Down an Unfamiliar Road

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER FOUR

Part II

Verse 7: “Jesus answered, ‘The Scriptures also say, You must not test the Lord your God.’”

One of the most reliable methods of determining the validity of Old Testament prophecy concerning Christ, is His own confirmation, such as in this instance. In each case where Christ quotes or concurs with the Scriptures, we can establish our beliefs on firm ground that they are valid because our Lord believed them to be true. Here the Master quotes the Torah where Moses was teaching the children of Israel on how they are to trust God, not test God.”¹ This warning involved an incident recorded in the Old Testament when they reached a place they named, Massah, which means “Testing.”² It has relevance to what Jesus was going through. God used Moses to lead the Hebrews out of Egypt, to where they were now migrating through the western Sinai desert on their way to the Promised Land. But things were not going well because they ran out of water. While Moses tried to figure out what to do, the people grew restless and began to argue with Moses. Instead of volunteering to go out in search of an oasis or other water supplies, they kept up their ranting and raving and putting pressure on Moses to do something. “Find us some water!” they kept yelling. “Get us some water!” they demanded. That’s when Moses asked them, “Why me? Why are you moaning and groaning about wanting water from me?” Moses wanted them to think about this: Who was it that ordered him to lead them out of Egypt? Who was it that set them free and opened the Red Sea so they could cross so He could destroy Pharaoh’s army? He was trying to get them to trust God. The One who brought them out would be the One to provide for their needs. How true this is for any person whom God leads out of the bondage of sin, who then finds themselves in difficult situations because of the new faith. He would not have led them out if He hadn’t also planned to be with them and supply their needs.

But the children of Israel would have none of it. They blamed Moses for getting them into this mess. Now not only were they in peril of dying, but also losing their families and livestock in the process. So Moses pleaded with God for an answer. The Lord relents and allows Moses to bring water out of a rock a short walk away at the foothills of Mount Horeb. Jewish scholars tell us that this was the same mountain that became better known as Mount Sinai, because it was in the Sinai desert, thus it would have been more properly referred to as the “Horeb, the mountain in Sinai.” This seems to fit because the Hebrew word Horeb means, “solitude.” Moses obeyed and God supplied the water need. But the children of Israel lacked faith. Yet they got what they were asking for. Out of frustration Moses named the place Meribah and Massah, because those words meant “rebellion” and “temptation.”

Now here was Jesus, out in the desert some forty days. He too had nothing to eat or drink, and the devil was trying to get Him to go to the Father the same way the children of Israel pushed Moses to go to God. Perhaps if He also accused His heavenly Father of getting Him into this mess, He could convince God to supply His need. Of course, that would have played right into the devil’s hands. What a lesson for all believers. Yes, there will be times when we may feel that God has allowed us to wander on our own accord into a position where we run out of supplies and have nowhere else to turn. But we can learn from both what happened to the children of Israel and what Jesus did under the same circumstances. There is no reason to tempt God for something little, when trusting God will get you something big.

Jewish scholars had their own definition about what it meant to “tempt” God. In his work to find conciliation between different Jewish texts that use the same Hebrew word, Rabbi Manasseh ben Israel noted in his commentary³ the difference between how the word “tempt” was translated; He says, “It may be added that where it is commanded not to tempt the Lord, it says ‘You shall not tempt,’ which word is always used in an objectionable sense, showing ignorance of the power, will, goodness, or perfection of God, when He is tempted. God said to Moses: ‘and they tempted me,’⁴ which temptation is always sinful; but later He changes the word, and says, ‘and tried me,’⁵ which may be taken in a different sense.”⁶ As such, to tempt God is to test the power, goodness and will of God out of ignorance. Therefore, not only should this not be done by a man to his fellow man, but for certain by man to his God. Yet, this is exactly what Satan was doing here with Jesus. But thank God the devil failed. And it should always be the case when Satan comes to tempt any of God’s children.

Verses 8-10: “Then the devil led Jesus to the top of a very high mountain and an instant showed Him all the kingdoms of the world and all the wonderful things in them. The devil said, ‘If you will bow down and worship me, I will give you all these things.’ Jesus said to him, ‘Get away from me, Satan! The Scriptures say, “You must worship the Lord your God. Serve only Him!”’”

