Down an Unfamiliar Road

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-SIX

Part V

But there is an underlying truth here not easily seen. You can only be betrayed by a friend, never by an enemy. So if anyone today is accused of betraying our Lord, they must first of all have claimed to be His friend. And the price of betrayal is also noteworthy. We know that 30 shekels of silver were the price to be paid to replace a servant who had been accidentally killed by a neighbor’s bull.¹ Also, when Israel and Judah were negotiating with Zechariah on keeping the union together, he said to them, “If you want to pay me, pay me. If not, don’t!” So they paid me 30 pieces of silver. Then the Lord told me, ‘So that’s how much they think I’m worth. Throw that large amount of money into the Temple treasury.’ So I took the 30 pieces of silver and threw them into the treasury at the LORD’s Temple.”² So it appears that either Judas Iscariot did not value our Lord’s capture too highly, or else the leading priests didn’t think his help was worth much more than that. But in either case, it was a disgrace for the royal son on of David, the promised Messiah, the Son of the living God to be betrayed for such a pitiful amount. Yet today, there are some who do the same for even less.

Early church scholar Origen had this to add: “Luke’s Gospel shows most clearly the kind of opportunity for which Judas was looking when it says, ‘And he sought an opportunity to betray Him in the absence of the crowds,’³ that is, when the people were not with Him but when He was alone with His disciples. His betrayer did the deed after supper when Christ was alone in the garden of Gethsemane. For once Judas reached his agreement with the Jews, he determined that his opportunity would come when Jesus was not with the crowds. Notice how even today the betrayers of Jesus Christ, Word of truth, and Word of God, see their best opportunity to hand Him over at a time when Christians are being persecuted.… They are at their worst when the number of His faithful is at its fewest. And since there is a time for all things, for Solomon, said: “there is a time to be born and a time to die,’⁴ the time for betraying the Word of truth was specifically when very few of the faithful were with Christ.”⁵

While all of this may have been a surprise to the disciples and followers of Jesus, it was known to Him from the beginning. That’s why He was able to remain so calm and resolute. But His chief disciples did not have such faith or confidence and would deny that he even knew Him. So Jesus will soon have to deal with their anxiety and total disbelief in what was happening under circumstances that will test their commitment to the breaking point.

Verse 17: On the first day of the Festival of Unleavened Bread, the followers came to Jesus. They said, “We will prepare everything for you to eat the Passover meal. Where do you want us to have the meal?”

We must remember, that Jesus and His followers were in Bethany, about 1½ miles from Jerusalem at this time. So the question was, into which city were they supposed to go so they could prepare for the Passover meal? It is important to notice that according to Jewish tradition, Passover is an eight-day festival that celebrates Israel’s emancipation from Egyptian slavery and their freedom to seek the Promised Land. During this commemoration period, there are many meals eaten and lighting of candles. This is how they prepare for the final day when the lamb is sacrificed. So when the disciples asked Jesus where they should go to start preparing, it was not just for one meal, but for the initial meal.

As far as the sacrifice of the lamb was concerned, that place was already settled in the Law of Moses: “You must not sacrifice the Passover animal in any of the towns that the LORD your God gives you. You must sacrifice the Passover animal only at the place that the LORD your God will choose to be the home for His name. There you must sacrifice the Passover animal in the evening when the sun goes down. This is the festival when you remember that God brought you out of Egypt. You must cook the meal and eat it at the place the LORD your God will choose. The next morning you may go back home.”⁶

Chrysostom tells us his understanding of this timing for this first meal that Jesus was to eat with His disciples. He writes: “By ‘the first day of the feast of unleavened bread,’ he means the day before that feast. For it is customary always to reckon the day from the evening.¹ He mentions this with regard to the evening of the Passover. It was on the fifth day of the week they came to Him. Hence, on the day before the feast of unleavened bread, they came to Him. As to the time, Mark says, ‘On the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, when they sacrificed the Passover lamb.‘⁸”⁹

Verses 18-19: Jesus answered, “Go into the city. Go to a man I know. Tell him that the Teacher says, ‘The chosen time is near. I will have the Passover meal with my followers at your house.” They obeyed and did what Jesus told them to do. They prepared the Passover meal.

Again, it is necessary that we keep in mind that any meal eaten during the time was considered a part of the Passover. So it is clear that this would be the first and last one they would eat together. What was important now was finding the right place. The Greek word translated from the Aramaic that Jesus uses to identify the individual they should contact is deina. It refers to a particular person whose name one cannot immediately recall or someone whose name is not important enough to mention. Jesus did not need to give them the man’s name. Jesus clearly says: “a man I know.” This is the same reading in the Aramaic Version, so leaving out the man’s name was not something the scribe overlooked in the translation.

Luke researched this event and came up with a more definitive scenario: “He [Jesus] said to them, ‘Listen, after you enter the city, a man carrying a pitcher of water will meet you. Follow him into the house which he enters. Tell the master of the house, “The Teacher says to you, my time is at hand. Where is the guest room, where I may eat the Passover with my disciples?”’”¹⁰

So Jesus’ instructions to His disciples to prepare the meal were very ordinary for that day. But since this took place before Passover Day, it is explained by Rabbi Maimonides: “It is a positive commandment of the Torah to eat matzah [flatbread without yeast] on the night of the fifteenth of Nisan, as is stated: “In the evening, you shall eat matzot.”¹¹ This applies in every place and at every time. Eating matzah is not dependent on the Paschal sacrifice. Rather, it is a mitzvah [commandment] in its own right. The mitzvah may be fulfilled throughout the entire night. Throughout the other days of the festival, eating matzah is left to one’s choice: If one desires, one may eat matzah. If one desires, one may eat rice, millet, roasted seeds, or fruit. Nevertheless, on the night of the fifteenth alone, [eating matzah] is an obligation. Once one eats a piece the size of an olive, he has fulfilled his obligation.”¹² Therefore, since Jesus would not be able to eat the actual Passover lamb in the Seder Meal with His disciples, He was satisfied to eat this meal of unleavened bread as His last supper.

