Down an Unfamiliar Road

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-TWO

Part XIII

Verse 46 (Con’t): In Isaiah, we find the following verses, “Family of David, listen very carefully! Is it not enough that you would test the patience of humans? Will you now test the patience of my God? But the Lord will still show you this sign: The young woman will become pregnant and will give birth to a son. She will name Him, Immanuel.”¹ Then Isaiah adds this, “This will happen when that special child is born. God will be giving us a son who will be responsible for leading His people. His name will be ‘Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Father of Eternity, Prince of Peace.’”² The prophet goes on, “This branch will grow from Jesse’s roots. The Lord’s Spirit will always be with this new king to give him wisdom, understanding, guidance, and power. The Spirit will help Him know and respect the Lord. He will find joy in obeying the Lord.”³ These verses have been accepted by Christians and many Jews as a clear reference to the Messiah and was fulfilled by none other than Jesus of Nazareth.

Then according to Jeremiah, “When He rules, Judah will be saved, and Israel will live in safety. This will be His name: Adonai Tzidkenu [ADONAI does what’s right].⁴ To this Ezekiel adds: “Then I, the LORD, will be their God, and my servant David will be the ruler living among them. I, the LORD, have spoken.”⁵ So we can see why the Jews waited so expectantly for this Messiah to come. However, they saw Him as a political liberator rather than a spiritual one. That’s why when the unknown prophet from Galilee showed up without riding in on a white horse followed by armed supporters, they could not imagine that He was the Messiah they were looking for.

The early church fathers had their opinions on the outcome of this one-sided discussion since it appears that all the opponents of Jesus could do was ask questions. And even though Jesus gave them answers, they themselves had no answers to His questions. For instance, Origen writes: “The reason they dared not to ask Him even another word was this, that having been asked themselves, they could not respond. For if their question had come from a desire to learn, then they would never have proposed their questions to Him. They dared not ask Him anything now. For they were asking Him only as tempters, and for this reason, He chose to confuse them by their own question so that, blushing, they might back away from His directness and thereafter ask Him nothing further.”⁶

Origen makes a good point here. If these people had come to really learn something from Jesus about the subjects they had in mind, they would not have asked them in such a way as to trick Him into saying something they could then ridicule. Early church theologian Jerome makes this same point: “The Pharisees and Sadducees had been looking for an opportunity for deceiving Him, looking to find some word that might be taken advantage of by the plotters. Yet they had been totally confounded in their conversations. So they asked nothing further. What did they do then? All they could do was turn Him over to the custody of the Roman authorities. From this, we learn that the faults of the jealous are indeed able to be overcome but are difficult to put to rest.”⁷ But this should not surprise us. After all, look what happened to Satan when he tried to trick our Lord during His time in the wilderness. He was not successful then, nor was he successful when he inspired these critics to do the same.

So as we can see, the Pharisees were quick to answer that everyone knew the Messiah would be a descendant of king David. Then came the hook. Our Master quoted from the Psalms.⁸ We must take into consideration that the Jews’ understanding of the Messiah during the time Jesus was here on earth had undergone a transition from what they read in the book of Isaiah. In the prayer, by Hannah, the mother of the prophet Samuel, we find a clue as to what they understood the role of this Messiah to be, “The LORD will judge even the lands that are far away. He will give power to His king. He will make His Anointed One strong.”⁹

Jewish scholars tell us, it was after the fall of the Maccabean dynasty, when the despotic government of Herod the Great and his family, and the increasing tyranny of the Roman empire had made their condition ever more unbearable, that the Jews sought refuge in the hope of a personal Messiah. They yearned for the promised deliverer of the house of David, who would free them from the yoke of the hated foreign power, would put an end to the godless Roman rule, and would establish His own reign of peace and justice in its place. In this way, their hopes became gradually centered in a desperately needed Messiah.

As evidence that in the Roman period the Messianic hope had become universal among the Jews may be adduced from what Flavius Josephus had to say: “That then should their city be taken, as well as their holy house, when once their temple should become firmly established…about that time, one from their country should become governor of the habitable earth.”¹⁰ And Roman historian Tacitus, who made note that, “Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus,”¹¹ also spoke of the Jews fascination with a divine deliverer, “There had been seen hosts joining battle in the skies, the fiery gleam of arms, the Temple illuminated by a sudden radiance from the clouds. The doors of the inner shrine were suddenly thrown open, and a voice of more than mortal tone was heard to cry that the gods were departing. At the same instant, there was a mighty stir as of departure. Some few put a fearful meaning on these events, but in most there was a firm persuasion, that in the ancient records of their priests was contained a prediction of how at this very time the East was to grow powerful, and rulers, coming from Judaea, were to acquire universal empire.”¹²

Even Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus, commonly known as Suetonius, a Roman historian who lived from circa 59-122 AD, writing about Vespasian,¹³ made the following observation, “A firm persuasion had long prevailed through all the East, that it was fated for the empire of the world, at that time, to designate some who should go forth from Judaea. This prediction referred to a Roman emperor, as the event showed; but the Jews, applying it to themselves, broke out into rebellion, and having defeated and slain their governor, routed the lieutenant of Syria, a man of consular rank, who was advancing to his assistance, and took an eagle, the standard, of one of his legions.”¹⁴ Also in the heart of the Jewish prayer life, we find this prayer, “The offspring of your servant David may you speedily cause to flourish, and enhance his pride through Your salvation, for we hope for Your salvation all day long. Blessed are you, HaShem,¹⁵ Who causes the pride of salvation to flourish.”¹⁶

So Jesus’ question about whose Son the Messiah would be, had to be processed by these Pharisees with all these views in mind. However, although they did answer correctly that it would be a descendant of David, they were looking for someone totally different than Jesus of Nazareth. So the question is, if this, was in fact, David’s son, then why does David call his son, Lord? Had the Pharisees been thinking of the person of the Messiah on a spiritual basis, they may have seen the light. But they were contemplating the person of the Messiah on a human basis.

Therefore, as a descendant of David, the true Messiah would come to sit on David’s throne and from there rule Judea and eventually the whole world. There were looking for someone to be a successful and victorious prince, coming to deliver them out of the hands of their temporal enemies. But if He were David’s son, then how could David see Him as someone higher, someone divine? This is what puzzled them. How could a human king like David, be the forebearer of a divine king called the Messiah?

Matthew says the Pharisees were at a loss for words. As a matter of fact, from that day forward none of His opponents dared ask Him any more questions. No doubt, for fear of being embarrassed again and made to look like blind men trying to lead the blind. Job experienced a similar situation, as his friend Elihu pointed out to him, “Job, these men lost the argument. They don’t have anything more to say. They don’t have any more answers. I waited for them to answer you. But now they are quiet. They stand there with nothing more to say.”¹⁷

This point in Matthew’s Gospel account is a critical turning point in the life of Jesus. From here on He will walk in the shadow of the cross waiting for Him up on Calvary’s brow, beckoning Him to come as the Lamb of God to be slain so that His blood can be used as the atonement for the sins of all who believe. This will influence His actions and words from now on until He quietly enters the room where the disciples are hiding for fear of the Jewish authorities, and says confidently to them, “Peace be with you!”¹⁸

1 Isaiah 7:14

2 Ibid. 9:6

3 Ibid. 11:1-3

4 Jeremiah 23:6 – Complete Jewish Bible

5 Ezekiel 34:24

6 Origen: Commentary on Matthew 5

7 Jerome: Commentary on Matthew 4.22.46

8 Psalm 110:1

9 I Samuel 2:10, (cf. Daniel 7:25)

10 Flavius Josephus, Wars of the Jews, Bk. 6, Ch. 5:4

11 Tacitus, The Annuals, Bk. 15

12 Tacitus, The Histories, Bk. 5:13

13 Vespasian was Roman emperor from 69 – 79 AD who besieged Jerusalem during the Jewish rebellion in 66 AD, some 30 years following the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus.