Several Bible scholars believe that the traditional spot where Satan offered Jesus dominion over all earthly kingdoms is called Mt. Quarantania, a limestone peak on the road from Jerusalem to Jericho. One commentator in the 1600’s named Fabricii (cited by John Gill), thinks it was Mount Lebanon. But no matter how high, it would be dwarfed next to the Matterhorn in Switzerland, or Mount Everest in Nepal. So this must be understood as figurative language since even from the highest peak one could only see Jerusalem off in the distance. Also, the request by Satan that Jesus bow down and worship him must be understood in a near east religious context. When Christians think of the word “worship,” it conjures up all sorts of church activities. But here it means to pay the utmost respect and honor to. This was done by bowing down and kissing the hand or feet of the one you are paying homage to. It is another way of acknowledging their superiority. That’s why what many Christians do today that they call worship, would not be accepted in Moses’ day, or in Jesus’ day.

Nevertheless, Jesus got the point, and He had the answer. It came from the Scripture that says: “You must worship the Lord your God, and Him only must you serve.”⁷ In the original Hebrew text, the word “only” does not exist, even though it was added in the Septuagint version. It reads: “You are to fear Adonai your God, serve Him and swear by His name.”⁸ The Aramaic version puts it: “You shall fear only the LORD your God; and you shall worship Him and swear by His name.”⁹ But the word “only” is in italics, which means it was inserted. So either the Word added to the word by saying “only” here and “alone” at the end, or otherwise it was added by the scribe who wrote this Gospel in Greek for Matthew; or he used a Greek translation of the Torah available at the time. In fact, the oldest copy of Matthew’s Gospel in Hebrew reads this way: “I will pray to the Lord and Him only you will serve.”¹⁰ Josephus shares the view of this commandment as a contemporary of Jesus, and says, “The first commandment teaches us that there is but one God, and that we ought to worship Him only.”¹¹ Why is this important? Because by adding the word “only” it suggests there are other gods a person may choose to serve. This was Jesus’ way of saying, you cannot serve two masters. There is no such thing as complete loyalty with a divided heart. Matthew says that the devil showed Jesus this scene in an instant. This can be understood in two ways. First, that the scene only lasted an instant, or, that it only took Satan an instant to show Jesus the scene. Whatever the amount of time it took Satan to give Jesus a view of all the world kingdoms that existed at that time, or how ever long Jesus looked at them, we do know it took Jesus only an instant to give His reply.

To me, this would be like someone having taken Michelangelo into the Sistine Chapel, pointing up the ceiling and saying, how would you like to own that? It might have been worth it to see Satan’s face had our Lord said to him, “You mean that’s all you want Me to do to get all the kingdoms of the world? Just for me to bow down in reverence to you? First of all, it is mine to begin with, but you stole it with your lie to Adam and Eve. Now I’ve come to take it back, and the price I’m about to pay is beyond anything you could ever accumulate to try and buy it back.” One Rabbi commenting on this verse explains that the last clause speaks of serving God. “Service to God takes in all positive commandments. These precepts train the heart and lead a person to cling to God’s glorious Name. This is what man was created for. Human beings were not created to acquire wealth and leave it to others or erect buildings for others to inhabit while they lay in a grave under the ground. Neither was a person brought into being for the purpose of enjoying a variety of meals, for the pleasure of eating lasts but for a few moments, because it takes much effort to acquire delicacies, most of which are unhealthful. The same is the case with joking and drunkenness, foolishness, and madness.”¹²

In other words, in everything and for everything we say and do, first consider how it affects our relationship with God and our fellow man. How does it please God and honor Him for what He’s done for us. And also, will what we say and do prove to our fellow man that God is number one in our lives; that we live to serve Him only, so that all we say and do glorifies our father in heaven. It might be a real shock to many believers if a poll were taken among their neighbors, workmates, family and friends using this question: “Do you believe they are really a true Christian?”

