Miles de Libros Cristianos Gratis. Accede a nuestra Biblioteca Virtual

Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 23:29

Para un estudio avanzado de: “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 23:29” utilice nuestra app.

Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchers of the righteous,

29. build the tombs of the prophets, &c.] Luk 11:47-48. A portion of the Temple-offerings was devoted to this purpose. See Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. ad loc.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

Ye build the tombs of the prophets – That is, you build sepulchres or tombs ever the prophets that have been slain. This they did professedly from veneration and respect for their character. This is often done at the East at the present day, and indeed elsewhere. Among the Muslims it is a common way of showing respect for any distinguished man to build a tomb for him. By doing this, they profess respect for his character and veneration for his memory. So the Pharisees, by building tombs in this manner, professedly approved of the character and conduct of the prophets, and disapproved of the conduct of their fathers in killing them.

And garnish … – That is, adorn or ornament. This was done by rebuilding them with more taste, decorating them, and keeping them neat and clean. The original word means, also, to show any proper honor to the memory of the dead, as by speaking well of them, praying near them, or rearing synagogues near them in honor of their memory.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Mat 23:29; Mat 23:33; Mat 23:36

How can ye escape the damnation of hell?

–

The difficulty of escaping the damnation of hell

I. What your situation actually is.

1. You are even now under sentence of condemnation.

2. You need to be awakened, no man will escape a danger he does not perceive.

3. In order to escape final condemnation you must pursue religion with perseverance.

II. The obstacles.

1. The effect of sin is to make men blind to their own sins.

2. The sinner often seeks deliverance in a way in which it cannot be obtained.

3. The unbelieving heart will not submit to God until its opposition be removed.

4. The fascinating power of worldly objects.

5. Then you say the difficulties are so great that you have not courage to make the attempt to escape. (E. Payson, D. D.)

Pretence vain

To pretend holiness when there is none is a vain thing. What were the foolish virgins better for their blazing lamps when they wanted oil? What is the lamp of profession without the oil of saving grace? What comfort will a show of holiness yield at last? Will painted gold enrich? Painted wine refresh him that is thirsty? Will painted holiness be a cordial at the hour of death? A pretence of sanctification is not to be rested in. Many ships have had the name of Hope, the Safeguard, the Triumph, yet have been cast away upon the rocks; so many who have had the name of saintship have been cast into hell. (T. Watson.)

Suspension and infliction of judgments

1. It is not right that God should punish one generation for the sins of another.

2. It is just that God should punish all generations for their own sins.

3. God might if He pleased pass by the sins of all generations; He might punish them hereafter, not here.

4. It is right that God should punish one generation and not another. He has always acted as a Sovereign in sparing or punishing particular generations. God delayed to destroy the Egyptians.

5. When God does spare one generation and punish another He always has some good reason for both sparing and punishing.

6. The sins of one generation may be a good reason why God should punish the sins of another.

7. It is criminal and foolish for one generation to imitate the sins of a former.

8. It is well for the present generation to discountenance open vices prevailing.

9. Sinners always are the troublers of the world. (N. Emmons, D. D.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Verse 29. Ye build the tombs of the prophets] It appears that, through respect to their memory, they often repaired, and sometimes beautified, the tombs of the prophets. M. De la Valle, in his Journey to the Holy Land, says, that when he visited the cave of Machpelah, he saw some Jews honouring a sepulchre, for which they have a great veneration, with lighting at it wax candles and burning perfumes. See Harmer, vol. iii. p. 416. And in ditto, p. 424, we are informed that building tombs over those reputed saints, or beautifying those already built, is a frequent custom among the Mohammedans.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

Luke hath it, Luk 11:47, Woe unto you! for ye build the sepulchres of the prophets, and your fathers killed them. Truly ye bear witness that ye allow the deeds of your fathers: for they indeed killed them, and ye build their sepulchres. It is plain by our Saviours discourse, that the Pharisees were at great charge oft times to rebuild or adorn the sepulchres of the Lords prophets, who had been slain by the Jews in former ages for testifying the truth of God, and the sepulchres of other righteous men dying for their righteousness. This they did like a company of hypocrites, to persuade the world of what they also said, that had they lived in the times of those prophets and other good men, they would have had no hand in their blood.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

Woe unto you Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites,…. This is the seventh and last time, in which these words are delivered in this exact form by our Lord, in this chapter; and expresses the certainty, both of their sin and punishment: and the instance annexed to it, no less discovers the hypocrisy of these persons, and supports the character given of them; as also furnishes out a sufficient reason, why a woe is denounced upon them;

because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous; meaning by the “prophets” and “righteous” men, the same persons, the prophets, who were righteous men; or else the prophets, and also other righteous men besides them. Rightly is the word “build”, used of tombs and sepulchres; the Jews have a canon, which runs thus h;

“they do not dig graves nor sepulchres, on a feast day.”

The commentators i on it say, that the graves are the holes which they dig in the earth, and the sepulchres are the buildings over the graves. In the Gemara it is asked k,

“what are the graves? and what are the sepulchres? says R. Judah, the graves are made by digging and the sepulchres or tombs , “by building”;”

and these edifices which they built over the graves of some of their prophets, and righteous men, were very grand and beautiful. The Cippi Hebmici furnish us with many instances of this kind: in Hebron, in the land of Canaan, which is Kirjath Arba, is the cave of Machpelah; in which were buried the fathers of the world, Adam and Eve, Abraham and Sarah, Isaac and Rebekah, Jacob and Leah; and over it is a wonderful, , “and beautiful” building and it is the building of David the king; and opposite the city, in the mountain, is a beautiful building, and there was buried Jesse, the father of David the king: in the way from Hebron to Jerusalem, is Chalchul, where Gad, David’s seer, was buried; and Tekoah, where Isaiah the prophet was buried, and over him a “beautiful” structure: at the Mount of Olives is a beautiful fabric, which they say is the sepulchre of Huldah, the prophetess; at the bottom of the mount is a very great cave, attributed to Haggai the prophet, and in the middle of it are many caves; near it, is the sepulchre of Zechariah the prophet, in a cave shut up, and over it is , “a beautiful arch”, or vault of one stone: between Rama and Jerusalem are caves ascribed to Simeon the just, and the seventy (elders of the) sanhedrim: at Rama, Samuel was buried, also his father Elkanah, and Hannah his mother, and in a cave shut up, and over the cave buildings: at Cheres, which is Timnath Cheres, in Mount Ephraim, are buried Joshua the son of Nun, and Nun his father, and Caleb the son of Jephunneh, and over them are trees. At Avarta is the school of Phinehas, the son of Eleazar the priest, and Eleazar is buried upon the mountain; and below the village, between the olive trees, Ithamar, and over him a large monument: at the barns is a temple of the Gentiles, with a vault and a cave, where they say are buried seventy elders. At Belata, a village about a sabbath day’s journey from Shechem, Joseph the righteous was buried: at Mount Carmel, is the cave of Elijah the prophet, and there was buried Elisha, the son of Shaphat the prophet: at Jordan was buried Iddo the prophet, and over it is a great elm tree, and it is in the form of a lion; and there was buried Shebuel, the son of Gershom, the son of Moses, over whom is a great oak tree: at Geba, in Mount Lebanon, is buried Zephaniah the prophet, in the middle of a cave shut up. On a mountain, a sabbath day’s journey from Zidon, Zebulun was buried, in a beautiful vault; at Cephar Noah, was buried Noah the just; and at Kadesh Nephtalim, Barak the son of Abinoam, and Deborah his wife, and Jael; and at Timnath, Shamgar the son of Auath, over whom are two marble pillars. At Cephar Cana, is buried Jonah, the son of Amittai, on the top of a mountain, in a temple of the Gentiles, in a “beautiful” vault: at Jakuk, was buried in the way, Habakkuk the prophet; and at the north of the village of Raam, was buried Obadiah the prophet: at Susan the palace, was buried Mordecai the Jew, and over him a beautiful stone statue; and on it written, this is the sepulchre of Mordecai, the son of Jair, the son of Shimei, the son of Kish, a man of Jemini; and near the river Hiddekel, Ezekiel the prophet was buried. In this account, many things may be observed, which confirm and illustrate the words of the text. And certain it is, that it was accounted very honourable and laudable in persons, to beautify the sepulchres of the patriarchs and prophets. Among the excellent characters given of Benaah, R. Jochanan’s master, it is said l,

“that he was a very wise man, and a judge, and understood mysteries and parables; , “and painted the cave” of Adam the first, and the cave of Abraham.”

Though perhaps this is to be understood of him in a figurative sense, but yet must allude to a literal one: the sepulchres of the prophets, were especially very sacred:

“all sepulchres (they say m) might be removed, but the sepulchres of a king, and the “sepulchres of a prophet”; they say unto him, were not the sepulchres of the sons of David removed? and the sepulchres of the sons of Huldah were in Jerusalem, and a man might not touch them, to remove them for ever. R. Akiba replied to them because of decency it was forgiven (or allowed) there, and from thence the uncleanness being channelled, went out to the brook Kidron.”

Now our Lord must not be understood as blaming them for barely building the tombs of the prophets, and garnishing the sepulchres of the righteous, which they might have done without blame. But because they did all this, that they might be thought to be very innocent and holy men, and far from being guilty of the crimes their forefathers were; when they were of the very selfsame blood thirsty, persecuting spirit; and did, and would do the same things to the prophets and apostles of the New Testament, their fathers had done to the prophets of the Old. They have a saying n, that

“they do not erect monuments “for the righteous”; for their words are their memorial.”

But this can only mean, that there is no need of monuments for them; since their sayings are sufficient to keep up the memory of them. Hence Dr. Lightfoot thinks, that our Lord reproves them out of their own mouths, for despising the words of the prophets; imagining they performed piety enough, by bestowing cost in adorning their sepulchres; when they themselves own, their sayings are the best remembrances of them, and therefore ought to be regarded more than their tombs.

h Misn. Moed Katon, c. 1. sect. 6. i Maimon. & Bartenora in ib. k T. Bab. Moed Katon, fol. 8. 2. l Juchasin, fol. 86. 1. m T. Hieros. Nazir, fol. 57. 4. n T. Hieros. Shekalim, fol. 47. 1.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

The tombs of the prophets ( ). Cf. Lu 11:48-52. They were bearing witness against themselves (, verse 31) to “the murder-taint in your blood” (Allen). “These men who professed to be so distressed at the murdering of the Prophets, were themselves compassing the death of Him who was far greater than any Prophet” (Plummer). There are four monuments called Tombs of the Prophets (Zechariah, Absalom, Jehoshaphat, St. James) at the base of the Mount of Olives. Some of these may have been going up at the very time that Jesus spoke. In this seventh and last woe Jesus addresses the Jewish nation and not merely the Pharisees.

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

Tombs of the prophets. By this name are called four monuments at the base of the Mount of Olives, in the valley of Jehosaphat; called at present the tombs of Zechariah, Absalom, Jehosaphat, and St. James. Two of them are monoliths cut out of the solid rock; the others are merely excavations, with ornamental portals. “They appear,” says Dr. Thomson, “to be quite extensive, consisting of winding or semicircular galleries, passing under the mountain more than a hundred feet from east to west, and terminating in a rotunda about eighty feet from the entrance. There is no authority for the name which they commonly bear.” Possibly they were in sight of our Lord when he spoke, and were pointed to by him. The reference would be all the more telling, if, as has been conjectured, the Pharisees were engaged in constructing the tombs of Zechariah and Absalom at the time that the Lord addressed them, and that the chambered sepulchres of James and Jehosaphat, lying between those two, were the sepulchres which they were garnishing at their entrances.

Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament

Mat 23:29

. For you build the sepulchers of the prophets. An unfounded opinion is entertained by some, that the scribes are here reproved for superstition, in foolishly honoring the deceased prophets by splendid sepulchers, as the Papists now transfer the honor of God to departed saints, and even are so perverse as to adore their images. They had not yet arrived at such a pitch of blindness and madness, and therefore the design of Christ was different. The scribes endeavored to gain the favor of the ignorant multitude, and indeed of all the Jews, by this additional hypocrisy, that they cherished with reverence the memory of the prophets; for while in this manner they pretended to maintain their doctrine, any one would have supposed that they were faithful imitators of them, and very keen zealots for the worship of God. It was a proposal, therefore, which was likely to prove highly acceptable, to erect monuments for the prophets, because in this way religion might be said to be drawn out of darkness, that it might receive the honor which it deserved. And yet nothing was farther from their design than to restore doctrine, which might appear to have been extinguished by the death of the prophets. But though they were not only averse to the doctrine of the prophets, but most inveterate enemies to it, yet they honored them—when dead—with sepulchers, as if they had made common cause with them.

It is customary, indeed, with hypocrites thus to honor, after their death, good teachers and holy ministers of God, whom they cannot endure while they are alive. Nor does this arise merely from the common fault, which Horace thus describes: “We hate virtue while it is in safety, but when it has been removed from our eyes, we seek it with envy;” (107) but as the ashes of the dead no longer give annoyance by harsh and severe reproofs, they who are driven to madness by the living voices of those men are not unwilling, by adoring them, to make an empty display of religion. It is a hypocrisy which costs little to profess warm regard for those who are now silent. (108) Thus each of the prophets, in his own age, was contemptuously rejected, and wickedly tormented, by the Jews, and, in many instances, cruelly put to death; while posterity, though not a whit better than their fathers, pretended to venerate their memory, instead of embracing their doctrine; for they too were actuated by equal hostility towards their own teachers. (109) As the world—not venturing altogether to despise God, or at least to rise openly against him—contrives this stratagem of adoring the shadow of God instead of God, so a similar game is played in reference to the prophets.