14 C. Suetonius Tranquillus, The Lives of the Twelve Caesars, T. Flavius Vespasianus Agustus, IV

15 HaShem is Hebrew meaning, “The Name,” which was substituted for the real name for God which the Jews feared to repeat in order to prevent them from saying His name in vain.

16 Amidah, Blessing #15, For the Messianic King

17 Job 32:15-16

18 Luke 24:36

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-TWO

Part XII

When it comes to treating our neighbor as ourselves, one Jewish commentator adds this: “While on the subject of what may have caused ill feeling in the first place, the Torah outlaws not only that one reacts by committing similar acts by taking revenge, but forbids even holding a grudge against such a person, or pointing out to him how righteous one is by not acting as he has done. Not only must one not harbor negative feelings against one’s fellow, but (as a general rule) one must strive to love one’s peers in a manner that shows one considers his peer’s personal interests as just as dear to one as he does himself.”¹

Yet, in the 613 positive and negative laws of the Old Testament that the Jews call their Mitzvot,² we find number 26, which, based on this scripture, states: “To love all human beings who are of the covenant.” The great Jewish teacher Maimonides in his listing places it as number 206 with this qualifier: “To love every member of our people.” We know from the Bible and many Jewish writings, what the Jews thought of Gentiles and Samaritans, so it would only be natural that they took Jesus’ statement here to mean loving their fellow Jews. So all 613 laws are reduced to two. Then our Lord explains why:

Verse 40: “All of the law and the writings of the prophets take their meaning from these two commands.”

The Aramaic Version renders verse 40 this way: “On these two commandments hang the Torah and the prophets.” In other words, from these two commandments all other laws, rules, guidelines, principles, etc., expressed in the written and verbal law, draw their strength. After all, as one venerated Rabbi used to say: “By three things is the world sustained: By the Law, by the Temple-service; and by deeds of loving-kindness.”³ So a summation of the whole Law into two or three was not new. That’s why there was no immediate rejection from Jesus’ listeners. In this case, Jesus was saying that by keeping these two commandments, a person in effect keeps all others.

So as we can see, that all these opponents of Jesus were trying their luck at tripping Jesus with trick questions. Even today, believers are faced with the same issues, when confronted with what are called: “paradoxical questions.” The problem with such inquiries is that they contain a logical fallacy based on a false preposition fueled by a false presumption. One of the most famous was pointed out by the apostle Paul to Titus concerning the saying of the Greek poet, Epimenides who said: “All Cretans are liars.”¹ Since Epimenides was himself a Cretan, therefore we could say that he was a liar, and what he said was untrue. However, if in fact, all Cretans were liars, then what Epimenides said was true. As you can see, there may be no way to find the answer to such questions.

While in the military, I was confronted in the hallway one day by a fellow soldier who was very critical of born-again Christians. He asked me quite loudly, so his fellow soldiers in a nearby room could hear him, “Do you believe there is nothing impossible with God?” I answered quickly, “Absolutely!” Then he said, “So, can God make a rock so big He can’t lift it?” I paused for a moment, and then the Holy Spirit gave me this to say. “Your question is limited to this earth. If God can lift this whole planet, then certainly He can lift any rock on this planet because there is no gravity out in space.” I heard laughter coming from inside the room. He smiled and said to me, “Seyda, you’re good!” and walked away.

These critics wanted Jesus to choose one law over another so that they could accuse Him of being narrow- minded. But Jesus turns the tables on them by giving them commandments from Deuteronomy,⁴ and Leviticus,⁵ in a way that forced them to agree that all other laws were covered by these two. This they had no interest in doing because both of these are commandments were from God Himself. Jesus knew that their attitude was similar to that of Ephraim in the Old Testament where God confessed: “Even if I wrote 10,000 laws for Ephraim, he would treat them as if they were for somebody else.”⁶ But this time, Jesus decided it was His turn. So our Lord poses a Messianic question for His detractors.

Verses 41-42: So while the Pharisees were standing there, Jesus asked them a question. He said, “What do you think about the Messiah? Whose Son is He?” The Pharisees answered, “The Messiah is the Son of David.”

Chrysostom shares the following thought in a sermon on this text: “Remember how many miracles have preceded this dialogue—after how many signs, after how many questions, after how great a display of His union with the Father in deeds as well as in words—now Jesus asks His own question. After so many previous events, He is now quietly leading them to the point of confessing that He is God. He does this so that they may not be able to say that He is an adversary to the law and a foe to God, even though He has worked mighty miracles.”⁷ It seems clear that once these Pharisees, Sadducees, scribes, and Herodians made up their minds to reject Jesus’ claim of being sent from God, they stubbornly closed their eyes, ears, and hearts to any truth that might be presented to them.

Chrysostom has more to say: “With His own disciples…He had asked first what the others say and only then what they themselves say. But in this case, He did not proceed in this way. For surely they would have said a deceiver and a wicked one, speaking all things without fear. So for this cause, He inquires directly for the opinion of these men themselves.”⁸ This was another way of our Lord saying to them: I’ve told you what I think, so now I want to let you tell me what you think.

Chrysostom concludes: “For since, He was now about to go on to His Passion, He sets forth the prophecy that plainly proclaims Him to be Lord. It is not as if the call to confession has emerged without any precipitating occasion, or from no reasonable cause or as if he had this as His prior aim. For He had already brought the issue to their attention, and they had answered that He was a mere man, in opposition to the truth. Now He is overthrowing their mistaken opinion. This is why He introduces David into the discussion, that His true identity and divinity might be more clearly recognized. For they had supposed that He was a mere man, yet they also say that the Christ is ‘the Son of David.’ Hence He now brings in the prophetic testimony to His being Lord, and to the genuineness of His sonship and His equality in honor with His Father.⁹”¹⁰

Verse 43-45: Jesus said to them, “Then why did David call Him ‘Lord’? David was speaking by the power of the Spirit when he said, ‘The LORD God said to my Lord: Sit next to me on my right side, and I will put your enemies under your control.’ David calls the Messiah ‘Lord,’ so how can he be David’s son?”

One Medieval Rabbi answers the question this way: “Our Rabbis interpreted it as referring to Abraham our father, and I shall explain it according to their words: ‘The word of the Lord to Abraham, whom the world called “my master,” as it is written¹¹: “Hearken to us, my master.’”¹² A German polemic Jewish writer adds his view: “The truth is that David said this passage about himself. Its meaning, then, is as follows: The Lord said unto me concerning my lord Saul who was pursuing me, ‘Sit at my right hand and I shall make your enemy Saul your footstool.’”¹³

In fact, one Jewish Targum (paraphrase) of this verse is as follows: “The Lord said in His decree to make me lord of all Israel, but He said to me, ‘Wait still for Saul of the tribe of Benjamin to die, for one reign must not encroach on another; and afterwards I will make your enemies a prop for your feet.’” Another Targum: “The Lord spoke by His decree to give me the dominion in exchange for sitting in study of Torah. ‘Wait at my right hand until I make your enemies a prop for your feet.’” Another Targum has: “The Lord said in his decree to appoint me ruler over Israel, but the Lord said to me, ‘Wait for Saul of the tribe of Benjamin to pass away from the world; and afterwards you will inherit the kingship, and I will make your enemies a prop for your feet.’”

But Jesus was interested in what they thought of David talking to the Messiah who is supposed to be his future son, and telling his future son to sit next to him. Now this is what they said, not what Jesus said. So He is trying to clarify their words. So what did they have to say?

Verse 46: None of the Pharisees could answer Jesus’ question. And after that day, no one was brave enough to ask Him any more questions.