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER FOUR

Part I (con’t)

Now Satan makes one last attempt to derail our Lord’s commitment to the cross. And what was his first temptation? Bread, of course! The devil was appealing to the human part of the God/man, hoping to use bread as bait for Jesus’ physical hunger in order to tempt our Lord’s spiritual allegiance to His Father’s will, and to expose any weakness in His trust in the power of God to see Him through. That’s why Jesus puts His spiritual man in control over His physical man in order to survive. But one polemic writer is not impressed. He notes that Jesus only did this once, while Moses, Elijah, Elisha and Ezekiel did it more than once, so why don’t the Christians worship them for their accomplishment as they do Jesus? But he fails to go on and compare what these prophets did to that of what our Lord Jesus accomplished on the cross and His triumphant emergence from the tomb.¹

The devil’s question, “If you are the Son of God,” clearly shows that Satan knew who Jesus was, but wanted Him to prove it his way. Oft times the Jews were not so upset when terms were used that already existed in their writings, but only when they were ascribed to Jesus of Nazareth. For instance, an ancient Jewish religious work ascribed by tradition to Enoch the great-grandfather of Noah, and written around 300 BC states clearly: “In those days the Lord told them to call and testify to the children of earth concerning their wisdom: Show it to them; for you are their guides, and the proper influence over the whole earth. For I and My Son will be remain with them forever in the paths of right living; and you will have peace: rejoice, you who live right. Amen.”² This was in reference to God’s Son the Messiah.

Also, in apocryphal books the Jews had access to in those days it states: “For my Son the Messiah will be seen together with those who follow Him, and will rejoice with those that remain thirty years. And it shall be after these years my Son the Messiah will die, and all those in whom is human breath. And the world will return to its first silence seven days, as it was at the beginning, so that no man is left.”³ It is interesting that the King James Translators renders it this way: “For my son Jesus shall be revealed with those that be with Him, and they that remain shall rejoice within four hundred years. After these years shall my son Christ die, and all men that have life. And the world shall be turned into the old silence seven days, like as in the former judgments: so that no man shall remain.”⁴ There are also similar references to the Messiah as the Son of God in the King James Version.⁵

So Matthew tells us, “Jesus answered Satan, ‘The Scriptures say, “It is not just bread that keeps people alive. Their lives depend on what God says.”’” The Scripture Jesus was referring to is where Moses speaks to the people, encouraging them to remain faithful, saying, “He humbled you and let you be hungry. Then He fed you with manna – something you did not know about before. It was something your ancestors had never seen. Why did the Lord do this? Because He wanted you to know that it is not just bread that keeps people alive. People’s lives depend on what the Lord says.”⁶ If Satan could quote Scriptures to make a point, then so could the Living Word.

Verses 5-6: “Then the devil led Jesus to the holy city of Jerusalem and put Him on a high place at the edge of the Temple area. He said to Jesus, ‘If you are the Son of God, jump off, because the Scriptures say, God will command His angels to help You, and their hands will catch You, so that You will not stumble over a rock.’”

There is no hint that the devil physically led Jesus to Jerusalem. This is another way of using figurative speech to say that they were transported to Jerusalem in spirit. It is the same travel that is made during a dream or vision. Even today, if we are invited to some event but cannot physically make it, we say, “I’ll be there in spirit.” Furthermore, there was no reason to lead Jesus there physically because that would suggest that Jesus could be led by the devil. In the first two instances the devil asked Jesus to prove that He was the Son of God by fulfilling his request. This is clear from the devil’s dare, “If you are the Son of God.” Of course, Satan knew who Jesus was, but this temptation was designed to make our Lord prove it on the tempter’s terms. If Satan needed any proof, Jesus supplied it; not by performing the wonders requested, but by refusing to obey the devil and using Scripture in His rebuttal. If we are going to convince the devil that Christ is in us today, the same formula is still potent and effective. The devil knew the Scriptures, but he always used them in a negative way. Here he quotes from a Psalm attributed to Moses: “He will command His angels to protect you wherever you go. Their hands will catch you so that you will not hit your foot on a rock.”⁷ I can imagine that Jesus smiled, because He could have picked up where Satan left off and finished His rebuke of Satan by quoting the next verse in that Psalm: “You will have power to trample on lions and poisonous snakes.”⁸