A proof of this—far too striking—may be seen in Popery. Not satisfied with paying just veneration to Apostles and Martyrs, they render to them divine worship, and think that they cannot go too far in the honors which they heap upon them; and yet, by their rage against believers, they show what sort of respect they would have manifested towards Apostles and Martyrs, if they had been still alive to discharge the same office which they anciently held. For why are they inflamed with such rage against us, but because we desire that doctrine to be received, and to be successful, which the Apostles and Martyrs sealed with their blood? While the holy servants of God valued that doctrine more highly than their own life, would their life have been spared by those who so outrageously persecute the doctrine? Let them adorn the images of the saints as they may think fit, by perfumes, candles, flowers, and every sort of gaudy ornament. If Peter were now alive, they would tear him in pieces; they would stone Paul; and if Christ himself were still in the world, they would burn him with a slow fire.

Our Lord, perceiving that the scribes and priests of his age were eager to obtain the applause of the people, on the ground of their being devout worshippers of the prophets, reproves them for deceit and mockery, because they not only reject, but even cruelly persecute, the prophets that are now present, (110) and whom God has sent to them. But it is a display of base hypocrisy, and shameful impudence, to desire to be thought religious on account of worshipping the dead, while they endeavor to murder the living.

(107) Virtutem incolumm odimus, Sublatam ex oculis quærimus invidi

[ Lib. III. Carm. XXIV. ]

(108) “ Qui ne peuvent plus cier contre les vices;” — “who can no longer exclaim against vices.”

(109) “ Car aussi ils ne traittoyent pas mieux ceux qui les enseignoient fidelement que leurs peres avoyent fait aux autres;” — “for they too acted no better towards those who taught them faithfully than their fathers had done to others.”

(110) “ Et lesquels ils voyen devan leurs yeux tous les jours;” — “and whom they see before their eyes every day.”

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

CRITICAL NOTES

Mat. 23:29. Build the tombs, etc.See R.V. A portion of the temple offerings were devoted to this purpose.

Mat. 23:31. The children.You inherit their wickedness in compassing the death of the prophet of the Lord (Carr).

Mat. 23:32. Fill ye up, etc.Or, more literally, And ye! fill ye up the measure of your fathers! The Saviours heart was heaving, and He felt the inadequacy of all common modes of expression to convey the commotion of His emotions. Hence the brokenness, abruptness, and boldness of His phraseology (Morison).

Mat. 23:33. Generation.Offspring (R.V.). Damnation of hell, or, judgment of Gehenna. This expression, the judgment of hell was not invented by our Saviour. It was current among the Rabbis. See Wetstein in loc.

Mat. 23:34. Wherefore.Therefore (R.V.). That solemn therefore looks back to the whole preceding context, and forward to the whole subsequent. Because the rulers professed abhorrence of their fathers deeds, and yet inherited their spirit, they, too, would have their prophets, and would slay them. Christs desire is that all should find in His gospel the savour of life; but His purpose is that, if it be not that to any, it shall be to them the savour of death (Maclaren). Prophets.Under direct inspiration, like those of old, which may especially refer to the Apostles.Wise men.Like a Stephen or an Apollos. Scribes.Such as Mark and Luke, and many a faithful man since, whose pen has loved to write the Name above every name (ibid.).

Mat. 23:35. Zacharias.If the reading son of Barachias be retained (it is omitted in the Sinaitic MS.) a difficulty arises; for the Zacharias, whose death in the court of the house of the Lord is recorded 2Ch. 24:20-22, was the son of Jehoiada. The words, however, do not occur in Luk. 11:51, and are possibly interpolated. Zechariah the prophet was a son of Barachias: but of his death no record is preserved. Another explanation has been offered. At the commencement of the Jewish war with Vespasian a Zacharias, son of Baruch, was slain in the temple by two zealots (Jos., B. J., IV. Mat. 23:4). Accordingly, many commentators have thought that Jesus spoke prophetically of that event. The coincidence is remarkable, but the explanation is hardly probable (Carr). We need not wriggle and twist to try to avoid admitting that the calling of the martyred Zacharias, the son of Barachias, is an error of some ones, who confused the author of the prophetic book with the person whose murder is narrated in 2 Chronicles 24. We do not know who made the mistake, or how it appears in our text, but it is not honest to try to slur it over (Maclaren). Dr. Plumptre says that the omission of the words son of Barachiah in the Sinaitic MS. betrays the hand of a corrector cutting the knot of the difficulty. Altar.Viz., of burnt-offering before the temple.

Mat. 23:36. All these things shall come.Viz., in their penalty.

Mat. 23:37. O Jerusalem, Jerusalem!See R.V. In the original Jerusalem is not spoken to, but spoken of; and therefore if any interjection should be desired, ah! would be better than O! (Morison). 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 Zechariah: 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 (Gibson).

Mat. 23:38. Your house.The temple, which Jesus was leaving (Mat. 24:1). It was no longer My Fathers house.

Mat. 23:39. Till ye shall say.In the future general conversion of Israel (Romans 11; Zec. 12:10; Isa. 66:20) (Lange). Blessed, etc.Psa. 118:26. They would say so when reciting the Hallel at the Passover, but without applying the words to Jesus (Bengel).

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Mat. 23:29-39

Cumulative transgression.This last accusation of the scribes and Pharisees is one which stands by itself. Probably, because in some respects it is also the worst. Just there when their true spirit was worst, they declare it to be best (Mat. 23:30). It is with this assertion the Saviour now deals. His way of doing so is marked, first, by great wisdom; secondly, by great faithfulness; thirdly, by tenderest love.

I. Great wisdom.This is shown, on the one hand, in the way of insight. He sees at once the true value of this idle respect for the dead. On the one hand, there is nothing to be lost by it from the point of view of the scribes. A dead prophet, in some senses, is a prophet no more. He can no longer disturb such men as the Pharisees by the holiness of his life, or the faithfulness of his reproaches, or the success of his mission. There is no reason to them, therefore, against making much of his memory. There is much reason rather, for doing so, with their views and desires. The names in question, by this time, have become popular names. It would cause these men, therefore, to become popular also, if they took up the same line. And that, as we know, was, above all things, the thing they desired (Mat. 23:5-7, etc.). In reality, therefore, they were the same kind of men as their fathers had been; animated by the same spirit, though in different ways, because under a different set of conditions (Mat. 23:31). On the other hand, by great foresight. The Saviour beheld, only too clearly, all that was about to be done. Who were to come in His name, even men equal in every way (Mat. 23:34) to any before. How they would be dealt with, even with at least equal cruelty (ibid.) to any before; and so with even greater pertinacity (city to city, etc.) than ever before. And in this, therefore, would appear to be the full answer to the preceding assertion of change. If they were honouring those dead witnesses, as affirmed, they were not treating living witnesses in that way. If they had not used their fangs for a time, it would soon be seen that they were very far from being without them. Both true serpents themselves, in short, and the offspring of vipers as well, Jesus here both sees and foresees them to be (Mat. 23:33, R.V.).

II. Great faithfulness.Things being so, these men must be taught clearly all that was implied on their part. All that was implied, on the one hand, in regard to their guilt. Continuance in evil implies not only progressionit implies rapid progressionin sin. To disobey, and be warned, and punishedand then to be delivered and spared for a timeand then to be guilty over again of that same disobedienceis to do more, very much more, than twice as bad as before. And this is true even where the repetition may be regarded as being of a representative kind, as where the children, e.g., have been warned in the person of their fathers; and where the sin of the fathers has been repeated, as it were, in the person of their offspring. Such children are more responsible, and therefore, when they do sin, are also more guilty, than they would have otherwise been. Hence, therefore, the fulness of the guilt resting on the generation before Him (Mat. 23:31). Hence, therefore, what He tells them, next, of the awful severity of its doom. The true inheritor (as He has shown) of the spirit of the past, it is also the heir of its judgments. Of all overt sin nothing is like the persecution of Gods representatives in proving enmity against Him. In regard to nothing, consequently, is He wont to exact a stricter account. Never yet had there been a generation which inherited so large an amount of responsibility on this score. Never yet a generation which added to it so much responsibility of its own. So the event would only too fully make plain. Upon it, therefore, is to descend, in all its fulness, what had been held back for so long. This is the rule with the long-suffering judgment of God. The generation which finally fills the cup (Mat. 23:32) has to exhaust it as well.

III. Tenderest love.As this meekest of Kings foresees these terrible griefs and foretells them, a sorrow of almost equal intensity seizes on Himself. What a sight is here of the past! What a sight, on His side, to begin! Often and often in bygone ages, with yearning affectionssee how much is revealed here of the mysterious depths both of His nature and heart!would He have gathered together the children of Jerusalem under His wings. What a sight on their side as well! Just as often, with invincible aversion, had His love been rejected! What a sight, therefore, in both respects, of the future! Never, now, can He make such offers again. Never, either, as things are, will they see Him again. When He does come (for come He will), nothing shall be as it was. Their house will be gone! Their spirit changed! And this cry in His ears: Blessed be He that cometh in the name of the Lord (Mat. 23:38-39).

See, therefore, at the last, what it is that Jesus asks from the worst! That they should accept His love as it is! Here is the great lesson of all! Here, where the Saviour is the severest, He is also most loving of all. On the other hand, however, we must not cancel the obverse side of this coin. Here, where He is most loving, He is also severest of all (Psa. 101:1; Rom. 11:22). Let no man dream, because of Christs love, that it is good to continue in sin. Not even that love can cause this to be true!

HOMILIES ON THE VERSES

Mat. 23:29-32. The penalty of prophesying.It must have appeared to be in itself a very seemly thing, this honouring of the great and good men of former generations, to whom the religion of Israel owed so much. It must, therefore, have been startling to such men to hear Christs sarcastic comment upon this apparently praiseworthy movement, and to find Him denouncing it as an aggravation of the sin of those who were promoting it, and basing on it a charge against them of insincerity and hypocrisy. It was true, doubtless, as any cynic in Jerusalem might have pointed out to them, that those prophets, whom they were so eager to honour now that they were dead, had met with very different treatment while they were living. But their answer would have been, We sorrowfully confess it. That is the very reason for this zeal in sepulchre building. We mean by this to dissociate ourselves from the conduct of our fathers. It is our way of putting on permanent record our protest against their sin, and our conviction that if we had been in the day of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. It expresses a genuine national repentance and desire to make reparation. And there were obvious and indisputable facts which seemed to go a considerable way to justify such an attitude. They were fairly entitled to say, Is there not an immense difference between our religious condition to-day and that of our fathers who persecuted the prophets? What were the sins which the prophets rebuked? Were they not idolatry, the worship of Jehovah fearfully corrupted by the admixture of polluted rites adopted from the Canaanite and Phnician religions, altars on high places and in sacred groves, associated with gross licentiousness? Have we not changed all that? If the prophets were to come back today, is there a single one of these points on which they could challenge our conduct? Are not their demands carried out by us most scrupulously? Where, then, is the insincerity in our honouring them, since we are obeying them? And so far the defence would have been plausible. Yet our Lord sets it aside. He tells them, You are labouring under a self-complacent delusion. You have no sympathy with the spirit of those you are professing to honour; you have no true sense of the moral grandeur of those men and of their protest; your reverence is taught by the precept of men, not by the prompting of your own hearts. Your homage is merely conventional. You are manifesting the very same spirit as your fathers, and in this very matter of monument-building, instead of severing yourselves from them you are in reality serving yourselvesheirs to their sin. With biting irony He says, There is a peculiar propriety in your building the tombs of those whom your fathers slew. You are completing their work. They killed, and you bury; the spirit is the same. Christ does not here state explicitly the ground of this condemnatory judgment. But we know the principle on which it was based. Apart from that sure moral insight by which He discerned beneath the smooth and decorous surface of their life the working of the same spiritthe same tempers and vices, the same outwardness and formalismwhich had characterised ancient Israel, His condemnation was justified by their attitude towards Himself. The way in which they treated Him, the living Prophet, was an infallible indication of the way in which they would have treated the prophets, whom they professed to honour, if they had been in their day. The spirit and conduct which Christ thus reprobated is not confined to the Pharisees of Jerusalem. It is an exemplification of a constant tendency of human nature.

I. Why were the prophets hated in their own day?

1. They proclaimed new and unpopular truth.Mr. John Morley remarks that the popular teacher in any department is he who is most in accord with the average sentiment of his day, who happens to chime in most harmoniously with its prepossessions, or most effectually to nurse and exaggerate them. That is precisely what the prophets were not.

2. They made powerful application of moral and religious truth to human life.If it is a thankless and dangerous task to attack mens traditional preconceptions, it is still more dangerous to touch their selfish interests. And that is what the prophets did, not in mere harmless generalities which hurt nobody, but with definite pointed application to particular prevalent sins and social wrongs.

3. The true prophet of God bore no outward sign by which he could be recognised as such.It needed a heart in sympathy with God to discern a true prophet.

II. Why were they honoured by later generations?That, too, is in accordance with human nature. It is not only that death softens all animosities. There was more than that in the reaction of feeling towards the prophets. A dead prophet is no longer to be dreaded. He is no longer dangerous in the way of drawing attention to the existing evils or stirring mens minds to ask inconvenient questions. Truth and real greatness have in them vitality and permanence which compel men at last to recognise them. The true poet sometimes, despite the depreciation of contemporary critics, becomes a classic, and then he is awarded the conventional admiration of those who could never of themselves have discovered in him anything to admire. So it was with the prophets of Israel. Men inspired by the same Spirit which spoke in the prophets and in Christ may come to us, and we may prove as blind to every token of the Divine in them, and as deaf and unresponsive to their message, as did the Israelites in Old Testament history, or the Pharisees in the time of Christ. Our reverence for the past will be proved not by our being mere imitators of those who were great because they imitated none, not by standing immovably on their position and repeating their phrases, but by going forward in their spirit, welcoming all fresh light, proving all things, and holding fast that which is good.A. O. Johnston, M.A.