But, our anonymous German polemic writer was not about to let Christians think that Jesus could be considered for the role of the Messiah that David was referring to. He tells of a Rabbi Solomon son of Abun who used to answer Christians who made that argument using this verse. Rabbi Solomon stated: “The [heavenly] Father told His Son [Jesus], ‘Sit at my right hand in heaven and don’t descend among your enemies the Jews until I destroy them, subdue them and make them a footstool for you.’ But the Son, i.e., the hanged one, was a wayward and defiant Son who did not obey His Father and descended in defiance of His will. The father, then, in His anger, caused the Jews to judge Him as a wayward and defiant son should be judged, indeed, the Jews are sons of prophets and knew that this is what He actually was, and so they killed Him for violating His Father’s command. When, however, they were unable to carry out the precise sentence of a wayward and defiant Son because of His sorcery, they carried out the sentence mentioned in an adjoining verse: ‘If a man is guilty of a capital offense and is put to death, and you hang him on a tree, [his body is not to remain all night on the tree, but you must bury him the same day, because a person who has been hanged has been cursed by God]¹⁴. . .”¹⁵

What this skeptic fails to see is that Jesus did not die as punishment for His defiance of God, but He died on the cross to save all those who are defiant before God. He was not sacrificed on the cross as part of His death sentence, but to remove the death sentence of sin of all who believe. And in so doing, He was not going against His Father’s will, but doing the will of His Father. There are several other factors behind the question Jesus submits to the Pharisees.

1 See Titus 1:10-14

2 Tzror Hamor, op. cit., Leviticus 9:17-18: Kedoshim, p. 1394

Sir Benjamin Disraeli (1804-1881), a British politician, novelist, essayist, and twice Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, was speaking before parliament on Tuesday, January 24, 1860, concerning an earlier address by the Queen. In his speech, he made this statement: “It is much easier to be critical than to be correct.

How often have we felt that same impulse to criticize when we hear someone misspeak during a speech, or an athlete make a bad play or a singer forget the lyrics to a well-known song? Our disapproval can either be based on the fact that we don’t like inconsistencies when someone is given such a public stage, or that we are so intent on wanting to see them do it right that we feel disappointed when they fail.

Many times, our response is based on perception rather than facts. Most of us who’ve watched the Olympics know that the judges are very strict, especially in the diving competition and gymnastics. But often, we are informed by a personal story of what those athletes went through to get to where they are. Some overcame severe illnesses, horrible accidents, poor living conditions, or other disadvantages. So often we find ourselves upset when those Olympic judges ignore such facts because they are always looking for perfection.

So the next time you feel the compulsion to speak out against what someone said or did that you think was wrong, first get the facts. You may learn that they were trying to do their best, not being their worst. And always keep this in mind: Just as you are watching them, they are watching you. So if you want them to be understanding when you make a mistake, try to be as equally understanding when they make an error. – Dr. Robert R Seyda

A TIME OF CRISIS

[I wrote this article some three years ago, and after reviewing it I wanted to share it with you again.]

What would you do if you were suddenly assigned the task of leading a large group of people out of being disconcerted, upset, downhearted, hard-headed, and wanting to give up and throw in the towel to defeat? Your success or failure would have a major impact on you as a leader, on your family, on your friends, and on those who are counting on you. Furthermore, you’ve never done anything quite like this before, especially with this magnitude.

Say you are a pastor, youth leader, group leader, Sunday school teacher, church administrator, Lay leader, or serve in any host of positions where strong and dedicated leadership is needed to move forward toward the goal God has placed in front of you. But you know it will not be easy; you also know that not everyone will respond enthusiastically to your leadership and may even try to discourage you.

Well, that’s what happened a long time ago to a spiritual leader named Moses. God had given him the assignment to take the children of Israel on to the Promised Land now that they had escaped the slavery of Egypt. But even more shockingly, God told Moses to do it on his own, that He was not going along because if He did the stubbornness and rebelliousness of the people might cause Him to destroy them.¹ But in fairness, God also told Moses that He would send angels ahead of him to defeat all their enemies.

So Moses had to consider either turning God down and refusing to take the chance or going ahead with the risk. If he succeeded, it would make him look like a champion with streets, buildings, and statues named after him. Instead, Moses took another route. He went to God and said without any equivocation: If you don’t personally go with us, then I refuse to go! After all, these are Your people, and You are the one who called me, and this is what You want for them.²

God was so moved, that He vowed right then and there to Moses that His presence would go with him every step of the way and that He would ensure Moses complete peace of mind by always being right by his side. What a lesson for all of us when called on to lead. Regardless of how much we may know and no matter how many plans we make and how much consultation and guarantees we may get from others, we must be absolutely resolute that we will not take one step forward unless God’s presence goes with us each step of the way. – Dr. Robert R Seyda

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-TWO

Part X

There is a story told by the Jewish fathers about a woman whose husband dedicated his life to the reading and studying of God’s Word. But he died suddenly in middle age. So she made the rounds visiting synagogues and study houses asking all the Sages and Rabbis: “My husband studied much Scripture and studied much Mishnah and listened to many scholars. Why did he die in middle age?” We are then told: “There was not one person who could answer her.”¹ Apparently, this woman was taught that constant reading of Scripture would guarantee a long and healthy life. So in other words, she wanted to know what law did he miss or what law did he not obey that cost him his life so early? They had no answer because the One who both gives and takes life did not consider how much time this individual spent in reading and studying the Scriptures as having any influence on when a person dies. Therefore, one’s hope for everlasting life cannot depend solely upon what an individual does, but what on an individual believes.

From what Matthew tells us, the Pharisees were so impressed by Jesus’ knowledge and interpretation of the Torah that they were curious to find out what He believed to be the most significant law to be observed. On the other hand, they may have already made up their minds and wanted to see if He agreed or disagreed with them. They knew one answer that their Rabbis taught: “By observing the Sabbath as a day of rest as prescribed by the Torah, we testify to our belief in God as the Creator of the Universe, and as the only legitimate Lawgiver.”² This led many religious teachers to proclaim: “He who keeps the Sabbath is as if he kept the whole law.”³ But Jesus will take them in another direction:

Verses 37-38: Jesus answered, “Love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your mind. This is the first and most important commandment.”

When Mark recorded this incident, he notes that Jesus followed a Jewish custom of first quoting the “Shema,” which goes: “Hear, Israel, the LORD is our God, the LORD is one.”⁴ One esteemed Jewish scholar suggests that this mantra be paraphrased as follows: “Hear, O Israel the words of the Torah and its commandment, for then you will immediately realize how the LORD is our God, possessing absolute power, being the Creator who had created all existence. You will then also realize that He is our God and has displayed His might and many-faceted abilities by means of His people, by means of us the Israelites. He has done nothing like it for any of the other nations. It follows that we more than any other nation are obligated to Him.”⁵

Matthew has our Lord beginning His quote from Deuteronomy 6:5. One Jewish Version reads: “Love ADONAI your God with all your heart, all your being and all your resources,”⁶ while another translates it: “Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might.”⁷ The Greek Septuagint has: “heart, soul, and power.” One early Jewish theologian expressed his insight into this commandment by saying: “You will fear the Lord your God, and serve before Him, and swear by His Name. You shall not go after the idols of the Gentiles, the idols of the peoples who surround you (for the Lord your God is a jealous God, His Shekinah dwells among you.)”⁸ In other words, by giving the Lord all of our heart, soul, and mind, nothing is left over for the idols and gods of this world.