Taking all this into account, some Bible scholars believe that Jesus and His disciples had the meal of flat matzah on Thursday evening, because after the meal they went over to the Mount of Olives for the night, and it was there He was arrested early Friday morning and would be on the cross before sundown that same day. But for all intents and purposes, knowing the exact date in history is not as significant as knowing that He did die and rose again from death to provide eternal life for all who believe in Him as their Lord and Savior.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-SIX

Part IV

Although in Mark’s Gospel the Greek says she broke “syntribō” the “alabastron,” meaning a container made of alabaster,¹ which some English versions translate as “box,” “vial,” “flask,” “jar,” etc., the Syriac Version says “she opened it.² The Persian Version adds even more by saying that “she broke open the top.”³ Most likely she broke the sealed thin neck of a jar and then poured the perfume on Jesus’ head while He was eating. From Jewish sayings, we know that pouring oil on the heads of guest seated at a table was an accepted custom for high ranking and special dignitaries.

In the Jewish Talmud, we find this discussion about such anointings: “The dripping of oil on the heads of the scholars. Rabbi Papa said to Abaye: Did the master speak of oil used for cleaning the head? — He said to him: Orphan, did not your mother do the dripping of the oil on the heads of the scholars at the time of the event? As in the case when one of the scholars was occupied with the wedding of his son in the house of Rabbah ben ‘Ulla — and some say, Rabbah ben ‘Ulla was occupied with the wedding of his son in the house of one of the scholars — and he dripped oil on the heads of the scholars at the time of the event.”⁴

So not only was some of our Lord’s followers upset due to the cost of the perfume but in a sense, they were passively saying that He wasn’t worth such an honor. Then again, with regard to seeing the perfume as being wasted perhaps they were reminded of what one well-known Rabbi did: “On the eve of every Sabbath Rabbi Huna would send a messenger to the market and any vegetables that the market gardeners had left over he bought up and had them thrown into the river. Should he not rather have had these distributed among the poor?”⁵

Verses 10-13: But Jesus knew what happened. He said, “Why are you harassing this woman? She did a very good thing for me. You will always have the poor with you. But you will not always have me.”

Again, let’s note that Matthew does not say Jesus saw what happened, but that He knew what had just occurred. So after the Master heard them complaining, He countered their indignation by telling them that they were in error to criticize her, because they didn’t understand that what she did was in preparation for what was to come. No matter how Mary looked at it, Jesus saw it from a different perspective. In any case, He wanted to let them know that what she had just done would become a part of the Good News story as it spread all over the world.

But He also reminds them that their good intentions were sorely misplaced. All the money in the world could never wipe out poverty. Even the logic of a court jester would suffice to teach them that if everybody in the world was rich, there would be no one to do the work required to keep them clothed, fed, and transported. Jesus was not putting down the poor, but merely recognizing that it is an accepted and vital part of life here on earth. And to show that they were not discriminated against in the kingdom of heaven, He was set to die to make them heirs and joint heirs with Him.

Was this some new social theory developed by our Lord? Absolutely not! Moses instructed the children of Israel before they entered the Promised Land, “There will always be poor people in the land. That is why I command you to be ready to help your brother or sister. Give to the poor in your land who need help.”⁶ As part of their verbal tradition, the Jews, refers to the times of the Messiah by saying in the Babylonian Talmud, “…for it is said, For the poor shall never cease out of the land.”⁷ This was said in the context of what things were then and the way they would be in the time of the Messiah’s eventual arrival. This would suggest that the Jews did not consider that there would ever be a time without poor people.

Thus we can say, Jesus indicates by his rebuke that the real contention of those who opposed the woman’s actions did not suggest it was unworthy of the Messiah, but that the woman’s act made little sense to them since they did not really believe that Jesus was the Promised One. Yet, she quietly performed her magnificent service and then allowed Christ to answer her critics. As a result, her act was assigned to immortality by Jesus’ own words. Our Lord now clarifies what the anointing was all about:

Verses 12-13: “This woman poured perfume on my body. She did this to prepare me for burial after I die. The Good News will be told to people all over the world. And I can assure you that everywhere the Good News is told, the story of what this woman did will also be told, and people will remember her.”

In Jewish tradition, there is a story about Abraham having a conversation with Death, and asking Death to let him have a little reprieve until he could get accustomed to the idea of dying. So just before Death came to take him by the hand to lead his body to the grave, we read: “Michael the archangel came with a multitude of angels and took up his precious soul in his hands in a divinely woven linen cloth, and they tended the body of the just Abraham with divine ointments and perfumes until the third day after his death,⁸ and buried him in the land of promise, the oak of Mamre, but the angels received his precious soul, and ascended into heaven, singing the hymn of ‘holy, holy, holy’ to the Lord the God of all,⁹ and they set it there to worship the God and Father.”¹⁰

Since there were no plans for Abraham to rise from death in three days, this reflects how one prepares for their stay in the grave. But since Jesus was going to rise in three days, the ointments and perfumes were applied early since the women who came to the tomb to do the same would not find Him there. What a wonderful lesson for us when we may be criticized for being too involved or giving too much time to the work of the Lord. Instead of becoming protective and responding defensively, why not let Christ take up our cause. Who knows, He may bless us in a way that will be remembered after our critics are long gone.

Verses 14-16: Right after this one of the twelve disciples went to talk to the leading priests. This was the follower named Judas Iscariot. He said, “I will hand Jesus over to you. What will you pay me for doing this?” The priests gave him 30 silver coins. After that, Judas waited for the best time to hand Jesus over to them.

After what we’ve seen now in the scheduling and meeting of the Sanhedrin, the visit by Judas Iscariot to the leading priests was more than just a coincidence. Perhaps when he saw how Jesus allowed this woman to pour expensive perfume on His head, and did not find it strange but supported her, this may have been the jab that sent this money-conscious thief over the edge and justified his visit to where this ad hoc Sanhedrin committee was meeting. The amount Judas received may seem trivial to some people today, but there are those in our lifetime who have betrayed Him for a lot less than this.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-SIX

Part III

As another highly respected Rabbi points out that these instructions from Moses are a warning that such discussions with the Judges of the Supreme Sanhedrin are not merely ‘consultations or options,’ but must not be deviated from.¹ He takes his cue from what the Jewish teachers said on this subject: “A Sage who rebels against the ruling of the court [is strangled],”² which is another way of saying, hanged. So it goes without saying, that this kangaroo court of Sanhedrin members was so committed to getting rid of Jesus that they were willing to violate whatever laws or rules were incumbent upon them. Nevertheless, they would have to wait for the right time and place.

