Down an Unfamiliar Road

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-THREE

Part X

Verse 29: Now, in quick succession, Jesus will focus on one type of tomb after another. “It will be bad for you teachers of the law and you Pharisees! You are hypocrites! You build tombs for the prophets. And you show honor to the graves of the godly people who were killed.

In this indictment, Jesus uses terms that were very familiar to His listening audience regarding the way they excavated graves and built shrines over them. In the Jewish Mishnah, we find the following instructions on preparing tombs or digging graves: “Dug out graves¹ and built tombs may not be dug during weekdays of a Festival, but dug out graves may be adapted [e.g., shortened or lengthened] during the Festival, and a clothes washer’s vat may be constructed during the Festival, and a coffin, with the deceased [present for all to see] in the courtyard [may be made during festival weekdays since people will know that this is not ordinary project].”²

Rabbis Moses Maimonides and Obadiah Bartenura commented on this by saying that the graves were the holes which are dug into the earth, and the sepulchers are the buildings erected over the grave.³ Likewise, in the Babylonian Talmud we read in their commentary on the Mishnah – called “Gemara”: “What are KUKIN [dug out graves] and what are BURIAL PLACES?— Said Rabbi Judah, kukin are recesses made by excavation and ‘burial-places’ are structures made by building.”⁴ This should help you distinguish between the two.

We are told that many of these edifices, which they built over the graves of some of their prophets and righteous men, were very grand and beautiful. Those who have visited the Holy Land come back with pictures and descriptions of these sepulchers that are very impressive, especially Rachel’s tomb near Bethlehem. Jesus was not speaking against such monuments since it was certainly an honor and laudable for people to show such respect to those they held in such high esteem, but to illustrate something that was made to look good on the outside while covering up their wicked deed on the inside.

Painting of Rachel’s Tomb as it looked in the late 1800’s © Holly Hayes

Chrysostom shares his view. He writes: “Jesus did not pronounce woe upon them because they blamed others or because they build monuments. Rather, He pronounces woe because while pretending to condemn those who killed the prophets, they do worse. They witness against themselves. As for evidence that their adorning of monuments is a pretense, Luke says, ‘Woe to you! For you build the tombs of the prophets whom your fathers killed. So you are witnesses and consent to the deeds of your fathers; for they killed them, and you build their tombs.’⁵ Their purpose was not to honor those that were slain but to make a show of the murders. They are afraid lest, when the tombs had perished by time, the proof of their daring should fade away. They set up these buildings as a kind of trophy, priding themselves in the daring deeds of those men and displaying them. This is what is reproved by the Lord.”⁶

Verse 30: “And you say, ‘If we had lived during the time of our ancestors, we would not have helped them kill these prophets.’”

How many times have you heard someone say, “If I had lived back in the days of… I would have done this or done that?” That’s what Jesus said the scribes and Pharisees were claiming. What upset our Lord most, was the fact that while they patted themselves on the back for showing such respect to these holy men of God, they actually would have joined them in persecuting and killing these holy men. It was all a sham, Jesus said. Rather than these scribes and Pharisees being descendants of the prophets, they, were in fact, children of those murderers with the selfsame bloodthirsty, persecuting spirit inside of those who killed them.

It didn’t take very long to prove our Lord right because these same individuals started doing the things to the apostles that their forefathers did to the prophets. This had been a long-standing problem as we see in Chronicles, “The Lord, the God of their ancestors, sent prophets again and again to warn His people. He did this because He felt sorry for them and for His Temple. He didn’t want to destroy them or His Temple. But they made fun of God’s prophets and refused to listen to them. They hated God’s messengers.”⁷

If there was anything that the Lord despised, it was self-righteousness and hypocrisy. Such, He found breeding among the Scribes and Pharisees, these self-made and self-appointed experts who spent most of their time pointing out and criticizing all things contrary to their own views and beliefs. As Eliphaz said to his friend Job, “What you say clearly shows your sin. You are trying to hide your sin by using clever words. I don’t need to prove to you that you are wrong. The words from your own mouth show that you are wrong. Your own lips speak against you.” While these charges did not apply to Job, it certainly fits the character of the scribes and Pharisees.⁸

Chrysostom gives us a paraphrase of what Jesus is saying here to these religious leaders: “And you yourselves continue to do these things in this spirit. Though you may speak to the contrary, you still do them. You say, ‘If we had lived in the days of our fathers we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’ Yet your own disposition is evident. Even as you are unfolding your intention, you are already expressing it however disguised. So Jesus adds, ‘Thus you witness against yourselves, that you are the sons of those who murdered the prophets.’ If you are the son of a murderer but do not partake of the mind of your father, you yourself are not to blame. But if you do so partake, you have an affinity with his wickedness.”⁹

Verses 31-32: “So you give proof that you are descendants of those who killed the prophets. And you will finish the sin that your ancestors started!”

The attitude of these opponents of Jesus would be much like (no offense is meant here nor any denigration of character intended) an illegitimate son extolling the virtues and the value of chastity, condemning all others who do not heed his words, all the while forgetting that he himself was the result of non-virtue and fornication. We must never forget that we are all sinners saved by grace, therefore we need to talk to unconverted sinners as once our brothers and sisters in the flesh while we try to get them to see the benefit and joy of becoming our brothers and sisters in the Spirit. Once the hypocrisy of these Pharisees had been exposed, the Lord would explain the consequences to them.

Cyril of Alexandria gives us his commentary: “We will carefully investigate what the Savior says. The forefathers of the Jews killed the holy prophets who were transmitting the divine word to them in those times. They surely have become witnesses for some of them, because the prophets are now revered and honored. They have placed crowns on their heads or assign … honor to their tombs as to holy things, for believing the prophets to be holy men, they have become the judges of those who have killed them. For by honoring them in this way, they have spoken against those who killed them, and through these things they accuse them of having acted wickedly. But though they agreed to condemn the murders committed by their own forefathers, they were about to become threshing floors for the same kind of evils, indeed, to things even worse. They ‘killed the author of life’ and added to their impieties against Him other murders, those of His holy apostles. For while one scrutinizes the sins of others, making a decision according to one’s innate reason, one sees the wickedness and censures it.… He who is led into similar passions is like a blind man carried away.”¹⁰

Some years later, Hilary of Poitiers has this to say on the text: “The form of judgment is perfect; the understanding and idea of equity are instilled in each of us by nature so that the more fully the ideal of equity is known, the less need there is for the forgiveness of iniquity. The people of the law killed all the prophets. They had become inflamed with hatred toward them because of the harshness of their reproaches since the prophets had publicly called them thieves, murderers, adulterers and sacrilegious. Moreover, because they had denounced the Jews as unworthy of the kingdom of heaven and because they taught that the Gentiles would be the heirs of the covenant of God, they afflicted the prophets with a variety of other punishments. The descendants, however, repudiated the deeds of their fathers, honoring the prophets’ books, decorating their tombs, restoring their sepulchers and attesting by these forms of respect that they were not culpable for the crimes of their fathers.”¹¹

Some 300 years later, another church scholar gives his impression of what he wants the reader to understand here. He writes: “Every good deed that is done for God is universally good for everything and everyone. Deeds that are not seen to benefit everything and everyone, however, are done on account of man, as the present matter itself demonstrates. For example, those who build reliquaries and adorn churches seem to be doing good. If they imitate the justice of God, if the poor benefit from their goods and if they do not acquire their goods through violence against others, it is clear that they are building for the glory of God. If they fail to observe God’s justice, … and if the poor never benefit from their goods and if they acquire their goods from others by means of violence or fraud, who is so foolish not to understand that they are building for human respect rather than for the glory of God? Those who build reliquaries¹² in a just manner ensure that the poor do not suffer as a result of it. For the martyrs do not rejoice when they are honored by gifts for which the poor paid with their tears. What kind of justice is it to give gifts to the dead and to despoil the living or to drain blood from the poor and offer it to God? To do such things is not to offer sacrifice to God but to attempt to make God an accomplice in violence, since whoever knowingly accepts a gift which was acquired by sinful means participates in the sin.”¹³

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-THREE

Part IX

Verses 27-28: “It will be bad for you teachers of the law and you Pharisees! You are hypocrites! You are like mausoleums that are painted white. Outside they look fine, but inside they are full of dead people’s bones and all kinds of filth. It is the same with you. People look at you and think you are godly. But on the inside, you are full of hypocrisy and evil.”