We see this also in the exposition of another Jewish scholar who remarks on the meaning of the words: “And you will love [the Lord].” It means: “Perform His commandments out of love. The one who acts out of love cannot be compared to the one who acts out of fear. If one serves his master out of fear, when the master sets a great burden upon him, this servant will leave him and go away [whereas if out of love he will serve him even under great burden]; with all your heart suggests: Love Him with your two inclinations [the good and the evil]. Another explanation; ‘with all your heart,’ is that your heart should not be divided [i.e., at variance] with the Omnipresent; with all your soul: Even if He takes your soul, and with all your means: with all your possessions. There are people whose possessions are more precious to them than their own bodies. Therefore, it says, ‘and with all your means.’ Another explanation is: You shall love God with whatever measure He metes out to you, whether it be the measure of good or the measure of retribution. Thus also did David say: ‘I will lift up the cup of salvation [and I will call upon the name of the Lord];’⁹ ‘I found trouble and grief [and I called out in the name of the Lord]‘¹⁰.”¹¹

According to Jewish verbal teachings, the Rabbis also explain: “With all your heart” means with your two impulses — the evil impulse, as well as the good impulse [i.e., those physical functions which may be used for sin, should also be harnessed for the service of God] “With all your soul” means even though he takes your soul [life], “With all your means” i.e., with all your money. Another explanation is with whatever measure He metes out to you [whether bad or good], still you must thank Him very, very much.”¹² Another Jewish writer adds this: “Moses the prophet said to the people of the house of Israel, Follow after the true worship of your fathers, that you may love the Lord your God with each disposition of your hearts, and also that He may accept your souls and the (dedicated) service of all your wealth.”¹³ So Jesus was not far afield from what the brightest and most intelligent Jewish teachers were saying.

One well-known Jewish commentary puts it this way: “Moses suggests that the people learn to love God as anyone performing God’s commandments out of a sense of love for Him and His Kindness will automatically not make himself and his family the center of his concerns, but will cleave to his Creator.”¹⁴ In other words, keeping the Sabbath focuses on mans’ virtues, while loving God with one’s whole being puts the emphasis on God’s virtues. But our Lord is not through:

Verse 39: “And the second command is like the first: ‘Love your neighbor the same as you love yourself.’”

Now the focus is on mankind’s virtues and ethics. Here our Lord quotes from Leviticus 19:18. In Luke’s version of this incident, someone asks Jesus to define neighbor, and Jesus tells the story of the good Samaritan.¹⁵ So we know that this was already in our Lord’s mind, that the word “neighbor” did not just mean the individual next door. It was already part of the verbal law, as it says: “The following are the things for which a man enjoys the fruits in this world, while the principal [reward is not diminished and] remains for him in the World To Come: honoring one’s father and mother, practicing charity and making peace between man and his neighbor, but the study of Torah is equal to all of them.”¹⁶

Origen adds his thoughts to what our Lord lists as the second great commandment: “The Lord Himself responds to them and teaches us. Not only is the greatest commandment to love the Lord, but as well it is the first commandment. It is first, however, not in the order of the Scriptures but in the order of virtue. And as this comes from such a source, it must be adhered to, since as with many established commands, Christ says that it is the first and greatest command that ‘you love the Lord your God with your whole heart and your whole mind and your whole soul,’ and the second, however, ‘is like unto’ the first; and accordingly, this similitude is also great, ‘that you love your neighbor as you love yourself.’ This is how we understand the second one, while another may be third in magnitude and order, or a fourth, and so in order we number the commands of the law, accepting this as wisdom from God, who orders them even to the least. Such is the task of no one else but Christ alone since He is ‘the power of God and the wisdom of God.’¹⁷”¹⁸

Bishop Cyril of Alexandria draws this conclusion: “Therefore, the first commandment teaches every kind of godliness. For to love God with the whole heart is the cause of every good. The second commandment includes the righteous acts we do toward other people. The first commandment prepares the way for the second and in turn is established by the second. For the person who is grounded in the love of God clearly also loves his neighbor in all things himself. The kind of person who fulfills these two commandments experiences all the commandments.”¹⁹

From this, we can conclude, that what Jesus is pointing out with this two-fold commandment is that no true believer can adhere to one without adhering to the other. In other words, it is impossible to love the Lord with all one’s heart, soul, mind, and strength and not love their neighbor as themselves. Likewise, to love one’s neighbor as themselves is another way of loving God wholeheartedly. So the real question for us today is: Why are so many who call themselves children of God living a double life by claiming adherence to the one commandment but not practicing the other?

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-TWO

Part IX

Verse 33: When the people heard this, they were amazed at Jesus’ teaching.

In a campaign speech given in California by former US President William Jefferson Clinton, Investor’s Business Daily, October 25, 1996. quoted him as saying: “The last time I checked, the Constitution said, ‘of the people, by the people, and for the people.’ That’s what the Declaration of Independence says.” The truth is, that is not what the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution says. It is part of the “Gettysburg Address” by President Abraham Lincoln on Thursday, November 19, 1882. In the same fashion, the religious leaders who confronted Jesus often misquoted what the Law said and our Lord was always ready to point out their errors.

Likewise, the Sadducees came with what they considered a superior knowledge of the Scriptures than this carpenter’s son from Nazareth in Galilee. But the Word Himself quickly proved He knew the Scriptures better than they did. Since the Sadducees did not believe in life after death, when Jesus told them that they were misinterpreting the Scriptures, it wouldn’t surprise me if He had this prophecy from Daniel in mind, “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. The wise people will shine as bright as the sky. Those who teach others to live right will shine like stars forever and ever.”¹ And who could miss the famous words in Hosea: “I will save them from the grave. I will rescue them from death. O Death, where are your diseases? O Grave, where is your power?”²

Furthermore, by not believing in the resurrection they were also questioning God’s power. After all, what did the great prophet Jeremiah say, “LORD God, with your great power you made the earth and the sky. There is nothing too hard for you to do.”³ Our Lord answered the Sadducees by using the Scriptures which they could not dispute because they were considered holy writ. What really scolded their attitudes was that Jesus was more or less saying since God is the God of resurrection if you don’t believe in the resurrection you don’t believe in God.

Jesus could not accept that these so-called religious wise men did not know what Job said about the resurrection;⁴ and what Daniel had to say.⁵ When Jesus told them there would be no marriage in heaven because the risen saints would be like angels, this was coming from the Son of God who was the Word. Just think about this: Marriage on earth was established so that mankind could procreate and raise their offspring in the safety and knowledge of their parents. Heaven will not be populated by human procreation, no more than the angels are produced that way. God made each angel by His own power. Likewise, each person who is resurrected from death or changed in the rapture will be considered remade by God. They did not remake themselves by way of human reproduction.

To this, our Lord adds the words of His heavenly Father: “I am the God of your father. I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.”⁶ By adding Moses’ father, Amram, to this list of names, one Jewish commentator says: “Amram, was honored by being mentioned first due to his humble son who had hidden his face from the spectacle, not feeling worthy of being addressed by God, even through an angel.”⁷ This statement quoted by Jesus is in the present tense, thereby indicating that God is still Isaac’s God. Predicated on that, we must conclude that since God is ever present yet never ending, then Isaac must also be such, otherwise, God would not be His God anymore.

Interesting to note here, if we place a comma after “I am,” making it the divine appellation, “I AM,” it still retains the same meaning, but adds to the eternal belief that Abraham’s God is the real living God that we all serve. No wonder the multitude was astonished to hear that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were alive and existed somewhere! Even though Jesus was discussing the resurrection, it appears that they were of the mind that only after the resurrection would these patriarchs once again be as alive as they were when they actually lived on earth. However, Jesus has given them a clear truth: once we are separated from our dead bodies our spirits still live on.

