cathedra”, which is sort of a school, and you hear of a person who chairs the department of philosophy and all, and so it is the sitting there as a teacher, as a lecturer, in the area of Moses.
All therefore whatsoever they bid you to observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not ( Mat 23:3 ).
Now, Jesus had just given a parable that the scribes and Pharisees had recognized was against them. He asked them, and they caught them or He caught them, and they realized that they were trapped by it. He had said to them: “There was a certain father who had two sons. And to the first he said, go out in the field and work for me. And the son said, okay, Dad, I’ll be glad to go. But he didn’t go. Or the first one said, no, I won’t go, and then later on he repented and went. The second one said, yeah, I’ll go, and he never went”. Now Jesus said, “which one really did the will of his father?” And they said, “Well, the one that went out.” And Jesus said, “That’s right. ( Mat 21:28-31 )”
Now Jesus is, you see, saying here, “Look, they say, but they don’t do. Now you observe to do the things that they tell you to do, but don’t follow their works, because they say things, but yet they themselves don’t do them.” The New Testament is quite emphatic in the fact that we are to be doers of the Word, and not hearers only, deceiving ourselves. Paul as he was writing his epistle to the Romans, spoke of how that the Jews so often felt that they were justified, just because they had the law. Not because they were doing it, but because they had it, they felt that they were justified. It’s just like so many people feel that they are Christians, just because they live in the United States. Not because they are actively following Jesus Christ, but after all, “I live in a Christian nation”. But Jesus said, “Look, these men are saying it, but they are not doing it. So follow what they say, but don’t follow their works”.
For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and they lay them on men’s shoulders; but they themselves will not move one of them with their little fingers ( Mat 23:4 ).
Now it is interesting as you go over to the Holy land and see the laborers and the heavy burdens that they bind, and lay on these laborers’ shoulders, it’s unreal. We have some fascinating pictures that look like a big bundle of sticks and all, walking down the road. I mean, all you can see are the feet underneath, but these guys are so laden down. They bound so many sticks and altogether, and put them on these guys’ shoulders; that’s all you can see are the feet underneath. And it looks like sticks are walking.
And so it was a picture that was very common to the people over there. The little donkeys, they really load those little donkeys down. Looks like sometimes you have four legs under the sticks walking. Or under this pile of sheaves or whatever, and they would bind these heavy, heavy burdens, and Jesus said, “and then they lay them on men’s shoulders, grievous to be born.” Now He is, of course speaking, figuratively.
They could see the figure in their mind. They had seen these fellows just loaded down with loads, just straining to try and carry it because they would lay so much on you. And so Jesus is saying this is what the scribes and Pharisees are doing. They lay these heavy, heavy burdens upon men, yet they themselves won’t even move with one of their fingers. They won’t lift anything with one of their little fingers. “For all of the works that they do, they do to be seen of men.”
Now, you remember the Sermon on the Mount in the sixth chapter, Jesus began by declaring, “Take heed to yourselves, that you do not your righteousness before men, to be seen of men, for verily I say unto you, you have your reward”( Mat 6:1 ).
And then He talked about how you gave: “Don’t sound the trumpet before you like the Pharisees, who like to make a big to-do over what they give, so all men can see what they are giving. But when you give, do it in secret, don’t let your right hand know what your left hand is doing. When you pray, don’t be like the Pharisees and all who love to stand on the street corners, that they might be seen of men, but go in your closet, shut the door. When you fast, don’t be like the Pharisees, who go around with these long faces, and they look so gaunt and all, but anoint your face and all, that you don’t appear unto men to fast”( Mat 6:2-6 ).
Now Jesus is here declaring again the very same thing, that the Pharisees and the scribes, their whole religion was an external, and their whole purpose and motive was that men might see them and look up to them as spiritual leaders. And so the very clothes they wore, the very affectations that they developed were to impress people with how spiritual, and how righteous they were, but it was all an outward show, but inwardly there was nothing there.
Be careful that you don’t get caught in a religious sham, where it is just an all outward demonstration, and in your mind you’re thinking; “I hope everybody sees me, how righteous I am. I go up on my tiptoes just in case, you know”. The whole idea is to affect men with how spiritual and how righteous I am.
Some fellow came up to me Thursday night after service and said, “I stood up tonight while they were singing, and I was worshiping the Lord, and someone came up and told me to sit down, and I was just there worshiping the Lord.” I said, “Well, whoever told you to sit down, told you right.” I said, “If everybody else is sitting down, and you are standing, then all you are doing is drawing attention to you. We are not here to be attracted to you; we are here to be attracted to Jesus Christ.”
Now you’ve got to be careful that in your worship of the Lord, that in your service to the Lord, that you don’t get caught in the trap of doing things so as to draw attention to yourself. Whatever you do in your worship, or in your service, if the net effect is drawing attention to you, and this what’s there within your heart, you’re in the same category as the scribes and Pharisees. We’ve got to be very careful of this.
You see, my old nature is totally corrupt. So much so, that even when I am engaged in my spiritual activities, my old flesh would still like to do things in such a way that everybody will know how spiritual I am. I would like people to know just how deeply committed my life is to God. How much time I devote myself into just seeking the Lord and His Word. In fact, in reality I want people to think that I do more then I really do. And so often, I try to give an impression that I am more spiritual than I really am, that I am more deeply committed than I really am, that I have a greater prayer life than I really do.
But whenever I try to give that impression to people, I am a hypocrite. I am guilty of hypocrisy. I am seeking to impress people. I should be interested only in impressing God with my righteous living, and I know that God can’t be impressed. But I should only be thinking of God when I am in worship, when I am in prayer, when I am giving. I should never be doing it for the effect that I can create in the mind of men, but I should always just be doing as unto the Lord, in that secret place of fellowship and communion.
Now, Jesus said,
For all of their works they do to be seen of men: and they make broad their phylacteries ( Mat 23:5 ),
Now the phylactery was the little box that they would bind on their wrist and bind on their forehead. And they were told under the law that they were to take and bind the law of God to the frontlets and their hands and so forth, and so there are these little leather boxes. And every day when they go to pray, except the Sabbath day, because on the Sabbath day you are not to bear any burdens and so forth, so they don’t do it on the Sabbath day; but every day as they go to prayer, they go through this ritual. First of all, binding their arm, and tying this little box on their arm.
Now in this little box on the hand there is one chamber in the little box and it has four passages of scripture from the Old Testament, in little scrolls in this little leather box on their hand. The one on their forehead, and they bind another leather thong around their forehead in this little leather box on their forehead, and in that there are four compartments, and these same four passages on little scrolls, only one little scroll in each four compartments. Now, these Pharisees, they would get big boxes, broaden their phylacteries, so everybody can see, “I am really heavy-duty prayer, because, look the big box that I got here”. And they would broaden their phylacteries, and of course the whole idea was people might observe them and see them.
And then of course they
enlarged the borders of their garment ( Mat 23:5 ),
Or these little tassels that they would put on their garments, and again they were to be more or less symbols. There was that law in the Old Testament of these fringes on their garments that they were to make, and so they would enlarge these fringes.
Now today they still have the fringes, but they put them on the prayer shawls that they wear. And of course, going to the Western Wall of the temple is always an interesting experience that you see them come up, and they start binding the phylacteries, and they take their prayer shawls with the fringes, even to the present day, and wrap them around in a traditional way, and then they go up and begin to read their prayers before the Wall. And it’s quite a fascinating scene to watch.
And so Jesus is saying though, that with them they were doing it in such a way as to draw attention to themselves, that they might appear before men to be holy, or righteous.
Now,
They loved the uppermost rooms at the feast, and the chief seats in the synagogue ( Mat 23:6 ),
The chief seats were down in the front, but they were facing the congregation, so that the whole congregation can see me going through my little prayers and all, and the whole congregation can see how righteous I am. And they loved those chief seats in the Synagogue. They loved the upper places in the feast and all. And they loved,
The greetings in the markets, to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi ( Mat 23:7 ).
Doctor, Doctor. Reverend.
But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your master, even Christ; [and notice,] all of you are brethren ( Mat 23:8 ).
Now He is talking to His disciples. He said don’t get into that spiritual hierarchy trip. You’re all brothers. There is not one above the other. You are all one together. You are all brothers. Don’t seek to promote yourself. Don’t seek the best places. When you bid onto the feast, He said take the lower place. And if the host says, “oh come, sit up here,” He said then you’re in good shape. But if you take the upper seat and the host says, “Hey, what are you doing up here? You belong down here at the end of the table” then it’s a very embarrassing thing. So better that you take a lower seat, and let them bid you higher, than to take the higher seat, and let them direct you lower. You’re brothers. Don’t try and develop a hierarchy where oh, you know, Reverend, Rabbi, or whatever.
And then He said,
And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven ( Mat 23:9 ).
So the title of father was prohibited by Jesus. In my associations I have become acquainted and friends of many ministers within the Episcopalian Church and also within the Catholic Church. And I have extreme difficulty in knowing how to address them, because for the life of me I cannot call them father so-and-so, because Jesus said not to. And so to me it creates a difficult thing as to how to address them, because they are usually introduced, “This is father so-and-so” and I just have a hang-up with this, but I just can’t address a man “father” in a spiritual sense. I don’t know. Do what you want, but I just have problems.
Neither be ye called masters; for one is your master, even Christ ( Mat 23:10 ).
In other words, Jesus is putting down the idea of titles. These guys love their titles, but you know a title really has an effect, a separation of people, and the elevation. And Jesus is really coming against this idea of the elevating of one man over another by some kind of a title. And that is why I personally disdain titles. I don’t want a title. And it’s interesting the letters that I get as people are trying to tack titles onto my name. And I always know that they don’t know me very well. If they knew me better, they wouldn’t tack a title on my name. So Jesus is saying, “Hey, you’re all brothers.” So “hey, brother Chuck”, but even that is sort of a title. Just Chuck is good enough.
Jesus said,
He that is greatest among you shall be your servant ( Mat 23:11 ).
Not to establish this spiritual hierarchy and oh, oh.
And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that humble himself shall be exalted ( Mat 23:12 ).
Now having declared that to His disciples, these are the rules for His disciples. He now turns and addresses Himself to these scribes and the Pharisee. And He has an eightfold denunciation against them, pronouncing an eightfold woe. To my disciples, don’t follow their example. They say, but they don’t do. They exalt themselves. They draw attention to themselves. They love to be exalted and elevated above people, but you are brothers. If you’re going to be the chief; be the servant. Humble yourself and God will exalt you. But exalt yourself and God will abase you.
Now woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! ( Mat 23:13 )
We sang “Jesus what a wonder you are. You are so gentle, so pure and so kind.” And for the most part Jesus was a very gentle person, so that when He gets to the place of the strong denunciation, you really take note. Now if some guy has a high temper, and he is going around blowing off all the time, you soon get to where you don’t pay attention anymore. “Oh, he is always blowing off steam, don’t worry about it”. But if a fellow is generally very meek and mild temperament, but suddenly he begins to really let off the steam, then you say; “Wow, what’s going on here? He’s really heavy.” And so Jesus really came down on them.
Now I am interested in the attitude of Jesus towards out-and-out acknowledged sinners, and contrast that with His attitude towards those spiritual leaders. To the woman who was taken in adultery and brought to Him by the Pharisees, and said, “We caught this woman in the very act of adultery, and our law says, stone her. What do you say?” If she was caught in the very act, where was the man? Surely he must have been caught too. But the poor woman didn’t have much rights in those days. So they brought the woman to Jesus, and He said, “Well, I say unto you, let him that is without sin throw the first stone”( Joh 8:7 ). And then He knelt down and began to draw in the dust or write in the dust, and probably wrote out the sins of these various guys were guilty of committing, and one by one, they began to leave the crowd until there was no one left, but the woman. And Jesus finally stood up and He said, “Where are your accusers?” And she said,” well, I guess they’ve all gone.” And He said, “Neither do I condemn you, go your way and sin no more”( Joh 8:11 ). Very gentle, very forgiving, very loving, very kind.
To the woman of Samaria who had had five husbands, and now had just moved in with a man without the benefit of marriage, Jesus talked to her about the glorious water of life that would satisfy that inner need in her life, where she wouldn’t be thirsty again. And He spoke with her so gently of eternal life, and the things of God. She was really a very wicked person. Always gentle with the sinners, who were acknowledged sinners. He never turned away one who came repenting. His arms were always open to receive, His words were always kind, and forgiving, and loving. But to those who had this pretense of being so spiritual, those who had the pretense of being so righteous and were trying to foster themselves off on the common people as spiritually superior, I mean Jesus really got heavy.
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for neither go ye in yourselves, but you will not allow those who are entering to go in ( Mat 23:13 ).
Not only have you not really entered in, but you would hinder those who would enter into the kingdom of heaven. Unfortunately this is also true today in many areas of the church, where the ministers of those churches have been caught up into liberalism and modernism. And they do not really enter into the kingdom of heaven, but also they prohibit people; they stand in the way, they make fun of the scriptures. They make light of the scriptures or they seek to declare that the scriptures really aren’t the scriptures.
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you devour widows’ houses, and for a pretence you make a long prayer [but your prayers are only pretensions]: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you compass the sea and the land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, you make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves. Woe unto you, ye blind guides which say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is guilty. You fools, blind: what is greater, the gold, or the temple that sanctifies the gold? And you say, Whosoever shall swear by the altar, it’s nothing; but whosoever swears by the gift that is upon the altar, he is guilty. You fools and blind: whether is greater, the gift, or the altar that sanctifies the gift? Whoso therefore shall swear by the altar, swears by it, and all of the things that are on it. And whoso swears by the temple, swears by it, and by him that dwelleth therein. And he that shall swear by heaven, swears by the throne of God, and him that sits thereon. Woe unto you scribes, Pharisees, hypocrites! ( Mat 23:14-23 )
I mean, He is really getting down on them for their traditional teachings. You know if you swear, you are making an oath now, “I swear by the temple, I’ll do it.” You swore by the temple. Oh well, that’s all right. He doesn’t have to keep it, it’s not a binding oath. “I swear by the gold in the temple.” Ho, ho, ho, look out now, that’s binding. I mean stupid, ridiculous, traditional things that had been developed and had become a part of their actual belief systems, dogmas that had turned into doctrines, traditions, that were being taught for doctrine.
Woe unto you scribes, Pharisees, hypocrites! because you pay tithes of mint and anise and cummin ( Mat 23:23 ),
Now these are little spices. And everybody had their own spice garden and they would raise their own anise, their own cummin and mint, and they would be careful. Now how much cummin do you use when you’re cooking? But they would take out of the spice garden, and they take and give ten percent to God. Very careful to measure out their spices, the mint, the anise, and their cummin to give God His ten percent.
So careful, yet, Jesus said,
you have omitted the way to your matters of the law, you’ve past over completely, judgement, and mercy, and faith ( Mat 23:23 ):
Now concerning the tithe, notice, Jesus said,
you ought to have done that [you ought to pay your tithes], but you are not to leave the other undone ( Mat 23:23 ).
Now Jesus does confirm that. They were correct in paying tithes. But they were very incorrect in not really seeking justices, and mercy, and faith.
Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat [or strain out a gnat], and swallow a camel ( Mat 23:24 ).
Now when they would drink their wine, they would pour it through a cloth, in case a little gnat may have flown into the wine, for if they would drink the wine with a gnat in it, the gnat wasn’t kosher. The gnat had blood in it, and they were not to eat anything with the blood; therefore, they would strain their wine, so they would be careful not to drink any gnats. “But they in turn,” Jesus said, “you are swallowing camels.” Now a camel is also an unclean beast. But it’s interesting that when you get into the fine points of picking in religious systems, how picky people can get in small little things, and yet they omit the more important things. And Jesus, of course, goes along with your paying tithes of your spices, but you’re not really seeking judgment, or mercy, or faith. You’re straining out the gnats, but you are swallowing camels.
You blind guides,
Woe unto you, scribes, Pharisees, hypocrites! for you make clean the outside of the cup and the platter, but within you’re full of extortion and excess ( Mat 23:25 ).
Now picture this, of a filthy cup inside. Outside your looking, “Oh, I am so thirsty”, get a drink of water. You see this beautiful, clean, sparkling cup, and you pick it up, and you look inside, and all this filth and vermin in there, yuck. The outside looks so good, but the inside is so filthy. And Jesus said, “that’s the way you guys are. You look so good on the outside, but the inside there is extortion, there is greed, there is all of these excesses.
Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and the platter, that the outside of them may be clean also ( Mat 23:26 ).
More important that the inside be clean than the outside. Men will start on the outward appearance; God is looking on the heart. And in the New Testament Jesus, and of course through the epistles is also emphasized, that more important than the outward actions or the inner attitudes of a man’s heart. It’s what’s within that the Lord is really counting and looking at. People can have an outward observance of righteousness, of religious rituals, of worship and all, but within it isn’t there. The Lord said, “Look, it’s got to be inside, that’s where you got to start. And from what is inside we’ll work out, but the attitude is more important than the actions”.
There are a lot of people doing the right things in the wrong ways. What they are doing may be right, but the attitude in which they are doing it is completely wrong. I would rather do the wrong thing and have a right attitude, than do the right thing and have a wrong attitude, because God can change my activities in a hurry. But many times it takes an entire lifetime to change the attitude of a man’s heart. What’s in your heart is what the Lord says counts.
Woe unto you scribes, Pharisees, hypocrites, for you are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful on the outside ( Mat 23:27 ),
They would go and whitewash the sepulchres, but within– on the outside they looked so pretty, so clean,
but inside they are full of [just skeletons] dead men’s bones, and all of the putrefying rotten flesh. Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within you’re full of hypocrisy and iniquity. Woe unto you, scribes, Pharisees, hypocrites! because you’ve build the tombs of the prophets, and you garnish, [decorate] the sepulchres of the righteous ( Mat 23:27-29 ),
When you go over to Israel today, you can see in the Kidron Valley, some of the tombs of the prophets that had been build. In fact, they call them the “tombs of the prophets”. Also, you can see how they garnish the sepulchres. You can go to what they call “the tomb of David”. And there is a big silver casket there in which David’s remains supposedly are lying, and all of the garnishing, all of the trappings and all that they have around this. And they come there and sit and pray, there by David’s tomb. But oh, they really still garnish so much this tomb of David.
“You honor your fathers,” is actually what He is saying. You give honor to your fathers, and you say;
if we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets ( Mat 23:30 ).
Oh, had we’ve been there, we would have been righteous, and we would have been pure.
Wherefore you are witnesses against yourselves, for you are the children of those who killed the prophets. Fill up then the measure of your fathers. Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can you escape the damnation of hell? ( Mat 23:31-33 )
Hey, He sounds like a hellfire and brimstone preacher.
Wherefore, behold, I sent to you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them you’re going to kill and crucify: and some of them you’re going to scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed from upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zacharias the son of Barachias, whom you killed between the temple and the altar. Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation ( Mat 23:34-36 ).
Actually in the crucifying of Christ, they became guilty of the worst of the heinous sins that man has ever committed. Their fathers had killed the prophets, Isaiah, and so many of the prophets were slain by the people in their days. But Jesus said, “you are going to kill the One of whom all the prophets spoke of.” Stephen laid on the charge, “you killed the One of whom all the prophets spake”( Act 7:52 ).
Now Jesus turns after this heavy denunciation and He reveals His heart.
Oh, Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and have stoned those that have been sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathers her chickens under her wings, but you would not! ( Mat 23:37 )
In spite of all that they had done Jesus said, “Look, I’d still love to gather your children together”. The love that God had, had not diminished. He still loved them. But it was they who refused. It wasn’t that the opportunity wasn’t there, it wasn’t that God was not merciful and forgiving, it wasn’t that God wouldn’t do it still for them, but they would not. And thus as the result,
your house is left unto you desolate ( Mat 23:38 ).
It has come to an end. It’s been left desolate. It’s all over. You’ve received the opportunity of the grace of God, you have refused it, and thus the nation Israel will no longer be the light through which God will shine forth to a dark world. Your house is left desolate.
For I say unto you, You will not see me again, until you are saying, Blessed is he who comes in the name of Lord ( Mat 23:39 ).
You won’t see me until the persecution is so heavy, the tribulation so great that you’ll be saying,” Oh, blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.” And they’ll be crying out and praying for Him before He returns.
Recently in one of my trips to Israel I was speaking at a congress in Jerusalem, which was called “the Peace of Jerusalem Congress”. It was a congress in which the churches of the world were expressing towards the people of Israel our love for them and our support for them. And when I arrived at my hotel room, I had a letter there from one of the rabbis from Measheream. And he was saying: “What are you doing here, speaking of support for Israel? Israel has no right to exist as a nation.” And he went on and was really taking me to task for speaking at this congress in support of the nation of Israel.
And so I took the letter to some of my Jewish friends there in Jerusalem, and I said: “Look at this greeting that I got from one of your rabbis.” And of course these friends had help set up this whole meeting, and we’re all gung-ho, because they realized the value of the support of the Christian Church for the nation of Israel. And I said, “Look what one of your rabbis has sent to me.” And they read it, and they said, “Oh, don’t pay any attention to it. Those guys are fanatics. They’re just radical, they’re fanatics, don’t pay any attention to it.” I said, “but he is a rabbi.” “Yeah, but rabbis can be fanatics too.”
I said, “Oh, really, then you mean that he is no doubt wrong in his idea that Israel shouldn’t be a nation, because he is just a fanatic? He’s made a mistake in this? “Oh, yeah, yeah.” I said, “Do you realize that some rabbis made a serious mistake two thousand years ago? And that unfortunately you’re still following their serious mistake.” I said, “How do you know?” But they weren’t just a bunch of radicals, just like this rabbi that wrote me, who made a tragic mistake. “And here, though two thousand years later, you’re still following the advice of those rabbis who rejected Jesus as the Messiah.” I said, “They were fanatics. They were radicals.” The guys were silent. “
Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary
Mat 23:1. , then) Having left His adversaries to themselves.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Mat 23:1-39
6. SCRIBES AND PHARISEES EXPOSED;
SEVEN WOES PRONOUNCED
Mat 23:1-39
1-4 Then spake Jesus to the multitudes and to his disciples. -This entire chapter is an exposition and denouncement of the sin of the scribes and Pharisees; Jesus speaks with unsparing yet with just severity. It is spoken to the people and his disciples; it is his final admonition to the people against the pernicious teachings of the Pharisees and their corrupt lives. Mark tells us that it was spoken to “the common people,” and adds that they heard him gladly. (Mar 12:37.) Luke tells us that he spoke “in the hearing of all the people,” and that it was spoken “unto his disciples.” (Luk 20:45.) His address was to his disciples in the presence of the multitude and for the benefit of all who heard. It may be that Matthew did not record this in chronological order; he places it in immediate connection with the events and conversations of the two chapters preceding; that is, during the six days of the Passion Week. Jesus had come to Jerusalem for the last time, never to leave it alive; this condemnation and warning of the scribes and Pharisees has its practical value today.
The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat.-They were the transcribers, readers, and teachers of the law of Moses the “seat” was also used by Grecian philosophers in lecturing, who were thence called “cathedrarii.” The synagogue expounders stood while reading the very words of the law, but sat while expounding it. The scribes and the Pharisees were in no way the successors of Moses by ordination or lineal descent they had no more authority from God than did the Sadducees. “All things therefore whatsoever they bid you, these do and observe.” “All things” which they teach according to the law of Moses, Jesus commended and instructed the people to obey, because God was the author of the law. However, the teachers of the law did not practice what they taught; “they say, and do not.” They did not practice what they preached. They taught things other than those revealed in the law; their teachings were mingled with the traditions of the rabbis. However, the failure of the scribes and Pharisees to do what the law required, though they preached it, did not excuse the people from obeying the law. This principle holds true today; religious teachers may not practice the word of God as they teach it; it is true that they ought to and are condemned for not doing it; yet that does not excuse anyone else for disobeying the commands of God. Jesus goes further in exposing the practices of these scribes and Pharisees, and charges them with fastening “heavy burdens” which were “grevious to be borne” upon the people; yet “they themselves will not move them with their finger.” They placed the heavy burdens of traditional interpretations upon the people, but would not do anything to help the people even bear the burden which these traditions imposed. The figure here is taken from the eastern manner of loading the camels; their burdens are packed in bundles, and put upon their backs. The Pharisees imposed the severest ordinances on the people. Peter called the system a burden which none could bear. (Act 15:10). They were not willing to lighten the burden placed on the people even though they saw them fainting under the heavy load , they had no mercy, no justice, no sympathy for the people.
5-7 But all their works they do to be seen of men.-They were not interested in the people obeying God, neither were they anxious to please God themselves; they were more anxious to appear as righteous before men. They did all their works, not for the good or man nor the glory of God, but for the praise of men. Jesus specifies what they did; “for they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments.” “Phylacteries” mean “preservatives” or “guards.” The phylactery was a passage of scripture, written on parchment, folded up, and tied on the forehead, so that it should be always in front of their eyes. This was a mechanical observance of Deu 6:8. “Enlarge the borders of their garments” means to put a fringe of blue in the borders of their garments to distinguish themselves from heathens. The scribes and Pharisees made “broad” their phylacteries; that is, instead of having one scripture, they had a number of scriptures inscribed and wore on their forehead, and thus appeared to be obedient to many scriptures; they “enlarged” the border of their garments to make it appear that they were righteous above the heathen; then broad phylacteries and enlarged borders could be easily seen, and this was what they desired. They were more interested in being seen of men to appear righteous than they were in being righteous. Another mark of their hypocritical life was that they loved to occupy “the chief place at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues.” The “chief seats” at the feast were those nearest the master of the feast; they were those prepared for honored guests; they were seats where every one could behold them. “The chief seats in the synagogues” were those seats that were prominent and commanded conspicious attention from others; they occupied these because they loved the applause and admiration of men. Furthermore, they delighted in receiving “the salutations in the marketplaces,” and to be called of men, “Rabbi.” Salutations at the street corners and in the assemblies of men were sought by these scribes and Pharisees; they loved to hear their disciples hail them in a crowd as “rabbi,” “great teacher.” The same inordinate love of human applause is condemned in God’s people today. “Rabbi” was an honorary title of the Jewish doctor of the law; it had three degrees, of which the first was “rab,” the great or master; the second was “rabbi,” my master; the third was “rabboni,” my great master.
8-12 But be not ye called Rabbi.-“Rabbi” was an honorary title which carried with it pride and arrogance; to call one rabbi implied a degree of obedience to him and his teachings, which were inconsistent with right judgments; the Jews were content with what the rabbi said, and did not question his authority or judgment. What is here taught is that the disciples of Jesus should not use such titles which would lead them to yield submission to any man’s will or judgment. This does not forbid anyone calling another by a professional title; it only denies God’s people acknowledging human authority as a guide in following God. “Call no man your father”; this also has the limitations mentioned with respect to “rabbi.” Children honor their father by affectionately calling him “father” or some other endearing name; they must call him by some name. No man in the spiritual sense should be called “father,” for God is our Father. Paul called Timothy his son in the gospel. (1Ti 1:2; 1Ti 1:18; 2Ti 1:2.) In this sense Timothy could speak of Paul as his “father” in the gospel, as Paul could speak of him as his “son” in the gospel. Only God is our Father in a spiritual sense and Jesus with the Bible our teacher; faithful disciples of the Lord recognized no other teacher or father. With like import we should not call anyone our “master,” “for one is your master, even the Christ.” “Rabbi,” “Father,” and “Master” should not be used to take the place of God, Christ, or his truth;but such titles of profession as may be used in giving honor to whom honor is due are not forbidden by Jesus here.
But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.- The title “rabbi” in the sense forbidden by Jesus meant “my great one” and suggested a review of the principle that Jesus had already taught, namely, that the greatest one among his disciples would be the greatest servant among them;that service is the standard of greatness. This principle occurs ten times in the gospels. Jesus honors and blesses true humility and loving service, but condemns affection and empty pride. God’s people are on a level with each other; they occupy the same relation to God and to Christ and should be on the same level with each other. The idea of popes, archbishops, bishops, and ecclesiastical heads in the religion of our Lord is condemned. The one who exalts himself shall be brought low, but the one who is humble God will exalt. Aesop, when asked what Jupiter was doing, replied, “He is humbling the exalted, and exalting the humble.”
[One who uses religious services for personal promotion rather than the salvation of souls falls under the curse of God. His duty is to present God and his cause and lose sight of self; if he does this, God will care for him, and he whom God cares for will be blessed and exalted in the next world, if not in this. The young preacher that forgets all else and works for the glory of God is the one that succeeds. In forgetfulness of self he goes where he can do greatest good in saving souls and honoring God. His success in this work gives him character and opens the way for worldly success, and this is the point of danger. When a man looks around for a place where he can get the best support or make for himself the greatest name, he is seeking to exalt himself. If he seeks that which will add to his temporal good, he will not only lose the eternal life, but more often than otherwise he will lose the good of this life. But he who gives up all, forgets his temporal good for the sake of Christ, will save his life, the real good of this life, and all the blessings of the life to come.]
13, 14 But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! -Here Jesus begins his pronouncement of “seven woes.” “Woe” is a word of solemn denunciation of punishment; it implies that great calamities of the most awful nature are impending over the guilty from the divine justice; it may also imply a retributive destiny for years and ages of sin. The scribes and Pharisees are here called “hypocrites,” and upon them Jesus pronounced his most scathing denunciations while on earth. The dark clouds begin now to gather around the great central truth of Jesus’ teaching-his crucifixion; he concludes his teaching with these sublime wails over the wickedness of the world as is personified in the scribes and Pharisees. The first woe is pronounced upon them “because ye shut the kingdom of heaven against men.” They are represented as not entering themselves, neither permitting others to enter. The kingdom of God was preached in its preparatory stage; it had been presented in promise and prophecy, and now it was presented in its preparatory state, and these scribes and Pharisees, the religious guides of the people, were doing all that they could to contradict the teaching of Jesus and to keep the people from accepting him as the Messiah. They would not accept him themselves, neither would they, by their authority over the people, permit others to accept him. Frequently, people were cast out of the synagogues because they accepted Jesus as the Messiah. In Luk 11:52 the figure is slightly changed and is stated that they “took away the key of knowledge” and would not enter themselves nor permit others to enter, or hinder others who would enter. They shut the kingdom of God by their example (Joh 7:48); by their doctrine, caviling at all that Jesus said (Mat 12:24; Joh 9:13-41; Joh 12:42; 1Th 2:14-16);and by their authority (Joh 9:22).
Verse fourteen is omitted from the Revised Version. Some authorities insert here or after verse twelve the following “Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows’ houses, even while for a pretence ye make long prayers therefore ye shall receive greater condemnation.” They used long prayers to deceive and gain the ends of avarice; they are said to have remained three hours in prayer, and pretended that their lengthened devotions represented pious character and were worthy of liberal support. Again these leaders plotted with the children of widowed mothers to gain the estate. The longer they continued their hypocritical prayers, the greater was their condemnation.
15 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!-This woe is pronounced upon them because they compassed “sea and land to make one proselyte.” They were very zealous to make a proselyte to their cause, but the proselyte was “two-fold more a son of hell” than they themselves. They spared no pains to make a convert to their opinions; this new convert from among the Gentiles was called “a proselyte.” There were great distinctions allowed among them; there were some who embraced the whole Jewish system and sought earnestly for its rewards; the centurion was probably one of this class (Mat 8:5)and possibly Cornelius (Acts 10). These were called “proselytes of righteousness.” Others received only certain parts of the system, and were not circumcised, while others received only part of the system and were circumcised. They confused their proselytes and corrupted them by their false doctrines. Often converts from one religion to another simply reject their old supersititions, and seize eagerly all the worst parts of their new faith, and end in becoming infidels; such were these proselytes. “Son of hell” means one worthy of eternal punishment. These religious teachers taught their proselytes their opinions and disregarded the word of God; they exalted the doctrines of men above the word of God; and hence caused their proselytes to despise God, which rendered them worthy of such condemnation.
