Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 23:2
saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat:
2. sit in Moses’ seat ] i. e. succeed him as teachers. For sitting as the posture of a teacher cp. ch. Mat 5:1.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Scribes and Pharisees – See the notes at Mat 3:7.
Moses seat – Moses was the great legislator of the Jews. By him the Law was given. The office of explaining that Law among the Jews devolved on the scribes and Pharisees. In the synagogues they sat while expounding the Law, and rose when they read it. By sitting in the seat of Moses we are to understand authority to teach the Law; or, as he taught the nation by giving the Law, so they taught it by explaining it.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
2. Saying, The scribes and thePharisees sitThe Jewish teachers stood to read, but satto expound the Scriptures, as will be seen by comparing Luk 4:16;Luk 4:20.
in Moses’ seatthat is,as interpreters of the law given by Moses.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Saying, the Scribes and Pharisees,…. The Persic version adds, the priests: but Christ does not here speak of the sanhedrim, or grand council of the nation, and of their legislative power; but of those that were the teachers of the people, and the interpreters of the law; and of those, who, though they corrupted the word with their glosses and traditions, yet retained some truth, and at least came nearer truth, than the Sadducees; who therefore are omitted, and only Scribes and Pharisees mentioned, who gave the literal and traditional sense of the Scriptures; of whom he says, they
sit in Moses’s seat: not that they were his successors in his office as a legislator and mediator; though the Persic version reads it, “sit in the place and chair of Moses”; but they read his law, and explained it to the people: this post and place, as yet, they kept in the office they were, and were to continue; and the people were to regard them so far as they spoke consistent with the law, until it had its full accomplishment in Christ. The allusion is not to the chairs in which the sanhedrim sat in trying and determining causes, but to those in which the doctors sat when they expounded the law; for though they stood up when they read the law, or the prophets, they sat down when they preached out of them: this custom of the synagogue was observed by our Lord; see Lu 4:16.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Sit on Moses’ seat ( ). The gnomic or timeless aorist tense, , not the aorist “for” the perfect. The “seat of Moses” is a brief form for the chair of the professor whose function it is to interpret Moses. “The heirs of Moses’ authority by an unbroken tradition can deliver ex cathedra pronouncements on his teaching” (McNeile).
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Moses ‘ seat [] . Or chair, as Wyc., in allusion to the practice of teachers sitting.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
2. In the chair of Moses. Reasons were not wanting for inserting here what Luke relates at a different place. Besides that the doctrine is the same, I have no doubt that Luke, after having said that the scribes were sharply and severely reproved by our Lord, added also the other reproofs which Matthew delayed till the proper place; for already we have frequently seen that the Evangelists, as occasion required, collected into one place various discourses of Christ. But as the narrative of Matthew is more full, I choose rather to take his words as the subject of exposition.
Our Lord gives a general exhortation to believers to beware of conforming their life to the wicked conduct of the scribes, but, on the contrary, to regulate it by the rule of the Law which they hear from the mouth of the scribes; for it was necessary (as I have lately hinted) that he should reprove many abuses in them, that the whole people might not be infected. Lest, through their crimes, the doctrine of which they were the ministers and heralds should be injured, he enjoins believers to attend to their words, and not to their actions; as if he had said, that there is no reason why the bad examples of pastors should hinder the children of God from holiness of life. That the word scribes, agreeably to the Hebrew idiom, denotes the teachers or expounders of the Law, is well known; and it is certain that Luke calls the same persons lawyers (89)
Now our Lord refers peculiarly to the Pharisees, who belonged to the number of the scribes, because at that time this sect held the highest rank in the government of the Church, and in the exposition of Scripture. For we have formerly mentioned that, while the Sadducees and Essenes preferred the literal interpretation of Scripture, the Pharisees followed a different manner of teaching, which had been handed down, as it were, to them by their ancestors, which was, to make subtle inquiries into the mystical meaning of Scripture. This was also the reason why they received their name; for they are called Pherusim, that is, expounders. (90) And though they had debased the whole of Scripture by their false opinions, yet, as they plumed themselves on that popular method of instruction, their authority was highly esteemed in explaining the worship of God and the rule of holy life. The phrase ought, therefore, to be thus interpreted: “The Pharisees and other scribes, or, the scribes, among whom the Pharisees are the most highly esteemed, when they speak to you, are good teachers of a holy life, but by their works they give you very bad instructions; and therefore attend to their lips rather than to their hands.”
