Down an Unfamiliar Road

WHAT IS AN AMERICAN?

Before the recent presidential election, the leader of ISIS put out the word for their savages to kill Americans all around the world, in any country. This is not new, it has happened before. In fact, some fourteen years ago, Peter Ferrara, an associate professor of law at the George Mason University School of Law in Northern Virginia published an article in the National Review on September 25, 2001, two weeks after the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the U.S. He wanted the savages to know what an American was so they would know what to look for in order to find one.

Characteristics of an American: An American is English, or French, or Italian, Irish, German, Spanish, Polish, Russian or Greek. An American may, also, be Canadian, Mexican, African, Indian, Chinese, Japanese, Australian, Iranian, Asian, or Arab, or Pakistani, or Afghan. An American may, also, be a Cherokee, Osage, Blackfoot, Navajo, Apache, or one of the many other tribes known as native Americans.

An American is Christian, or he or she could be Jewish, or Buddhist, or Muslim. In fact, there are more Muslims in America than in Afghanistan. The only difference is that in America they are free to worship as each of them chooses. An American is also free to believe in no religion. For that, he will answer only to God, not to the government, nor to armed thugs claiming to speak for the government and for God.

An American is from the most prosperous land in the history of the world. The root of that prosperity can be found in the Declaration of Independence, which recognizes the God-given right of each man and woman to the pursuit of happiness.

An American is generous. Americans have helped out just about every other nation in the world in their time of need. When Afghanistan was overrun by the Soviet army 20 years ago, Americans came with arms and supplies to enable the people to win back their country. As of the morning of September 11, Americans had given more than any other nation to the poor in Afghanistan.

Americans welcome the best ~ the best products, the best books, the best music, the best food, the best athletes. But they also welcome the least. One national symbol of America, The Statue of Liberty, welcomes “your tired, your poor, the wretched refuse of your teeming shores, the homeless, tempest-tossed.” These, in fact, are the people who built America. Some of them were working in The Twin Towers the morning of September 11, earning a better life for their families.

I’ve been told that the World Trade Center victims were from at least 30 other countries and cultures with first languages other than English including those countries of the 9/11 terrorists.

So you can try to kill an American if you must. Hitler tried. So did General Tojo, Stalin, and Mao Tse-Tung, and every bloodthirsty tyrant in the history of the world. But, doing so would be futile because Americans are not a particular race or ethnicity of people from a particular place. They are the embodiment of the human spirit and ideology of freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and freedom of religion. Everyone who holds to that spirit and ideology, everywhere, is an American.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-SIX

Part XII

We also find some interesting information in Jewish literature on the subject of the rooster crowing. In the Jewish Mishnah, we are told that on all other days they removed the ashes from the altar at the first crowing of the rooster, or near to it, but on the Day of Atonement, it started at midnight, and the high priest was responsible for making it happen.¹ And in the Babylonian Talmud, it speaks of roosters crowing twice and sometimes thrice.² So the rooster crowing played a role in the fact that Jesus was ending His mission as a Prophet. He was about to become the High Priest who would sprinkle His own blood on the altar in the Holy of Holies,³ before He ascended to be at the right hand of the Father to await the day when He would return as KING of Kings.

Verse 35: But Peter answered, “I will never say I don’t know you! I will even die with you!” And all the other followers said the same thing.”

Now Peter is on the defensive. It’s almost as though he took Jesus’ statement that he would not live up to his vow as a challenge. So it would be up to him to prove his Master wrong. Not only do we know that he failed, but failed miserably. But we also find out that it led him to repentance and gave him a renewed resolve to be more dedicated and committed to his Lord with unconditional love and loyalty. So if or when you also may find yourself unable to live up to your expectations and must admit failure, don’t take it as a defeat. Let that stumbling block become a stepping-stone to greater things in your life that will honor and bring glory to your Lord and Savior, Jesus the Christ.

Verses 36-37a: Then Jesus went with His followers to a place called Gethsemane. He said to them, “Sit here while I go there and pray.” He told Peter and the two sons of Zebedee to come with Him.

Gethsemane is a garden that lies at the foot of the Mount of Olives alongside the Kidron brook. It is a level plot of ground of some fifty-seven square yards, where several old olive trees still stand today. It has been identified as the spot to which our Lord often retreated for prayer before His impending arrest. In Jewish and European documents we find many stories and things said about Gethsemane.

As a matter of fact, a German traveler and writer named Hiob Ludolph went to Ethiopia, learned the language and compiled a lexicon. In it, he shared that according to Ethiopian tradition, Mary the mother of Jesus was buried in Gethsemane.⁴ The term “Gethsemane” was translated in the Münster Hebrew version of the New Testament as “valley of olives.” St. Jerome, who spent 30 years in a cave under the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem translating the Scriptures from Hebrew into Latin, says that while he was there the people referred to Gethsemane as a “very fertile valley.”⁵ Others, however, point out that it is a compound word in Hebrew, made up of “gat” = press, and “shemen” = oil, which combines for “gatshemene,” meaning: “oil press.” It is easy to see how this was eventually rendered in English as “Gethsamane.”

In Jewish writings, where the Temple compound was being described, it says, “…as to the south-western [portion], Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob said: I forget what its use was, while Abba Saul said: There they put wine and oil and it used to be called the Cell of the House of Oils.”⁶ This is where they stored their wine and oil for temple service. This would then suggest that at, or near this place, was a very public olive press, where they squeezed the olives to extract the oil in them, which they gathered in great quantity from off the Mount of Olives; at the foot of which this place was; and a very significant place it was for our Lord to go to at this time, when He was about to be squeezed in the winepress of God’s wrath against sin, so the resulting flow would become the substance for cleansing and the balm for healing. Apparently, it was not a place unfamiliar to the disciples. This is verified by the fact that Judas Iscariot knew exactly where to go to find Jesus.

Verse 37b-38: Then He became very heavyhearted and troubled, and Jesus said to Peter and the two sons of Zebedee, “My heart is so burdened with grief, I feel as if I am dying. Wait here and stay awake with me.”

