Down an Unfamiliar Road

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-SIX

Part XIX

One highly regarded Jewish scholar, Moses Maimonides, gives the following clarification on such individuals. “The laws which pertain to a “mesit”, a person who entices others to serve false gods, differ from those pertaining to others liable for capital punishment. We hide witnesses to observe his act. He does not need a warning as must be given to others who are executed. If he departed from the court after being acquitted, and someone said: ‘I know a rationale that will lead to his conviction,’ he is returned and retried. If he was sentenced to death and someone said: ‘I know a rationale that will lead to his release,’ he is not retried. The court does not advance arguments in defense of a mesit. An elderly person, a eunuch, and a person who does not have sons will not be placed on the court which judges him so that they will not have mercy on him. For cruelty to those who sway the people after empty promises brings mercy to the world, ‘so that God will turn away from His fierce anger and grant you mercy.’¹ A “mesit” is a Jew who seduces an individual to idolatry, while a “maddiah” is someone who publicly entices many into idolatry.”²

The Hebrew word for Messiah is “Mashiah.” Could this have been a case of sinister satire? In the Talmud, we find an interesting teaching on the trial of such mesits and maddiahs. The main commentary (Gemara) points this out: “A light is lit in an inner chamber, the witnesses are hidden in an outer one [which is in darkness] so that they can see and hear him, but he cannot see them. Then the person he wished to persuade says to him, ‘Tell me confidentially your proposition to me’; and he does so. But the person objects; ‘How can we forsake our God in Heaven, and serve idols’? If he retracts, it is well. But if he replies: ‘It is our duty and proper for us’, the witnesses who were listening outside bring him before the Beit Din,³ and have him stoned.”⁴

In this same folio we find an interesting anecdote:

“In the uncensored editions of the Talmud there follows this important passage: ‘And this they did to Ben Stada in Lydda, and they hung him on the eve of Passover. Ben Stada was Ben Padira. Rabbi Hisda said: ‘The husband was Stada, the paramour Pandira. But was not the husband Pappos ben Judah? — His mother’s name was Stada. But his mother was Miriam, a dresser of woman’s hair? This woman has turned away from her husband, (i.e., committed adultery). R. Travers Herford, identifies this Ben Stada as Jesus of Nazareth.⁵ As to the meaning of the name, he connects it with ‘seditious’, and suggests⁶ that it originally denoted ‘that Egyptian’,⁷ who claimed to be a prophet and led his followers to the Mount of Olives, where he was routed by the Procurator Felix,⁸ and that in later times he might have been confused with Yeshua ha-Nōtzri (Jesus of Nazareth). This hypothesis, however, involves the disregard of the Talmudic data, for Pappos ben Judah lived a century after Jesus.⁹ Although the mother’s name, Miriam (Mary), would raise no difficulty, yet the Hebrew “megaddela neshayia” [hair dresser] may be the result of a confusion with Mary Magdalene.¹⁰ Also, Joseph Derenburg, a Franco-German orientalist, denies the identity of Ben Stada with Jesus, and regards him simply as a false prophet executed during the second century at Lydda.”¹¹

Verse 63a: But Jesus said nothing.

So in true fashion of the Messiah, He fulfilled the words of the prophet: “Though mistreated, He was submissive — He did not open His mouth. Like a lamb led to be slaughtered, like a sheep silent before its shearers, He did not open His mouth.”¹² After all, He was standing here as the Lamb of God who must be sacrificed to provide forgiveness for those who believe.

Some have compared our Lord’s silence before the court with Apollonius (15-100 AD), a Greek philosopher from the town of Tyana in the Roman province of Cappadocia in Asia Minor, who some have identified as the Apollos who became a friend of the apostle Paul. Little is known about him with certainty. Being a 1st-century orator and philosopher around the time of Christ, he was compared to Jesus of Nazareth by Christians in the 4th century. On one occasion, Apollonius was threatened with being tried before emperor Domitian, and later gives a summary of his defense:

“If,” said Apollonius, “I am allowed to plead as long as the necessities of the suit require me to, the whole of the Tiber river might run through the meter before I could have finished; but if I am only to answer the questions put to me, then it depends on the cross-examiner how long I shall take to give my answers.” “You have refined,” remarked the other, “conflicting talents when you thus engage in talking about one and the same matter both with brevity and with verbosity.” “They are not conflicting talents,” said Apollonius, “but resemble each other. And moreover, there is a balance between the two…and for my own part I am sure that silence constitutes an excellence much required in a law-court.”¹³

So even among the Greeks, remaining silent was considered a virtue that works to the good of the defendant in court. The apostle James may have been aware of this concept, because he also promoted a basic premise for all believers to follow in such circumstances: “My dear brothers and sisters, always be more willing to listen than to speak.”¹⁴

Verse 63b: Again the high priest said to Jesus, “You are now under oath. I command you by the power of the living God to tell us the truth. Tell us, are you the Messiah, the Son of God?”

The high priest’s insistence that Jesus swear by the living God that He was, in fact, the Messiah, the Son of God, was not to get the truth out in the open for all to hear and believe but to accuse Him of lying under oath. This is one of the rare places where we find “Messiah, Son of God,” spoken of in the same sentence by a Jewish opponent of our Lord. It appears that the high priest accepted what the Psalmist said about the Anointed One.¹⁵ But this was not all that out of line.

The great Jewish commentator Rabbi Rashi made this observation on what the Psalmist said: “Our Sages expounded the passage as referring to the King Messiah.¹⁶”¹⁷ So the question about being the Messiah was bait. He wanted an admission in order to accuse Jesus of blasphemy, a sin worthy of death. The truth was revealed but the mind-searing rage of hate hid this reality from their eyes. How often are sinners confronted with the truth but yet fail to see it because they are blinded by doubt and fear?

How ironic those false witnesses could not convict Jesus, but the truth found Him guilty of being honest. What a wonderful dilemma! If anyone accuses you of being a Christian, or a Bible Believer; or a Jesus Fanatic, let the truth convict you. Before, when Jesus was asked if He had anything to say in His defense against the witnesses that were brought against Him, He remained silent. But now He is asked a question under oath. If He remained silent, then it would be interpreted by the interrogator as sufficient to prove his point that Jesus was making such a blasphemous claim.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-SIX

Part XVIII

Verses 59-60a: The leading priests and the high council tried to find something against Jesus so that they could kill Him. They tried to find people to lie and say that Jesus had done wrong. Many people came and told lies about Him. But still, the council could find no real grounds for a death sentence.