16-22 Woe unto you, ye blind guides.-In pronouncing this woe, Jesus calls the scribes and Pharisees “blind guides.” They claimed to be leaders and guides of the people in their service to God. Not only does this condemnation rest upon the blind guides of that age, but upon such guides in religious thought of all. He has now called them “hypocrites,” “blind guides,” “fools and blind”; it would be difficult to find epithets which signify greater contempt and condemnation. In teaching the people these blind guides said, “Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor.” If a man swear at all and invoke the condemnation of God, he is bound to keep his oath. In Mat 5:33; Mat 5:37 we have the same principle taught. These “blind guides” said that if one swore by the temple, the oath was not binding; hence they had a loophole to escape from keeping their oath. However, they said if one swears “by the gold of the temple,” then one must keep that oath. The “gold of the temple” meant any of the gold with which the temple was ornamented. All this shows a trifling with oaths. A man in a vain conversation would take an oath thoughtlessly by some golden article of the temple; he must keep that oath; but if in all seriousness he swore by the temple, then he need not keep his oath. Some think that the gold here mentioned does not refer to the gilding of the temple, but the offering of gold which was in the treasury. In replying to this doctrine Jesus calls them “fools and blind” and asks “which is greater, the gold, or the temple that hath sanctified the gold?” Which is greater, the gold ornaments of the temple or the temple itself? Or which is greater, the whole or a part of the whole? This reduces their doctrine to an absurdity.
Again they taught with respect to oaths that if one should swear by the altar, then that one would not have to keep his oath; but “whosoever shall swear by the gift that is upon it, he is a debtor.” This doctrine was as foolish as that of swearing by the gold upon the temple. The great altar of burnt offerings stood before the porch of the temple. (2Ch 5:1; Mat 5:23.) .The altar was a place of great veneration, since it was the instrument by which the great idea of sacrifice was preserved. It was the place where men met God to seek pardon. “The gift that is upon it” means the gift that was sacrificed unto God by the people. The law required certain sacrifices to be made. These sacrifices were burned upon the altar. The doctrine of these blind guides was that you could swear by the altar, but not have to keep the oath, but if one swore by the gift that was on the altar, then the oath was binding. This is the same principle involved in the temple and the gold and the temple. Jesus again argues that the altar is greater than the gift, since it is the “altar that sanctifieth the gift.” Jesus then adds that when one swears by the altar he swears “by all things thereon.” The nice dictinctions which they made proved that they were blind guides and foolish leaders. He adds that those who swear by the temple swear “by him that dwelleth therein”; he swears by the temple and all that belongs to it, and there was no way of escaping the performance of the oath. That it was like those who swear “by the heaven,” for one who swears by the heaven swears “by the throne of God, and by him that sitteth thereon.” Jesus shows the Pharisaic perversion of the oath and condemns their trivial and foolish way of evading and enjoining oaths upon the people. The law bound every one who made an oath or vow to keep that according to the instructions given in the law.
23, 24 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!- The first three woes are passed and the next four are pronounced upon different forms of hypocrisy. This fourth woe is upon an extreme scrupulousness in regard to the slightest ritual performances, with a slight remorse for the grossest immoralities. They abused the law of Moses by exalting inferior precepts to fill the place of the higher commands of mercy and truth. “Ye tithe mint and anise and cummin, and have left undone the weightier matters of the law, justice, and mercy, and faith.” The Jews were required to pay a tenth part or tithe of all their property for the support of the system of worship. The tithe usually went to the priests and Levites. (Num 18:20-24.) The tithes were paid in kind, an actual tenth of the year’s increase; that is, they paid a tenth of their grain, their vineyards, their cattle, and all that they produced. When a Jew lived at a distance from Jerusalem, he was permitted to change it into money and bring that to the priests. (Deu 14:24-25; Deu 14:27; Deu 14:29.) “Mint and anise and cummin” were small vegetable plants, produced by the Jews for seasoning and flavoring their food. “Mint” was the same plant which we know by that name; the Jews scattered it on the floors of their synagogue. “Anise” was what we now call “dill,” an herb of strong aromatic flavor; and “cummin” was a plant like our fennel. (Isa 28:25-27.) They were all garden herbs of the least value, and specimens of the rigidness of the Pharisees. They were commanded to tithe all the increase of their seed. (Deu 14:22.) Jesus did not condemn the tithing of these, but condemned their scrupulousness in tithing these little things, and leaving undone, or disregarding, the weightier matters of “justice, and mercy, and faith.” While scrupulously tithing the little things, they were practicing injustice; they disregarded the justice which the law required. (Isa 1:17-23.) They showed no mercy in exacting these lesser matters, and were unmerciful toward their fellows. They ignored “faith” which was trust in God. They did not believe their own prophets, for they had testified of Jesus; he was fulfilling the prophecies, but they did not believe him as the Messiah. Again Jesus calls them “blind guides, that strain out the gnat, and swallow the camel!” The gnat was a small insect generated in wine or falling into it; it was considered an unclean animal. (Lev 11:4.) For fear of moral contamination they were exceeding careful to strain the liquid which they drank. The camel was a huge and unwieldly beast of burden, larger than an ox. This statement of Jesus seems to have been a proverb. The Arabs had this proverb, “He swallowed an elephant, but was strangled by a flea.” The meaning of Jesus is that by a verbal exaggeration, which is usual in proverbs, to describe a common but foolish custom. The Pharisee, whose conscience had pricked him and made him sad, if he had by chance swallowed a gnat, could yet go quietly and comfortably under the camel load of such sins as injustice, cruelty, and unfaithfulness; he wept at the shocking accident of failing to tithe a small bundle of herbs, but shouted himself hoarse a little later, “His blood be on us, and on our children” (Mat 27:25), at the crucifixion of Jesus.
25, 26 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!- The fifth woe is pronounced upon moral hypocrisy, in which men will show a fair exterior of conduct, while they are secretly practicing the most abominable wickedness. Two forms of such hypocrisy are mentioned here by Jesus; they are the secret commercial dishonesties and secret licentiousness. In describing this practice Jesus said, “For ye cleanse the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full from extortion and excess.” Their vessels for food and drink are used here to enforce the moral lesson; they cleansed their vessels for food and drink, but did not cleanse themselves; they were like those who cleansed the outside of a cup or dish, while they left the part from which they took their food foul and unsightly. They appeared well to their countrymen, and deceived them as to their real character. They are “full from extortion and excess.” The figure is carried out; “they,” the dishes, are full of extortion and excess, which the Pharisees swallowed down without scruple. (Prow. 18:21.) “Extortion” is the unjust wresting away the property or rights of others , “excess” is gluttony or intemperance of all excessive wickedness. They went to the extreme in all of their wicked practices, and at the same time, like cleansed vessels on the outside, were full of wickedness and sin. Again Jesus calls them, “Thou blind Pharisee,” and demands that they “cleanse first the inside of the cup and of the platter, that the outside thereof may become clean also.” If one will first cleanse the heart, then all the life will soon be pure and pious; the heart has in it the issues of life. (Prow. 4:23.) The Lord’s people should not reverse this law, and hope to reform men by cleansing the outside appearance. This is like the proverb, “Make the tree good, and its fruit good.” (Mat 12:33.) Cleansing the outside of a literal cup would not necessarily cleanse the inside of it; but the cleansing of the heart of man will result in the purifying of the outward conduct.
27, 28 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!- The sixth woe is pronounced upon pious hypocrites or religious insincerity. Jesus enforces this condemnation by a most striking figure taken from a class of objects very similar around Jerusalem. He compares these scribes and Pharisees to “whited sepulchres, which outwardly appear beautiful, but inwardly are full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness.” It was a custom there to whitewash the sepulchres, which would be noticed by all; it is like our modern custom of keeping flowers or grass on the graves of loved ones. The graves are beautifully kept and adorned with costly monuments, but within they contain the decomposed bodies and foul odors arising from the decomposition. A sepulchre, or a corpse, was considered by the Jews unclean. (Num 19:16.) The Pharisees went so far as to mark with lime or chalk the ground under which the sepulchral cave extended. How awful a figure to show the condition of these hypocrites. Jesus makes his own application of the figure and says, “Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but inwardly ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.” This comparison illustrates in a striking manner the superficial and deceptive character of the religion of the Pharisees. It may find an application in many of our modern religious practices. Jesus is still looking at their hearts and contrasting their hearts with their profession; he is contrasting what they really are with what they claim to be. Jesus teaches here that an effort to appear to men better than we are is hypocrisy and makes hypocrites of those who attempt it.
29-36 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!- This seventh woe pronounced upon these scribes and Pharisees condemns them for building “the sepulchres of the prophets, and garnish the tombs of the righteous.” They built domes and columns over the graves of the prophets, and adorned or garnished them. They made it appear that they were honoring the prophets and righteous men of old, yet at the same time they were dishonoring them by rejecting their teachings and examples. The fathers had put to death many of the prophets, and now this generation was honoring these prophets by adorning their graves and saying, “If we had been in the days of our fathers, we should not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.” They erected monuments over the prophets who had been slain; they garnished their sepulchres and made them white and beautiful outwardly, that men might believe that they were practicing their virtues. These tombs were in the valley of Jehoshaphat south of Jerusalem. They would like for the present generation to believe that they respected and honored these prophets and would not have consented unto their death, had they lived in the days of the prophets. Jesus brings to their attention that they, in doing this, confessed that they were “sons of them that slew the prophets.” They condemned the cruelty of their ancestors; they honored their tombs; but they cherished the hatred that their fathers had toward the prophets and were seeking to do the same violence against Jesus; in this they condemned themselves. It was easier for them to build and garnish the tombs of the dead prophets than to obey their instruction and accept Jesus as the Messiah.
Jesus tells them to do what he knew they had determined to do; that is, fill to the full measure the iniquity of their fathers. This time he denounces them by saying, “Ye serpents, ye offspring of vipers, how shall ye escape the judgment of hell?” They were called serpents, because they had the subtlety and venom of serpents; as the serpent killed the body, so they destroyed the souls of men their malice was to destroy even the Savior of the world. It seems that Jesus’ denunciation here rises to an appalling climax of woe. They were called “offspring of vipers,” which means that they had accumulated so much of the hatred of their fathers that they are fitly called the “offspring of vipers.” Jesus asked the question, “How shall ye escape the judgment of hell?” He did not expect an answer to this question; it was another way of saying to them that there was no escape for them. The condemnation of everlasting punishment belongs to such characters. Only by repentance can anyone escape from just condemnation. Some of these may have repented, but the condemnation pronounced by Jesus belongs to such characters as he here described. It is the condemnation of the lost. The question is frequently the strongest mode of affirmation and Jesus here uses it.
In pronouncing this woe Jesus predicts what will be done to other servants of God. Their fathers had killed the prophets, but they were preparing to kill the Messiah who was Prophet, Priest, and King. Jesus said, “I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes:some of them shall ye kill and crucify.” The apostles and inspired teachers were sent by Jesus into all the world. These apostles were to be inspired by the Holy Spirit and would warn the people of their sins and dangers. (Exo 7:1; Joh 4:19; 1Co 14:1; 1Co 14:34.) These were cruelly treated; the Jews stoned Stephen (Act 7:59), cut off James’ head, or rather caused a cruel king to do it, to please them (Act 12:2). They scourged Peter and other apostles (Act 5:40), persecuted Paul and Barnabas from city to city, and doubtless many others whose names are written only in the martyrology of the Lamb’s book of life. All the apostles, save one, according to tradition, were put to death for the cause of Christ. Frequently they scourged the servants of God. (Act 22:19-24 2Co 11:24-25.) To persecute means to oppress wrongfully with a rage. Jesus said that they would do all these things to his faithful servants and would do them and bring upon themselves “all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of Abel the righteous unto the blood of Zachariah son of Barachiah, whom ye slew between the sanctuary and the altar.” There is a measure of guilt which no one can pass by and not condemn without bringing down upon oneself all the accumulated woes of divine vengeance. “Righteous blood” means the blood of innocent persons; righteous Abel was the first martyr for God. (Gen 4:8.) “Zachariah son of Barachiah” was slain between the “sanctuary and the altar.” We have no divine record of this crime. Some think that he was the prophet “Zechariah,” but we have no way of knowing. He was slain on holy ground where they ought to have been worshiping God. What a crime to slay a prophet of God on the very spot where they should be worshiping God. Jesus warns the people by saying that “all these things shall come upon this generation.” If this generation had repented and accepted Christ as the Savior, they might have been redeemed;but they rejected him and brought upon themselves the fearful and awful condemnation. These things came upon that generation in the sense that the consummation of earthly punishment for such deeds befell that generation.
37-39 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, that killeth the prophets.- Here Jesus identifies Jerusalem with the people who inhabited it, those who committed the crime. This is the solemn farewell of the Savior over the city after his last public address. He mourns over the nation and city where Jehovah had shown so much love and mercy for generations. How touching, how pitiful! Jesus sees the dark fate brooding over the city, and his final words are of tenderness, mournfulness, and mercy. He recites the wickedness of the nation and the city. They had killed the prophets and stoned those who had been sent to them; in spite of this Jesus would have gathered them together as a hen “gathereth her chickens under her wings,” but they would not let him. This was a simple and dutiful image of tender protection; his wings would have protected them when the storm hovered or the enemy approached. The fearful calamity that should befall Jerusalem and the Jews was brought upon them by themselves; they had opportunity to escape it, but “ye would not.”
Your house is left unto you desolate.-It is no longer God’s house; it is “your house.” God has left it and has no more claim in it; it is “desolate”; that is, God has deserted it. It matters not how much it might be thronged by men or adorned with gifts and sacrifices; after Christ was crucified, all of these availed nothing; the day of its doom began when they crucified the Lord of glory. Jesus then pathetically said to them, “Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.” Those of you who were angry at the words of the little children, welcoming the Messiah into the temple, shall see me no more, until my coming in terrific majesty, to avenge these wrongs. Happy will ye be then if ye can echo that chant of welcome to the Son of God. The public ministry of Jesus was finished with these words. The plot thickened against him, and he kept aloft from the rulers till Judas betrayed him into their hands. Henceforth, Jesus retires to the bosom of his own disciples to prepare himself for the great sacrifice for the sins of the world.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
This chapter is one of the most sublime and awful in the whole inspired volume. It records the last words of Jesus to the crowds. He summed up, He reached His verdict, He pronounced sentence.
It is awful in its majesty, terrible in its resistless force. With what relentless persistence and unfailing accuracy He revealed the true condition of the leaders of the people, their occupation with externalities and pettiness, and their neglect of inward facts and weightier matters.
Here, indeed, if ever, we have “thoughts that breathe and words that burn.” One can almost feel the withering force of His strong and mighty indignation- indignation directed, not against the people, but against their false guides. And yet behind it all is His heart, and the “woes” merge into a wail of agony, the cry of a mother over her lost child.
Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible
23. For Mar 12:37-40 Mt. substitutes a much longer discourse. The relation of this to Lk. may be shown as follows:
Mt. Lk.
1-3
4 11:46
5
6-7a Mar 12:38b, Mar 12:39 11:43, 20:46
7b-11
12 14:11, 18:14
13 11:52
15
16-22
23 11:42
24
25-26 11:39-41
27-28 11:44
29-31 11:47-48
32-33
34-36 11:49-51
37-39 13:34-35
It will be seen that Luk 11:39-52 contains sayings spoken to a Pharisee, 38, or Pharisees, 42, or lawyers, 46, all of which are incorporated in Mat_23, but without distinction of audience, in a different order, and in different language. The last difference makes it very unlikely that Mt. and Lk. had a common written source. Mt vv. 37-39 recur in Luk 13:34-35 in a different context, and with variations of language. A common written source is improbable.
(E) 1. Then Jesus spake to the multitudes, and to His disciples, saying.] Mk. has: And in His teaching, He was saying. Lk. also has in this connection.
(L) 2. The scribes and the Pharisees sit on the seat of Moses.] Cf. B. Rosh ha Shanah 25a Every council of three in Israel is like the council of Moses; Aboth 1:1 Moses received and delivered to Joshua, and Joshua to the elders, and the elders to the prophets, and the prophets to the men of the great synagogue.- ] The aor. is difficult. It may be due to the fact that the editor writes from his own standpoint, and looks back upon the period when the scribes and Pharisees were in power. But Wellhausen speaks of it as a Semiticism.
(L) 3. All things therefore whatsoever they say to you, do and observe.] The words are difficult in view of the criticism of the regulations of the traditional law in 15:1-20; cf. esp. 15:6. We must suppose that a limitation is to be inferred from sit in Moses seat. Do all things that they teach, in so far as this is in harmony with the spirit of the Mosaic law. The comprehensiveness of the saying reminds us of 5:18.-But do not according to their works: for they say, and do not.] This can hardly mean that the Pharisees did not themselves endeavour to conform to the regulations of the traditional law. The implies that the whole Pharisaic system was professedly an endeavour to fulfil the commands of God expressed in the Old Testament, and to live up to the moral standard there revealed. By is meant that in practice their system tended to miss the real righteousness of the Old Testament, and to overlook its true principles, love, mercy, truth, etc. Cf. 12:7. They professed regard for the Old Testament, but neglected the mercy which it taught; 15:4, 5 they so explained away the divine command of filial duty as to sanction the direct contrary; 23:23 they paid great attention to minuter regulations of the law, but neglected the great underlying moral principles.
(L) 4. And they bind heavy burdens, and lay them upon the shoulders of men; and they themselves with their finger are unwilling to move them away.] Luk 11:46 has: Ye burden men with intolerable burdens, and yourselves touch not the burdens with one of your fingers. The verse gives an example of the failure to do referred to in v. 3. The law was given not as a burden, but as a privilege. But the Pharisaic interpretation of it made it a burden upon life. And the Pharisees refused to lighten this ever accumulating burden of legal restrictions in the slightest degree. Traditionalism is always unwilling to relinquish what has become effete and antiquated. The burdens referred to are those of the traditional law with its ever-increasing complexity.
For = to remove, cf. Rev 2:5, Rev 6:14.
(L) 5. And all their works they do to be seen of men: for they make wide their phylacteries, and enlarge their tassels.] The verse emphasises a special vice which was eating into the heart of the whole Pharisaic system. For , see DB., Phylacteries. For , cf. on 9:20.
(M L) 6, 7. And love the chief seat at feasts and the first places in the synagogues, and salutations in the market-places, and to be called by men, Rabbi.] Lk. has (11:43): You love the first place in the synagogues, and the salutations in the market-places. Mk. reverses the order, and so does Lk. in the parallel to Mk., 20:46. -] so Lk. . Mk 38 has .
(L) 8. But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Teacher, and all ye are brethren.]
(L) 9. And call no man your father upon earth: for one is your Father, the heavenly one] is harsh. Father was a term of respect for the men of a past generation; cf. the title of the Mishnic treatise Pirke Aboth = Sayings of the Fathers, and the title of Ecclus 44. The Aramaic Abba was used as a title or name of distinguished teachers; cf. Levy, Neuheb. Wrterbuch; Dalm. Words, 339.
(L) 10. And be not called leaders: for one is your leader, even Christ.] and (v. 8) are probably renderings of , If so, the two verses are duplicate versions of one saying. See Dalm. Words, 340.
(L) 11. But the greater among you shall be your minister.] Cf. Mar 9:35, Mar 10:43.
(L) 12. And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased, and whosoever shall humble himself shall be exalted.] Cf. Pro 29:23. Similar words occur in Luk 14:11, Luk 18:14.
4. ] Add , B D al. Omit ( ) L 1 209 a b e ff2 h S1 S2. Probably an interpolation from Luk 11:46.
] Om. S1.
5. ] S1 S2 have the thongs of their frontlets.- ] S1 S2 have lengthen the fringe(s) of their cloaks. The translators are influenced by knowledge of Jewish practice and custom.
7. ] D al S1 S2 , .
8. ] S1 S2 have call not ye men Rabbi, assimilating to v. 9.
12. E F G al add here: Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites: for ye devour the houses of widows, and for a pretence pray at length. Therefore ye shall receive more abundant judgement. Omit B D L Z a e ff1 g1 2 S1. The words are an interpolation from Mar 12:40, Luk 20:47. In some authorities the words stand after v. 13.
13-32. Seven illustrations of Pharisaic saying, and not doing.
13. But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut the kingdom of the heavens before men: for ye enter not in, neither do ye allow those who are going in to enter.] Luk 11:52 has: Woe to you, lawyers! for ye took away the key of knowledge. Yourselves ye did not enter, and those were going in ye prevented. Cf. Fragment of a Lost Gospel, ed. Grenfell and Hunt, ll. 41-46, which may be reconstructed as follows: The key of the kingdom (or of knowledge) they hid. Themselves entered not, neither suffered they those who were going in to enter. The meaning is that the Pharisaic interpretation of the law obscured rather than illuminated its religious content.
(L) 15. But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hvpocrites! for ye go about sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is become (one) ye make him twice as much as yourselves a son of Gehenna.] For the Jewish Propaganda, cf. Bousset, Rel. Jd. 80-82; Schrer, 11 ii. 291 ff. For = , cf. Jon 1:9, Hag 2:6.- ] that is, one destined for Gehenna; cf. , Rosh ha Sh 17a, = son of the coming age, Berakh 57a.
] i.e. to Pharisaism. Whilst the number of heathen attracted to Judaism at this period was very great, a comparatively small proportion would have been regarded by the Pharisees as satisfactory converts. The Hellenistic Jewish literature, e.g. the writings of Philo and the Sibylline Oracles (Book iii.), are evidence of the zeal of Jews of the Dispersion to attract Gentiles to the worship of the one God. But converts to Pharisaism as distinguished from Judaism, with its infinite variety of shades of belief and practice (Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, Therapeut, and those who belonged to none of these orders), were probably few. may reflect upon this comparative failure of Pharisaic missionary zeal. Friedlnder1 ingeniously illustrates the verse by reference to Jos. Ant. xx. 34-48. It is there recorded that a Jew named Ananias converted to the worship of God Izates, son of Monobazus of Adiabene, but told him that he could worship God without being circumcised. However, another Jew, reputed to be accurately acquainted with Jewish learning, , persuaded Izates to be circumcised, on the ground that he was guilty of impiety in neglecting to do so. Friedlnder sees in this story an example of the Pharisaic zeal in compassing sea and land to make one proselyte to their own rigid interpretation of the universal application of the requirements of the law to the Gentiles.
(L) 16. Woe to you, blind guides, who say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is not valid; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, is bound by his oath.] Cf. 5:33-37. As in that section, the reference is not to legal oaths but to the unnecessary reference to divine things in common life, Kiddushin 71a by the temple, Taanith 24a by the temple worship.
(L) 17. Fools and blind: for which is greater, the gold, or the temple that hallowed the gold?]
(L) 18. And, Whosoever shall swear by the altar, it is not valid; but whosoever shall swear by the gift which is upon it, he is bound by his oath.]
(L) 19. Ye blind men: for which is greater, the gift, or the altar that halloweth the gift?] B C al prefix , as in v. l7.
(L) 20. He therefore who sweareth by the altar, sweareth by it, and by all that is upon it.]
(L) 21. And he who sweareth by the temple, sweareth by it, and by Him who dwelleth in it.]
(L) 22. And he who sweareth by heaven, sweareth by the throne of God, and by Him that sitieth upon it.]
(L) 23. Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye tithe mint and dill and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law, judgement, and mercy, and faith: these ye ought to have done, and not to have neglected those.] Luk 11:42 has: But woe unto you, Pharisees! for ye tithe mint and rue and every herb, and pass by judgement and the love of God: these ye ought to have done, and not to have passed over those.-For the tithing of small herbs, cf. Maaser, i. I: Everything which is eatable, and is preserved, and has its nourishment from the soil, is liable to be tithed.-] = mint. See DB., Mint.-] = dill. See DB., Anise; cf. Maaser, iv. 5: Rabbi Eliezer said, Of dill must one tithe the seed, and the leaves, and the stalks.-] See DB., Cummin. All three herbs were used in cooking, and the two latter for medicinal purposes. For , Lk. has . Nestle, Exp. Times, Aug. 1904, suggests a misreading of = for = For judgement, cf. Isa 1:17, Jer 22:3, Zec 7:9, Secrets of Enoch 42:9 Blessed is he who gives a just judgement for the orphan and the widow. For mercy, cf. 9:13; and for faith, cf. Hab 2:4.
(L) 24. Blind guides, who strain out the gnat, and swallow down the camel.]
(L) 25. Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye cleanse the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of rapacity and wantonness.] Luk 11:39 has: Now, ye Pharisees cleanse the outside of the cup and the plate (), but your inside is full of rapacity and wickedness.-] The verb is usually followed by a genitive. here signifies that the contents of the vessels are obtained by immoral methods.
23. S1 S2 omit. Burkitt thinks that they presuppose , and that this is original, being a literal translation of an Aramaic idiom. In Luk 11:42 S2 again omits , but S1 presupposes it. But the Syriac VSS. elsewhere omit . So S1 9:11, 13:10, Luk 12:12, Luk 18:1, Luk 24:44, Joh 3:7, Joh 3:4:20, Joh 3:24; S2 Mar 13:10, Luk 24:44, Joh 3:7.
25. For the purification of vessels, see Schrer, II. ii. 106 ff., and B. Kelim. The verse is aimed at the excessive importance attached to the ceremonial cleanness or uncleanness of utensils. After all, what does this matter, provided that they are used for honourable purposes? But if they be used to contain food gained in a dishonest manner, they may rightly be regarded as unclean.
(L) 26. Blind Pharisee, cleanse first the contents of the cup and of the platter, that its outside also may be clean.] That is, use the vessels only for food honestly procured, and it will be unnecessary to ask if the outside is ceremonially clean. Luk 11:40, Luk 11:41 has: Ye fools, did not He who made the outside make also the inside? But give as alms what is within; and, behold, all things are pure to you. It is questionable whether the two Evangelists understood the words to be a polemic against the Pharisaic regulations about the purification of vessels, or whether they interpreted cup and plate as metaphors for men, like the sepulchres of the next verse, and understood the words to be aimed at the regulations concerning personal ceremonial cleanness; cf. Mar 7:1ff. In Mt. the reference to the cleansing of literal vessels seems hardly disputable, and in v. 26 would have to be deleted before could be interpreted as a metaphor of the human person. Lk., by inserting in v. 39, seems to draw a contrast, not, as in Mt., between the outside of the vessels and their contents, but between the ceremonial cleanness of the vessels and the moral uncleanness of their possessors. Cf. Buddhist and Christian Gospels, p. 84: What use to thee is matted hair, O fool! what use the goatskin garment? Within thee there is ravening; the outside thou makest clean. But in v. 41 he seems to fall back upon the other contrast between the inside and outside of the vessels. Wellhausen thinks that Lk. has here misrendered his original. He would transpose and (with D Cyp) in v. 40, render by do = set straight = cleanse, and substitute for Mt.s . Does not the man who cleanses the inside cleanse the outside too? (cf. Mar 7:1ff). Cleanse the inside, and, lo, all is clean. If this be the original form of the saying, Mt. has wrongly inserted and in v. 26. But, however the apparent inconsistency in Lk. be explained, it seems most natural to suppose that Mt. rightly understood the saying to be aimed at the casuistical distinctions between clean and unclean utensils.1- ] omit D S1 1 209 a d e ff.
(L) 27. Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like to whitened tombs, which outside appear beautiful, but inside are full of dead bones, and all uncleanness.] Luk 11:44 has: Woe to you! for ye are as sepulchres that are unseen, and the men who walk over them do not know it. It was customary on the 15th of the month Adar to whitewash graves, that people might not unintentionally touch them and contract ceremonial defilement; B. Moed Qat. 1 a, Schequal, i. 1. Moed Qatan, 5a, bases this on Eze 39:15.-] The tombs were whitened with chalk or lime. The Talmudic verb is = to mark, distinguish. occurs in Pro 21:9, where it apparently means plaistered, i.e. luxurious, dwellings. There is no need to suppose that , which is omitted in S1, is a later gloss by someone who thought that the purpose of the whitening the tombs was to beautify them. might seem to suggest an sthetic purpose for the whitening. But the original Aramaic may have been a more colourless word. The saying in Luk_11 has a different turn. There the Pharisees are likened to unwhitened tombs, which therefore defile those who unwittingly pass over them. The difference is not favourable to the theory of a common Greek source for Mt. and Lk.
(L) 28. So also ye outwardly appear to men to he just, but within are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness.] Like the whitened sepulchres, the Pharisees were fair outside, foul inside.
(L) 29. Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye build the tombs of the prophets, and adorn the sepulchres of the just.] Luk 11:47 has: Woe to you! for ye build the sepulchres of the prophets, but your fathers killed them.
(L) 30. And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been their associates in the blood of the prophets.] That is, You honour the dead whom your ancestors put to death, and say that, had you lived in the days of your fathers, you would have been wiser than they.
(L) 31. So that you bear witness to yourselves, that ye are the descendants of those who killed the prophets.] Luk 11:48 has: Therefore ye are witnesses, and consent to the deeds of your fathers: for they killed them, but ye build (their sepulchres). By so saying, you bear witness to the murder-taint in your blood.
(L) 32. And you will fill up the measure of your fathers.] And you will sin as they sinned.
(L) 33. Ye serpents, ye offspring of vipers, how are you to escape from the condemnation of Gehenna?
(L) 34. Therefore, behold, I send to you prophets, and wise men, and scribes. Some of them you shall kill and crucify; and some of them you shall scourge in your synagogues, and hunt them from city to city.] Lk. has: Therefore also the wisdom of God said, I will send to them prophets and apostles, and some of them they shall kill and persecute. In S. Luke may be an insertion by the Evangelist into Christs words, and by may be meant Christ Himself. Or the clause may be a continuation of Christs words. In that case the words which follow are presumably a quotation from an unknown source. See on Luk 11:49. In Mt. there is no hint that the words are a quotation, and the Evangelist clearly regards them as words of Christ Himself. But, of course, the Evangelist may have been aware that the Lord was quoting and adapting to Himself words from some literary source.- ] The Christian missionaries are described under terms taken from Jewish institutions. The passed over into the Christian Church, but the terms and were too familiar is contemporary Judaism to be permanently adopted by Christian teachers. For the scourging in the synagogues, cf. 10:17; for the persecuting from city to city, 10:23.
(L) 35. In order that there may come upon you all the righteous blood slain upon the earth, from the blood of Abel the righteous to the blood of Zachariah son of Barachiah, whom ye slew between the shrine and the altar.] Luk 11:50 has: In order that the blood of all the prophets (slain from the foundation of the world) may be required from this generation, from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zachariah, who was slain between the altar and the house. Abel (Gen_4) and Zachariah (2Ch 24:20ff.) represent the beginning and end of the Old Testament Canon of Scripture, in which Chronicles is the last book. The murder of Zachariah left a deep impression upon Jewish tradition. In the Bab. Talmud, Sanh 96b, Gittin 57b; in the Jerus. Talmud, Taanith 69a; and in the Midrashim, e.g. Echa Rabbati, Wnsche, p. 21, Koheleth 316, Pesikta R. Kahana 15, it is recorded that Nebuzaradan slew many Jews in order to quiet the blood of Zachariah, who is said to have been a priest and a prophet. It seems natural, therefore, to suppose that the Zachariah of the Gospels is the Zachariah of 2 Chronicles. Abels blood cried from the ground (Gen 4:10). Zachariah, when dying, said, The Lord look upon it and require it (2Ch 24:22).- ] The Zachariah of 2 Ch. was son of Jehoiada. It is possible that Christ spoke of Zachariah as son of Barachiah, because the tradition of His age identified or confused the priest and the prophet; cf. Zec 1:1 (see Dictionary of Christ and Gospels, art. Barachiah). In this case the omission of by * is due to someone who wondered at the Barachiah instead of Jehoiada. Or the son of Barachiah may be an insertion by the editor of the Gospel, either on the ground of Jewish tradition, or in remembrance of the LXX. of Isa 8:2, Zec 1:1. The fact that the editor of the Gospel elsewhere uses LXX. forms of proper names, as in , , 1:8, 10, is in favour of the latter. Or, lastly, the son of Barachiah may be a later insertion in the Gospel.
(L) 36. Verily I say to you, All these things shall come upon this generation.] Luk 11:51 has: Yea, I say to you, it shall be required from this generation.
(L) 37. O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killeth the prophets, and stoneth those sent to her, how often would I have gathered thy children, as a hen gathereth her young ones under her wings, and ye would not!] So Luk 13:34.-] Cf. 2 Est 1:20.
(L) 38. Behold your house is left to you.] So Luk 13:35.
(L) 39. For I say to you, You shall not see Me henceforth, until you say, Blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord.] So Luk 13:35 with for , without , and with for . ] cf. Apoc. Bar 8:2 He who kept the house has forsaken it; Joseph. Wars, vi. 299; 2 Es 1:33, Jer 12:7, Jer 26:6, Enoch 89:56 He forsook that their house. ] See note on p. 284.