This time our Lord wanted to be alone to pray, so after Peter, James, and John sat down He walked on a little further. I’m sure the three disciples could see that He was struggling with grief, almost to the point of thinking He may pass out. So just in case He became too distraught, He asked them to stay awake until He was finished praying. It doesn’t appear that our Lord went out of sight because the disciples were able to report later that they saw Him fall face down on the ground, and no doubt heard Him cry out to His heavenly Father.

Early church bishop Hilary had this to say about our Lord’s sudden grief: “When we read that the Lord was sad, we must examine everything that was said to find out why He was sad. He previously warned that they would all fall away. Brimming with confidence, Peter responded that even though all the others might be alarmed, he would not be moved—he who the Lord predicted would deny knowing Him three times.‘⁷ In fact, Peter and all the other disciples promised that even in the face of death they would not deny Him.⁸ He then proceeded on and ordered His disciples to sit down while He prayed.⁹ Having brought with Him Peter, James, and John, He began to grieve. Before He brought them along with Him, He did not feel sad. It was only after they had accompanied Him that He grew exceedingly sad. His sadness thus arose not from Himself but from those whom He had taken with Him. It must be realized that the Son of man brought with Him only those whom He showed that He would come into His kingdom at that time when, in the presence of Moses and Elijah on the mountain, He was surrounded by all the splendor of His eternal glory. But the reason for bringing them with Him both then and now was the same.”¹⁰

Verse 39: Then Jesus went on a little farther away from them. He fell face first to the ground and prayed, “My Father, if it is possible, don’t make me drink from this cup. But do what you want, not what I want.”

In recorded Jewish verbal traditions we find the subject of posturing for prayer discussed. It says: “Kidah [bowing] is upon the face, as it says: Then Bath-Sheba bowed with her face to the ground. Keri’ah [kneeling] is upon the knees, as it says: From kneeling on his knees, prostration is spreading out of hands and feet, as it says: Should I and your mother and your brethren come to prostrate ourselves before you on the ground.¹¹”¹²

Then another Rabbi explains: “Prostration, what is implied? After one lifts his head from the fifth bow, he sits on the ground, falls with his face towards the earth, and utters all the supplications that he desires. ‘Kneeling’ always refers to [falling to] one’s knees; ‘bowing,’ to bending over on one’s face; and ‘prostration,’ to stretching out on one’s hands and feet until he lies flat with his face on the ground.”¹³ And Rabbi Simeon concludes: “Happy is he who attains union with the Divine, for then his prayers rise on high and return with the blessings from the mansion symbolized by prostration of the face upon the ground at the time of prayer, an attitude by which we supplicate that judgment may be tempered with mercy as it is written, ‘He is a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is He.‘¹⁴”¹⁵

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-SIX

Part XI

Verse 32: “But after I am killed, I will rise from death. Then I will go up into Galilee. I will be there before you get there.”

Now the Master puts a qualifier at the end of His portend of their forsaking Him in His hour of need. He tells them that they will meet again back in the familiar territory of Galilee. Not only that, but He says to them, I’ll get there before you do. This promise was promptly forgotten by the disciples in the midst of Christ’s other announcements. Later, at the tomb, He had to remind them again through Mary Magdalene. If they would have retained it and trusted in it, perhaps their faith would not have waned so fast. Therefore, since Christ has given us a promise that He will return to gather us together to be with Him forever. Let us learn from this incident that He is true to His word.

Chrysostom has this to say about the effect of this promise: “Jesus does not permit them to become sorrowful but immediately says, ‘But after I have risen again, I will go before you into Galilee.’ For He does not immediately appear from heaven on a single occasion and then depart to a distant country. Rather, He promises to come in resurrected form to the same nation in which He had also been crucified, and nearly to the same place. All this was to give complete assurance that He had indeed been crucified and that He indeed rose again, thereby to comfort them more abundantly when in sorrow. Therefore also He specified “to Galilee,” in order that being freed from the fears of the Jews they might believe His saying. This is why He indeed appeared there.”¹

Most of us have had the experience of someone texting or calling us saying: “I’ll be waiting for you at the entrance of the restaurant, or I’ll wait for you to meet me at their office.” So we start our journey fully expecting to see them standing at the entrance or sitting in their when we arrive. This is basically what Jesus was saying to His disciples. He wanted to meet them in Galilee to tell them about His plans of going back to the Father. That He would be gone for awhile, but they should not worry, He will be back. You would think this would have given the disciples all the faith and confidence they needed to endure and cope with His crucifixion and death. But unfortunately, it did not turn out that way.

Verse 33: Peter answered, “All the other followers may lose their faith in you. But my faith will never be shaken.”

But Peter, “The Rock”, as Jesus called him, wanted his Lord to know that he would not allow his Master make this journey alone. This strong fisherman wanted to impress Jesus with his promise that nothing would keep him from being there when He needed him. So Peter blurts out both his oath of loyalty and a simultaneous indictment of the other disciples for not having the courage to do the same. We are not told how they reacted, but we do find out that Jesus was not fooled. Perhaps our Lord had these words of Solomon flash through His mind: “You might call many people your ‘friends,’ but it is hard to find someone who can really be trusted.”²

Early church scholars have a number of opinions on what happened here. For instance, Origen writes: “The other disciples only fell away from Jesus, but Peter, who thought that he could begin with deceit and end up with the truth, both fell away from Jesus and also denied Him because of the audacious promise he made that he would never fall away. It was not only out of carelessness but almost also out of vileness that he said, ‘Even if all fall away because of you, I will not fall away.’ He made a rash promise because he did not know the deceitfulness of human nature. This is why Peter didn’t simply fall away from Jesus or even deny him once but abandoned Him so completely that he denied him three times.”³

I doubt that Jesus felt insulted by Peter’s prattle on unconditional loyalty because He knew this brash and bold fisherman was earnest and really planned to carry out his oath of allegiance. But, no doubt all of us have heard the old saying spawned by the writings of Saint Bernard of Clairvaux (c. 1150 AD): “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.”