Here, Matthew dutifully points out the fact that as Jesus stood in front of this ad hoc kangaroo court, they “tried to find” some evidence that would allow them to find cause for a guilty verdict that would demand the death penalty. They couldn’t deny His miracles. His teachings made too much sense. His conduct was impeccable. So they resorted to collecting false evidence.

This is the same conclusion that Origen came to. He writes: “From this, it is clear that Jesus committed no sin; no deceitfulness was uttered from His lips.¹ His life was unimpeachable and completely blameless, leaving His enemies no opportunity for provocation. Clearly, they found nothing to say against Him or to insinuate by shading the truth. There is room for false testimony when it is given with a shading of the truth; however, no shading of the truth was found which could further their lies against Jesus—although there were many who wished to find favor with Caiaphas and the chief priests and the scribes and the elders and the whole council. They were the ones who went out looking for such witnesses.”²

These people were properly called, “false witnesses.” But there is a twist here we must not miss. They are not false witnesses because of what they said, but because of who they were. Notice, they didn’t call Bartimaeus who was once blind or Simon who was once a Leper, or Lazarus who once was a dead man. Had Bartimaeus been touched by Jesus and nothing happened, or Simon the leper Jesus was supposed to have healed was still covered with flesh-eating sores, or Lazarus was still rotting in the grave after Jesus called him to come out several times, yes, then they could give an accurate testimony. But those called in to testify had never been touched by Jesus. They only repeated the falsehoods they were told to say.

Yet, all of this fit God’s plan. Remember, the lamb that was to be slain for the Passover meal had to be found without blemish, injury, or flaw in order to qualify. So in a sense, this was the examination necessary to declare that the Lamb of God was, in fact, perfect for sacrifice. That was the only way God the Father could then proclaim that mankind’s sins had been atoned for and the curse of the death sentence for those sins had been repealed. But only for those who put their faith in Him as their Savior and Lord.

Verses 60b-61: Then two people came forward and said, “This man claimed, ‘I can destroy the Temple of God and build it again in three days.”’

Early church leader Jerome raises an interesting point: “How can they be false witnesses if they said what we read the Lord had said before? Because a false witness takes the truth and twists its meaning. The Lord had spoken of the temple of His body,³ but they falsely accused Him with those very words. With a few things added or changed, they made it into an understandably false accusation. The Savior had said, ‘Destroy this temple.’ They changed His words to say, ‘I can destroy God’s temple.’ … But the Lord, indicating the living and breathing temple, had said, ‘And in three days I will raise it up.’⁴” It is one thing to build and another to raise up.”⁵ In other words, they were not false witnesses because of what they said but because of the way they twisted what they heard Him say to give it their own meaning.

Verse 62: Then the high priest stood up and said to Jesus, “Don’t you have anything to say about these charges against you? Are they telling the truth?”

Now we can clearly see that this was not a spontaneous hearing. The people who came to bear false witness had been chosen some time ago, just waiting to do what they were being paid to do. Obviously, the high priest and his cohorts were attempting to make laws that fit their charges.⁶ And our Lord knew that His royal ancestor King David had been through the same thing.⁷ But in spite of the collaboration with liars and bogus reports, the Sanhedrin members were unable to find a particular law that Jesus violated which was worthy of death.

At least we can give Caiaphas credit for giving Jesus an opportunity to say something in His defense. The question is, why didn’t our Lord do so? It’s my opinion, that He felt there was no need to defend Himself against lies and fabrications. Besides, He knew what His mission was, and He decided not to allow anything to interfere with His completing that mission. But what happened here also says a lot about the people trying to destroy our Lord’s name and ministry.

From Jewish writings, we find that Jews appointed to the Sanhedrim – both to the Supreme council and to a Minor council – only men of wisdom and understanding, of unique distinction in their knowledge of the Torah and who possess a broad intellectual potential. The qualifications were listed as follows: “They should also have some knowledge concerning other intellectual disciplines, e.g., medicine, mathematics, the fixation of the calendar, astronomy, astrology, and also the practices of fortune-telling, magic, sorcery, and the hollow teachings of idolatry, so that they will know how to judge them. We appoint to the Sanhedrin only priests, Levites, and Israelites of the lineage of fine repute who can marry into the priesthood. This is derived from Numbers 11:16: ‘And they shall stand there with you.’ Implied is that they should resemble you, Moses in wisdom, the fear of heaven, and in the lineage. It is a law for there to be priests and Levites in the Supreme Sanhedrin, as Deuteronomy 17:9 states: ‘And you shall come to the priests and to the Levites.’ If appropriate ones are not found, it is then permissible for any Israelite to be a judge.”⁸

So this was not a ragtag group of malcontents. These were the elite of Israel. Why is it that both in the past and present, the most acclaimed atheist, agnostics, and skeptics have been those with intellectual skills and laudable degrees from fine universities. Yet they cannot see the truth in God’s Word. Let me illustrate it this way: If you took five of the most brilliant individuals with degrees from the world’s finest universities who are blind, and five people off the street who never finished grade school who are also blind and live as beggars, put them all inside a museum and ask to give the proper name for some piece of fine art you are describing to them, the astute ones would have no better chance of naming those objects than the ones considered ignorant. Why? Because they are equal in their blindness.

Likewise, these religious leaders could not see that the man standing in front of them was the true Messiah because they were all spiritually blind. No doubt that’s why they violated their own legal tradition that said: “A court should not begin adjudicating a case at night. According to the verbal teachings, this concept was derived as follows: Based on Deuteronomy 21:5 which mentions: ‘Every dispute and every blemish,’ an equation⁹ is established between the adjudication of disputes and blemishes. Just as blemishes are viewed only during the day; so, too, disputes should be adjudicated only during the day. Similarly, we do not listen to the testimony of witnesses or validate the authenticity of legal documents at night. With regard to cases involving monetary law, if the judges began hearing the matter during the day, it is permitted for them to conclude the judgment at night.”¹⁰ But they were not only spiritually blind, their jealousy and hatred for Jesus drove them to classify Him as someone they could legally and successfully oppose and depose.