37-39. The words seem to be a fragment belonging to an earlier period of the ministry, when Christ was leaving Jerusalem for the last time before His triumphal entry. We must imagine a controversy with the Jews similar to that recorded in S. Joh 10:22-39. As on that occasion, the Jews had perhaps tried to stone Him. He therefore spoke to them these parting words. They had rejected His teaching, and had adopted towards Him a policy which would lead in the near future to His death, and in the further future to the destruction of their State. For the present He would visit their Temple no more. Their house was given up to them. They would see Him no more until they greeted Him with the words of the Psalmist.
The editor seems to have placed the paragraph here because it was suggested to him by the murders of v. 35 (Zachariah was stoned, 2Ch 24:21). Lk. links them to another saying of Christ about Jerusalem, 13:33-35.
26. ] is omitted by D S1 1 209 a e; ] B* D E S1 1 13 28 69 124 157 a e; , B2 al. may have been inserted to assimilate to v. 25, and consequently changed into .
27. S1 has: Graves that on the outside are whitened, and inside, etc., omitting . Merx regards the words as a gloss added by someone who misunderstood the purpose of the whitening of the graves. But this is quite unnecessary. Our Greek text simply states that graves when whitened appear outwardly beautiful, and does not say that they were whitened in order to beautify them. S1 has probably taken offence at the word as too strong a term to express the result of the whitening, and consequently omitted the clause.
32. ] So B.* S1 60. is read by B2 C al, but the imperative breaks the connection: You acknowledge that you are physically descended from prophet-murderers, and, in fact, you are also morally their successors, and will sin as they sinned. The present would be even better than the future, and the Aramaic original may have had the participle = Ye are filling up; that is, You sin, e.g., in the murder of the Baptist as they sinned. D H al have the aorist , which gives an inferior sense.
35. ] Omit * 6 13. Jeromes Nazarene Gospel had filium Joiad. In evangelio quo utuntur Nazareni pro filio Barachi filium Joiad reperimus scriptum, Comm. in Mt.
38. ] C D al add ; cf. Jer 22:5 . Omit B. L ff2 S1.
] may mean either the city or the temple. For the latter, cf. Jer 26:6 Them will I make this house (cf. v. 3 the court of the Lords house) like Shiloh; Apoc. Bar 8:2 He who kept the house (cf. 1 from the interior of the temple) has forsaken it. For the former, cf. Jer 12:7 I have forsaken My house; 22:5 This house shall become a desolation. For thus saith the Lord concerning the house of the King of Judah. Enoch 8950., 51, they forsook that their house; 55 He forsook that their house and tower. See Charles note on 50. The two meanings seem here to be combined, Your city and Temple are abandoned by God, and given up to desolation. For the idea of the abandonment of a doomed city by the divine power which protected it, cf. the story told in Jos. Wars, vi. 299, of the priests who, before the capture of the city by Titus, heard a sound as of a multitude, saying, Let us go hence. Cf. also Apoc. Bar 8:1, 2, and Tacitus, Hist. v. 13.
E editorial passages.
L the Matthan Logia.
B. Babylonian Talmud.
DB. Dictionary of the Bible (Hastings).
M the Second Gospel.
Dalm. Dalman.
al i.e. with other uncial MSS.
S Syriac version: Sinaitic MS.
S Syriac version: Curetonian.
1 Rel. Beweg. pp. 32 f.
Jos. Josephus.
Exp. Times Expository Times.
O quotations from the Old Testament borrowed from a collection of Messianic prophecies. See pp.61 f.
1 If this be so, the thought here is much the same as that which Mt. (15:10-20) has read into Mar 7:14-23. There it is Eating meat with unwashen hands will not defile you if you are morally clean; here it is if Eating from vessels which are ceremonially unclean will not defile you, if the food has been honestly obtained.
Bab. Babylonian Talmud.
LXX. The Septuagint Version.
Fuente: International Critical Commentary New Testament
Humbling the Self-exalted
Mat 23:1-12
These words were addressed to the disciples and the crowds that had gathered around. The Jewish religious leaders divorced morality and religion, and insisted that men should respect their office, whatever might be their personal character. The craving for this has been the temptation and bane of Christs ministers in every age.
But how evidently our Lord condemns clerical and priestly assumption! With the two-edged sword, which pierces to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, He cuts between the professions and performances of these men. No more awful words were ever spoken! How true is Mat 23:4! The hypocrite always spares himself, but is merciless in his demands on others. The true servant of God never exacts these titles as a rightful homage, or as indicating either superiority or special sanctity. We all have one Master and one Father; and, though our talents greatly differ, we stand on an absolute equality so far as saving grace is concerned.
Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary
While the Lord Jesus came not to condemn the world but to save all who would believe in Him, He expressed Himself in terms of great severity against those who, while professedly the guardians of Scripture, lived hypocritically and opposed the truth that He proclaimed, thereby misleading their unwary followers. Yet so long as they were the readers of the Law in the synagogues, He would have the people take heed to the Word of God, which they professed to honor, but to be careful not to imitate the corrupt lives of those who expounded it to them.
Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses seat: all therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on mens shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments, and love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues, and greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi. But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ. But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant. And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted, (vv. 1-12)
The term Moses seat indicates the place that the Pharisees and the scribes occupied as the recognized teachers of the law given by Moses. When they read and explained its precepts, their hearers were responsible to obey, not because of any inherent authority vested in them but because of the truth they made known. But He drew a marked distinction between their words and their ways. They expounded and preached to others what they did not attempt to practice themselves. It is a terrible thing for those who occupy the place of preachers or teachers of the Word when they simply traffic in truth that has never affected their own lives.
These leaders in Israel formed a kind of clerical caste who were most outspoken in denouncing the sins and frailties of the people in general, but they themselves were simply complacent as they gave punctilious attention to the outward signs of religion. They knew nothing of genuine piety and holiness of heart and life.
They were not concerned about the approval of the God they professed to honor but were constantly looking for mens applause. It is always a snare when one feels he has a certain reputation of godliness to maintain before his fellows. It is so easy to succumb to the temptation of trying to appear more devoted than one really is. The only right thing is to live before God and to be utterly indifferent to mens praise or blame.
The Pharisees sought to attract attention to their religiousness, even by their garb. Wearing the broad phylacteries that seemed to indicate greater reverence for Scripture than others, and with the fringes on their garments conspicuously enlarged, they delighted in the reverence accorded them. They were given the seats of honor at the appointed feasts and in the services of the synagogue, while in public places generally they were greeted with their highly prized titles of Rabbi, Rabbi! Who can fail to see in all this a picture of what is very common today in many ecclesiastical circles?
Against all this outward show of piety Jesus solemnly warned His disciples, Be not ye called Rabbi. They were not to seek honorable recognition from their fellows but were to realize that Christ Himself was their Teacher, or Master, and they were but brethren-all of one great family. As born from above, they were to call no man father upon earth, for God Himself was their Father. Is it not strange that this definite command is so flagrantly disregarded by those who call their so-called priests Father?
Because of the readiness with which His disciples were inclined to seek honor one over another, Jesus repeated the admonition, Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ. The word really means leader but was generally understood as teacher or master.
Certainly Jesus did not mean that His followers were to despise the gifts He gives-among which are teachers, though a different word is used-which are to be owned and valued by the saints as given for their edification. But we are not to have mens persons in admiration because of worldly advantage.
On the part of those thus entrusted with a special ministry there should be no self-seeking but service in love, as following Christs own example. For he who exalts himself will be abased in due time, even as he who humbles himself shall be exalted by the Lord who values all service that is done with a single eye to His glory.
Eight woes follow, uttered by the Lord in judgment upon the religious leaders whose spirit and behavior were so opposed to their profession. The first woe is found in verse 13:
But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.
This judgment is pronounced because of opposition to the Word of the kingdom, in which they had no interest, and they endeavored to hinder others who might become concerned. It is a very serious thing to stand in the way of anyone who might otherwise be prepared to enter into the kingdom of heaven.
The second woe was against those who used a profession and outward appearance of piety as a cloak.
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation, (v. 14)
Solomon tells us that the prayer of the wicked is an abomination to the Lord (Pro 28:9). How much more when such prayer is used to build up a reputation for godliness while actually living in hypocrisy.
The third woe is against proselytism, when they themselves were so unreal.
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves, (v. 15)
It is characteristic of sectarians generally that they are far more concerned about obtaining adherents to their special beliefs than winning lost souls for Christ. Those thus perverted become ardent advocates of the system with which they identify themselves, and as a rule trust in their association for ultimate salvation, so entering into a worse state than before they were proselytized. It is harder to reach and awaken the adherent of a false cult than to bring a godless worldling to see his lost condition and his need of salvation.
The fourth woe is against those who use vain and profane oaths.
Woe unto you, ye blind guides, which say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor! Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gold, or the temple that sanctifieth the gold? And, Whosoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing; but whosoever sweareth by the gift that is upon it, he is guilty. Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gift, or the altar that sanctifieth the gift? Whoso therefore shall swear by the altar, sweareth by it and by all things thereon. And whoso shall swear by the temple, sweareth by it, and by him that dwelleth therein. And he that shall swear by heaven, sweareth by the throne of God, and by him that sitteth thereon, (vv. 16-22)
One of the most striking evidences of anyones illogical reasoning is when he lays greater stress upon secondary things than upon those of major importance. These blind guides, as Jesus called them, put more emphasis upon the gold with which the temple building was enriched and adorned than upon the sanctuary itself, so that with them to take an oath on the gold of the temple meant more than to swear by the sacred building in which God had dwelled of old.
In the same spirit, they put the offering above the altar in holiness, whereas it was the altar that sanctified the gifts placed upon it. That altar typified Christ, and the gifts and offerings represented various aspects of His work. But He had to be who He was, the Eternal Son of God become flesh, in order to do what He did. To swear by the altar was therefore to swear by all that was placed upon it, and to swear by the temple was to swear by Him who dwelled therein, even as to swear by heaven (a most frequent thing) is to take an oath by the throne of God and by Him who sits upon it. All such oaths were forbidden very definitely by the Lord on a former occasion (Mat 5:33-37).
The fifth woe was pronounced on those who were inclined to overemphasize trifling details of the law while utterly ignoring the weightier matters with which it dealt.
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone. Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel, (vv. 23-24)
To tithe even the cheapest of herbs was quite right in itself, but to lay special stress upon this and advertise it as though indicating remarkable scrupulosity, while neglecting matters of a far greater importance, indicated a conscience that was unexercised and a spirit insubject to God. He would have those who professed obedience to His law careful to exercise discernment and mercy and faith. He who is thus exercised will not neglect things of less weight and importance.
The sixth woe was against those who set a great value upon ceremonial cleansings, while overlooking the importance of a clean heart and a pure life.
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess. Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also. (vv. 25-26)
They were likened to a housekeeper who was very careful to have her cups and other vessels clean outwardly, while inside they were filthy and uncleansed. God desires truth in the inward parts. Where the heart is purified by faith the outward behavior will be in accordance with it.
The seventh woe is somewhat similar, but is an even stronger condemnation of the toleration of hidden corruption while pretending to godliness and devotion.
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead mens bones, and of all uncleanness. Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity, (vv. 27-28)
These hypocrites were like beautifully adorned and whitened tombs that appear pleasant and often majestic in the sight of men, but are full of decaying bodies and of all uncleanness. Such are they who appear to be righteous before men but within are full of dissimulation and lawlessness.
The last woe, making a complete octave of denunciation of hypocrisy, was pronounced upon those who honored the memory of the former prophets while refusing to obey their words.
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous, and say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets. Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell? (vv. 29-33)
How characteristic was the glaring error of these pretenders to appreciation of the faithful testimony of men of God in past centuries! Just as the descendents of those who vilified Martin Luther in his day and generation now vie with one another in lauding his genius and intrepidity, or the children of those who detested the stand taken by Abraham Lincoln are often loudest in his praise, so these Pharisees honored the memory of Isaiah whom their fathers sawed asunder; or Jeremiah, who was imprisoned in a filthy dungeon by the religious leaders of his times; or Zechariah, slain between the porch and the altar by zealous contenders for that which the prophet denounced. Yet there was no evidence that these scribes and Pharisees accepted and acted upon the admonitions of those whose sepulchers they garnished, but they showed by their attitude toward the King in their midst that they were of the same spirit as their ungodly fathers.
While boasting that if they had been alive in the days of old their response would have been different, their present behavior proved the opposite. It was for them to fill up the measure of their fathers in the final rejection of the Lord of glory.
Condign judgment therefore awaited them. Their words and their behavior proved them to be a generation of vipers, the seed of the serpent-that old serpent which is the Devil and Satan-how then could they escape participation in his judgment?
The Lord then sums up the guilt of that unbelieving generation and pronounces its doom:
Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes; and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar. Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation, (vv. 34-36)
Messenger after messenger had been sent by God to Israel, but they had spurned and rejected them all. They would do the same to those who rebuked their sins and hypocrisy. Morally they were no different from those who had shed the blood of all the righteous from Abel to one of the last of the prophets. Their hearts remained unchanged and their consciences seared; therefore, the ire of God must be vented upon them.
Although God could not do otherwise, consistently with His holy character, than to deal with them in judgment because of their wickedness, the heart of the Lord grieved over them and longed even yet for their deliverance. Pathetic indeed is the lament with which He concluded this most solemn discourse.
O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! Behold, your house is left unto you desolate. For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord. (vv. 37-39)
Jerusalem, the city of the great King, knew not the time of her visitation. He who would have saved and brought in the promised kingdom blessings was in their midst and they knew Him not. Had they only turned to Him in repentance, He would have sheltered them from judgment as a hen protects her chickens from the hawk seeking to destroy them. But they would not receive Him. They were responsible, therefore, for their own condemnation.
Because they rejected Him, He rejected them nationally for the present time. They should not see Him henceforth until they were ready to own Him as their King, crying in the words of Psalm 118 with which the poor of the flock (Zec 11:11) had greeted Him as He rode into the city a few days before, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord (Mat 21:9).
Before that day, this whole dispensation of grace-the period of the revelation of the mystery of the church as the one body of Christ-was to come in. At present, God is gathering out of all nations a people to the name of His Son. Not until that work is completed will Israel as a nation look upon Him whom they pierced and acclaim Him as their Redeemer and King.
Fuente: Commentaries on the New Testament and Prophets
Mat 23:17
The Visible Temple.
I. A Temple there has been upon earth, a spiritual Temple, made up of living stones-a Temple, as I may say, composed of souls. This Temple is invisible, but it is perfect and real because it is invisible, and gains nothing in perfection by possessing visible tokens. There needs no outward building to meet the eye, in order to make it more of a Temple than it already is in itself. God and Christ and angels-souls, are not these a heavenly court, all perfect to which this world can add nothing? This is true and ever to be borne in mind; and yet no one can deny on the other hand, that a great object of Christ’s coming was to subdue the world, to claim it as His own, to assert His right as its Master, to show Himself to all men, and to take possession. When He came He had not a place to lay His head; but He came to make Himself a place, to make Himself a home, to fashion for Himself a glorious dwelling out of the whole world which the powers of evil had taken captive. He was not born in the Temple of Jerusalem; He abhorred the palace of David; He laid Himself on the damp earth in the cold night, a Light shining in a dark place, till by the virtue that went out of Him He should erect a Temple worthy of His Name.
II. And lo! in omen of the future, even in His cradle, the rich and wise of the earth seek Him with gold, and frankincense, and myrrh as an offering. Pass a few generations and the whole face of things is changed; the earth is covered with His temples, as it has been for ages. Go where you will, you find the eternal mountains hewn and fashioned into shrines where He may dwell who was an outcast in the days of His flesh. The invisible temple has become visible, and He has made Him a temple, not only out of inanimate things, but of men also as parts of it. Not gold and silver, jewels and fine linen, and skill of man to use them, make the house of God, but worshippers: the souls and bodies of men whom He has redeemed.
III. The temple is greater than the gold, therefore care not though the gold be away; it sanctifies it, therefore cherish the gold while it is present. Christ is with us, though there be no outward show. Where He really places His Name, there-be the spot a palace or a cottage-it is sacred and glorious. He accepts our gold and our silver, not to honour Himself thereby, but in mercy to us.
J. H. Newman, Parochial and Plain Sermons, vol. vi., p. 280.
References: Mat 23:18.-Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. ix., p. 99. Mat 23:19.-Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xiv., No. 831. Mat 23:22.-R. W. Evans, Parochial Sermons, vol. ii., p. 248.
Mat 23:23
We learn from the text:-
I. That the commands of God are of different degrees of importance. There are matters of more weight than others among the Divine precepts. That God has commanded a thing always invests it with a certain importance, but all His commandments are not of equal gravity. There are higher and lower obligations; and the higher will be first attended to, nay, if need be, will absorb into them the lower.
II. The weightiest of all God’s commands have respect to judgment, mercy, and faith. That is a truth which is emphasized over and over again by the prophets in the Old Testament, and the Apostles in the New. The inner is more important than the outer; the spirit than the letter; the principle than the action; the character than the isolated deed. The heart is the great thing, for out of it are the issues of life; and therefore it should have the first and the greatest attention. If that be wrong, nothing can be right; but if that be right, everything will partake of its quality.
III. Attention to the matters of less importance will not compensate for the neglect of those which are of essential moment. Punctilious tithe-paying will not condone oppression, or injustice, or the lack of humble faith in God. Ritual is not religion: it is only, even at the best, the outer garment which she wears on certain occasions; but religion herself is character, and that is a moral unit, giving its quality both to the worship and to the ordinary conduct of the man. It is no vindication for not doing a most important duty, to say that I have done something else that is on a far lower plain.
IV. Where the heart is right with God through faith in Jesus Christ, both the weightier matters and those of less importance will be attended to. The performance of one duty must not be pleaded as an excuse for the neglect of another. In all such matters what is put before us is not an alternative-whether we shall do this or that-but an aggregate, for we are to do this and that.
W. M. Taylor, Contrary Winds, p. 356.
I. On closer observation, the sins of the Pharisees resolve themselves chiefly into four-Pride, hypocrisy, superstition, and a dislike to real spiritual religion. To understand Christ’s feelings and actions towards them, you must remember that the men who committed these sins were the enlightened ones of the earth. They knew their Bibles wonderfully. They had the Name and Word of God constantly on their lips. And the cause of truth and of God was committed to them. Hence Christ’s exceeding severity with these men. For there are two points on which Christ was always most jealous: the one was the glory of the Father; and the other the interests of religion, and especially the consciences of young believers. Whatever compared with these, whatever offended against these and hurt them, was sure to awake Christ’s holy anger, and incur His awful malediction. And this is exactly what pride and hypocrisy, superstition and severity, do. Therefore Christ’s utter revulsion of a Pharisee.
II. (1) God is in His holy temple, and all creation lies-poor and sinful-at His feet. Whatever lifts itself up offends against God’s holiness, and rebels against God’s sovereignty. Hence Christ’s detestation of a Pharisee. (2) And the characteristic of our religion as a test of everything is reality. There is no false sheen thrown upon any part of God’s creation. The beauty of the interior generally exceeds the beauty of the, exterior. God in His work and in His truth is all real. He abhors hollowness. Hence Christ’s woe to a Pharisee. (3) Truth is always simple. Superstition complicates and clouds God’s great, simple plan. Therefore God repudiates it. (4) God is one God, therefore He loves unity because it is His own reflection; therefore he hates all separation. All sitting aloof, all unkind feeling towards brethren, all party spirit-is offensive to God; and this is just what the Pharisees did. Hence again, the rejection and curse of a Pharisee.
J. Vaughan, Sermons, 11th series, p. 109.
References: Mat 23:23.-J. Vaughan, Sermons, 9th series, p. 109. Mat 23:23, Mat 23:29.-D. Fraser, The Metaphors of the Gospels, p. 181. Mat 23:31-32.-F. W. Farrar, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxv., p. 401. Mat 23:32.-Homiletic Magazine, vol. xiii., p. 55. Mat 23:34-39.-Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. iii., p. 347.
Mat 23:37
I. One of the first things which strikes young children as they begin to grow up and look abroad in the world, is the wonderful parental instinct, as it is called, of dumb creatures-that secret and silent law which makes the mother of every animal, almost, so earnestly and affectionately watch over her offspring. Now here our Saviour teaches us that this instinct is not only put into their hearts by Him, but that it is actually a sign and token from Him-a pledge and visible shadow of the peculiar mercy, with which He watches over His Church. Look at the whole history of God’s ancient people, Israel. It is nothing from beginning to end but a course of these parental providences. Everywhere the Lord offers to gather them under His wings.
II. For us it is easier to understand how truly this comparison of the hen describes God’s mercy to each of us one by one. (1) First, our mother’s love, that earliest and sweetest kindness that we are permitted to taste on earth. Whence comes it? Is it not altogether God’s gift. Whatever our mothers did for us, and whatever love it was in their hearts to show us, God alone put it in their hearts; it was but a drop from the overflowing fountain of His love. (2) Again, what shall we say of our spiritual mother the Church? Who can count the number of the fourth part of the graces and lovingkindnesses which He through her is ever bestowing upon us? But our Lord’s words remind us of one particular action of the mother-bird-the spreading her wings to receive and shelter the young ones, when they want warmth, or rest, or protection. “How often would I have gathered thy children together, as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings!” So the Holy Dove, the Spirit of Christ, comes down and broods over the waters of baptism, over the souls and bodies of those who are there to be new born, or having been so, comes to them continually in more and more warmth, strength, and life. Christ by His Holy Spirit broods over them, sheltering, warming, quickening, doing all that they need. And in order to do this, observe He gathers them. He gathers us into His holy Church. It is there that His wings are spread, other places have no promise of the same heavenly and life-giving shadow.
Plain Sermons by Contributors to “Tracts for the Times.” vol. viii., p. 151.
The Saviour’s Sorrow over Lost Men.
I. Words like these, spoken at such a moment, let us see, as far as words can do, into the innermost of Jesus’ heart. They are a wonderful expression of His deep-seated desire to save from ruin the worst of men, to save the unwilling, to save to the very last. (1) If ever excess of guilt could have alienated the Saviour, and steeled Him against mercy, it must have been Jerusalem’s. Her privileges had been surpassing. The centre of God’s worship, the capital of God’s elect, to her citizens revelations had been given with a prodigality which almost wearies us. Nothing could exceed her advantages except her crimes. (2) If sinners’ sins cannot destroy Christ’s willingness to save them, neither can their unwillingness to be saved. Refusal does not overbear this extraordinary desire of God to save us. Neither (3) can delay outweary it. On the contrary, time only tests to the utmost the sincerity of the Divine mercy. The perseverance of the Saviour is the measure of His love.
II. This language of the departing Saviour tells us how He blesses those who will be gathered. Strong love like His is gentle as it is strong. Only let the mighty Lover who made you gather you to Himself, and you will see how He will cradle you like a mother. For when these bursting words of His tell what He would have done with Jerusalem’s citizens, if they would have let Him, they shed light into such secret nests of home tenderness and of low, sweet love, that nothing can be more precious or more wonderful. What wouldest thou, Lord? “I would have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings.” The very image has its own softness in it. To be sure, it was nothing new to speak of God’s care for men as the wings of a bird. Of old, as Moses sang before he died, Israel had been carried by Jehovah across pathless sand-drifts, as an eagle’s fledglings are borne upon her strong, broad pinions through the desert air-softly carried, safely, grandly, to its rest. To the faithful of later ages, Jehovah’s perpetual keeping was symbolised in the widespread golden wings of cherubim, which cast their shade down upon the mercy-seat of the most holy place, and under that covert pious Hebrew souls were taught to nestle. But these were both majestic types, removed from familiar human things. In the hands of Him who brought divinity down into the bosom of an earthly home, the image grew far lowlier. The fowl of motherly instinct which nestles close upon the ground, and gives of all feathered creatures our homeliest pictures of domestic care-she is His choice; and of all acts of that kindly mother-hen, her most intimate and secret act of love. Ah! it was like the meekness of Jesus to speak thus; and to any fearful, heartbroken evildoer, whose soul craves yet hardly dares to hope for sympathy, is it not heartening to be told in lowly words that you may creep under the mighty shadow of the crucified Redeemer of the world with such confidence as the chicken to its mother’s wing?
III. The words of the text give deeper insight still into the Redeemer’s heart. Underneath the joy of salvation, it touches a fount of tears. It is, in truth, His last wail of sorrow over men who would not be saved. Who knows the bitterness of love that is unprized and useless? When God weeps to win His children back from crime and ruin, and His children laugh and will not, I know no words to sorrow in, but only tears. Love weeps when justice smites. The Lamb sorrows in His wrath. And it only makes justice the more awful when you see that it has so much of pity in it, and so little of poor personal triumph or ungenerous readiness, that the Judge yearns and wails over the soul He dooms.
J. Oswald Dykes, Sermons, p. 356.
I. Consider the enormity of the sins of which a society may be guilty, beyond the will of any individual man to be found there. Jerusalem had slain the prophets; she had overlaid the Law of God with human inventions. The Scriptures told them of Messiah, and He passed before their very eyes, yet they could not see Him. When an impure woman was to be condemned, our Lord saw that there was not out of a crowd of accusers even one whose conscience would not reprove him as guilty of the very same sin.
II. It is remarkable, too, that the social state is worse than any one man-even the wickedest-would wish to make it. In the ancient and the modern world each offender knows that his particular form of vice can only be practised so long as it is not too common-each is ready to condemn the vices which he does not affect. Yet when the various forces of selfishness work together, they do in fact strengthen one another. And on the great aggregate of human wickedness the watchful eye of the Almighty looks down-not with pleasure, His wrath is kindling against us as a consuming fire.
III. But this guilt, real as it is, is often accompanied by a profound unconsciousness. We, with our well-meant cant about national greatness, and the blessings of a Christian country and and the like, do shut our eyes wilfully to fearful signs of evil within.
IV. It is true that a nation goes through a moral probation, as a man does; that up to a certain point she has her opportunities of retrieval, after this sin is finished and brings forth death. Jerusalem slept not less soundly the day after the Crucifixion than the day before; nor were her markets less thronged, nor the proud carriage of her priests at all abated. Yet the transactions of one week had altered utterly the condition of that place. In God’s hand is the sudden thunderbolt that shatters in a moment, and the decay that eats slowly for centuries. But once more, evil itself is punishment and destruction, fraud and wrong-doing are the bandits that steal about and rob you; drunkenness, gambling, impurity, are the monsters that dash your sons and daughters against the stones. But remember that sin, great and potent as it seems, is a conquered kingdom; it looks menacing, its numbers are legion, but the victory gained over it by our Lord was a real victory, and its strength is ready to crumble away when it is touched in earnest. Blessed are all those who make themselves instruments in such a work of love.
Archbishop Thomson, Lincoln’s Inn Sermons, p. 356.
The Invitation refused.
I. To the great fact of God’s continual, efficient calls every man’s own conscience is the best witness. Doubtless these calls fall louder and deeper sometimes on the spiritual ear than they fall at other times. They lie thickest, I believe, in early life. There are states of mind we can scarcely say how, and there are providential scenes we can scarcely say why, which give an intensity to those many voices-when a verse of Scripture will sometimes roll its meaning like thunder, or when a whisper of the soul will carry an accent tenfold with it. But the call is not confined to these specialities. There is a finger of a man’s hand, which is always waking the strings of thought. It is when we lie down; it is when we rise up; it is when we sit in the house; it is when we are walking by the way. Perhaps not a room in which we have ever lain down to sleep; perhaps not a church into which we have ever entered, even with careless foot; perhaps not a sin which we ever deliberately did; perhaps not an incident for weal or woe, that lies on the chequered path of life-but there was something there that swelled that “how often.”
II. Some there are who will rise up and say, “I do not consider that I have ever yet been called.” And these divide themselves into two classes: (1) Those who wish they could believe that they had been called, but cannot bring their mind to think that anything so good has happened to them, as that God should so remember and desire them as that He should call them; (2) those who virtually complain, “I do not hold that I have yet received my call. Why does not God, if He would yet save me, make some great interposition on my behalf?” Alas! for the guilty unbelief of the one, and the awful presumption of the other. Of all the refusals of God’s love the real secret is the same. They may cover themselves up with various pretexts, but the cause is one. It is not in any outward circumstances; it is not in any particular temperament; it is not in the want of power; but our Saviour points to it at once with His omniscient mind. “How often would I have gathered ye, and ye would not!” It is the absence of the will; it is the want of that setting of the mind to God’s mind; that conformity of the affections to God’s promises; that appreciation of unseen things; that spiritual sense, which is the essence and the beginning of a new life. Therefore they cannot come.
J. Vaughan, Fifty Sermons, 1874, p. 86.
Christ is set forth here under the symbol of a shelter. This is the central thought of the text, and we are now summoned with all humility and reverence to study it.
I. The first thing suggested by this symbol is the idea of danger. Not only or chiefly were the Jews warned of danger from the stroke of the Roman eagle, which was about to rend them as its prey. Great as was the political calamity that menaced them, their greatest danger was spiritual; the danger shared by all, in every age, who have broken the law, but have not accepted the Saviour. Infraction of law must be followed by infliction of penalty. Danger is implied in this very image, though at first sight it seems only to suggest ideas of beautiful tenderness and peace. No place for this figure would have been found in the symbols of Christ if there had been no danger.
II. The symbol of a shelter is so presented as to set forth the glory of Him who is thus revealed. It is Divine protection that is offered you. The overshadowing wing of omnipotence is spread in your defence. All the perfections of the sovereign Spirit combine to make the living shield which beats back the destroying stroke, and which is broad enough to canopy a fugitive world.
III. This symbol of a shelter illustrates in the highest degree the condescending tenderness of Christ. It does so by its homely simplicity, as well as by its ineffable pathos.
IV. This symbol of Christ is so set forth as to suggest the idea of a shelter, afforded by one who interposes his own life between us and danger. A rock, out in the blinding glare of the wilderness, is a shelter to the traveller by being his substitute, and receiving the sunstroke on itself. A shield in the day of battle is a shelter to the warrior only when the shattering blow rings on the shield itself. Christ is a shelter to trusting souls only by interposing His own life between them and the shock of doom.
V. Note the ends to be attained by the sinner’s flight to the Saviour. It is obvious that the immediate result is safety. But it would be a radical mistake to suppose that the Gospel urges men to seek safety only for safety’s sake. Safety in Christ is the first step to practical godliness.
VI. This symbol of Christ is drawn in such a way as to show that man is responsible in the matter of his own salvation.
C. Stanford, Symbols of Christ, p. 275.
I. Men, while they are in a state of nature, are exposed to imminent danger. As transgressors of the law of God, they are liable to its penalty.
II. Our Lord Jesus Christ offers Himself as a shelter against this danger.
III. He fulfils this function with condescending tenderness.
IV. He delivers His people by the substitution of His own life for theirs.
V. The immediate result of application to Him is safety.
VI. Men are responsible in the matter of their own salvation.
G. Brooks, Five Hundred Outlines of Sermons, p. 323.
References: Mat 23:37.-D. Fraser, The Metaphors of the Gospels, p. 209; J. B. French, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxx., p. 364; J. Keble, Sermons for Sundays after Trinity, part i., p. 323; R. Heber, Parish Sermons, vol. ii., p. 421. Mat 23:37, Mat 23:38.-Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. v., p. 31; J. M. Neale, Sermons in Sackville College, vol. ii., p. 243.
Fuente: The Sermon Bible
11. The Woes of the King and His Lamentation over Jerusalem.
CHAPTER 23
1. The Hypocrisy of the Pharisees.(Mat 23:1-12.)
2. The Woes of the King upon Them.(Mat 23:13-36.)
3. The Lamentation over Jerusalem. (Mat 23:37-39.)
For the last time we have seen the Pharisees in the presence of the Lord in the previous chapter. What an important part these ecclesiastical leaders of the professing people of God play in this Gospel. They rejected Him; hated Him without a cause, and after they found they could not ensnare Him they resorted to that which Satan had put into their wicked hearts that they might kill Him. That which the Lord had foretold in His parable of the vineyard is now soon to take place. They made their plans and are ready to take their King and deliver Him into the hands of the Gentiles to be crucified. He is now soon to be taken, delivered into mans hand, going to the cross, where He, who knew no sin, was to be made sin for us. How solemn His words when He stood before Pilate and declared, Thou hadst no authority whatever against me if it were not given to thee from above. On this account he that has delivered me up to thee has greater sin. But before we reach the story of the passion of the King, so wonderfully told in this Gospel, we find the King first of all passing judgment upon these evil leaders of the people. In the next place we have recorded, as nowhere else in the Gospel records, the great Olivet discourse, in which the King reveals the future. Here we find prophecy concerning the Jews and Jerusalem, the church and the Gentiles.