There has been a lot of debate about where human spirits will spend their time awaiting the resurrection where they will face the judgment seat of God. For the believer, we can be assured, whether we are alive in the body or separated from our body by death, we will all be changed, in a split second when the Messiah comes in the clouds to rapture us all away together at the same time. So, what does it matter where our spirits will rest until that day? The important thing is, that we will not be forgotten on resurrection day. But this debate still wasn’t over.

Verses 34-36: The Pharisees learned that Jesus had made the Sadducees look so foolish that they stopped trying to argue with Him. So the Pharisees called another meeting. Then one of them, an expert in the Law of Moses, asked Jesus a question to test Him. He said, “Teacher, which command in the law is the most important?”

In your mind’s eye, can you see the Pharisees going off to the side and huddling while they discuss their strategy on how to stump this prophet from Galilee? He always puts it back on them and leaves them standing with empty mouths because of their empty minds. To just walk away now would be to admit defeat. So they were determined to keep trying until they could point to some successful mastery over this non-certified teacher.

After discussing the matter, the Pharisees decide to make one more attempt. This is the last inquiry by the religious opponents of Jesus in this series. It started out with a religious question: “Tell us! What authority do you have to do these things you are doing? Who gave you this authority?”⁸ Then it proceeded to a political question: “So tell us what you think. Is it right to pay taxes to Caesar or not?”⁹ This was followed by a theological question: “But all seven men had married her. So when people rise from death, whose wife will she be?”¹⁰ Now we have a legal question: “Teacher, which command in the law is the most important?”

This was by far the hardest one. After all, there were all the written laws, followed by the verbal laws. However, it seems as though these Pharisees were looking for an answer regarding the Laws of Moses because the verbal laws were established by Rabbis, many of whom they disagreed with. But the Laws of Moses were given by God, and they covered legal, moral, and ceremonial issues. Knowing and following these laws were very important.

Early church apologist Bishop Cyril had this to say: “After the humiliation of the Sadducees Jesus was highly regarded by the crowds. The Pharisees, filled with envy out of an immeasurable shamelessness, again were testing Him, hypocritically asking if He might deliver a ruling concerning the first commandment. By doing so, perhaps Jesus would amend the commandment in a manner that might lead to an accusation against Him. Now, Matthew and Luke call the person who asked the question a lawyer, while Mark calls him a teacher of the law. This does not indicate a disagreement.¹¹ For they both represent the questioner as one learned in the law and as a teacher of the law who is an interpreter of the law to the people. But the Lord publicly reveals their evil. They were not coming to have Him interpret the law so that they might benefit but because they were seized by envy. So Jesus teaches that one should not measure out one’s devotion, loving God in part but also clinging in part to the concerns of this world. Through His teaching, Jesus said that His commandment was the summary of all the commandments. The lawyer thought He could cast Jesus into danger as one who makes Himself out to be God. Jesus failed to respond in the manner he expected, but he ends up praising Jesus, as Mark says.¹²”¹³

Early church scholar Origen gives us his commentary on this last question. He writes: “Now let us consider one argument of entrapment. He calls Jesus “teacher” trying to entrap Him since he offers his thoughts, not as a disciple of Christ. This, however, will be clearer from an example we now offer. Consider: The father of a son is indeed the father, and no one else is able to call him father except the son; the mother of a daughter is indeed her mother, and no one else can call her mother except her own daughter. And so the teacher of a disciple is indeed his teacher, and the disciple of a teacher is truly His disciple. As a result, no one is able to say “teacher” properly except a disciple. And see how, on account of this, that not all who call Him teacher do so appropriately but only those who have a desire to learn from Him. He said to His disciples, ‘You call me teacher and lord, and rightly so, for so I am.’¹⁴ Therefore disciples of Christ properly indeed address Him as teacher, and by this word from the Lord Himself His servants rightly call Him Lord.”¹⁵

Origen also makes a salient point by showing how this lawyer tried to disarm Jesus by flattering Him with the term Rabbi. Origen goes on to say this to his readers: “Thus the apostle spoke well when he said, ‘Yet for us, there is one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and for whom we exist.’¹⁶ And consider what he says, ‘It is enough for the disciple to be’ not simply like a teacher but ‘like his teacher.”¹⁷ Therefore, if anyone does not learn something from this word or surrender himself with his whole heart, in order to become his delightful dwelling place but still calls him ‘teacher,’ he is brother to the Pharisees attempting to entrap Christ while calling him ‘teacher.’ And so all who say ‘Our Father who art in heaven’ ought not to have ‘the spirit of slavery in fear but a spirit of the adoption of sons.’¹⁸ However, whoever does not have ‘the spirit of adoption of sons’ and yet says ‘Our Father who art in heaven’ is lying, since he is not a son of God while calling God his father.”¹⁹

How true this is even today. Not everyone who bows their head and begins reciting the Lord’s Prayer by saying, “Our Father,” is truly a child of God. For any person to walk up to a man and address him as “father”, they can only do so if they were born from that man’s seed. That’s why, anyone professing to be a believer who calls God, “Father,” can only do so if they have been born again by His grace, through His Son. Perhaps this can explain why so many who erroneously call God, “Father,” never get an answer.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-TWO

Part VIII

Verse 30: “After the resurrection takes place, there will be no marriage or men and women. Instead, everyone will be like the angels in heaven.”

This was not a new theology. Jewish Rabbis taught the same thing. One of their most respected Rabbis repeated a tradition that was already extant in Jesus’ day and made it one of his favorite sayings. It went: “[The future world is not like this world.] In the future world there is no eating nor drinking nor procreation nor business nor jealousy nor hatred nor competition, but the righteous sit with their crowns on their heads feasting on the brightness of the divine presence, as it says, And they beheld God and did eat and drink.¹”²

This Jewish concept extended into the Middle Ages, as we can see from this commentary: “In the world to come, there is no body or physical form, only the souls of the righteous alone, without a body, like the ministering angels. Since there is no physical form, there is neither eating, drinking, nor any of the other bodily functions of this world like sitting, standing, sleeping, death, sadness, laughter, and the like. Thus, the Sages of the previous ages declared: ‘In the world to come, there is neither eating, drinking, nor sexual relations. Rather, the righteous will sit with their crowns on their heads and delight in the radiance of the Divine Presence.’ From that statement, it is clear that there is no body, for there is no eating or drinking. [Consequently,] the statement, ‘the righteous sit,’ must be interpreted metaphorically, i.e., the righteous exist there without work or labor.”³ So it is possible that not only did Jesus quote from their Torah but also from their Mishnah to prove their question as baseless.

And in his perusal of all the sayings of the Jewish fathers, Rabbi Nathan made note of this: “What is recited on the seventh day [of the week]? A Psalm, a Song. For the Sabbath day:⁴ For a day which is wholly Sabbath, in which there is neither eating nor drinking nor commerce, but the righteous sit with their crowns on their heads and are nourished by the splendor of the Shekinah; as it is said, ‘And they beheld God and did eat and drink⁵ – like the ministering angels.”⁶

Not only that, but in one of their most coveted books we read: For in the heights of that world shall they dwell, and they shall be made like unto the angels, and be made equal to the stars, and they shall be changed into every form they desire, from beauty into loveliness, and from light into the splendor of glory.”⁷ Also, in their much read apocalyptic work they say: “There my eyes saw their dwelling with the Angels, and their resting places with the Holy Ones.”⁸

In other words, just like Jesus said, the resurrected saints will exist like the angels. So this was not some heretical doctrine our Lord was teaching, but something already part of the Jewish canon. Not only did Jesus debunk the Sadducees’ concept of no resurrection, but He also struck back at their disbelief in angels. This was always a part of Jewish theology, as one well-known Jewish Philosopher stated: “God, therefore, having added the good doctrine, that is Abel, to the soul, took away from it evil doctrine, that is Cain: for Abraham also, leaving mortal things, ‘is added to the people of God,’ having received immortality, and having become equal to the angels; for the angels are the host of God, being incorporeal and happy souls.”⁹