In the Syriac and Arabic versions of Matthew, it reads, “you look like tombs covered with lime.” It is known that the Jews marked their graves with white lime so that they might be easily spotted. This was to assist priests, Nazarites, and travelers in avoiding them so they would not be polluted by inadvertent touching. As Moses taught: “Whoever touches one that is slain with a sword in the open fields or a dead body or a human bone or a grave, will be unclean seven days.”¹ We see this explained in the Jewish Mishnah, “…graves are marked with lime which is dissolved and poured on to forewarn a priest, or Nazarite, not to defile themselves by trespassing there.”²

Also, Rabbi Moses Maimonides offers his insight, “Whenever a person discovers a grave, a corpse, or a portion of a corpse that would impart impurity, he should mark it, so that it will not create an obstacle for others. During Chol HaMoed,³ agents of the court go out to mark the graves. An identification mark is not made over a body part that is the size of an olive, because ultimately, its size will be reduced in the earth. With what is the identification made? With lime. It should be mixed and poured over the place of the impurity. The identification mark should not be placed on the exact perimeters of the impurity, but instead, should extend somewhat on either side so as not to ruin pure articles. The identification mark should not be extended much beyond the place of the impurity so as not to spoil Eretz Yisrael.⁴ An identification mark is not made on places that are definitely known to be used for burial, for their identity is universally known, only on the places that are doubtful, e.g., a field in which a grave is hidden by low-hanging branches of trees, or rocks jutting out from a wall.”⁵

There is no doubt, the scribes and Pharisees knew what Jesus was talking about how many of the tombs were whitewashed during these events. At first sight, they hoped they would be thought of for what they pretended to be, pure and holy, righteous and pristine. But in fact, they were as rotten and filthy inside as a sepulcher full of dead men’s rotting corpses, and all the uncleanness; worms, and rottenness which arise from the putrefied carcasses, and are very nauseous and defiling. But there is a subliminal note here in what Jesus says. Just as people are made physically unclean by touching such whitewashed tombs, so people are made spiritually unclean by their contact with these whitewashed Pharisees.

Several early church scholars found a lot of things to say to their listeners and readers based on what Jesus was saying here to Jews who tried to look clean but did not have a clean look. For instance, one early church scholar says: “How men can be compared with a cup and a plate is made clear when Christ adds, ‘for you are full of robbery and iniquity within.’ The Jews washed themselves, their clothing and their utensils as often as they entered the temple or offered sacrifices on solemnities, but they never washed themselves from sin. God neither praised cleanliness of the body nor condemned bodily filth. Nevertheless imagine for the moment that God hates filth of the body, of vessels and other such things. If He were to hate the defilement of things like this, which necessarily get soiled during their ordinary use, how much more would He abhor the defilement of the human conscience, which it is possible for us to keep clean continually? It is not the vessels that need washing with water but the conscience that needs washing with prayer. No one notices if the bowl has been cleaned on the inside, but only if it is dirty on the outside does it get washed. A man … can never touch a drop of water and yet be perfectly clean before God if he has not been defiled by interior sin. If he were to commit a sin, however, he would be black with filth before God, even though he washes himself in the open sea and in every river of the world.”⁶

Then early church scholar Origen adds this commentary: “As the scribes and Pharisees were previously called ‘full of robbery and self-indulgence,’⁷ likewise here they are said to be ‘full of hypocrisy and iniquity’ and are compared with ‘the bones of the dead and all uncleanness.’ Hypocrisy, because it is a counterfeit of the good, possesses nothing vital of the good it simulates, but is only its dead bones, so to speak.… If we listen with wisdom to what the present passage wants to tell us, we will understand that every simulated righteousness is a dead righteousness, hence no righteousness at all. Just as a dead man can still have the appearance of a man, even though he is in fact no longer a man, so also a dead chastity is no chastity. For any virtue is dead when it is not practiced for God but feigned on account of men. He who feigns righteousness can give the appearance of being righteous even though what he has is not righteousness at all but only a figment of righteousness, much like impersonators who can take on the appearance of another individual without thereby actually becoming the other person. The same is true concerning chastity. Because of this, men who do such things are appropriately compared with ‘whitewashed tombs which look beautiful from the outside,’ for they give every external appearance of righteousness, even though they are full of ‘the bones of the dead’ within.”⁸

Then, around 370 AD, early church preacher Chrysostom has this to say to his congregation: “You have been counted worthy to become temples of God. But you have instead suddenly become more like graves, having the same sort of smell. This is dreadful. It is extreme wretchedness that one in whom Christ dwells and in whom the Holy Spirit has worked such great works should turn out to be a sepulcher, a place for death. What wretchedness is this? What mourning and lamentation does this call for! The members of the body of Christ have become a tomb of uncleanness? Remember your sonship and how you were born. Consider what things by which you have been counted worthy. Recall what sort of garment you received in baptism. You were intended to be a temple without fault, beautiful, not adorned with gold or pearls but with the spirit that is more precious than these. You are hardly ready to appear in the city above if you remain a tomb below. For if here, this is forbidden, much more there. Even here you are an object of scorn. You carry around a dead soul. You are shunned. Be honest. If anyone were to go carrying around a dead body, wouldn’t everyone else rush for cover! Wouldn’t they all flee? But this is what you are like. You go about carrying a corpse far more grievous than this. It is a soul deadened by sins, a soul paralyzed.”⁹

The remarkable thing about the words of Jesus is that although they were spoken over 2,000 years ago to a generation no longer with us, they are just as powerful, meaningful, and relevant to those today who call themselves children of God as they were back then. Such individuals claim, that the old man of sin within is dead and they are now alive in Christ Jesus. Yet, they continue to carry around the corpse of their old nature because they cannot bring themselves to bury it and move on.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-THREE

Part VIII

Verse 24: “You are delusional! You strain a gnat out of your drink, then turn around and swallow a camel!”

Here again, Jesus opens another four-fold series of indictments against the Pharisees and scribes on their dichotomous interpretation of verbal law, and God’s law. He starts with their punctilious payment of tithes, right down to the spices given to them. He matches three spices with three virtues. There is no reason to draw any inference as to how they match up either in essentials or use. However, there is a subliminal touché that Jesus accomplishes against the Pharisees’ pride.

According to the Jewish Mishnah: “Rue weed, wild asparagus, pigweed, mountain coriander, water parsley, and meadow berries, are exempt from tithes because tithes are only taken from owned produce; the aforementioned are generally abandoned and are considered ownerless property and are not subject to tithes.”¹ In other words, such spices were not subject to tithing, yet they did it anyway just for show. But we can also see that the three spices were designed to make them feel good when mixed with their soups and salads, while the three virtues are designed to make others feel good when mixed with compassion.

Here we have the same principle at work in the prophet Samuel’s question: “Which pleases the LORD more: burnt offerings and sacrifices or obeying His commands? It is better to obey the Lord than to offer sacrifices to Him. It is better to listen to Him than to offer the fat from rams.”² And Proverbs echoes the same sentiment, “Do what is right and fair. The LORD loves that more than sacrifices.”³

This was also the prophet Hosea’s message to the people, “This is because I want faithful love, not sacrifice. I want people to know God, not to bring burnt offerings.”⁴ One Jewish Rabbi comments on this verse: “We see that the burnt offering is the most beloved of sacrifices, for the burnt offering is entirely consumed by the flames. But the study of Torah is more beloved by God than burnt offerings. For if a man studies Torah he comes to know the will of God.”⁵ In other words, to know the will of God one must study the word of God. Hosea goes on to mention the acts of loving-kindness God expected, because “From the very first the world was created only with mercy.⁶”⁷

When Jesus mentions the weightier or more important issues in keeping the law, no doubt the Pharisees and scribes knew that He was making a reference to the teachings in the Mishnah, where Rabbis were discussing what proselytes should be taught. If he can prove his desire to be a proselyte, then the Rabbi says, “…he is accepted straightaway, and is given instruction in some of the minor and some of the major commandments,”⁸ among which was the “Poor Man’s Tithe.”⁹ So in effect, Jesus was putting these scribes and Pharisees on the level of proselytes in their knowledge and understanding of the law. The Jews had a law, which forbids them the eating of any creeping thing, and of this they were strict observant.¹⁰

With regard to straining out a gnat, we discover that this Greek word kōnōps is used only here in the New Testament. We are told that it refers to a wine gnat or midge that is bred in fermenting and evaporating wine. Straining was to prevent ingestion and thereby becoming impure. For instance, in the Jewish Talmud, we find: “If one eats a flea or a gnat he is an apostate. Now such a thing could only be done to provoke, and yet we are taught that he is merely an apostate! — Even in that case, he may just be trying to see what a forbidden thing tastes like.”¹¹

And, a highly respected Rabbi states: “One who eats an entire fly or an entire mosquito [gnat] whether alive or dead is worthy of lashes for partaking of a flying teeming animal.”¹² Jesus is using this as an illustration of their inconsistency and hypocrisy. In other words, while they are trying to avoid being called an apostate, they are in fact showing themselves to be renegades. It was simply using one of the smallest of creatures in comparison with one of the largest to illustrate how they were so picky in pointing out the smallest of misdeed in others while ignoring the biggest mistake in their own lives.