The chapter which is before us contains the Woes of the King upon the Pharisees. It is one of the most solemn ones in Matthew. Pharisaism is still in the earth; Ritualism, Traditionalism and with it the rejection of the authority of the Lord and His written Word, is Pharisaism, that evil leaven against which the Lord warns. This Christian Pharisaism is far worse than the old Jewish system. And where in Christendom is a little of that leaven lacking? Only the Grace of God, an unbroken fellowship with the Father and His Son in the power of the Holy Spirit, can keep the individual believer from manifesting a Pharisaical spirit.
Then Jesus spoke to the multitude and to His disciples, saying: The scribes and the Pharisees have set themselves down in Moses seat; all things therefore, whatever they may tell you, do keep. But do not after their works, for they say and do not, but bind burdens heavy and hard to bear, and lay them on the shoulders of men, but will not move them with their finger. And all their works they do to be seen of men: for they make broad their phylacteries and enlarge the borders of their garments, and love the chief place in feasts, and the first seats in the synagogue, and salutations in the market places, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi. But ye, be ye not called Rabbi; for one is your instructor, and all ye are brethren. And call not any one your father upon earth; for one is your Father, He who is in the heavens. Neither be called leaders, for one is your leader, the Christ. But the greatest of you shall be your servant. And whoever shall exalt himself shall be humbled, and whoever shall humble himself shall be exalted (Mat 23:1-12). These are indeed cutting words. Out of His mouth goes a two-edged sword. Well may these words be placed in connection with the church message to Pergamos, in which the glorified Christ saith, These things says He that has the sharp two-edged sword. Pergamos shows prophetically that period of the church when Ritualism, Nicolaitanism (Clericalism) came in like a flood and a certain class of men assumed the place of authority in the church, as leaders, priests, and began to dictate and teach the traditions of men. And ever since that time and through that into which Pergamos developed, Thyatira (Roman Catholicism), the leaven of the Pharisees, has worked on in Christendom and is still working. The Lord speaks first of all of the place which the scribes and Pharisees had chosen. They had placed themselves in Moses seat. This no doubt He spoke in reference to legislation and not in regard to doctrine.
They had occupied the legislative seat, and when their sect started it was with a zeal for the law, which God had given through Moses. Soon, however, they became corrupt. In that part of the Talmud which is called the Mishnah it is stated that they were to be regarded as if put into that place by Moses himself, taking their places in his seat, and were to be obeyed, so far as outward observations were concerned. [The Talmud is composed of two parts, the Gemara and the Mishna. Mishna means repetition, and was a repetition of the written law.]
As far as the God given law was concerned and its observances, they were to do and to keep what the Pharisees said. What a wise exhortation this is! He, the King, fully recognized the position they had taken; if He had spoken otherwise, they might have accused Him of inciting the multitudes to riot against their authority. Rom 13:1-7 contains a similar wise exhortation by the Spirit of God for this present age. Against which the Lord warns is their works. There were two great schools among these Pharisees as we stated before; the school of Hillel and the school of Shammai. These were occupied with interpretations of the law. What strange interpretations were given, what tedious burdens were bound upon the people, which God never meant, could easily be illustrated and demonstrated by quotations from that tremendous literary work, the Talmud. The burdens became intolerable. The blame rested equally on both the great rabbinic schools. For although the school of Hillel was supposed in general to make the yoke lighter, and that of Shammai heavier, yet not only did they agree on many points, but the school of Hillel was not unfrequently even more strict than that of his rival. In truth their differences seem too often only prompted by a spirit of opposition, so that the serious business of religion became in their hands one of rival authority and mere wrangling (Edersheim). But while they put these burdens upon the people and domineered over them they neither kept them nor did they move a finger to remove them. In connection with this external show of religion, for which the Pharisees stood, the Phylacteries are mentioned. The general Christian reader has little information about the meaning of this word. The word phylacteries means observatories to keep the remembrance of the Law alive. In different parts of the Pentateuch we read these words, And thou shalt bind these words for a sign on thy hand, and they shall be for frontlets between thine eyes. And thou shalt write them upon the posts of thy house, and upon thy gates (Exo 13:9-16; Deu 6:9, etc.). The last named injunction, Write them upon the posts of thy house, is literally practised by orthodox Jews, by writing these words upon a piece of parchment, inclosing them in a tin box, and this box is nailed on the door posts. From the same words the phylacteries, or tephillin, were instituted. These are two strips of leather to each of which is attached a small box; in these boxes there are likewise pieces of parchment upon which the Hebrew text of Deu 6:4-8 is written. The one leather strip with this box is wound around the forehead, the box resting in the middle of the forehead, while the second strip is wound around the arm, the left arm, which is nearest to the heart. The ends of this one is made to form the Hebrew letter shin, which stands for Shaddai, the Almighty. Strange and curious laws are connected with the preparation of the phylacteries, the wearing of them; the rabbinical writings contain much on the phylacteries which is superstitious. Thus the talmudical tract Berachoth declares, It is necessary to wear the phylacteries nights in the home as they drive away the demons. Orthodox Jews use them as their fathers did, and there is no doubt that the wearing of phylacteries in the twentieth century by strictly orthodox Jews and their belief in them is the same as in the days when our Lord spake these words. It is seen that the phylacteries sprung from a literal interpretation of the above passages in the Pentateuch, an outward religious observance for which there was no foundation whatever in the law. The Lord, however, does not attack this, we believe, ancient custom, but He attacks the habits of the Pharisees to wear the phylacteries and the enlarged borders of their garments (Num 15:38), so as to be seen of men. They did it all for show; selfishness controlled them and they had no heart for the things of God. They loved the first places, the honor and praise of men; flatterers, they enjoyed and loved to receive honoring salutations from the side of men in market places. Rabbi, Rabbi, which means teacher or instructor, they loved to be addressed as well as Abba, which is father. All these titles simply sprang from their self-seeking. The Lord now gives teaching, telling his hearers that which concerns of course disciples alone, that they are brethren and that they have but one teacher, the Christ Himself; that they should not call man father, but one is their Father, God Himself. The greatest of His own is the One, who is a servant of all. This reaches over into the new dispensation. The instructor, the guide, is the Lord and the Holy Spirit. Alas! how the enemy has succeeded in producing and fostering this distinctive mark of Pharisaism in Christendom, with its man-made institutions, titles, honors, offices and leaderships. It was not so in the beginning, but corruption has entered in and we find at the end of the age a Pharisaism far worse than that which the Lord here condemns. And there is a judgment coming upon that boasting, proud, Pharisaical, ritualistic Christendom. The judgment broke over the heads of the Pharisees, their religious system, and so will it break over Christendom. Then those who exalted themselves will be humbled and those who humbled themselves will be exalted. What an encouragement for every true servant of the Lord Jesus Christ to follow strictly these words of our Lord, to go on under Him as Lord and under the guidance of His Spirit, to have no name among men, but to be known of God. In this there is rest and joy and the power of God rests upon the testimony of such who serve in this spirit.
And there is a deeper meaning still to Mat 23:8-10. We quote from one who has expressed it in simple as well as beautiful language. It is a declaration of the essential relations of man to God. Three things constitute a Christian: What He is, what he believes, what he does; doctrine, experience, practice. Man needs for his spiritual being three things: Life, instruction, guidance; just what our Lord declares in the ten words of the Gospel, I am the way, and the truth and the life. The Roman Catholic church… has caught these three things with its usual insight and avows its ability to supply them. The office of the Roman Catholic church is claimed to be threefold: the priestly office imparting and sustaining life by means of the sacraments; the teaching office endowed with infallibility; the guiding office by spiritual confessors. These three things are just what our Lord forbids in the passage under consideration. Acknowledge no man as Father; for no man can impart or sustain spiritual life; install no man as an infallible teacher; allow no one to assume the office of spiritual director; your relation to God and to Christ is as close as that of any other person. (Western: The Genesis of the New Testament)
And now the Lord takes up His Woes. It is a fearful uncovering of the hearts of the Pharisees and their corruption. And thus He lays bare the hidden things. He will do so again. There are eight woes given in this chapter, though it seems the fourteenth verse does not belong to this chapter. It is, however, found in both the Gospels of Mark and Luke, so that it is evident the Lord also uttered these words. In different respects there is a correspondency between the first discourse of our Lord in this Gospel, the sermon on the mountain and the last one addressed to the multitudes and to His disciples. The Olivet discourse is addressed exclusively to the disciples, who have asked Him. The Sermon on the Mount, as generally the great discourse in the fifth, sixth and seventh chapters of this Gospel is called, was addressed to the multitudes and the disciples. What this great discourse stands for, the proclamation of the King, we learned in our exposition. He sat there as the great One greater than Moses, expounding and expanding the Law. Here He is upon the seat of judgment; the King is the Judge. In the sermon on the Mount He utters His Blessings, Beatitudes, but here as judge He pronounces His Woes.
We shall not follow these woes in a detailed exposition, but mention the leading thoughts in them.
But woe unto you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, for ye shut up the kingdom of the heavens before men; for ye do not enter, nor do ye suffer those that are entering to go in (Mat 23:13). The Kingdom has been preached unto them, but they shut willfully their eyes and turned away from the light, which had burst upon them. They did not enter in and kept others away from it. And this is an awful woe which falls likewise upon the modern Pharisees, though in a different sense. How many of the man-made priests and teachers, following the traditions of men, usurping the place of the Lord Jesus Christ, are themselves unsaved and keep others from knowing the truth.
Omitting that which is given as the next verse, we read the second Woe. Woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, for ye compass the sea and the dry land to make one proselyte, and when he is become such, ye make him twofold more the son of hell than yourselves (Mat 23:15). Coming from such lips, what a condemnation they contain! They were sectarians, and sectarianism is the fruit of the flesh, as clearly taught in the Epistles. They did everything to make proselytes, and that too for selfish motives. Proselytism was condemned by the rabbinical schools. One of the talmudical sayings is, Proselytes are as a scab to Israel. It was for selfish reasons they made proselytes to their sect. Is it any different in the proselyting Christendom, down to the smallest party? And after they had attracted some to themselves they made them worse than they were. An awful indictment indeed.
Woe unto you, blind guides, who say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple he is a debtor. Fools and blind, for which is greater, the gold, or the temple which sanctifieth the gold? And, whosoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gift that is upon it is a debtor. Fools and blind ones, for which is greater, the gift, or the altar which sanctifieth the gift? He therefore that sweareth by the altar swears by it and by all things that are upon it. And he that sweareth by the temple swears by it and by Him that dwells in it (Mat 23:16-22.) Without following this woe in every word, it is evident that these leaders loved the gold of the temple more than the temple and the gift which was upon the altar more than the altar. Fools and blind guides they were.
Woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, for ye pay tithes of mint and anise and cummin, and ye have left aside the weightier matters of the law, judgment and mercy and faith; these ye ought to have done and not have left those aside. Blind guides who strain out the gnat, but drink down the camel (Mat 23:23-24).
Their self-righteousness and piety consisted in being very scrupulous about minor things, while the important matters were completely ignored by them. They strained at a gnat and swallowed a camel. It is not different today. The little unessential things in religious practices are unduly magnified, while the important matters are ignored. Woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the dish, but within they are full of rapine and intemperance. Blind Pharisees, make clean first the inside of the cup and of the dish, that their outside also may become clean. Woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, for ye are like whited sepulchres which appear beautiful outwardly, but within are full of dead mens bones and all uncleanness. Thus also ye, outwardly ye appear righteous to men, but within are full of hypocrisies and lawlessness. Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, for ye build the sepulchres of the prophets and adorn the tombs of the just, and ye say, If we had been in the days of our fathers we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. So that you bear witness of yourselves that ye are sons of those who slew the prophets; and ye, fill up the measure of your fathers. Serpents, offspring of vipers, how should ye escape the judgment of hell? (Mat 23:25-33).
These are the concluding woes. They need not much comment. Pharisiaism keeps the outside clean, while inside there is corruption and death. There is a self-righteous, religious boasting of being more advanced than the fathers, and more tolerant than they were. But the omniscient One, reads their hearts and declares that they fill up the measure of the fathers. They were unsaved men, not the offspring of God, but of vipers; their father, the devil; and they were facing judgment of Gehenna.
Other words were uttered by the King. These are found in the three verses which follow. He would send them prophets and wise men and scribes, and they were to kill them, crucify them, persecute them, and all the righteous blood shed upon the earth should come upon them. This was to come upon that generation. What they hear from His lips another witness filled with the Holy Spirit, Stephen, tells them; with the stoning of Stephen the measure was filled up and judgment came.
And now the sublime, mournful ending. The last word of the King to Jerusalem. Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those that are sent to her, how often would I have gathered thy children as a hen gathers her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! Behold your house is left unto you desolate; for I say unto you, Ye shall in no wise see me henceforth until ye say, Blessed be He that comes in the name of the Lord.
What a loving, sublime lamentation this is! The King is a King of Love and His heart yearns over His city Jerusalem. How He did long for them! The illustration He uses is one they fully understood, not alone by its simplicity, a hen gathering her chickens, but also because their elders had mentioned this very fact. The Rabbis spoke of Messiah under the name of the Shekinah and declared that Israel would be gathered under the wings of the Shekinah, where they would find rest and blessing. And now the Shekinah was with them. The promised One has come and they would not have Him. They turned away from Jehovah, their King. Their house — no longer the Fathers house — is to be left desolate. They would see Him in no wise henceforth. That this has a national significance, the rejection of them is evident. And no sooner were the words spoken than He left the temple and went away.
But the discourse which has nothing but Woes ends with a Blessed, and here comes in the bright ray of hope for Israel. Ye shall in no wise see me henceforth until ye say, Blessed be He that comes in the name of the Lord. This is the promise of His second Coming, and when He comes He will find a believing remnant of that very people, welcoming Him with the messianic greeting of the 118th Psalm. Then the Shekinah-Glory will spread over Jerusalem and Israel s land, and He that scattered Israel will gather them from the four corners of the earth. It is a strange and evil doctrine which maintains that inasmuch as the woes were spoken upon these Pharisees, that they are also to see Him again. It is claimed that these wicked Pharisees, the offspring of vipers, who could not escape the judgment of hell, are all to be raised from the dead when Christ comes again and have a second chance to see Him, and that then they will receive Him. Such Jewish universalism has no Scripture foundation whatever. It is a remnant which will behold the King coming out of the opened heavens in the day of His manifestation.
Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)
Chapter 65
A Form of Godliness Condemned
Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on mens shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments, And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues, And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi. But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ. But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant. And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.
(Mat 23:1-12)
That which the Word of God calls godliness is the worship of God. Godliness with contentment is great gain (1Ti 6:6). Blessed are they who, being born of God, worship God in Spirit and in truth! Blessed is that person who, trusting Christ as his Savior and Lord, worships God, ever coming to God by Christ Jesus! But, when the Bible speaks of a form of godliness (2Ti 3:5), the reference is to the mere practice of religion. A form of godliness is going to church. A form of godliness is engaging in religious activity. A form of godliness is saying your prayers. How few there are who have the blessed great gain and sweet contentment of godliness! What multitudes there are who have a form of godliness! The apostle Paul warned us that in the last day the vast majority of the religious world would have a mere form of godliness, an outward show of religion, while denying the very power of true godliness, which is the gospel of Christ (2Ti 3:5). In the days of our Lords earthly life and ministry Judaism had already withered into a mere form of godliness; and the Son of God abhorred it.
Matthew 23 records the very last words ever spoken by the Son of God in the temple at Jerusalem. Judgment was about to fall on that nation. In just a short while God would destroy the city, the nation, and the temple. In this chapter our Lord tells the multitude and his disciples why such judgment must come. The first twelve verses of this chapter show us how utterly contemptible a mere form of godliness is to the Son of God.
In these verses, and in those that follow, our Savior gives a withering exposure of the religion of the scribes and Pharisees, and of their disciples today. He sharply rebukes them, both for their doctrine and their practices. Their religion retained the Word of God and the name of God; but it was nothing less than an utter denial of God. By this time, Judaism had been reduced to nothing short of idolatry! Will worship, ritualism, and legalism prevailed. And our Lord despised it. Knowing well that his time on earth was almost done, knowing that soon his followers must be left alone like sheep among wolves, he warns us plainly against the false shepherds and false religion that surrounds us in this world.
Nothing is more abominable in the sight of God than a self-righteous form of godliness. Here are five important lessons to be learned from these twelve verses.
1.It is the solemn responsibility of every faithful servant of God to warn his hearers of the false teachers and false religion that surrounds them.
It is not meekness, but cowardice, that causes men to hold back in denouncing false doctrine. No man was ever more meek, more gracious, or more loving than the God-man. Yet, no man ever more boldly denounced false religion (Mat 7:14-23).
That man who refuses to identify heresy and heretics is unfaithful to his charge as Gods messenger and Gods watchman (1Ti 4:1-8; 2Ti 2:16-18; 2Ti 3:1-5; 2Ti 4:1-4; Php 3:17-19; Col 2:8-23). No sin is more sinful than silence when alarm is needed! All preachers of free-will, works religion are false prophets. All who make salvation dependent upon mans will, mans works, or mans worth are destroyers of mens souls and must be treated by us as Gods enemies (2Jn 1:10).
2.It is the responsibility of every man to try the spirits and judge preachers and their message by the Word of God (Mat 23:2-3).
Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world. Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.
(1Jn 4:1-4)
Those who sit in Moses seat are responsible to teach what Moses taught. And they are to be obeyed, followed, and honored, only as they obey, follow, honor, and teach the Word of God (Heb 13:7; Heb 13:17; 1Th 5:12-13). But we must not allow any man to be our pope. Like the noble Bereans, we are responsible to search the Scriptures for ourselves. We must receive nothing taught by any man that we do not find written in the Book of God.
3.Nothing in all the world is more obnoxious, abominable, and damning to the souls of men as an outward, self-righteous form of religion (Mat 23:3-7).
In Mat 23:3-7 our Savior identifies self-righteous religion by four common traits. It may have many names, varied ordinances, and conflicting ceremonies, but false religion can always be identified by these four things. There are many other things to identify it, as we have seen; but these four common characteristics of false religion are observable by everyone, except the people involved.
First, false religion always seeks to bring people into some form of legal bondage. All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on mens shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers (Mat 23:3-4). Obviously, when our Lord said, Whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do, he was speaking sarcastically. He had already declared that by their traditions they had transgressed the commandment of God and made it of none effect (Mat 15:3). The gospel of Christ proclaims liberty to sinners in captivity. All human religion seeks to bind the captive more securely. Like the Gadarenes had often bound the demoniac with fetters and chains, religious people seek to bind the souls of men in the chains of the Mosaic law, the fetters of religious customs, and the bonds of religious superstition. When the Lord Jesus comes in the saving operations of his grace, he sits the captive free (Mar 5:1-15). His word to his servants, with regard to all he has raised from death to life, is Loose him, and let him go (Joh 11:44).
Till God the sinner’s mind illume,
Tis dark as night within;
Like Lazarus in the dreary tomb,
Bound hand and foot by sin.
Yet though in massy fetters bound,
To God’s free grace a foe,
The gospel has a joyful sound:
Loose him, and let him go.
Sinners shall hear this joyful sound,
When God designs it so;
Grace shall beyond their sins abound;
Loose him, and let him go.
Justice, beholding his attire,
No more appears his foe;
He says, I’ve all that I require; –
Loose him, and let him go.
He stands accepted in his name
Whose blood for him did flow;
The holy law proclaims the same:
Loose him, and let him go.
John Kent
I was once in bondage, cursed and condemned by my sin. I lived under the galling yoke of the law, bound by the heavy chains of guilt, the willing captive of Satan. But the Lord Jesus saw me, had compassion upon me, came to my dark dungeon, and said, Loose him, and let him go!
Long my imprisoned spirit lay,
Fast bound in sin and natures night;
Thine eye diffused a quickening ray
I woke, the dungeon flamed with light;
My chains fell off, my heart was free,
I rose, went forth, and followed Thee.
Still the small inward voice I hear,
That whispers all my sins forgiven;
Still the atoning blood is near,
That quenched the wrath of hostile Heaven.
I feel the life His wounds impart;
I feel the Savior in my heart.
No condemnation now I dread;
Jesus, and all in Him, is mine;
Alive in Him, my living Head,
And clothed in righteousness divine,
Bold I approach theternal throne,
And claim the crown, through Christ my own.
The Lord Jesus Christ has brought me into the blessed liberty of his free grace. My soul overflowed with unspeakable joy, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life in the glorious liberty of the sons of God. It is this blessed liberty of grace that I want you to know and enjoy. I urge you to count as your souls enemy every preacher, and every form of religion that seeks to bring you into bondage.
Second, false religion is always marked by the glaring hypocrisy of those who seek to impose it upon you. They say and do not. They bind heavy burdens and lay them on others, but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. They talk about obeying the law; but they know they do not obey it. They require from others things they do not practice themselves.
Their religious rules and regulations, their rituals and ceremonies, their sabbath days and duties are bound together in creeds, by-laws, church covenants, and constitutions like huge intolerable burdens. They form a galling yoke that no man can bear. Like the scribes and Pharisees, false religion piles its great load upon ignorant men and demands obedience, but offers nothing to help the needy soul. The Lord Jesus is not like them. His servants are not like them. Our Savior says, Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light (Mat 11:28-30). His sweet yoke of grace gives rest to weary sinners.
Third, all the outward works of false religionists are performed only to be seen of men (Mat 23:5), so that men will approve of them and applaud them as godly, holy, devoted people, so that others will admire them as great lovers of God. False religion teaches people to dress in a way that will show others their godliness. False religion teaches people to find a way to demonstrate their giving, so that people will know how sacrificial they are. False religion teaches people to advertise the amount of time they spend reading the Bible and praying, so that others can observe their devotion. False religion teaches people to humbly let people know when they fast, so that their spiritual gravity can be applauded.
All these things, our Savior tells his disciples to do in secret (Mat 6:16-18). How often have you heard someone say, I want the world to see Jesus in me. What they really mean is, I want the world to think I am a good man, not like them. The world did not see Jesus in Jesus. It certainly will not see him in you and me! False religion teaches people to make broad their phylacteries and enlarge the borders of their garments, to put I love Jesus and WWJD (What Would Jesus Do) bumper stickers on their cars, so that the world can acknowledge them as devoted people.
Throughout the New Testament, our Lord and his apostles teach us the very reverse of these things. True godliness, true worship, true faith in Christ is a matter of the heart. It causes saved sinners to seek the will of God and the glory of God in all things. Its works are always portrayed as works of love and faith. Those who perform them are totally unaware of having done so (Mat 25:34-40), while those who boast of performing them never do (Mat 25:41-46). Beware of every form of religion that teaches you to do anything for to be seen of men.
Fourth, false religion encourages the love of recognition (Mat 23:6-7). False religion says, Stand up and testify. The Word of God teaches us to bow before the throne of grace and worship. The scribes and Pharisees loved the best place in public meetings. The upper most rooms at feasts. They sought the most prominent place of recognition in church. The chief seats in the synagogues. They craved the recognition of men, having their names recognized and honored. Greetings in the markets. And they loved titles of distinction, by which they were pretentiously elevated above others. To be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi, or Reverend, or Father. Religious hucksters love to be first and foremost. Gods servants teach, by practice and precept, the unity of Gods saints in Christ as brethren.
4.It is absolutely wrong for believers to give any man the names, titles, and honors that belong to our God and his Christ alone.
But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ (Mat 23:8-10).
C. H. Spurgeon wrote, In the church of Christ, all titles and honors which exalt men and give occasion for pride are here forbidden. To call a man Father is to rob God of his supremacy and Fatherhood as God. To call a man Reverend is to rob God of his supremacy and holiness as the Holy One. Holy and reverend is his name (Psa 111:9). To speak of a man as your priest or intercessor is to rob Christ of his Priesthood. To call a man Doctor or Rabbi, or Master is to rob Christ of his glory as our Teacher.
5.The secret of greatness in the kingdom of God is service to the kingdom of God.
But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant. And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted (Mat 23:11-12).
Richard Baxter said, Church greatness consisteth in being greatly serviceable. The desire of the Pharisee is to receive honor, and to be called Master. The desire of the believer is to do good, devoting himself and all that he has to the glory of God and the service of his people, each esteeming the other better than himself.
If there be therefore any consolation in Christ, if any comfort of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any bowels and mercies, Fulfil ye my joy, that ye be likeminded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind. Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves. Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others. (Php 2:1-4)
What a solemn passage this is! If there were no other passage in the whole Book of God to warn us of man-centered, self-righteous, works religion, this should be sufficient to alarm us and cause us to abhor it. It seems that our Savior considered no language sufficiently strong to express his utter contempt for mans religion and religious customs. Pretentious sanctity and the outward show of religion, a mere form of godliness, are things detested by the Son of God! Our attitude toward such should be the same.
Fuente: Discovering Christ In Selected Books of the Bible
The King’s Warning against False Teachers
THEN spoke Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat: all therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.
Then spake Jesus to the multitude: the King commenced his final address to the people. He was soon to withdraw himself from them; but first he would put them on their guard against their false teachers. They had heard what he had said to the scribes and Pharisees; now they would hear what he said of them. And to his disciples: according to Luke, Jesus spoke to his disciples “in the audience of all the people.” His theme was one that concerned the whole population as well as his own disciples. He knew that he would shortly be taken away from them; therefore he warned them against those who would seek their ruin: “Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Hoses’ seat: all therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do.” It was the duty of Moses to expound to the people the Law of God. The scribes and Pharisees occupied his place; but alas! the Spirit that guided him was not in them. They spoke as from the chair of Moses, ex cathedra, as we say; and as far as they really filled his seat, and followed his sayings, their words were to be obeyed. Our Saviour could not have intended the people to heed their false comments and foolish glosses upon the Law of Moses; for he had already declared that by their traditions they had transgressed the commandment of God, and made it of none effect.
At this time, however, our Lord was speaking of another grievous fault in the scribes and Pharisees; namely, that they said one thing and did another: “But do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.” Sad indeed is the state of that religious teacher of whom the Searcher of hearts has to say, “Do as he says, and not as ho does.” Many such are with us still, preaching one thing, and practising another. May the Lord preserve the people from following their evil example!
Mat 22:4. For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men’s shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.
The contrast between the true Teacher and the false ones is clearly brought out by this verse: “They bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men’s shoulders.” Their regulations as to moral and ceremonial observances were like huge faggots or crushing burdens bound together, and made into a weight intolerable for any man to carry. Many of these rules by themselves were grievous enough; but all together they formed a yoke that neither the people nor their fathers could bear. The scribes and Pharisees piled the great load upon them; but neither helped them to sustain it, nor offered to relieve them of any portion of it: “they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.” How different was Christ’s teaching: “Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest”! Taking their burdens of sin and sorrow and care upon his own shoulders, he exchanges them for his easy yoke, which itself gives rest to all who wear it.
Mat 22:5-7. But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments, and love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues, and greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi.
This was the fatal flaw in their character: “But all their works they do for to be seen of men.” So long as they stood well in the sight of their fellow-creatures, they cared little or nothing how they appeared to the eye of God. They were very particular about the literal observance of certain Mosaic injunctions, although they completely missed the spiritual meaning of them: “They make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments.” Four passages from the Law, Exo 13:3-16; Deu 6:4-9, xi. 13-21, were written on strips of parchment, and worn on the forehead and the hand or arm as amulets, or preservatives. These the scribes and Pharisees made especially prominent, yet all the while the Word of the Lord was not hidden in their hearts, nor obeyed in their lives. The Lord commanded the children of Israel to make fringes in the borders of their garments, and upon the fringe a ribband or thread of blue, that they might look upon it, and remember all the commandments of the Lord, and do them (Num 15:38-39). These ritualists of our Saviour’s day were very scrupulous about having deep fringes or large tassels to their garments; but they remembered not the commandments of the Lord to do them. Many keep the laws of God to the eye, but violate them in the heart. From such deceit may the Spirit of truth preserve us!
Jesus next put together four things that the scribes and Pharisees loved: “the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues, and greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi.” Whether they met with their fellow-men for feasting, for worship, for business, or for instruction, they loved to be first and foremost. This is a common sin, and one into which we may easily fall. Our Lord felt it necessary to warn even his disciples against that evil, for his next words were evidently spoken specially to them.
Mat 22:8-10. But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.
In the Church of Christ, all titles and honours which exalt men and give occasion for pride are here forbidden. In the Christian commonwealth we should seek to realize a truer “Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity,” than that for which the world clamours in vain. He who is called “Rabbi” robs Christ of his honour as the only Master or Teacher of his disciples: “for one is your Master, even Christ.” He also takes from his fellow-Christians the privilege that they share equally with him: “and all ye are brethren.” Those who use such titles as “Holy Father “and “Eight Reverend Father in God “would have a difficulty in explaining away our Saviour’s words: “Call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.” In the tenth verse, our Lord’s words might be rendered: “Neither be ye called leaders (guides, instructors: for one is your Leader (Guide, Instructor), even the Christ (the Messiah).” If we follow him, we cannot go wrong.
Mat 22:11-12. But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant. And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.
This is nearly the same lesson that is recorded in Mat 20:27. Our Lord had to repeat many times this law of his kingdom: “He that is greatest among you shall be your servant.” You are all equal; but if there is one amongst you who claims to be the greatest, he shall be the servant of all. Where our King rules, any one of his disciples who exalts himself shall be abased; while, on the other hand, the one who humbles himself shall be exalted. The way to rise is to sink self; the lower we fall in our own esteem, the higher shall we rise in our Master’s estimation.
Fuente: Spurgeon’s The Gospel of the Kingdom
Mat 15:10-20, Mar 7:14, Luk 12:1, Luk 12:57, Luk 20:45
Reciprocal: Gen 34:14 – uncircumcised 1Ch 24:6 – the scribe Mar 12:38 – Beware
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
THIS CHAPTER RECORDS his burning words. In a few days the multitude, influenced by these men, would be shouting for His death. Their responsibility and guilt was greatly increased by this warning the Lord gave them as to the true character of their leaders.
He began by according to them the place they claimed as the exponents of the law of Moses. Therefore the people were to keep and do the law as they heard it from their lips. Yet they were to carefully avoid taking them as examples. Their lives contradicted the law they proclaimed. They legislated for others without the smallest conscience as to their own obedience. This the Lord stated in verse Mat 23:4, and it is a very common offence with professional religionists, who love directing other people while having an easy time themselves.
Then, in verses Mat 23:5-12, He exposed their love of notice and pre-eminence. All was for the eye of men. At feasts-the social circle-in synagogues- the religious circle-in markets-the business circle-they wanted the chief place as Rabbis and Masters. The disciple of Christ is to be the exact opposite of all this, so let us take it deeply to heart. The abasement of such men is only a matter of time. They were supposed to be signposts into the kingdom but really they were obstructions. They did not enter themselves and hindered others.
Moreover, they used their position to rob the poor and defenceless widow, covering up this enormity with the parade of long prayers, consequently they should receive severer judgment. Long prayers may impress the crowd, but they did not impress the Lord! Let us remember this and avoid them ourselves. We venture to affirm that no one marked by deep desire and really conscious of the presence of God, can wander about in a maze of words. As Ecc 5:2 indicates, his words must be few.
Great zeal for the making of proselytes is characteristic of the Pharisaic mind, and the Lords words in verse Mat 23:15 expose a remarkable feature of mere proselytism. It reproduces with added emphasis the character of the proselytizers in those who are proselytized. The Pharisees were children of hell, and their converts were the same in a twofold way. This is why there is always a tendency for evil men and seducers to wax worse and worse, until all is ripe for judgment.
In verses Mat 23:16-22, the Lord condemns their fanciful teachings. The distinctions they draw between the temple and the gold of the temple, between the altar and the gift upon it, might make the unthinking regard them with awe as possessing very superior minds; in reality their distinctions were purely imaginary and only a proof of their own blindness and folly. So with other matters; much punctiliousness over small things; much negligence as to great things-whether positively, as to what they observed, as in verse Mat 23:23, or negatively, as to what they refused, as in verse Mat 23:24. Blind they were indeed, and that type of blindness is all too common today.