However, at the same time other Rabbis taught: “Observe when the Holy One shall raise the dead He will form bodies for them similar to what they were incarnated in during their earthly existence, whether they lived in a foreign country or in the Holy Land; for in every body there exists a mysterious bone, like unto a seed hidden in the earth, and by it the body will be formed anew at the day of resurrection.”¹⁰ This concept is certainly reflected in the teachings of the apostle Paul.¹¹

In fact, there is a legend in the Jewish commentary on Hebrew scriptures that the Roman Emperor Hadrian asked how humans would be revived in the world to come, and Rabbi Joshua Ben Hananiah replied that it would be “From Luz, in the back-bone.” “Prove this to me,” said Hadrian. Then the Rabbi took Luz, a small bone of the spine, and immersed it in water, but it was not softened; he put it into the fire, but it was not consumed; he put it into a mill, but it could not be crushed; he placed it upon an anvil and struck it with a hammer, but the anvil split and the hammer was broken.¹² So it is starting with this bone called “luz” that the new body will be formed, he exclaimed.

This brings us to the point of Christian thinking about the new body we will receive on the day of resurrection. Since there will be no eating or drinking, and procreation, it would be completely unnecessary then to think in terms of a corporeal existence. Therefore, the body made for the new world existence should be understood as something far superior to what we have in this world.

Verses 31-32a: “Surely you have read what God said to you about people rising from death. God said, ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.’”

Here our Lord repeats the words of God His father to Moses at the burning bush: “I am the God of your father,” he continued, “the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.”¹³ The Sadducees thought they had come to argue with Jesus, but now He’s telling them they are arguing with God, Moses, and God’s Word.

But Jesus was not the only one who found the Sadducees’ exegesis of Scripture to be faulty, the Jews noted that: “It has been taught: Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Jose, said: In this matter I refuted the books of the sectarians, who maintained that resurrection is not deducible from the Torah. I said to them: You have falsified your Torah, yet it has availed you nothing. For you maintain that resurrection is not a Biblical doctrine, but it is written, ‘[Because he has despised the word of the Lord, and has broken his commandment], that soul will utterly be cut off; his iniquity will be upon him.’¹⁴ Now, [seeing that] he will utterly be cut off in this world, when will his iniquity be upon him? surely in the next world.”¹⁵

Chrysostom gives us his impression of our Lord’s wise and ingenious answer to these Sadducees: “It is again by Moses that He stops their mouths. It is they who had brought forward Moses. Jesus says He is not the God of those who are not, who are utterly blotted out and rise no more. He did not say ‘I was’ but ‘I am.’ I am the God of those that are, those who live. Adam lived on the day he ate of the tree, then died in the sentence. Even though the progeny of Adam died, they live in the promise of the resurrection. How then does he say elsewhere, ‘That he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living?’¹⁶ But this is not contrary to that. For here he speaks of the dead, who are also themselves to live. Furthermore, ‘I am the God of Abraham’ is another thing from ‘That he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living.’ He knew of another death too, concerning which he says, ‘Let the dead bury their dead.’¹⁷ And when the multitudes heard this, they were astonished at his teaching. Yet not even here did He persuade the Sadducees. They go away defeated, while the crowd, with less vested interests, reaps the benefit.”¹⁸

The Jews had other scriptures that emphasized the eternal nature of God’s relationship with the patriarchs. For instance, we read: “And I fell prone and bowed down to the Lord, and the Lord with His lips said to me: Have courage, Enoch, do not fear, arise and stand before my face into eternity. And the archangel Michael lifted me up and led me to before the Lord’s face. And the Lord said to His servants tempting them: Let Enoch stand before my face into eternity, and the glorious ones bowed down to the Lord and said: Let Enoch go according to Your word. And the Lord said to Michael: Go and take Enoch from out of his earthly garments, and anoint him with my sweet ointment, and put him into the garments of My glory.”¹⁹ If God did this for Enoch, certainly He would maintain the same relationship with Abraham. The point is, had God said: “I was the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,” then that would show the relationship was over. By saying: “I am,” it means their relationship is still alive, even though their bodies were put away long ago in the tomb. This leads Jesus then to say:

Verse 32b: “Therefore, He is not the God of dead people but of living people.”

Here our Lord builds on what was already part of Jewish thinking. There is a story about Rabbi Hiyya the Elder and Rabbi Jonathan who were visiting a cemetery, and Rabbi Jonathan walked by some of the graves to get to the coffin of Rabbi Simeon bar Yose bar Leqonia. His friend Rabbi Hiyaa said, somewhat satirically, “Because of what you are doing the dead will say, ‘Tomorrow they will join us in the grave. But now they trample upon us.’ He said to him, ‘Do the dead know anything about what the living do? Is it not so written, “The dead know nothing.”²⁰ Hiyya said to him, ‘You know how to recite Scripture but you do not know how to interpret the verse:’ ‘For the living know that they will die’²¹ refers to the righteous who are called “the living” even when they are dead; and ‘the dead know nothing’²² refers to the wicked who are called ‘the dead’ even when they are alive.’”²³

So clearly, many Jews believed that even after a righteous person’s body dies, as far as God is concerned their souls are still alive. In fact, one Rabbi of the first century presented the same Scripture²⁴ that Christ cites to prove the immortality of the soul in refuting the Sadducean belief. “…for God is not the God of the dead for the dead are not; but of the living, for the living exist; therefore also the Patriarchs in respect of the soul, may rightly be inferred from hence to live.”²⁵ No doubt this is a clear reference to what Jesus called: “eternal life.” It doesn’t start at the resurrection, but as soon as a believer is born again. So then, it is the body that dies, not the spirit. That’s why Paul and the Apostles preached that those who depart their body on this earth, await in their spirit the day of resurrection. Once their spirits are awakened they will then receive a new form fit for eternity.²⁶

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-TWO

Part VII

Verse 25: “Now, there were seven brothers among us. The first brother married but died. He had no children. So his brother married the widow.”

It is possible that these Sadducees took this story from their own Mishnah where it states: “If there were two brothers and one of them died childless, and the second performed the levirate marriage with his deceased brother’s wife, and after a third brother was born the second died childless, the first [wife i.e., the widow of the first deceased brother, who is also the widow of the second], is now exempt from halitzah and levirate marriage with the third brother on account of her being the wife of his brother who was not his contemporary.”¹

So we can see that Jesus had a pat answer, but He took this occasion to teach an important lesson even though these Sadducees extended the required law to seven brothers just to make it complicated for Him. In addition, there was another factor that I’m sure both the questioners and Jesus knew was in the teaching of the Rabbis, about how long each brother must wait before they married their brother’s widow: “The deceased brother’s wife shall neither perform the halizah nor contract levirate marriage before three months have passed.”² Jewish scholars explain, this 90 day period was to protect the younger brother from getting married, only to find out that his brother’s widow was already pregnant by his deceased brother or someone else.³

Early church preacher Chrysostom has his own opinion about this story. He says: “To avoid censure for the fact that the seven brothers had one wife, they refer to Moses’ authority. However, I believe that their whole story was just fiction. For the third would not have taken her when he saw the two bridegrooms dead, or if the third, yet not the fourth or the fifth; and if even these, much more the sixth or the seventh would not have come to the woman but have shrunk from her. For such is the custom of the Jews. If they now still have this resistance, how much more did they have it then? They often avoided marrying under these circumstances, even when the law was restricting them.”⁴

Verses 26-28: “Then the second brother also died. The same thing happened to the third brother and all the other brothers. The woman was the last to die. But all seven men had married her. So when people rise from death, whose wife will she be?”