Chrysostom sees the same thing when he says: “How many chief priests were there? For the law wills there should be one, but then there were many. From this, it is beginning to be evident that the Jewish structure of governance had begun to collapse. For Moses, as I said, commanded there should be one and that when he was dead there should be another… Yet for all this, boiling with anger, they changed their purpose again. For though they had said, “Not at the feast time,” when they found the traitor, they did not wait but killed Him at the feast.”³

Verse 6: While this was happening, Jesus was in Bethany at the house of a former leper named Simon.

Most scholars take the designation of Simon the leper to, first of all, distinguish him from other Simons living in Bethany, and second, that this was his former state before he was healed. Since he is included here in the Scripture, there is strong support that he was among one who was healed by Jesus. It would not violate the Gospel record nor be unsupported by the timeline of Jesus’ ministry to wonder if Simon was the only one of the ten lepers healed who came back to thank Jesus.⁴

Verse 7: While He was there, a woman came to see Him. She had an alabaster jar filled with expensive perfume.⁵ She poured the perfume on Jesus’ head while He was eating.

The fortuitous break the Jewish leaders were waiting for to carry out their plot was just around the corner but little did anyone know what would precipitate such an act of betrayal. It may have started with the caring act of reverence and admiration on the part of a woman who wanted to show her devotion to Jesus the Messiah.

At this point, let’s take off our western culture hats and put on our Jewish kippahs, or as they are known in Yiddish, yarmulkes. We should not see Jesus sitting in a chair at a table, facing the woman as she comes in. Rather, He was reclining on His side at the table with His legs bent at the knees so His feet faced behind Him. He does not see the woman enter the house, come up behind Him and begin to pour out her perfume on His head. It should be noted that Matthew does not say that Jesus then turned around to see who it was. He didn’t have to, He was the Messiah and knew exactly what was going on.

Chrysostom gives us his view of who this woman was. He writes: “It may seem that this woman is the same in all the Gospel narratives. But I doubt it. In John, she is another person, one to be much admired, the sister of Lazarus.⁶ But not without purpose did the Evangelist mention the leprosy of Simon. He did this in order to show how the woman gained confidence and came to Jesus. Leprosy seemed to be the most unclean disease and those who inflicted by it were shunned. Yet she saw that Jesus had both healed the man and had gone into his house. This is why He remained with the leper. She grew confident that He could also easily wipe away the uncleanness from her soul.”⁷

Some scholars believe that the precious ointment she brought was a composition of those spices mentioned in Exodus.⁸ We are told by one Rabbi that when it comes to expensive perfume, we should take into consideration what the patriarch Job had to say concerning their preparation: “He makes the depths seethe like a pot, he makes the sea [boil] like perfume in a kettle.”⁹ The Rabbi states that the Hebrew word merkabah¹⁰ is understood as the perfume compound mentioned in God’s instructions to Moses,¹¹ because the word used there is mirqachath, which is another way of transliterating the Hebrew, merkahah. But he adds: “Can this possibly be a reference to “ambergrtis”, which is a waxy secretion of the sperm whale much valued in perfumery?”¹² This may have been a reference to the one in Job’s oceanic perfume kettle.

Verses 8-9: The disciples saw the woman do this and were upset with her. They said, “Why waste that perfume? It could be sold for a lot of money, and the money could be given to those who are poor.”

Again, Matthew doesn’t say Jesus saw her do it but His disciples did. This further substantiates the picture of her coming up from behind Jesus to anoint Him. This makes it possible that the disciples were watching what was going on while Jesus was dining with Simon. But instead of being thrilled at such adulation for their Master, it angered some of them. The woman involved here is accepted by most scholars to be the sister of Lazarus, whose act of anointing Jesus is outlined in John’s Gospel.¹³ Yet, some take the anointing Jesus received in Luke as performed by a different woman.¹⁴ Matthew calls the ointment she brought as “expensive perfume.” From Mark we learn that it was called “Spikenard.”¹⁵

To give you some idea of how such ointments and perfumes were regarded in those days, we turn to a Roman author, naturalist, and philosopher (23-79 AD), who wrote: “There are some single essences also which, individually, afford ointments of very high character: the first rank is due to malobathrum,¹⁶ and the next to the iris of Illyricum and the sweet marjoram of Cyzicus, both of them herbs. There are perfumers who sometimes add some few other ingredients to these: those who use the most, employ for the purpose honey, grains of salt, omphacium,¹⁷ leaves of agnus,¹⁸ and panax,¹⁹ all of them foreign ingredients. The price of ointments of cinnamon is quite enormous; to cinnamon there is added oil of balanus, xylobalsamum, calamus, sweet-rush, seeds of balsamum, myrrh, and perfumed honey: it is the thickest in consistency of all the ointments; the price at which it sells ranges from thirty-five to three hundred denarii per pound. Ointments of nard, or foliatum, are composed of omphacium or else oil of balanus, sweet-rush, costus, nard, amomum, myrrh, and balsamum.”²⁰

So we can see why pouring out such an expensive unguent on some stranger’s head was considered a waste of a valuable commodity. This same naturalist goes on to add: “Unguents keep best in boxes of alabaster, and perfumes when mixed with oil, which conduces all the more to their durability the thicker it is, such as the oil of almonds, for instance. Unguents also improve with age; but the sun is apt to spoil them, for which reason they are usually stowed away in a shady place in vessels lined with lead.”²¹ So this was not some cheap perfume this woman brought to anoint Jesus, it was the best money could buy. How much more then, should those things we offer in exultation, honor, and glory to Him be the very best we can possibly bring in our praise and worship.

During this intense season of political discourse, I’m reminded of something one of America’s most talkative yet lovable politicians named Hubert Horatio Humphrey (1911-1978), senator and Vice President of the United States (1965-1969), once said: “The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously.” I guess the only ones that can take seriously are those whose words are confirmed by their actions. Not by what they will do, but by what they have already done.