Mat. 23:31-32. Judicial abandonment.

1. Christs enemies shall not want a witness of their malicious opposing of Him; yea, from their own words and purposes He shall bring matter of conviction against themtheir never-dying worm shall breed in their own bosom. Ye are against yourselves witnesses.
2. Christ will give over desperate enemies to their own malicious disposition, and will defy them, as here He saith, Fill ye up the measure of your fathers.
3. There is a measure set to be filled up with the transgressions of the Lords enemies, and till this cup be full to the lip, they shall be suffered to go on; but when this cup is full, then the cup of Gods wrath shall be full also, and run over upon them to their destruction. Therefore saith He, Fill ye up the measure; that is, Go on till you kill Me, as your fathers did the prophets.David Dickson.

Mat. 23:32. A terrible command!Then come the awful words; bidding that generation fill up the measure of the fathers. They are like the other command to Judas to do his work quickly. They are more than permission, they are command; but such a command as, by its laying bare of the true character of the deed in view, is loves last effort at prevention.A. Maclaren, D.D.

Mat. 23:33. The sin that hath never forgiveness.I think that the most awful word which has ever been written by a human pen is, the wrath of the Lamb. There is something which always seems very terrible when I open this chapter. These words are doubly awful on the lips of the patient and forgiving Christ. There is a sin which remains unconquerable, even by the love and pity of the Incarnate Word; which remains insoluble even in the menstruum of the grace of Christ; and which defies every effort of the Redeemer to transfigure its hideous form and make it, transformed, the attendant and minister of the eternal triumph of His cross. There is a sin which can draw down on a man, even from the Divine lips, the sentence, It had been better for that man if he had never been born.

I. We will endeavour to identify the spiritual condition on which this hateful epithet is branded by John the Baptist and by the Lord. In each case the term is aimed expressly, by name, at the same class, and presents a vivid image of the same sin. This is surely a very important indication to guide us in determining what this unpardonable sin may be. It is the sin of these vipers, be they who they may. It is the spirit which searches for love that it may wound it, for grace that it may poison it, for life that it may kill it, lest the world should live anew by grace, be comforted and cherished by love, and link itself on by hope to the bliss and glory of heaven. It is the spirit which, seeing this love incarnate on its Divine errand, seeing the worlds death-pallor tinged with the rosy glow, and the rigid limbs stirring under the currents of a new-born life, said straightway, This is of the devil; and stung the Divine Onethough it could not touch the fountain of His power, the love which drew Him from heaven to Calvaryeven unto death (see Mat. 3:7; Mat. 12:10-14; Mat. 12:22-24; Mat. 12:34; Mat. 23:13-15). Then the Pharisees went out, and held a council against Him, that they might destroy Him (Mat. 12:14). Mark the occasion. A man made whole on the Sabbath daya great healing accomplished, a great burden lifted, a great joy poured into a sad, weary heart, a great ray of the love of God sent streaming into the darkness of the world. But a Pharisaic regulation had been broken. Perish the healing, perish the Healer, but let the rule of the Pharisees live! Do you wonder at the sequel? Wherefore I say unto you, all manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men, etc. In this chapter it is precisely the same. It is the wrongs and miseries of others, of hearts bruised under the heel of the Pharisees insolence, and bleeding from the strokes of their rods, which stir the Saviours indignation.

II. What lies at the root of this state of mind and spirit? Whence does it spring? Not from the perversities, infirmities, lusts, and vices which belong to the prodigals character, and are unveiled in the prodigals life (cf. 1Jn. 1:5-10 with the spirit of the Pharisee in Luk. 18:10-14). The sin which saith, I have no sin, remaineth. Even against Gods love it is hard as adamant and cold as death. The Pharisees spirit, which would dash fiercely the cup of life from the lips of a dying world, lest its own privilege should perish; which would brand the spirit of the Divine Healer, Teacher, and Saviour of the world, as devilish, and hunt it from the earth, stung to death with its viperous fang; which holds every wide gospel proclamation an intolerable insult, and every healing touch of Divine love a bitter painit is this, and nothing which a poor lost soul can brood over in its anguish, which is the unpardonable sin. This was the python on which the sun-bright Saviour rained the arrows of His indignation and hate. Ye serpents, etc.J. Baldwin Brown, B.A.

Holy indignation.I heartily sympathise with Adam Smith, who said, as a man who had made excuses for a bad character left the company, I can breathe more freely now. I cannot bear that man; he has no moral indignation in him. The mind of Christ is far too seldom followed in the conduct of our social relations.United Presbyterian Magazine.

Faithful preaching.Said Robert Morris to Dr. Rush, I like that preaching best which drives a man into the corner of his pew and makes him think the devil is after him.Thwing.

Mat. 23:34-35. The process of condemnation.

1. Our Lord, in the face of His enemies, avowed Himself to be God, having authority to send out prophets, and to bestow gifts on men.
2. Our Lord knoweth how His servants will be served in every place they come unto, and what measure of sufferings each of them will meet with from the wicked.
3. The Lords servants (albeit they know that sufferings abide them) must, notwithstanding, go on in their message; for this is the forewarning given unto His servants also, I send you prophets, and some of them ye shall kill, etc.
4. They who go on in the course of any sin, do subscribe unto the sins of such as before them did follow that sort of sin, and justly may be condemned and punished as guilty of the sin of others, which they do approve; for so Christ reckoneth, saying, That on you may come all the blood, etc.
5. The sufferers for righteousness, from the beginning of the world, are all in the rank of martyrs, and their sufferings are kept in fresh remembrance. From righteous Abel unto Zacharias, etc.
6. Raging persecutors look neither to place nor person nor consequence of their cruelty, but as blind beasts do follow forth their own fury; for betwixt the porch and the altar was Zacharias slain.David Dickson.

Mat. 23:35. Nemesis!In whose mind was the intent or design that is referred to when it is said, That upon you might come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth? If we view the subject philosophically, and as regards the theological substrate that underlies the free-and-easy phraseology, we must at once answer, with Calvin, In the mind of God. It would be contrary to sound theology, and to sound philosophy, to ignore the agency of God in the matterHis intentional agency, and thus His intent. He suffered them to walk in their own ways (Act. 14:16). He did not deem it right to break in upon the mental and moral constitution. He had given them, that He might arrest the murderous strokes that were about to fall. On the contrary, He had long continued to maintain, and He intended still to maintain, that constitution; and when He foresaw that they would madly persist in abusing it, and bid defiance to His righteousness and grace, He resolved that by suffering them meanwhile, as long as wisdom would permit, and then by-and-by bringing on them, after their cup of iniquity was full, the consummation of the doom which was their due, He would turn them to account, as beacons in His universe. There is, however, nothing in all this of the nature of unconditional intent, purpose, or decree. And it is noteworthy, besides, that in the connection of Mat. 23:34-35 the reference to the action of God is only theologically and philosophically implied, not formally expressed. There is, instead, express reference to the action of the scribes and Pharisees themselves. They acted in their own infatuated way, in order that all the righteous blood shed on the earth might come upon them; that is, they acted as if they were intending and desiring that the blood might come on them. They were like those who love death and seek itseek destruction (Pro. 8:36; Pro. 17:19; Pro. 21:6). They did not, indeed, formallyas logicians speaklove, seek, and intend their own death and destruction. But they formally loved, sought, and intended that which God had connected with death and destruction. And thus, while dashing along in their loved career, they materiallyas logicians phrase itand virtually rushed voluntarily upon their deserved retribution.J. Morison, D.D.

Mat. 23:36. Forewarned!It is a special motive unto repentance to tell men of the propinquity of judgment.David Dickson.

National catastrophes.It takes centuries for the mass of heaped-up sin to become top-heavy; but when it is, it buries one generation of those who have worked at piling it up, beneath its down-rushing avalanche.

The mills of God grind slowly,
But they grind exceeding small.

The catastrophes of national histories are prepared for by continuous centuries. The generation that laid the first powder-horn-full of the train are dead and buried long before the explosion which sends constituted order and institutions sky-high. The misery is that often the generation which has to pay the penalty has begun to wake to the sin, and would be glad to mend it, if it could. England in the seventeenth century, France in the eighteenth, America in the nineteenth, had to reap harvests from sins sown long before. Such is the law of the judgment wrought out by Gods providence in history. But there is another judgment, begun here and perfected hereafter, in which fathers and sons shall each bear their own burden, and reap accurately the fruit of what they have sown. The soul that sinneth, it shall die.A. Maclaren, D.D.

Mat. 23:37. The Saviours sorrow over a sinful world.These words form the concluding portion of our Saviours last public discourse. They were the last utterances from His lips in the templethey mark the end of His ministry. His subject has been the wickedness of the Pharisees, and His words have risen into a vehement and terrible invective. But this stern work is hard for the gentle Christ. He cannot, without pain, go on with this denouncing of doom upon His chosen people. All at once He breaks down; the pentup pity, the infinite compassion, leapt from His aching heart, and the language of His spurned affection, the ineffable sadness of His sympathising spirit, came wailing forth in the melting tenderness of this most sorrowful apostrophe, O Jerusalem, Jerusalem! thou that killest the prophets, etc. The text reveals the heart of Christ.

I. See how earnestly Jesus desires to save the guilty.Jerusalem is under the shadow of death. But she does not realise it; she does not know her danger. It is not always easy to warn men of their peril. Jerusalem had been warned; the Son of God had pleaded with her, He had wept over her, He had invited her to repent; and the end of all is this confession of defeat: I would and ye would not. You will see how, in His opening words, O Jerusalem, Jerusalem! His love shines out.

1. It is not diminished by any wickedness.

2. It is not chilled by perversity.

3. It is not outwearied by delay.At this very hour if Jerusalem had repented, all heaven would have been jubilant.

II. See how tenderly He gives shelter and rest to those who come.Even as a hen, etc.

III. See how, in spite of all the love of God and Christ, some men will perish.I would and ye would not, and you have your way. I sometimes think this is the saddest and darkest word in all the Book. Oh! the awful dignity of the human willthis great and dreadful power in me that can flaunt itself in the face of a gracious God and defeat His purpose.W. J. Woods, B.A.

Christ a Shelter.I. The first thing suggested by this symbol is the idea of danger.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.

II. The symbol of a shelter is so presented as to set forth the glory of Him who is thus revealed.The overshadowing wing of omnipotence is spread in your defence.

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.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 sinners 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 safetys 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, D.D.

Mat. 23:38. The departure of Christ from the temple.

I. The close of a mournful past.

II. The sign of a miserable present.

III. The token of a sad futurity.J. P. Lange, D.D.

The desolate temple.Every Christian temple in which Christ is not preached, is empty; so is every heart in which He does not live.Heubner.

Mat. 23:39. Christ hiding Himself.

1. It is righteousness with Christ to smite them with judicial blindness who refuse obstinately to acknowledge Him when He offers Himself unto them; as here He saith, Ye shall not see Me henceforth; that is, you shall not perceive Me to be the Messiah; for otherwise bodily they did see Him, and did crucify Him, but they saw not who He was; for had they known, they would not have crucified the God of glory.
2. At last, Christs most cruel enemies shall see and know and acknowledge Him to be that blessed Messiah; for all knees shall bow to Him, and all tongues shall confess to Him, and these His adversaries among the rest shall say, Now we see that Jesus is the blessed Son of God, and the true Lamb of God, hills and mountains fall on us, and hide us from the wrath of the Lamb; yonder is the blessed Saviour, who came in the name of the Lord.David Dickson.

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

TEXT: 23:2936

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. 33 Ye serpents, ye offspring of vipers, how shall ye escape the judgment of hell? 34 Therefore, behold, I send unto you 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.

THOUGHT QUESTIONS

Do you think Jesus intends to condemn the Pharisees for building the sepulchers of the prophets and garnishing the tombs of the righteous? Should they have done that? If not, why not? If so, what spirit?

Why is the confident affirmation of the Pharisees, If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets, just another hypothesis contrary to fact?

What is so damning about the Pharisees use of the expression our fathers? Jesus sees it as the basis for driving home His accusation.

Why do you think the ancient prophets, whose tombs these hypocrites beautified, were hated in their own day? Why were they honored by succeeding generations, who, according to Jesus, really shared the same attitude as those who killed them originally? Explain how this really exemplifies a typical characteristic of human nature, hence repeatable in our own times.

If, according to Jesus argument, the Pharisees confessed themselves worthy heirs of the slayers of Gods prophets, how can Jesus order them to fill up, then, the measure of your fathers? Is this not inciting them to further evil? Why would Jesus Christ saying anything so provocative? What could possibly be gained by this?

Jesus termed the Pharisees serpents, offspring of vipers. Is this a nice way to talk to people one hopes to win to ones cause? Or did Jesus have any such hope now? Who had already used this language to describe this crowd?

How do you account for Jesus vehement, judgmental language: You serpents, you brood of vipers, how are you to escape being sentenced to hell?? What does HE know about their final fate?

How does Jesus promise to send Israel prophets, wise men and scribes become a tacit declaration of His deity?

Do you see Jesus prediction that Israel would kill and crucify, scourge and persecute His messengers as a prophecy or as an astute observation about the probabilities? If He knew the Pharisees were persecuting Him, could He not have guessed, with considerable accuracy, that they would do much the same to His followers?

If Jesus found the scribes to be constantly opposing His teaching and mission, how could He justify sending scribes to Israel? What was the position of the scribe in ancient Jewish life? What modern term(s) would you use to paraphrase what Jesus meant? To what function in the New Testament Church is Jesus here referring?

Jesus said, Therefore I send you prophets, some of whom you will kill . . . that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed on earth. . . . What logical connection is there between the multiplied blood guiltiness for all the righteous ever slain and the mistreatment of Jesus messengers? Is He sending these messengers for the purpose of increasing Israels guilt? Or would this be but an undesired, however, inevitable, result of His sending them? Why does He begin by saying, Therefore . . .?