Origen then goes on to say: “It seems to me that Jesus’ other disciples had the foresight and wisdom (when it was first said ‘you will fall away because of me tonight’) not to profess that they would never fall away, for they saw the truth of Jesus’ prediction. But because only to Peter alone was it said, ‘Truly I tell you, before the cock crows you will deny me three times,’ they eventually promised along with Peter, ‘Even if we have to die with you, we will not deny you.’ The difference between Peter and the other disciples is this: Peter did not acquiesce even after Jesus prophesied that he would deny Him three times before the cock crowed. The others, however, who were not included in this prophecy or in things said only to Peter, responded with a promise which did not seek to make a liar out of the Lord, as Peter’s promise did.”⁴

Early church scholar Chrysostom had this view: “Peter then spoke confidently and elevated himself above the rest by saying, ‘Though they all fall away because of you, I will never fall away.’ It may be that in some degree his bravado sprang from jealousy. For at the supper, they were all talking about which one of them was the greater. This passion for recognition was still troubling them. Therefore, Jesus resisted Peter, not compelling him to a future denial—God forbid! But He left him destitute of His help, convicting human nature.”⁵

To put Chrysostom’s statement another way, we might say that if you make a promise or vow to God that even you are not sure you can keep, and later on it is proven that it was not obtainable, then don’t expect God to demand that you keep your oath. Such promises depend on your strength and commitment alone. So don’t blame your heavenly Father when what you pledge out of jealousy, pride, or even anger does not come to fruition. You made it, so you must live with its success or failure. That’s what happened to Peter.

Verse 34: Jesus answered, “The truth is, tonight you will say you don’t know me. You will deny me three times before the rooster crows.”

Was Christ’s prediction of Peter’s pending denial derived from the fact that Christ foresaw this incident or was this a pronouncement on the part of our Lord in order to prove an eternal point? Owing to Peter’s personality, temperament and nature, both what he said here and what happened later were typical of Peter’s tendencies. The spontaneity with which Christ responded to Peter’s statement of commitment leads me to believe that Jesus foresaw what was inevitable, based on His spending the past three years with Peter.

Therefore, Peter would have denied Christ anyway, even if it had not been predicted it beforehand. This gives us a glimpse into the foreknowledge of God. He didn’t have to vacillate on where Jesus was going to be born; He didn’t need to take a chance on whether or not Jesus would die on a cross, God knows every option at play in every set of circumstances to the point that He can look out into the future and see where we will be and what will be at any given point in our lives. Should this frighten us? No, it should encourage us to believe when He said He will never leave us or forsake us.⁶

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-SIX

Part X

Early church scholar Cyril gives us his commentary on this portion of Matthew. He writes: “The disciples were not merely confused; rather the matter greatly disturbed them, and the knowledge of this mystery was hard to grasp. How could one be raised from the dead, or one with countless wonders done on behalf of the people be handed over to death and dishonor? Yet this agrees with what the prophet said: ‘Strike the shepherd.’¹ David also says to the Father, ‘Therefore those whom you struck, they will persecute.’² However, not all this occurred at the will of the Father; He did not desire for Him [the Son] to suffer, if only the Jews would have accepted Him. So one cannot say He willed a murder. The Father consented with the Son’s choice to suffer this. So it is written that the Father struck ‘the shepherd.’ He permitted Him to suffer yet had the power to prevent the suffering. Something like this is at work in the passage that says Pilate was ‘over’ Christ. ‘You would have no power over me if it were not given to you from above,’³ that is, ‘if the Father had not permitted me to suffer.”⁴

However, I think bishop Cyril misses an important point. Jesus was sent to die whether the Jews believed in Him or not. In fact, those who did believe had their faith strengthened when He rose from death and ascended to the Father with a promise to return so they could be where He was going. Had the Jews accepted Him and Jesus would have considered His mission finished. Then, even they would have been cheated out of having the possibility of singing that grand old hymn by Alfred Ackley: “I serve a risen Savior, He’s in the world today. I know that He is living, whatever men may say.” . . . “He lives, He lives. Christ Jesus lives today! He walks with me and talks with me along life’s narrow way.”

Verse 30: They all sang a song and then went out to the Mount of Olives.

Here is one of the first references to Jesus singing. I’m sure He did that more than once, but on this occasion, it was part of the ceremony. Using my own imagination I can see and hear the disciples singing the hymn by Robert Lowry: “What can wash away my sins, nothing but the blood of Jesus.” Or one of my favorites by Andre Crouch: “The blood that Jesus shed for me way back on Calvary, oh the blood that gives me strength from day to day, it will never lose its power.”

However, Jewish tradition tells us that as part of the Passover liturgy, special hymns were sung from the Hallel Psalms (meaning “Praise Psalms”), consisting of Psalms 113-118. Looking at these Psalms, imagine if you can, Jesus singing the following lines: “Death’s ropes were around me. The grave was closing in on me. I was worried and afraid. Then I called on the Lord’s name. I said, ‘Lord, save me!’ LORD, you saved my soul from death. You stopped my tears. You kept me from falling. I will continue to serve the Lord in the land of the living. What can I give the Lord for all that he has done for me? He saved me, so I will give Him a drink offering, and I will call on the Lord’s name. Lord, I am your servant! Yes, I am your slave, as my mother was. You set me free from the chains of death. I will give you a thank offering. I will call on the Lord’s name.”⁵

Had He done so, it would have been more for the disciples than for Himself. And I am sure it would have become one of the favorite hymns of the apostolic church and beyond. But since we are told in the Jewish guide to the Passover meal⁶ that the Benediction Song is taken from Psalm 118. In reading this Psalm it comes across like the summary of Christ’s life. But as the meal came to a close these may have been the final words of their song: “LORD, you are my God, and I thank you. May God, I praise you! Praise the LORD because He is good. His faithful love will last forever.”⁷

Verse 31: Jesus told the followers, “Tonight you will all lose your faith in me. The Scriptures say, ‘I will kill the shepherd, and the sheep will run away.’”

With the supper over, the singing quieted down. Our Lord now gets to the real issue at hand. In His usual way, He offers the prophecy found in Zechariah 13:7 as a basis for what will happen next. This is not only uncanny but done on purpose. They may try and argue with Him, but they will be less disposed to argue with Scripture.