Verses Mat 23:25-28, expose another pernicious characteristic; they only concerned themselves about external cleanliness, so as to appear well in the eyes of men. They had no concern for the inside which was open to the eye of God. They were most careful as to possible defilement acquired by contact from without; yet most careless as to defilement which they themselves generated from within. In result they became centres of defilement, and far from acquiring it from others they diffused it to others. This is a most subtle evil, from any suspicion of which we may well pray to be preserved.
Lastly, verses Mat 23:29-33, the Lord charged them with being the murderers of Gods prophets. They built tombs for the earlier prophets, since the sting of their words was no longer felt, but they were truly the children of those that had killed them; and, true to the principle of verse Mat 23:15, they would prove themselves twofold more the children of murder; filling up the sins of their fathers, and ending up without a doubt in the damnation of hell.
This passage furnishes us with the most terrible denunciation from the lips of Jesus, of which we have any record. He never said such things to any poor publican or sinner. These hot words were reserved for religious hypocrites. He was full of grace and truth. Grace with truth He extended to the confessed sinners. The searchlight of truth, without mention of grace, was reserved for the hypocrites.
So it came to pass that the blood of a long line of martyrs was going to lie at the door of that generation; and now for the last time Jerusalem was having the opportunity of trusting under the wings of Jehovah, who was amongst them in the person of Jesus. Often He would have thus sheltered them as the Psalms bear witness, and often would Jesus have gathered them during His sojourn amongst them; but they would not. Consequently the beautiful house in Jerusalem, once owned as Jehovahs was now disowned. It was just their house and desolate; and He who would have filled it was going from them, to be unseen till they should say, Blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord. They will not say this, as Psa 118:1-29 shows, until that day arrives which the Lord hath made, when the stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner.
Fuente: F. B. Hole’s Old and New Testaments Commentary
23:1
The audience that heard this remarkable chapter was composed of the multitude and the disciples. The first 12 verses were addressed to that part of the multitude designated scribes and Pharisees, and what should be the attitude of the disciples toward that group.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Mat 23:1. To the multitudes, and to his disciples. Luke (Luk 20:45): then in the audience of all the people, he said to his disciples. His disciples were probably close about Him, the people gathering about them; Mat 23:8-12 appear to be addressed especially to His disciples.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Subdivision 5. (Mat 23:1-39.)
Judgment pronounced.
They are silenced, but not won. The human heart is a citadel that can entrench itself against the clearest evidence; and the conscience can harden itself by repeated rejection of the truth, until light be as darkness. Thus it is now that He who would (how often!) have gathered the children of Jerusalem, as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, is forced to give them up to the avenger soon to come. Israel is doomed, and the lips of divine love have to pronounce her doom, until she shall say in truth and penitence, “Blessed be he that cometh in the name of the Lord.”
But the terrible denunciation that follows is rather against the leaders that have misled her to her ruin; though the blind leaders and the led fall together into it. From the necessity of the case, the judgment pronounced is given in the most open manner in the presence of the multitude, preceded by that picture of the rule of the rabbi, which could not but appeal to the experience of all who heard it. Yet it left them under it, of their own choice.
1. (1) The scribes and Pharisees had set themselves down in Moses, seat. It was their own act, and yet could not be looked upon wholly as a usurpation. An earnest zeal for the law of God in opposition to prevailing laxity had put them originally in the place that they now occupied. Degeneration had come in, and they had fallen from the ancient spirit while retaining the place – a place in which the Lord evidently recognizes them here, while recognizing fully also the degeneracy. They were now mere barren professors, contradicting their profession with their lives; while the rule of the rabbi was a tyranny of the severest kind, binding upon men’s shoulders burdens grievous to be borne – a growing oppression; more and more intolerable, and never lightened.
“Rabbinism placed the ordinances of tradition above those of the Law, and this by a necessity of the system, since they were professedly the authoritative exposition and the supplement of the written law. And although it was a general rule that no ordinance should be enjoined heavier than the congregation could bear, yet it was admitted that, whereas the words of the Law contained what ‘lightened,’ and what ‘made heavy,’ the words of the scribes contained only what ‘made heavy.’ Again it was another principle that where an aggravation or increase of the burden had once been introduced, it must continue to be observed.”* Well might the Lord say, that they would not put forth even a finger to move the intolerable load.
{* Edersheim, vol. 2, p. 407.}
With the people all this, of course, increased their power; and power and place was what they were constantly seeking. Thus they made broad the ‘phylacteries’ or parchment strips in which they strove after their peculiar manner to have the law in the most literal way as “frontlets between the eyes” (Deu 6:8)*; while the actually enjoined tasselled “borders” (Num 15:38) they enlarged, to make them conspicuous, as the Lord reproaches them. Naturally with this there was the love of conspicuous places also, at feasts and in the synagogues, and of greetings in the markets in which they were to be accosted as Rabbi, with all due respect.
{*They were “square capsules, covered with leather, containing on small scrolls of parchment these four sections of the law: Exo 13:1-10; Exo 11:1-10; Exo 12:1-51; Exo 13:1-22; Exo 14:1-31; Exo 15:1-27; Exo 16:1-36; Deu 6:4-9; Deu 11:13-21. The phylacteries were fastened by long leather straps to the forehead, and round the left arm, near the heart.”}
(2) Such were the Jewish leaders: among the disciples Jesus enjoins them that such things were not to be. They were not to be called Rabbi, but to be all brethren; with Christ alone their real Teacher. There was to be no authority among them but His own; no claim of spiritual fatherhood but for the Heavenly Father; nor of leadership, again; for any but Christ. The “leader” here (kathegetes) is more than teacher: he is the teacher who may have many teachers under him. All this, as it plainly calls for most serious attention on the part of all who call Christ Lord in truth, so also it needs wisdom in the application: for all these terms, “teacher,” “father,” “leader,*” are applied in Scripture itself to disciples, and cannot be meant, therefore, to be in an absolute way forbidden. But it was in Israel then; as it has come to be so largely in the Christian Church today, that those who should have been the servants of their brethren claimed to be masters, and stood between the consciences of men and Him who is alone the Lord of the conscience. Neither the Church as a whole nor any class of men in it can claim aright authoritative place for their teaching, which Scripture alone (as the word of the Lord) has; and yet this is what, with many modifications, is continually being done, and the people of God also are on their side not merely allowing but prompting the claim. In this way the word of God loses irreparably; it is made plastic in the hands of men; and, dethroned from its place of authority, it becomes subject to the reproach which attaches to all human handiwork: infidelity finds its own in this degradation. The louder and more authoritative the Church’s voice, the more that of God through His word becomes silenced and unheard.
{*The exact word here is only found in the New Testament in this place, but it is only an intensive form of that used in Act 15:22, “leading men” and in Heb 13:7; Heb 13:17; Heb 13:20, “leaders,” which the common version translates “those that have the rule.”}
But how different is the “ministry” which is really that, which seeks no lordship for itself, and no authority, but, like the Baptist of old, points only to that Other, in whose presence it stands self-emptied, because filled, satisfied, glorified with the light, unseen of the world, into which it has entered! True, it will not lead men universally to faith, which Christ’s own presence in it was not able to do; yet the faith to which it brings men will be how different! But it is not of this the Lord speaks here. He carries us back instead to that glimpse of an open heaven, which He so lately Himself has opened to them, and again He repeats: “The greater of you shall be your servant.” In service – in the ability to serve – true greatness is. And if the spirit of service be love, and love be the spirit of heaven, then it must be – there can be no avoidance of so plain a fact -that “whosoever shall exalt himself among you shall be humbled; and whosoever shall humble himself shall be exalted.”
2. The Lord turns now and addresses personally the leaders of the people, smiting them with a sevenfold perfect “woe,” because of their condition which He reveals in successive flashes of awful wrath. Yet no mere outburst of passionate emotion is it that manifests itself in these burning words. They are measured utterances in which the truth of divine judgment is as plain as its reality. And even in form, as they are sealed with the number of perfection; which is at the same time the stamp of an oath,* so this seven is in its structure, like that of the creative days, a 3. 3. 1, beginning indeed with the “light,” which is in these “blind guides” but darkness, in the first three woes; in the second three, stigmatizing their duplicity – their double life; while the final one, which has the characters of both preceding sections, brands them as the true children of those who slew the prophets, however much (now that these were dead) they might build their sepulchres.
{*”To swear” is in Hebrew to “use or name seven (victims or witnesses) as to oneself, i.e. to bind oneself by an attested oath.” (Davies’ Heb. Lexicon.) Compare Gen 21:28. Beersheba is thus the “well of seven” or “of the oath.”}
a. (1) The first “woe” deals with their opposition to the Kingdom of heaven; which they shut up in the face of men, themselves neither entering in; nor (as far as lay in them) suffering others to enter. As it is put in Luke, they had “taken away the key of knowledge.” With their legal and traditional teachings they had barred man’s approach to the only place of blessing in subjection to the glorious King in whom the Kingdom was presented to them, so that the outcasts of Israel, the “tax-gatherers and harlots,” went into it more easily than they.
Thus they had not the light, and had refused the light: for if “light had come into the world,” it is necessarily self-manifesting, as well as that which manifests other things; and men who refuse it do so, not because of insufficient evidence, but because they “love darkness rather than light.” And such were the leaders of Israel: here is their condition written upon their forehead.
(2) But while they had taken away the key of real knowledge, it was in perfect accord with this that they should be zealots of their own false knowledge, and eager to gain proselytes to it. Perfectly accordant, too, it was that they should, in the condition in which they were, have proselytes that would go beyond themselves. Calling the light darkness they naturally called the darkness light, and as light would propagate it. The second woe, therefore, follows the first in easily intelligible order.*
{*The omission of the fourteenth verse here is justified as well by its character as by the textual evidence; for in this place it would not suit, however characteristic of the leaders it might be, and was. It is found in Mark and Luke.}
(3) The third woe again shows how the light in them was darkened by their inversion of true proportion as to the holy things. With them the gold of the temple was more highly estimated than the temple itself, and the gift than the altar that sanctified it. And then this casuistry was used to teach men how they could swear vain oaths and be excused responsibility – a responsibility which the Lord affirms in every case.
b. (1) The three following woes are plainly different from the preceding ones. They show us the double life of these Jewish leaders. In the first case, the profession of absolute integrity could hardly be more complete than in paying tithes of the very mint and anise and cummin, the least product of their fields; yet on another side there was an absolute deficiency in that which should have been rendered. The moral elements, the weightier matters of the law, were just with them the things that had no weight. They strained carefully out the gnat in such things, but they swallowed easily the camel!
(2) Then the cup and dish they cleansed on the outside; within they could keep them full of rapine and indulgence. With a correct outside the lusts within were retained and sanctioned.
(3) The third woe speaks of spiritual death within; with a good looking exterior only, like a whitened sepulchre. This is the most inward aspect of the evil, but it presents the same duplicity as those preceding it.
c. In the next and last case, there is a return to the beginning. The opposition to God with which this characterization began is here as real as there; yet it is covered with a veil which might hide it, not only from others but from themselves. The dead prophets they memorialized and honored – built sepulchres to the men their fathers killed. And this honor to the dead might well save them from all identification with the men that killed them, though these might unfortunately be their fathers. Alas, their present opposition to the Kingdom of God showed how much value was to be attached to such a profession of regard for men who lay quietly in their graves and never troubled them. They were witnesses themselves that they were children of those who slew the prophets. Let them fill up then the measure of their fathers: fill it up and more they would, as already He had shown them, for these with whom He was now face to face would be His betrayers and murderers.
And He would send them prophets and wise men and scribes, and the old history would be repeated. With the long record of ages before them, and that history of their forefathers preaching to them of God’s controversy with them for their sins, they would renew and consummate it in their own persons, making themselves heirs of all that long reign of unbelief and evil, of the blood-shedding crying out to God from Abel to Zechariah slain between the temple and the altar, in the very face of God Himself. If this were the Zechariah the prophet, of the returned remnant,* how the guilt of Israel is emphasized in this! and “which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted?” are Stephen’s words to them at a later time. Upon this generation was to come the recompense of that long wearing out of the saints of God.
{*There seems no good reason for supposing any other than Zechariah the prophet to be meant, though Zechariah the son of Jehoiada is generally taken to be. But this leaves the “son of Barachias” to be accounted for, when the “son of Jehoiada” also would have better reminded them of the history. It seems also too far back (in Joash’s time) for the Lord’s purpose, when summing up the guilt of the people.
As to Zechariah the prophet, he was son of Berachiah, and grandson of Iddo, and “the Jewish Targum states that Zechariah the son of Iddo, a prophet and priest, was slain in the sanctuary” (See “The Irrationalism of Infidelity,” by J. N. Darby, pp. 150-159).}
3. But here the pent-up love in the heart of Christ breaks out in a lament over the city which had rejected Him. City as it was of murderous hatred against those sent to it of God, how often would He have gathered her children together, as the hen gathers her brood under her wings! but they would not. Now their house – which He could no longer call His Father’s – was left to them as they would have it; but to real desolation. Nor would they see Him henceforth, according to the blessing which those rejected prophets had prophesied should yet be theirs, until, with hearts disciplined with sorrow, and in judgment made to learn the righteousness which alone could be the preparation for it, they should be enabled from their heart to say, “Blessed be he that cometh in the name of the Lord.”
Fuente: Grant’s Numerical Bible Notes and Commentary
The Scribes and Pharisees, so often mentioned in the gospels, were the great doctors and spiritual guides amongst the Jews. Scribe is the name of an office; Pharisee the name of a sect. They were both learned in the law, and teachers of the law of Moses.
Our blessed Saviour, in the former part of his gospel, held many conferences with these men, and used the most persuasive argument to convince them both of their errors and wickedness. But their obstinancy and malice being such, that neither our Saviour’s ministry nor miracles could convince them: hereupon our Lord denounces, in this chapter, eight several woes against them.
But first he charitably warns his disciples and the man, saying, The Scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat; that is, they teach and expound the law of Moses, which they were wont to do sitting, Whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do.
That is, “What they teach you consonant to the word of God, and agreeable to the writings of Moses and the prophets: if they go not out of Moses’ chair into their own unwritten traditions, follow their doctrine, and obey their precepts; but do not after their works, follow not their example, take heed of their pride and hypocrisy, of their ambition and vain-glory. Obey their doctrine wherein it is sound; but follow not their example wherein it is corrupt.”
Learn, 1. That the personal miscarriages of ministers, must by no means beget a disesteem of their office and ministry. Charity must teach us to distinguish betwixt the calling and the crime.
2. That the infallible truths of God, recommended to us by a vicious teacher, ought to be entertained and obeyed by us, without either scruple or prejudice. What the Pharisees themselves, says Christ, bid you observe, that observe and do.
3. That no people are obliged to follow their teacher’s pattern and example any farther than it is agreeable to scripture-rule, and conformable to Christ’s example: Do not after their works, who say, and do not.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Mat 23:1-3. Then spake Jesus to the multitude Leaving all converse with his adversaries; whom he now gave up to the hardness of their hearts. The scribes and Pharisees sit in Mosess seat Or, chair That is, read and expound the law of Moses, and are the appointed teachers of the people. The Jewish doctors, as is well known, always taught sitting. The name Pharisees being the appellation of a sect, it cannot be supposed that our Lord meant to say of all the party that they sat in Mosess chair. Such a character was applicable to none but the doctors of the sect; for which reason we must suppose that the name scribes and Pharisees is a Hebraism for the Pharisean scribes. All therefore they bid you observe, &c. That is, all that they read out of the law, and enforce on the manifest authority thereof, that observe and do Readily and cheerfully: All, says Theophylact, that they require, ,
, from the law of God out of the books of Moses. An interpretation which must be allowed of. Because Christ elsewhere requires his disciples to beware of the leaven, that is, the doctrine, of the scribes and Pharisees; because they taught for doctrines the commandments of men, and by their traditions made void the law of God; and were blind leaders of the blind. But do not ye after their works By no means imitate their practices; for they say and do not They give many precepts to their disciples, which they do not perform themselves. As we must not receive corrupt doctrines for the sake of any laudable practices of those that teach them; so we must not imitate bad examples for the sake of the plausible doctrines of those that give them.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
CX.
JESUS’ LAST PUBLIC DISCOURSE. DENUNCIATION
OF SCRIBES AND PHARISEES.
(In the court of the Temple. Tuesday, April 4, A. D. 30.)
aMATT. XXIII. 1-39; bMARK XII. 38-40; cLUKE XX. 45-47.
a1 Then spake Jesus b38 And in his teaching cin the hearing of all the people he said unto athe multitudes, and to his disciples [he spoke in the most public manner], 2 saying, c46 Beware of the scribes, aThe scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat: 3 all things whatsoever they bid you, these do and observe: but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. [As teachers of the law of Moses the scribes and Pharisees were the only religious guides whom the people had, so they were obliged to follow them as expounders of that law, but they were no means to look to them as living exemplification of that law.] 4 Yea, they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men’s shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with their fingers. [The law itself was a heavy yoke ( Act 15:10), but these teachers added to the burden of it a vast volume of traditions, but they themselves did not keep these traditions, excusing themselves by inventing subtle distinctions like those in reference to the Corban ( Mat 15:4-6) and to oaths ( Mat 15:16-22). See Exo 13:3-10, Exo 13:11-16, Deu 6:4-9, Deu 11:13-21. These were enclosed in a leather case and were fastened to the forehead and left arm. The authority for wearing them was purely traditional, and the practice seems to have arisen from a literal interpretation of Exo 13:9, Exo 13:16, Deu 6:8, Deu 11:18. The Pharisees made the leather case large, that their righteousness might be more conspicuous], and enlarge the borders of their garments [These were the fringes mentioned in Num 15:38, Num 15:39. But the Pharisees offended again, even in their obedience, by wearing broader fringes than other people, that they might appear more religious], cwho desire to walk in long robes [This robe was a professional dress, as marked as that worn by priests and kings. It showed that its wearer was professionally religious], a6 and love the chief places at feasts [see Exo 22:22-24, Deu 27:19.] a8 But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your teacher [Christ], and all ye are brethren. 9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, even he who is in heaven. 10 Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even the Christ. 11 But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant. [See pp. 557, 558.] 12 And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be humbled; and whosoever shall humble himself shall be exalted. [See pp. 431, 494, 537. Thus Jesus reproves those who make religion a matter of praise-seeking ostentation, whether they do so by seeking position, or by peculiarity of dress, or by assuming or accepting titles of honor or distinction. This sin of ostentation was the first enumerated sin of the Pharisees.] 13 But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye enter not in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering in to enter. [Our Lord’s language is figurative and presents the kingdom of God as a house around the door of which the Pharisees have gathered, not entering in themselves, and blocking the way against those who would enter. This they did by their opposition to Jesus. For a similar charge see p. 315.] 15 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte; and when he is become so, ye make him twofold more a son of hell than yourselves. [Proselytes here meant are not those converted from heathenism to worship God, but Jews converted to Phariseeism. These become worse than their instructors, because each generation drifted farther from the law and became more zealously and completely devoted to the traditions.] 16 Woe unto you, ye blind guides [Jesus above denounced them for their hypocrisy, but this woe is pronounced upon them for their [608] ignorance and folly], that say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor. [The word “debtor” is here meant to describe one who owes it to himself and to God to keep his oath. The Pharisees graduated oaths according to their own foolish conceptions of the sanctity of the object invoked, so that if the object by which a man swore was not sacred enough, he was not forsworn if he did not keep his oath. Esteeming the gold of the temple more sacred than the temple itself, they held that an oath by the former was binding while an oath by the latter was not. The gold meant is probably the golden ornaments on the temple.] 17 Ye fools and blind: for which is greater, the gold, or the temple that hath sanctified the gold? 18 And, Whosoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gift that is upon it, he is a debtor. 19 Ye blind: for which is greater, the gift, or the altar that sanctifieth the gift? 20 He therefore that sweareth by the altar, sweareth by it, and by all things thereon. 21 And he that sweareth by the temple, sweareth by it, and by him that dwelleth therein. 22 And he that sweareth by the heaven, sweareth by the throne of God, and by him that sitteth thereon. [Our Lord designed to teach that all oaths were binding. See p. 243.] 23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye tithe mint and anise and cummin, and have left undone the weightier matters of the law, justice, and mercy, and faith: but these ye ought to have done, and not to have left the other undone. [See p. 313. The anise was used for medical purposes and also for culinary seasoning, so that Pliny says “the kitchen can not be without it.” Cummin also was a condiment and a medicine, the bruised seed mixed with wine being used as a styptic, especially after circumcision. It was also used as an ingredient for salves and plasters such as were applied to the ulcers of cattle produced from the bites, grubs, etc., of insects.] 24 Ye blind guides, that strain out the gnat, and [609] swallow the camel! [A proverbial expression, indicating care for little faults and a corresponding unconcern for big ones.] 25 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye cleanse the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full from extortion and excess. [Jesus here compares the Pharisees to a woman who washes the outside of her dishes and leaves the inside unclean. But in describing that inner uncleanness he passes from the figure to the reality, and specifies that it consists of extortion and self-indulgence. They made their outside clean by traditionary ablutions. See pp. 393, 394.] 26 Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first the inside of the cup and of the platter, that the outside thereof may become clean also. [Here again the literal peeps through the figurative: a pure inner life makes clean outward conduct.] 27 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which outwardly appear beautiful, but inwardly are full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness. 28 Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but inwardly ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity. [Luke records Jesus as having taught this lesson by an exactly opposite figure. See p. 313. There men were contaminated by the touch of a grave because there was nothing outside to notify them of its presence. Here men are contaminated by the same thing because the outside is rendered so white and beautiful that men are deceived into thinking that the inside is harmless.] 29 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye build the sepulchres of the prophets, and garnish the tombs of the righteous, 30 and say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we should not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. 31 Wherefore ye witness to yourselves, that ye are sons of them that slew the prophets. 32 Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. [See p. 314.] 33 Ye serpents, ye offspring of vipers, how shall ye escape the judgment of hell? [See p. 73.] 34 Therefore, behold, I send unto you [610] prophets, and wise men, and scribes: some of them shall ye kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute from city to city: 35 that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of Abel the righteous unto the blood of Zachariah son of Barachiah, whom ye slew between the sanctuary and the altar. 36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation. [See pp. 314, 315.] 37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, that killeth the prophets, and stoneth them that are sent unto her! how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! 38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate. 39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord. [See pp. 491, 492.]
[FFG 606-611]
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
Matthew Chapter 23
Chapter 23 clearly shews how far the disciples are viewed in connection with the nation, inasmuch as they were Jews, although the Lord judges the leaders, who beguiled the people and dishonoured God by their hypocrisy. He speaks to the multitude and to His disciples, saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses seat. Being thus expositors of the law, they were to be obeyed in all that they said according to that law, although their own conduct was but hypocrisy. That which is important here is the position of the disciples; it is in fact the same as that of Jesus. They are in connection with all that is of God in the nation, that is to say, with the nation as the recognised people of God-consequently, with the law as possessing authority from God. At the same time the Lord judges, and the disciples also were practically to judge, the walk of the nation, as publicly represented by their leaders. While still forming part of the nation, they were carefully to avoid the walk of the scribes and Pharisees. After having reproached these pastors of the nation with their hypocrisy, the Lord points out the way in which they themselves condemned the deeds of their fathers-by building the sepulchres of the prophets whom they had slain. They were, then, the children of those who slew them, and God would put them to the test by sending them also prophets and wise men and scribes, and they would fill up the measure of their iniquity by putting these to death and persecuting them-condemned thus out of their own mouths-in order that all the righteous blood which had been shed, from Abels to that of the prophet Zechariah, should come upon this generation. Frightful amount of guilt, accumulated from the beginning of the enmity which sinful man, when placed under responsibility, has ever shewn to the testimony of God; and which increased daily, because the conscience became more hardened each time that it resisted this testimony! The truth was so much the more manifest from its witnesses having suffered. It was a rock, exposed to view, to be avoided in the peoples path. But they persisted in their evil course, and every step in advance, every similar act, was the proof of a still increasing obduracy. The patience of God, while graciously dealing in testimony, had not been unobservant of their ways, and under this patience all had accumulated. All would be heaped upon the head of this reprobate generation.
Remark here the character given to the apostles and Christian prophets. They are scribes, wise men, prophets, sent to the Jews-to the ever rebellious nation. This very clearly brings out the aspect in which this chapter regards them. Even the apostles are wise men, scribes, sent to the Jews as such.
But the nation-Jerusalem, Gods beloved city-is guilty and is judged. Christ, as we have seen, since the cure of the blind man near Jericho, presents Himself as Jehovah the King of Israel. How often would He have gathered the children of Jerusalem, but they would not! And now their house should be desolate, until (their hearts being converted) they should use the language of Psa 118:1-29, and, in desire, hail His arrival who came in the name of Jehovah, looking for deliverance at His hands, and praying to Him for it-in a word, until they should cry Hosanna to Him that should come. They would see Jesus no more until, humbled in heart, they should pronounce Him blessed whom they were expecting, and whom they now rejected-in short, until they were prepared in heart. Peace should follow, desire precede, His appearing.
The last three verses exhibit clearly enough the position of the Jews, or of Jerusalem, as the centre of the system before God. Long since, and many times, would Jesus, Jehovah the Saviour, have gathered the children of Jerusalem together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, but they would not. Their house should remain forsaken and desolate, but not for ever. After having killed the prophets, and stoned the messengers sent unto them, they had crucified their Messiah, and rejected and slain those whom He had sent to proclaim grace unto them even after His rejection. Therefore should they see Him no more until they had repented, and the desire to see Him was produced in their hearts, so that they should be prepared to bless Him, and would bless Him in their hearts, and confess their readiness to do so. The Messiah, who was about to leave them, should be seen of them no more until repentance had turned their hearts unto Him whom they were now rejecting. Then they should see Him. The Messiah, coming in the name of Jehovah, shall be manifested to His people Israel. It is Jehovah their Saviour who should appear, and the Israel who had rejected Him should see Him as such. The people should thus return into the enjoyment of their relationship with God.
Such is the moral and prophetic picture of Israel. The disciples, as Jews, were viewed as part of the nation, though as a remnant spiritually detached from it, and witnessing in it.
Fuente: John Darby’s Synopsis of the New Testament
WARNINGS AGAINST THE EVIL EXAMPLE OF THE SCRIBES AND PHARISEES
It is still Wednesday, and the last day our Lord ever spoke in the temple. These scribes and Pharisees are thronging Him on all sides, being the great and influential people of the Church. He acquits Himself of all responsibility by publicly exposing their evil example, and warning the people against following them. N.B. All this He did boldly in their presence; meanwhile they got so awfully mad that they laid violent hands on Him and took His life. Two hundred millions of martyrs have traveled the same road to bloody death. Lord, help us to be true, and tell the whole truth, even under the most embarrassing environments, fearless of men and devils!
Luk 20:45-46; Mar 12:38-39. And He spoke to them in His teaching, Beware of the scribes, who wish to walk about in robes, and receive salutations in the markets, and the first seats in the synagogues, and the first couches in the suppers. All this pompous display panders to pride, feeds vanity, and grieves the Holy Spirit now as in the days of Christ; and is more abominable in preachers and Church members than in debauchees and prostitutes.
Mat 23:1-12. Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to His disciples, saying, The scribes and Pharisees sat in the seat of Moses. Therefore, all things so many as they may say to you to observe, keep and perform; but do not according to their works; for they say, and do not. For they bind heavy burdens and difficult to be borne, and place them on the shoulders of the people; and they do not wish to touch them with their finger.
How lamentably do we see this identical maladministration on the part of many leading clergymen this day, taxing their members heavily, and even oppressively, while they do not tax themselves! It is a shame for a pastor to enforce the tithe law among his members and not personally lead the way in keeping it. The truth of it is, the tithe is the minimum. We all ought to go vastly beyond it, even to the half of our income in many instances; but the preachers, true to their attitude as leaders of the flock, ought to excel all their members in self-denial, frugality, economy, and consequent liberality to the heathen, the poor, and every laudable philanthropy.
They do all their works to be seen by the people. O what abominable pride! Who is guilty? But Jesus is speaking of the preachers. They broaden their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments. These phylacteries were strips of parchment, on which passages of Scripture were written, and swinging about as they moved hither and thither, made quite a conspicuous display. Lord deliver us from all needless ornamentation of every sort!
They love the first couch at the suppers, and the first seats in the synagogues, and salutations in the forums, and to be called by the people, Doctor, Doctor. Be ye not called Doctor: for one is your Teacher, even Christ: and you are all brothers. Doctor is a Latin word, from doceo, to teach, and literally means a teacher. Here you see that our Savior forbids the use of the honorary epithet, as no man has anything to teach, Christ being our only Teacher, while we are all disciples i.e., students; for this is the meaning of disciple. This is certainly a final settlement of all questions appertaining to the honorary appellation of Doctor as applied to a minister of the gospel. Of course, we can not control the people in their salutations; but we certainly should never recognize the title, nor use it in its application to ourselves, nor encourage the use of it on the part of others. As Jesus well says, none of us preachers are Doctors i.e., teachers but all students at the feet of Jesus, who is our only Teacher. As Jesus here well says, we are all brothers. So let us lay aside all of this Babylonian pomposity, which sacrifices to pride and grieves the Holy Spirit, and henceforth salute one another by the humble and loving appellation of Brother and Sister.
Call no one father upon the earth: for one is your Father, who is in the heavens. This sweeps away the vanity of Romanism, calling their priests Father; while the Protestants salute their preachers with Doctor, which means teacher. Be not called teachers: for one is your Teacher, Christ. Lord, help us all to abide with Thee in loving obedience in this matter as in all others!
But let him who is the greater of you, be your servant: for whosoever shall exalt himself, shall be abased; and whosoever shall humble himself, shall be exalted. All these manifestations of pride grieve the Holy Spirit away and ruin religion. The leading preacher should invariably lead the way in self-denial, self-sacrifice, humility, and meekness; otherwise he is utterly unworthy to be a leader. Why will not the preachers and Church members hear the voice of Jesus, and govern themselves accordingly? If we do not learn of Him, and walk in His commandments, we will erelong encounter the awful embarrassment of the guest at the marriage feast without the wedding garment.
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament
Mat 23:2. Sit in Moses seat. The sanhedrim had seventy one chairs of gold, or rather gilt with gold. The council which sat at Alexandria had also chairs of gold. The highpriest was the president: he sat in the middle, with thirty five chairs on his right hand, and thirty five on his left. The number had its origin from the seventy elders consecrated by Moses. Whether our Lord meant to say that the scribes and pharisees were fairly put into power, or that they had usurped authority, is doubtful. Galatinus is of the latter opinion: yet the Lord would have them obeyed, and gave them all due reverence, as a judicial court, though he afterwards exposed their religious pretensions with just severity. Let all ministers, at proper seasons, learn of their Master how to address obdurate and incorrigible men.
Mat 23:5. They make broad their phylacteries. Almost every jew to the present day has a phylactery, curiously made of leather or parchment, and worn on the left arm. The passages of the law usually written are such as the following. Exo 13:3-10; Exo 23:11-16. Deu 6:5-9; Deu 9:13-21. Some wore them on their foreheads, covered in part by turbans. The word is untranslated, and the admonition of Moses is good. The point reproved by our Saviour, is a vain and ostentatious parade of piety.
Mat 23:8. Be ye not called rabbi, my master, as the next words explain; for one is your Master, even Christ. No title is given, except that of scribes, to Nehemiah and Ezra, who came from Babylon. The title had its origin in the Hebrew schools, where we find rab and rabbam. Our Saviour does not reprehend a scholar for saying, my master, but the ambition of such as aimed at that distinction in religious matters. Every professor in the sciences has a name expressive of the nature of his official engagements, and this is plainly a matter of convenience. The clergy also at the reformation were distinguished by being called Clerks. The papists were the first that called their aged fathers Reverend, and hence it has become general to this day, as a term of courtesy, to distinguish a mans profession.
Mat 23:15. Ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte. The proselytes to judaism were of two orders. The first were circumcised, and might enter the court of the Israelites; the second were proselytes of the gate, baptized, but not circumcised. The whole of these amounted, in our Saviours time, to about one fifth of the Hebrew nation. They are here indicated to be still immoral in their lives.