There are many beautiful and inspirational songs we sing in praise and worship today, but having grown up during the time when the church hymnal was used, I still find that whenever one of these old hymns is sung, my heart warms and my eyes get teary. Here is the story of one of those songs as written by the author:

Back in 1932, I was 32 years old and a fairly new husband. My wife, Nettie and I were living in a little apartment on Chicago’s Southside. One hot August afternoon I had to go to St. Louis, where I was to be the featured soloist at a large revival meeting. I didn’t want to go. Nettie was in the last month of pregnancy with our first child. But a lot of people were expecting me in St. Louis. I kissed Nettie good-bye, clattered downstairs to our Model A, Ford, and in a fresh Lake Michigan breeze, chugged out of Chicago on Route 66.

However, outside the city, I discovered that in my anxiety at leaving, had forgotten my music case. I wheeled around and headed back. I found Nettie sleeping peacefully. I hesitated by her bed; something was strongly telling me to stay. But eager to get on my way, and not wanting to disturb Nettie, I shrugged off the feeling and quietly slipped out of the room with my music.

The next night, in the steaming St. Louis heat, the crowd called on me to sing again and again. When I finally sat down on the platform, a messenger boy ran up with a Western Union telegram. I ripped open the envelope. Pasted on the yellow sheet were the words: YOUR WIFE JUST DIED. People were happily singing and clapping around me, but I could hardly keep from crying out. I rushed to a phone and called home. All I could hear on the other end was “Nettie is dead. Nettie is dead.”

When I got back, I learned that Nettie had given birth to a boy. I swung between grief and joy. Yet that night, the baby died. I buried Nettie and our little boy together, in the same casket. Then I fell apart. For days I closeted myself. I felt that God had done me an injustice. I didn’t want to serve Him anymore or write gospel songs. I just wanted to go back to that jazz world I once knew so well before I was converted in 1921 at the age of 22.

But then, as I hunched alone in that dark apartment those first sad days, I thought back to the afternoon I went to St. Louis. Something kept telling me to stay with Nettie. Was that something from God? Oh, if I had paid more attention to Him that day, I would have stayed and been with Nettie when she died. From that moment on I vowed to listen more closely to Him.

But still, I was lost in grief. Everyone was kind to me, especially a friend, Professor Frye, who seemed to know what I needed. On the following Saturday evening, he took me up to Madam Malone’s Poro College, a neighborhood music school. It was quiet; the late evening sun crept through the curtained windows. I sat down at the piano, and my hands began to browse over the keys.

Something happened to me then I felt at peace. I feel as though I could reach out and touch God. I found myself playing a melody, one I’d never heard or played before, and the words that came into my head just seemed to fall into place:

“Precious Lord, take my hand,
lead me on, let me stand!
I am tired, I am weak,
I am worn, Through the storm,
through the night lead me on to the light,
Take my hand, precious Lord, lead me home.”

The Lord gave me these words and melody. He also healed my spirit. I learned that when we are in our deepest grief when we feel farthest from God, this is when He is closest, and when we are most open to His restoring power. And so I go on living for God willingly and joyfully until that day comes when He will take me and gently lead me home.

When my way grows drear precious Lord linger near,
When my light is almost gone,
Hear my cry, hear my call,
Hold my hand lest I fall,
Take my hand precious Lord, lead me home.

Thomas A. Dorsey

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-SIX

Part II

It is reasonable to believe that the number who met at Caiaphas’ house was only a small, ad hoc, hand-picked portion of this mighty council. However, we are told that forty years before the destruction of the Temple the Sanhedrin forsook their locale in the Chamber of Hewn Stone and took its seat in the trade Halls, which was another location near the Temple Mount.¹ A Jewish genealogist also mentions this: “Forty years before the Temple was destroyed did the Sanhedrin abandon [the Temple] and held its sittings in Hanuth.²”³ In other words, they moved from the Temple Mount inside the walls to the Mount of Olives outside the walls of Jerusalem proper.

With this time-frame being in 30 AD, it fell during the ministry of Jesus. But we also find another contributing factor mentioned: “Capital cases were only dealt with by any court of 23 while the Sanhedrin sat in the Hewn-Stone Chamber of the Temple: the abandoning of their seat, therefore, meant the cessation of judging capital cases.”⁴ This provides more evidence as to why the High Priest went to Pontius Pilate in order to get the death sentence for Jesus. Rabbi Maimonides adds: “Forty years before the destruction of the Temple, capital punishment was nullified among the Jewish people. Although the Temple was still standing, since the Sanhedrin went into exile (left the Chamber of Hewn Stone) and were not in their place in the Temple, these laws could not be enforced.”⁵ When we look at this through a figurative lens, we can see the “Hewn Stone” as a symbol of Jesus Christ the stone which the builders threw away, and since this happened just as Jesus’ ministry was beginning, it makes for a graphic illustration of how He, the Cornerstone, was rejected in favor of the stone tablet of Moses.

Now, as we have seen, by abandoning their traditional meeting place in the Temple and relocating to “Chanoth” (the Sheds or vendor’s stalls), the Sanhedrin could no longer enforce capital punishment, which was their argument to convince Pontius Pilate to act on their behalf.⁶ Some scholars have raised the question, why did the Sanhedrin not meet in the Temple chamber? Dr. John Gill says, “To me, the reason seems to be that they chose not to meet there, but at the high priest’s palace because of privacy, that it might not be known they were together, and about any affair of the moment; and particularly this: the high priest’s residence was always Jerusalem, and he never removed from there; nor did he go from the Temple over there except at night, or an hour or two during the day; for he had an apartment in the temple, which was called the chamber of the high priest, where he was the whole day.”⁷

Maimonides agrees: “There was a chamber prepared for him [the high priest] in the Sanctuary which was called: The Chamber of the High Priest. The glory and the honor of [the High Priest] would be to remain in the Sanctuary the entire day and to go to his private home only at night or for an hour or two during the day. His home should be in Jerusalem and he should never depart from there.”⁸ Matthew now reveals the reason for their meeting.

Verses 4-5: In the meeting, they tried to find a way to arrest and kill Jesus without anyone knowing what they were doing. They planned to arrest Jesus and kill Him. They said, “We cannot arrest Jesus during Passover. We don’t want the people to become angry and cause a riot.”