One Jewish polemic writer sees Jesus teaching here in a different light. He says: “He meant, ‘I am the camel.’ Now, those prophets who are as significant as gnats you leave alone and tell nothing; indeed, you even accept their prophecies. But as for me who am as important as a camel and who came to suffer tribulations for your sake – just as a camel bears the burden willingly, so did I descend willingly to suffer tribulations and so redeem the world – you swallow me up; i.e., it is your intention to kill me.”¹³ In all my studies and reading I’ve not found any other scholar who accepts this interpretation. But it does show the faulty mentality that our Lord encountered.

Verse 25: Then comes the next warning. “It will be bad for you teachers of the law and you Pharisees! You are hypocrites! You wash clean the outside of your cups and dishes. But inside they are full of what you got by cheating others and pleasing yourselves.”

Rabban Gamaliel offered a similar comparison between what was on the outside not corresponding to what was on the inside. He proclaimed: “No disciple whose character does not correspond to his exterior may enter the Beth ha-Midrash.”¹⁴ We must make note at this point, what Jesus is saying here is still tied to His admonition about the inconsistency of the Jews who swore on the gold as being more valid that swearing on the Temple. And, swearing on the offering gave more certainly to the vow than swearing on the altar.

Early church bishop Apollinaris gives his explanation: “The law of Moses taught through the use of symbols how to maintain purity throughout life’s activities. It was the custom of the Jews, passed on to them from their ancient traditions, to wash carefully their cups and the dish that contained their food. They observed these practices to maintain their purity and to avoid contact with “sinful people.” Their aim was that they might flee from fellowship with sinners.… How much more through such practices were they preparing themselves to flee from sin itself. And yet those who were carefully observing these practices were themselves acting like robbers and violently making a profit, becoming loathsome by doing so. Therefore Jesus says this: ‘Flee unrighteousness, O blind Pharisee. For you fail to perceive how you are acting. For what is in the cup and dish are clean if they are not gained in an unrighteous manner. Righteousness cleanses the vessel much better than water.’”¹⁵

Then early church theologian Origen has this to say: “If it is proper to regard everything in the gospel according to the moral sense … we can say that it is a sort of spiritual food and spiritual drink that we receive when we read the law and the prophets in Scripture. Indeed, the language through which we take our spiritual drink and the biblical narratives on which we are nourished are the plates and cups for our food and drink. This is why we are warned not to take as much care for their outside as we do for their inside so that our hearts might be filled with pure understanding, not merely adorned with fine rhetoric and grammar. For ‘the Kingdom of God does not consist in words but in power.’¹⁶ Whoever strives harder to dress his speech in elegant composition than to fill it with saving doctrine has cleaned only the outside, but the inside remains stained with vanity.…We can also say that the very words of the law and the prophets are the cups of spiritual drink for souls and that the plates or bowls of nourishing food for the faithful are their wise authors. The scribes and Pharisees work diligently at discerning only the external, literal meaning of these prophetic cups and plates and bowls, eager to demonstrate that the vessels themselves are pure and holy. The disciples of Christ … hasten to purify and sanctify the interior, spiritual meaning by means of knowledge and credible explanations, so that they might eat and drink the law and the prophets whose inside has been purified, desiring as they do to hear and understand the interior, mystical meaning and to go beyond the literal sense of the words.”¹⁷

Verse 26: “Pharisees, you are blind! First, make the inside of the cup clean and good. Then the outside of the cup will also be clean.”

There is no evidence that Jesus found the Pharisees and scribes in the same condition that Isaiah did: “But now those leaders are drunk. The priests and prophets are all drunk with wine and beer. They stumble and fall down. The prophets are drunk when they see their dreams. The judges are drunk when they make their decisions. Every table is covered with vomit. There is not a clean place anywhere”¹⁸ However, what our Lord saw was just as despicable and disgusting. This was a very important part of a strict Jewish family’s life.

As a matter of fact, in the Jewish Mishnah there is a whole tractate giving rules about the places where they washed, the things to be washed, and the manner of washing them; about which they were very nice, pretending to have achieved outward cleanness but had no regard for inward purity.¹⁹ For instance, in Chapter 1, they discuss what constitutes pure water, its source, etc. Then in Chapter 2, they talk about how much its depth constitutes immersion.

As John Gill points out, “Christ’s sense is, that they took much pain, and were very careful, that the cup they drank out of, and the platter, or dish they ate off of, should be very clean; when at the same time, the food and drink that were within them, were acquired by oppression and plundering; by devouring widows’ houses, by making undue claims upon, and extorting unjust sums from the fatherless, the poor, and the needy; and were abused by them, to enjoy luxury and intemperance. In like manner, the Jews themselves say of hypocrites.”²⁰ Then, our Lord transitions to another form of impurity which the Pharisees and scribes have attempted to camouflage.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-THREE

Part VII

Verses 20-22: “Whoever uses the altar to make a promise is really using the altar and everything on the altar. And anyone who uses the Temple to make a promise is really using the Temple and God, who lives in it. Whoever uses heaven to make a promise is using God’s throne and the one who is seated on it.”

Two things we need to notice here. Jesus was not promoting the idea of swearing by using the altar, Temple or heaven, nor was He telling the Jews that it was wrong. He was pointing out the seriousness of using such sacred objects when making a vow. By focusing on the gold and the offerings, they were trying to avoid the possibility of profaning the Temple and the altar. But our Lord wanted them to know, you can’t have one without the other because each gives the other its meaning. In other words, if a person swears by the altar they should know that the offering on the altar is automatically included and thereby make the oath binding.

But most of all, Jesus points out the connection between the altar, Temple, heavens, and God. It is to God that all the gifts on the altar are made; it is to God that all the praise in the Temple is directed, and it is to God that all adoration directed toward heaven is ascribed. So if you make an oath using God as the ensurer of that oath, you include everything that belongs to Him. Another way to put this is, if you dedicate your hands to do God’s work, you are including your heart, soul, mind, body, and spirit; if you dedicate your heart to Him, you are including everything you are, everything you have, and everything you own. Therefore, take your vows seriously.