In his commencement address at Yale University on June 11, 1962, President John F. Kennedy gave the graduating students this to think about: “The great enemy of truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived and dishonest – but the myth – persistent, persuasive and unrealistic… We subject all facts to a prefabricated set of interpretations. We enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”

Perhaps all of us have been guilty at one time or another of speaking before we think. Sometimes it is easy to walk those opinions back without too much harm, but on other occasions, it is shot like an arrow from a bow and we cringe when we see the reaction of the person or persons we’ve hurt with such darts of thoughtless persuasion. King Solomon recognized this even in his day. That’s why he said: “Every cautious person acts with knowledge, but a fool parades his folly.”¹

And this is never more true than what we say before God, either in our hearts, minds, or with out lips. Solomon also gives these words of wisdom: “Don’t speak impulsively — don’t be in a hurry to give voice to your words before God. For God is in heaven, and you are on earth; so let your words be few.”² Solomon went on to say, that such rash words can give you nightmares and cause you great anxiety. Only a thoughtless person speaks in endless chatter without giving much thought to what they say. In other words, say what you mean, and mean what you say because you have proof that what you say is meaningful. – Dr. Robert R Seyda

Last week, here in the United, we celebrated Veterans Day. The people watching or attending many of these memorials, no doubt heard the lone bugler play a haunting tune on his trumpet that has become known as “Taps.” It’s the song that gave me a lump in my throat when I conducted funeral services for veterans, and it brought tears to my eyes as I stood at the graveside of my youngest brother. But, most people do not know the story behind the song? I found this story and I hope you will be interested in finding out something about its humble beginnings.

Reportedly, it all began in 1862 during the Civil War, when Union Army Captain Robert Ellicombe was with his men near Harris’s Landing in Virginia. The Confederate Army was on the other side of the narrow strip of land. During the night, Captain Ellicombe heard the moans of a soldier who lay severely wounded on the field. Not knowing if it was a Union or Confederate soldier, the Captain decided to risk his life and bring the stricken man back for medical attention. Crawling on his stomach through the gunfire, the Captain reached the stricken soldier and began pulling him toward his encampment. When the Captain finally reached his own lines, he discovered it was actually a Confederate soldier, but the soldier was dead. The Captain lit a lantern and suddenly caught his breath and went numb with shock. In the dim light, he saw the face of the soldier. It was his own son. The boy had been studying music in the South when the war broke out. Without telling his father, the boy enlisted in the Confederate Army. The following morning, heartbroken, the father asked permission of his superiors to give his son a full military burial, despite his enemy status. His request was only partially granted. The Captain had asked if he could have a group of Army band members play a funeral dirge for his son at the funeral. The request was turned down since the soldier was a Confederate. But, out of respect for the father, they did say they could give him only one musician. The Captain chose a bugler. He asked the bugler to play a series of musical notes he had found on a piece of paper in the pocket of the dead youth’s uniform. This wish was granted. The haunting melody, we now know as “Taps” … used at military funerals was immortalized. It became a standard component to U. S. military funerals in 1891.

There are many variations of where this melody was born, how it was used, and how it became part of the United States Military funerals. Here are some of the words from Taps as copyrighted by the Pennsylvania Military College:

To hear Taps played while reading the lyrics, please access this video:

Day is done . . . Gone the sun . . . From the lakes . . . From the hills . . . From the sky . . . All is well . . . Safely rest . . . God is nigh . . .

Fading light . . . Dims the sight . . . And a star . . . Gems the sky . . . Gleaming bright . . . From afar . . . Drawing nigh . . . Falls the night . . .

Thanks and praise . . . For our days . . . Neath the sun . . . Neath the stars . . . Neath the sky . . . As we go . . . This we know . . . God is nigh . . .

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-SIX

Part XVII

Verse 56: But all these things have happened to show the full meaning of what the prophets wrote. Meanwhile, all of Jesus’ followers ran off and left Him.

Many Bible scholars take the opening portion of this verse as a note from the transcriber of Matthew’s journal since it comes at the end of the narration of what happened in the Garden of Gethsemane. Others see it as Matthew’s way of closing out this portion of his record on what happened. In fact, the oldest Hebrew version of Matthew does not put it in parentheses.¹ In any case, it does not do any harm to the text and should not be voided as being something other than that which was inspired by the Holy Spirit.

Living in Germany I heard of many Germans who, during the time of Hitler in WWII, risked their lives and fortunes to help those being persecuted escape torture and death in the ovens of concentration camps. What would you think if you heard that after the war was over, some of those same people turned on their benefactors, denying that they knew them, even trying to pretend that they did not receive any help from them, instead of standing up for those they once looked on as heroes? This same conduct, however, seems less offensive today when we hear of many forsaking the Son of God for even fewer reasons.

At this point, all of the disciples had no reason to forsake their Lord. We know that John and Peter followed Him to the high priest’s house, but there was no need for the others to have fled in such haste. Matthew is quite clear when he said (no doubt including himself), they all forsook Him and fled. In the midst of His enemies, while in great distress and trouble, such action was very unkind and ungrateful. This account of Matthew pretty much agrees what the Jews themselves say of in their concocted story.² They also stipulate that the citizens of Jerusalem killed many of Jesus’ followers and that the rest fled to the mountains. But this was never proven of the eleven disciples. However, when applied to the many, many others who followed Him, it may have some merit.

Verse 57: The men who arrested Jesus led Him to the house of Caiaphas the high priest. The teachers of the law and the older Jewish leaders were gathered there.

This first stop was what we would call today a “preliminary hearing” to find out if there was enough evidence to proceed with a trial. There has been some debate over who the high priest was, because the next stop was at Ananus’ palace, also a high priest. However a check of Jewish history will show that the high priesthood was frequently changed in those times, and men were put in that position by the Roman governor, as a result of favor or bribery. And just like today, after a person is no longer a serving senator, governor, or even president, they are still referred to by that title.