So we can see, that the high priest met during his break from the Temple at night to plan the arrest of Jesus. We will see in verse 14, it was after this meeting that Judas Iscariot went to initiate his act of betrayal. And as mentioned above, this meeting may also have been connected with the establishment of the feast days for Passover. What had happened to Jesus’ royal ancestor King David, was now happening to Him, “My enemies are always twisting my words. They are always making plans against me. They hide together and watch every move I make, hoping for some way to kill me.”⁹

The Psalmist described their tactics, “They use the law to make life hard for the people. They attack those who do right. They say innocent people are guilty and put them to death.”¹⁰ And the same spirit that came against the prophet Jeremiah, was alive in the hearts of these enemies of our Lord, “Let us destroy the tree and its fruit! Let us kill him! Then people will forget him.”¹¹ The Jewish high priest who called this meeting was known by his Greek name, Caiaphas.

Bible historians tell us that his first name was Joseph and that he succeeded Simon son of Camith, as high priest, around 25 AD. Then, some two years after our Lord’s death, he was deposed by Vitellius governor of Syria. He was also the son-in-law of the high priest Annas, who held that office himself by appointment of Valerius Gratus, who preceded Pontius Pilate, about 18-36 AD, which was a longer period than several of his predecessors and successors. But behind all of this, we find these words: “People might make many plans, but what the LORD says is what will happen.”¹²

Apparently, the leaders of the Sanhedrin had enough members arrive to constitute a majority. And after much deliberation, they concluded it would be advisable to wait until the feast of Passover was complete. But it also raises another issue. It appears that they had already pronounced our Lord guilty of whatever charges they might bring against Him. This was contrary to their own rules. According to the Rabbis: “As each individual is convicted, he is placed under detention and the court then determines if these individuals make up a majority of the city.”¹³ It appears that they had no intention of examining each of Jesus’ followers to see how many believed in Him as the Messiah. Perhaps they feared that it would be a majority and that would put them in a very delicate situation, to say the least.

But Rabbi Maimonides gives us a closer look at the proper procedure. “How is the applicable law for a rebellious elder carried out? When a matter is undecided because of its difficulty and a sage who is scholarly enough to issue rulings whether with regard to a matter which he arrived at through his own reasoning or which he received from his teachers. He and the sages who differ with him ascend to Jerusalem and come to the court which holds sessions at the entrance to the Temple Mount. The court tells them: ‘This is the law.’ If the elder listens and accepts the ruling, it is desirable. If not, they all go to the court which holds sessions at the entrance to the Temple courtyard.”¹⁴

By following the account of what happened to Jesus, it is clear that the rules were made up as they went along. Maimonides continues to spell out the proper procedure: “If the elder listens and accepts the ruling, they go their [separate]ways. If not, they all go to the Supreme Sanhedrin in the Chamber of Hewn Stone from which the Torah emanates to the entire Jewish people, as Deuteronomy states: ‘You will then act according to what they have told you there in that place which ADONAI will choose.’¹⁵ The Supreme Sanhedrin will then tell them: ‘This is the law’ and they all depart…There are four transgressors whose execution must be announced publicly: a rebellious elder, lying witnesses, a person who entices others to worship idols, and a wayward and rebellious son. For with regard to all of them, the Torah states: ‘so that people will hear and become afraid.’”¹⁶ They did not plan to give Jesus any of these rights. So instead of being a court, they became conspirators.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-SIX

Part I

Verses 1-2: After Jesus finished saying all these things, He said to His followers, “You know that the day after tomorrow is Passover. On that day the Son of Man will be handed over to His enemies to be killed on a cross.”

Now we see a significant change in the direction of our Lord’s warning. It is no longer something in the future, but events in the next few days that would change the world. So often when we read in the Gospels about when the feasts were scheduled to commence, it is easy to think that they were fixed dates just like what we have in our calendars. But a research of Jewish literature shows that each feast was schedule based on many factors. One leading Rabbi said: “When the court institutes a leap year, they write a letter to all the people in distant places, notifying them that a leap year has been instituted, and the reason for which it was instituted. These letters were written in the name of the ‘nasi.’‘¹”²

The Rabbi continues: “They would say, ‘Let it be known that I and my colleagues have agreed to add to this year this many days’ – for it was possible for them to declare a month of twenty-nine days or a month of thirty days. The intent is that the court had the option of notifying the people in the outlying areas that the month would [probably] be either full or lacking. Scholars add: ‘Since through calculations, it is possible to know whether or not it is likely for the moon to be sighted on the thirtieth night, the court would notify the people in the outlying areas accordingly. This notification would, however, be conditional on the actual sighting of the moon‘.”³

Scholars believe that this Rabbi’s statement is based on a narrative in Jewish tradition that tells how Rabban Simeon ben Gamaliel sent letters to Jews throughout the diaspora notifying them of the declaration of a leap year.⁴ So, apparently, Jesus and His followers received word that the Sanhedrin had scheduled the Passover and it was only two days away. With Christ’s reference here to the Passover, let us look at another simile. Out of a family’s whole flock, only one sheep would be chosen to die as a sacrifice to pay for their safe passage out of Egypt. How would this sheep be chosen? What would determine its being picked depended on the qualifications necessary? It must have no injuries, cuts, or bruises. It must be clean and whole in every way.

Among the flock that Jesus led on this day, He alone was the one who met those prerequisites. No one could volunteer to take His place: not Peter, not James, not John. And since no one could substitute for Him back then, no one can substitute for Him now: not the Chinese Buddha of Nepal, nor the Muslim Mohammad of Arabia, nor the Hindu Vishnu of India. He alone is still the one Lamb who qualifies to pay for the redemption and salvation necessary caused by sin in the world.

So how could our Lord know for certain that the time had come for Him to be offered up as the Lamb of God? Early church scholar Origen gives us his answer: “We know that the Father had set the hour of His Passion. For He said to his mother at one point, ‘My hour has not yet come.’⁵ In another place, ‘Now is my soul troubled; and what shall I say? Father, save me from this hour!⁶ No, this is why I came to this hour.” And elsewhere, “Father, the hour has come! Glorify your Son, that your Son may glorify you.”⁷ Since the Father set the hour of His Son’s Passion, He could not suffer anything from the time the devil had departed from Him until His Passion.‘⁸”⁹

In his sermon on this text, Chrysostom gives his interpretation: “Notice how Jesus has thrown into the shade what was most painful to them. For He does not say, ‘You know that after two days I am betrayed,’ but ‘You know that after two days is the Passover feast,’ to show that what is done is a mystery. A feast and celebration are being kept for the salvation of the world. With foreknowledge, He is prepared to suffer all. So then, as though this were sufficient consolation for them, He did not even say anything to them now about a resurrection. He had already spoken about it and did not need to speak about it again. And moreover, as I said, He shows that even His suffering itself is a deliverance from countless evils, having by the Passover reminded them of the ancient benefits received in Egypt.”¹⁰

Verse 3: Then the leading priests and the older Jewish leaders had a meeting at the palace where the high priest lived. The high priest’s name was Caiaphas.