It may now be asked, Ought we to submit to all the instructions of teachers without exception? For it is plain enough, that the scribes of that age had wickedly and basely corrupted the Law by false inventions, had burdened wretched souls by unjust laws, and had corrupted the worship of God by many superstitions; but Christ wishes their doctrine to be observed, as if it had been unlawful to oppose their tyranny. The answer is easy. He does not absolutely compare any kind of doctrine with the life, but the design of Christ was, to distinguish the holy Law of God from their profane works. For to sit in the chair of Moses is nothing else than to teach, according to the Law of God, how we ought to live. And though I am not quite certain whence the phrase is derived, yet there is probability in the conjecture of those who refer it to the pulpit which Ezra erected, from which the Law was read aloud, (Neh 8:4.) Certainly, when the Rabbis expounded Scripture, those who were about to speak rose up in succession; but it was perhaps the custom that the Law itself should be proclaimed from a more elevated spot. That man, therefore, sits in the chair of Moses who teaches, not from himself, or at his own suggestion, but according to the authority and word of God. But it denotes, at the same time, a lawful calling; for Christ commands that the scribes should be heard, because they were the public teachers of the, Church.
The Papists reckon it enough, that those who issue laws should possess the title and occupy the station; for in this way they torture the words of Christ to mean, that we are bound to receive obediently whatever the ordinary prelates of the Church enjoin. But this calumny is abundantly refuted by another injunction of Christ, when he bids them beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, (Mat 16:6.)
If Christ pronounces it to be not only lawful, but even proper, to reject whatever of their own the scribes mingle with the pure doctrine of the Law, certainly we are not bound to embrace, without discrimination or the exercise of judgment, whatever they are pleased to enjoin. Besides, if Christ had intended here to bind the consciences of his followers to the commandments of men, there would have been no good ground for what he said in another passage, that it is in vain to worship God by the commandments of men, (Mat 15:9.)
Hence it is evident, that Christ exhorts the people to obey the scribes, only so far as they adhere to the pure and simple exposition of the Law. For the exposition of, Augustine is accurate, and in accordance with Christ’s meaning, that, “the scribes taught the Law of God while they sat in the chair of Moses; and, therefore, that the sheep ought to hear the voice of the Shepherd by them, as by hirelings.” To which words he immediately adds: “God therefore teaches by them; but if they wish to teach any thing of their own, refuse to hear, refuse to do them.” With this sentiment accords what the same writer says in his Fourth Book of Christian Doctrine: “Because good believers do not obediently listen to any sort of man, but to God himself; therefore we may profitably listen even to those whose lives are not profitable.” It was, therefore, not the chair of the scribes, but the chair of Moses, that constrained them to teach what was good, even when they did not do what was good. For what they did in their life was their own; but the chair of another man did not permit them to teach what was their own.
(89) “ Docteurs de la loy;” — “teachers,” or “doctors of the law.” Harmony, vol. 1, p. 281.
(90) Harmony, vol 1, p. 281.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(2) The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses seat.The words were probably spoken of their collective action as represented in the Sanhedrin, rather than of their individual work as interpreters of the Law. As such, they claimed to be the authoritative exponents of the Law, and our Lord recognises (unless we suppose a latent protest in His words, like that which is veiled in the full well ye reject of Mar. 7:9) their official claim to reverence.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
2. Sit in Moses’ seat By being the transcribers, readers, and teachers of Moses’ words. The seat or cathedra 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. These scribes and Pharisees were in no way the successors of Moses by ordination or lineal descent. They had not, any more than the Sadducees or Herodians, a regular organic office. Their seat was not an apostolic throne, an episcopal see, or any successional position whatever. All they had was a reading desk and chair, from which, as from Moses himself, the words of Moses could come forth. The Greek word for sit signifies, have seated themselves.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘Saying, “The Scribes and the Pharisees sat (aorist) on Moses seat,” ’
This verse raises three questions. Who are indicated by ‘the Scribes and the Pharisees’? Why is the aorist of the verb used? And what is Moses’ seat
‘The Scribes and the Pharisees.’ This phrase is unique in Matthew. Previously ‘the Scribes and Pharisees’ have been a combination united by having only one definite article, or alternatively, especially in what follows, as having no definite article. So we have to explain why Matthew made this slight alteration to his usual style. It has been suggested:
1) That we translate as ‘the Scribes, that is, those who are of the Pharisees’, for kai often indicates such an explanatory connection.