Jesus was not fishing for things to criticize these religious leaders about, it was all part of Jewish tradition. For instance, according to John Gill, the following oath was taken: “…swear to me that you wilt not betray me, and he swore to him; by what did he swear? says Rabbi Jose bar Chanina, “by the innermost altar.”¹ Also, in another Midrash it is written, “Again, it is said of Zedekiah, ‘…that Nebuchadnezzar made him to swear’; ‘by what did he make him to swear?’ says Rabbi Jose, ‘by the covenant he made him to swear’; Rabbi says, ‘by the altar‘ he made him to swear.”²

But the real irony that Jesus points out, is that the Pharisees were vowing to offer something higher than the altar. No doubt they had forgotten God’s words to Moses: “Seven days you will make atonement on the altar and consecrate it; thus the altar will be especially holy, and whatever touches the altar will become holy.”³ They had gotten it backwards, but that didn’t matter to them because it didn’t fit into their scheme. Then the Master shows them their foolishness in not respecting the Temple. King David made it clear, “LORD, I love the house where You live, the place where your glory is.”⁴ And had they forgotten the words of Solomon, “Now, Lord, I have built a beautiful Temple for You, where You may live forever.”⁵

When the priest brought water from the pool for the altar, they chanted this hymn, “The LORD has chosen Zion to be the place for His Temple, the place He wanted for His home. He said, “This will always be My place of rest. This is where I want to sit on My throne.”⁶ Previously, Jesus told His followers, “Don’t make a vow using the name of heaven, because heaven is God’s throne.”⁷ But in the Mishnah we read, “[If a man said,] ‘I adjure you’, or ‘ I command you’, or ‘I bind you’, they are liable. [But if he said,] ‘By heaven and by earth’, they are exempt.”⁸

Origen has this to say about swearing on objects to validate one’s oath: “One of the Pharisaical traditions regarded oath taking. Some were swearing by the temple, others by the gold of the temple; some by the altar, others by the gifts of the altar. The Pharisees were teaching that one who swore by the gold of the altar or by the gift of the altar was obligated, whereas one who swore by the Temple or by the altar was not under obligation. Our Savior spoke against these traditions. He wished to call them back from human traditions to divine revelation. Those who hand on such traditions are blind and foolish. They do not see that what is placed in the Temple is not sanctified through itself but through the Lord of the Temple. That which is placed on the altar is judged already as a gift of God, which is why it is placed on the altar. It seems foolish to argue that one who swears in one way is bound and one who swears in another way is not bound. This assumes that what is sanctified is above the one who sanctifies. It seems foolish to argue that one who swears by heaven is less vulnerable than one who swears by God Himself. Jesus showed them that it was equally as absurd to swear by heaven as to swear by the Temple or by the altar. It is irrational to assume that one avoids punishment because he is not swearing by God but by the throne of God. Thus He spoke to the Jews prohibiting them to follow the Pharisaic tradition. Moreover, He clearly rejected the whole business of swearing at all, as if it were a superior way.”⁹

To put it another way, if someone has to swear or affirm on a person or object believed to be greater and more trustworthy than themselves, they are admitting that you cannot believe what they say. So without realizing it, these Jews were using God’s name and God’s house in vain. They had twisted the Scriptures to such a point that Jesus saw them as blind men leading the blind. But it appears that Jesus is just getting started because He presents another four-fold indictment of the scribes and Pharisees.

Verse 23: “It will be bad for you teachers of the law and you Pharisees! You are hypocrites! You give God a tenth of the food you get, even your mint, dill, and cumin. But you don’t obey the really important teachings of the law—being fair, showing mercy, and being faithful. These are the things you should do. And you should also continue to do those other things.”

Jesus was referring here to the established law on tithing produce: “A tenth of all crops belongs to the LORD. This means the crops from fields and the fruit from trees—a tenth belongs to the LORD.”¹⁰ And this included what is said in Isaiah: “A farmer prepares the ground, and then he plants the seed. He plants different kinds of seeds different ways. He scatters dill seeds, he throws cumin seeds on the ground, and he plants wheat in rows. A farmer plants barley in its special place, and he plants spelt seeds at the edge of his field.”¹¹ Mint, dill, and cumin were well-known aromatic plants used in cooking. It grew with very little effort and attention. So the Pharisees were not being all that generous with the Lord by tithing such spices because they didn’t require much investment.

The Rabbis were very detailed in the tithing of these edibles, describing it to this point: “One who peels the outer husk of barley, peels one by one, and may eat without tithing, but if he peeled several and put them into his hand and he is not standing next to the storage pile where he could return them to, he is liable.”¹² Also, the Rabbis specified that: “Pressed figs, dates, carobs, rice, and cumin and if one brought these from a distant country, since they are very similar in appearance as the ones grown in Israel, the Rabbis did not differentiate between the two. However, rice from outside the land [of Israel, since it is easily distinguishable from the white rice of Israel], whoever uses it is exempt from tithing it.”¹³

But while the Pharisees paid close attention to these specifics, they completely overlooked what God said: “People, the LORD has told you what goodness is. This is what He wants from you: Be fair to other people. Love kindness and loyalty, and humbly obey your God.”¹⁴ In other words, Jesus was pointing out the Pharisees’ attention to detail, at the expense of more important matters; weightier moral matters of the law.¹⁵

Origen sees an application for what Jesus teaches here to the church in his day. He writes: “Not only among the Jews but among ourselves as well, we find people sinning in these ways. They are swallowing camels. People of this type frequently show off their religion even in the smallest of things. They are rightly called hypocrites for wanting to exploit their religiosity before men but being unwilling to undertake that very faith which God Himself has justified. Therefore the imitators of the scribes and Pharisees must be dislodged and sent away from us, lest a woe touches us in the same way it touches them. The scribes could be described as those who valued nothing found in the Scriptures except its plain sense interpreted legalistically. Meanwhile, they condemn those who look into the very depths of God Himself. Mint and dill and cumin are only spices for food but are not themselves substantial food. What substantive food would mean in conversion would be that which is necessary for the justification of our souls—faith and love—unlike these legalisms, which are more like condiments and flavorings. It is as if a meal might be thought to consist more of condiments and flavorings than the food itself. The seriousness of judgment is neglected while great attention is given to minor matters. Spiritual exercises which in and of themselves are hardly justice are spoken of as justice and compassion and faith. It is lacking in justice to treat these small parts as the whole. When we do not offer to God the observance of all that is necessary for worship, we fail altogether.”¹⁶

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-THREE

Part VI

Verse 16: Now comes the fourth warning to both the Pharisees and scribes from our Savior: “It will be bad for you teachers of the law and you Pharisees! You guide the people, but you are blind. You say, ‘If anyone uses the name of the Temple to make a vow, that means nothing. But anyone who uses the gold that is in the Temple to make a promise must keep that promise.’”

Here Jesus throws the words of His opponents back at them and introduces to the western reader a custom known only among the Jews at that time. In so doing, our Lord points out their inconsistency of interpretation by showing how some say that swearing by the Temple will demand that a vow be kept, but others say it’s not the Temple, but the gold in the Temple that makes the vow binding. The gold, meaning the money.

Using the holy Temple to swear on was done in order to make the most sacred of vows. In the Jewish Mishnah we read where using the Temple in a vow was being discussed regarding what happens to the wives of priests taken captive or coming under Gentile rule if they are suspected of cohabiting with the enemy, “Rabbi Zechariah ben Ha-Katzav who was a priest said; I swear by this Temple, her hand did not move out of my hand from the time that the heathens entered Jerusalem until they departed and she was not defiled.”¹ And again, in the Talmud, we find, “It once happened that the price of a pair of birds in Jerusalem had risen to gold denarii. Thereupon, Rabbi Simeon ben Gamaliel vowed, ‘By this Temple! I shall not go to rest this night before these can be obtained for silver denarii’.”²

Today we have similar validations such as, “I swear on the Bible,” or “I swear to God,” or “I swear on my Mother’s grave.” In Jewish literature, we find that Rabbi Johanan emphasized that when swearing by the Temple it was then an obligation for the person making the oath to carry it out even it proves to be inconvenient.³ So we can see that swearing by the Temple was a long-standing tradition, not something that Jesus made up.

However, as far as using the gold in the Temple to back up a promise was concerned, scholars say this is to be understood not of the gold that covered any part of the Temple; nor of the golden vessels in it; but of the gold, or money, or gifts which were offered for the service of the Temple which are called “Korban.” As Jewish scholars explain, the term “ḳorban” was frequently used in vows. By saying, “Let my property be to you a ḳorban”—that is, a gift or donation consecrated to God. When such a donation was identified as korban, it would prevent any other person from deriving any personal benefit from what he was donating.⁴ In Christianity, we can liken this to the tithe.

This, of course, led to such vows being greatly abused by religious leaders, as all inconsiderate vows did, and therefore, was much opposed by the sages.⁵ Jesus had such a vow in view when He accused the teachers of the Law and Pharisees: “If someone says to his father or mother, ‘I have promised as a korban’ (that is, as a gift to God) ‘what I might have used to help you,’ then you no longer let him do anything for his father or mother. In the same way, with your tradition which was handed down to you, you nullify the Word of God! And you do other things like this.”⁶

However, the charge of hypocrisy, or lip-service, raised by some against the Pharisees in connection with making such vows was not all bad. Pharisaic tradition did actually provide a remedy against rash vows by empowering any sage consulted to dissolve the vow in case it could be shown that it was not made with a full consideration of all its consequences. This very power, “to unbind that which is bound” by the Law being declared to be a privilege of the Rabbis, derived from the spirit of the Law while seemingly against the letter of the law.