Their question involved the teaching of Moses on marriage, and the obligation that any brother who died childless, should be honored by his younger brother marrying his widow so as to bring a son into the world who might bear his name as a legacy, is reflected in the story told about Judah: “Judah chose a woman named Tamar to be the wife of his first son Er. But Er did many bad things. The Lord was not happy with him, so the Lord caused him to die. Then Judah said to Er’s brother Onan, ‘Go and sleep with your dead brother’s wife. Become like a husband to her. If children are born, they will belong to your brother Er.’”⁵

This was based on the Law given by Moses, “If two brothers live together, and one of them dies without a son, the wife of the dead man must not marry a stranger outside the family. Her husband’s brother must take her as his wife and be intimate with her. He must do the duty of a husband’s brother for her. Then the first son she has will be considered the dead man’s son in order to keep the dead man’s name alive in Israel.”⁶ However, Moses added this: If the brother refuses to cooperate, “Then the leaders of the city must call the man and talk to him. If the man is stubborn and says, ‘I don’t want to take her,’ then his brother’s wife must come to him in front of the leaders. She must take his sandal off his foot and spit in his face. She must say, ‘This is being done to the man who will not give his brother a son!’”⁷

According to Jewish customs and manners, this sandal used to slap the uncooperative brother is called a “Ḥaliẓah.” Jewish scholars say that the law given here in Deuteronomy made a change from what was given in Genesis.⁸ They teach that by the second giving of the Law, only one brother-in-law needed to perform the ceremony. The old custom of the levirate marriage,⁹ is thus modified in the Deuteronomic code by permitting the surviving brother to refuse to marry his brother’s widow, provided he submits to the ceremony of ḥaliẓah. So by knowing all of the legal twists and turns contained in this statute, it was chosen by the Sadducees as a test case just for that reason, hoping it would confuse Jesus and force Him to show His ignorance of the law.

So, between Genesis and Deuteronomy came a taboo mentioned in Leviticus: “You must not be intimate with your brother’s wife. That would be like being intimate with your brother.”¹⁰ And later,¹¹ such a forbidden union would not allow any children to be recognized. So the only exclusion from this would be if the brother married his brother’s widow in order to raise up a child in his honor as part of this “Levirate Marriage.” But Jesus had no interest in parsing words with these Sadducees. That’s why He gives a blunt and direct response.

Chrysostom puts it this way: “Watch Jesus answering these like a crafty teacher. For though they deceitfully came to Him, yet their question was one of ignorance. Therefore He does not say to them, “You hypocrites.”¹² Jesus knew that if He gave His own opinion on this subject these opponents could go away and tell others that the prophet from Galilee was making up His own rules. But our Master knew their cunning and was able to quickly outmaneuver them. The Psalmist describes Him this way: “Lord, you are faithful to those who are faithful. You are good to those who are good. You never do wrong to those who have done no wrong. But you outsmart the wicked, no matter how clever they are. You help those who are humble, but you humiliate the proud.”¹³

Verse 29: Jesus answered, “You are so wrong! You don’t know what the Scriptures say. And you don’t know anything about God’s power.”

So we see that in response, our Lord does not call them names, nor does He foster His own opinion on the matter, but He does what He so often did and that was turn to the Scriptures. The two things that He says these people missed was what the Word of God had to say about it, and what the power of God had to do with it.

Let’s look at how the Jews interpreted the Scriptures and how the power of God to raise the dead was understood. We find one example in their Babylonian Talmud: “How is resurrection derived from the Torah? — As it is written, And you will give the Lord’s heave-offering to Aaron the priest.¹⁴ But would Aaron live forever; he did not even enter Palestine that offerings should be given him? But it teaches that he would be resurrected, and Israel would give him offerings. Therefore, resurrection is derived from the Torah.”¹⁵ In the same document, we read: “Rabbi Simai said: How do we learn about the resurrection from the Torah? — From the verse, ‘And I also have established my covenant with them, [the Patriarchs] to give them the land of Canaan.’¹⁶”¹⁷

On another occasion, several Sadducees asked Rabban Gamaliel: “How do we know that the Holy One, blessed be He, will resurrect the dead?” Gamaliel answered these skeptics: “From the Torah, the Prophets, and the Holy Writings…‘From the Torah’: for it is written, And the Lord said to Moses, Behold, you will sleep with your fathers and rise up [again].¹⁸ ‘But perhaps,’ said they to him, ‘[the verse reads], and the people will rise up?’ ‘From the prophets’: as it is written, Your dead men will live, together with my dead body will they arise. Awake and sing, you that dwell in the dust: for your dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth will cast out its dead.¹⁹ But perhaps this refers to the dead whom Ezekiel resurrected?²⁰ ‘From the Holy Writings’: as it is written, And the roof of your mouth, like the best wine of my beloved, that goes down sweetly, causing the lips of those that are asleep to speak.²¹ But perhaps it means merely that their lips will move, even as Rabbi Johanan said: If a halachah²² is said in any person’s name in this world, his lips speak in the grave, as it is written, causing the lips of those that are asleep to speak? [Thus he did not satisfy them] until he quoted this verse, which the Lord swore unto your fathers to give to them;²³ not to you, but to them is said; hence resurrection is derived from the Torah. Others say that he proved it from this verse, But you that did hold fast onto the Lord your God are alive every one of you this day;²⁴ just as you are all alive today, so shall you all live again in the world to come.”²⁵

None of this should surprise us today because there are many around who do not believe in life beyond the grave. They say that we evolved from animals, and like animals when we die we cease to exist in any fashion because our bodies are consumed in the grave. While serving in the military, I was confronted by a fellow soldier who told me he did not believe in God, heaven or hell. So he asked me how could I accept such false notions. So I replied to him: Let’s say that you and I die right now. If you’re right, you’ve won but I haven’t lost anything. But if I’m right, then you’ve lost and I’ve won everything. I’ll end up in heaven and you’ll end up in hell. So it all depends on if you want to take a chance on being wrong. He looked at me and said, “I never thought of it that way before.” So I said to him, “Once you’re dead, it will be too late to think about it, so you’d better think about it now.”

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER TWENTY-TWO

Part VI

Verse 21b: Then Jesus said to them, “Give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and give to God what belongs to God.”

This same story is told in a non-canonical Gospel, but reads a little differently: “They showed Jesus a gold coin and said to him, ‘The Roman emperor’s people demand taxes from us.’ He said to them, ‘Give the emperor what belongs to the emperor, give God what belongs to God, and give me what is mine.’”¹ So, now His critics were on the defensive. Perhaps they thought Jesus would take the same position as another Galilean, whose name was Judas. Josephus tells us: “Judas, prevailed with his countrymen to revolt, and said they were cowards if they would tolerate paying taxes to the Romans and would, next to God, submit to mortal men as their lords.”² Josephus goes on to say: “This man was a teacher of a peculiar sect of his own, and was not at all like the rest of those their leaders.”³

This may not have been Judas Iscariot, but it sure did sound like him. However, Jesus makes it clear to them, you must recognize Caesar as the power and authority behind the taxes and fees that were required of all those living under the flag of the Roman empire, so there was no penalty in a Jew paying his due. However, should that same Caesar demand what is given to God, such as obedience, loyalty, service, praise, and worship, then do not give it to him, but give it only to God.