But our Lord took a different route in order for believers to find strength if tempted in like manner. From what archaeologists and Jewish historians have told us, King Herod built three heavily fortified towers of the citadel upon a location that was already a very fortified position since the days of Solomon. Jerusalem’s citadel was the highest point of the city about 2500 feet above sea level. Herod built the citadel and towers to protect the western side of the city of Jerusalem and his ornate palace. These were fantastic towers, the largest was the Phasael Tower, standing some 145 feet high (about 14 stories). But the most beautiful was Mariamne Tower, rising to 75 feet. This may have been the place Satan had in mind. According to Eusebius, this may have also been the same pinnacle from which James, the brother of Jesus was thrown because he refused to denounce Jesus as the Messiah.⁹ Jewish historian Josephus, who describes the construction of Herod’s Temple, tells us: “…for while the valley was very deep, and its bottom could not be seen, if you looked down from above into the depth, this further vastly high elevation of the courtyard stood upon that height, insomuch that if any one looked down from the top of the battlements, or down from both those altitudes, he would be giddy, while he could not see clearly into such an immense depth.”¹⁰

In addition to that, it was a common belief among Jews that Jerusalem was the most beautiful and holy city on earth. This was because it housed the Ark of the Covenant in the holy tent, which later became a temple. It signified the presence of God. According to one Jewish commentary, this is what happened in the wilderness: “And on the day that the tabernacle was erected the cloud covered the tabernacle, even the tent of the testimony; and at evening time there was upon the tabernacle as it were the appearance of fire, until morning. So it was always: the cloud covered it by day, and the appearance of fire by night.”¹¹ This cloud became known as the “Shekinah” glory of God’s presence. That was also the opinion of another Jewish commentator: “Why do I say that the original consecration sanctified the Temple and Jerusalem for eternity . . . the original consecration did not sanctify it for eternity? Because the sanctity of the Temple and Jerusalem stems from the Shekinah, and the Shekinah can never be nullified. Therefore, it states: ‘I will lay waste to your Sanctuaries.”¹² The Sages declared: ‘Even though they have been devastated, their sanctity remains.”¹³ Now perhaps we can see why the Jews held the Temple in such high regard.

The key point here is that as long as the Shekinah glory was present, the sanctity of the Temple remained. No wonder when Jesus showed up later, He did not find any Shekinah at the front entrance, rather He found a commercial cloud of smoke, and it angered Him. That’s why Rabbis declared: “Jerusalem is holier than other walled cities.”¹⁴ The commentator then follows this with a list of restrictions on things that may be brought into and kept there.¹⁵ We are also told by numismatics that the inscription on one side of the Jewish shekel were the words, “Jerusalem, the holy city.” It is still somewhat of a mystery why the devil would pick a tower on Jerusalem’s wall as the place where this temptation took place. Certainly the mountain where all of this was taking place could provide a cliff or high place for such an attempt. No doubt Satan had something else in mind. The rule he offered our Lord over these kingdom was a spiritual rule. That they would all acknowledge Him as the Messiah and worship Him. So in the devil’s mind, what better place for the Messiah, who claimed to be one with God, to die, thereby rendering the phrase “God is dead”, as being appropriate long before it was ever uttered by an atheistic European philosopher.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER FOUR

Part I

Verse 1: “Then the Spirit led Jesus into the desert. He was taken there to be tempted by the devil.”

Jesus’ temptation in the wilderness was not by accident nor an arbitrary event. As the first man Adam was tested, so the second Man Adam was as well. In the garden Adam was tempted to disobey with the offer of become like God. Here, God the Son is tempted to disobey with the offer to become like man. In the beginning Satan used a lie to disguise reality; here he attempts to use truth to perpetrate a lie. How can we reconcile this action of the Holy Spirit with other aspects of His ministry. Did not Jesus say that our prayer should include, “Lead us not into temptation.”

The Greek word rendered “lead” has a more descriptive meaning and that is: “to bring;” and the word “temptation” refers to being tested and tried. In other words Jesus was saying that we should request that God not cause us to go through a trial or testing without a reason. After all, isn’t the Holy Spirit supposed to be a comforter instead of an observer? But this is only half the light that emanates from what our Lord taught about praying. The same prayer goes on to say, “But deliver us from evil.” To put it another way, “Don’t cause us to go through trials and testing without giving us the necessary tools to overcome and survive.” We must remember, we cannot be delivered unless we are in or facing danger. Christ had to pass His ordination test before entering the ministry.

The Holy Spirit is the testing agent. If we are to be led by the Spirit we can expect battles, trials and hardships. But do not despair, for even as we see in verse 11, after the turmoil God’s angels will come to our aid and comfort. The purpose of the temptation by the devil was not to conquer Jesus nor kill Him, He was bound to die anyway, but rather, to cause Him to disobey the Father. Had the devil succeeded in persuading Christ to perform one of the contrived acts that he suggested, this spot on our Lord’s record would have caused Him to be rejected as the perfect sacrifice and spotless lamb. The elimination of Jesus as the Lamb of God would have sealed man’s doom forever, because after Jesus there would have been no other Savior, because there was no other only begotten Son.