Mat 23:23. Judgment, mercy, and faith. The best way of acquainting ourselves with the meaning and difference of these three terms, will be from the observations of Maimonides, who in More Nevoc, part 3. chap. 53, says, they are most accurately distinguished among the Hebrews. The first signifies justice, or equity in judging. The second is the highest degree of mercy, or bounty. The third denotes that virtue of honesty in all kinds, which by the law of God is due from us to our brethren, whether by way of strict justice or of charity. Thus when John the baptist acquaints all the different kinds of men who came to him, what was their righteousness, the prescription he gives to the multitude is, to communicate to him that hath not. Now the whole difference of this from the second is, that a man performs all acts of charity which the law requires, as often as occasion presents itself; but in the other, the merciful man seeks out for opportunities, and performs more than the law requires, which Christ therefore calls perfection. Now to the first of those in Maimonides, the two former are exactly agreeable, judgment being clearly answerable to the first, and mercy to the second. All the difficulty lies in the third, or faith, which at first sight may appear probable to be equivalent to righteousness; for the Hebrew word which is directly translated faith, very often means righteousness and truth. So that it is not improbable that faith here, understood for righteousness, should not be rendered faith but fidelity. But if we extend our observations somewhat farther, it will appear that there is no room for these probabilities, the express words of Luke, in setting down this passage, enforcing another interpretation. Lukes words are, Ye tithe mint, and rue, and all manner of herbs, and pass over judgment and the love of God. Whereas by judgment must be understood all the duties of justice and charity to our neighbours; so the love of God, which comprehends all the duties of the first table, is set down as directly answerable to faith, which must therefore of necessity be the believing in God, as faith is the foundation of our love to him, according to the apostle. 1Ti 1:5. The end of the commandment is charity, out of a pure heart, and of faith unfeigned; the love of God, and of our neighbour.
Mat 23:24. Which strain at a gnat, passing your wine through a lawn, and swallow a camel. You tithe garden herbs; but for gifts, and corban, excuse a son from supporting his aged parents. This is to swallow a camel, a keen proverb, cutting like a razor.
Mat 23:33. The damnation of hell. Literally, the judgment of Gehenna, or of hell fire.
Mat 23:35. The blood of Zacharias, son of Barachias. The gospel of the Nazarenes reads, son of Jehoiada, which confirms the exposition given of 2Ch 24:20. Our Saviours declaration is, that the jews who murdered the christians, should have the heaviest share of punishment, with all those who have shed the blood of his saints, in the unquenchable fire of hell.
Mat 23:37. As a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings. This, the tenderest sentiment of nature, intimates that Christ had repeated all the efforts of the ancient prophets to save and retrieve his country from ruin, but that the obduracy of their hearts, and their blindness as a priesthood, had frustrated the gracious efforts of love. Hence they perished in the sins of their fathers, as stated in the last chapter of the book of Chronicles.
REFLECTIONS.
Our divine Master, and inspirer of the prophets, now closes his ministry to the jews. He does it with all the majesty peculiar to his character as Lord and Judge. He does it in language which a humble minister in any case scarcely dares to use. He had opened his ministry with eight beatitudes: now he closes it with eight denunciations of woe against the incorrigible and unbelieving nation. He does it with full strokes against their reigning sins, and clears his soul of the blood of men, who, after the resurrection of Lazarus, had agreed to take away his life. Oh blind guides, perverting the law to professional interests, you could not foresee that your lives, and those of your children, must go for his life. Those blind guides neither entered the kingdom of heaven themselves, nor allowed the people to do so. Yet for gain they sent out emissaries to persuade the gentiles to be circumcised, and to send offerings to the temple. The papists at the reformation acted the same wily part, employing every art and every terror to obstruct the conversion of sinners to God. How blind, to say that an oath by the temple was nothing, while an oath by the gold of the temple made a man a debtor to pay his vows. Surely the temple, and its altar, hallowed every gift. To complete all, and fill up their measure, those hardened men decorated the sepulchres of ancient martyrs, while seeking to martyr the Saviour and his servants!
Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Mat 23:1-12. Warnings to the People and the Disciples.
Mat 23:2 f. Loisy regards this as an interpolation (by a Judaising redactor) out of harmony with the attack that follows. Holtzmann thinks it is Mt.s, breathing special respect for the Law, like Mat 5:17 ff., but irreconcilable with Mat 15:3-14. But, as Pfleiderer puts it, we must admit that in the attitude of Jesus towards the Mosaic Law different expressions which cannot be reconciled stand side by side, the most natural explanation of which may be found in a change of mood. Cf. p. 667.sit: lit. sat. Plummer suggests that at the end of the verse we should supply when they taught you to observe the Law.
Mat 23:4. By minute ordinances (e.g. rules for Sabbath keeping) they make life a burden for others, but give no help towards removing them or making them more tolerable.
Mat 23:5. phylacteries (lit. amulets, the Gk. translation of Heb. tephillin, lit. prayers), small square leather cases strapped on the forehead and the left arm (Deu 6:8*). Each contained four passages from the Law (Exo 13:1-16. Deu 6:4-9; Deu 11:13-21), written on four strips and one strip of parchment respectively.borders the tassels of plaited or twisted threads on the four corners of the simlah or Jewish shawl-like upper garment. Mat 23:8-12 seems specially addressed to the disciples. With Mat 23:11 f. cf. Mar 9:35; Mar 10:44, Mat 20:26.
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
The Lord now turns to speak to the entire crowd, His disciples being mentioned as included. He warns them against the hypocrisy of scribes and Pharisees, for they sat in Moses’ seat as enforcers of the law, but considered themselves exempt from its responsibilities. Yet he does not excuse the people on account of the hypocrisy of leaders. So far as they propounded the law of Moses, He tells the people to obey, but not to follow their example. For they laid heavy burdens on the people’s shoulders, but would not ever lend a finger to help them. How empty and cruel is the prejudice of legal – minded men!
Their own works were not those of lowly submission to God, but such things as they thought would impress men. They made broad phylacteries, which were head-bands with the law inscribed in them, taking Exo 13:9 literally “a memorial between thine eyes”), rather then having their eyes opened to see its moral significance. Num 15:38-39 had spoken of a ribbon of blue in the borders of the Jews’ garments (not only of leaders), and those they enlarged so that others would notice them. But the true reason for them was that, in seeing the ribbon, the wearer would be reminded of heaven’s authority, and therefore to obey the commandments of God.
With the intention of impressing Men, the scribes and Pharisees loved to have the prominent Places at feasts and chief seats in the synagogue. Of course this is nothing but immature vanity, a childish desire to be noticed. It is the same as regards their love for being greeted in places of concourse and of being called “Rabbi,” which is ‘Teacher.’ Well might Rom 2:21 remind such men, “Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself?” The teaching of the law should deeply humble those who are taught, but Pharisees used it for their own self exaltation.
Such titles as Rabbi (Teacher) or Father or Master (Leader) are neither to be given to men, nor are men to accept them. The Lord is plainly speaking in a spiritual sense, for of course a natural father is entitled to be called such by his children. But designations which put one in any place of spiritual prominence are to be totally refused. Men may invent variations of these such as “reverend,” which is worse, for the title means “worthy of reverence.”
On the other hand, scripture is clear that there are those who are in a spiritual way “fathers” (1Co 4:15), “teachers”, “Pastors,” “evangelists” (Eph 4:11), and “leaders” (Heb 13:17 – J.N.D. trans.), but to give or to accept a title as such is strictly forbidden by the Lord. Only Christ has a right to the title “Teacher” or “Leader,” and only God the Father in heaven is entitled to being designated “Father.” “All ye are brethren,” He insists; that is, none are above others, but on the same plane.
In God’s eyes therefore the one who takes the lowly place of servant is greater, if comparisons are to be made. If one were to exalt himself, he should be abased; but he who humbles himself shall be exalted. This is a purely divine principle, pre-eminently seen in the Lord Jesus, who humbled Himself to the lowest place of ignominy and suffering, now exalted to the highest place over all the universe.
In total contrast to this, seven solemn woes are now pronounced against scribes and Pharisees (for verse 14 is not found in authentic manuscripts). The Lord does not hesitate to call them “hypocrites,” for theirs was a mere pretence of spirituality. First, they were against the truth, deliberately hindering men from entering the kingdom of heaven, refusing it themselves and depriving others of receiving its blessings. To defend their own pride they were willing to make others suffer.
Secondly, they sought by every means to make even one proselyte, for they desired their own authority over men, and if they could proselytise a Gentile to the Jewish religion, this was a great triumph for their pride. Then they made hi m double the son of hell than they were themselves, bolstering men’s unseemly pride in their religious zeal and dignity. Pride is the very thing that drags men down to Gehenna.
The third woe (v.16) calls them blind guides, dealing with their perverting the truth to suit their own whims. They gave permission to men to swear by the temple, though forbidding to swear by the gold of the temple. But the temple was the dwelling of God. The gold was sanctified by the temple: it received its importance because connected with the temple. Similarly, the fundamental truth of the altar they degraded, while the gift upon it they considered too sacred to swear by. Yet the altar speaks of the person of Christ, which sanctifies the gift, which speaks of His sacrifice. Certainly His sacrifice is precious, but He Himself is greater than His sacrifice. Therefore one who swore by the altar was thereby swearing by it and by whatever was offered upon it. He was virtually swearing by Christ and by everything connected with him.
If one were to swear by the temple, he was actually swearing by the living God who dwelt in the temple. Men think lightly too of swearing by heaven, and many use the words, “heavens” as an ejaculation, but heaven is God’s throne, and such swearing involves swearing by Him who sits upon the throne. All of these things indicate a deficient recognition of the supreme honour to which God is entitled.
The fourth woe is a denunciation of their show of being meticulous in trivial matters while ignoring for more serious matters which the law required, judgment, mercy and faith. Fairness of judgment in discerning between good and evil was to them a matter of no Importance compared to tithing the smallest, most insignificant items of income. Mercy toward others in need was also ignored; and faith, the one principle of any true relationship with God, was forgotten. They ought to have put for more emphasis on these things, while of course not neglecting the small things, but not making them the matter of prime attention. It is evident that blind guides are worse than none at all. But the Pharisees had no excuse, for they were able to find the gnat and strain it out of their diet, but oblivious to the Camel, they swallowed it.
The fifth woe reproves the mere exterior purity the Pharisees assumed, with correct formal observance of religion, while they were inwardly full of extortion and excess, given to dishonest dealings with others and to lustful self indulgence. They are told therefore to cleanse first the inside of the cup and platter, which is by all means the most important; but He adds, “that the outside of them may be clean also.” Clearly He does not mean that the mere literal cleansing of the inside of a cup will result in the outside being clean, but rather that this will be the result of one’s cleansing of his inner motives. True spiritual cleansing inwardly will have a proper outward result.
The sixth woe is similar, but emphasizes their effort to make themselves attractive to men while inwardly there was only the corruption of death. White washed graves appeared beautiful, but this only concealed the bones of dead men similarly, their show of righteousness was a more cover-up of hypocrisy and wickedness.
The seventh woe now denounces the hypocrisy of their professed regard for prophets and righteous men who had died. They would build memorials to them and decorate their graves, avowing that they, if they had been living when these were, would not have participated in rejecting or murdering the prophets. But they were the sons of these murderers: they had precisely the same attitude, for they still refused their word while pretending to honour them. Their animosity against the Lord Himself was the same as that of their fathers against the prophets. Their own attitude was a clear witness against them. They would fill up the measure of their fathers by their rejection and murder of the Lord Jesus .
His scathing words, “Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers” ought to, and may have, awakened: some of them to the dreadful seriousness of their being identified with the scribes and Pharisees as a class. At least Nicodemus was delivered from them (Joh 7:50-51; Joh 19:39), and later Paul (Php 3:5-7), so that they escaped the damnation of hell; though the Lord’s question was a gravely serious one for those who clung to the pride of their religious prestige.
These very men would prove themselves sons of the murderers of the prophets, for the Lord Jesus Himself would send to them prophets and wise men and scribes, who would suffer at their hands crucifixion and death in some cases; in others scourging and persecution from city to city. Whether they thought themselves capable of this cruelty or not, they fulfilled these words later.
In verse 35 the Lord declares a Most solemn principle, fastening Upon the Jews the guilt of the blood shedding of all righteous men from Abel to Zacharias. This evidently embraces the whole Old Testament, for it seems clearly to refer to Zechariah the prophet, son of Barachias (Zec 1:1). Another Zechariah, son of Jehoiada, was martyred in the court of the temple (2Ch 24:20-21), but the son of Barachias prophesied much later than this, to the returned remnant. It seems an Unusual coincidence that both would be killed in the court. In this case the martyr was apparently engaged in actual priestly service, being the grandson of Iddo, of the priestly family (Zec 1:1; Neh 12:1-4), and killed between the temple and the altar. This emphasizes the cold-blooded ruthlessness of his attackers, with no regard for God’s glory symbolized in the temple and the altar.
Because “this generation” was still in practical character identified with their guilty fathers, they partook of the same guilt. We cannot escape this principle, that we bear the responsibility of that with which we are identified, though much may have occurred before our day. So today the church of God on earth bears the shame of many disobediences in the past. We cannot lightly ignore this.
However, the Lord’s words are not all solemn, stern denunciation. He heart expands in tenderest concern in verse 37, while declaring the fact of Jerusalem’s stoning and killing the prophets. His Godhead glory again shines out in His words, “How often would I have gathered thy children together as a hen doth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!” As the glory of God departed from the temple in Ezekiel’s day (Eze 11:23), so that glory would now depart in the person of their true Messiah, for He was about to be crucified. This would leave their house ( not now called God’s house) desolate.
That desolation too would remain far longer than anyone would then have imagined. Over 1950 years have passed, and the temple has not even been rebuilt.
The blessed Messiah of Israel, rejected then, will not be revealed to Israel until, coming in great power and glory, He will draw forth their adoring ejaculation, “Blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord.”
Fuente: Grant’s Commentary on the Bible
CHAPTER 23
Then Jesus spake, &c. Then, that is to say, when, by His most wise answers and reasonings, He had confounded the errors of the Scribes and Pharisees, and had proved that He was the Messiah,-then, I say, He put to rebuke their persistent effrontery by this powerful and pathetic speech, by which He uncovered their feigned appearance of sanctity, and showed their lurking dishonesty, so that the people might avoid it.
Saying, &c. By seat we here understand the honour, dignity, and authority of teaching and commanding, which Moses had with the Jews, and to which the Scribes had succeeded. We gather from S. Luk 4:16, that the Scribes not only sat, but sometimes stood when they taught. In like manner, the chair of S. Peter is used to signify the power and authority of teaching and ruling all the faithful throughout the world, in which the Roman Pontiffs succeed S. Peter. For otherwise no Pontiff ever sits now in that actual wooden chair in which S. Peter sat, but it is religiously preserved in his basilica, and is shown to the people every year on the Feast of S. Peter’s Chair, to be venerated. Hence S. Jerome said to Damasus, “I am united in communion to your blessedness, that is, to the chair of Peter.” For although as a private man the Pontiff may err, yet when he defines anything ex cathedra, that is, by his Pontifical authority concerning the faith, he cannot err, because he is assisted by the Holy Ghost.
Observe, many of the Scribes and Pharisees were priests or Levites, whose duty it was to teach the people (Mal 2:7). But Christ did not wish to name the Priests, because He would not derogate from the sacerdotal honour.
All things therefore whatsoever, &c. He means, of course, all things not contrary to Moses and the Law. For the doctrine of the Scribes, when they taught men to say corban to their parents, was contrary to the Law, as Christ showed (xv. 4). In like manner, it was contrary to the Law of Moses to teach, as the Scribes did, that Jesus was not the Messiah, or the Christ. For Jesus showed those very signs and miracles which Moses and the Prophets had foretold Messiah would perform. In such things, therefore, the people must not follow the doctrine of the Scribes, nor be obedient to them; but in other things, in which their teaching was generally conformable to the Law of Moses, it was their duty to obey them. Christ therefore here teaches that all the other dogmas of the Scribes, which were not repugnant to the law, even though they were vain and foolish, and therefore not binding (for that a law should be obligatory, it must command something honest and useful, as Civilians and Theologians teach in their treatises upon laws, also D. Thomas, 1. 2 qust. 95, art. 3), such as were the frequent washings of the hands and other parts of the body, might yet serve for the merit of blind and simple obedience, and for reverence of the sacerdotal order. So Jansen, Franc. Lucas, and others. But Maldonatus restricts the word all to such commands alone as are contained in the Law of Moses. Certainly these were what Christ chiefly referred to.
For they say, i.e., command, and do not. They teach and order well, but they live ill. They both break the law, and scandalise their subjects by their evil example, and thus incite them likewise to break the law. For as one hath said, “The whole world comports itself according to the king’s example,” we may add, of the Teacher’s likewise. For men give wore credit to deeds than they do to words. Christians ought to bear in mind these words of Christ when they see certain Bishops, Pastors, and Magistrates not living in accordance with the law of Christ.
For they bind . . . upon men’s shoulders; Arab. upon their necks; Gr. , i.e., they bind and, as it were, gather them together in heaps. This signifies both the multitude and the heavy weight of the precepts with which they burden the people.
Unbearable; Vulg. Gr. , as English version, difficult to be borne, rather than impossible. Such were the numerous precepts, beyond what the Law required, concerning oblations, tithes, first-fruits, &c. Consider only the vigorous observance of the Sabbath, which they enjoined, so that they would not allow Christ to heal the sick on that day, nor suffer His disciples to satisfy their hunger by plucking ears of corn.
Move them; Vulg. Syr. and English Version, touch them. As S. Chrysostom says, “He shows that theirs was a double wickedness, both because they wish the multitude to live in the strictest possible manner, without the least indulgence, and because, indulging themselves inordinately, they assume great licence. Which things are the very opposite of what is required in a good prince. For such a one permits himself no indulgence, but is mild towards his subjects, and ready to bestow pardon.”
All things that they may be seen; Gr. , i.e., be a spectac1e. He notes their vain ostentation of sanctity in praying in the public streets, &c Christ here touches upon the root of the incredulity of the Scribes, that they would not believe in Him, because they sought after vainglory and the applause of men. “For it is impossible,” says S. Chrysostom, “that he who covets the earthly glory of men should believe in Christ preaching heavenly things.”
They make large their fringes; Vulg. They prolong the fringes of their cloaks; Syr. They, the Jews, interpreted too literally the words of Deu 6:8, “Thou shalt bind them, i.e., the precepts of God, for a sign upon thine hands, and they shall be moved (Vulg.) before thine eyes.” They bore certain pieces of parchment about their arms and foreheads. Whence they were called armlets and frontiers. They did this that they might strike against their eyes and foreheads, and admonish them to meditate upon and keep the Divine Law. The words inscribed upon the pieces of parchment were, “Hear, 0 Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord.” “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength.” They were called phylacteries, from , to guard, to keep, because they put them in constant remembrance of observing the law.
For a similar reason, in Num 15:38 and Deu 22:12, the Lord commanded the Jews to wear fringes, threads depending from the lowest skirt of their garments, and that they should be of a light blue or dark blue colour, as men who professed and lived the heavenly life by keeping the law. S. Jerome adds that the more devout Jews were wont to insert very sharp thorns in these fringes, that being pricked by them as they walked, they might be always reminded of the Divine Law. All these things the Pharisees wore larger and broader than other people, that they might appear to all to be stricter observers of the law, although they made but little of it in their minds. “Not understanding,” says S. Jerome, “that these things should be carried in the heart, not in the body, for bookcases and chests have books, but have not therefore the knowledge of God.” Moreover, S. Chrysostom, by philacteries, understands amulets worn to preserve health, for such the Scribes esteemed the pieces of parchment described above. In the same way, some Christians wear the Gospel of S. John about their necks as a kind of charm to preserve health.
And salutations in the market-places; Vulg. in the forum. S. Chrysostom says, “They love the first salutations, not only as regards time, that we should salute them first, but also as regards the voice, that we should cry out, ‘Hail, Rabbi;’ and as regards the body, that we should bow the head to them; and as regards place, that we should salute them in public.” Wisely saith R. Matthies in Pirke Avoth, “Always be the first to salute every one. Be the tall of lions, and not the head of foxes; that is, be the lowest among good and honourable men, not the chief among deceitful, proud, and impious ones.”
Rabbi, from , i.e., much or great, because a great man, such as a Rabbi, or Doctor of the Law, was equivalent to many persons, as excelling others in learning and authority. Well saith R. Benzoma in Pirke Avoth, “Who is a wise man? He who willingly learns of all, according to the words, ‘I had more understanding than the aged, because I sought Thy commandments.’ Who is the mighty man? He who rules over anger, and his own spirit, according to the saying, ‘Better is the patient man than the strong, and he that ruleth his spirit than he that taketh a city’ (Pro 16:32). Who is the rich? He that is contented with his own, as it is said (Psa 128:2), ‘Thou shalt eat the labour of thine hands; 0 well is thee, and happy shalt thou be.’ Who is honoured? He that honoureth others, as it is written, ‘Him that honoureth Me I will honour, and they that despise Me shall be lightly esteemed. ‘”
But be not ye called Rabbi, &c. He forbids the ambition of the Scribes and Pharisees, who desired to be honoured and called Rabbi above Christ, yea, even to the exclusion of Christ. But it is lawful to desire a doctor’s degree, as a testimony of learning, that by it we may obtain authority, and preach, and have influence with the people, and by this means gain the greater fruit. Wherefore the Council of Trent (sess. 24 c. 12) orders that all dignities, and at least the half of canonries in cathedral and collegiate churches, should be conferred only upon masters and doctors, or at least licentiates in theology or canon law. Christ does not say, do not be, but do not be called, Rabbi.
Christ does not forbid the doctor’s degree, but the proud ambition of the name, that by it a man should please himself and despise others, as though he had his knowledge and learning from himself, and not from Christ, which was what the Scribes did. Therefore He adds the reason, for one is your Master, even Christ. He means, there is one chief Rabbi over all, of whom all others are the disciples, and all are brethren, equal one to another. Therefore let none of them proudly lift himself above the rest, and wish to be called Rabbi, as though he were of himself a doctor and master of others, for this is a wrong done to Christ, who alone has all wisdom in Himself, and is the only supreme Doctor of all, who indeed makes them doctors. And in this lower sense Paul himself, as S. Jerome says, with modesty calls himself the doctor of the Gentiles.
Call no one your father upon earth, &c. He means in the sense of the prime author of life and the preserver of all things, as though ye entirely depended upon any but God. This was what the Gentiles and Atheists did, and others who trusted in men rather than in God. That this is the meaning, is plain from the reason which He subjoins, for one is your Father, &c. “Of whom the whole family in Heaven and earth is named” (Eph 3:15). God therefore is the only real Father of all, forasmuch as He only gives soul and life, creates, and preserves. In comparison of Him, says S. Jerome, earthly fathers are only so in a figurative sense, and ought not therefore insolently to command their children, but ought to submit themselves together with their children to God, the chief Father of all.
Neither be ye called, i.e., be not ambitious of being called masters; Vulg. magistri; Gr. , or governors, moderators; Syr. rulers; for One is the Ruler and Orderer, Gr. , of jour life, that is, Christ. He Himself, in the first place, by Himself teaches us, and leads us by the way of virtue to heavenly glory. All others teach as they have been first taught by Him. Secondly, all others only teach in words that sound in the outward ears, like a tinkling cymbal; but Christ makes known their meaning inwardly to the mind. For, as S. Chrysostom says, “it is not man who gives man understanding by teaching, but exercises by means of admonition what has been ordained by God.” Thirdly, all others only show what the law commands and what God requires; but Christ gives grace to the will, that we, when we hear the things which ought to be done, may indeed constantly fulfil the same.
He that is the greater of you, &c. “He teaches,” says S. Chrysostom, “that the disease of vainglory must be got rid of by humility.” And Origen says, “If any one ministers the divine words, knowing that it is Christ who produces fruit by His means, he by no means holds himself forth as a master, but a minister.” Whence it follows, He that is the greatest, &c., because even Christ Himself, who is the true Master, hath professed Himself to be a minister, in that He saith, I am among you as he that ministereth; and well does He add after the whole saying, He that exalteth himself shall be abased; but he that humblest himself shall be exalted. These words are true as applied both to God and men, says Remigius. For both God and men exalt the humble and depress the proud. “Glory follows them that flee from it, and flees from those who pursue it. God will bring down insolent pride from its lofty height, and will raise up humility to glory,” says S. Hilary.
Blessed Peter Damian gives a memorable example (Epist. 15). There was, he says, a certain bold and warlike clergyman, who became great by means of his pride and his arms. And he had in consequence a quarrel about certain estates with another powerful man, which he determined to decide by the fortune of war, and the troops of both were drawn up in battle array. The clergyman before the battle went into a church and heard Mass. It chanced that the words of the Gospel were read, All that exalteth himself shall be abased. When he heard them he said insolently, or rather blasphemously, “These words are falsified in me, for if I had humbled myself I should never have become as great as I am.” By and by, in the heat of battle, his horse being very thirsty, ran, contrary to his wish, to some water that was near. He struck his horse with his shield, in order to cause it to return into the battle, when, behold, an enemy’s sword transfixed that blaspheming mouth of his like a thunderbolt, and slew him, humbling his pride and casting him down to the ground, showing that the words of Christ are indeed true.
Ver. 13. Woe unto you, Scribes, (Mat 23:13) &c. Observe that, as Christ enumerated eight beatitudes, repeating the word blessed eight times in S. Matt. v., so does He here bestow eight maledictions upon the impious Scribes, eight several times repeating the word woe. Christ the new Lawgiver imitates Moses, the ancient lawgiver, who promises many blessings to those who keep the law, and threatens with as many curses those who break it. Thus Origen.
Moreover, the word woe is partly prophetic of the grave punishment which should fall upon the wickedness of the Scribes, and is partly condoling and pitying in its signification. Whence Basil says, “This word woe, which is prefixed to intolerable pain, applies to those who were soon afterwards to be destroyed by dreadful punishments.” The word woe therefore presupposes a deadly fault, for it threatens the punishment of hell, as Christ explains in ver. 33 (Mat 23:33).
For ye shut, &c “I indeed open to all the kingdom of Heaven; for I preach, repent ye, for the kingdom of Heaven is at hand. For this kingdom has been shut for four thousand years, through Adam’s sin. I, expiating that sin by My death, will now open it, that whoso believeth in Me and followeth My life, may enter into the open kingdom. Wherefore many of the Jews, being aroused by My preaching, are striving to enter in. But you, 0 ye Scribes, turn them away, and shut Heaven against them by your vain and perverse traditions, which ye instil into their minds.” For, as S. Chrysostom says, “The kingdom of Heaven is Holy Scripture; the door is the understanding of Scripture, or Christ; the bearers of the keys are the Scribes and Priests; the key is the word of knowledge; the opening of the door is interpretation. Ye also cause men to offend by your wickedness and evil example; and because ye calumniate and persecute Me, and draw them away from believing in Me, which is the road to Heaven. For I am the door, because by Me alone there is entrance into Heaven.”
Tropologically, they shut up the kingdom of Heaven who excommunicate any one without cause.
For ye enter not in yourselves, &c. This is a grievous sin. For if, says S. Chrysostom, it is the part of a doctor to recall the erring, he who draws those who are going on safely into error is altogether a son of perdition, yea, he is a pestilence itself. Wherefore such a doctor deserves, and brings upon himself as many hells as the number of souls whom he corrupts and destroys, because he is not a teacher and promoter of salvation, but a betrayer.
Ver. 14. Woe unto you, &c. Because ye devour, that is, exhaust, the substance of widows, in extracting money from them by selling them under a feigned appearance of sanctity your long public prayers. This is why He adds in explanation, making long prayers. Gr. , praying at length as a pretext.
Wherefore ye shall receive greater damnation. The Syriac translates, ye are about to receive the extremest judgment; both because ye rob from widows, and because, as Chrysostom says, ye paint avarice the colour of religion, that iniquity may be loved, being esteemed as piety. Ye also imbue widows with your own errors and wickedness. Wherefore ye ought to receive the punishment of your own sin and the guilt of their ignorance, as S. Hilary says.
Woe unto you . . . hypocrites, &c. Instead of hypocrites, the Syriac has here and in the verses which follow, acceptors of persons. Proselyte means the same in Greek as advena, or stranger, in Latin. A proselyte was one who was converted from heathenism to Judaism, and became attached to the Jewish Church and religion. In Hebrew proselytes are called gerim. Christians call such persons neophytes. The Scribes strove to turn many Gentiles to Judaism, for the sake of ambition as well as avarice, that they might augment their oblations. Sea and land, that is, the whole world.
Ye make him the son, that is, guilty, worthy of hell, twofold more than yourselves; Gr. . For, as Euthymius says, it is the same as in nature, that scholars easily surpass their teachers in vice. “Because,” as Chrysostom says, “being provoked by the evil example of their teachers, they become worse than them, especially when they are stirred up by the words and examples of their teachers.” Again, many proselytes, when they see your evil doings, return to heathenism. For he who relapses commits a greater and, as it were, a double sin.
Ver. 16. Woe unto you, (Mat 23:16)&c. . . . but if he shall swear by the gold of the temple, &c., the gold, that is, which he has vowed to pay. Instead of he is a debtor, the Arabic translates he has sinned, that is, he does not pay what he has sworn.
Observe (from the words in Mat 5:34), that the Scribes thought from what God had commanded, that they should swear by Him alone,-an oath by any creature was not an oath, nor obligatory; but being blinded by avarice, they excepted such things as, being offered to God, filled their own coffers, as if these alone were to be accounted most sacred. Wherefore they are rightly called by Christ blind guides. Moreover, the Scribes were wont to say that the oblations were more holy than the Temple itself, “that they might make men more ready for offerings than for prayers,” says the Gloss. He calls the gold which was cast into the treasury of the Temple for maintaining its ministers the gold of the Temple. Truly says the Gloss, “He that swears by a creature, swears by the Deity which presides over the creature.”
Ye fools and blind, &c. This reasoning of Christ is clear, and convicts the Scribes of folly. Holiness is properly interior virtue, and the grace which sanctifies the soul. But the Temple is here called holy by metonymy, because it is set apart for holy things, such as the offering in it of prayers and sacrifices to God. This, therefore, was only an external holiness which the temple communicated to the other things offered in it to God. Wherefore the Temple was more holy than anything offered in the Temple, and therefore an oath made by the Temple was more binding than an oath made by the gold offered in the Temple.
And whose shall swear by the altar, &c. The same reasoning applies to the altar which Christ has already applied to the Temple.
The altar which sanctifieth, Syr. consecrates, the gift. A gift offered to God is not properly sanctified, so that it should be in itself righteous or holy, but it is said to be sanctified extrinsically, because it is offered to God, and thus sanctified.
Mystically: S. Augustine says (1 Qust. Evang. 34), “The Temple and the Altar is Christ. The gold and the gifts are the praises and sacrifices which are offered in Him and by Him.” Origen says, the altar is the heart; the gifts are prayer and fasting, which the heart makes holy.
Whoso shall swear by the temple, &c. That is, he swears by God, who has His throne in the Temple, that He may be worshipped there. For the sacred majesty and holiness of God are supposed by men to abide in the Temple. Whence, S. Nilus says, “Come to the church as to Heaven.”
And he that sweareth by heaven, &c. For by the common usage and belief of men, he who swears by God, who only is infallible, and the uncreated Truth itself, calls Him to attest what he says or promises. Wherefore, he who swears by Heaven, swears by God, the King and Lord of Heaven, and calls Him to witness.
Ver. 23. Woe unto you, (Mat 23:23) &c. Tithes were sanctioned by God in the law. Whence R. Achiva says in Pirke Avoth, “Tithes are the bulwark of riches,” because they defend and preserve them. “Tradition is the bulwark of the law. A vow is the bulwark of abstinence; silence, of wisdom.”
Mint, a herb of sweet smell, which is often put into broth. Anise, says Pliny, is of efficacy against flatulency and pains in the stomach.
And ye have left, &c. . . . judgment, i.e., justice and equity, passing unjust sentences, so as to favour your own friends and those who offer you gifts. Mercy, because ye rigidly and cruelly exact tithes of widows and the poor. And faith, i.e., fidelity in words and compacts. Or faith in God, and Christ who has been sent by Him. Therefore, ye are unbelievers, in that ye lack faith, hope, and charity, which are the things that God above all requires, according to the words in Micah vi. 8, “I will show thee, 0 man, what is good; and what doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?”
These care the things which ye ought to have done, and not to omit the others, such as the tithing of mint, which was either commanded or permitted by the law.