2) That we translate as ‘both the Scribes and the Pharisees’ firmly distinguishing between them, for many Scribes were not Pharisees.
3) That Jesus is citing a well known saying, ‘the Scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat’ which had been translated into Greek prior to its use by Matthew who retains it as it stands.
4) That the intention is to sum up that section of the people who assiduously follow the Teachings of the Elders, and seek to impress it on others.
In favour of 1) is that it is the Scribes who would be seen as the lawgivers, and not the Pharisees, for the latter were primarily not teachers, but a sect who assiduously followed the Law. In other words a Pharisee was not necessarily a teacher. Against it is that previously, and later in the chapter, Scribes (of the Pharisees) and Pharisees are seen together as one whole.
In favour of 2) is that it represents the most straightforward reading of the grammar, but very much against it is that, as in 1), the Pharisees were not seen as teachers as such.
In favour of 3) is that it explains the unique grammar, for it would simply arise because it was a part of the saying and Matthew would not alter it. Against it is that we know nothing of such a saying. But even if we select this option we still have to decide on the connection of the Scribes with the Pharisees
In favour of 4) is that it ties in with what follows, and it reminds us that the major part of the Scribes, who were Pharisees, together with the Pharisees, were those who dedicated themselves most to the observance of the Law as practised by the Pharisees, at least outwardly. Thus we might paraphrase ‘the Pharisaic Scribes strongly supported by all the Pharisees’, in Israel’s eyes a strong combination.
On the one hand it might suggest that Jesus is indicating that the teaching of the Scribes and Pharisees was not to be haphazardly discarded, and that regard had to be taken to the fact that in general they were a strong and reliable source of knowledge about the Law of Moses. But against this suggestion is the fact that even in this very passage Jesus calls them ‘blind guides’, and ‘fools and blind’, and ‘blind’ (Mat 23:16-17; Mat 23:19). He points out that they lay on people heavy burdens grievous to be borne (Mat 23:4). All this does not sit well with Jesus recommending the disciples to pay heed to what they say. This possibly indicates that His recommendation is limited to when they sit on ‘the seat of Moses’.
‘Sat on Moses’ seat.’ It is, however, not certain what Jesus meant by ‘sitting on Moses’ seat’, for the idea is found nowhere else apart from in one Talmudic reference where ‘the seat of Moses’ is seen as a pattern of Solomon’s throne. If we take that hint we may see it as indicating the authority of the Law. Compare Exo 18:13 where Moses officially sat in order to act as lawgiver and judge for the people. Thus it may be saying that they perform the same function.
It has been suggested that ‘Moses’ seat’ was a chair in the synagogue reserved for the holding of the scrolls of the Law and possibly used by those who in the services read from the Law in Hebrew, and then gave the Aramaic translation/paraphrase. This was a central aspect of the service. Such stone seats have been excavated in ancient synagogues (later than the time of Jesus) which were clearly shaped so as to hold scrolls, and it may well be that the idea was that they held the scrolls of the Law (as ‘Moses’ seat’) and that the reader of the Law for that day would pick up the scrolls and then reverently sit down on the seat to read them out as though he were Moses, following it up, as the custom was, with an Aramaic paraphrase, thus solemnly ‘sitting in Moses’ seat’ as the Law promulgator (compare Exo 18:13). After that he would equally solemnly and reverently replace the scrolls on the seat. Moses had spoken! The reading from the prophets was possibly dealt with differently, being read standing, prior to the reader then sitting down, probably in a different seat (for the first held the scrolls) to expound on the passage read (compare Luk 4:16-20), the scrolls of the Law having again been previously set down again on ‘Moses’ seat’.
If this was the practise in 1st century AD then what ‘they bade men’ in Mat 23:3, which had to be listened to and obeyed, were the direct words of the Law of Moses as read in Hebrew and then paraphrased in Aramaic. That would certainly make sense in the context. And it would explain fully why He could tell them to pay heed to the Scribes and the Pharisees.