We can be sure that the three temptations listed here were not the only ones which the devil used during these 40 days and nights Jesus was alone in the wilderness. We can believe that He was tempted with every conceivable temptation that would come to any normal human under those conditions. To get a better grip on this suggestion, try thinking of what might bother you and bring you stress, if you were stranded in a remote area such as this. But not all readers of this Gospel were as impressed with what Jesus went through. This we find in one Jewish German Rabbi’s polemic reaction:

“Now what was the need for relating that he fasted forty days and forty nights? What sort of praise of God is it to say that he needs food and drink? Why, all the angels of our God who served him need no food or drink. Moreover, Moses, who was flesh and blood, was sustained by the glory of the divine presence forty days and forty nights without eating bread or drinking water, and so was Elijah. Furthermore, the Jews were unable to look upon the countenance of Moses until he placed a veil over his face because he had approached his creator; how much more, then, should this be true of this man, who called himself God. Also, why did he become hungry? If you say that it was because of his flesh, the flesh could not fast forty days and forty nights if not for the holy spirit. It was the holy spirit, then, which gave him the strength to fast forty days and forty nights, in that case, why did it not sustain him indefinitely without food or drink and without hunger or thirst? In addition, when Satan told him, ‘If you are God, make these stones into bread and eat it,’ why did he reply, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone”? This is a faulty response, for Satan could have answered him. Moreover, why did Satan tempt him in all these ways? After all, everyone knows that Satan is an evil angel who knows both manifested and hidden things just as any other angel does, and if it had been true that Jesus was divine, why should Satan have troubled him so much and not been afraid of him?”¹

You need not to be an astute theologian to see the faulty reasoning in this man’s thinking. First of all, he does not understand that Jesus went through this ordeal to show that the God who sent Him was different than what mankind had come to expect. Throughout Jewish literature we see a judgmental God. The Stoics taught about apathetic gods; and the Epicureans spoke of completely detached gods; the Romans presented gods with destructive power. But it was Jesus who brought into the world an incredibly dynamic concept of the One True God, One who was willing to deliberately undergo every human experience, so that those who come to Him will know that He understands.

Plutarch, one of the most religious of the Greek philosophers, declared that it was blasphemous to involve God in the affairs of this world.² With Jesus depicting God as One identified with the suffering of this world, it was bound to revolutionize man’s understanding. This came after centuries where the idea of the untouchable God was paramount. But through His temptation and suffering, He would now be identified with those who faced such sorrows. This was the fulfillment of the prophecy of Isaiah, that the Messiah would be: “a man of suffering, well acquainted with grief.”³

As to this previous critic’s notion that if the Holy Spirit sustained Jesus in the wilderness as He went without food or water, why did this not then become a permanent source of sustenance. To this I would ask this Rabbi, since the fourth man joined the three Hebrew children in the fiery furnace and the angel sealed the mouths of the lions for Daniel while he was in their den, then why didn’t they continue to follow them as body guards? This was testing, a trial to prove, as in the case of the three Hebrews and Daniel, that their faith in a God who would deliver was proven true. Therefore, by faith they knew that when needed, their God would command His angels to take charge. This was also only a prelude to what Jesus would go through in His appearance before the high priest Caiaphas and Pontius Pilate, and then what He went through on the cross.

Verses 2-4: “Jesus ate nothing for 40 days and nights. After this, he was very hungry. The devil came to tempt him and said, ‘If you are the Son of God, tell these rocks to become bread.‘”

From the context of these verses, we conclude that the devil came to Christ on the 40^th day of his fasting with these last three temptations, because it says of Jesus: “He was very hungry.” They were a culmination of all temptations He endured during this period because they vexed the body, soul and spirit. Jesus could have turned anything into bread to satisfy His hunger, but He was not about to give in to a desire of the flesh that would give the devil something to brag about. A 40 day fast was not new, and struck a familiar note to any Jewish reader of Matthew’s Gospel since they had read: “Then the Lord said to Moses, ‘Write everything that I have told you. This is the agreement that I made with you and the Israelites.’ Moses stayed there with the LORD for 40 days and 40 nights. Moses did not eat any food or drink any water. And he wrote the words of the agreement (the Ten Commandments) on the two stone tablets.”⁴ And we also read elsewhere: “Then Elijah walked for 40 days and nights to Mount Horeb, the mountain of God. There Elijah went into a cave and spent the night.”⁵ The phrase, “day and night” was the old way of saying, “twenty-four hours.”