Ye blind guides which strain out, &c.; Gr. , i.e., straining, purifying, draining wine, milk, or oil from gnats or other impurities or dregs, by means of a strainer of linen, or other such material. As Apuleius says of the Gymnosophists, “They know not how either to cultivate land or to strain gold.” Swallow a camel. For camel, Cajetan puts wrongly asilum, a gadfly, an insect which makes a horrid noise. All the codices, Greek, Latin, Syriac, and Arabic have camel, which is properly opposed to gnat, as something very large to something very small. The sentence is proverbial, and means, “Ye have exact care of trifling things, such as tithing of herbs, lest any one should defraud you in the smallest possible degree ; but you at the same time commit, without any scruple, all manner of injustice, rapine, and other wickednesses, as big, as it were, as camels, which ye may be said to swallow down.” As it is said in job xv. 16, “Who drinketh iniquity like water.” “Christ derides the zeal of the Scribes,” says Origen, “in being so scrupulous about very trifling things, and so free and bold in the commission of great crimes; in being superstitious about ceremonial washings, but devoid of true relation and charity.” They have those who are like them among Christians even now, who scrupulously recite the rosary, and fast in honour of the Blessed Virgin, and withal are guilty at the same time of luxury, rapine, theft, &c.
Proverbs with a similar meaning are: “To draw water from a fountain to fill the sea.” “To strip one who is bare, to heap garments upon those who are clothed.” “He takes a candle to add to the sunlight.” “To hunt a dog with a lion, a hare with an ox.”
Mystically: S. Gregory understands by the gnat, Barabbas; by the camel, Christ. This is what he says (lib. 1, Moral c. 6), “The gnat wounds in humming but the camel of its own accord bends to receive its burden. The Jews, therefore, strained out the gnat, because they asked that the seditious robber might be set free. But they swallowed the camel, because by their cries they strove to destroy Him, who of His own will had come down to bear the burdens of our mortality.”
Ver. 25. Woe unto you, (Mat 23:25)&c. This is another parable, in which Christ calls man a cup and a plate. The body and external goods He calls the outside of the cup and the platter. The soul and the conscience He calls that which is within. The meaning is, “You, 0 ye Pharisees, studiously wash and cleanse your hands, your bodies, the cups and plates and glasses out of which ye eat and drink, but ye fill your conscience with the uncleanness of rapine and every sort of wickedness. Whereas ye ought to take chief care that your conscience should be purified, for it is that alone which makes us clean in the sight of God, as it is also that from which flows all impurity of acts and deeds. It is the conscience which is the source of the goodness or wickedness of actions. Wherefore, if the conscience be clean, all other things will be clean also.”
Briefly and simply we may explain thus. “Ye are zealous to cleanse the external cups and plates, out of which ye eat and drink; ye neglect to cleanse by repentance the interior cups and dishes of the conscience, which are filthy with sin.”
Full of uncleanness, Vulg. The translator had in his Greek text, , where we now read , or , i.e., intemperance. It means, “Ye think ye are defiled, if ye drink out of a dirty cup; but ye do not think ye are defiled by intemperance, when ye are drunken. But it is intemperance which defiles the soul, not a dirty cup.”
Thou blind Pharisee, &c. “O thou who art a teacher of others, and art blind thyself, cleanse first thine own mind and inward conscience, then shall all outward things become clean unto thee.”
Vers. 27, 28. Woe unto you . . . full of iniquity; Gr. , i.e., perversion of the law. “Ye simulate an outward zeal for the law, whilst inwardly ye despise and pervert it.” Appositely says Auctor Imperfecti, “Tell me, 0 hypocrite, if it is good to be good, why do you not wish to be what you wish to appear? It is more base to be what it is base to appear: and what it is beautiful to appear, it is beautiful to be.”
“Moreover, there are many in our days like the Pharisees,” says S. Chrysostom, “who take the greatest care of cleanliness and outward adorning, but whose souls have no ornaments; yet who fill their souls with worms and gore and an inexpressible stench; who fill them, I say, with wicked and absurd lusts.”
Ver. 29. Woe unto you . . . because ye build; Vulg. who build, the combs, &c. For although this was in itself a holy and religious thing, yet in the Scribes it was vicious and wicked. S. Chrysostom gives three reasons-1st. He says Christ does not blame the work, but the intention. They did it for pomp. But as regards pomp, what does it profit them to be praised when they are not, and to be tormented when they are in hell? 2d. Because, without reason, he honours the just, who despises justice; and the Saints cannot be the friends of those to whom God is an enemy. 3d. Because the martyrs take no pleasure in being honoured with money which has caused the poor to weep. For the Scribes exacted money from the poor, that they might build with it magnificent monuments to the Prophets, or rather for their own glory. And 4th, and principally, Christ here blames the Scribes for building monuments to the Prophets, because at the very time they did it, they were thinking how they might kill other and greater prophets, such as Christ Himself and His disciples. And this was why they seemed to imitate the murders and the sacrileges of their fathers, and to give an implied consent to them. As though He had said, “Ye bury the prophets who were slain by your fathers; and ye have a like desire to kill and bury Me. Rightly, therefore, do ye bury the Prophets whom your fathers slew; just as the sons of robbers bury those whom their fathers have murdered, that they may conceal the crime.” So Origen, S. Jerome, and others.
By adding the word hypocrites, He intimates that they built the tombs of the Prophets, not from true, but merely pretended piety, that they might hide their own wickedness; and that they might appear religious defenders of the law, and that it was out of zeal for righteousness that they persecuted Christ unto the death, as though He were a breaker and an enemy of the law. And herein was a twofold wickedness. First, the compassing the death of Christ; secondly, hypocrisy, because of the pretence that they did it in order to vindicate the law. Somewhat similarly, when the Emperor Caracalla had slain his brother Geta upon his mother’s bosom, being persuaded by his servants to enrol his brother among the gods, with the object of veiling the crime, cried, “Let him be a god if you please, so long as he is not alive.” Thus the Scribes did not wish Christ and the Prophets to live, lest they should reprove their evil deeds. They preferred to kill them, and to cover the crime by building them magnificent sepulchres. Wherefore, Auctor Imperfecti says, “The Jews always held departed Saints in honour, and despised and persecuted living ones.” There are persons who act in a like manner among Christians even now.
Ver. 30. And say, &c. They deceive themselves, and utter falsehoods. For if they killed Christ, the Prince of the Prophets, because He reproved their wickedness, surely they would have killed the Prophets, who were wont to do the same.
Wherefore ye testify against yourselves, &c. That is, you testify that you are the sons of those who murdered the Prophets, and consequently that you have the same disposition and the same propensity to kill those who rebuke your vices, which they had. For children are like their parents. For a father is wont to transmit his inclinations, talents, and views to his children. Hence children “favour their parents.” Also there is the example and training of parents, by means of which they influence their children to do the same things that they do themselves.
Ver. 32. Fill ye up then; Arab. ye fill up, &c. That is, by killing Me and the Apostles, as your fathers killed the Prophets. These words of Christ are not a command, but a prediction. It is as though He said, “I do not command, but I permit and foretell that you, 0 ye Scribes, by killing Me, will fill up the measure of your fathers, who slew the Prophets; and when this measure has been filled up, God will, at one and the same time, avenge both your own and your fathers’ crimes, by the extreme destruction which He will bring upon Jerusalem by Titus and Vespasian.”
From this and the 35th and 36th verses Theologians teach that God has decreed to kingdoms and states and individuals a certain measure of sins, before He fully and perfectly punishes them. But by and by, when they have been completed, then He punishes all at the same time most fully. Thus Christ looked for the killing of Himself and His Apostles before Jerusalem was overthrown. So, also, God said to Abraham (Gen 15:16), “The iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full.” Auctor Imperfecti says, God does not immediately punish a nation or a city when they sin, but waits for many generations, and sometimes threatens, and sometimes chastises in part, that the longer He waits the more just may be His judgment. But when God does determine to destroy that city or nation, He seems to avenge upon them the sins of all the preceding generations; as though that generation alone suffered what all the previous ones deserved. Thus God commanded Saul to blot out the posterity of Amalek on account of the wickedness of their parents, and their perpetual hostility to Israel (1Sa 15:16). The reason is, because children and descendants are counted as one with their parents; hence the merits or demerits of the parents are imputed to the children, when, indeed, children imitate the wickedness and manners of their parents. Then, indeed, when the measure of sins predetermined by God is filled up, they suffer for their own and their fathers’ sins.
Observe, however, that children are not punished more grievously than their own sins deserve, but because they imitate their parents’ sins, and fill up the measure of iniquity. Hence it comes to pass that the anger of God burns against them when it would not have so fiercely burned unless they had filled up that measure. And in this sense and for this reason children are said to have visited upon them the sins of their parents, because God, in punishing, looks to the offences of both, according to Deu 5:9, “A jealous God, rendering the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate Me.”
Ver. 33. Ye serpents, &c. . . . the damnation of hell, wherewith I will condemn you in the day of judgment as Christicides and Deicides. He calls the Scribes serpents and vipers, because of their serpentine disposition, and wish to slay Himself and His Apostles.
Ver. 34. Therefore, behold, I send, &c. Observe the word therefore, that it expresses from the preceding verse an effect, as it were, from a cause. It means, “because ye, as serpents and vipers, will kill Me, your Messiah, for which wickedness ye will be cut off and condemned to hell. I have had pity upon you, and will send to you My disciples after My death, that they may avert from you this destruction, that they may arouse you to repentance and faith in Me. But I foresee that ye will slay them also, as I have predicted in the 32d verse.”
I send. Luk 11:49 says, The wisdom of God hath said, that is, indeed, Christ Himself.
Prophets, and wise men, and Scribes. Luke has Prophets and Apostles. S. Jerome says “This marks the various gifts of Christ’s disciples. Prophets, who foretell things to come; wise men, who know when they ought to speak the word; Scribes, those learned in the law.”
Some of them ye shall kill, as S. Stephen by stoning, James the greater by the sword; and crucify, as S. Simeon, Bishop of Jerusalem, successor of S. James (see Euseb. H. E. ii. 32); and some of them ye shall scourge, as Peter and the Apostles (Acts iv. and v.), and persecute from city to city, like Paul and Barnabas (Acts xiii. and xiv.).
Tropologically: Origen says (hom. 23, in Num.), “And I, this day, if I will not hear the words of a Prophet, if I despise his warnings, stone that Prophet, and as far as in me lies, kill him.”
Ver. 35. That upon you may come, &c., righteous blood. That is, of the righteous men who have exhorted others to live justly and holily, both by word and example. Whence S. Luke has, the blood of the Prophets; for a Prophet in Scripture frequently denotes a just and holy man. S. Austin gives the reason for what Christ says in this verse, “Because the imitation of wicked men causes people to obtain not only their own deserts, but the deserts of those whom they imitate.” Moreover S. Chrysostom says, “Even as the rewards which all the preceding generations deserved were bestowed upon those who received Christ, so what their wicked ancestors merited came upon the latest Jews.”
Which was shed, &c. Because, although Cain, who slew his brother Abel, was not a Jew by race, yet by his wickedness in killing righteous Abel he afforded an example to the Jews, who were most prone to follow it, in killing the holy Prophets. Thus Cain the fratricide was not the natural, but the symbolical father of the Jews who slew their brethren, Christ and the Prophets. By a like analogy the devil is called the father of all the proud and the wicked.
The Jews, even though they knew the Divine vengeance which pursued Cain’s fratricide, not only imitated it, but far transcended it by slaying Christ, the Son of God, and His Apostles. We may add, that although Cain was not a direct forefather of the Jews, he was one of their collateral ancestors. He was the brother of Seth, from whom Abraham and the Jews were sprung. But the posterity of Seth married the daughters of Cain, as Abulensis saith (Qust. 260) (see Gen 6:2). This is probable, but not certain. All that Scripture says is, that from them the giants were sprung, who were the cause of the Deluge, in which they perished. But it does not say that other children were not sprung from them.
There were persons who praised this fratricide of Cain, and for that reason were called Cainites, as S. Augustine says (lib. de hres. c. 18), “The Cainites are so called because they honour Cain, saying that he was a man of the greatest virtue.” They also think that the traitor Judas was something divine, and account his wickedness a benefit. They assert that he knew beforehand how great a benefit the Passion of Christ would be to the human race, and for that reason betrayed Him to the Jews to be put to death. They are also said to honour the Sodomites, and those who made a schism amongst the ancient people, Korah, Dathan, and Abiram.
Zacharias the son of Barachias. You will ask who was this Zacharias? There are three opinions. The first that of S. Chrysostom (Hom. de Joan. Bapt.), Vatablus, Arias Montanus, &c. They think that he was the Zachariah, the last but one of the twelve minor Prophets. For he was the son of Barachiah, but we nowhere read that he was slain between the Temple and the altar.
The second and more probable opinion is, that he was the Zachariah who was the son of Jehoiada, who, with base ingratitude, was slain in an awfully sacrilegious manner by King Joash in the most holy place,-that is to say, in the court of the Priests, which was between the Temple, or the holy place, and the altar of burnt-offering; for this altar was in the court of the Priests (2Ch 24:21). So Abul. (Qust. 2I5), S. Jerome, Bede, Tertullian (Scorpiace, c. 3), “Zachariah is slain between the Temple and the altar, marking the stones with indelible spots of blood.” For although there were other Prophets slain by the Jews after Zachariah, he is the last whose murder is related in Scripture. Add to this that Scripture makes mention only of the blood of Abel and this Zacharias as crying for vengeance. Of Abel’s it is said (Gen 4:10), “What hast thou done? The voice of thy brother’s blood crieth unto Me from the ground.” And of Zacharias (2Ch 24:22), “Who, when he was dying, said, ‘The Lord look upon it, and require it.'” Chrysostom says, “He makes mention of Abel to show that they would kill Christ and His Apostles out of envy, as from envy Cain slew Abel; of Zacharias, because the holy man was slain in the holy place.”
You will say, this Zacharias was the son of Jehoiada, not of Barachias. S. Jerome answers that Jehoiada was also called Barachiah, perhaps because Barachiah in Hebrew signifies “the blessed of the Lord.” And it is plain that Jehoiada, who was a very holy man, was such. S. Jerome adds, “In the Gospel which the Nazarenes make use of, we find, instead of the son of Barachias, the son of Jehoiada.”
The third opinion is, that this Zacharias was the father of John the Baptist, concerning whom there is a tradition that he was slain by the Jews because he proclaimed the advent of Christ, saying in his Canticle, “And thou, child, shalt be called the Prophet of the Highest, for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare His ways;” and because he had hidden his son John from Herod, the murderer of the innocents, who sought to kill him on account of the miracles which happened at his birth. For this Zacharias was the last of the Prophets. For John, his son, was rather an index to a present Christ than a Prophet of a future one. Again, that this Zacharias was the son of Barachias is attested by S. Hippolytus, the martyr, who is cited by Nicephorus (H. E. ii. 3). S. Jerome rejects this as apocryphal; but the same thing is asserted by S. Cyril, against the Anthropomorphites, Peter of Alexandria (in regula Eccles. can. 3), S. Epiphanius (lib. de vit. et obit. Prophet.), Baronius (in apparat. Ann.), S. Thomas (in Catena). Origen, Theophylact, Euthymius, and S. Basil (Hom. de humana Christi generat.) add that this Zacharias was slain by the Jews because, after the birth of Christ, he placed the Blessed Virgin as a virgin among the virgins in the Temple. But this is difficult to be believed, for reasons given by Baronius and Abulensis.
Ver. 36. Verily I say, &c. The vengeance for these crimes of My death and the death of My Apostles and others shall come upon the Jews under Titus.
Ver. 37. Jerusalem, Jerusalem, &c. He repeats Jerusalem twice, to express the depth of His grief and compassion. It is as though He said, “0 Jerusalem, city of God, chosen by Him and beloved above all other cities, which He has adorned with so many graces and benefits,-the law, the Temple, priesthood, doctrine, enriched with a kingdom, Prophets, miracles,-thou hast always been ungrateful for all these things. Thou hast slain the Prophets, and soon thou wilt kill Me and My Apostles. Wherefore thou hast become a wicked and lost city, destined by God to be destroyed and burnt by the Romans.” By city, the inhabitants, especially the Priests and magistrates, who chiefly were guilty of the blood of the Prophets, are meant.
That killest the prophets. S. Luke says that Christ added, it cannot be that a Prophet perish out of Jerusalem: it was the appropriate work of Jerusalem to kill the Prophets.
How often have I wished, formerly by the Prophets, and now by Myself and the Apostles, to gather into My bosom, to bring back to the one God and the one faith, thy sons,-that is, thy citizens, who are scattered unto various errors, and are hurling themselves into the perils of Gehenna. For nothing disperses like sin, and nothing so gathers us to God as virtue, says Theophylact.
As a hen gathereth her chickens, wandering in different directions, under her wings, to cherish and warm them, and defend them from the hawk.
Christ compares Himself, and His love and solicitude to save the Jews, to a hen cherishing her chickens under her wings. First, because hens love their young ones above all other birds, and manifest the greatest care and protection over them, says S. Chrysostom. Thus a hen calls and clucks, so that even if she cannot see her chickens, they may recognise their mother by her call. Whilst sparrows, swallows, storks, are only recognised by the parent birds whilst they are in their nests. Christ has loved us with supremest love, “being made Himself,” says S. Hilary, “as it were, an earthly and domestic bird, being anxiously solicitous for us all through His life, teaching, sighing, and groaning, in order that He might save us.”
2. Neither sparrows, nor thrushes, nor ducks, nor any other birds become so weak when they have young as the hen does, whose voice “becomes hoarse,” says S. Augustine (in Ps. 59): “the whole body becomes neglected, the wings droop, the feathers become loose, and all this is the effect of maternal love. Thus Christ gathered all nations, like a hen her chickens, Who became weak for our sakes, receiving flesh from us, that is, from Human nature, was crucified, despised, slapped with the hand, beaten, hung on the cross, wounded with a lance. Therefore this is of maternal infirmity, not loss of majesty, that inasmuch as He shared with us in our infirmity, He might release us from our sins.”
3. The same Augustine says on the words in the 91st Psalm, “Thou shalt be safe under his feathers,” “If a hen protects her young ones under wings, how much rather shalt thou be safe under the wings of God, against the devil and his angels, who fly round about like hawks, that they may carry off the young chickens.”
4. The word in the Greek for hen is , which is a generic name for any bird, but the Vulg. does well to translate it by gallina, a hen. For, as S. Augustine says, it is wonderful what love almost all birds, but especially the hen, show in cherishing and protecting their young.
5. A hen with a branch of rue under her wings, says Pierias, is the hieroglyphic of security. Afranius, in the particulars which Constantine ordered to be collected about agriculture, says that hens will be safe from the cat if a little bunch of wild rue be tied under one of their wings. Democritus says further, that the same herb will protect them from foxes, and from every other hostile animal. Such security, only in a far higher degree, does Christ afford to His people.
6. A hen is the symbol of fruitfulness. It often lays an egg a day, and sometimes two in a day. And one egg occasionally produces two chickens. What is more fruitful than Christ?
Again, a cock and a hen are the symbol of watchfulness and guardianship. What is more watchful than Christ?
Tropologically: a hen is the Church and her Priests. For, as Auctor Imperfecti says, “As a hen that hath young ones does not cease to call them, but with assiduous clucking checks their straying away; so also ought Priests not to cease by their teaching and zeal to correct the negligence of an erring people. And as a hen that hath chickens not only warns her own young ones, but even loves as her own the young of any bird excluded from those to whom they belong; so likewise does the Church not only study to call her own Christians, but Gentiles and Jews also, if they be brought to her; she quickens them all with the warmth of her faith. She regenerates them in baptism, she nourishes them by preaching, and she loves them with maternal charity.”
7. There exists the figure of a hen with the motto, “Where Christ has been received, there is nothing sad.” Also,
8. The eggs of hens are said to be useful in various complaints, such as pains in the eyes and gout. So likewise is Christ the best Physician of all the infirmities of souls.
9. When a hen is in any peril which threatens herself alone, as from a kite, or a cat or dog, she flees. But if she fears danger for her young ones, she gathers them under her wings, and strives to protect them by every means in her power. She will often fight for them with her wings, her beak, and her whole body. So Christ fought for us against the devil and sin unto death, even the death of the cross.
And ye would not: because ye will pursue Me with hatred even unto death, and will not suffer your citizens to be converted unto Me and your God. This, as I have already observed, is especially addressed to the Scribes and rulers.
Ver. 38. Behold your house, &c. That is, the Temple, says S. Jerome and Theophylact; but more correctly, the city of Jerusalem and the whole region of Judea, which, as the punishment of such black ingratitude, was to be laid waste by the Romans, under Titus. There is an allusion to Jer. xii. 7, “I have left my house, I have forsaken my inheritance.” For when Jerusalem was forsaken by God, it became the synagogue of Satan, and so the prey of the Roman eagles under Titus and Vespasian, who partly slew the Jews, partly led them away captive, and partly scattered them over the whole world.
For I say unto you, &c. “I will withdraw Myself from you into Heaven; and ye shall see Me no more upon earth, until the Day of judgment, when I will condemn your unbelief.” Some take this verse to refer to Christ’s solemn entry into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday, when the Jews cried aloud to Him, Hosanna, Blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord. But this is clearly an erroneous opinion, for this triumphal entry was already past, as is plain from chap. xxi. 1, &c. These words were spoken by Christ after Palm Sunday, three days before His crucifixion. So the Fathers and Commentators, passim.
I say then that Christ is here speaking, concerning the end of the world and the Day of Judgment. This is the opinion of S. Chrysostom, Theophylact, S. Augustine (de consens. Evang. lib. 2, cap. 75). As though He had said, “You, 0 ye Scribes, who constantly contradict and calumniate Me, saying that I am not the Messiah, but that I cast out devils by Beelzebub, shall not see Me from by and by, that is, after the few days before My death, in which I shall be conversant among you, until the Judgment Day, when ye shall be compelled, even against your will, to acknowledge Me as Messiah, the Son of God, and your Judge as well as the Judge of all men; and to cry Hosanna, if not with your outward lips, at least in your hearts and minds, though against your will. Then shall ye see that I was, and am Blessed, I who came in the Name of the Lord, inasmuch as I was sent by God the Father to redeem and save all mankind, then, I say, when ye ought to have worshipped and adored Me.”
Secondly, it is possible that this passage may be understood of the Jews, who about the end of the world shall be converted to Christ by the preaching of Elias, and who, when He shall presently come to judgment, will acknowledge Him to be Messiah, the Blessed of the Lord. As though He said, “You, 0 ye Jews, do not wish to acknowledge Me as Messiah, and persecute Me as a false Christ, even unto death; but your posterity in the end of the world will acknowledge and worship Me. On them, therefore, I will bestow My grace and glory, but you I will condemn to everlasting punishment. And this will be to my praise and honour and glory, but to your shame and everlasting contempt.” Thus does Christ prick the hard and unbelieving hearts of the Jews. This was prophesied by Hos 3:4, &c., to which Christ here makes allusion.
Fuente: Cornelius Lapide Commentary
1. Jesus’ admonition of the multitudes and His disciples 23:1-12 (cf. Mar 12:38-39; Luk 20:45-46)
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
As we have seen, there were three groups of people present in the temple courtyard. These were the disciples of Jesus, His critics, namely, the various groups of Israel’s leaders, and the crowds of ordinary Israelites. Jesus now turned from addressing the Pharisees (Mat 22:41) and proceeded to speak to the multitudes and His disciples primarily.
Jesus had begun to criticize the Pharisees and scribes to their faces about one year earlier (Mat 15:7). Later He warned His disciples to beware of the teachings of the Pharisees and the Sadducees (Mat 16:5-12). Now He denounced these enemies publicly. He did so because the decision the masses and His disciples now faced was whether to follow Jesus or Israel’s established religious leaders. They could not do both.
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
6; Mat 22:1-46; Mat 23:1-39
Chapter 17
Conflict in the Temple – Mat 21:18-46 – Mat 22:1-46 – Mat 23:1-39
IT had been written that the Lord should suddenly come to His Temple; {Mal 3:1} but He would not too hastily assert His rights. The first day He simply “looked round about upon all things,” {Mar 11:11} and then withdrew to Bethany. The second day-without, however, even yet assailing the authority of those in power-He assumed His prerogative as Lord of the Temple by casting out the traffickers, healing the blind and the lame, and accepting the hosannas of the children. The scribes and Pharisees showed some displeasure at all this, and raised objections; but the answer they received silenced, if it did not satisfy them. Thus two days passed without any serious attempt to dispute His authority; but on the third day the conflict began. It was a dark and terrible day, and of its fateful history we have a full account in this Gospel.
The day opens with the sight on the-way to the city of the withered fig tree, a sad symbol of the impending fate of Israel, to be decided ere the day closed by their final rejection of their Saviour-King. This was our Lords single miracle of judgment; many a stern word of warning did He speak, but there is no severity in His deeds: they are all mercy and love. The single exception, if exception it may be called, makes this great fact stand out only the more impressively. It was necessary for loves sake to show that in that arm, which was always strong to save, there was also strength to smite if the sad necessity should come; but so tender-hearted is He that He cannot bear to strike where the stroke can be felt, so He lets it fall on an unconscious tree. Thus to the end He justifies His name of Jesus, Saviour, and illustrates the blessed truth of which His whole life is the expression, that “God is love.” “The Son of man is not come to destroy mens lives but to save them.” Judgment is His strange work; from the very thought of it He shrinks, as seems suggested to us here by the fact that, in the use He makes of the circumstance in His conversation with the disciples, He refrains from speaking of its dark significance, but rather takes the opportunity of teaching from it an incidental lesson full of hope and comfort regarding the power of faith and the value of prayer (Mat 21:21-22).
As soon as on the third day He enters the Temple the conflict begins. It would seem that the interval our Lord had in mercy allowed for calm reflection had been used for no other purpose than to organise a conspiracy for the purpose of entangling Him in His words and so discrediting His authority. We gather this from the carefully framed questions with which He is plied by one party after another. Four successive attacks are recorded in the passage before us: the first by the chief priests and elders of the people demanding His authority; the next by the Pharisees, assisted by the Herodians, who endeavoured by means of the difficulty of the tribute money to embroil Him with the Roman power; this was again immediately followed by a third, in which the prime movers were the Sadducees, armed with what they considered an unanswerable question regarding the life to come; and when that also broke down there was a renewed attack of the Pharisees, who thought to disconcert Him by a perplexing question about the law,
We may not discuss the long sad history of these successive attacks with any fulness, but only glance first at the challenge of our Lords authority and how He meets it, and next at the ordeal of questions with which it was followed.
I-THE CHALLENGE. {Mat 21:23-46 – Mat 22:1-14}
“By what authority doest Thou these things? And who gave Thee this authority?” The question was fair enough; and if it had been asked in an earnest spirit Jesus would have given them, as always to the honest inquirer, a kind and satisfying answer. It is not, however, as inquirers, but as cavillers, they approach Him. Again and again, at times and in ways innumerable, by fulfilment of prophecy, by His mighty deeds and by His wondrous words, He had given proof of His Divine authority and established His claim to be the true Messiah. It was not therefore because they lacked evidence of His authority, but because they hated it, because they would not have this man to reign over them, that now they question Him. It was obvious that their only object was to entangle Him; accordingly our Lord showed how in the net they were spreading for Him their own feet were caught.
He meets their question with a counter-question, “The baptism of John, whence was it? from heaven, or of men?” The more we examine this question, the more must we admire the consummate wisdom it displays. We see at once how it turns the tables on His critics; but it is far more important to notice how admirably adapted it was to lead them to the answer of their own question, if only they would follow it out. They dared not repudiate the baptism of John; and had not John baptised Jesus, and solemnly borne repeated testimony to His Messiahship? Had he not most emphatically borne that very testimony to a formal deputation sent by themselves? {Joh 1:19-27} Finally, were not the ministry and testimony of John closely associated in prophecy with that very coming of the Lord to His Temple which gave them so deep offence: “Behold, I will send My messenger, and he shall prepare the way before Me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to His temple: behold, He shall come, saith the Lord of hosts.” Our Lords counter-question, then, was framed with such exquisite skill as to disappoint their malice, while at the same time it was suited to-guide the earnest inquirer to the truth.
The propounders of the question were not true men, but hypocrites. A negative answer they could not give. An affirmative they would not give. So when they refused to answer, our Lord replied, “Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things.”
The Lord of the Temple now assumes the offensive, and directs against His opponents a series of parables which He holds up to them as a triple mirror in which from different points of view they may see themselves in their true character, and as a set of danger signals to warn them of their impending doom. He presents them with such marvellous skill that He makes the Pharisees their own judges, and constrains them to pass sentence on themselves. In the first parable He constrains them to declare their own guilt; in the second, He makes them decree their own punishment; in the third, He warns them of the impending fate of the people they were leading to destruction.
We have said that in these parables Christ assumes the offensive; but this is true only in a very superficial sense. In the deepest sense He spoke them not against the Pharisees, but for them. His object was to carry home to their hearts the conviction of sin, and to impress them with a sense of their danger before it was too late. This was what above all they needed. It was their only hope of salvation. And how admirably suited for His purpose were these three parables! Their application to themselves was plain enough after it was stated, but not beforehand; the effect of which was that they were put in a position to give an impartial verdict on their own conduct. It was the same method so effectively employed by Nathan in bringing conviction to the conscience of David. Had Christ charged the sin of the Pharisees directly home upon them they would have been at once thrown on the defensive, and it would have been impossible to reach their conscience through the entanglements of prejudice and personal interest.
Christ wishes to disentangle them from all that was darkening their moral vision, and He uses the parable as the most effective means. It is a great mistake, then, to suppose that Jesus contented Himself with turning the tables on them, and carrying the war, so to speak, into the enemys country. It was with them a war of words, but not with Him. He was seeking to save these poor lost ones. He wished to give them His best for their worst. They had come to entangle Him in His talk. He does His best to disentangle them from the meshes of self-deception. The tone of all three parables is exceptionally severe; but the spirit of them is love.
THE TWO SONS. {Mat 21:28-32}
The parable of the two sons is exceedingly simple; and the question founded upon it, “Whether of them twain did the will of his father?” admitted of but one answer-an answer which seemed, as it was spoken, to involve only the simplest of all moral judgments; yet how keen the edge of it when once it was disclosed! Observe the emphatic word did, suggesting without saying it, that it made comparatively little difference what they said. {see Mat 23:3} So far as profession went, the Pharisees were all that could be desired. They were the representatives of religion in the land; their whole attitude corresponded to the answer of the second son: “I go, sir.” Yet when John-whom they themselves admitted to be a prophet of the Lord-came to them in the way of righteousness, they set his word aside and refused to obey him. On the other hand, many of those whose lives seemed to say “I will not,” when they heard the word of John, repented and began to work the works of God. Thus it came to pass that many of these had entered the kingdom, while the self-complacent Pharisee still remained without.
The words with which the parable is pressed home are severe and trenchant; but they are nevertheless full of gospel grace. They set in the strongest light the welcome fact that the salvation of God is for the chief of sinners, for those who have been rudest and most rebellious in their first answers to the divine appeal; and then, while they condemn so very strongly the self-deceiver, it is not for the purpose of covering him with confusion, but in order to open his eyes and save him from the net in which he has set his feet. Even in that terrible sentence which puts him lower down than open and disgraceful sinners, there is a door left still unlatched for him to enter. “The publicans and harlots go into the kingdom of God before you”; but you may enter after them. If only you, like them, would “afterward” repent-if you would repent of your hypocrisy and insincerity, as they have repented of their rudeness and rebellion-you would be as gladly welcomed as they into the kingdom of God.
THE HUSBANDMEN. {Mat 21:33-46}
The second parable follows hard on the first, and presses the chief priests and Pharisees so closely that they cannot fail to see in the end that it is themselves they have been constrained to judge and condemn (Mat 21:45). It is indeed difficult to suppose that they had not even from the beginning some glimpse of the intended application of this parable. The vineyard was a familiar symbol with a definite and well-understood meaning, from which our Lord in His use of it does not depart. The vineyard being the nation, the owner is evidently God; the fruit expected, righteousness; the particulars mentioned (the fence, the press, the tower) implying the completeness of the arrangements made by the owner for securing the expected fruit. The husbandmen are the leaders of the people, those who are responsible for their direction and control. The going to a far country represents the removal of God from their sight; so that they are, as it were, put upon their honour, left to act in the matter of the vineyard according to the prompting of their own hearts. All this is contained in the few lines which make up verse 33 {Mat 21:33}, and forms the groundwork of this great parable. Thus are set forth in a very striking manner the high privileges and grave responsibilities of the leaders of the Jewish people, represented at the time by the chief priests and Pharisees He was then addressing. How are they meeting this responsibility? Let the parable tell.