As on any subject, a perusal of the writings of Jewish scholars finds differing interpretations of just who Zechariah was referring to. Rabbi Solomon Jarchi indicates that “My shepherd” pertains to: “the one whom I appointed over the flock of My exile.”⁸ Meanwhile, Rabbi Isaac ben Abraham points to the king of the Ishmaelites or the Turks.⁹ However, Rabbi David Kimchi has this to say, “Rabbi Abraham Aben Ezra, has interpreted this prophecy of the great wars which will be in all the world in the days of the Messiah, the son of Joseph.¹⁰”¹¹ An earlier Rabbi, Isaac Abravanel, also believes that the shepherd in Zechariah 13:7 is speaking of Messiah, the son of Joseph.¹²

Jesus could have as easily quoted from Job, who said to his supposed friends, “I cannot depend on you, my brothers. You are like a stream that has no water when the weather is dry but is flooded when the rains come. In the winter, it is choked with ice and melting snow. But when the weather is hot and dry, the water stops flowing, and the stream disappears.”¹³

In his sermon on this text, Chrysostom writes: “Then Jesus said to them, ‘You will all fall away because of me.’ After this, He mentions a prophecy: ‘For it is written, “I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock will be scattered.”¹⁴ He was urging them to be attentive to what has been prophetically predicted of His death and resurrection, and at the same time, He wanted to make it plain that He was indeed crucified according to God’s purpose. All of this was to show that He was no alien from the old covenant or from the God who preached it. What was done in the Old Testament was a dispensation. All the prophets proclaimed all things beforehand from the beginning that are included in this salvation event. All this was to increase faith. And He teaches us to know what the disciples were before the crucifixion and what they did after the crucifixion. For indeed they who were not able so much as to stand their ground when He was crucified after His death became mighty and stronger than adamant.”¹⁵

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-SIX

Part IX

Some Jewish scholars see this anguish of the Messiah as, “…the suffering which must precede His coming.”¹ However, others accept it as the trials and suffering the Messiah would endure. After these hymns of praise, the participants lift their cups and say, “Blessed art thou, O Lord, God and King, who are mightily praised, God of thanksgivings, Lord of wonders, who chooses song and psalm, King, God, the life of the world.”² The fourth cup is consumed and then the meal concludes.

In one Jewish article on these four cups I found the following: “First Cup – God chose us to be His holy people. To accomplish this He promised to unburden us from our enemy’s entanglements. Second Cup – God teaches us that we cannot effect our own release and that in our helpless state we must trust in Him and in Him alone for our salvation. Third Cup – God further reveals to us that His sovereign work of salvation necessitates both divine power and payment. Our salvation would cost Him dearly, even the life of the Lamb. Fourth Cup – God lets us know that the redemption which is ours is still not fully complete. We must await the future with hope for Messiah’s coming, for He alone can transform us fully into the holy people He has ordained us to be.”³

I wonder how more meaningful it would be today for Christians to say these same things after each sip from the communion cup. The Eucharist in many churches has become – Let’s get this over with so we can get on with the service inconvenience. In one large church, since it is somewhat time-consuming and expensive to serve the Lord’s supper to the entire congregation, they have established a communion room where people can go and be given the cup and the bread individually at the opportune time. Since Jesus gave this to promote harmony among His followers, it’s hard to see how this can be done on a singular basis.

The apostle Paul adds something in his repeat of what happened here between Jesus and His disciples at the time of this meal. He says: “When supper was over, He did the same with the cup. He said, ‘This cup is the new promise made with my blood. Every time you drink from it, remember me’.”⁴ The KJV reads, “As oft as you do this.” This has given rise to the belief that it is to be done frequently. Jesus only did it once, but He knew that it was connected to the Passover Meal, which was once a year. Nevertheless, I accept that what pleases Him the most is not how often it is done, but that when it is done, it is done to remember what He did for all those who believe.

Verse 29: “I want you to know, I will not drink this wine again until that day when we are together in my Father’s kingdom and the wine is new. Then I will drink it again with you.”

Based on this, we can see that Matthew may be referring to the fourth cup in his recollection of the last supper. We must also note that Jesus then states that the wine inside represented His blood. All of those present were certainly aware of the original use of blood in establishing the old covenant. It is also interesting, that while Jesus equates the wine as a symbol of His blood, according to Jewish traditional teachings the wine at this supper was to be red.

In the Talmud, we read, “Rabbi Judah said: It must possess the taste and appearance of wine. Said Raba, What is Rabbi Judah’s reason? Because it is written, Look not thou upon the wine when it is red.”⁵ Jewish scholars say: “Thus it does not merit the name wine unless it has its appearance too.”⁶ This is because you cannot call it wine unless it is red, and the reason why red wine most fitly represented the blood sprinkled on the door-posts of the Israelites at Passover. So likewise the blood of Christ, shed for the remission of the sins of His people is red.

This leads us now to Moses: “Moses read the scroll with the special covenant written on it. He read the covenant so that all the people could hear him. And the people said, ‘We have heard the laws that the Lord has given us. And we agree to obey them.’ Then Moses held the bowls full of the blood from the sacrifices. He threw that blood on the people. He said, ‘This blood shows that the Lord has made a special covenant with you. The laws God gave you explain the covenant.‘”⁷

That must have gone through their minds as Jesus held up the cup to signify a new covenant with God through His blood. There is an additional factor concerning the blood that is given: “This is because the life of the body is in the blood. I have told you that you must pour the blood on the altar to purify yourselves. It is the blood that makes a person pure.”⁸ No wonder Jesus said that His blood was being poured out for the forgiveness of sins.

Furthermore, God gave the prophet Jeremiah a word about the new covenant that Jesus was introducing here, “This is what the Lord said, “The time is coming when I will make a new agreement with the family of Israel and with the family of Judah. It will not be like the agreement I made with their ancestors.”⁹ Then Jesus announces that this will be the last time He will use the wine of the old covenant to celebrate the new. The next time it will be the new wine of the new covenant.