For Jewish devotees who fasted, their regimen did not require restriction of movement or activities. The Rabbis taught: “One is not permitted to eat after sundown until sundown the next day for it to be a full day’s fast.” What one did during this time is clearly outlined: “From morning to midday they look into the affairs of the city; from then onward they read for a quarter of the day from the Torah and the Prophets and the rest of the day is spent in praying for mercy, as it is said, And they stood up in their place, and read in the book of the Law of the Lord their God a fourth part of the day; and another fourth part they confessed and prostrated themselves before the Lord their God.⁶”⁷

We have no record that Jesus took food or drink after dark on any of these days. It seems obvious, that after forty days and nights our Lord would be physically tired and emaciated. But the real challenge during this period of 40 days was more than just physical hunger or stress due to depredation. It was the trial of His commitment to the mission His heavenly Father sent Him to accomplish. As we all know, sometimes thinking day in and day out about something we are facing can only make it more difficult. But the most difficult contest was yet to take place.

It is amazing how many speeches are given, laws are written, and decisions are made based on how little people know, not how much knowledge they have assimilated. I say that because for every fact we know, there are thousands out there we do not know. The only way to increase our knowledge is to read, study and access those additional truths and words of wisdom, before making up our minds. That’s why it amazes me when legislators vote for a bill they have not read and politicians propose rules and regulations without considering their redundancy. But the most flagrant is when someone gives their opinion. Webster defines opinion as “a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.” No wonder Jesus did not come to give us His opinion, but to bring us the solid, undeniable truth His Father in heaven gave Him about the requirements for salvation and everlasting life. Anyone who disputes what Jesus said, or offers you a different plan of salvation, just remember, it’s only their opinion. – Dr. Robert R. Seyda

While doing some research on Paul’s Epistles, I came across the Latin writings of a Catholic monk named Haimo, who lived between 790 – 855 AD, at the Benedictine Abbey of Saint-Germain in the cathedral town of Auxerre, in central France on the Yonne River, who was also the abbot at the commune, Cessy-les-Bois, as well as the founder and prestigious master of a Carolingian School.

In commenting on Galatians 3:2: “Are you so foolish that, while you began with the Spirit, you are now being made perfect with the flesh?¹” here is what Haimo writes: “Paul means that, although you had begun to be converted spiritually, or had begun to speak through the Holy Spirit in other tongues, you are now wearied by rites and rituals, disregarding all things spiritual as you start using man-made ceremonies. Here Paul is referring to the circumcision of the flesh and all such sacrifices prescribed by the Law.”

Then Haimo goes on to make Paul’s statement relevant to his day. He says: “Put another way, in the beginning of the faith, all those who believed in Christ received the Holy Spirit just as they do now. What is more, they received speaking in other tongues through which they demonstrated that they possessed the Holy Spirit. There is no better example by which to prove this than the account in the Acts of the Apostles where Paul said to some of the believers, who had been baptized into John’s baptism, ‘Did you receive the Holy Spirit when becoming believers?’ They responded, ‘No, none of us have heard of a Holy Spirit: for we are unable to speak in other tongues. When Paul baptized them in Jesus’s name, however, they began to speak in other tongues.”²

Haimo then concludes: “Those Galatians did not receive the Holy Spirit and speaking in other tongues through works of the Law. Rather, it was because they believed in Christ as a result of hearing the faith of the Lord preached by the Apostle. By the hearing of faith Paul means that a person hears what they must believe, and later will be asked about this belief before being baptized.”

I found this a very interesting insight into church doctrine during the early medieval period of church history. I guess the question now is, had this emphasis on belief in Jesus Christ and the baptism in the Holy Spirit been continued at this level, what a difference it would have made in the history and development of the church as we know it today.