One problem with this interpretation is that the Pharisees (as opposed to the Scribes) were not particularly involved with this ministry for participants were selected by the ruler of the synagogue and his elders, and the Pharisees had no special prerogative in this regard. The Pharisees were simply a sect of men dedicated to their own special views, even though they were to a certain extent admired and highly respected by the people. It may, however, be that we are to translate Jesus’ words as we saw above as ‘the Scribes, even those of the Pharisees’, describing especially those Scribes present in the Temple courtyard with their Pharisee companions. This would explain the unusual double definite article. The Scribes if present in a synagogue would, as trained Teachers of the Law, naturally be chosen for the task of reading the Law.
Highly in favour of this interpretation is that Jesus goes on to speak of the Scribes as blind guides (Mat 23:16), continually emphasising their blindness (Mat 23:17; Mat 23:19), and as ‘hypocrites’, whilst elsewhere emphasising that ‘they make the word of God void through their tradition’ (Mar 7:13). It is difficult to see how Jesus could then tell His Apostles to do what they say other than when reading out the Law of Moses.
On the other hand, as we have seen, an alternative suggestion is that the Pharisaic Scribes and the Pharisees were seen as jointly representing the same teaching, the Scribes then seen as ‘occupying Moses’ seat’ (speaking as his representatives) on behalf of both, and thus also speaking on behalf of all the Pharisees. This would tie in with the way in which Matthew regularly connects them. They would be the main religious arbiters seen in Galilee (Mat 5:20; Mat 12:38; Mat 15:1). (Compare how the Apostles and ‘men of good report’ could be seen as leading the church together in Act 6:1-4, even if only briefly, although the preaching was initially to be done by the Apostles on behalf of all).
Alternately ‘Moses’ seat’ might be seen as indicating that the Scribes, as it were, deputised for Moses in the expounding of the Law, and that therefore their teaching, in so far as it actually involved the carefully cited Law, should be accepted. If we take ‘all things literally as meaning ‘everything’ this interpretation, fails on the grounds that it is later made quite clear (as it has been previously – e.g. Mat 15:3-6; Mat 16:6; Mat 16:12) that Scribal interpretations were not necessarily acceptable, and could indeed be downright wrong (see also Mat 23:16; Mat 23:18). How then could Jesus (or even Matthew) possibly have bid His disciples to observe them? No one who had put together the Sermon on the Mount could possibly have suggested this. Furthermore there were disagreement among the Scribes themselves, as we know from the disputes between the schools of Shammai and Hillel. Furthermore the Scribes in Judea did not always see eye to eye with the Scribes in Galilee.
This would then favour the suggestion that the ‘bidding’ of the Scribes was limited to the time when they sat and read the Law and paraphrased it from Moses’ seat. In other words the disciples and the crowds were to listen to the Law being read and expounded and must obey it in full, not despising it simply because it was read out by a Scribe of the Pharisees. At a time when scrolls of the Law were comparatively rare and expensive, and when not all understood Hebrew, such readings with their accompanying Aramaic paraphrase would be one time when all could learn what the Law did actually say. Thus to use a modern saying, ‘they were not to throw out the baby with the dirty bath water’.
The verb in the aorist may indicate that ‘took their seat on Moses’ seat’ indiates how the Scribes had in the past, as it were, in all sincerity, sought to take up their position as expounders of Moses. It may, however, simply indicate that they were at the time in a synagogue and that he was referring to the Scribes who had sat on the platform, seen, with the seat of Moses in the centre, as ‘Moses seat, because any one of them could be called on to read. But the fact that He was speaking to the crowds rather suggests the Temple area. On the other hand the aorist may indicate that they constantly did it as a definite act, but this last, although it does occur, is an unusual use of the aorist.
Further Note On Moses’ Seat.