Leading up to Jesus’ arrest, Valerius Gratus was the Roman Prefect of Judea under Tiberius. He succeeded Annius Rufus, and was replaced by Pontius Pilate. During his tenure, Valerius appointed several people to the post of the high priest. His first was Ishmael ben Phabi (Fabi), followed by Eleazer ben Ananus, then Simon ben Camithus, and finally Joseph Kuppai, known better by his Greek name, Caiaphas, who was the son-in-law of Ananus.³

Two early church scholars give us the history as they understood it on Caiaphas’ role in this sordid affair with an innocent man. Jerome, who lived in this area of Israel for thirty years, tell us: “In accordance with God’s command, Moses ordered that high priests should succeed their fathers and a line of descent should be woven among priests. Josephus relates that the disreputable Caiaphas purchased the high priesthood from Herod for one year only.⁴ No wonder, then, the dishonorable high priest judges dishonorably.”⁵

Then Origen says: “I believe the word for Jewish slavery whereby poor and abandoned persons now profess to be slaves, is ‘Caiaphas.’ He is known as the high priest who, at odds with the truth, rails against Jesus. But Jesus according to the truth is a priest, the Word of God; under Him are established all who worthily and zealously serve God the Father. Where the high priest Caiaphas is found, however, there the scribes come together, that is, learned men who preside over the perishing written word. While being scribes, they are also elders who preside not over the truth but over the classic usage of a mere word.⁶ They are unwilling to consider anything beyond that.”⁷

Verse 58: Peter followed Jesus but stayed back at a distance. He followed Him to the courtyard of the high priest’s house. Peter went in and sat with the guards. He wanted to see what would happen to Jesus.

Although many of the disciples and followers quickly left the arrest scene in the Garden of Gethsemane, John stayed close to his Master, while Matthew notes that Peter followed off in the distance. Jerome states: “Either out of a disciple’s love or out of human curiosity, Peter wanted to know what judgment the high priest would make concerning the Lord: whether he would have Christ put to death or beaten with whips. There is a difference between the eleven apostles and Peter at this point. They fled, whereas he followed the Savior from a distance.”⁸

It must have been with a heavy heart that Peter lagged behind the arresting squad that guided Jesus to the compound of the high priest. I have to imagine that the words of Jesus rebuking him for being influenced by Satan to try and dissuade Him from continuing on to His destiny with death were running through his mind. And then, when his Master told him how weak his oath of loyalty was and that to the contrary he would deny Him rather than defend Him, even though he did pull the dagger and cut off the high priest servant’s ear. So perhaps Peter felt he had something to prove. Therefore, he’d wait for the right moment to display his willingness to surrender all for the one whom God the Father revealed to him as being the Messiah, the Anointed One, the Son of God.

But whatever his intentions, it didn’t turn out the way he may have imagined it. Because once they got to the high priest’s compound, things seemed to change. Below is an artist’s rendering of what the high priest’s compound may have looked like in that day. And somewhere in the courtyard, just inside the small gate you see on the far wall, is where Peter made his terrible choice to say: “I don’t know Him.”

Palace of Caiaphas during the Second Temple Period according to the model at Jerusalem

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-SIX

Part XVI

Verses 50b-51: Then the men went forward and grabbed Jesus and arrested Him. When that happened, one of Jesus’ disciples grabbed his dagger and pulled it out. He swung it at the servant of the high priest and cut off his ear.

Nothing in Jesus’ demeanor seemed to faze these people. But after examining other Gospel accounts we find that according to John, Jesus did exchange words with them and at first they were somewhat intimidated¹ but soon got over it. Also, Luke tells us that at the supper, Jesus told His disciples that if they didn’t have any knives, they should get some. At that point, they told Him they already had two.² John tells us it was Peter who pulled the dagger. In the process, he escalated the tension. But Jesus intervened, and by healing the wounded man’s ear stopped any further violence, but not before Jesus rebuked Peter for his careless actions. If He had wanted to, our Lord could have opened Peter’s eyes just like He did for Elisha’s servant, so he could see the army of angels standing ready to come to the Messiah’s rescue.³

But Jesus was more interested in fulfilling the scriptures,⁴ than impressing His disciples. John Gill has put together an excellent summary of these scriptures:

“The several parts of the sufferings of the Messiah are foretold in the writings of the Old Testament; the spirit of Christ, in the prophets, testified before hand of them; as that he should be reproached and despised of men,⁵ be spit upon, smote, and buffeted,⁶ be put to death,⁷ and that the death of the cross,⁸ and be buried,⁹ and also the several circumstances of His sufferings, which led on to them, or attended them; as the selling Him for thirty pieces of silver,¹⁰ the betraying Him by one of his familiar friends,¹¹ the seizing and apprehending Him, and which is particularly referred to here,¹² His disciples forsaking Him,¹³ and even His God and Father,¹⁴ His suffering between two thieves,¹⁵ the parting of His garments, and casting lots for His clothing,¹⁶ the giving Him gall and vinegar when on the cross,¹⁷ and not breaking any of His bones,¹⁸ yea, the Scriptures not only declared, that these things should be; but the necessity of them also, that they must be; because of the purposes and decrees of God, which are eternal, immutable, and unfrustrable; for as God had determined on His salvation of His people by Christ, and that through His sufferings and death, these were determined by Him also, even the time, nature, manner, and circumstances of them; and which the Scriptures declare, and therefore must be likewise; and because of the covenant of grace, which is sure, unalterable, and unchangeable; in which Christ agreed to assume human nature, to obey, suffer, and die in it, and so do His Father’s will, which was to bear the penalty of the law, and undergo the sufferings of death, and which therefore must be, or Christ’s faithfulness fail.”¹⁹

Verses 52-54: Jesus said to the man, “Put your dagger back in its place. People who use swords will be killed with swords. Surely you know I could ask my Father and He would give me more than twelve legions of angels. But it must happen this way to show the truth of what the Scriptures said.”

Even in this moment of seeming complete helplessness, Christ shows that He is still the Master of the situation. They could not capture Him before this moment, neither were they forced to wait one hour longer. The Scriptures had foretold this point in time, and since they spoke of Him they must be fulfilled through Him to the letter. Jesus would have it no other way. Had Christ been in hiding previous to this hour, but now on this occasion ventured as close to Jerusalem as possible only to be caught, then the nature of His sacrifice would have taken on a different light. But this was the exact hour, ordained of the Father. It could not have been one second sooner nor later.