At this point, the words given in Isaiah may have crossed our Lord’s mind, “But the Lord was pleased with this humble servant who suffered such pain. Even after giving himself as an offering for sin, he will see his descendants and enjoy a long life. He will succeed in doing what the Lord wanted. After his suffering, he will see the light, and he will be satisfied with what he experienced.”¹⁰ This verse gives weight to the theory that Christ was inaugurated and God’s kingdom established after His resurrection.

His statement, then, that some of them would not taste death until they saw this happen, is taken by some scholars as the time between His resurrection and His ascension, not to His second coming. We can see this born out when Jesus joined two of His disciples on the road to Emmaus, and later on the shores of the Sea of Galilee. Some scholars also point out that by Jesus leaving the city with His disciples, He was violating the canon. However, in the Jewish verbal tradition, there are no unified agreements on this, as we see in the discussion between Rabbi Judah and others about spending the night in Jerusalem.¹¹

There was more than one reason by our Lord chose to go to the Mount of Olives after the meal. This was the place where the high priest stood and burned the red heifer, and sprinkled its blood. The Jewish Mishnah states, “All the walls there were high, save only the eastern wall because the High priest that burns the Red Heifer and stands on the top of the Mount of Olives should be able to look directly into the entrance of the Sanctuary when the blood is sprinkled.”¹² Could it also be that from Calvary’s brow Jesus was able to look across and see the Temple glowing in the dark? Perhaps this was why He cried out on the cross with such passion, “Father, forgive them. They do not know what they are doing.”¹³

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-SIX

Part VIII

Verse 26: As they continued eating, Jesus took some flatbread and thanked God for it. He broke off some pieces, gave them to His followers and said, “Take this bread and eat it. It is my body.”

This verse suggests that the Lord and His disciples had started eating sometime before this incident took place. As a matter of fact, in verse 21 we find they had already been eating. We can see what the Jews said concerning the meal that only included the flatbread. Rabbi Maimonides says this: “At present, one eats a small piece of matzah and does not taste anything afterwards, so that, after the completion of the meal, the taste of the meat of the Paschal sacrifice or the matzah will [remain] in one’s mouth, for eating them is the mitzvah.”¹

During the regular Seder meal, three flat loaves of matzah bread were laid one on top of each another. The black threads on the matzah represent the stripes the Israelites received as slaves in Egypt. Matthew tells us that Jesus thanked God for the bread, just like He did the five flatbreads and two fish.² According to Jewish custom, after lifting up the bread, the host of the meal then offers this prayer, “Blessed art thou, O Lord our God, king of the universe, who brings forth bread from the earth. Blessed art thou, O Lord our God, king of the universe, who sanctified us with His commandments, and commanded us concerning the eating of unleavened bread.”³

Pictures of the three pieces of Matzah used in the Seder meal.

We are not told by Matthew if our Lord prayed this exact prayer verbatim seeing that He was praying to His own Father in asking God’s blessing on this bread for His disciples. But our Lord does follow the custom of not breaking the bread until it is blessed. In the Babylonian Talmud, we read, “The law is as laid down by Raba, that one says the blessing first and afterward breaks the loaf.”⁴ In his instructions on the eating of the bread, Rabbi Maimonides adds: “The host should recite the blessing “hamotzi.” When he completes the blessing, he should break bread.”⁵

Another aspect we should mention is that this bread was called the “Bread of Affliction.” And since Jesus mentioned that it represented His body, we can see how the two are melded together. As a matter of fact, Rabbi Maimonides makes this observation: “…he recites the blessing: ‘Blessed are You, God, our Lord, King of the universe, who has sanctified us with His commandments and commanded us regarding the eating of the Paschal sacrifice,’ and eats from the body of the Paschal sacrifice.”⁶ In other words, even though Jesus was holding the bread, He said that it represented His body. And that body is none other than the body of the Lamb of God, sacrificed for the death angel to pass over us because our bondage to sin and slavery has been broken and we are free to live and worship our God and King.

Verses 27-28: Then He took a cup of wine, thanked God for it, and gave it to them. He said, “Each one of you drink from it. This wine is my blood, which will be poured out to forgive the sins of many and begin the new agreement from God to His people.”

When our Lord took the cup and blessed it, the factors involved in which blessing our Lord cited all depends on which cup Matthew is talking about. In the Seder Meal, there are four cups which are raised. A fifth is also raised called the “Cup of Elijah,” but it is not consumed. The four cups are tied to God’s promises: “I am Adonai. I will release you (cup one), from the forced labor of the Egyptians, I will rescue you (cup two) from their oppression, and I will redeem you (cup three) with an outstretched arm and with great judgments. I will receive you (cup four) as my people, and I will be your God.”⁷

According to the Jewish Haggadah, the first cup is called the “Kiddush,” or “Sanctification.” This signifies the first part of Exodus 6:6, “ I am Adonai. I will free you from the forced labor of the Egyptians.” After the pouring of this cup the host recites Genesis 1:31-2:3, and then prays a prayer that begins, “Blessed art thou, O Lord our God, creator of the fruit of the vine.”⁸ After this first cup is consumed while reclining, then the host takes the middle loaf of the three matzah loaves and breaks it in two. He hides the one-half to be searched for later. Since Matthew has indicated that Jesus already broke the bread, then this cup he is referring to here must be the second cup.

The second cup is called the “Cup of Deliverance.” This reflects the second part of Exodus 6:6, “I will rescue you from their oppression.” As the cup is raised the participants recite a blessing. The part that I like goes as follows, “Then shall we give thanks to You with a new song, for our redemption and the liberation of our soul. Blessed art thou, O Lord, Redeemer of Israel.” Then the prayer, “Blessed art thou, O Lord our God, king of the universe, keeper of the fruit of the vine,”⁹ is said before the second cup is consumed in the reclining position. If in fact, this is what Jesus said, I’m sure the disciples were reminded of what Jesus told them before: “I am the real vine, and my Father is the gardener.”¹⁰

The third cup that is poured is called the “Cup of Redemption.” This relates to the last part of Exodus 6:6, “I will redeem you with an outstretched arm and with great judgments.” The blessing that is said at this time is for the food that was already eaten. Today we call this “Table Grace.” It is important to notice that such grace is said “after” the meal. The Host begins by saying, “Gentlemen, let us say the blessing.” Then the participants’ reply, “May the Name of the Lord be blessed from now unto eternity.” The host then says, “Let us bless Him our God of whose food we have eaten.” The participants follow with, “Blessed be He our God of whose food we have eaten and through whose goodness we live.” The third cup is then consumed while reclining.¹¹