So in this sense, when making a vow, the Pharisees taught, that whosoever swore by the gold treasury in the Temple in dedicating their korban, they could not go back on their word anymore than they could not pay their korban. This showed the covetous disposition of these men, who made nothing of oaths that were sworn by the Temple; but only those made as korban, or donations to it, as binding because to them the money was more important than a man’s word. And besides, by holding them to their promise sworn to such korban it produced more money for the Temple. So in a way, they were dissing the Temple while making the korban holy.

Verse 17: “You are blind fools! Can’t you see that the Temple is greater than the gold on it? It’s the Temple that makes the gold holy!”

So these four accusations involve the Pharisees’ Insincerity, Instigation, Instability, and Insecurity in their faith. They thought that because of their positions and superior knowledge they could get away with it by claiming to be practicing righteousness. But Jesus called it right by accusing them of being not only blind but blind fools. Today, this would be similar to someone preaching to their congregation on tithing and giving, and emphasize how such contributions to the church was the basis for bringing them more blessings so that they could then give even more, without realizing that it is the giving that is the blessing, not what you get in return. But Jesus will have more to say on this subject.

One early church bishop commented about the gold in the Temple: “Jesus is saying that the gold in the Temple…were considered by the Jews to be worthy of much more honor than the Temple. Therefore they were condemned by the Lord.… But the saying possesses a figurative meaning directed against them because they are not receiving the truth regarding Christ. Instead, they were judging Moses and the types given through him as more valuable than Christ.… They were rejecting the Christ who sanctifies Moses while simultaneously praising the law. Just as the law was praiseworthy, not because it possesses the types and the symbols but because it prefigures the true mystery of worship in Christ in the same way that gold is precious because of the one who sanctifies the temple, and heaven is beautiful because of the God who sanctifies it and dwells within it.”⁷

Verses 18-19: “And you say, ‘If anyone uses the altar to make a promise, that means nothing. But anyone who uses the gift on the altar to make a promise must keep that promise.’ You are blind! Can’t you see that the altar is greater than any gift on it? It’s the altar that makes the gift holy!”

One of the earliest theologians of the church gives us his commentary on this subject. He writes: “Those who work in the fields of the gospel seek the hidden meaning of these passages of Scripture. We are not simply confiscating the higher parts of Scripture but rather looking toward its whole sense. As regards swearing, it is intended as a binding action, seeking to confirm the word concerning which something is sworn.

Consider this analogy. Think of the altar as the heart and the temple as the whole of Scripture. The temple of God’s glory, spiritually understood, is the divinely inspired Scripture. The gold refers to the meanings it conveys. To swear is to witness to the Scriptures, as a validation and confirmation of the word we speak. Therefore we ought to profess the whole sense of Scripture as a confirmation of the sense which we invoke in all of our words.

Gold found outside the temple is not sanctified. Rather, that gold which is found in the temple is the measure of that which is outside it. Similarly, the meaning which is found outside of the Scriptures is not holy, but it is contained in the meaning of the Scriptures. Only that sense of Scripture is sanctified which can be seen from within the temple itself, that is, within the whole of Scripture. The temple, that is, the reading of the Scriptures, makes a great and venerable sense, just as consecrated gold is valuable. So we ought not to swear by our own intellects to confirm our beliefs as if we were creating witnesses that could judge according to the truth. But let us explore further the analogy of the temple, the gold, and the altar. The altar is the place where a vow is sanctified. The altar in this passage is the heart of a man. What happens in the heart happens deeply within a person. Vows and gifts placed on the altar are clearly those placed upon the human heart. When you begin to pray, you place the vow of your prayer upon your heart, as if you had placed something upon the altar, so that you might offer your prayer to God.

Suppose you are ready to place an offering of psalms upon your heart, so as to offer to God an offering of psalms, accompanying yourself with a harp. Or suppose you are ready to give alms. You make an offering of alms upon your heart, just as if you had placed something on the altar, as you would offer your alms to God. Suppose you have proposed to fast in order to make an offering of your fasting upon your heart as if you had placed something upon the altar.

In this way, the heart of a man makes vows in a holy and venerable way. It is from the heart, that is, the altar, that the vow is offered to God. Therefore it is not possible for the offering of a man to be more honorable than his heart from which the offering is sent up.”⁸

From all this discussion involving making vows by using God’s name, the Temple, the Altar, or some other sacred object to secure its validity, we can see why Jesus was so upset at those who did so under the guise of doing God’s will when, in fact, it was for their own benefit. The apostle John did not tell us: “For God so love the world that He put up His one and only Son as collateral so that those who wanted to could buy their salvation at a bargain price could do so.” No! It was a gift! Likewise, whatever we do in His name for others should also be a gift. God help us if preachers start charging for their prayers, sermons, advice, and counseling. Promising blessings from God while making themselves wealthy.

“If there is no struggle, there is no progress.” This wise saying was made by famed 19th-century African-American author and orator. Frederick Douglass as he began his speech on Monday, August 3, 1857, in Canandaigua, NY, on the 23rd anniversary of the West India Emancipation. He reminded everyone of the British efforts toward emancipation as well as the crucial role of the West Indian slaves in their own freedom struggle.

This saying has greater meaning when we learn what Douglass himself struggled through. His mother died when he was 10, his father was suspected to be a plantation owner since he was moved into the main house. He was sent to work as a servant in a white household in Baltimore. The owner’s wife defied the law against teaching slaves how to read and taught young Frederick the alphabet. When she was forbidden to continue, Frederick learned to read on his own.

He was then transferred to a less hospitable owner who had a reputation as a “slave-breaker.” But the abuse did not break 16-year-old Frederick emotionally or psychologically. Douglass eventually escaped with the help of a free black woman and traveled by train to New York to the house of a slavery abolitionist. There, the woman who helped him escape came and they were married.

They settled in New Bedford, Massachusetts in a thriving free black community. They joined a church and regularly attended abolitionist meetings. At one meeting, Douglass was asked to tell his story. It was so moving, that he was asked to speak at other meetings. Once during a lecture tour through the Midwest, Douglass was chased and beaten by an angry mob before being rescued by a local Quaker family.

But opposition to his message continued and he finally had to sail overseas to escape capture. With many supporters who attended his lectures there, he was able to raise enough money to purchase his legal freedom and return to the USA a free man. In 1872, he was the first black man ever nominated for vice president of the United States on the Equal Rights Party ticket.

Just like Douglass, many of us were once slaves, but slaves to sin. When we heard the Word about the emancipation effort of Jesus of Nazareth, we wanted to be free. But it didn’t come easy. There were struggles both within and without. Sometimes, we even tried to escape but it always caught up with us. But once we learn that the price for our freedom had been paid by Jesus, the Son of God, and once we accepted this payment by faith, we became free in Christ. But then, the struggles continued on a different level.

Too often we try to hide what we went through, but just like Frederick Douglass, we should never be afraid to tell our story to inspire others, because we too have learned on an emotional and spiritual level, if there is no struggle, there is no progress. – Dr. Robert R Seyda

YOU CAN’T HAVE ONE WITHOUT THE OTHER

Sometimes, I get tired of all the commercials on TV because they seem endless and I want to see the program. But I realize they are the ones paying the bill so why not endure it. However, there is another lesson to be learned from such ads. Take for instance the ad to help cure acne; the one for arthritis pain; the one for headaches; the one for high blood pressure, cholesterol; the ones advertising cancer and diabetes treatments, just to mention a few.

However, if there were no diseases like acne, arthritis, headaches, high blood pressure, cholesterol, cancer, diabetes etc., these cures and treatments would not be advertised! The same goes for the Gospel of Jesus Christ; the forgiveness of sins; and the way to salvation. If there were no sin and no consequences of sin then Christianity and the preaching of the gospel would not exist; there would be no cross, no resurrection, and no return of the Messiah. Why ask people if they want to be saved, if you don’t tell them what they are being saved from?