There are two things I feel are important to make note of in this section. First, after Jesus told Peter to put the dagger back in its sheath, He then stated: “Surely you know.” This means that sometime between when Peter joined Jesus as a disciple and now, he became aware of the special protection that Jesus had with God’s guardian angels. Perhaps it was after Peter learned the whole story of Jesus’ temptation in the wilderness,²⁰ or a short time earlier when Jesus was praying and the angels came to comfort Him.²¹

When speaking of the angels available for Him to call, our Lord uses the military term “legions” to describe how big the angelic army was. According to Bible historians, a legion, from the Latin legio, to collect or choose, was a particular division or battalion of the Roman army, which at various times contained different numbers. During the period of our Savior’s journey, it probably consisted of 6,200-foot soldiers and 300 cavalry horses. Therefore, twelve of such legions would amount to about 78,000 men. But what number in a legion meant to the Roman army was not necessarily the same as an angelic legion.

Verse 55: Then Jesus said to the group, “Why do you come to get me with swords and clubs as if I were a criminal. Every day I sat in the Temple area teaching. You did not arrest me there.”

Jesus now challenges this mob to explain why they picked this time and place to arrest Him. But this was a rhetorical question because He was about to give them the answer. This was designed to point out that no one should doubt that the ensuring events were all under the control of God’s will. So when we read that Jesus promised that we may have trials and tribulations, let us not forget that it’s all in God’s plan, so face it, accept it, and let God work a miracle through it. That way, when we experience such moments of exasperation during our journey, we can assure ourselves that God is in control.

Though we may see those in whom we trust fail or forsake us when things get tough, yet we can trust in our God. But the disciples were more than just friends; they counted for more than mere followers. They were the ones that Jesus rescued from lives that were meaningless to the rest of the world and had no chance of ever impacting society for the good in any way. He gave them a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to walk with the Son of God and thereby be qualified to go out and rescue others in the world from similar insignificant lifestyles so they too could make a difference in the world. Then we should rejoice that we were counted worthy to be one of them.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-SIX

Part XV

Verse 47: While Jesus was still speaking, Judas Iscariot, one of the twelve apostles arrived. He had a big crowd of people with him, all carrying swords and clubs. They had been sent from the leading priests and the elders of the people.

The stillness in the garden is now shattered. Just as Jesus awakened His sleeping disciples the final time, an armed crowd shows up at the entrance to the garden. It is interesting to note, the Greek term used to describe the group that arrived is: polys ochlos (large multitude). Most people assume that there was only a small number who arrived, but Matthew tells us is was a big crowd.

Most scholars believe the large crowd consisted of Roman soldiers, Temple guards, officers, chief priests, along with their servants, captains of the Temple, and elders of the people. So this would constitute a much larger crowd than most people think, and greater than that which is often displayed in motion pictures about the life of Christ. However, some spurious attempts have been made to discount what Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John record about this event.

Around 600 AD, some fragments of Jesus’ biography made their way into the Babylonian Talmud; and in 827 AD, Archbishop Agobard of Lyon attests to a sacrilegious story of Jesus that circulated among Jews. In the Middle Ages, the book became the object and tool of a most acrimonious controversy. Jews, Christians, and atheists, such as Shem-Tob ben Isaac Shaprut of Tudela, Martin Luther, and François-Marie Arouet, better known as Voltaire, quoted and commented on what became known as the “Toledot Yeshu” (Life of Jesus), trying to disprove the beliefs of Christians yet revealing their own biases and prejudices.

In this spurious document, we find the following recounting of our Lord’s arrest in Gethsemane:

“Then they [Jesus and His disciples] journeyed to Jerusalem, there to celebrate the Feast of Unleavened Bread [Passover]. Now when the devout men saw Judas Iscariot they rejoiced with great joy, and said to him, ‘Point Him out to us, we ask you, what remains to be done.’ (For he had secretly withdrawn himself and come to the elders and wise men of the city.) Then Judas related all that had happened, and how he had obtained the unpronounceable name YHWH from the illegitimate one. Therefore, they rejoiced, and Judas said to them, ‘If you will obey my orders, tomorrow I will deliver this fellow into your hands.’ Then said the wise men, ‘Have you enough knowledge of his going and coming?’ Judas replied, ‘Everything is known to me. Look, he goes to the temple to attend the sacrifice of the paschal victim, but I have sworn to him by the Ten Commandments not to deliver him into your hands. And he has with him, 2000 men. You should be prepared tomorrow, and know that the man before whom I bow down in adoration, he is the illegitimate one. Act bravely, attack his followers, and seize him.’ Simon, son of Shetach and all the rest of the wise men danced for joy, and they promised Judas to obey his orders. The next day Yeshua came with all his crowd, but Judas went out to meet him, and falling down before him, he worshiped him. Then all the citizens of Jerusalem, being well armed and equipped, captured Yeshua. And when his disciples saw him held captive, and that it was vain to fight, they took to their legs here and there and gave themselves up to bitter weeping. Meanwhile, the citizens of Jerusalem, waxing stronger, conquered the illegitimate one and his crowd, killing many of them, while the rest fled to the mountains.”¹

But the account given to us by Matthew is accepted as the true story of that momentous occasion:

Verse 48: Judas planned to do something to show them which one was Jesus. He said, “The one I kiss on the cheek will be Jesus. Arrest Him.” So he went to Jesus and said, “Greetings, Rabbi!’ Then Judas kissed Him on the cheek. Jesus responded, “Good friend, do the thing you came to do.”

At the head of this crowd stood a passive assassin named Judas Iscariot, one of Jesus’ own followers. This form of ambush was ripe in the early days of Israel after they entered the Promised Land,² and our Lord’s royal ancestor faced a similar situation.³ In this case, the betrayal would be consummated with a kiss on the cheek. The Greek word used here for “kiss” is kataphileō. It means, “to kiss much, kiss again and again, kiss tenderly.” We can see it more clearly in context by looking at examples.⁴ In some countries even today, family, friends, and guests are often treated with alternating kisses on each cheek as many as two times each. Such kissing is also expressed with what is called “cheek to cheek.”

According to the Syriac version of Matthew, it reads that when Judas Iscariot arrived, he came toward Jesus and said, “Shalom Rabbi” (Peace, Teacher). In the Farsi Version, Judas is recorded as saying, “Peace be upon You, Rabbi.” This was the customary form of salutation that disciples rendered to their wise teachers. As a matter of fact, in the Talmud, we find it said: “The greeting of a disciple to his Master is ‘Peace be upon you.’”⁵ Jesus did not dismiss this act of friendship. As a matter of fact, He greets Judas by calling him “good friend.” I can only imagine that at that moment Judas Iscariot’s heart must have burned with conviction as his Lord kindly embraced him.