There have been attempts to relate ‘Moses’ seat’ to the description written down in the Halakah (Jewish Law, written down after 400 AD) of the working of the Rabbinic Sanhedrin. We say the Rabbinic Sanhedrin because strictly speaking it indicates the practise that built up after the fall of Jerusalem. In the days prior to the fall of Jerusalem the one who was ‘head over the Sanhedrin’ was the High Priest, and the Sanhedrin consisted of three sections, the Chief Priests and their fellow-Sadducees, including Scribes; the lay aristocracy; and the Scribes of the Pharisees and fellow-Pharisees.It is doubtful if the Scribes of the Pharisees at that time thought of the High Priest as the one who had greatest knowledge among them. That was clearly a provision added later and was a new innovation.The High Priest had the oversight because of who he was. And this oversight by the High Priest had indeed been the situation from the original commencement of the Sanhedrin which originally consisted of priests and lay aristocracy.
In the Halakah we read, First, a supreme court is established in the Temple. This is called the Great Sanhedrin. It is composed of 71 judges. This is derived from Num 11:16 which states: “Gather for Me seventy men from the elders of Israel.” And Moses presided over them, as the verse continues: “And they shall stand there with you.” Thus there are 71.
(Note: the Jewish tradition that the 70 formed a ‘court’ with Moses is incorrect. The 70 were appointed to act as minor judges for cases which were seen as too trivial for Moses to deal with. We know of no equivalent of the Sanhedrin in Moses’ day, nor indeed throughtout the period of Judges and Kings. It came into being a hundred or so years after the Babylonian exile, made up of priests and lay aristocrats and led by the High Priest).
The one who is of greatest knowledge is placed as the head over them. He acts as the Rosh Yeshivah. And he is called the nasi by the Sages in all sources. He assumes the position of Moses our teacher.
The greatest among the remaining 70 is appointed as an assistant to the head. He sits at his right and is called av beit din. The remaining judges from the 70 sit before them and are seated according to their age and according to their stature. Whoever possesses greater wisdom than his colleague is seated closer than his colleagues to the nasi on his left. The members of the Sanhedrin sit in a semi-circle so that the nasi and the av beit din can see all of them.
(Note: This attempt to grade themselves among the Pharisaic Scribes is taken up from their practise of doing the same at feasts (Luk 14:10). Contrary to the teaching of Jesus they were superiority conscious. It would not apply in the same way in the Sanhedrin prior to the destruction of Jerusalem because too many different parties were involved, who no doubt sat in their own groups. Thus the reference to ‘the Temple’ is a deliberate attempt to backdate the innovations, which reminds us that what we find in the Mishnah and the Talmud cannot simply be assumed to apply in the time of Jesus).
The Halakah then goes on to speak of other ‘courts of judgment’ In addition, two courts of 23 judges each are appointed. One holds sessions at the entrance to the Temple courtyard. and the other at the entrance to the Temple Mount. In addition, in every city in Israel in which there are 120 or more adult males, we appoint a minor Sanhedrin. They hold court at the entrance to the city, as implied by Amo 5:15 : “And you shall present judgment in your gates.” How many judges should be in such a court? 23. The one who possesses the greatest wisdom is the chief justice and the remainder sit in a semi-circle so that the chief justice can see all of them.. Once again we detect the later influence of the Rabbis. As will be noted the reference in Amos simply states the well known fact that in towns and cities the justices met in ‘the gate’ in public view. How much of what is written here specifically applies the situation pre-70 AD we cannot now know.
End of Note.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Mat 23:2 . The phrase: “ to sit in Moses’ seat ” (in the seat which Moses had occupied as lawgiver), is borrowed not from Exo 18:13 , but refers to the later practice of having chairs for teachers (comp. Act 22:3 ), and is intended as a figurative mode of describing the functions of one who “ acts as a public teacher of the Mosaic law ,” in discharging which functions the teacher may be regarded as the representative and successor of Moses . Accordingly, in Rabbinical writers, one who succeeds a Rabbi as the representative of his school is described as . See Vitringa, Synag. p. 165 f.
] have seated themselves, have assumed to themselves the duties of this office. In the whole of this phraseology one cannot fail to detect an allusion to the pretensions and self-seeking character of the Pharisees. Comp. 2Th 2:4 .