Why then, please tell me, do so many ministers only talk about how loving and caring and forgiving God is, extolling His love and grace and mercy, without mentioning the severe consequences if such love and grace and mercy are ignored? If we are all going to heaven no matter what, then close down the churches, sell the pulpits and pews for firewood and let’s have a party until we die! The truth of the matter is this, that without God’s grace and love and mercy; without Christ’s death on the cross and His miraculous resurrection; without the blood that washes away all sin, our destiny is eternal punishment.

What would you think of someone going around offering a cure for a disease that no one has? What would you say about someone offering free airfare to a place that does not exist? Why preach heaven, if there is no hell? Why preach salvation, if there is no punishment for sin? Why preach eternal life, if there is no eternity? Yes, it is God’s desire that none should perish, that all should be saved, but that’s because we all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. In other words, one has no meaning without the other. – Dr. Robert R Seyda

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-THREE

Part V

Verse 14: “It will be bad for you teachers of the law and you Pharisees. You are hypocrites. You cheat widows and take their homes. Then you make long prayers so that people can see you. So you will have a worse punishment.”¹

There are a number of Greek manuscripts that do not include this verse. But I want to include it because it harmonizes with what Jesus is saying. Jewish historian Flavius Josephus says, “For there was a certain sect of men that were Jews, who valued themselves highly upon the exact skill they had in the law of their fathers and made men believe they were highly favored by God, by whom…women were misled.”² As such, the women were led to believe that by honoring these Pharisees, and giving them whatever they asked for, they were honoring God. Such scoundrels forgot about the warning Moses gave: “You must never do anything bad to women whose husbands are dead or to orphans. If you do anything wrong to these widows or orphans, I will know it. I will hear about their suffering. And I will be very angry.”³ Yet, after such scams they still had the aloofness and arrogance to stand in public and pray long prayers.

In the Talmud, we find this notation: “The pious men of old used to wait for an hour and pray for an hour and then wait again for an hour. But seeing that they spend nine hours a day over prayer, how is their knowledge of Torah is preserved and how do they get their work done? [The answer is] that because they are pious, their Torah knowledge is preserved and their work is blessed.”⁴ So we can see, long prayers were an honored tradition among pious Jews.

But one early church writer did not have such admiration for these heartless Pharisees who spent all their time in prayer, not in seeking on how to give, but how to get. He writes: “It is just for anyone who does evil to receive deserved retribution. But in this case, we have one who is using prayers as a cloak for his own wickedness. And he is deriving even the reason for his greed as godliness. Surely, he is justly liable to a far more grievous punishment. So why did God not stop this and depose them? Because the time had not yet come. He leaves them time for repentance for a while. But by His sayings, He tries to prevent His own disciples from being similarly deceived or to be drawn to emulate these men because of the dignity of their positions. Earlier He said, ‘Observe whatever they tell you but not what they do.’⁵ For they do many things wrong.”⁶ 

Verse 15: “It will be bad for you teachers of the law and you Pharisees! You are hypocrites. You travel across the seas and across different countries to find one single convert who will follow your ways. When you find that person, you make him worse than you are. And you are so bad that you belong in hell!”

This verse in the earliest Hebrew version of Matthew reads this way: “You encompass sea and land to bind the heart of one man to your faith and when he is bound he is doubly worse than before,” and is rendered as part of verse 14. So there may have been some redaction or notes that got from the margin into the text along the way. However, since this was addressed to the scribes and Pharisees in Jesus’ day, then we need only to focus on the principle involved, and that is to be sure that those we win for the kingdom of God are followers of Christ, not followers of ourselves.

It was established in Jewish verbal tradition by a well-known spokesmen who said: “He who teaches Torah to his neighbor’s son is regarded by Scripture as though he had fashioned him, as it is written, and the souls which they had made in Haran.⁷”⁸ In the same place, we find where another Rabbi adds: “He who influences his neighbor to fulfill a precept is regarded by Scripture as though he had done it himself, for it is written, ‘The Lord said unto Moses . . . take . . . your rod, wherewith you smote the river;’⁹ did Moses then smite it? Aaron smote it! But, he who causes his neighbor to fulfill a precept, is regarded by Scripture as though he had done it himself.”¹⁰

Early church writer Jerome saw the action of these hypocrites this way: “The scribes and the Pharisees were reviewing the whole world on account of the business and diverse profits taken by their disciples. These profits were taken under the pretense of sanctity.”¹¹ In other words, they classified what they were doing as good works worthy of public support. It reminds me of the promotional advertisement used by some radio and televangelists who claim that if the hearer or viewer sends in money they will receive a blessing. And the higher the amount, the greater the blessing. Some of these individuals even claim that they heard such directions directly from God’s voice.

Chrysostom in one of his sermons has this to say: “The scribes and Pharisees have laid endless toil upon others. This should draw them toward being more empathetic with others’ burdens. But the things that we acquire easily we care less about. So even their unfair advantages do not render them more gentle. Here He lays to the charge of the priests two things. First, that they have been unprofitable for the salvation of many. They have forgotten that they need much toil in order to win over even one. And second, that they were remiss in the preservation of those whom they had won. Not only were they careless but traitors. We see this from the wickedness of their lives, corruption and making others worse. When a disciple sees his teacher as being corrupt, he becomes even more so. He does not stop at his teacher’s corruption.”¹²

There is an interesting story about a Hebrew scholar named Shammai who was a contemporary of Jesus. The Rabbis taught: “A certain non-Jew once came before Shammai and asked him, ‘How many Toroth¹³ have you?’ ‘Two,’ he replied: ‘the Written Torah and the Verbal Torah.’¹⁴ ‘I believe you with respect to the Written, but not with respect to the Verbal Torah [said the Jew]; make me a proselyte on condition that you teach me the Written Torah only.’ But he scolded and repulsed him in anger. When he went before Hillel, he accepted him as a proselyte. On the first day, he taught him, Alef, beth, gimmel, daleth;¹⁵ the following day he reversed [them ] to him. ‘But yesterday you did not teach them to me this way,’ he protested. ‘Does this mean then that you rely on me? Then also rely on me with respect to the Verbal [Torah].’”¹⁶ In other words, it was not enough that this non-Jew learn the written word, but also accept the verbal word of Hillel as being equally necessary.

Today, we might see this if a non-Christian came to a member of the Latter-day Saints and ask how many Bibles are there and being told there are two. One being the Bible, and the other being the Book of Mormon. In addition, they have two other texts – the Book of Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price. Each reads very much like the Bible in type and breadth of thematic concerns and literary forms (history, law, psalm). Even the rhetorical stance of each canon is biblical: God is speaking to prophets faced with temporal crises of spiritual significance. In terms of the authority granted these texts, all have equal weight, including both Bible testaments, as historical witnesses to God’s promise of salvation, enacted by covenant with the Israelites and fulfilled in the atonement of Jesus Christ as the only begotten of the Father.¹⁷

We also read where Jews were encouraged Jews to purchase heathen slaves and convert them to Judaism. In doing so, says Rabbi Ammi in the name of Rabbi Simeon ben Lakish, “You bring them under the wings of the Shechinah.”¹⁸ There are many sayings and teachings in Judaism on proselytes and proselytizing. It was an exacting science, and the rules had to be followed to the letter of the verbal law.

Here are some of the instructions found in the Talmud: “The Master said, ‘If a man desires to become a proselyte . . . he is to be questioned as follows: “What reason have you for desiring to become a proselyte . . .” and he is made acquainted with some of the minor, and with some of the major commandments’. What is the reason? — In order that if he desires to withdraw let him do so; for Rabbi Helbo said: “Proselytes are as hard for Israel [to endure] as a sore, because it is written in Scripture. ‘And the proselyte shall join himself with them, and they shall cleave to the house of Jacob’.””¹⁹ But it gets worse when we read this: “Rabbi Helbo said: Proselytes are as injurious to Israel as a scab, for it is said: And the stranger shall join himself with them, and they shall cleave to the house of Jacob. Here it is written. [This is the law for all manner of plague of leprosy . . .] and for a rising, or for a scab.”²⁰

This attitude may have come from what happened in Persia when the Jews were liberated by the death of Haman, “Wherever the king’s command was read in every province and every city, there was joy and gladness among the Jews. They were having parties and celebrating. Many of the common people from other groups became Jews. They did this because they were very afraid of the Jews.”²¹ Perhaps that is why the Pharisees had to look so hard and long to find a proselyte. But what upset Jesus, was the fact that they would mold that new believer into a more righteous fool and arrogant Jew than the Pharisee himself was.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-THREE

Part IV

Verse 12:       “People who think they are better than others will be humbled. But people who humble themselves will be honored.”