Finally, comes the fourth cup. The fourth cup poured is called the “Cup of Hope.” This cites Exodus 6:7a, “I will take you as my people, and I will be your God.” After the cup is filled the Hallēl¹² from Psalm 115 is then recited. I like the way it begins, “Not to us, Adonai, not to us, but to Your name give glory, because of Your grace and truth.” This is followed by Psalms 116-118. We note that even the Jewish rabbis saw the suffering of the Messiah in these psalms. In the Talmud we read, “Now since there is the great Hallēl, why do we recite this one? Because it includes a mention of the following five things: The exodus from Egypt, the dividing of the Red Sea, the giving of the Torah, the resurrection of the dead, and the anguish of Messiah.”¹³

Samuel Johnson (1709-1784), British writer and author of “A Dictionary of the English Language” published in 1755 also wrote a tale about Rasselas, Prince of Abyssinia in Ethiopia, who was talking to his friend, the astronomer, Imlac, as they looked into the night sky. He told him that he considered their long friendship as one of the greatest blessings of his life. And then the Prince said this: “Integrity without knowledge is weak and useless, and knowledge without integrity is dangerous and dreadful.¹ He then informed his friend that he saw in him all the qualities needed for trust, such as kindness, experience, and fortitude. My, what an endorsement!

I read once where someone wrote: “Integrity is the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles. It is not just related to honesty but encompasses the entire range of moral values and also includes the strength to stand firmly to protect these values, morals, and principles. However, the moment we are born, the first thing we acquire is knowledge and not integrity.” As we know, survival is based on our knowledge and how we apply it to everyday life. But as Samuel Johnson points out, what good does it do to possess something vital to our lives if it is empty of ethics and virtues?

Someone may claim to be the smartest person in the world, but if they use their knowledge for all the wrong purposes, it can be dangerous and fearful for those around them. Likewise, a Christian may have extensive knowledge of God’s Word, if they place no thought or value on how they apply it to themselves or others, it will lead to confusion and dissension. So, not only should we learn what God’s Word means, but what He meant when He said it. As Publilius Syrus, the ancient Latin writer of proverbs once said: “What is left when honor is lost?” – Dr. Robert R Seyda

I’ve always loved using illustrations in my sermons just as Jesus used parables to explain the truth more clearly. I collected dozens of such books from antique book stores, especially when I visited London. Here is one I think you will appreciate for the message it brings.

Yeas ago, there was once a swing bridge built on a huge pillar out in the middle of a large river. During most of the day, the bridge sat sideways with its length running parallel with the river banks, allowing ships to pass thru freely on both sides of the bridge. But at certain times each day, a train would come along and the bridge would be turned sideways so it crossed the river, allowing the train to pass over.

A switchman sat in a small shack on one side of the river where he operated the controls to turn the bridge and lock it into place for the trains to cross. One evening, the switchman was waiting for the last train of the day to come. He checked his watch, and at the scheduled time he stepped to the controls and turned the bridge into position. But to his dismay, he found that the locking control on the other side did not work. If the bridge was not locked in position it would wobble back and forth at both ends and cause the train to jump the track and go crashing into the river. And this would be a passenger train with many people aboard.

Suddenly, thru the dimming twilight, he caught sight of the train lights coming down the tracks. He quickly hurried across the bridge to the other side of the river where there was a manually operated control lever which he could operate to lock the bridge in place. But he would have to pull back the lever and hold it firmly in place as the train crossed the river. So he took hold of the lever and leaned backward to apply his weight to it, locking the bridge. He could hear the rumble of the train behind him, so he kept applying the pressure to keep the mechanism locked. Many lives depended on this man’s strength.

Then, from the direction of his control shack on the other side of the river, he heard a sound that made his blood run cold. “Daddy, where are you?” His little four-year-old son was crossing the bridge looking for him. His first impulse was to yell at the child, “Hurry! Hurry!” But the train was already too close; the boy’s tiny legs would never allow him to make it across the bridge in time. In the same instant, he thought of leaving the lever to run and snatch up his son and carry him to safety. But he realized that he could not get back to the lever in time for the train to pass safely. One thing was for sure, either he had to think of the many people on the train or his little son. It took only a moment for him to make his decision. He closed his eyes and pulled with all his might on the lever to keep the bridge locked in place.

The train sped safely and swiftly by over the river on its way. No one on board was even aware of the tiny broken body thrown mercilessly into the river by the rushing locomotive. Nor were they aware of the pitiful figure of the sobbing man, still clinging tightly to the locking lever long after the train had passed. Neither did they see him walking home more slowly than he had ever walked before, to tell his wife the horrible news of how they had just lost their little boy.

As we comprehend what this experience must have meant to this man and how it affected him, we begin to realize what our Father in Heaven must have had to endure when He sacrificed His Son to bridge the gap between us and eternal life. Can there be any wonder that the earth trembled and the skies darkened when His Son was crucified? And how it must now affect Him when people ignore that bridge and try to paddle their way across the rapidly flowing river of death with little thought or appreciation for the sacrifice God made. But those who do take the bridge to the other side, the day they see Jesus, the one who gave His life for that bridge, they will no doubt fall down at His feet to thank and praise Him and the Father for their wonderful act of love, grace, and mercy.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-SIX

Part VII

Verse 21b: Then Jesus said, “Believe me when I say that one of you twelve here will hand me over to my enemies.”

A German Jewish Rabbi who published his polemic version of the events in the life of Jesus during medieval times, adds this to Matthews narrative: “Jesus said to Peter the donkey, ‘ Peter, one of us will betray me this night, and I will be held and suffer punishment.’ Peter then said to him, ‘Since you know the future, you must be God, why, then, didn’t you tell me until now?’ And Jesus said to him, ‘Tell no man that I am God, for, from the time that I abandoned the Torah of my birthplace, I have rebelled against my Creator and against His Torah.’”¹ This is a very lame effort to try and discredit Jesus as being the faithful Messiah that He was claimed to be. What our Rabbi friend forgot is that Jesus had been telling His disciples for quite some time that He would suffer, but He chose this occasion to make the official announcement that the time had come for it to take place, and He would be revealing the traitor who would initiate the action.