Just how many righteous people murdered do you think Jesus meant in this reference to all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah?

Do you not think it unjust of God to bring the guilt of the murders of all the righteous upon the Jewish people, since they had not personally committed them? Is Jesus ignoring the ancient law of personal accountability: The soul that sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son; the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself? (Cf. Ezekiel 18; Deu. 24:16; Jer. 31:30.)

Jesus refers to a Zechariah, son of Barachiah, slain between the sanctuary and the altar. But the only Zechariah murdered in Biblical history is son of Jehoida, not Barachiah. (Cf. 2Ch. 24:20 ff.) The only Zechariah son of Barachiah is the writing prophet about whose death nothing is known. Luke (Luk. 11:51) omits the fathers name altogether. Worse yet, Jesus accuses the Pharisees of having slain him (whom you murdered . . .). How do you deal with this problem?

In what sense do you think Jesus meant the expression this generation in His warning, All these things will come upon this generation?

Do you think some modern Christians are tempted to boast of the great, spiritual accomplishments of past spiritual giants, while at the same time cutting down their own contemporaries who teach the same message and manifest the same righteousness as the past heroes themselves? Explain. If you think people do this, what is wrong with them? What makes them do this?

PARAPHRASE

How terrible for you text doctors and sectarians, false faces! You erect funerary monuments for the prophets and embellish the burial places of good men. Piously you assert, If WE had lived in our fathers day and time, we would not have joined with them in killing the prophets. So you do admit that you are sons of the very men who assassinated Gods spokesmen! Now it is your turn: go ahead and finish what your fathers began! You poisonous snakes, hatched by murderous reptiles: how can you escape being condemned to hell? But take notice that I, on my part, am therefore going to send you prophets, sages and Biblical scholars. Some of these you will slay, even crucify. Some you will flog in your synagogues and hunt down from one town to another. In the plan of God this is so that you will become guilty of all those innocents whose blood has been shed on earth, beginning with the murder of innocent Abel and ending with the assassination of Zechariah, Barachiahs son, whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar. I can tell you for sure that all the punishment of this guilt will be borne by the generation now living!

SUMMARY

Men sanctimoniously boast of the monumental moral achievements of past spiritual giants, while cutting down their own contemporaries who preach the same truth and uphold the same standards as those ancient heroes. Such hypocrisy is punishable in hell. Nevertheless, such conduct would not deter Jesus from dispatching His messengers to save Israel, even though He clearly foresees their maltreatment. But just as clearly He announces the impending judgment to fall upon the generation then living as punishment for the guilt of slaughtering Gods spokesmen.

NOTES
A Rancorous and Persecuting Spirit, Guilty of Murdering Gods Witnesses

Mat. 23:29 Woe unto you . . . for ye build the sepulchers of the prophets, and garnish the tombs of the righteous. (Cf. Luk. 11:47 f.) How these words must have stung the shocked hearers! Israel owed so much to the ministry of its prophets and to the moral grandeur and fearless proclamation of men whose very lives reproved Israels transgressions and called the nation back to God. The nation ostensibly wished to express its thanks by honoring these valiant spiritual warriors of God by erecting monuments in their memory or by replacing ruder, previous structures with finer, more ornate ones. Such high tribute, by reflection, appeared to honor Him who sent them. For its promoters to hear Jesus define the seemingly laudable tomb projects as a gross lack of honesty or sincerity, could be no less than offensive. But our Lord nonetheless correctly terms it hypocrisy, because, although they may be blind to the true significance of their deeds, their actions are quite out of harmony with their professed principles. Their two-facedness lies in claiming to be troubled by the assassination of Gods messengers in the past, while they were even then scheming to snuff out a living Prophet who reproached them for their own darling sins. Because it morally costs them nothing (no need to repent or change), Jesus contemporaries willingly pay their respects to the courageous prophets whose voice for God was not silenced by the angry bellowing of their contemporaries. Rather than honor those worthies by reproducing their godliness and submitting to their doctrine, these hypocrites erected monumental mausoleums only to perpetuate their memory, while crucifying those ancients modern colleagues.

Note the association: prophets and righteous men. (Cf. Mat. 10:41; Mat. 13:17; study the use of prophets and saints in reference to Gods people martyred for their testimony, in Rev. 11:18; Rev. 16:6; Rev. 18:20; Rev. 18:24). Righteous men belong right beside the prophets, because their lives testify to their recognition of the will of God and accuse the bad conscience of the wicked, as much as do the verbal testimonies of the prophets. Life, character and godly example all count! This explains why Jesus put this climactic woe last. It exposes the root problem that accounts for all the others. Israels unconscionable indifference to Gods men was tantamount to rebellion against Him to whom the godly were uncompromisingly faithful. (See notes on Mat. 10:40 ff.; cf. Luk. 10:16; Joh. 12:44; Joh. 13:20; Act. 16:15; Gal. 4:14; 1Th. 2:13.) It was because the Traditionalist Theologians of Israel really cared little about honoring God that they could act as Jesus described in this entire chapter. Further, while other sins were bad enough, the sin of despising Gods heralds, scoffing at His prophets and murdering innocent people who refuse to go along, recreates the same moral climate that led to the Babylonian captivity: there was no remedy (2Ch. 36:16) and the Lord was not willing to forgive (2Ki. 24:3 f.; cf. Jer. 15:1 ff.). If it be thought hard to believe that Gods people could so cruelly mistreat His prophets, consider the evidence. Constantly harassed, Jeremiah was tried and barely acquitted, but poor Urijah fell victim to the sword of Jehoiakim (Jeremiah 26; cf. Jer. 32:1 ff; Jeremiah 36; Jer. 37:16 ff; Jeremiah 38). Amos was a persona non grata in Israel (Amo. 7:10 ff.). The uncompromising Micaiah was imprisoned by Ahab (1Ki. 22:1-28). King Asa jailed Hanani (2Ch. 16:7 ff.). Jesus will mention Zechariahs assassination (2Ch. 24:20 ff.). Not the least are the countless rebellions against the great Moses (Exo. 14:11 f; Exo. 16:1-12; Exo. 17:1-7; Exo. 32:1 ff.; Num. 11:1 ff; Num. 12:1 ff; Num. 14:1 ff; Num. 16:1 ff; Num. 20:2-13; Num. 21:4 ff.). Remember Stephens charge against the Sanhedrin in Act. 7:52!

A Nice Speech, but a Glaring Admission

Mat. 23:30 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. Psychologically, they may well have persuaded themselves of their greater readiness to hear and obey the now-dead prophets. They could protest that these monuments intended to signal their definite, spiritual dissociation from their cruel ancestors who had brutalized the prophets. They could argue that their actions evidenced their approval of the prophets pronouncements and their own conscientious decision to carry out what the prophets had preached and for which they were eliminated. Resentful, they could counter Jesus indictment: How can you charge us with hypocrisy in giving respect and recognition to the prophets, when, today we are really practicing what they preached? After all, we are not crude idolaters; we worship the one, true God! But in this profusion of devotion, Jesus discerns a glaring admission:

Mat. 23:31 Wherefore ye witness to yourselves, that ye are sons of them that slew the prophets. The words that will convict you are your own and are sufficient to show you to be their true, spiritual heirs. In what ways did these sectarians inadvertently betray themselves?

They confessed without shame to being sons of the prophet-killers. Their highly revealing choice of language is hardly accidental. Their attitude was not that our prophets were killed by the fathers, but our fathers killed the prophets. (Contrast Stephens language: YOUR fathers, Act. 7:51 f.).

Down under the veneer of high devotion, Jesus sees the same superficiality and ceremonialism, the same sinful attitudes characteristic of preceding ages. Complacently and gratuitously they claim to be better men than their ancestors: Matthew Henry (V, 339f.) wrote:

The deceitfulness of sinners hearts appears very much in this, that . . . they fancy . . . that, if they had had other peoples opportunities, they should have improved them more faithfully; if they had been in other peoples temptations, they should have resisted them more vigorously; when yet they improve not the opportunities they have, nor resist the temptations they are in.

Their swaggering boast of greater piety, presumably evident in their properly entombing the prophets, betrays the same unjustified self-esteem their conceited fathers possessed. More appropriate than their self-praise would have been the contrite admission, We have sinned, we and our fathers (Alford, 232).

Further self-incriminating evidence lies in their confession that the men whose blood was shed were the prophets. On what reasonable basis could they justify their calling them prophets? Did they know it because these men of God had furnished the true prophetic signs as their credentials? (Deu. 18:15-22; Deu. 13:1-5; Isa. 8:19 f.; 1Ki. 22:28; Jeremiah 26; etc.) And, precisely as their fathers had done when rejecting the true prophets in their day, the scribes and Pharisees did not utilize these same standards to test Jesus claims honestly so as to recognize (or discredit) Him.

Because Jesus contemporaries had not learned the lessons of their national, prophetic heritage, they would repeat its errors. In verse 34 Jesus will demonstrate just how truly these sons are typical of their fathers. They will repeat the dark history of their grandfathers almost literally. He had already predicted the harassment of His disciples by those who persecuted the prophets who were before you (Mat. 5:12), as if the persecutors of all ages belonged to but one monstrous class.

You confess the guilt of your fathers? Then you know the standard against which they sinned! But if you pretend to condemn their sin, and yet permit yourselves to repeat itand repeat it you will!you testify against yourselves by proving your more excellent opportunity to know and do better, and consequently condemn yourselves for your greater inexcusability! (Cf. Rom. 1:32 to Rom. 2:29.)

So, If we had been . . . we would not have . . . . is but a hypothesis contrary to fact, because even during this Last Week of Jesus ministry Israels religious and political elite had been waging an all-out smear campaign to crush this Prophet whose spectacular credentials established His divine authority more concretely than all who had preceded Him (Mat. 12:14; Joh. 5:18; Joh. 7:1; Joh. 7:25; Joh. 7:30; Joh. 7:44; Joh. 8:59; Joh. 10:31; Joh. 10:39; Joh. 11:49-53). The treatment they accorded Jesus, their living Prophet, unerringly established what kind of treatment they would have accorded the martyred prophets, had they lived in their time.

Jesus thorough refutation of their pretense to do homage to the prophets exposes an unfortunately typical human trait evident in their practice. They venerated the prophets merely because they were idealized, emptied of meaning and gone. While eulogizing them and turning their tombs into national shrines, by hating the prophets of their own day these hypocrites were motivated by the same spirit that goaded their fathers to murder. Why is this true?

They were unwilling to come to grips with truth that was new to them and unapproved by official consent.

Their traditional concepts, their selfish interests could not tolerate their contemporary prophets forceful, pointed application of unwelcome truth to their personal immorality and to their own social evils.

They shared no deep yearning to know Gods judgment on their personal lives. Their heart was not in harmony with God Himself. They were not open to anything He might say without their prior approval.

They did not realize why they, the successive generation, were really honoring their fallen prophets. Like their fathers, they did not fear the dead prophet. He no longer threatened their comfort or convenience by troubling their conscience with embarrassing truth and accusing questions. The dead prophet no longer confronts them like an accusing conscience, calling attention to THEIR corruption or prodding THEM to action. It simply costs far less morally to make a national hero of an unthreatening, dead prophet, than to have to live with and listen to a living one. (Study 1Th. 2:14 b Th 2:16.)

They undervalued the witness that the ancient prophets had already given to Jesus as the Christ. Were they really sensitive to that testimony in its entirety, they would have seen in the program of the Galilean Prophet the marvelous fulfilment of Gods testimony to His real identity.

HOW MAY WE EXTRICATE OURSELVES FROM THIS HYPOCRISY?

We must not be content merely to produce a wooden copy of the mannerisms, speech patterns, cultural distinctives and other superficial characteristics of Gods great leaders of the past. We must savor their spirit and love the Spirit who made them what they are, following His leading in our time and life.

Nor must we try to remain staticly rooted to the cultural distinctives of their era, as if these represented a superior holiness. We must faithfully preach their timeless message to living people in our own culture and in our own era.

We must embrace all that is true and unquestionably from God, regardless of who says it, whether we ever believed it before or not, whether our fathers ever heard of it or not. We must hold it fast, simply because we love the God who revealed it.

We show our true respect for Gods prophets by our treatment of those who speak His messages to us today, not by the empty praise we express for those long-dead.

When God Gives Up On People

Mat. 23:32 Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. This measure, according to one view, is the standard of wickedness set by your fathers. Your forefathers have set a high mark in ungodliness and, with unreasoning consistency, you have accepted their misguided philosophy. Meet their mark! This surprising challenge provokes this scolding reproof: How can a person who claims to lead men to God provoke these bitter enemies to further brutality? What could He possibly hope to gain by egging them on to further evil? Several rebuttals are possible:

His is a call to end their hypocrisy by dropping their mask of sham piety: Act according to your true character for once, so people can see how truly you really are like your fathers!

It is a revelation that He fully knows their dark plotting: Get on with your bloody business! This is the week, this is the city and you are the men. Since I am your target, finish what your fathers began! (Cf. Joh. 13:27; Mat. 26:50 taken as a command.)

Jesus concedes them their will. Fill ye up (plrsate, aorist imperative). Although imperative in form, His words do not necessarily order His enemies to act, because imperative verbs may sometimes express a concession. (See note on Mat. 19:12 and citation from Blass-Debrunner; cf. Hos. 4:17; Rev. 22:11.) If you are firmly resolved to tread the path marked out by your fathers, go ahead, but do not complain that I did not warn you! (Cf. Joh. 2:19 also imperative.) Because these Jews did not like to retain the love, the knowledge, the honor and the messages of God in their hearts (Joh. 5:23; Joh. 5:38; Joh. 5:41; Joh. 5:44; Joh. 8:42; Joh. 8:47; Joh. 12:43; Joh. 15:24 f; Joh. 16:3), Jesus gives them up to do what ought not to be done. (Study Rom. 1:24; Rom. 1:26; Rom. 1:28.) He openly recognizes their God-given freedom to act either to receive or reject Him, and concedes them the right to the latter option, however much it pains Him.