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
2 Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat:
Ver. 2. Sit in Moses’ chair ] i.e. Have the ordinary office of teaching the people, but quo iure, by what law, he questioneth not. The priests and Levites should have done it, but the Scribes and Pharisees had for present taken it upon them, stepped into the chair, and there set themselves, a Rom 2:20 . So Hildebrand and his successors have invaded Peter’s chair, as they call the see of Rome; but what said an ancient? Non habent Petri haereditatem, qui Petri fidem non habent. They have no right to Peter’s chair that have not Peter’s faith. The Index Expurgatorius commands ( sublata fide ) endure for the faith, instead of Fidem Petri, the Faith of Peter, to print it Sedem Petri. The seat of Peter, Perfrica frontem, said Calvus to Vatinius, et digniorem te dic qui Praetor fieres quam Catonem, Put on a good face, and say that thou art fitter for the office than Cato himself. (Quintil. lib. ix. cap. 2.) But what a bold face had Barcaena the Jesuit, who, Diabolo advenienti occurrit obviam petiitque ut cathedram eius occuparet, quia erat dignior, meeting the devil, required his chair of him, as one that better deserved it. He had his desire, I doubt not. But if Scribes and Pharisees sat in Moses’ chair, it is no news than for bad men to succeed better; as Timotheus Herulus did Proterius the good Bishop of Alexandria, and as Arminius did Junius in the professor’s place at Leyden.
a , Sedeo. colloco. I sit, I lie down.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
2. ] Moses’ seat is the office of judge and lawgiver of the people: see Exo 2:13-25 ; Deu 17:9-13 . Our Lord says, ‘In so far as the Pharisees and Scribes enforce the law and precepts of Moses, obey them: but imitate not their conduct.’
must not be pressed too strongly, as conveying blame, ‘ have seated themselves ;’ it is merely stated here as a matter of fact . Mat 23:8 ; Mat 23:10 however apply to their leadership as well as their faults; and declare that among Christians there are to be none sitting on the seat of Christ .
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Mat 23:2 . . . , on the seat of Moses, short for, on the seat of a teacher whose function it was to interpret the Mosaic Law. The Jews spoke of the teacher’s seat as we speak of a professor’s chair. , in effect, a gnomic aorist = solent sedere (Fritzsche), not a case of the aorist used as a perfect = have taken and now occupy, etc. (Erasmus). Burton (Syntax) sees in this and other aorists in N. T. a tendency towards use of aorist for perfect not yet realised: “rhetorical figure on the way to become grammatical idiom, but not yet become such,” 55. . Wendt ( L. J. , i., 186) thinks this an addition by the evangelist, the statement strictly applying only to the scribes.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Pharisees. See App-120. The Sadducees had their own “leaven” (Mat 16:6) but not this.
sit = have taken [their] seat.
in = upon. Greek. epi.
Moses’. See note on Mat 8:4.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
2.] Moses seat is the office of judge and lawgiver of the people: see Exo 2:13-25; Deu 17:9-13. Our Lord says, In so far as the Pharisees and Scribes enforce the law and precepts of Moses, obey them: but imitate not their conduct.
must not be pressed too strongly, as conveying blame,-have seated themselves;-it is merely stated here as a matter of fact. Mat 23:8; Mat 23:10 however apply to their leadership as well as their faults; and declare that among Christians there are to be none sitting on the seat of Christ.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Mat 23:2. , …, sit, etc.) Representing Moses, reading and interpreting his law, and even urging more than he enjoined.- , the Scribes and the Pharisees) The sins which are here enumerated, did not belong all equally to both of these classes; but they had many in common, and participated in many; see Luk 11:45.[983]
[983] 2 And of those sins of the Scribes and Pharisees specified in the discourses of Christ, which are described more fully by Matthew, Mark and Luke, have selected those sins which would most clearly show to the untutored populace why they should beware of the Scribes-viz., their haughtiness, their avarice, and their hypocrisy.-Harm., p. 472.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
sit in
Cf. Ezr 7:6; Ezr 7:25; Ezr 7:26. Jesus’ disciples were to honour the law, but not the hypocritical teachers of it.