Since Jesus knew what they were up to, He was able to respond with measured and precise words. One early church scholar gives us his take on this dialogue: “What then! You permit us to serve a man, and not God? And how is this not a violation of the law? It will amount to nothing. Indeed, the act of giving tax to Caesar does not prevent the service of God, although you would like to think so. This is why it is necessary for you to give to God equally what is God’s, in such a manner that if what is Caesar’s is kept for the service of God, it is necessary that God be preferred to him. If you remain a contributor to Caesar, you should attribute this to your sins, not to God. In the same way, Paul similarly applies himself to the same distinction. In sending a letter to the Romans he wrote, ‘Pay to the world, therefore, what is due to the world; to those you owe taxes, taxes; to those you owe tribute, tribute.’⁴”⁵

Jesus did not take a cultist position on this, for He knew that the Jewish Rabbis had taught: “For the law established by the king is binding law. Indeed, anyone who does not pay this tax transgresses, for he is taking what is due the king. This applies whether the king is Jewish or Gentile.”⁶

Verse 22: When they heard what Jesus said, they were impressed. So they left Him and went away.

Caught in their own trap, the Herodians and Pharisees are exposed for who they really were. Our Lord’s show-and-tell illustration answered their question without rebuttal. I like the way one commentator describes what happened. This English text is dated from the 1800’s so it may seem a little Shakespearean, but I think you’ll get the point.

“This conclusion is drawn from their own maxims and premises. They held that “wherever the money of any king is current, there the inhabitants acknowledge that king for their lord.” Now, by admitting that this was Cæsar’s coin, and by consenting to receive it as the current coin of their country, they, in fact, acknowledged their subjection to his government, and of course their obligation to pay the tribute demanded of them. This answer was full of consummate wisdom, and it completely defeated the harmful designs of His enemies. He avoided rendering Himself detestable to the Jewish people by opposing their notions of liberty or appearing to pay court to the emperor, without exposing Himself to the charge of sedition and disloyalty to the Roman government.⁷

Whatever the Herodians and Pharisees had hoped to gain, they left carrying less than they arrived with. For sure, their own reputations had suffered devaluation, but they went away with an increased admiration and respect for Jesus of Nazareth. Even though the Pharisees cut their losses, the word of their failure got around town in a hurry. So the Sadducees decided to try their luck in causing Jesus to misspeak by using a “religious question” as bait. Paradoxically enough, it was on a subject they themselves did not believe in – the resurrection.

Although Caesars no longer rule the world, the principle remains the same today. As citizens, we are to be good stewards and support honest government and leaders by paying our fair share of the needed taxes to provide necessary services and protection. But at the same time, we are citizens of heaven’s kingdom and we should have the same attitude in providing for the mission that Jesus started, and continue doing the work all of us were called to do in this world.

Verse 23: That same day some Sadducees came to Jesus. (Sadducees believe there will be no resurrection from death.) The Sadducees asked Jesus a question.

Most scholars believe that this parenthetical statement was either added by Matthew’s scribe to his Greek translations, or a copier who felt the reader needed to know. The Syriac version reads, “and were saying to Him there is no resurrection of the dead,” while the Ethiopic version renders it: “saying, there is no resurrection of the dead.” But whatever the source, it is a fact that the Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection, angels, or spirits.

According to Rabbi Nathan it all started when two disciples of Antigonus of Soko, one named, Zadok, and the other, Boethius, interpreted his words: “Be not like slaves that serve their master for the sake of compensation; be rather like slaves who serve their master with no thought of compensation, and let the fear of Heaven be upon you,” to mean there was no life beyond the grave, so enjoy life while you have it. They said: “Why did our ancestors see fit to say such a thing? Doesn’t it make sense that if a laborer works all day should he not take his reward in the evening?” They go on to say: “If therefore, our ancestors had really believed that there is another world and that there will be a resurrection of the dead, they would never say such a thing.”⁸

So the one group that followed Zadok became known as Sadducees,⁹ and the other group who followed Boethius became known as Boethusians, but both maintained their denial of the resurrection and were perpetual opponents of the Pharisees. According to Jewish scholars, “There certainly were some differences between the Sadducees and the Boethusians, but the latter appear to have been a subgroup or an offshoot of the Sadducean group.”¹⁰ But by the time Jesus came, the Pharisees and Sadducees were functioning as two opposing groups.

In an early church commentary on Matthew we find the following observation on what took place here: “On the day when the Pharisees returned, the Sadducees acquiesced. The Sadducees then returned, and in turn, the Pharisees withdrew. So it was one opponent and then another through many days of struggle. They accosted Him frequently so that one or the other might be able to best Him, or if they were not able to put Him down squarely, they might instead undermine others’ judgment of Him. So they frequented His company. Among numerous enemies, the strongest warrior will be found. While they were not able to put Him down simply by words, they all surrounded Him. They could not overcome Him by strength; they sought to turn everyone against Him, with the crowd close behind.”¹¹

Verse 24: They said, “Rabbi, Moses told us that if a married man dies and has no children, his brother must marry his widow. Then they will produce children for the dead brother.”

Apparently, these Sadducees had heard how Jesus always used the written law to explain His theological position. So they begin by quoting Moses’ words on how a younger brother can keep the family tree alive for an older brother who dies without having any children.¹² In fact, any son born to this remarried widow would then be given the name of her deceased husband in order to keep his name alive.¹³

Rabbi Rashi gives us further information concerning certain exemptions that were allowed: “If a man dies, and his brother is born after his death, his widow may not marry the brother of her deceased husband. This law applies only to brothers who share in the inheritance“together” [namely, paternal brothers]. This excludes maternal brothers.”¹⁴

And, another Jewish commentator adds this: “The Torah’s words: ‘When one of them dies childless’ [should not be interpreted narrowly]. When the deceased has a son, a daughter, a descendant of a son, or a descendant of a daughter, as long as he has left progeny – whether from the woman to whom he is presently married or from another woman, his wife is free from the obligation of chalitzah¹⁵ or yibbum.¹⁶ Even if he has a descendant who is illegitimate or an idolater, that descendant frees the deceased’s wife from the obligation of chalitzah or yibbum.”¹⁷

However, some scholars add: “If a man fathered a child or children, and they all died in the father’s lifetime, the man’s wife is obligated to perform the rite of yibbum.”¹⁸ Since these questioners did not believe in the resurrection, Jesus knew they were using this as bait in getting Him to misspeak or go against the teaching of the Law. So He waited to see what else they had to say.

The great Chinese philosopher Confucius wrote several important works, but he was also quoted by many who heard him teach. One quote ascribed to him reads: “Better a diamond with a flaw than a pebble without.” It is a poetic way of saying: “It is better to be imperfect and useful than to be perfect and useless.”

This concept of recognizing the value in things with blemishes was also expressed in other Chinese Proverbs such as: “Better be a piece of broken jade than unbroken tile— it’s better to die with honor than to survive in disgrace.”

Dr. Peter G. Vajda, seminar leader, workshop facilitator, and motivational speaker made this comment on the subject of seeing good in the midst of bad: “One way we measure success and greatness is by assessing our failures – or rather, what we have learned about ourselves through these failures. There is no perfection without fault – none. The self-reflection that follows failure is the catalyst that fosters improvement, growth, and greatness.”

Such insight can have immeasurable value, especially in our spiritual lives. Too many Christians give up trying because they just can’t seem to measure up to the expectations of their fellow believers or the church group they belong to. I cannot remember, ever meeting anyone who was more interested in getting approval and applause from those they didn’t know than from those closest to them.

We must never forget that the One we should please first and foremost is our heavenly Father. No matter what others may think of our performance, as long as He is satisfied, that’s what really counts. We see how important this is in the fact that many of those who disapprove of our character because of flaws in our moral judgment or the function of our virtues, only take time to criticize us. Our Heavenly Father, however, not only convicts us of our wrongs but then extends His divine hand to help us stand up again after we fall so that we can continue to make progress.

So let this proverb become a reality in your life. Just keep telling yourself: “I’d rather be a useful defective diamond in God’s eyes, than a useless perfect pebble in the eyes of my fellow man.” – Dr. Robert R Seyda