Many of the early church scholars were impacted by what Judas did here. Chrysostom says: “For having shown His own strength, at once He yielded Himself. But the other Evangelist says that even at that very moment He continued to reprove Him, saying, ‘Judas, would you betray the Son of man with a kiss?’⁶ Are you not ashamed even of the form of your betrayal? Nonetheless, He submitted to being kissed and did not even resist this shameless act. He gave Himself up willingly. They laid their hands on Him. They seized Him that night on which they ate the Passover. To such a degree did they boil with rage and madness. They, however, would have had no strength against Him unless He had permitted it. Yet this did not deliver Judas from unspeakable punishment. He even more exceedingly condemns himself by the manner of his betrayal, by the Lord’s meekness and leniency and gentleness. He became fiercer than any wild beast.”⁷ Jerome has this to say: “It was shameless indeed and a sign of broken trust to call Him master and to plant a kiss on the one he betrayed. But Judas still has something of the modesty of a disciple, for he does not deliver up Christ to His persecutors openly but with the sign of a kiss. This is the mark which God put on Cain lest anyone who came upon him should kill Him.”⁸

Chrysostom then adds this commentary: “How fitting are the instruments of the priests! They came against Him ‘with swords and clubs.’⁹ Judas himself was with them, one of the Twelve. In the interest of fair disclosure, the Evangelist still calls him ‘one of the Twelve,’ unashamedly. ‘Now the betrayer had given them a sign, saying, “The one I shall kiss is the man; seize him.”’ O with what depravity had the traitor’s soul been inflamed! With what kind of eyes did he then look at his Master? With what mouth did he kiss Him? O accursed purpose! What sign did he devise? What did he dare? What sort of clue of betrayal did he give? Whoever I kiss! He was emboldened by his Master’s gentleness. Yet it by itself was sufficient to shame him. The kiss deprived him of all excuse, for he was betraying one incomparably meek. But why does he say [‘Seize the one I kiss’?] Often when Jesus had been under attack and possible seizure, He had gone out from the crowd, through the middle of it, without their even knowing it.‘¹⁰”¹¹

Then Bishop Hilary offers an interesting insight: “There is a certain order to the different facets of Christ’s suffering. But the reason for Judas’s kiss was that we might discern all our enemies and those who we know would delight in raging against us. The Lord does not resist his kiss.”¹² What Hilary seems to be saying is that although Jesus knew the purpose for which Judas Iscariot came, and He was also cognizant that it would lead to His arrest, torture, and death, He opened His arms to Judas and accepted the betrayal kiss without resistance. This then should serve as an example for all of those who followed Him. Whenever those come against us for the sole purpose of trying to embarrass us or have us persecuted for the name of Christ, we should not shout back or make accusatory statements in our defense, but acknowledge that we know why they are there and we are willing to suffer whatever punishment or persecution that may come as a result of being a born again committed Christian, and a dedicated follower of Jesus Christ.

1 Sepher Toldoth Yeshu, Ch. 3

2 II Samuel 3:27; 20:9-10

3 Psalm 28:1-3; cf. Psalm 55:20

4 See Luke 7:45; 15:20; and Acts 20:37

5 Babylonian Talmud, Seder Nezikin, Masekhet Shevu’oth, folio 32a, fn. (24).

6 Luke 22:48

7 Chrysostom: Matthew, Homily 83.2

8 Jerome: Commentary on Matthew, Bk. 4, Ch. 26.49

9 See verse 47

10 Luke 4:30

11 Chrysostom: ibid.

12 Hilary of Poitiers: On Matthew, 32.2

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-SIX

Part XIV

Verses 43-44: Then He went back to His followers. Again He found them sleeping. They could not stay awake. So He left them and went away one more time and prayed. This third time He prayed, He said the same thing.

This back and forth from prayer to awaken His sleeping disciples must have been even more tiring and disappointing to Jesus. Even though He told them at the supper that Judas Iscariot would betray Him this very night, they still did not seem to comprehend the seriousness and magnitude of the situation. None of the disciples came running to Him saying, “We can’t find Judas! Let’s get out of here before he comes back!” We can only imagine that since Jesus announced His betrayal with such calmness, and told Judas to go do what Satan had put in his heart, the disciples perhaps had taken it for granted that just as He slipped through the crowd in Nazareth when they wanted to throw Him off a cliff, He would find a way to survive this time. In other words, they were in denial that their Lord would really let Himself be beaten and crucified. So why weren’t they on their knees praying for God to protect their Messiah and Master?

Several early church scholars give us their impressions on what was happening at this critical point before the arrest and trial of our Lord. Origen writes this commentary: “But notice that after the first prayer ‘He came to the disciples and found them sleeping.’ Likewise after the second prayer, ‘He came and found them sleeping, for their eyes were heavy.’ On this, I believe they were the eyes not so much of their bodies as of their souls. Besides, He had not yet removed the heaviness from their eyes, ‘because He was not yet glorified.’ And just as ‘the Spirit had not been given, because Jesus was not yet glorified,’ so too the heaviness had not yet been removed from their eyes ‘because Jesus was not yet glorified.’ Therefore He does not rebuke them, but ‘leaving them again, He went away and prayed for the third time, saying the same words.” He also teaches us through those ‘same words,’ that we may not grow faint in prayer but persist in the very words of our prayer until we obtain those things we have begun to pray for.”¹

When looking at the schedule kept by Jesus and His disciples in the previous two days, it is quite easy to see why stopping for a time in a quiet garden would lead to their falling asleep. But Origen does touch on an important topic concerning their lack of spiritual awareness. Did they really understand what was about to happen in a few short hours? Had they not been briefed by their Master on the impending crisis that was about to take place? So why did they not do something to make sure that someone was on guard just in case it happened on their watch? We might say the same thing about the church today and its state of alert on the return of the Son of God. Were He to come tonight, how many of His disciples would He find spiritually asleep?