This is persuasive reverse psychology that powerfully pushes them to face the logical extremes of their insane plotting, before they actually carry it out. If pointed parables cannot awaken their seared conscience, perhaps blunt, plain-spoken exposure of the monstrousness of their planned sin would shake them. Thus, His love continues to work at their salvation, despite their determination to remain irreclaimable. To the tough He becomes tough, that by all means He might save some. (Cf. 1Co. 9:19-23.)

Another, more threatening interpretation may lie behind the words, Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. In this case, the measure of your fathers is a figurative, divine measuring vessel in the hand of God into which one generation after another pours the dreadful responsibility for its sinfulness. In fact, God is keeping score, whether people know and believe it or not. (Cf. Amo. 1:3; Amo. 1:6; Amo. 1:9; Amo. 1:11; Amo. 1:13; Amo. 8:7.) When God deems it full to overflowing (cf. Gen. 15:16), He pours out judgment on the sinners. Jesus means, accordingly, In the same manner your fathers filled their measure to overflowing and God poured out His wrath on them, you too might as well go ahead and fill the divine measure, and pay the moral consequences for your guilt! This interpretation emphasizes their ripeness for judgment in contrast to Gods limit for tolerating their sins. (Cf. Jer. 44:22; Rev. 14:17 f.) Some might see the measure of your fathers as the measure begun by your fathers. In this case, each succeeding generation of wicked unbelievers adds to the final overflow by doing its part, hence Jesus challenges His generation to run the cup over, bringing divine wrath upon the nation that rejected Gods mercy. He often brings punishment of one generation upon the next, Whether He does so or not often depends upon whether or not the sons follow the wicked example of their parents (Ezekiel 18). But where they do, He justly punishes the children for willingly repeating the sins of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of them that hate Him (Deu. 5:9 f.).

Notice how Jesus interwove His scathing denunciation of the Pharisees with concepts introduced earlier the same day. The bloody repudiation of the prophets here reflects the attitudes of the Tenant Farmers in the Vineyard (Mat. 21:33-39).

Mat. 23:33 Ye serpents, ye offspring of vipers: by repeating nearly word-for-word John the Baptists searing censure of these religious pretenders expressed years before this (Mat. 3:7; cf. Luk. 3:7), and His own verdict uttered in mid-ministry (Mat. 12:34), Jesus forcefully reminds them what little effect all this prophetic preaching of repentance had produced in them. John had challenged their motives: Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath? Now, Jesus three and a half years later, convincingly closes all doors to escape, asking, How shall ye escape the judgment of hell?

THEIR CHARACTER explains the severity of His attack. They are serpents, offspring of vipers. (Cf. notes on Mat. 3:7.) Like those reptiles full of venom, they are poised to strike without warning. (Cf. Pauls unfigurative language that expressed approximately the same sense, (Act. 13:10). Not unlikely, Jesus words also reveal their spiritual parentage. (Cf. Joh. 8:44; 1Jn. 3:8-10.)

THEIR CONDEMNATION: the judgment of hell, i.e. the judgment that God pronounced that condemns them to suffer there. Jesus Christ does not hesitate to preach hell and damnation nor to point the way of escape therefrom nor to expose the character of those who just suffer there. However blistering Jesus sentence may sound, it does not here expose the relative severity involved: They shall receive the greater condemnation! (Mar. 12:40 = Luk. 20:47). Not merely in hell, they face a greater degree of punishment there, because of their superior chance to know and to do Gods will (Jer. 16:11 f.; notes on Mat. 11:22; Mat. 11:24).

THEIR QUANDARY: how shall we escape? Given their present course and character, they could not. Although His question is formally rhetorical, the literal form of His question should cause at least some of the more meditative among them to reflect. If God sees you in your present, hell-inspired role, can He welcome you? If not, what plans are you making to avert His inexorable wrath? But His deliberative question is really a rhetorical substitute for an assertion: You shall not escape being consigned to Hell! So long as they remain impenitent, their destiny is inflexibly decided.

The typically Pharisean response would be, I shall escape the judgment of hell by virtue of my prayer and tithing, and where these do not suffice, by the merits of the fathers, as if ANY amount of human effort possessed sufficient merit to earn escape from punishment. This constitutes self-deception, because this very accumulation of religious pretenses proves that the hypocritic knew about our holy God, hence could have recognized his own imperfection because of its striking contrast to Gods glorious righteousness, and so could have doubted the value of all his own human goodness, and finally surrendered all claim to his self-justifications and cast himself on the all-sufficient mercies of God.

Murderers of Contemporary Prophets

Mat. 23:34 Therefore, behold, I send unto you prophets. (Cf. Luk. 11:49-51.) Behold: watch for the unexpected in what I am about to say. Rather than deny you further light and opportunity on the grounds of what you have any normal right to expect, I will do the astonishingly unpredictable! Therefore, i.e. in light of your wilful, headlong plunge into self-destruction in hell because of your moral agreement with your fathers who assassinated the prophets, I send unto you some more prophets! What incredible mercy, patience and love!

The clearly foreseen, murderous project of these wicked men would not deter the Son of God from commissioning His heralds. The hatred and rejection that His people would confront are no good reason to abandon His plan to evangelize Israel and the world. To the very end Jesus is faithful minister to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Mat. 10:6; Mat. 10:23; Mat. 15:24; Act. 13:46), sending one servant after another (Mat. 21:36) to harvest the fruits of righteousness in Israel, only to see them go down, mistreated and martyred one by one.

But our Lord is not simply furnishing more cannon fodder for the malice of His detractors. Rather, He is graciously redoubling His efforts to expose these killers to the LOVE OF GOD! Incredibly, the martyrs merciful mission to unbelieving Judaism was to begin at Jerusalem, the stronghold of these prophet-slayers (Luk. 24:47 f.; Act. 1:4; Act. 1:8)!

Behold, I send you prophets: Who does He think He is anyway? Only the Lord God sends prophets (2Ch. 36:15 f.; Neh. 9:26; Neh. 9:30; Deu. 18:15; Deu. 18:18; Amo. 3:7)! Here the divine majesty of Gods Son breaks through the veil of the earthly flesh of Jesus of Nazareth, revealing Him as the Sender of the prophets. Further, He kept His word. (Joh. 20:21, Mat. 28:18 f.; see notes on Mat. 5:12.) Earlier Jesus had promised, I will send them prophets and apostles (Luk. 11:49 f.), but here, I send unto you prophets, wise men and scribes. Following the death of the last genuine prophets, Israels teachers had been uninspired sages and theologians, the wise men and scribes. So, the Kingdom of the Messiah is to be led by its Nebhiim, Hakamim and Sopherim too, as was Gods Kingdom of Israel. In using this terminology to speak of Christian teachers, the Lord is not merely copying the Jewish economy to give His Church a pseudoclassic structure and an unearned prestige. Rather, by using this language, He achieved two purposes:

He indicated His intention to equip His people with Christian teachers and missionaries who would announce and expound Gods will and wisdom. In contrast to the theologians of the old order, the new covenant scholars would be sent by and loyal to the Messiah, proclaiming His Gospel.

Prophets, as distinguished from the other offices, wrote or spoke Gods message by direct inspiration or mandate. Among these are the Apostles and Spirit-led men like Stephen and Philip (Acts 7, 8), Agabus and others (Act. 11:27 f.), those at Antioch (Act. 13:1), Judas and Silas (Act. 15:32) and Philips daughters (Act. 21:9).

Wise men (sophs) in Israel were not simply what is implied by this word in the Greek world. Instead, they were teachers of wisdom (hakamim) whose function was to develop practical applications of what, in Israel, was considered the Wisdom par excellence, the Law. Not necessarily inspired, the Christian wise men would be experienced, devout disciples qualified to teach, like Barnabas and Apollos (Act. 18:24 ff.).

Scribes in Israel were not merely secretaries who copied Scripture, but men whose expertise in expounding it made them the recognized theologians in Israel. Although Paul was primarily a missionary (apstolos), his undying mark on Christian history was made by his theological writing in the form of New Testament epistles which explain Christian doctrine and its applications. Many others, too, would fit this category. (See notes on Mat. 13:52.) Mark and Luke are not merely Gospel scribes who limited themselves to chronicling, but men who, like the Apostles, Matthew and John, arranged their materials in didactic form so as to communicate the true sense of Jesus Christ. While these latter Evangelists were Apostles by mandate, they also functioned as scribes in the sense Jesus original hearers would have understood Him here.

It is well to notice, however, that the functions of wise men and scribes overlapped historically in Judaism, so that these titles referred sometimes to the same person. (Cf. Bowker, Jesus and the Pharisees, 40.)

Jesus verbally associates His Christian teachers with the Old Testament prophets and righteous men, so as to introduce a parallel between their respective ministries for which they were cruelly ill-treated. By specifying how His Pharisean opponents would retrace the well-worn pattern of victimizing Gods ambassadors, He established the formers spiritual kinship to the bloody fathers whose ruthlessness they claimed to repudiate.

Some of them you will kill and crucify. These are not necessarily the same people suffering, first, death, and then the added humiliation of exposure on a cross. Rather, some would be put to death by stoning (Act. 7:54 to Act. 8:1; Act. 26:10) or perhaps by the sword (Act. 12:1 ff.); others by being nailed to a cross. (Cf. Mat. 21:35.) Because crucifixion was normally a method used by the Romans, the Lord is predicting some executions by Romans instigated by Jews (Peter? Joh. 21:18 f.).

Some of them you will scourge in your synagogues. (Cf. Mat. 10:17; Act. 5:40 f; Act. 22:19; Act. 26:11; 2Co. 11:24, the notorious 39 lashes.)

Some you will persecute from city to city. (Mat. 10:23; 1Th. 2:14-16; Act. 13:45; Act. 13:50; Act. 14:2; Act. 14:5; Act. 17:5; Act. 18:5 f., Act. 18:12; Act. 19:33; Act. 20:3; Act. 21:27; Act. 23:12; Act. 24:1 ff.; Act. 26:11, and the Acts accounts of Pauls harassment by Jews who, not content to see him leave their town, pursued him to other cities as well, in order to hinder his ministry (Act. 14:19; Act. 17:13).

However, Jesus mentioning this outrage preannounced unbelieving Israels final response to His last, merciful invitations to accept His grace. So doing, they justified the judgment He must announce next:

Answering for the Murder of the Martyrs

Mat. 23:35 that upon you may come all the righteous blood. To which verb is Jesus clause to be connected in the mind of the reader?

I send you prophets . . . that upon you may come all the blood . . .? OR

You will kill, crucify, scourge . . . and persecute . . . that upon you may come all the blood . . . ?

In the former case, He appears to commission His prophets so as to increase unbelievers guilt. In the latter, it appears that Jewish leaders desired to bring this condemnation upon themselves. From Gods perspective, is the clause, that upon you may come . . . . an expression of purpose or result? That is, did Jesus send His messengers with the purpose of increasing Israels guilt for rejecting them, or did it just turn out that way?

PURPOSE. Sending more emissaries was the only way to save anyone. He planned it that way, because, although He clearly risked raising the guilt-level of the obstinate and unrepentant, He contemporaneously multiplied the gracious opportunities to accept His generous invitation to the long-awaited banquet of God! (Cf. Mat. 8:11 f.) Even if it meant the sacrifice of His heralds, He was offering complete amnesty to anyone who would surrender. By the convicting power of apostolic preaching He intensified their sense of guilt and so left the salvageable among them so deeply conscience-stricken that their repentance became real and lasting. (Cf. Act. 2:37 as a case in point of just such self-reproach produced by Peters hammering home the fact that Israel had murdered their longed-for Messiah.)

RESULT: Nobody was forced, no ones freedom compromised. Everyone could cast his personal vote, for, or against, Jesus of Nazareth, but no one could escape the inevitable consequences of his individual decision. Jesus left open two free options, and, if anyone selected one of the two choices, no one would stop him. But, once the die was cast, nothing could halt the resulting avalanche of judgment plunging down on those who turned Jesus down. Thus, human freedom and divine sovereignty are respected to the very last.

Three questions remain to be considered: (1) Why should all this guilt be required of one single generation of Jews? (2) What is involved in the great time-span from Abel to Zechariah? (3) Who is this Zechariah and what has Abel to do with Jesus basic point? These questions find their solution in a correct understanding of what Jesus means by all the righteous blood shed on the earth. This expression appears to be absolutely universal. Does Jesus broad condemnation apply to literally every innocent victim of violence, i.e. must the vengeance of God rain down upon Jesus own generation to vindicate all these? To this, the premature reaction is: Injustice! To blame one generation for all the worlds innocent victims is unworthy of God! But Jesus concept in this paragraph (Mat. 23:39 ff.) is a unit. He began discussing the tombs of the prophets and of the righteous (dikan, Mat. 23:29). It is the prophets blood that was shed (Mat. 23:30). Jesus generation is composed of the sons of those who murdered these witnesses for God (Mat. 23:31). Unless compelling reasons lead us to refer the righteous blood to some distant victims yet unmentioned, we must regard it as referring to that of Gods witnesses who were martyred for their testimony to Gods truth. (Cf. Mat. 10:40 ff.; Joh. 15:20.) Not the least of this righteous blood would be that of Jesus Himself (Mat. 27:25; Act. 3:14 f.; 1Pe. 3:18). Jesus includes the righteous right along with the prophets, because every righteous man who ever lived is a witness for God, living proof that Gods will is knowable, just as surely a witness as a living prophet. Therefore, the suppressing of the righteous proves that their slayers reject the norm that Gods people stand for,

This, then, explains why Jesus began with Abel the righteous. For, while that ancient saint did not relay an inspired message from God to man, as did the prophets, yet he became the first recorded witness for God when he stood firm in sacrificing what God required, notwithstanding the older brothers insistence on bringing something else (Heb. 11:4). So, by humbly offering his sacrifices in faith, he testified to the knowability and rightness of Gods will. His is the first recorded example of a mans trusting God, doing what was right and being commended by God for it (Gen. 4:4 f.). However, for this testimony he was murdered by the jealous hate of his brother, and thus became the first martyr in the battle between godliness and unrighteousness. His death cries out against anyone who walks in the way of Cain (Jud. 1:11), victimizing his brother because his brothers actions are righteous (1Jn. 3:12).