Some Bible scholars believe that this meeting took place two days earlier just as Jesus was teaching His disciples on what was going to happen (see Verse 1). Here Matthew mentions the “leading priests.” This not only included the past and present high priests, but also those who were the heads of the 24 courses of the priests chosen to be members of the Sanhedrin. Then, he mentions the “older Jewish leaders.” These no doubt included the doctors of the law and Scribes. Most of these were Pharisees, but some were Sadducees. There may have been one or two members of the Herodians as well. The Aramaic version states that this group consisted of the “high priests, scribes, elders, and people of the court.” Therefore it included civil magistrates and religious judges so that it represented both the ecclesiastical section as well as the lay people.

One Jewish scholar offers this inside account: “We appoint to a Sanhedrin – both to the Supreme Sanhedrin and to a minor Sanhedrin – only men of wisdom and understanding, of unique distinction in their knowledge of the Torah and who possess a broad intellectual potential. 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 hollowed teachings of idolatry so that they will know how to judge them. We appoint to the Sanhedrin only priests, Levites, and Israelites of a lineage of fine repute who can marry into the priesthood. This is derived from Numbers 11:16: ‘And they will stand there with you.’ Implied is that they should resemble you, Moses in wisdom, the fear of heaven, and in the lineage.”¹¹

So we are not talking about a small group of rebel clergy. Rabbi Maimonides also tells us, “A king of Israel may not be included in the Sanhedrin, for we are forbidden to disagree with him and repudiate his words. The High Priest, by contrast, may be included in the Sanhedrin if his knowledge makes him fitting.”¹² This honorable Jewish judicial body had always met in a chamber within the Temple court. According to the Jewish Mishnah, we read that in the Temple court there were six chambers, three on the north side and three on the south side. Those to the south were the “Wood Chamber”, the “Golah Chamber,”¹³ and the “Chamber of Hewn Stone” (in Hebrew, “Lishkat ha-Gazit”). It says of the Chamber of Hewn Stone, that it was there the Great Sanhedrin of Israel used to sit and judge.¹⁴ But under the stress of this situation with a rogue prophet about to strip away not only their hypocrisy but their power over the people as well, they threw out the rules and decided to do things their way.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Robert R Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

SUMMARY OF CHAPTER TWENTY-FIVE

At the beginning of Chapter 24, we read where Jesus took His disciples over to the Mount of Olives for one last instruction session on what was about to happen and what was going to take place down the road. He continued His private discussion with them here in this chapter.

He begins by saying, “At that time.” Obviously, He was talking about the future. He then told the parable of ten bridesmaids who had been invited to participate in a wedding. The time came for them to go to where the wedding was to take place and to patiently wait for the arrival of the groom. Since it was the custom, in those days, for the groom to come at night to steal the bride away, they took their oil lamps to make sure that when they heard the announcement of his arrival, they would be able to have the light they needed to go out and meet him. Unfortunately, only five of them were alert enough to take along some extra oil so they would be ready in case the wait for the groom took longer than they thought it would. As a result, only the five wise bridesmaids made it into the wedding festival.

Then our Lord told the parable about an estate owner who left to go abroad on a lengthy trip. So he called in his servants that were in charge of his business, gave each of them a different amount of money so they could manage his estate while he was gone. The servant with the most responsibility was given five bags of silver, the next servant received two bags, and the last servant got one. It took a long time before the property owner returned. When he did, he called in his servants to give an account of how the business went while he was gone. The servant who got five bags of silver had been able to make the business grow and earn an additional five bags. In other words, the estate owner not only got back what he gave the servant, but his business was now even more prosperous than when he left. The second servant had been able to do the same with his two bags of silver. But the servant who received one bag went and hid it so that it was safe until the owner returned. As a result, the first and second servants were promoted while the last servant was thrown off the estate in shame and embarrassment.

After this, Jesus then tells His disciples that when He returns with heaven’s angels to sit upon His throne, all of those He left behind will be called before Him. And just like a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats, with the sheep on his right and the goats on his left, so He will separate the ones He left behind, with those who were diligent and faithful on His right and those who were lazy and unproductive on His left. To those on His right He will say, “Come , you who are blessed by my Father, receive your inheritance, the kingdom that was prepared for you before the world began.” And to those on His left, He will say: “Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.”

But the Master will not do this without any explanation. To those on His right, He will tell them how they fed Him when He was hungry. How when He was thirsty they gave Him something to drink, when He was homeless they took Him in, when He was cold they gave Him warm clothes to wear, when He was sick they nursed Him back to health, and when He was in prison they went to visit Him. This sounded strange to them, so they ask, “When did this happen? We never saw you like that!” Then the Master pointed to all their fellow believers standing around and said, “When you did that for them, you were doing it for Me.“

Then those on His left who were ordered to depart desperately asked for an explanation of why they were being ejected from His presence. Again, He repeated what He said to those on His right about His being hungry, thirsty, homeless, cold, sick and in prison. But to them, He said, “When you refused to do anything for your fellow believers who were suffering under these conditions, you were refusing to do it for Me.”

So the lesson to His disciples was clear. The time of His return was unpredictable, like that of the groom, but they needed to be prepared and ready when He did come. And while He was gone, they had work to do to make what He started to grow and prosper, each one according to the gifts given them, so that when He returned they could claim their part of the kingdom as an inheritance. And finally, their mission, while He was away, was to do all they could to support each other and reach out to those who needed help. After all, He died for them too; His blood was also shed for them, so they needed to hear the Good News of His first coming so they could be ready for His return.