Solomon says, “Wisdom teaches you to respect the Lord. You must be humbled before you can be honored”¹ Also, “Pride is the first step toward destruction. Proud thoughts will lead you to defeat. It is better to be a humble person living among the poor than to share the wealth among the proud.”² And he goes on to say, “Your pride can bring you down. Humility will bring you honor.”³

One of the proudest potentates in the Old Testament found this out, “Now I, Nebuchadnezzar, give praise, honor, and glory to the King of Heaven. Everything He does is right. He is always fair, and He is able to make proud people humble!”⁴ Unfortunately, many in the early church got away from this idea of humility. Down through church history, we can see this malady raise its head again and again.

Several early church fathers must have been disturbed by trends they saw in their day, and so they have some strong words to say about what it means to humble oneself. For instance, Chrysostom put this in his sermon on the subject: “For nothing is as crucial as the practice of modesty. This is why Jesus is continually reminding them of this virtue, both when He brought the children into the midst and now. Even when He was preaching on the mount, beginning the Beatitudes, this is where He began. And in this passage He plucks up pride by the roots, saying, ‘Whoever humbles himself will be exalted.’⁵”⁶

If there was ever anyone who could go around bragging about His position in the Godhead and His anointing as the Messiah, it was Jesus of Nazareth. But He followed the examples of Abraham and Moses and gave God all the glory. Then Chrysostom says: “See how He draws the hearer right over to the contrary thing. For not only does He forbid them to set their hearts upon the first place but also requires them to follow after the last. For so shall you obtain your desire, He says. So one who pursues his own desire to be first must follow and take up their position in last place.”⁷ This certainly goes back to where Jesus taught that when you enter a banquet hall, don’t take the highest seat of honor on the platform but the lowest, so that if you are moved it will be a promotion, not a demotion.⁸

Then, Chrysostom finishes making this point: “And where will we find this humility? Go to the city of virtue, to the tents of the holy men, to the mountains, to the groves. There you may see this height of humility. For these persons, some illustrious from their rank in the world, some having had wealth, in every way put themselves down, by their clothing, by their dwelling, by those to whom they minister. As if they were written characters, they throughout all things are writing the story of humility.”⁹ Just as Jesus went up to the mountain alone to pray, and did not live in luxury or wear expensive clothing, so it appears that many in the early church era, including the rich and famous, did the same.

And the Patriarch of the church in Alexandria, Egypt had this to say: “Since those who have arrived teaching new beliefs, for the most part, do so from conceit and arrogance, I will say something concerning the value of the teaching. The Lord cuts short this opinion and way as leading to destruction. He says, ‘You love glory and the places of first importance.’ Meanwhile, He desires the servant’s role and cultivates humility.”¹⁰ How different this is from when I heard that a certain well-known televangelist asked his congregation to prove their faith by footing the bill on a new jet airplane so he could get around to his appointments easier. He requested that his congregation of 200,000 plus chip in $300 dollars each to pay for a $65 million Gulfstream G650 jet. And just think, Jesus, the Son of God, walked everywhere He went.

One of the earliest church scholars, Origen, said this to his fellow ministers: “I wish everyone might hear this, and most of all deacons, priests, and bishops, especially those who think to themselves that these words were not really written: ‘He who exalts himself will be humbled.’ On this basis, they then act as if they do not know that Jesus said, ‘He who has humbled himself will be exalted.’ They do not hear Him who said, ‘Learn from me; for I am gentle and lowly of heart.’¹¹ They thought themselves to be self-inspired and through this inspiration fell ‘into the judgment of the devil.’¹² They had not thought of critically examining their false humility. They would have done better to have remembered the word of wisdom that says, ‘The greater you are, the more you must humble yourself, and you will find grace before God.’¹³ It was the Lord who provided the pattern for this process. No matter how great He was, He humbled Himself. For ‘though He was in the form of God, [He] did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped but emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form He humbled Himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross. Therefore God has highly exalted Him and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name.’¹⁴”¹⁵

Verses 13-14: “It will be bad for you teachers of the law and you Pharisees! You are hypocrites! You block the way for people to enter God’s kingdom. You yourselves don’t enter, so you stop those who are trying to get in.”

It must be first understood here that Jesus was not calling them hypocrites because they were teachers and Pharisees. Rather, He was more or less saying, if you call yourselves teachers and Pharisees, then you need to live up to your high calling. So, Jesus was not targeting the whole group but only those who were making a mockery out of their position in society. Jesus was not alone, we find that King Alexander Jannai gave his wife Salome this advice while laying on his death-bed: “Fear not the Pharisees and the non-Pharisees but the hypocrites who ape the Pharisees; because their deeds are the deeds of Zimri,¹⁶ but they expect a reward like Phineas.”¹⁷

According to Jewish historian, Josephus, Jannai also told his wife: “She should go in triumph, as upon a victory, to Jerusalem, and put some of her authority into the hands of the Pharisees; for that they would commend her for the honor she had done them, and would reconcile the nation to her for he told her they had great authority among the Jews, both to do hurt to such as they hated, and to bring advantages to those to whom they were friendly disposed; for that they are then believed best of all by the multitude when they speak any strong thing against others, though it is only out of envy at them.”¹⁸

So Jesus was singling out some Pharisees, perhaps like those the Rabbi’s described: “A foolish [overly] pious person, a crafty wicked person…the “struck” Pharisees [i.e., they strike themselves to show humility and abstinence] destroy the world.”¹⁹ In fact, both the Jerusalem and Babylonian Talmuds have disparaging things to say about them. The following hybrid description combining elements from both Talmuds mentions the different types of Pharisees.

There are seven kinds of Pharisees: (1) the “shoulder” Pharisee, who ostentatiously carries his good deeds on his shoulder so all can see them; (2) the “wait-a-moment” Pharisee, who wants you to wait while he performs a good deed; (3) the “bruised” Pharisee, who runs into a wall while looking at the ground to avoid seeing a woman; (4) the “reckoning” Pharisee, who commits a sin, then does a good deed and balances the one against the other; (5) the “pestle” Pharisee, whose head is bowed in false humility, like a pestle in a mortar; (6) the Pharisee who asks, “What is my duty, so that I may do it?” as if he thought he had fulfilled every obligation already; (7) the “Fear of the consequences” Pharisee, who is afraid if he doesn’t perform each commandment; and, the “Pharisee from love” – love for the rewards God promises for performing the commandments, or love of Torah itself.²⁰

Now our Lord gives a four-fold warning to the scribes and Pharisees for their oft pernicious methods in holding sway over the people. Extracting this sermon from its place and setting does not in the least diminish its force and essence for today’s believer. Some claim that it was a one-time affair. Like a stick of dynamite, good for only one blast. But Jesus meant for it to have a lasting effect.

I believe that it is just as relevant today as it was back then. Who then are the scribes and Pharisees of today? For sure, they are not as easily identified as belonging to any certain group or sect within Christianity. But, they are among us nevertheless, in our Christian society’s, government, leadership, administration at large, as well as at the local level in almost every church. But as in this situation, so also in our day, one would have to say to them, “Woe is thee!” The first warning involves how they police the gate to the kingdom of God.

It would be one thing if they were trying to screen people wanting into the kingdom of God by making sure they had the right identification, but they were hindering people from trying to get in because they themselves didn’t think it was right to enter. But Jesus knew their efforts were not based on any altruistic desire to prevent people from being harmed or exploited. Rather, that they were afraid that if the people did get in, they would be free from their power and authority to live in grace and mercy instead of under the bondage of the law and verbal traditions. But our Lord is not finished, He has a second warning for them.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-THREE

Part III

Verses 6-7: “These men love having positions of honor at banquets and the most important seats in the synagogues. They love for people to show respect to them in the marketplaces and to call them ‘Rabbi.’”