But who is Zechariah? Because the book of Chronicles occurs last in the Hebrew canon, the last martyred prophet of God in the Hebrew Old Testament is the priestly Zechariah, son of Jehoiada, stoned to death in the court of the Temple (2Ch. 24:20 ff.) He too had delivered Gods Word, but was murdered by order of King Joash. As he lay dying, he gasped, May the Lord see this and call you to account! God DID see it and avenged His prophets death (2Ch. 24:23 ff.). But how could Zechariah son of Jehoiada be called in our text son of Barachiah? Either Matthew wrote these words or he did not.

If Matthew wrote them:

The priestly son of Jehoiada is not intended. Jesus may refer to martyrdom that occurred more recently than the close of the Old Testament, well-known to His hearers, but unrecorded elsewhere. This would compel us to surrender the view that He means all Biblical murders and refers, instead, to all martyrs for righteousness in pre-Christian history.

Jesus may refer to Zechariah son of Jehoiada.

(1)

Barachiah and Jehoiada are possibly different names for the same father. Many Hebrews bore two names, e.g. Jechoniah = Jehoiachin; Gideon = Jerubbaal; Dan. 1:6. However, were this the case with such a famous father like Jehoiada, it is strange that he should never have been called by this other name in the Old Testament.

(2)

Barachiah and Jehoiada are both fathers of Zechariah, however, in different senses, one being the true father and the other the grandfather. Accordingly, Zechariah would be grandson of the famous Jehoiada, but son of an obscure Barachiah whose name was registered in Levitical genealogies, knowable to the Jews and here cited by Jesus. This explanation is less likely, because the Old Testament chronicler lays stress on the martyrs being Jehoiadahs son, as if immediate sonship were meant.

Least likely is the suggestion that Jesus intended a Zacharias son of Baruch, unjustly accused and murdered in the Temple near the end of the Jewish war (Josephus, Wars, IV, 5, 4). The Lord speaks of Zechariahs death as a fact already well-known, not a yet-future martyrdom. He does not say, Whom you will slay, but whom you slew. Further, the names are different: Baruch is not Barachiah, however similar.

If Matthew did NOT write Zechariah son of Barachiah:

Perhaps Matthew wrote only Zechariah, as did Luke (Luk. 11:51). If so, a very early copyist, remembering the more famous Old Testament writing prophets patronymic (Zec. 1:1), mistakenly supposed that Jesus alluded to him, rather than the almost forgotten son of Jehoiada, and erroneously inserted son of Barachiah, whereas Jeohoiadas son is meant.

Perhaps Matthew originally wrote, Zachariah son of Jehoiada, but an early scribe, forgetting Jehoiadas son, considered Jehoiada a mistake to be corrected by altering it to Barachiah, father of the Minor Prophet (Zec. 1:1).

But in favor of these hypotheses there is no documentary evidence in the manuscripts, except the omission of son of Barachiah in the original Sinaiticus and Eusebius, and a comment by Jerome in his commentary on our text: In the Gospel which is used by the Nazarenes, in the place of Son of Barachiah we find written son of Jehoiada. These appear to be personal choices of scribes too isolated to affect the textual tradition.

Although a judicial assassination of Jeremiahs contemporary, Urijah (Jer. 26:23) took place about 200 years after that of Zechariah, Jehoiadas son, the latters martyrdom appears literally on the last pages of the Hebrew Old Testament, and perhaps for this reason Jesus mentioned him as the end point.

A MISCARRIAGE OF DIVINE JUSTICE?

Whether or not we have correctly identified Zechariah, Jesus point still stands. If He meant Jehoiadas son, then the time span in His mind, from Abel to Zechariah, encompasses all the murders from the beginning to the end of the Hebrew Bible. Otherwise, from the first murder down to the latest assassination of Gods prophet. But, regardless of the choice, with what justice can the Lord indict the religionists of His day for the brutal rejection of the prophets and righteous men over such a vast span of time, when His contemporaries did not even exist at the time of those atrocities? Several answers are possible:

In saying, that upon you may come . . . whom you murdered, the allusion is generically to the entire Jewish nation in all of its ages from its inception down to Christ. While Jesus contemporaries could not rightly be indicted for crimes committed by their predecessors centuries earlier, nevertheless, by their hatred for Gods servants (Mat. 23:34), they qualify for membership in the one teeming society of those who murder prophets. Between the sanctuary and the altar bespeaks the blind fury of the persecutors who knew nothing sacred, neither the person of Gods prophet nor the holiness of His temple. Although this elucidates why the larger part of many generations of Israel is guilty of its personal crimes against God, it does not yet explain why one particular generation should receive the total brunt of the punishments for crimes reaching clear back to Abel, i.e. even before the official birth of Israel at the call of Abraham.

The terrible indictment is unequivocably levelled solely at Jesus own generation. Why?

Because the past had prepared for the present. It is a fact observable in the history of nations that the catastrophes of a people are often the grim harvest of sins and errors sown long before. It may require generations for these to come to a head. Those who lit the fuse are often long gone before the explosion that blows the mountain of iniquity, burying beneath its weight only the contemporaries who, like their forebears, had shared in amassing the sin. But the past would lose with the present. The ancient, prophet-murdering fathers would now lose all they had so carefully transmitted to posterity, as their equally iniquitous descendants were swept away in the fury of God.

Because the present welcomed the past. By murdering Gods Son, persecuting His apostles and other messengers, Jesus contemporaries would sin in full light of their own historys lessons. Jesus age stood at the end point of Gods dealings with men, a period rich in accumulated evidence of the great criminality of this act, since God had shouted protests against the killing of His prophets clear back to the assassination of Abel! In full view of historys vindication of Gods prophets, Jesus generation would proceed to crucify Him who enjoyed the highest, most complete authentication by God who through Jesus had done the most evident and most numerous miracles. (Cf. Joh. 7:31; Joh. 11:47 f.) Every generation of sons that witness the previous instances of disobedience, hear the many warnings, observe the exemplary punishment of their fathers, and yet repeat the same disobedience, is to be judged more than simply as bad as their fathers. They are far more guilty than their predecessors and must answer for much, much more, because, by duplicating their fathers sins in full light of their divine punishment, they concur in their fathers acts. The principle of divine justice is clear: the accumulated brilliance of all this light and the force of all the evidence against which they will have sinned multiplies the degree of guiltiness they would incur for having turned against it.

No wonder the wrath of God was timed to explode in that generation! More astonishing yet is the forty years of grace God bestowed on His people before outraged justice lashed Jerusalem in a holocaust of blood in 70 A.D. But here is a lesson: even as in the last days of the Jewish state the patience of God waited while the Church broadcast the Gospel in a final effort to save the savable, but a day came when the ax fell, so also today Gods vengeance waits patiently while the number of those to be slain for their witness to His Word moves toward completion (Rev. 6:9-11). But that judgment and their vindication will come at last (Rev. 16:6; Rev. 18:20; Rev. 19:2).

Mat. 23:36 Verily I say unto you, all these things shall come upon this generation. Here again is the familiar theme of the parable of the Wicked Husbandmen in the Vineyard (Mat. 21:40). This time, however, Jesus reveals the time-schedule for the hurricane of holy wrath that would break over Israel: this generation. He will enlarge upon this ominous threat in the next chapter when He describes the siege and taking of Jerusalem and reiterates the time-schedule (Mat. 24:34). The wrath of God that destroyed Jerusalem in 70 A.D. and dispersed the unbelieving Jews among the nations, therefore, was neither unreasonable nor unexpected (Deuteronomy 28).

The expression, this generation, as Jesus often employs it, is loaded negatively to mean this crowd, this people referring to those people who refused to be persuaded of His Messiahship on the basis of the good evidences He furnished. (Cf. Mat. 11:16; Mat. 12:39; Mat. 12:41 f., Mat. 12:45; Mat. 16:4; Mat. 17:17; Mar. 8:12; Mar. 8:38; Luk. 7:31; Luk. 9:41; Luk. 11:29-32; Luk. 11:50 f.; Luk. 17:25; cf. Peters expression: Act. 2:40, or Pauls, Php. 2:15.) This common nuance however, does not exclude its literal meaning, the people now living, i.e. all the people born and living at about the same time (cf. Mat. 1:17!) a sense which flows into the other: a group of such people with some experience, belief, attitude, etc. in common, (cf. gene, Arndt-Gingrich, 153). His antithesis in our text is all previous generations of prophet-murderers, as opposed to this generation.

Ironically, all of Israels guilt, accumulated from all previous ages was finally and permanently to be borne away by the one perfect sacrifice of the Lamb of God in that one generation (Heb. 9:15; Rev. 12:5; Rev. 12:9-11)! All those of that generation who would yet embrace this offer to divine mercy could be saved and miss the threatened disaster. (See on Mat. 24:15 ff.) Unbelievers of that same last, characteristic generation (Mat. 24:34), however, would feel the full impact of Gods terrible punitive justice. (Deu. 5:9, note Gods use of generation.)

FACT QUESTIONS

What is meant by Jesus observation that the Pharisees build the sepulchers of the prophets and garnish the tombs of the righteous? What motivated them to do this?

To what prophets and righteous men, now buried in the garnished tombs, does Jesus refer?

Who actually slew the prophets?

In what sense are the Pharisees the sons of the prophet-slayers?

What is the measure of your fathers that the Pharisees are ordered to fill up?

In what sense were Pharisees serpents, a generation of vipers?

Define the judgment of hell that the Pharisees could not escape.

In the New Testament Church identify the personnel referred to by Jesus as prophets, wise men and scribes whom He would send.

Name some messengers of Jesus Christ whom the unbelieving Jewish nation and its rulers (a) killed, (b) crucified, (c) scourged, (d) persecuted from city to city.

10.

What does it mean for the blood of someone to come upon someone else in the phrase: that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed on earth . . .?

11.

Identify Zechariah . . . murdered between the sanctuary and the altar. List three or four Zechariahs in the Bible, one of which may be the man mentioned by Jesus in this section. State the problems connected with any certain identification and furnish solutions to each problem wherever possible.

12.

In what way did Jesus prophecy come true that all the blood would come upon that generation?

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

(29) Ye build the tombs . . .Four conspicuous monuments of this kind are seen to the present day at the base of the Mount of Olives, in the so-called Valley of Jehoshaphat, the architecture of which, with its mixture of debased Doric and Egyptian, leads archologists to assign them to the period of the Herodian dynasty. These may, therefore, well have been the very sepulchres of which our Lord spoke, and to which, it may be, He pointed. They bear at present the names of Zechariah, Absalom, Jehoshaphat, and St. James; but there is no evidence that these were given to them when they were built, and the narratives of earlier travellers vary in reporting them. It may be noticed, however, that of these four names, Zechariah is the only one that belonged to a prophet, and the reference to the death of a martyr-prophet of that name in Mat. 23:35, makes it probable that the name may have been, as it were, suggested by the monument on which the Pharisees were lavishing their wealth and their skill at the very time when they were about to imbrue their hands in the blood of One who was, even in the judgment of many of their own class, both a prophet and a righteous man.

Garnish.Better, adornas, e.g., with columns, cornices, paintings, or bas-reliefs. Even these acts, natural and legitimate in themselves, were part of the hypocrisy or unreality of the Pharisees. They did not understand, and therefore could not rightly honour, the life of a prophet or just man. They might have learnt something from the saying of a teacher of their own in the Jerusalem Talmud, that there is no need to adorn the sepulchres of the righteous, for their words are their monuments. In somewhat of the same strain wrote the Roman historian: As the faces of men are frail and perishable, so are the works of art that represent their faces; but the form of their character is eternal, and this we can retain in memory, and set forth to others, not by external matter and skill of art, but by our own character and acts (Tacitus, Agricola, c. 46).

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

29. Build the tombs of the prophets The EIGHTH WOE is pronounced upon their ancestral hypocrisy. When the men looked into the history of Israel they took not the side of those who murdered the holy men of old, whose tombs are round Jerusalem. No, they were on the side of the prophets and martyrs. So they gave themselves much imaginary credit for being about as good as those holy martyrs.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you build the sepulchres of the prophets, and garnish the monuments 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’.”

The thought of whitewashed tombs leads on to the way they treat the tombs of the prophets, and the monuments to ‘the righteous’. They honour both prophets and righteous men of the past. They build their tombs and decorate their monuments (Herod the Great had built a new marble monument over David’s tomb. It was an age of such gestures. And the Scribes and Pharisees, as well as the people, heartily approved of it because of their admiration for David, even if they did not like Herod and did not do it themselves. And the wealthier among them would almost certainly have contributed to similar gestures). ‘Righteous men’ are those well known from their history for their faithfulness to God (compare Hebrews 11). Once men are dead they very often become seen as respectable and acceptable, and that is what has happened in this case. Once they are safely out of the way and could no longer make accusations or demands they were honoured.