Then Bishop Hilary shares his thoughts: “After that, He returns to the disciples and finds them sleeping. He asks Peter why he could not watch with Him one hour—Peter, indeed, was one of the three, for he had boasted in front of the others that he would not fall away. And He indicates the cause of His greater fear, saying, ‘Pray that you may not enter into temptation.’ He wanted then to prevent temptation (so He included in His prayer the words ‘lead us not into temptation’),² lest anything in us cater to the weakness of the flesh. He also makes it clear why he urged them to pray in order to avoid temptation, saying, ‘The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.’ These words did not apply to Himself but were aimed at them. For that matter, how is it that now His spirit is willing, whereas before His soul was sad even to death?³ At any rate, He orders them to watch and pray lest they give in to temptation and succumb to the weakness of the body. He, therefore, prays that, if possible, the cup may pass from Himself, for when it comes to drinking from it, all flesh is weak.”⁴

We also have the commentary of Jerome: “It is impossible for the human soul to avoid temptation. Hence we say in the Lord’s Prayer, ‘Lead us not into temptation,’⁵ which we are unable to withstand. We do not refuse to face temptation entirely but pray for the strength to bear up under it. Therefore he does not say, ‘Watch and pray that you may not be tempted’ but ‘that you may not enter into temptation,’ that is, that temptation may not overwhelm you and hold you in its grip. For example, a martyr who has shed blood by professing faith in the Lord was certainly tempted but was not ensnared in the net of temptation. One who denies the faith, however, has fallen into the snares of temptation. ‘The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.’ This is aimed at those rash people who think that whatever they believe, they can obtain. Therefore, as much as we trust in the ardor of our spirit, so too should we fear the weakness of the flesh. And yet, according to the apostle, the works of the flesh are mortified by the Spirit.”⁶

Origen, whom we quoted before, has so more to say on this subject: “As long as Jesus was present, His disciples did not sleep. After He had walked a short distance away, they were unable to watch for even one hour in His absence. For this reason, we should pray that Jesus will not leave us for even a short while but will fulfill what He promised when He said to us, ‘And I am with you all days, even to the end of the world.’⁷ In this way will we keep watch as he banishes sleep from our souls, to make it possible for us to fulfill His command: ‘Do not give sleep to your eyes or slumber to your eyelids, that you may escape as a doe from the nets and a bird from the snare of the catchers.’⁸ But coming to the disciples and finding them asleep, He arouses them with a word and tells them to listen, so He may, as it were, say to those who are listening: ‘How is it that you were not able to watch with me for even one hour?’ He orders us then to be wakeful so we may keep watch and pray. Now that person watches who does good works, that person watches who diligently attends to the truth of the faith lest he be ensnared by any shady teaching. He who watches and prays in this way will have his prayer heard. This is what the Lord means when he says, ‘Watch and pray.’ We should first watch and while watching, we should pray.”⁹

And Bishop Hilary leaves us with this thought: “The fact that, after returning and finding them asleep, He first reproves them, secondly is silent, and thirdly orders them to rest, can be explained in this way: First, after the resurrection, He scolded them for scattering and for being apprehensive and restless; second, once the Holy Spirit had been sent, He came and found them sleeping, since their eyes were too heavy for them to discern the freedom of the gospel—having been held back by the love of the law for some time, their faith was still sleeping; and third, with the return of his radiance, He restored them to restfulness and peace of mind.”¹⁰

Verses 45-46: Then Jesus went back to the followers and said, “I see you are still sleeping and resting? But the time has come for the Son of Man to be handed over to the control of sinful men. So stand up! We must go! Here comes the one who will hand me over!”

We do not know how long our Lord prayed each time, but it must have been long enough for the wear and tear of the last 16-18 hours to overcome them. We know that Daniel prayed three times a day, but not within the same time frame.¹¹ Besides that, at their last meal they drank from four glasses of wine, and that may have contributed to it as well.¹² The disciples had the same opportunity to pray as Jesus did, but they chose rather to sleep. Even after Christ awakened them they still persisted on getting a nap. However, when the hour of trial came Jesus was prayed up; He withstood the persecution, but the disciples who slept instead of praying fled in terror. You can’t save up nor buy back your opportunities to pray. All too often we fail in the time of trial because we put off praying, even though we knew the storm was on the way.

When a person is informed by the doctor that they only have hours or days to live, they can be observed reacting in different ways: Some become remorseful, despondent, or resentful that life has treated them so cruelly. Some simply resign to it, act as if it’s their fate, and some withdraw into a catacomb of not wanting to be bothered; while others try to use each precious second of time left to prepare for the unknown hour. They become kind, gentle and self-sacrificing; they want to be a blessing rather than have a blessing said over them. So it was with Jesus. He knew that His time was short. But He challenged the future, marched into the difficulty with head held high, and gave His all for undeserving mankind. If in fact, Christ lives within us, then we are capable of doing the same for Him.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-SIX

Part XIII

Early church leader Leo the Great gives us an interesting insight into what he feels our Lord’s prayer here is trying to communicate, not only to the Father but also to us. He says: “The disciples were admonished, and the Lord bid the Father that they might confront the force of the present temptation with watchful prayer: ‘My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless not as I will, but as you will.’ The first petition arises from weakness, the second from strength: He desired the former based on our nature and chose the latter based on his own. Equal to the Father, the Son knew that all things were possible to God; rather, he descended into this world to take up the cross against his will so that he might suffer through this conflict of emotions with a disquieted mind. But in order to show the distinction between the receiving nature and the received nature, what was proper of humanity desired divine intervention and what was proper to God looked upon the human situation. The lower will yielded to the higher will, and this demonstrated what the fearful person may pray for and what the divine healer should not grant. ‘For we do not know how to pray as we ought,’¹ and it is good for us that what we want, for the most part, is not granted. God, who is good and just, shows mercy toward us by denying us those things we ask for which are harmful.”²

Jesus uses the drinking of a cup to describe what awaited Him. One polemic writer questions why Jesus was asking for His heavenly Father to remove the cup if it is His will. He writes: “…then the wills are not the same, and if they have two wills, then Jesus could not be God.”³ Our Rabbi friend forgets that Jesus was letting the Father know that if He was thinking about sparing His only Son the agony of suffering and death He would abide by His Father’s decision. However, He knew what the Father wanted and so He pledged to do what the Father had sent Him to do. In other words, Jesus was sure His Father would not change His mind.