It is a terrible indictment, showing in the strongest light the guilt of their fathers, and pointing out to them that they are on the verge of a crime far greater still. Again and again have prophets of righteousness come in the name of the Lord, and demanded the fruits of righteousness which were due. How have they been received? “The husbandmen took his servants, and beat one, and killed another, and stoned another.” So have their fathers acted time after time and still the patience of the owner is not exhausted, nor does He even yet give up all hope of fruit from His favoured vineyard; so, as a last resort, He sends His son, saying, “They will reverence my son.”
We can imagine the tone in which the Son of God would speak these words. What a sublime consciousness is implied in His use of them! and how touchingly does He in this incidental way give the best of all answers to the question with which His enemies began! Surely the son, the only and well-beloved son, had the best of all authority to act for the father! In the former parable He had appealed to the recognised authority of John; now He indicates that the highest authority of all is in Himself. If only their hearts had not been wholly shut against the light, how it would have flashed upon them now! They would have taken up the cry of the children, and said, “Hosanna! blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord”: and the parable would have served its purpose before it had reached its close. But they are deaf and blind to the things of God; so the awful indictment must proceed to the bitter end.
If there was in the heart of Christ an exalted consciousness of His filial relation to God as He spoke of the sending of the Son, what a pang must have shot through it as He proceeded to depict in such vivid colours the crime they are now all ready to commit, referring successively as He does to the arrest, the handing over to Pilate, and the crucifixion without the gate: “They caught him, and cast him out of the vineyard, and slew him.” How appalling it must have been to Him to speak these words! how appalling it ought to have been to them to hear them! That they did feel the force of the parable is evident from the answer they gave to the question, “What will he do to those husbandmen?” and, as we have said, they must surely have had some glimpses of its application to themselves; but it did not disturb their self-complacency, until our Lord spoke the plain words with which He followed up the parable, referring to that very Psalm from which the childrens cry of “Hosanna” was taken. From it He selects the symbol of the stone rejected by the builders, but by God made the head of the corner, applying it to Himself (the rejected stone) and them (the builders). The reference was most appropriate in itself; and it had the further advantage of being followed by the very word which it would be their salvation now to speak. “Hosanna” is the word which immediately follows the quotation He makes, and it introduces a prayer which, if only they will make their own, all will yet be well with them. The prayer is, “Save now, I beseech Thee, O Lord”; followed by the words, “Blessed be He that cometh in the name of the Lord.” May we not assume that our Lord paused after making His quotation to give them the opportunity of adopting it as their own prayer? His whole heart was longing to hear these very words from them. Have we not the proof of it further on, in the sad words with which He at last abandoned the hope: “I say unto you, ye shall not see Me henceforth till ye shall say, Blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord”? {Mat 23:39}
Seeing they will not take the warning of the parable, and that they refuse the opportunity given them while yet under its awe-inspiring influence, to repent and return, He must give sentence against them: “Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken away from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.” This sentence He follows up by setting before them the dark side of the other symbol: “Whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.” They were stumbling on the stone now, and about to he broken upon it; but the danger that lay before them if they persisted in their present unbelief and sin, would be far greater still, when He Whom they now despised and rejected should be at the head of all authority and power.
But all is vain. Steeling their hearts against His faithful words, they are only the more maddened against Him, and fear alone restrains them from beginning now the very crime against which they have just had so terrible a warning: “When they sought to lay hands on Him, they feared the multitudes, because they took Him for a prophet.”
THE MARRIAGE FEAST. {Mat 22:1-14}
The manner in which this third parable is introduced leaves room for doubt whether it was spoken in immediate connection with the two preceding. The use of the word “answered” (Mat 22:1) would rather suggest the idea that some conversation not reported had intervened. But though it does not form part of a continuous discourse with the others, it is so closely connected with them in scope and bearing that it may appropriately be dealt with, as concluding the warning called forth by the first attack of the chief priests and elders. The relation between the three parables will be best seen by observing that the first has to do with their treatment of John; the second and third with their treatment of Himself and His apostles. The second and third differ from each other in this: that while the Kings Son, Who is prominent in both, is regarded in the former as the last and greatest of a long series of heavenly messengers sent to demand of the chosen people the fruits of righteousness, in the latter He is presented, not as demanding righteousness, but as bringing joy. Duty is the leading thought of the second parable, privilege of the third; in the one sin is brought home to Israels leaders by setting before them their treatment of the messengers of righteousness, in the other the sin lies in their rejection of the message of grace. Out of this distinction rises another-viz., that while the second parable runs back into the past, upwards along the line of the Old Testament prophets, the third runs down into the future, into the history of the apostolic times. The two together make up a terrible indictment, which might well have roused these slumbering consciences, and led even scribes and Pharisees to shrink from filling up the measure of their iniquities.
A word may be necessary as to the relation of this parable to the similar one recorded in the fourteenth chapter of St. Luke, known as “The parable of the Great Supper.” The two have many features in common, but the differences are so great that it is plainly wrong to suppose them to be different versions of the same. It: is astonishing to see what needless difficulties some people make for themselves by the utterly groundless assumption that our Lord would never use the same illustration a second time. Why should He not have spoken of. the gospel as a feast, not twice merely, but fifty times? There would, no doubt, be many variations in His manner of unfolding the thought, according to the circumstances, the audience, the particular object in view at the time; but to suppose that because He had used that illustration in Galilee He must be forbidden from reverting to it in Judea is a specimen of what we may call the insanity of those who are ever on the watch for their favourite “discrepancies.” In this case there is not only much variation in detail, but the scope of the two parables is quite different, the former having more the character of a pressing invitation, with only a suggestion of warning at the close; whereas the one before us, while preserving all the grace of the gospel as suggested by the figure of a feast to which men are freely invited, and even heightening its attractiveness inasmuch as it is a wedding feast-the most joyful of all festivities-and a royal one too, yet has throughout the same sad tone of judgment which has been characteristic of all these three parables, and is at once seen to be specially appropriate to the fateful occasion on which they were spoken.
As essentially a New Testament parable, it begins with the familiar formula “The kingdom of heaven is like.” The two previous parables had led up to the new dispensation; but: this one begins with it, and is wholly concerned with it. The Kings Son appears now, not as a messenger, but as a bridegroom. It was not the first time that Jesus had spoken of Himself as a bridegroom, or rather as the Bridegroom. The thought was a familiar one in the prophets of the Old Testament, the Bridegroom, be it remembered, being none other than Jehovah Himself. Consider, then, what it meant that Jesus should without hesitation or explanation. speak of Himself as the Bridegroom. And let. us not imagine that He simply took the figure, and applied it to Himself as fulfilling prophecy; let us not fail to realise that He entered fully into its tender meaning. When we think of the circumstances in which this parable was spoken we have here a most pathetic glimpse into the sanctuary of our Saviours loving heart. Let us. try with reverent sympathy to enter into the feeling of the Kings Son, come from heaven to seek humanity for His bride, to woo and to win her from the cruel bondage of sin and death, to take her into union with Himself, so that she may share with Him the liberty and wealth, the purity and joy, the glory and the hope of the heavenly kingdom! The King “made a marriage for His Son”-where is the bride? what response is she making to the Bridegrooms suit? A marriage for His Son! On Calvary?
It must have been very hard for Him to go on; but He will keep down the rising tide of emotion, that He may set before this people and before all people another attractive picture of the kingdom of heaven. He will give even these despisers of the heavenly grace another opportunity to reconsider their position. So He tells of the invitations sent out first to “them that were bidden”-i.e., to the chosen people who had been especially invited from the earliest times, and to whom, when the fulness of the time had come, the call was first addressed. “And they would not come.” There is no reference to the aggravations which had found place in the former parable. {Mat 21:39} These were connected not so much with the offer of grace, which is the main purport of this parable, as with the demand for fruit, which was the leading thought of the one before. It was enough, then, in describing how they dealt with the invitation, to say, “They would not come”; and, indeed, this refusal hurt Him far more than their buffets and their blows. When He is buffeted He is silent, sheds no tears, utters no wail; His tears and lamentation are reserved for them: “How often would I, have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!” “They would not come.”
But the love of the King and of His Son is not yet exhausted. A second invitation is sent, with greater urgency than before, and with fuller representations of the great preparations which had been made for the entertainment of the guests: “Again, he sent forth other servants, saying, Tell them which are bidden, Behold, I have prepared my dinner: my oxen and my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready: come unto the marriage.” As the first invitation was that which had been already given and which they were now rejecting, the second refers to that fuller proclamation of the gospel which was yet to be made after the work of the Bride-groom-Redeemer should be finished when it could be said, as not before: “All things are ready.”
In the account which follows, therefore, there is a foreshadowing of the treatment the apostles would afterwards receive. Many, indeed, were converted by their word, and took their places at the feast; but the people as a whole “made light of it, and went their ways, one to his farm, another to his merchandise: and the remnant took his servants, and entreated them spitefully, and slew them.” What was the consequence? Jerusalem, rejecting the gospel of the kingdom, even when it was “preached with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven,” must be destroyed; and new guests must be sought among the nations that up till now had no especial invitation to the feast. This prophetic warning was conveyed in terms of the parable; yet there is a touch in it which shows how strongly the Saviours mind was running on the sad future of which the parable was but a picture: “When the king heard thereof, he was wroth: and he sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city.” Why “city”? There had been no mention of a city in the parable. True; but Jerusalem was in the Saviours heart, and all the pathos of His lament over it is in that little word. “Their city” too, observe, -reminding us of “your house” at the close of this sad day. {Mat 23:38} In the same way the calling of the Gentiles is most skilfully brought within the scope of the parable, by the use of the peculiar word translated in the Revised Version-“the partings of the highways,” which seems to suggest the thought of the servants leaving the city precincts and going out in all directions along the main trunk roads to “the partings of the highways,” to carry the gospel to all without distinction, wherever could be found an ear of man to listen, or a human heart to welcome the Kings grace and the Bridegrooms love. Thus, after all, the wedding was to be furnished with guests.
The parable, as we have seen, is one of grace; but righteousness too must find a place in it. The demand for fruits of righteousness is no less rigid in the new dispensation than it had been in the old. To make this clear and strong the parable of the Feast is followed by the pendant of the Wedding Garment.
There are two ways in which the heavenly marriage feast may be despised: first, by those who will not come at all; next, and no less, by those who try to snatch the wedding joy without the bridal purity. The same leading thought or motive is recognisable here as in the parable of the two sons. The man without the wedding garment corresponds to the son who said “I go, sir,” and went not, while those who refuse altogether correspond to the son who answered “I will not.” By bearing this in mind we can understand, what to many has been a serious difficulty-how it is that the punishment meted out to the offender in this second parable is so terribly severe. If we simply think of the parable itself, it does seem an extraordinary thing that so slight an offence as coming to a wedding feast without the regulation dress should meet with such an awful doom; but when we consider whom this man represents we can see the very best of reasons for it. Hypocrisy was his crime, than which there is nothing more utterly hateful in the sight of Him Who desireth truth in the inward parts. It is true that the representation does not at first seem to set the sin in so very strong a light; but when we think of it, we see that there was no other way in which it could be brought within the scope of this parable. It is worthy of notice, moreover, that the distinction between the intruder and the others is not observed till the king himself enters, which indicates that the difference between him and the others was no outward distinction, that the garment referred to is the invisible garment of-righteousness. To the common eye he looked like all the rest; but when the all-searching Eye is on the company he is at once detected and exposed. He is really worse than those who would not come at all. They were honest sinners; he was a hypocrite-at the feast with mouth and hand and eye, but not of it, for his spirit is not robed in white: he is the black sheep in the fold; a despiser within, he is worse than the despisers without.
Even to him, indeed, the king has a kindly feeling. He calls him “Friend,” and gives him yet the opportunity to repent and cry for mercy. But he is speechless. False to the core, he has no rallying point within to fall back upon. All is confusion and despair. He cannot even pray. Nothing remains but to pronounce his final doom (Mat 22:13).
The words with which the parable closes (Mat 22:14) are sad and solemn. They have occasioned difficulty to some, who have supposed they were meant to teach that the number of the saved will be small. Their difficulty, like so many others, has been due to forgetfulness of the circumstances under which the words were spoken, and the strong emotion of which they were the expression. Jesus is looking back over the time since He began to spread the gospel feast, and thinking how many have been invited, and how few have come! And even among those who have seemed to come there are hypocrites! One He specially would have in mind as He spoke of the man without the wedding garment; for though we take him to be the type of a class, we can scarcely think that our Lord could fail to let His sad thoughts rest on Judas as He described that man. Taking all this into consideration we can well understand how at that time He should conclude His parable with the lamentation: “Many are called, but few chosen.” It did not follow that it was a truth for all time and for eternity. It was true for the time included in the scope of the parable. It was most sadly true of the Jewish nation then, and in the times which followed on immediately; but the day was coming, before all was done, when the heavenly Bridegroom, according to the sure word of prophecy, should “see of the travail of His soul, and be satisfied.” No creed article, therefore, have we here, but a cry from the sore heart of the heavenly Bridegroom, in the day of His sorrows, in the pain of unrequited love.
II-THE ORDEAL OF QUESTIONS. {Mat 22:15-46}
The open challenge has failed; but more subtle weapons may succeed. The Pharisees have found it of no avail to confront their enemy; but they may still be able to entangle Him. They will at all events try. They will spring upon Him some hard questions, of such a kind that, answering on the spur of the moment, He will be sure to compromise Himself.
1. The first shall be one of those semi-political semi-religious questions on which feeling is running high-the lawfulness or unlawfulness of paying tribute to Caesar. The old Pharisees who had challenged His authority keep in the background, that the sinister purpose of the question may not appear; but they are represented by some of their disciples who, coming fresh upon the scene and addressing Jesus m terms of respect and appreciation, may readily pass for guileless inquirers. They were accompanied by some Herodians, whose divergence of view on the point made it all the more natural that they should join with Pharisees in asking the question; for it might fairly be considered that they had been disputing with one another in regard to it, and had concluded to submit the question to His decision as to one who would be sure to know the truth and fearless to tell it. So together they come with the request: “Master, we know that Thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest Thou for any man: for Thou regardest not the person of men. Tell us therefore, What thinkest Thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not?”
But they cannot impose upon Him: “Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye Me, ye hypocrites?” Having thus unmasked them, without a moments hesitation He answers them. They had expected a “yes” or a “no”-a “yes” which would have set the people against Him, or better still a “no” which would have put Him at the mercy of the government. But, avoiding Scylla on the one hand, and Charybdis on the other, He makes straight for His goal by asking for a piece of coin and calling attention to Caesars stamp upon it. Those who use Caesars coin should not refuse to pay Caesars tribute; but, while the relation which with their own acquiescence they sustain to the Roman emperor implied corresponding obligations in the sphere it covered, this did not at all interfere with what is due to the King of kings and Lord of lords, in Whose image we all are made, and Whose superscription every one of us bears: “Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesars; and unto God the things that are Gods.” Thus He not only avoids the net they had spread for Him, and gives them the very best answer to their question, but, in doing so, He lays down a great principle of far-reaching application and permanent value respecting the difficult and much-to-be-vexed question as to the relations between Church and State. “O answer full of miracle!” as one had said. No wonder that “when they had heard these words they marvelled, and left Him, and went their way.”
2. Next come forward certain Sadducees. That the Pharisees had an understanding with them also seems likely from what is said both in ver. 15 (Mat 22:15), which seems a general introduction to the series of questions, and in ver. 34 (Mat 22:34), from which it would appear that they were somewhere out of sight, waiting to hear the result of this new attack. Though the alliance seems a strange one, it is not the first time that common hostility to the Christ of God has drawn together the two great rival parties. {see Mat 16:1} If we are right in supposing them to be in combination now, it is a remarkable illustration of the deep hostility of the Pharisees that they should not only combine with the Sadducees against Him, as they had done before, but that they should look with complacency on their using against Him a weapon which threatened one of their own doctrines. For the object of the attack was to cast ridicule on the doctrine of the resurrection, which assuredly the Pharisees did not deny.
The difficulty they raise is of the same kind as those which are painfully familiar in these days, when men of coarse minds and fleshly imaginations show by their crude objections their incapacity even to think on spiritual themes. The case they supposed was one they knew He could not find fault with so far as this world was concerned, for everything was done in accordance with the letter of the law of Moses, the inference being that whatever confusion there was in it must belong to what they would call His figment of the resurrection: “In the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her.”
It is worthy of note that our Lords-answer is much less stern than in the former case. These men were not hypocrites. They were scornful, perhaps flippant; but they were not intentionally dishonest. The difficulty they felt was due to the coarseness of their minds, but it was a real difficulty to them. Our Lord accordingly gives them a kindly answer, not denouncing them, but calmly showing them where they are wrong: “Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God.”
Ye know not the power of God, or ye would not suppose that the life to come, would be a mere repetition of the life that now is, with all its fleshly conditions the same as now. That there is continuity of life is of course implied in the very idea of resurrection, but true life resides not in the flesh, but in the spirit, and therefore the continuity will be a spiritual continuity; and the power of God will effect such changes on the body itself that it will rise out of its fleshly condition into a state of being like that of the angels of God. The thought is the same as that which was afterwards expanded by the apostle Paul in such passages as Rom 8:5-11, 1Co 15:35-54.
Ye know not the Scriptures, or you would find in the writings of Moses from which you quote, and to which you attach supreme importance, evidence enough of the great doctrine you deny. “Have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?” Here, again, Jesus not only answers the Sadducees, but puts the great and all-important doctrine of the life to come and the resurrection of the body on its deepest foundation. There are those who have expressed astonishment that He did not quote from some of the later prophets, where He could have found passages much clearer and more to the point: but not only was it desirable that, as they had based their question on Moses, He should give His answer from the same source; but in doing so He has put the great truth on a permanent and universal basis; for the argument rests not on the authority of Moses, nor, as some have supposed, upon the present tense “I am,” but on the relation between God and His people. The thought is that such a relation between mortal man and the eternal God as is implied in the declaration “I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob” is itself a guarantee of immortality. Not for the spirit only, for it is not as spirits merely, but as men that we are taken into relation to the living God; and that relation, being of God, must share His immortality: “God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.” The thought is put in a very striking way in a well-known passage in the Epistle to the Hebrews: “But now they the patriarchs desire a better country, that is, a heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for He hath prepared for them a city.”
Our Lords answer suggests the best way of assuring ourselves of this glorious hope. Let God be real to us, and life and immortality will be real too. If we would escape the doubts of old Sadducee and new Agnostic, we must be much with God, and strengthen more and more the ties which bind us to Him.
3. The next attempt of the Pharisees is on an entirely new line. They have found that they cannot impose upon Him by sending pretended inquirers to question Him. But they have managed to lay their hands on a real inquirer now-one of themselves, a student of the law, who is exercised on a question much discussed, arid to which very different answers are given; they will suggest to him to carry his question to Jesus and see what He will say to it. That this was the real state of the case appears from the fuller account in St. Marks Gospel. When, then, St. Matthew speaks of him as asking Jesus a question, “tempting Him,” we are not to impute the same sinister motives as actuated those who sent him. He also was in a certain sense tempting Jesus-i.e., putting Him to the test, but with no sinister motive, with a real desire to find out the truth, and probably also to find out if this Jesus was one who could really help an inquirer after truth. In this spirit, then, he asks the question, “Which is the great commandment in the law?”
The answer our Lord immediately gives is now so familiar that it is difficult to realise how great a thing it was to give it for the first time. True, He takes it from the Scriptures; but think what command of the Scriptures is involved in this prompt reply. The passages quoted lie far apart-the one in the sixth chapter of Deuteronomy, the other in the nineteenth of Leviticus in quite an obscure corner; and nowhere are they spoken of as the first and second commandments, nor indeed were they regarded as commandments in the usually understood sense of the word. When we consider all this we recognise what from one point of view might be called a miracle of genius, and from another a flash of inspiration, in the instantaneous selection of these two passages, and bringing them together so as to furnish a summary of the law and the prophets beyond all praise which the veriest unbeliever, if only he have a mind to appreciate that which is excellent, must recognise as worthy of being written in letters of light. That one short answer to a sudden question-asked indeed by a true man, but really sprung upon Him by His enemies who were watching for His halting-is of more value in morals than all the writings of all the ethical philosophers, from Socrates to Herbert Spencer.
It is now time to question the questioners. The opportunity is most favourable. They are gathered together to hear what He will say to their last attempt to entangle Him. Once more He has not only met the difficulty, but has done so in such a way as to make the truth on the subject in dispute shine with the very light of heaven. There could not, then, be a better opportunity of turning their thoughts in a direction which might lead them, if possible in spite of themselves, into the light of God.
The question Jesus asks (Mat 22:41-45) is undoubtedly a puzzling one for them; but it is no mere Scripture conundrum. The difficulty in which it lands them is one which, if only they would honestly face it, would be the means of removing the veil from their eyes, and leading them, ere it is too late, to welcome the Son of David come in the name of the Lord to save them. They fully accepted the psalm to which He referred as a psalm of David concerning the. Messiah. If, then, they would honestly read that psalm they would see that the Messiah when He comes must be, not a mere earthly monarch, as David was, but a heavenly monarch, one who should sit on the throne of God and bring into subjection the enemies of the kingdom of heaven. If only they would take their ideas of the Christ from the Scriptures which were their boast, they could not fail to see Him standing now before them. For we must remember that they had not only the words He spoke to guide them. They had before them the Messiah Himself, with the light of heaven in His eye, with the love of God in His face; and had they had any love for the light, they would have recognised Him then-they would have seen in Him, whom they had often heard of as Davids Son, the Lord of David, and therefore the Lord of the Temple, and the heavenly King of Israel. But they love the darkness rather than the light, because their deeds are evil: therefore their hearts remain unchanged, the eyes of their spirit unopened; they are only abashed and silenced: “No man was able to answer Him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask Him any more questions.”
III-THE HOUSE LEFT DESOLATE. {Mat 23:1-39}
The day of grace is over for the leaders of the people; but for the people themselves there may still be hope; so the Lord of the Temple turns to “the multitude,” the general throng of worshippers, mingled with whom were several of His own disciples, and solemnly warns them against their spiritual guides. There is every reason to suppose that many of the scribes and Pharisees were within hearing; for when He has finished what He has to say to the people, He turns round and addresses them directly in that series of terrible denunciations which follow (Mat 13:1-58, seq.).
His warning is couched in such a way as not in the least degree to weaken their respect for Moses, or for the sacred Scriptures, the exposition of which was the duty of their spiritual guides. He separates sharply between the office and the men who hold it. Had they been true to the position they occupied and the high duties they had been called to discharge, they would have been worthy of all honour; but they are false men: “they say, and do not.” Not only so, but they do positive evil, making that grievous for the people which ought to be a delight; and when they do or seem to do the right thing, it is some petty observance, which they exaggerate for the sake of vain display, while their hearts are set on personal pre-eminence. Such are the leading thoughts set forth with great vigour of language and force of illustration, and not without a touch of keen and delicate irony in our Lords remarkable indictment of the scribes and Pharisees recorded by our Evangelist (Mat 23:2-7).
Then follows one of those passages of profound significance and far-reaching application which, while admirably suiting the immediate occasions on which they were spoken, prove to be a treasury of truth for the ages to come. At first sight it strikes us as simply an exhortation to cultivate a disposition the reverse of that of the scribes and Pharisees. He has been drawing their portrait; now He says, Be ye not like unto them, but unlike in every respect. But in saying this He succeeds in laying down great principles for the future guidance of His Church, the remembrance of which would have averted most of the evils which in the course of its history have weakened its power, hindered its progress, and marred its witness to the truth. With one stroke He abolishes all claims of men to intervene between the soul and God. “One is your Teacher” (R.V), “One is your Father,” “One is your Master.” Who is that One? He does not in so many words claim the position for Himself; but it is throughout implied, and at the end almost expressed; for, while in speaking of the Teacher and the Father He says nothing to indicate who the One is, when He comes to the Master He adds “even the Christ” (R.V). Standing thus at the end of all, these words suggest that the office of the Christ was to bring God within reach of every soul, so that without any intervention of scribe or Pharisee, priest or pope, each one could go direct to Him for instruction (Teacher), for loving recognition (Father), for authoritative guidance and control (Master).
We must remember, too, that He was speaking to His disciples as well as to the multitude, and to them these words would be full of meaning. When He said, “One is your Teacher,” of whom could they possibly think but of Him-self? When He said, “One is your Father,” they would recall such utterances as “I and My Father are One,” and have suggested to them the truth which was so very soon to be plainly stated: “He that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father.” It is probable, then, that even before He reached the end, and added the words “even the Christ,” the minds of His disciples at least had anticipated Him. Thus we find in these remarkable words an implicit claim on the part of Christ to be the sole Prophet, Priest, and King of His people: their sole Prophet, to teach them by the enlightening and sanctifying grace of the Holy Spirit; their sole Priest, to open up the way of access to a reconciled Father in heaven; their sole King, alone entitled to be the Lord of their conscience and their heart.
If only the Christian Church had been true to all this, how different would her history have been! Then the Word of God would have been, throughout, the only and sufficient rule of faith, and the Holy Spirit dealing directly with the spirits of men its sole authoritative interpreter. Then would there have been no usurping priesthood to stand between the soul of men and their Father in heaven, to bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne and lay them upon mens shoulders, to multiply forms and observances and complicate what should have been simplest of all-the direct way to the Father in heaven, through Christ the great Priest of humanity. Then would there have been no lordship over mens consciences, no ecclesiastical usurpation, no spiritual tyranny, no inquisition, no persecution for conscience sake. How inexcusable has it all been! It would seem as if pains had been taken deliberately to violate not only the spirit, but the very letter of the Saviours words, as, e.g., in the one fact that, while it is expressly written “Call no man your father upon the earth,” the Church of Rome has actually succeeded age after age in getting the millions under its usurped spiritual control, to give a man that very title; for the word “pope” is the very word which our Lord so expressly forbids. But all clerical assumption of priestly power is just as certainly and as clearly in violation of this great charter of our spiritual liberties.
“And all ye are brethren.” This is the second commandment of the true canon law, like unto the first and springing naturally out of it, as naturally as the love of neighbour springs out of love to God. As soon as the time shall come when all Christians shall own allegiance alike, full and undivided, to the one Lord of mind and heart and conscience, then will there be an end to all ecclesiastical exclusiveness; then shall we see realised and manifested to the world the brotherhood in Christ of all believers.
Turning once again to the scribes and Pharisees, the Lord of the Temple denounces them in words perhaps the most terrible in the whole Bible. It is a very thunderstorm of indignation, with flash after flash of scorn, peal after peal of woe. It is “the burden of the Lord,” “the wrath of the Lamb.” Is this at all inconsistent with the meekness and lowliness of His heart, the love and tenderness of His character? Certainly not! Love is no love at all, unless it be capable of indignation against wrong. Besides, it is no personal wrongs which stir the heart of Jesus, “Who when He was reviled, reviled not again, when He suffered, He threatened not”; but the wrong these hypocrites are doing to the poor sheep they are leading all astray. The occasion absolutely demanded a tempest of indignation. There is this further to be considered, that the Lord Jesus, as Revealer of God, must display His justice as well as His mercy, His wrath as well as His love.
This passage, terrible as it is, commends itself to all that-is noblest and best in us. Who is there who does not thank God for this scathing denunciation of that most hateful of all abominations-hypocrisy? See how He brands it in every sentence-“Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!” – how piece by piece He shows their miserable life to be a lie. Hypocrites! because you profess to sit in Moses seat, to have the key of knowledge, to know the way of life yourselves, and show it to others; and all this profession is a lie (Mat 23:13). Hypocrites! because your pretended charity is a lie, aggravated by the forms of devotion with which it is masked, while the essence of it is most sordid avarice (Mat 23:14). Hypocrites! because your zeal for God is a lie, being really a zeal for the devil, your converts being perverts worse than yourselves (Mat 23:15). Hypocrites! because your morality is a lie, making the law of God of none effect by your miserable casuistry (Mat 23:16-22). Hypocrites! because your devotion is a lie, consisting merely in punctilious attention to the minutest forms, while the weighty matters of the law you set aside, like those who “strain out the gnat and swallow the camel” (Mat 23:23-24, R.V). Hypocrites! because your whole demeanour is a lie, all fair without like a whited sepulchre, while within ye are “full of dead mens bones, and of all uncleanness” (Mat 23:25-28). Hypocrites! because your pretended reverence for the prophets is a lie, for had you lived in the days of your fathers you would have done as they did, as is plain from the way in which you are acting now; for you build the tombs of the dead prophets and put to death the living ones (Mat 23:29-31).
The sin branded, sentence follows: “Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers.” Since you will not be saved, there is nothing for it but that you go on in sin to the bitter end: serpents, “for ever hissing at the heels of the holy,” a brood of vipers, with no hope now of escaping the judgment of Gehenna!
As in the Sermon on the Mount (see page 722) so here, when He speaks as Judge He cannot conceal His personal majesty. All throughout He has been speaking with authority, but has, as usual, avoided the obtrusion of His personal prerogative. Even in saying “One is your Master, even the Christ,” it is not at all the same as if He had said, even Myself. All it necessarily conveyed was, “One is your master, even the Messiah,” whoever he may be. But now He speaks as from His judgment throne. He is no longer thinking of Himself as one of the prophets, or even as the Kings Son, but as Lord of all; so He says: “Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth,” from Abel to Zacharias. And, again, “Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.”
But judgment is His strange work. He has been compelled by the fire of His holiness to break forth into this tempest of indignation against the hypocrites, and to pronounce upon them the long-deferred sentence of condemnation and wrath. But there has been a wail in all His woes. His nature and His name is love, and it must have been a terrible strain on Him to keep up the foreign tone so long. “The wrath of the Lamb” is a necessary but not a natural combination. We may not wonder, then, though well we may adore, when after the tension of these woes, His heart is melted into tenderness as He mourns over the fate which all His love may not avert: “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!” Again, observe the lofty consciousness shining out in the little pronoun “I.” He is a young man of little more than thirty; but His personal consciousness runs back through all the ages of the past, through all the times of the killing of the prophets and stoning of the messengers of God, from Abel on to Zachariah: and not only so, but this Son of Israel speaks in the most natural way as the brooding mother of them all through all their generations-what wonders, not of beauty alone, and of exquisite pathos, but of conscious majesty in that immortal lamentation!
Our Saviours public ministry is closed. He has yet many things to say to His disciples-a private ministry of love to fulfil ere He leave the world and go to the Father; but His public ministry is ended now. Commenced with beatitudes, it ends with woes, because the blessings offered in the beatitudes have been rudely rejected and trampled underfoot. And now the Lord of the Temple is about to leave it-to leave it to its fate, to leave it as He counselled His disciples to leave any city or house that refused to receive them: shaking the dust off His feet; and in doing so, as He turns from the astonished hierarchs, He utters these solemn words, which close the time of their merciful visitation and leave them to “eat of the fruit of their own way, and be filled with their own devices”; “Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.” Your house. It was Mine. I was its glory, and would have been its defence; but when I came unto My own, Mine own received Me not; and now it is no longer Mine but yours, and therefore desolate. Desolate; and therefore defenceless, a ready prey for the Roman eagles when they swoop on the defenceless brood. “For I say unto you, Ye shall not see Me henceforth till”-till when? Is there still a door of hope? There is, even for scribes and Pharisees-hypocrites; the door ever open here on earth: “Him that cometh unto Me, I will in nowise cast out.” The door is closed upon them for ever as leaders of the people; as temple authorities they can never be recognised again, -their house is left to them desolate, but for themselves there is still this door of hope; these awful woes therefore are not a final sentence, but a long, loud, last call to enter ere it be too late. And as if to show, after all the wrath of His terrible denunciation, that judgment is “His strange work” and that He “delighteth in mercy,” He points in closing to that still open door, and says, “Ye shall not See Me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord.”
Why did they not say it then? Why did they not entreat Him to remain? But they did not. So “Jesus went out, and departed from the Temple.” {Mat 14:1} and though eighteen hundred years have rolled away since then, the time has not yet come when as a people they have said, “Blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord”; accordingly their house is still desolate, and they are “scattered and peeled”-chickens that will not nestle under the mothers wing.