And indeed the Scribes and Pharisees and the people smugly said, (and probably believed it), ‘If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.’ They were actually convinced that their attitude to prophets and righteous men was the right one, and that had they been alive in their day they would have listened to them and followed them. They totally overlooked their own attitude towards John the Baptist and their plots against Jesus, and their willingness to beat people who disagreed with them. After all, that was different. He could not really be righteous, for He did not agree with them, and all should recognise they only beat people who were in the wrong, (that is who were opposed to or neglected their teaching). And the same attitude would apply to His followers, for while He criticised their righteousness, they criticised His and theirs (Mat 9:3; Mat 9:11; Mat 9:34; Mat 12:2; Mat 12:24). And they would continue to do so. They no doubt said that He took things too far, and applied them too literally. What was needed was balance, (that is, to take up their position). Thus they considered that it was probably better for all if He was out of the way. For He was not really ‘a prophet’. He was a false prophet. So rejecting Him was not quite the same thing as rejecting the prophets.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

In Spite Of Their Claims To Be Otherwise They Should Recognise That They Were Simply As Bad As Their Fathers (23:29-33).

Along with their generation the Scribes and Pharisees made a great fuss about the godly of the past by erecting and decorating their tombs and monuments. It made them feel that they were not like their fathers who had disposed of the prophets and the godly. But at the same time they rejected John the Baptist and were intent on getting rid of Jesus. They did not realise that they were thereby guilty of rejecting Someone greater than the prophets, for they were not spiritually attuned. Thus Jesus points out that they were essentially just like their fathers.

Analysis

a “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you build the sepulchres of the prophets, and garnish the monuments of the righteous” (Mat 23:29).

b “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’.” (Mat 23:30).

c “Thus you witness to yourselves, that you are sons of those who slew the prophets (Mat 23:31).

b “Fill you up then the measure of your fathers” (Mat 23:32).

a “You serpents, you offspring of vipers, how will you escape the judgment of Gehenna?” (Mat 23:33).

Note that in ‘a’ they try to make a great fuss of the righteous dead, and in the parallel they do so because they are like vipers trying to escape the judgment of Gehenna. In ‘b’ they claim not to be like their fathers, and in the parallel Jesus tells them in fact that they really are, and sarcastically urges them to act accordingly (as they were in fact at this moment planning to do). Centrally in ‘c’ is the fact that they are showing all the time that they are the sons of those who slew the prophets.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

The eighth woe:

v. 29. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchers of the righteous,

v. 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.

v. 31. Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets.

v. 32. Fill ye up, then, the measure of your fathers.

v. 33. Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?

The actual and reputed graves of the prophets of the Old Testament were held in great veneration by the Jews of the time of Christ, a sign which usually characterizes a dead orthodoxy: building tombs and decorating graves while actually rejecting the words of the prophets thus honored by an outward show. And all this is accompanied by much show of sanctimoniousness. They bitterly deplore the fact that the fathers showed so little discrimination and were so hasty in their actions a trait found to this day in a generation that imagines itself far beyond the people of a few centuries ago in the matter of understanding and knowledge, especially of the Scriptures, and in humaneness. All of which only went to show that they had their fathers’ spirit as well as their blood, that as children of murderers of prophets they would have little compunction, and no hesitation, about filling up the measure of their fathers, exceeding them in cruelty and bloodthirstiness, in killing the Savior. In view of such baseness and hypocrisy, the Lord can hardly find epithets to express His contempt of such wickedness. Serpents, offspring of vipers, He calls them, for whom it will be impossible to escape the damnation of hell.

The Pharisees and Sadducees

Although there were a number of parties or sects among the Jews, all of which had their adherents among the common people, such as the Herodians, the Essenes, and the political parties of various times, yet none were so influential nor exerted their sway over the people for a longer period of time than the Pharisees and Sadducees.

The most powerful of the Jewish sects was that of the Pharisees, the representatives of extreme Hebraism, the orthodoxists among the Jews.. Their members were selected only from the richer and more distinguished ranks of society. They adhered strictly to the literal sense of the Mosaic Law. To the authority of Scriptures they added that of tradition, the rules and regulations of the elders. But they introduced also some of the speculative tenets from the philosophy or religion of the Eastern nations. These ideas had been adopted by the Jews during the exile, and were founded upon the Persian dualism. The doctrine of fate or predestination, of angels and demons, and of a future state of rewards and punishments, were among the newly formulated articles of belief. The Pharisees tried to compromise between the revealed religion and these obscure tenets, adopting those parts which were not expressly condemned in the Old Testament. Since they believed in fate, they maintained that it cooperated in every action of man, and stated that to act what is right or the contrary, is principally in the power of man. They moderated the doctrine of the transmigration of souls in so far as to say that all souls are incorruptible, but the souls of good men only are removed into other bodies, while the souls of bad men are subject to eternal punishment.

Their doctrine is repeatedly referred to in the New Testament, since Christ was often obliged to expose the falseness of their claims, to warn against the leaven of their false doctrine. Mat 16:12; Mar 8:15. They adhered with the greatest severity to the 613 precepts of the Great Synagogue, thereby making their own lives and those of their followers an intolerable burden. Incidentally they disregarded entirely the evil condition and the wicked desires of the heart, priding themselves only on their external show of holiness. They lived meanly and fasted oftener than the Law required; they despised delicacies in diet, Luk 18:12. They forbade even the most necessary works and deeds of mercy on the Sabbath, Mat 12:1-8; Mat 9:1-38; Mat 10:1-42; Mat 11:1-30; Mat 12:1-50; Mat 13:1-58; Luk 13:14-16; Mar 2:27; Joh 7:23. Christ calls their slavish adhering to the traditions of the elders a vain worship, Mar 7:2-9.

These doctrines were continually revealed in the feigned virtue of the Pharisees’ lives; in fact, the two were so closely related that a sharp division is hardly possible. The passage above. Mat 23:1-39, is a complete denunciation of the hypocrisy of the Pharisees. They managed to cast sand into the eyes of the people to such an extent that whatsoever they did about divine worship, prayers, and sacrifices was accepted without question, and many cities gave great attestation to them on account of their entire virtuous conduct. Since they interpreted all the prophecies referring to the greatness of the Messiah’s kingdom as foretelling a temporal empire, they never ceased in their attempts to regain political influence, succeeding, at times, for a brief period. They appeared before the multitude with their fasting. Mar 2:18. To eat with unwashen hands was in their eyes a transgression equal to the vilest sins, Mar 7:2-7. They feared defilement by the touch of a great sinner, Luk 7:36-50, and always strove to carry out the Law in its full strictness, Joh 8:2-11.

Since they thus both in their doctrine and in their religious practices held a position which was directly opposed to Christ, it is not surprising that they were filled with venomous hatred toward the Nazarene. They tempted Him, Mat 16:1; Mar 8:11; they tried to entangle Him in His talk, Mat 22:15; Mar 12:13; Luk 20:20; they took counsel to destroy Him, Mar 3:6; Joh 11:47-53. And after having succeeded in removing the Master, they persecuted the disciples in the same way, Mat 23:34; Act 7:58; Act 8:3; Act 9:1-2; Gal 1:13; Act 23:6-9. It is the world-old story of righteousness and truth being hated by unrighteousness and hypocrisy.

The bitter enemies of the Pharisees and their opponents in doctrine, but united with them in their hatred of Christ, were the Sadducees, the representatives of the extreme ultra-development of Hellenism, with Greek characteristics. They were recruited only from the richest people, with leanings toward pagan culture. They were the rationalists among the Jews, with modern tenets of philosophy. They denied the immortality of the soul and the resurrection of the body. Mat 22:23-33; Mar 12:18-27. They maintained that there is no angel or spirit, Act 23:8. They accepted the books of Moses only and rejected all traditions, saying that the Jews were to esteem those observances to be obligatory which are in the written Word, but are not to, observe what is derived from the tradition of the forefathers. Since they did not believe in an afterlife, they rejected the idea of future rewards or punishments. On account of the small number of their followers and the narrow scope of their influence, they are not alluded to so often in Scriptures as are the Pharisees.

Christ was obliged, for the sake of the truth, to warn against their false doctrines, Mat 16:6-12. He confuted them and their doctrine of marriage, a problem which they had invented to mock Him, Mat 22:32. Upon other occasions, also, the Sadducees were exposed and their arguments overthrown with the same decisive frankness, Mat 16:4; Mat 3:7. And therefore their relation toward the Prophet of Nazareth was anything but friendly. To be termed a wicked and adulterous generation, Mat 16:3-4, and be told that they knew not the Scriptures nor the power of God, Mat 22:29; Mar 12:24, roused their anger in such a measure that they gladly joined with the Pharisees in the council, the Synedrion, consulting how they might take Jesus by subtlety and kill Him, Mat 26:3-4. And after the death of Jesus they persecuted His disciples. Act 4:12; Act 5:18, since the most influential in the nation belonged to their sect, Act 5:17. But the Word of God remained victorious.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

Mat 23:29-31. Ye build the tombs, &c. 8. The eighth woe is denounced, because by the pains they took in adorning the sepulchres of the prophets, they pretended a great veneration for their memory; and as often as they happened to be mentioned, condemned their fathers, who had killed them; declaring, that if they had lived in the days of their fathers, they would have opposed their wickedness; while in the mean time they still cherished the spirit of their fathers, persecuting the messengers of God, and particularly his divine Son, on whose destruction they were resolutely bent. The meaning of the 31st verse is, “By affirming, that if you had lived in the days of your fathers, you would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets, you acknowledge that you are the children of them who murdered the prophets;their children, I must give you to know, in other respects than by natural generation; for though you pretend to be more holy than they were, you are like them in all respects; particularly you possess their wicked persecuting spirit, and testify it by all your actions.” See Luk 11:48 and 1Ma 13:27; 1Ma 13:29. What Vitringa tells us, (de Synagog. p. 221.) of the extraordinary honour paid to the sepulchre of Mordecai, is an agreeable illustration of these words. Josephus also, from Nicolaus Damascenus, mentions Herod’s repairing in a very splendid manner the sepulchre of David. See his Antiq. lib. 16: cap. 7 and compare Act 2:29. From the 3rd to the 30th verse of this chapter is exposed every thing that commonly passes in the world for religion; whereby the pretenders to it keep both themselves and others from enteringinto the kingdom of God; from attaining, or even seeking after those tempers, in which alone Christianity consists; as, first, punctuality in attending on public and private prayers merely for the sake of shew; Mat 23:4-14. Secondly, zeal to make proselytes to our opinion or communion, though they have less of the spirit of religion than before; Mat 23:15. Thirdly, a superstitious reverence for consecrated places or things, without any for him to whom they were consecrated, Mat 23:16-22. Fourthly, a scrupulous exactness in little observances, though with the neglect of justice, mercy, and fidelity, Mat 23:23-24. Fifthly, a cautiousness to cleanse the outward behaviour, without any regard to inward purity; Mat 23:25-26. Sixthly, a specious face of virtue and piety, covering the deepest hypocrisy and villany, Mat 23:27-28. Seventhly, a professed veneration for all good men, except those among whom they live, Mat 23:29-30. See Bengelius. All, from Mat 23:29 to Mat 23:32., Grotius has very justly observed, should make one sentence; , because, referring to each member of it; and Mat 23:31 should be in a parenthesis: woe to you Scribes, because you buildand sayand fill up, &c.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Mat 23:29 ff. Comp. Luk 11:47 ff.

The of the tombs of the prophets and the of the sepulchres of the righteous (the Old Testament saints, comp. Mat 23:35 ; Mat 13:17 ; Heb 11:23 ); this preserving and ornamenting of the sacred tombs by those who pretended to be holy was accompanied with the self-righteous declaration of Mat 23:30 . On the ancient tombs of a more notable character, see, in general, Robinson, Pal . II. p. 175 ff., and on the so-called “tombs of the prophets” still existing, p. 194. Tobler, Topogr. v. Jerus . II. p. 227 ff.

, . . .] not: if we had been , but: if we were (comp. on Joh 11:21 ), if we were living in the time of our fathers, certainly we would not be , etc.

, . . .] Thus (inasmuch as you say ) you witness against yourselves (dative of reference, Jas 5:3 ), that you are the sons , etc. contains a twofold meaning . From . ., in which the Pharisees point to their bodily descent, Jesus likewise infers their kinship with their fathers in respect of character and disposition . There is a touch of sharpness in this pregnant force of , the discourse becoming more and more impassioned. “When you thus speak of your fathers , you yourselves thereby testify to your own kinship with the murderers of the prophets.” De Wette’s objection, that this interpretation of would be incompatible with what is said by way of vindicating themselves at Mat 23:30 , does not apply, because Jesus feels convinced that their character entirely belies this self-righteous utterance, and because He wishes to make them sensible of this conviction through the sting of a penetration that fearlessly searches their hearts and reads their thoughts.

] i.e . the crime of shedding their blood. On in the sense of caedes , see Dorvill. ad Charit . p. 427. For , see on Gal 6:6 .

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

29 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous,

Ver. 29. Ye build the tombs, &c. ] And lost their cost, because they received not their doctrine. So do the Papists to this day in their pretended honouring the ancient saints and martyrs, whose religion and practices they persecute in the true professors. a How much better Rabus Crispen, the French chronicler, Knox, Foxe, and others, who have raised the martyrs, as so many Phoenixes, out of their ashes again, by recording their holy lives and Christian deaths! And how shall Cope and Kemp stink for ever in the nostrils of all good people! The former for fouling so much fair paper in railing at, and casting reproach upon, the holy martyrs of the Protestant religion, in his sixth dialogue especially: the latter for disgracing them some few years since, excusing the gunpowder traitors at the same time, in a sermon at St Mary’s in Cambridge.

a Vetus est morbus quo mortui sancti coluntur, vivi contemnuntur.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

29 33. ] The guilt resting on these present Pharisees, from being the last in a progressive series of generations of such hypocrites and persecutors, forms the matter of the last Woe. 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 sepulchres of the prophets, joined with their prophet-persecuting acts, convicting themselves of continuity with their fathers’ wickedness. See, as clearly setting forth this view, Luk 11:47-48 . ‘(Sit licet divus, dummodo non vivus). Instead of the penitent confession, “We have sinned, 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 ( Act 7:52 ).’ Stier (ii. 453). Again notice the emphasis, which is now markedly on ; thus bringing out that relation in all its fulness and consequences.