Now, we will walk through Chapter twenty-six in the coming days. This will be a painful journey with our Lord. We will see how the disciples were tested for their loyalty, and watch as our Lord Jesus undergoes the most agonizing trial of His life. I hope and pray that you will come along to discover things you may not have known before about our Lord’s passion.

God bless all of you faithful readers. May He send you blessings for your dedication and love of His Word. We will begin Chapter twenty-six tomorrow.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-FIVE

Part XI

Verse 45: “The king will answer, ‘The truth is, anything you refused to do for any of my people here, you refused to do for me.’”

In other words, this is a case of God’s quid pro quo that is as old as Abraham.¹ Solomon passed on this same truth.² This is the natural reaction of some people who complain that they shouldn’t be punished for something they didn’t do. But we all have learned that often times neglect to do anything brings on a greater catastrophe than trying to do something even if it turns out to be wrong. So our Lord does not mince words in what He says next:

Verse 46: “Then these evil people will go away to be punished forever. But the godly people will go and enjoy eternal life.”

One’s eternal destiny based on their obedience or disobedience was made clear to Daniel: “There are many who are dead and buried. Some of them will wake up and live forever, but others will wake up to shame and disgrace forever.”³ The destination of the disobedient being hellfire was not new to Jewish thought. In a Targum on Isaiah, we find this quote on: “The sinners in Zion are afraid; terror has seized the wicked, who, when they were committing theft in their ways said: Who of us will dwell in Zion, in which the brightness of His Shekinah is like devouring fire? Who of us will journey to Jerusalem, where the wicked will be judged, to be thrown into everlasting fire?”⁴

The sad part is, that this lake of fire was originally prepared for the devil and his cohorts. So it is no wonder that the same punishment meant for Satan will be carried out on all those who work for him and serve his purposes. There are several theories explaining what some feel God was really saying when He said let us make man in our image, and they were created a little lower than the angels,⁵ One conjecture is that after God created man to resemble Him, Satan became jealous that this new creation was made in the image of God, and influenced other angels to join him in the rebellion that caused his, and their, fall to earth. They say it was especially humiliating when the devil found out that many in this new creation were destined to become children, not angels, of God.⁶

That’s why his first attempt after his fall was to get mankind to join him in his rebellion. Not only that but Satan and his angels’ connection to hell are also spoken of in Jewish literature. They say: “The fire which the Holy One, blessed be He, created on the second day of the week will never be extinguished.”⁷ So when put together, the Jews taught that the fallen angels fell on the second day of creation, and it was on the same day that God created hell just for them.

At the same time, they taught that heaven, the place for the saints to dwell forever in joy, was prepared on the first day of creation. So these things have been awaiting the day of judgment ever since. And again in the Targum on Isaiah we read, “For hell is made ready from eternity on account of their sins; yea, the eternal King hath prepared it deep and wide: a fiery pyre as of abundance of fuel burns in it: the Word of the Lord, like an overwhelming torrent of brimstone, will kindle it.”⁸ So this idea was not new, and Jesus.

There is no question that Jesus meant this as a revelation of the last days and His second coming, followed by the judgment. Here people will be judged on their willingness to follow the commandments of the Lord by being a light on the hill and the salt of the earth. The supposition of whatever they did for the most insignificant of the world they were, in fact, doing for Him, can be extended even beyond the deeds mentioned here by Christ. The reason being, of course, is that after Jesus finished with His list of hunger, thirst, loneliness, clothes, illness and prison, He then said, “Whatever” you did for them, you did for Me (see verse 41 above.)

Not only will we be judged on what we did, but on what we didn’t do (see verse 45 above.) Furthermore, there is room to include things we did do, albeit wrong, such as jealousy, hatred, persecution, bias, etc. Beware that, in the end, you are not classified as a goat. Most of the disciples no doubt knew of the old Jewish saying in their verbal teachings: “Be it known to you that the world to come was made only for the righteous.”⁹

As Jesus and His disciples were leaving the Temple area,¹⁰ what He had to say about the buildings being reduced to rubble should have given them a clue that things may not turn out the way they anticipated when the Messiah came. And now that He had spent a great deal of time with them on the Mount of Olives explaining why they should be ready and not surprised for events yet to come, we can almost see the look of disbelief in their eyes. I can imagine one of them whispered to another, “This is not what I was expecting.” But our Lord’s drama concerning His passion was just beginning. Now, even more frightening things would be revealed. I can also envision that Jesus wondered if they were ready for what He was about to tell them.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-FIVE

Part X

To put this in perspective, Jesus is saying that good or bad the evidence will either convict or acquit the person being judged. For instance, let’s say you tell your son to go rake the leaves in the yard while you went to the store. When you got back, you called him and said: Why didn’t you do what I asked you to do? He may ask, how did you know. After all, you weren’t at home to see if he did or not. You can easily say: I know you didn’t rake the leaves because they are still all over the yard. So in other words, it is the leaves that have judged him, not you.

Another early church scholar sees a moral lesson in what Jesus said: “This can also be said of teachers who gave the food of learning to those hungry for righteousness, so they might be fed and grow healthy in good actions; who administered the drink of truth to those thirsty for the knowledge of God. Teaching in the Word, they certainly fed them and also gave to drink, baptizing in the Holy Spirit those who are strangers in the world. For all souls are truly strangers on this earth who can say, ‘For I am your passing guest, a sojourner, like all my fathers.’¹ Preaching the word of faith, they welcome souls from the spreading of error and make them fellow citizens and family members of the saints. They welcome Christ Himself and clothe, by teaching righteousness, those who are naked and even without a garment of righteousness. As is written: ‘Put on, then, compassion, faith, peace and kindness.’² That is to say, they clothe Christ and baptize them in Christ, as is written: ‘For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.‘³”⁴

Then Origen has a unique way of interpreting this part of the parable. He writes: “In the same way, we have woven a garment for the cold and shivering Christ. We have received the fabric of wisdom from God that we may impart knowledge to some and clothe them with ‘compassion, chastity, kindness, lowliness’ and the other virtues. All these virtues are the spiritual garments of those who have listened to the words of those who teach these virtues, according to him who says, “Put on, then, compassion, kindness, lowliness, gentleness” and so forth, more so Christ himself, who is all these things to the faithful, according to him who said, ‘Put on the Lord Jesus.’⁵ Therefore, when we have clothed with garments of this type ‘one of the least’ who believe in Christ, we have apparently clothed the Lord Himself, so that the word of God in the world will not go naked. But we must also welcome the Son of God who became a stranger and the members of His body who are strangers in the world, untainted by all mundane actions, even as He says about Himself and His disciples: ‘They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.’⁶ And Christ asks the Father to permit them to be with Him where He is.”⁷