But why a cup? The drinking of a lethal substance by one’s own hand has been a method of suicide for ages. But Christ was not taking His own life nor was He being involuntarily killed. Drinking the cup that contained a fatal substance became a symbol of voluntarily dying for the cause. He was not at the mercy of a superior force. He willingly forfeited his own life knowing at the time He had to make a last minute choice between saving Himself or saving the world. So the question may be asked: when did He drink the potion, thereby passing the point of no return?

When Peter brandished the sword, Christ admonished him and said that He could have called for help from multiple angelic legions had He wanted to. But this would have been a forced deliverance. Much like submitting to a stomach pump after you’ve swallowed the poison. I think that within seconds after Christ said, “Nevertheless, not My will but Your will be done,” He drank the bitter cup, and prepared to go on to His death without ever looking back.

NOTE: In the Jewish Mishnah we find a description of the duties of the high priest leading up to the Day of Atonement. In reading this we can see how Jesus fulfilled this duty as our High Priest just days prior to His death and sacrifice. “Seven days before Yom Kippur they seclude the High Priest from his home to the chamber of the officials [since it is only the High Priest who performs the Yom Kippur service he is secluded within the Temple confines to assure that he does not become defiled and disqualified.” In other words, he does no work. We find that the last miracle Jesus performed was the healing of the two blind men as they were leaving Jericho on their way to Jerusalem (See Matthew 20:29-34). It also says, “If he was a scholar he would lecture [the entire night] but, if not, scholars would lecture before him.” In Matthew Chapters 21 through 25, we find where our Lord spent quite a bit of time teaching about the anticipation of the return of the Messiah. It goes on to say, “Throughout the seven days they did not withhold from him food or drink even those kinds that may cause emissions. But on the eve of Yom Kippur near nightfall, they would not allow him to eat a lot because food induces sleep and he is not allowed to sleep the night of Yom Kippur.” From the time they left the meal with Simon the Leper in Bethany (See Ch. 26:6-7), our Lord did not eat again until He ate with His disciples. And then He did not eat very much. The high priest was also prevented from sleeping. Says the Mishnah, “If he wanted to sleep, young priests would snap their middle finger before him and say: My Master the High Priest, stand up once on the cold floor and drive away the sleep and they would keep him busy until the time of the slaughter of the daily morning offering.” We know that from the time Jesus at the last supper until He was led off to Calvary, he did not sleep. There were times when He was slapped in the face, just like the high priest lest he falls asleep.⁴

Verses 40-41: Then He went back to His followers and found them sleeping. He said to Peter, “Could you men not stay awake with me for one hour? Stay awake and pray for strength against the temptation to give up. Your spirit wants to do what is right, but your body is weak.”

Some people have criticized these apostles for not being alert and steadfast as they waited for their Master to finish His prayer. But we must remember, they had been up all day, and after their last supper with Jesus had gone over to the Mount of Olives. So this incident took place some time after midnight. It is no cause for wonderment why Jesus spoke directly to Peter here. Just minutes before he had declared loyalty to the death. Now here in the peace and quiet of the garden he falls asleep. How often, in the heat of persecution and impending disaster we pledge our life’s allegiance to the Master, only to either fall asleep during the lull or ultimately deny Him before His persecutors. Peter’s actions should not surprise us.

We should not fault the disciples too severely, because there are other instances of persons in excessive grief and trouble falling asleep, as Elijah,⁵ and Jonah,⁶ so that this did not arise from a secure, lazy, indolent frame of spirit; or from any disregard to Christ, and neglect of him, and lacking in concern for Him; but from their great sorrow of heart; for, the trouble and distress that He was in, added to the causes above mentioned. How many Christians have you heard stand up in the heat and fervor of revival and proclaim their loyalty to God, to the Bible, and to their Lord Jesus Christ, only to be found guilty of diminishing ardor when at their workplace or among friends at a social event?

Verse 42: Then Jesus went away a second time and prayed, “My Father, if I must do this and it is not possible for me to escape it, then I pray that what you want will be done.”

The same thing that incapacitated Peter’s fidelity to Christ often renders us helpless in times of trial, and that is we lose faith in ourselves, but do not have enough faith in Christ to overcome it. How different the attitude of the second man Adam. The first Adam wanted to do his own will, here Jesus prays to the Father, “Your will be done.” This self-will was the beginning of sin and still remains its main cause today. But if sin imprisoned mankind through the disobedience of self-will, in the beginning, man can be freed from sin through Christ who sacrificed His own self-will on the altar of God’s will. Whenever we are confronted with sin and the temptation to do things our way instead of God’s way, the altar of God’s will is always ready to give us the same victory won by of our Lord Jesus Christ’s willing sacrifice.

John Keats (1795-1821), an English poet, was focusing on two scenes painted on a Sosibios vase, and penned these lines at the end his ode to that urn: “When old age shall this generation waste, Thou shalt remain, in midst of other woe than ours, a friend to man, to whom thou say’st, Beauty is truth, truth is beauty, – that is all ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.”¹

Although this renown romantic poet was giving praise to this piece of Greek pottery he made the ethical point, that the beauty of truth rests in the fact that it will outlast all of the discord and cynical thoughts of mankind who dispute reality and have only distrust for those who think differently than they do.

This is so true when it comes to God’s Word. Atheists, agnostics, and unbelievers have rejected the Bible as a source of wisdom and truth for centuries. But what is so disconcerting, is that we live in an era when not only have many believers left their Bibles unopened laying on their nightstands or stuffed in a drawer, but a number of ministers no longer believe it is relevant to modern society and therefore have written their own bibles to preach from.

Jesus foresaw this development because He echoes the words of the wise young Psalmist who said: “Your eternal Word, O LORD, stands firm in heaven forever,”² when gave this promise to His disciples and all who would come to follow Him: “Heaven and earth will become obsolete, but My words will never become obsolete.”³

That’s why we look at the cross instead of an ancient urn and see the wonder of God’s love displayed in the dying Lamb of God, the one who is called the Way, the Truth, and the Life, giving Himself so that we who were destined to die might instead receive the gift of everlasting life and say: How beautiful is the Truth, yes, the Truth is beautiful, and that’s all we have been given to know, and all we will ever need to know. – Dr. Robert R Seyda