, imper., fill ye also (as well as they) the measure (of iniquity) of your fathers.

Mat 23:33 repeats almost verbatim the first denunciation of the Baptist in this, the last discourse of the Lord: thus denoting the unchanged state of these men, on whom the whole preaching of repentance had now been expended. One weighty difference however there is: then it was, ; the wonder was, how they bethought themselves of escaping now, ; how shall ye escape?

On , see Rev 12:9 .

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Mat 23:29-33 . Final woe (Luk 11:47-48 ), dealing with yet another phase of hypocrisy and a new form of the contrast between without and within; apparent zeal for the honour of deceased prophets, real affinity with their murderers.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

Mat 23:29 . , may point to repair or extension of old buildings, or to new edifices, like some modern monuments, the outcome of dilettante hero-worship. , , probably synonyms, though there may have been monuments to the dead apart from burying places, to which the former word points. and are also practically synonymous, though the latter is a wider category. points to decoration as distinct from building operations. Frrer ( Wanderungen , p. 77) suggests that Jesus had in view the tomb of Zechariah, the prophet named in the sequel, in the valley of Jehoshaphat, which he describes as a lovely little temple with ornamental half and quarter pillars of the Ionic order.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Mat 23:29-33

29″Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you build the tombs of the prophets and adorn the monuments of the righteous, 30and say, ‘If we had been living in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partners with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’31So you testify against yourselves, that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets. 32Fill up, then, the measure of the guilt of your fathers. 33You serpents, you brood of vipers, how will you escape the sentence of hell?”

Mat 23:29 “hypocrites” See Special Topic at Mat 6:2.

“you build the tombs of the prophets” In the OT God’s people would kill God’s prophets and then build large tombs for them. The building of monuments to God’s spokesmen is not what God wanted. He desires obedience to His message (cf. Mat 23:34-35). As the leaders of the OT killed the prophets, these leaders would kill Jesus and His followers.

Mat 23:30 “if” This is a second class conditional sentence, which is called “contrary to fact.” A premise is made that is false and, therefore, the conclusion drawn from it is also false.

Mat 23:33 “You serpents, you brood of vipers” Jesus was not always the meek and mild, “turn the other cheek” man often pictured (cf. Mat 3:7; Mat 12:34). Religious self-righteous hypocrisy elicited His harshest condemnation-and still does!

“hell” See Special Topic at Mat 5:22.

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley

Woe, &c. Compare Mat 5:9, and see App-126.

tombs. Greek. taphoi. There are four at the base of Olivet: those of Zechariah, Absalom, Jehoshaphat, and St. James; but there is no authority for these names.

garnish = adorn or decorate. Perhaps being whitened just then, before the Passover.

sepulchers = mnemia = monuments.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

29-33.] The guilt resting on these present Pharisees, from being the last in a progressive series of generations of such hypocrites and persecutors, forms the matter of the last Woe. 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 sepulchres of the prophets, joined with their prophet-persecuting acts, convicting themselves of continuity with their fathers wickedness. See, as clearly setting forth this view, Luk 11:47-48. (Sit licet divus, dummodo non vivus). Instead of the penitent confession, We have sinned, 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 (Act 7:52). Stier (ii. 453). Again notice the emphasis, which is now markedly on ; thus bringing out that relation in all its fulness and consequences.

, imper., fill ye also (as well as they) the measure (of iniquity) of your fathers.

Mat 23:33 repeats almost verbatim the first denunciation of the Baptist-in this, the last discourse of the Lord: thus denoting the unchanged state of these men, on whom the whole preaching of repentance had now been expended. One weighty difference however there is: then it was, ; the wonder was, how they bethought themselves of escaping-now, ; how shall ye escape?

On , see Rev 12:9.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Mat 23:29-31. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchers 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.

They talk in the same conceited manner, and they claim self-righteousness, as their fathers did; and if their ancestors killed the prophets, these men garnish their sepulchers, and so are sharers in their forefathers deeds. How often it happens that men say they would not have done such crimes as others have committed, whereas they do not know the vileness of their own hearts. If they were under the same conditions as others, they would act in the same way. It would have been a better sign if the scribes and Pharisees had lamented before God that they themselves were not treating his prophets as they ought to be treated. How very faithful was our Master! He was very tender in spirit; but still, he spoke very severely. The old proverb says that a good surgeon often cuts deeply, and so it was with the Lord Jesus Christ. He did not film the evil matter over, he lanced the wound. He is not the most loving who speaks the smoothest words; true love often compels an honest man to say that which pains him far more than it affects his callous hearers.

Mat 23:32-33. Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?

This is Christs utterance, let me remind you. Our modern preachers would not talk like this, even to scribes and Pharisees who were crucifying Christ afresh, and putting Him to an open flame. They would search the dictionary through to find very smooth and pretty words to say to Christs enemies. We are not of their way of thinking and speaking, nor shall there be while we desire to follow in the footsteps of our Lord.

Mat 23:34. 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:

Which they did; the servants of Christ were thus worried and harried all over the land.

Mat 23:35-36. 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.

So they did. The destruction of Jerusalem was more terrible than anything that the world has ever witnessed, either before or since. There must have been nearly a million and a quarter of people killed during that terrible siege, and even Titus, when he saw the awful carnage, said, What must be the folly of this people that they drive me to such work as this? Surely, the hand of an avenging God must be in it. Truly, the blood of the martyrs slain in Jerusalem was amply avenged when the whole city became a veritable Aceldama, or field of blood.

Mat 23:37-38. 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.

What a picture of pity and disappointed love the kings face must have presented when, with flowing tears, he spoke these words! It was the utterance of the righteous Judge, choked with emotion. Jerusalem was too far gone to be rescued from its self-sought doom, and its guilt was about to culminate in the death of the Son of God.

Mat 23:39. 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.

This exposition consisted of readings from Mat 23:29-39; and Mat 24:1-21.

Fuente: Spurgeon’s Verse Expositions of the Bible

Mat 23:29.[1009] – — , because ye build-of the prophets-and garnish-of the righteous) (see ver 35). This was all that they did in memorial of the ancient prophets and righteous men, without observing their words or imitating their deeds; with a resemblance to their fathers in their dispositions; with a contempt of the Messiah, to whom those prophets had borne witness. Understand, therefore, only, as in ch. Mat 24:38. Scripture is wont to call those who have died in the Lord righteous, rather than saints;[1010] see Luk 14:14, and Heb 12:23.

[1009] ) A hypocrite brings guilt on himself, even in respect to those things which are not unrighteous or wrong in themselves.-V. g.

[1010] In Latin, saint and holy are both expressed by the same word, sanctus.-(I. B.)

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

ye build: Luk 11:47, Luk 11:48, Act 2:29

Reciprocal: Pro 14:18 – inherit Ecc 7:16 – Be not Son 5:7 – the keepers Isa 10:1 – Woe Jer 2:30 – your own sword Eze 18:17 – he shall not Eze 20:4 – cause Mat 23:13 – woe Rom 2:1 – whosoever

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

PHARISAIC SINS

Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!

Mat 23:29

We have to do with what are familiarly known as Pharisaic Sins. They resolve themselves chiefly into four:Pride, Hypocrisy, Superstition, and a Dislike to Real, Spiritual Religion. The rest are offshoots; these are the roots and these are the only sins against which Christ was ever severe. Why? Because the men who committed them were the enlightened ones of the earth.

I. Pride.God is in His holy temple, and all creation liespoor and sinfulat His feet. All glory is Gods. Any glory given to any creature is a robbery of the Almighty! Hence Gods abhorrence of pride. Hence Christs detestation of a Pharisee!

II. Hypocrisy.And the characteristic of our religion, as a test of everything, is reality. We have to do with a very real Goda God of truthalways the same. He abhors hollowness. The unfelt speechthe form, which represents nothingthe act, with no intentionthe double facethe smile that covers coldnessthe polite word which simulates affectionthe prayerless prayerthe praiseless hymnthe fixed eye which looks out from a wandering mindthe self of a seeming worshipthe whited sepulchres of black deathGod flings them from Him; He cannot away with them; and hence, Christs woe to a Pharisee!

III. Superstition.Truth is always simple. Superstition complicates and clouds Gods great, simple plan. It loses the spirit in the letter; and makes more of little externals than of the great principles of our faith. That is superstition! Therefore God repudiates itand hence, again, Christs denunciation of a Pharisee!

IV. Dislike of spiritual religion.And once more. God is one Godtherefore He loves unity, because it is His own reflection. All party spirit; all depreciation of what is spiritual; all that does not put Christ in His own proper placemaking the Head one, and the Body one, and Christ all in allis offensive to God; and this is just what the Pharisees did. Hence, again, the rejection and the curse of a Pharisee.

And Christ walks now this earth, and He confronts everywhere the proud, and the formal, and the superstitious, and the severe. He comes into our churches, and He seeswhat?

The Rev. James Vaughan.

Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary

3:29

The prophets had been dead for centuries and were placed in tombs at the time of their death. The word for build is defined at this place by Thayer, “To restore by building, to rebuild, repair.” To garnish is defined, “To ornament, adorn.” There was nothing wrong in the work of these scribes and Pharisees respecting the treatment of the burial places of the prophets.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous,

[Ye garnish the sepulchres of the righteous.] Let them raise some pillar upon his sepulchre. The Glossers are divided about the rendering of the word pillar. Some understand it of a kind of building or pillar; some of the whiting or marking of a sepulchre above spoken of. The place referred to speaks concerning the remains of the didrachms paid for the redemption of the soul: and the question is, if there be any thing of them due, or remaining from the man now dead, what shall be done with it; the answer is, “Let it be laid up till Elias come: but R. Nathan saith, Let them raise some pillar [or building] upon his sepulchre.” Which that it was done for the sake of adorning the sepulchres is proved from the words of the Jerusalem Gemara upon the place; They do not adorn the sepulchres of the righteous, for their own sayings are their memorial. Whence those buildings or ornaments that were set on their sepulchres seem to have been sacred to their memory, and thence called as much as souls; because they preserved the life and soul of their memory.

These things being considered, the sense of the words before us doth more clearly appear. Doth it deserve so severe a curse, to adorn the sepulchres of the prophets and righteous men? Was not this rather an act of piety than a crime? But according to their own doctrine, O ye scribes and Pharisees, their own acts and sayings are a sufficient memorial for them. Why do ye not respect, follow, and imitate these? But neglecting and trampling upon these, you persuade yourselves that you have performed piety enough to them, if you bestow some cost in adorning their sepulchres, whose words indeed you despise.

Fuente: Lightfoot Commentary Gospels

Mat 23:29. For ye build the sepulchres of the prophets. (Comp. Luk 11:47-48). According to the universal custom of building monuments to ancient and celebrated persons.

And garnish the tombs of the righteous, those considered especially saintly. The prophets, the higher class, are represented as lying for a long time in unknown, perhaps dishonored, graves. The so-called tombs of the prophets are still pointed out near the Mount of Olives on the road from Jerusalem to Bethany.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

This is the eighth woe denounced by our blessed Saviour against the Pharisees for their grand hypocrisy, in pretending great honour to the saints departed, building their tombs, and garnishing their sepulchres, and declaring against their fathers impiety, That had they lived in their days, they would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.

Now their hypocrisy appeared in three particulars.

1. In that they continued in their own wickedness, and yet recommended the saints departed; they magnify the saints, but multiply their sins, and instead of imitating their virtues, they content themselves with garnishing their sepulchres.

2. In professing great respect to the dead saints, and at the same time persecuting the living. Palpable hypocrisy! And yet as gross as it is, it prevails to this day. The church of Rome, who magnify martyrs, and canonize saints departed, have yet added to their numbers, by shedding of their blood.

3. In taking false measures of their love to the saints departed, from their building their tombs, and garnishing their sepulchres; whereas the best evidence of our love unto them is the imitating their virtues, and cherishing their followers. It is gross hypocisy to pay respect to the relics of saints, and veneration to their images; and at the same time to persecute and afflict their followers.

Learn hence, 1. That the world has all along loved the dead saints better than living ones. Mortui non mordent. The dead saints example, how bright soever, is not so scorching and troublesome at a distance; and he himself no longer stands in other men’s light; whereas the living saints example is a cutting reproof to sin and vice.

Observe, 2. That there is a certain civility in human nature, which leads men to a just commendation of the dead, and to a due estimation of their worth. The Pharisees here though they persecuted the prophets whilst alive, yet had they a mighty veneration for their piety and virtue after they were dead, and thought no honour too great to be done unto them.

Note, 3. That it is the grossest hypocrisy to pretend to love goodness, and yet hate and persecute good men. These hypocritical Pharisees pretended highly to piety and religion, and at the same time killed the prophets, and stoned them that were sent unto them.

4. That the highest honour we can pay to the saints departed, is not by raising monuments, and building tombs to their memory; but by a careful imitation of their piety and virtue, following the holiness of their lives, and their patience and constancy at their deaths.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

23:29 {9} Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous,

(9) Hypocrites, when they try the most to cover up their wickedness, it is then by the just judgment of God that they shame themselves.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

The seventh woe 23:29-36

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

By building monuments to the prophets and other righteous people that their forefathers had martyred, the Pharisees were saying that they would not have killed them if they had been alive then. These construction projects constituted professions of their own spiritual superiority as well as honors for the dead. The Christian who naively thinks he or she would not have committed the mistakes that the early disciples of Jesus did makes the same assumption of superiority.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

Disfruta de miles de canciones cristianas en exclusiva sólo en Bibles