UPDATE FOR ALL MY STUDENTS

We have now finished Matthew, Chapter Three.  We found that John the Baptizer was a relative of Jesus; also that his water baptism was based on the Jewish rite of purification; that he was not a voice crying in the wilderness, but a voice crying: “In the wilderness prepare a way for the Lord.”  We also got a better understanding of what repentance means, and the background of the Pharisees and Sadducees.

Our next study will be Chapter Four beginning on Monday, October 12.  We examine our Lord’s temptation in the wilderness; the beginning of His preaching ministry; His calling of the first disciples; and the start of His healing ministry.  There are some exciting discoveries found in this chapter, I don’t want you to miss it.

So post a reminder on your computer screen.  You can make this your daily devotion time.  And I pray that it will increase your hunger to know more about God’s Word, so that you get to know more about Him, His Son, and His Holy Spirit.

So I invite you to use this posting as an opportunity to ask any questions you may have on what we’ve studied, and comments you want to share, or anything that has helped you get a better understanding of what it means to be a believer in Jesus Christ.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER THREE

Part V

So what John the Baptizer saw was not all that unexpected when Jesus the Messiah appeared. What upset the Jews is that their expectations for the man of their choice were not fulfilled, and they got a little known prophet from Galilee. But why were they so disappointed? Didn’t Isaiah say: “He was always close to the Lord. He grew up like a young tree, putting down roots in dry ground. There was nothing special or impressive about the way he looked, nothing we could see that would cause us to like him. People made fun of him, and even his friends left him . . . We treated him like someone of no importance, like someone people will not even look at but turn away from in disgust.”¹

But doesn’t their own commentary in the Book of Light also say: “Humans will perceive wondrous, precious wisdom never experienced by them before, as it is written: “The Spirit of Adonai will rest on Him, the Spirit of wisdom and understanding, the Spirit of counsel and power, the Spirit of knowledge and fearing Adonai² — All these are destined to light upon King Messiah so that he may judge the world, as it is written: ‘He will judge the impoverished justly.’³”⁴

Here is an interesting passage in this same Book of Light related to the dove and the Messiah: On his death bed, one Rabbi says, “I believe I hear the fluttering of angel wings. Ah! what do I see’? The tree of life radiating a perfume that fills the sky-blue vault of heaven itself. I see descending and landing the mystic heavenly dove, so I can recognize the King Messiah.”⁵ Also, John Gill comments on another passage from the Book of Light that goes: “…a door will be opened, and out of it will come the dove which Noah sent out in the days of the flood, as it is written, ‘and he sent out the dove’, that famous dove; but the ancients do not speak about it, for they did not know exactly what it was, only from where it came, and announced its message; as it is written, ‘…it did not return again to Noah anymore’: no man knows where it went, but it returned to its original place, and was hidden behind this door; and it will take a crown in its mouth, and put it on the head of the King Messiah.‘”⁶

All pious Jews were awaiting the magical moment when Messiah would be pointed out, they just weren’t ready for it to be a carpenter’s son who grew up in rural Nazareth of Galilee. Furthermore, what about this voice that spoke from heaven? What were the Jews waiting on with regard to such an announcement concerning the identity of Messiah? There is an interesting story about several Rabbis meeting in the upper chamber of a house in Jericho, when suddenly a voice from heaven spoke and said: “There is one among you who is worthy for the Shekinah glory to rest on him as it did on Moses, but his generation does not merit it.”⁷ All the Sages who were present turned and looked at Hillel the Elder, but he quickly died. It happened again when they met at another Rabbi’s house, and this time they all turned and looked at Samuel the Little. But he too died shortly thereafter. Before he died, Samuel the Little said the same would happen to two other great Rabbis, Simeon ben Gamaliel and and Ishmael ben Elisha, the high priest. Therefore we can see why a voice from heaven announcing an anointing was not looked on with great anticipation. It would not be long after the voice that spoke from heaven when Jesus was baptized that He too would die. But His death would be far more important than that of the other Rabbis mentioned.

Perhaps when it was told about this voice speaking about Jesus of Nazareth and calling Him His Son, some of them would not have grieved had He too would immediately meet the same fate. So when He suddenly disappeared for 40 days, it’s possible some of those who were there for the baptism thought it did. So a voice out of heaven was not that bizarre to the Jews, for they believe in it themselves. In fact, Rabbis say that such a voice even spoke to the wicked King Herod. Therefore they could not reject the voice speaking to Jesus who was by far more righteous and pure than Herod could ever dream of being.