We learn that the word Rabbi literally means: “my great one,” and figuratively as, “my master,” or “my teacher.” It became a title of respect used by everyone for Torah scholars, even those of the same rank.¹ No doubt, this was derived from what Jewish historians tell us about Jehoshaphat king of Judah. They say: “Every time he beheld a scholar or disciple he rose from his throne, and embraced and kissed him, calling him Father, Father; Rabbi, Rabbi; Mari, Mari!”² The Aramaic term “Mari” is equivalent to master or lord.³

When it comes to seeking places of honor and wanting to be addressed by titles of respect, early church scholars had a few things to say. For instance, Origen says: “We must first admit that this kind of delight is found not only among the scribes and Pharisees but also in Christ’s church, and not only at dinner, while taking places at the table, but also the front seats in church. These are the deacons or those who wish to become deacons, yet who ‘squander the savings of widows, praying for a good opportunity’ and yet ‘will receive a greater judgment.’ They covet even more avidly the highly visible ‘first seats’ of those called priests. Indeed, however, even they do not put as much effort into their scheming as those who are called bishops, the ones who love ‘being called Right Reverend by men.’ It is they who ought most clearly to understand that a bishop is to be ‘above reproach’ and so on,⁴²⁴ so that he would be called ‘bishop’ not by men [only] but rather before God.”⁵

Then, early church preacher Chrysostom gives his input: “Everything Jesus accused them of was small and trifling. Yet He was dealing with the cause of all the evils: ambition, the violent seizing of the teacher’s chair, and so on. These He brings forward and corrects with diligence, confronting this strongly and earnestly charging them. His own disciples needed to be warned about these matters.”⁶ As a minister or teacher, it is one thing to seek honor and recognition in order to elevate oneself, but it is another to receive honor which then can be attributed to the One who is responsible for our calling and anointing. This was the apostle Paul’s goal,⁷ and it should always be ours.

Verse 8: “But you must not be called Rabbis. You are all equal as brothers and sisters. You have only one Rabbi.”

So much for the Pharisees and other religious leaders, now our Lord focuses on His followers. The force of the original language here seems to place the emphasis upon title-seeking for ego’s sake, and not to do the job itself. Jesus doesn’t say “Do not seek to become a teacher,” but rather He simply admonishes them, “Do not seek to be called, teacher,” in the sense that you now have no one above you or anyone you need to consult with; as though you are the original source of this knowledge and wisdom.

This hints at the real sin involved; the search for recognition, for acknowledgment sake; to gain fame, popularity, esteem, exaltation and accolades for what one has made of themselves, rather than for what God has made them. In seminary, I often heard it said of some of my fellow seminarians, “They are here for the degree, not the education.”

If credit for hard work and study result in being appointed to help others gain greater understanding and knowledge about our Lord and our faith, there is no reason to shun the position of a teacher, as long as God gets all the credit and acclaim. Having worked with many Jewish Rabbis, I have come to the conclusion that this title today is more equivalent to the Christian term “Reverend,” than someone who claims to be a scholar and whose words cannot be challenged.

Verse 9: “And don’t call anyone on earth ‘Father.’ You have one Father. He is in heaven.”

Now, when our Lord forbids calling anyone “Father,” it is obvious He was not talking about the human term for a male parent. It would have been hard to explain away all the scriptures that speak of honoring one’s father. In seminary studies, it is part of the curriculum to study about the early church fathers. But Jesus was aiming at another use of the word “Father” that was use often applied to someone who was seen as a holy and wise interpreter of Scripture.

Three early church scholars had some interesting things to say about these titles, especially as it was understood in their day. For instance, Origen offered this commentary: “You have one teacher, and you are all brothers to each other. For you have been born anew, not only from water but also from the spirit, and you have received the spirit of adoption, so that it might be said of you that you were “born not of the flesh, nor of the will of man” but from God.⁸ It is hard to imagine this being said of anyone or any son until now. You do not call anyone on earth ‘Father’ in the sense that you say ‘our Father’ of the One who gives all things through all ages and according to the divine plan. Whoever ministers with the divine word does not put himself forward to be called ‘teacher,’ for he knows that when he performs well it is Christ who is within him. He should only call himself “servant” according to the command of Christ, saying, ‘Whoever is greater among you, let him be the servant of all.’⁹”¹⁰

Then we read in Chrysostom’s sermon on these verses where Jesus says: “You are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brothers.” Chrysostom comments: “This is why Paul says, ‘For who is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers?’¹¹ — not masters. Again, ‘call no man your father.’ This is said in order that they may know whom they ought to call Father in the highest sense. It is not said frivolously as if no one should ever be called father. Just as the human master is not the divine Master, so neither is the father the Father who is the cause of all, both of all masters and of all fathers.”¹²

And finally, Jerome gives his interpretation: “No one should be called teacher or father¹³ except God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ. He alone is the Father because all things are from Him. He alone is the teacher because through Him are made all things and through Him, all things are reconciled to God. But one might ask, ‘Is it against this precept when the apostle calls himself the teacher of the Gentiles? Or when, as in colloquial speech widely found in the monasteries of Egypt and Palestine, they call each other Father?’ Remember this distinction. It is one thing to be a father or a teacher by nature, another to be so by generosity. For when we call a man father and reserve the honor of his age, we may thereby be failing to honor the Author of our own lives. One is rightly called a teacher only from his association with the true Teacher. I repeat: The fact that we have one God and one Son of God through nature does not prevent others from being understood as sons of God by adoption. Similarly, this does not make the terms father and teacher useless or prevent others from being called father.”¹⁴

Verses 10-11: “And you should not be called ‘masters.’ You have only one Master, the Messiah. Whoever serves you like a servant is the greatest among you.”

What our Lord opposed most was anyone setting themselves up with scriptural authority over others so that they became dependent on them to interpret doctrines and ordinances instead of teachers who helped those to learn who came to them for help and instruction. This was often done to bring honor to themselves. It also put their words above the words of the law and the Bible. Thus, such devotees would no longer seek God for help and guidance, they would simply depend on the word of man.

For instance, in the Jewish Mishnah we read: “If all the sages of Israel were in one scale of the balance and Eliezer ben Hyrcanus in the other, he would outweigh them all. Abba Shaul, however, said in his name: If all the sages of Israel, together with Eliezer ben Hyrcanus were in one scale of the balance, Elazar ben Arach would outweigh them.”¹⁵ Jesus also forbids them accepting the title “Master.” The Greek word used here also means “guide,” or “teacher.” But it also applied to those who “mastered it over others.”

We find such a reference in Latin writings: “From the time that Rome mastered the whole of Italy she was emboldened to aspire to govern all mankind, and after driving from off the sea the Carthaginians, whose maritime strength was superior to that of all others, and subduing Macedonia, which until then was reputed to be the most powerful nation on land, she no longer had as rival any nation either barbarian or Greek; and it is now in my day already the seventh generation that she has continued to hold sway over every region of the world, and there is no nation, as I can see, that disputes her universal dominion or protests against being ruled by her.”¹⁶

In the Jewish community, this word was associated with “Rabbi.” According to Jewish resources, in the Jewish synagogues (schools) in Palestinian, the sages were addressed as “Rabbi” (my master). Jesus was not prohibiting these titles of respect to denigrate His followers, but rather that they not be tempted into thinking themselves better than anyone else, especially their brethren and fellow believers.

Chrysostom had this message for those who might misinterpret Jesus’ used of the word “one.” He says: “Previously when Jesus had asked, ‘What do you think of the Christ?’ it is worth noting that He did not say, ‘What do you think of me?’ So it is here that He says you have one master, and He does not make this subjective by saying ‘me’ but ‘the Christ.’ Yet note that this passage repeatedly speaks of the one master, the one teacher, repeatedly applying the term one. Does this term apply to the Father alone so as to reject the only begotten Son? Is the Father a guide? All would agree, and none would challenge it. And yet ‘one,’ He says, ‘is your guide, even Christ.’ For just as Christ, being called the one guide, does not cast out the Father from being guide, even so, the Father, being called Master, does not cast out the Son from being Master. For the expression ‘one’ is spoken in contradistinction to the human way of speaking and within the rest of the creation.”¹⁷

This is another way of saying that no matter how many we may have among us whose learning and studies have put them above the peers as experts on interpreting God’s Word as it relates to knowing the original languages and understanding the context through historical examination, in the end, there is only One who ranks above all others and that is God Himself. And as His children, He is the One we call Father in the sense that He is the head of our family.