Verse 22: The followers were very sad to hear this. Each one said, “Lord, surely I am not the one!”

No one can say this was not a normal reaction on the part of dedicated disciples upon hearing that one of them would be so disrespectful and irreverent as to betray their Master to the enemy. What gain could be made with such action? How could that ever be seen as some victory for their Messiah? So they found it unconscionable that Jesus would even bring it up. Therefore, it was predictable that each one of them would want to clear themselves of any possible guilt by asking the Lord to declare for all to hear that they were not the one.

Origen made this commentary on the implications of such a betrayal. He writes: “Perhaps someone will ask: If the twelve apostles all had clean consciences (that is, if they were all innocent of any act of betrayal against the teacher), why were they ‘sorrowful’ at the news that He would be betrayed, as though it could have been one of them to whom He was referring? I believe that each of the disciples knew from the things Jesus had taught them that human nature is unstable and vulnerable to be turned toward sin and that in struggling ‘against the principalities and powers and rulers of this world of darkness² a man can be besieged and fall or be so weakened by the power of the enemy that he becomes evil.”

Origen goes on to say: “Aware of these things, then, each disciple was ‘very sorrowful’ because Christ had said ‘one of you will betray me.’ And each disciple, not knowing what he might do in the future, began to inquire one by one: ‘Is it I, Lord?’ Yet, if the apostles had good reason to fear that they might betray Him, we who have not yet tasted of perfection must also be afraid of falling victim to future weakness. This is why the apostle said, ‘I am certain that neither death nor life … is able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus.’³ But whoever is not yet perfect should remain aware that he is still capable of falling.”⁴ As we will learn later, Peter had good reason to question whether or not it was him, as did the others who fled the scene when Jesus was arrested, along with Thomas who would doubt His resurrection.

Verses 23-24: Jesus answered, “One who has dipped his bread in the same bowl with me will be the one to hand me over. The Son of Man will suffer what the Scriptures say will happen to Him. But it will be very bad for the one who hands over the Son of Man to be killed. It would be better for him if he had never been born.”

The real subject of this portion of the text is Judas Iscariot. It appears, that as they were eating Jesus was talking to them about His being betrayed to the authorities. Needless to say, the disciples were more than disappointed, they were shocked. So each one began to ask Jesus, “Is it me?” One by one they threw the question at Him, until finally, He answered, that the same person who had been dipping their bread into His bowl of Charoset would be the betrayer.

In Jewish literature, we find Charoset described as a sweet paste consisting of figs, nuts, almonds, and other fruits; to which they added apples; all which they crushed with pestle and mortar, and mixed with vinegar; into which they sprinkled calamus root and cinnamon and then formed small long threads in remembrance of the straw they used to build with while in Egypt; and it was necessary for it to be thick in memory of the clay used to make the buildings for Pharaoh. Another interesting fact that Maimonides shares with us is that on any other night the bread would be dipped only once in the Charoset, but on this night it was to be dipped twice.⁵

When the recollection of this incident by Matthew, Luke, and John are put together, it suggests that Judas had already dipped his matzah in the bowl once, now Jesus dips in His matzah again and gives it to Judas. That, even more than His words, gave the disciples the signal that this was the betrayer, again fulfilling the words: “My best friend, the one I trusted, the one who ate with me—even he has turned against me.”⁶ No doubt everyone’s eyes were focused on those reclining closest to Jesus.

Verse 25: Then Judas, the very one who would hand him over, said to Jesus, “Teacher, surely I am not the one you are talking about, am I?” Jesus answered, “Yes, it is you.”

This response by Judas Iscariot must come because everyone was looking at him. So it is no wonder that he turned to look at Jesus and say quite incredulously, “Surely Lord, You’re not talking about me!” According to John Gill, the Ethiopian version of Matthew reads: “Then Judas, which betrayed Him or that was about to betray Him, had taken a step towards it, was seeking an opportunity to do it, and at length effected it.” The Persic version reads, “Judas Iscariot; who after all the rest had put the question to Him asked.” And one of the oldest Hebrew versions of Matthew reads: “Judas, who sold Him, answered and said to Him: Rabbi am I this one?”⁷ It doesn’t seem possible that Judas was so innocent of what he had done that he could honestly have no knowledge that he was the one. Perhaps in the translation from the original Aramaic, the real sense and meaning of Judas’ question might have been more like, “Lord, how did you know it was me.”

I can imagine a hush then fell over the room; everyone stopped eating, and all eyes were fixed on the Master. We don’t know for sure if Jesus simply looked down at the bowl where He had just dipped His flatbread or looked straight into Judas Iscariot’s eyes, but in either case, I’m sure His words, “Yes, you’re the one.” were cutting even though they were said gently. But our Lord then tells everyone that this was not unexpected; that His leaving was already scheduled from long ago and recorded in the Scriptures.⁸

By so doing, our Lord makes it clear that this was all voluntary on His part. But what about Judas Iscariot, was his act voluntary? I have no doubt but that it was. He was not bribed by the leading priests, he voluntarily went to them with the idea and they bought it for 30 pieces of silver. And our Lord’s statement that it would have been better that such a traitor had never been born, was part of Jewish oral tradition. In the Talmud we read, “Whosoever takes no thought for the honor of his maker, it would have been merciful he had not been born into the world. What does this mean? Rabbi Joseph asked: It refers to one who commits transgression in secret.”⁹ So we see that Jesus was not pronouncing a curse on Judas Iscariot, but simply repeating what the Rabbis’ had taught about those who stoop so low as to betray their own mentor to the enemy.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-SIX