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
Neh 8:4-8, Mal 2:7, Mar 12:38, Luk 20:46
Reciprocal: Exo 18:13 – General Deu 19:17 – General Deu 33:10 – They shall teach 1Ch 24:6 – the scribe Ezr 7:11 – a scribe Ezr 7:25 – teach ye Neh 8:1 – Ezra Son 5:7 – the keepers Zec 11:16 – which Mat 5:20 – exceed Mat 7:29 – and not Mat 15:1 – scribes Mat 16:1 – Pharisees Mat 21:33 – husbandmen Mar 1:44 – show Luk 11:46 – Woe Joh 7:19 – yet Tit 3:1 – to be subject
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
23:2
Moses wrote the law that was to regulate the Yews during that dispensation. After he died it was the duty of others to teach and enforce it upon the nation, and that was a work done by the scribes and Phari sees which is the meaning of their sitting in Moses’ seat.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat:
[In Moses’ seat, etc.] This is to be understood rather of the legislative seat (or chair), than of the merely doctrinal; and Christ here asserts the authority of the magistrate, and persuadeth to obey him in lawful things.
Concerning the chairs of the Sanhedrim there is mention made in Babylonian Succah; “There were at Alexandria seventy-one golden chairs, according to the number of the seventy-one elders of the great council.” Concerning the authority of Moses and his vicegerent in the council, there is also mention in Sanhedrim; “The great council consisted of seventy-one elders. But whence was this number derived? From that place where it is said, ‘Choose me out seventy men of the elders of Israel: and Moses was president over them.’ Behold seventy-one!”
What is here observed by Galatinus from the signification of the aorist sat is too light and airy: “He saith, They sat and not, They sit; that he might plainly demonstrate, that their power was then ceased.” But if we would be so curious to gather any thing from this aorist, we might very well transfer it to this sense rather: “The scribes and Pharisees, the worst of men, have long usurped Moses’ seat; nevertheless, we ought to obey them, because, by the dispensation of the divine providence, they bear the chief magistracy.”
Concerning their authority, thus Maimonides: “The great council of Jerusalem was the ground (the pillar and ground) of the traditional law, and the pillar of doctrine: whence proceeded statutes and judgments for all Israel. And concerning them the law asserts this very thing, saying, ‘According to the sentence of the law which they shall teach thee.’ Whosoever, therefore, believes Moses our master and his law, is bound to rely upon them for the things of the law.”
Christ teacheth, that they were not to be esteemed as oracles, but as magistrates.
Fuente: Lightfoot Commentary Gospels
Mat 23:2. The scribes and the Pharisees. Joined together, because the scribes were mostly Pharisees. Study of the Scriptures would be of comparatively little interest to the indifferent Sadducees. Theologians, from the nature of their pursuits, are in more danger of becoming Pharisees than Sadducees.
Sit in Moses seat, as judges and expounders of the law. As a lawgiver Moses spoke in the name of God; as judge and administrator he had successors, with authority to explain what he meant, but not to legislate. Under Roman rule, the function of the Sanhedrin, composed mainly of Pharisees, was limited to this.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Verse 2
Sit in Moses’ seat; succeed him as teachers of the law of God.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
23:2 {1} Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees {a} sit in Moses’ seat:
(1) We ought to listen to whatever we are truly taught from the word of God, even by wicked teachers, but in a way so that we abstain from their evil behaviour.
(a) Because God appointed the order, the Lord would therefore have his word to be heard even from the mouth of hypocrites and hirelings.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
The scribes were the official teachers of the Old Testament. The Pharisees were a theological party within Judaism. Jesus was addressing two different though somewhat overlapping groups when He made this distinction. Some scribes were Pharisees, but not all Pharisees were scribes. The first title addressed the role of some of the leaders and the second the theological beliefs of some of them. A modern illustration might be "preachers" and "evangelicals." Not all preachers are evangelicals though some are. Likewise not all evangelicals are preachers though some are.
According to Old Testament figurative usage a person who sat on a predecessor’s seat was that person’s successor (Exo 11:5; Exo 12:29; 1Ki 1:35; 1Ki 1:46; 1Ki 2:12; 1Ki 16:11; 2Ki 15:12; Psa 132:12). When Jesus said the scribes and Pharisees had seated themselves on Moses’ seat He meant they viewed themselves as Moses’ legal successors, possessing his authority. This is indeed how they viewed themselves. [Note: Mishnah Sanhedrin 11:3.] Jewish synagogues typically had a stone seat at the front where the authoritative teacher sat. [Note: E. L. Sukenik, Ancient Synagogues in Palestine and Greece, pp. 57-61.] Likewise most rabbis sat when they taught. The NASB translation "have seated themselves" hints at the irony that follows in the first part of Mat 23:3. They presumed to be Moses’ successors with his authority.