And finally we have this ancient commentary: “Why then, my most beloved? Does our Lord hunger and thirst? Is He Himself the one who made everything in heaven and on earth, who feeds angels in heaven and every nation and race on earth, who needs nothing of an earthly character, as He is unfailing in His own nature, is this one naked? It is incredible to believe such a thing. Yet what must be confessed is easy to believe. For the Lord hungers not in His own nature but in His saints; the Lord thirsts not in His own nature but in His poor. The Lord who clothes everyone is not naked in His own nature but in His servants. The Lord who is able to heal all sicknesses and has already destroyed death itself is not diseased in His own nature but in His servants. Our Lord, the one who can liberate every person, is not in prison in His own nature but in His saints. Therefore, you see, my most beloved, that the saints are not alone. They suffer all these things because of the Lord. In the same way, because of the saints the Lord suffers all these things with them.”⁸

Put together, these expressions may be taken as holding the view that acts of love, graciousness, and mercy were done by believers to fellow believers. For how else could Christ claim that it was done to Him if He does not live in the heart of the person receiving such compassion. Since His most often verbalized commandment was to love one another, then it would seem to be that this is upon which when a believer stands before God he or she will be judged as being compliant. This does not eliminate the love and compassion all believers should show like the good Samaritan in Jesus’ parable.

Verse 41: “Then the king will say to the evil people on his left, ‘Get away from me. God has already decided that you will be punished. Go into the fire that burns forever—the fire that was prepared for the devil and his angels.”

We must make special note that in this parable, Jesus is having the king say that God is the one who will punish them. We also notice that this punishment is the unquenchable fire prepared for the devil and his angels. Therefore, this fire was not originally prepared for Adam and Eve, and their descendants. The Jewish concept of Gehenna where the fire burned is something the disciples could easily relate to. Gehenna was often used as a metaphor for the type of punishment that only the worst of sinners would have to endure. So instead of having their conscience at peace because they did the right thing, their minds will be in torment knowing how wrong they were and cannot undo their wrong to make it right.

Verses 42-43: “You must go away because when I was hungry, you gave me nothing to eat. When I was thirsty, you gave me nothing to drink. When I had no place to stay, you did not welcome me into your home. When I was without clothes, you gave me nothing to wear. When I was sick and in prison, you did not care for me.”

Now, Jesus says, the words of the king for those who stood on his left were not comforting. In fact, they were condemning. But even more than that, it ties together all that Jesus has tried to illustrate with these parables, from the foolish women to the worthless servant, to the goats. It’s like saying, you tried to pretend that you were part of what the Kingdom of God is all about, but you came up short on account of being uncommitted and uncaring about the mission given you. So since you showed that you weren’t with me now I’m telling you, that I’m not with you.⁹

This not only goes for individuals, but for churches as well who profess to be one with Jesus Christ. The remarkable thing is that they are banished from His presence. While training to become a grief counselor and bereavement facilitator, I learned that the difference between grief and disappointment in our loss is that we grieve over losses that can never be recovered, and in some cases, never replaced. This can cause agony and mental torment beyond belief.

Here in our text, Jesus brings up attitudes and actions in these people’s past that have now come back to judge them. What is lost, is that the opportunity to redress these failures is now gone forever. This is why they were told to go away. This is why people need to approach the Lord and inquire if they are guilty of such lack of compassion while it is still time to repent and change.

Verse 44: “Then those people will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty? When did we see you without a place to stay? Or when did we see you without clothes or sick or in prison? When did we see any of this and not help you?’”

This defensive answer seems to correlate with what King Saul told Samuel when he was confronted about not following instructions concerning the Amalekites.¹⁰ Also, the people of Judah said they were not aware they didn’t carry out the LORD’S instructions to the fullest.¹¹ God told Israel, it was a matter of respect.¹² Also, it’s a case of getting the message wrong,¹³ as well as misunderstanding that what you do to others is also done to God.¹⁴

One early church writer framed it this way: “Oh, the invariable disobedience of sinners! Who does not realize that every evil we do is done not because we are corruptible but because we have a bad intention? Plainly then the corruptible flesh of sinners will die, but wickedness will live on. Did they not hear the Lord saying to the righteous, ‘As you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me?’¹⁵ Certainly, they should have understood that what they fail to do to people, they fail to do to Christ. But those who hear, remain adamant; those who understand, pretend they do not understand. They stand in judgment, and yet they keep on sinning. This also applies to bad teachers … who did not clothe the naked, either by teaching justice or by baptizing in Christ; who did not welcome strangers in the world through the word or introduce them into the house of the church through faith; who did not heal the sick by their words; who did not lead out, through penance, those who were sitting in the prison of ungodliness. If it is ungodly not to offer material things to bodies, which cannot live forever even if they accept these things, can you imagine how ungodly it is not to administer spiritual things to souls that are in danger and could live forever if only these things were administered to them? Since the soul is more precious than the body, it is all the more sinful not to give spiritual alms to troubled souls rather than material alms to bodies.”¹⁶

The question that comes up at this point is how can we tie punishment with the devil to followers of Christ who have not obeyed His words nor sought His will? Some find such a connection in what was said about this punishment. That it was prepared for the devil and his angels. This was because they rebelled against God, and as a result were cast out of heaven. Look at the Israelites that were freed from Egyptian bondage, but in the wilderness made a golden calf which they then worshiped as a symbol of God, rather than God Himself. As a result, everyone over the age of 21 was not allowed into the Promised Land. No doubt, because of their penchant not to walk by faith but by sight God ordered Moses to construct the Ark of the Covenant so they could see that God was with them. This is explained later when Jesus would say to Thomas: “You believe because you see me. Great blessings belong to the people who believe without seeing me!”17  Some people may object and ask how can a loving, caring God do something like this? The truth is, it isn’t God doing anything, it is the evidence that justifies the sentence for what people have done to themselves.