Part VI

From all accounts, it appears that the man who owned this house was a follower of Jesus. They may have met the last time our Lord was in this area when He came to cleanse the Temple. However, what man would have a room big enough to host a supper for thirteen people or more? There is an interesting custom spoken of in the Babylonian Talmud that may help shed some light on the place where Jesus ate with His disciples. It reads, “A synagogue which contains a dwelling for the synagogue attendant is liable to have a piece of parchment in a case inscribed with specified Hebrew verses from the Torah.¹”² Jewish commentator Rabbi Rashi explains, “In the metropolis people from many cities assemble in the synagogue, it, therefore, seems to belong to everybody, i.e., to nobody, whilst in the villages those who attend are known to all, being like partners in the synagogue.”³ In the same Talmud we read: “…a synagogue in a large town since people from all parts come to it, may not be sold, it being regarded as belonging to a wider public.”⁴

In other words, the place Jesus sent His followers to did not belong to the man who took care of it, he was merely the synagogue attendant. And, the owner of the lot was compelled at festival time to allow those who asked to use the space freely. For as Moses Maimonides states, “A house in the city which is sold is never designated as the permanent property of the buyer.”⁵ Many scholars believe that this later became the Upper Room where the disciples and followers awaited the arrival of the Holy Spirit, while other say it was within Jerusalem proper, because after the supper was over they did not have to walk far over to the Garden of Gethsemane where Jesus was later arrested.

Verses 20-21a: In the evening Jesus was at the table with the twelve followers. They were all eating.

According to the law of Moses, this meal was to be consumed at night.⁶ Now, the mood and tone changes from what we’ve been reading in Matthew’s account of what happened during these last days of Jesus’ before His crucifixion and resurrection. Gone were the miracles, the teaching sessions, addressing large crowds of followers, and debates with the scribes and Pharisees. Our Lord’s focus on His suffering and death now were paramount in His mind and actions.

He may have felt much like His royal ancestor, David, who thought about what was facing him through the actions of someone who betrayed him, “It is you, the one so close to me, my companion, my good friend, who does this. We used to share our secrets with one another, as we walked through the crowds together in God’s Temple.”⁷ As the Rabbinical fathers point out, this was a close relationship that involved knowing one another very well because of shared interests and purpose and learning from one another.⁸

Later on, our Lord would even used the words of His forefather when addressing the one who would turn his back on Him, “My good friend, the one I trusted, the one who ate with me—even he has turned against me.”⁹ All the prophesies that foretold His suffering and death were about to be fulfilled. And perhaps the words in Isaiah about His pain and suffering were on His mind. Also, the word that the prophet Zechariah received may have given Him cause to ponder, “The Lord All-Powerful says, ‘Sword, wake up and strike the shepherd, my friend! Strike the shepherd, and the sheep will run away. And I will punish those little ones.’”¹⁰

In the Jewish Mishnah we read these instructions: “On Passover eve close to minhah time,¹¹ a man may not eat until night falls. And even the poorest person in Israel may not eat unless he reclines [as a sign of freedom]. And they [the charity officials] may not provide him with less than four cups of wine; even if he is so poor that he normally receives from the charity plate but did not receive wine, he must purchase it himself.”¹²

In deference to the famous picture of the Last Supper by Leonardo da Vinci, Jesus and His disciples did not “sit upright” at the table, but they “reclined” alongside the table. In the Mishnah we find the following instructions, “If those at the table are sitting upright, and are not part of the group, each one says Grace for himself. If they have reclined, one says Grace for all.”¹³ We know that after Jesus took the bread He blessed it, so this is even more indication that they were reclining next to the table. And in the Talmud we find this teaching: “Even the poorest man in Israel must not eat until he reclines. It was stated: For the eating of the unleavened bread reclining is necessary…As for the drinking of] the wine, — It was stated in Rabbi Nahman’s name that reclining is necessary.”¹⁴

Then, in an older version of the Talmud we read this: “Said Rabbi Levi, ‘Because it is the custom of slaves to eat standing, here [on Passover night, the Mishnah requires people] to eat reclining to proclaim that they have gone out from slavery to freedom.’ Rabbi Simon said in the name of Rabbi Joshua b. Levi, ‘That olive’s amount [of unleavened bread] with which a person fulfills his obligation on Passover ― one must eat it reclining.”’ ¹⁵

The account Maimonides gives of this usage reads this way: “Even one of Israel’s poor should not eat until he can recline. A woman need not recline. If she is an important woman, she must recline. Even a son in the presence of his father or an attendant in the presence of his master must recline. However, a student before his teacher should not recline unless his teacher grants him permission. Reclining on one’s right side is not considered reclining. Neither is reclining on one’s back or leaning forward. When must one recline? when eating the matzoh and when drinking these four cups of wine. While eating and drinking at other times: if one reclines, it is praiseworthy; if not, there is no requirement.”¹⁶

Also in this same Tractate, Maimonides comments on the Haggadah, which is the guide used for the Seder meal, and points to the moment when the son asks the host, “Why is this night different from all other nights?”¹⁷ The host then cites five different reasons, and the fifth one is, “On all other nights, we eat either sitting upright or reclining. On this night, we all recline.”¹⁸ And for our Lord and His disciples, this truly was a night different from all others. But not because they were reclining, but because it would be their last meal together.

This may bring up the question, how then was it that John was observed leaning on Jesus’ chest? We may find the explanation in these instructions in the Talmud: “Said the Exilarch¹⁹ to Rabbi Shesheth: Although you are venerable Rabbis, yet the Persians are better versed than you in the etiquette of a meal. When there are two couches [in the set], the senior guest takes his place first and then the junior one above him. When there are three couches, the senior occupies the middle one, the next to him in rank takes the place above him, and the third one below him. Rabbi Shesheth said to him: So when he wants to talk to him [the senior guest], he has to stretch himself and sit upright to do so!”²⁰

Scholars point out that the disciples went to prepare a place for the supper, and it was not until the next night that Jesus and the others arrived to eat. If this was the case in such a small room where thirteen long couches around a table would be difficult to arrange, then the triple couch would have Jesus in the middle and perhaps Peter above Him and John below. But all of this is speculation and does not earn that much importance. What is important, is what happened that night at the meal and how it affected the rest of the outcome for the ensuing hours in the life and ministry of Jesus, and the meaning it gave to a meal that Christians have commemorated ever since.