It’s also amazing that many refused to accept Jesus’ words when He said He was speaking on behalf of His Father in heaven, yet we find this teaching by the Rabbis: “This principle that one who follows the School of Shammaite’s view endangers himself only after the heavenly voice went forth to decree that the law follows the view of the School of Hillel. But before the Heavenly voice went forth anyone who wished to adopt for himself a stringency in the law and act according to the stringent rulings of both the Houses of Shammai and Hillel ― they permitted him to do so but concerning him it was said, “The fool walks in darkness.”⁸

It is obvious that even according to Jewish tradition and their verbal laws, Jesus should have been considered as a serious candidate to be Messiah. But just as their own Rabbis had said, anyone who fails to listen to the heavenly voice will be seen as a fool who walks in darkness. There is a faulty reasoning alive in our world today, that when tragedy occurs and innocent lives are lost as a consequence, the first reaction is to attack the cause and the causer. It does not require a genius IQ to comprehend this truth: guns, knives, blunt instruments, and other objects used as weapons don’t kill, it’s the people who use them. Yet politicians and pundits want to get rid of these objects that can be used for keeping peace and peaceful purposes.

The same can be said for sinners. God does not send people to hell, they go there of their own choice. And God does not force people into heaven, they must want to go there and seek the way to get there. For those who came out to poke fun at John the Baptizer, and then later turn their mockery on Jesus, did not understand that they were throwing God’s lifeline back into His face. They were more or less saying, they didn’t need God’s help in securing salvation, they could achieve that on their own. It is painful, yet unfortunately true of many today, to describe them as they were in Jesus’ day: “Fools who walk in darkness.”

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER THREE

Part IV (con’t)

Verses 13-14: “Then Jesus traveled from Galilee to the Jordan River. He met with John, wanting John to baptize Him. But John tried to dissuade Him. John said, ‘Why do you come to me to be baptized? I should be baptized by You!‘”

Matthew does not indicate whether Jesus was already out ministering in Galilee, where He had become known as a prophet. Rather, he wants to tell the story of how Jesus came down from Galilee to where John the Baptizer had his ministry along the east side of the Jordan River. This certainly raises the question, what did Jesus do from the time He was twelve, talking to the elders in the Temple just before He was old enough for his bar mitzvah, until now when He shows up at John the Baptizer’s encampment? We are not told how old Jesus is at this point, but in Jewish verbal teachings we have some clues: “…at five years of age, a boy is ready to learn the Scriptures, at ten years of age, he is ready to study the Mishnah, at thirteen he is ready for the fulfilling of the commandments (bar mitzvah), at age fifteen he is ready to study the Talmud, at eighteen years of age he is ready for the bride-chamber, at age twenty for pursuing a calling, at age thirty for authority, at age forty for discernment, at age fifty for counsel, at age sixty for to be an elder, at age seventy for grey hairs, at age eighty for special strength,¹ at age ninety for bowed back, and at age one hundred a man is as one that has already more or less died and ceases to have any effect on the world.”²

Based on this, most scholars believe that Jesus embarked on His ministry after reaching the age of thirty. That means He spent the intervening eighteen years since he visited the Temple, working with His stepfather Joseph in Nazareth. This would explain why the elders in Nazareth knew Him so well when He came back to minister in the synagogue.³ Our Lord’s decision to go where John the Baptizer ministered shows the depth of His humility. It also gives Him more credence as an emissary from God the Father because He willingly subjected Himself to the ordinance of water baptism.

As to the exact place where John the Baptizer was ministering, one historian tells us: “Beth-Abara was the name given to the place where John was baptizing when Jesus came to him for baptism. In all the ancient manuscripts, and versions the reading is actually Bethania. This has consequently been the name used in critical editions of the text. The substitution of the one name for the other is due to Origen, who tells us that the reading found in almost all the copies was Bethania, but that he, knowing the localities, altered it to Bethabara?⁴ Most of the Church Fathers follow Origen in this, even those best acquainted with Palestine. From this it may fairly be inferred that there was a place on the Jordan called Bethabara, probably because of a much frequented crossing, since the word Bethabara means home of crossings; to which John the Baptizer resorted as a suitable location for his labors as a preacher of the kingdom of heaven.”⁵ Perhaps he was also influenced by the fact that Bethany can be also be taken to mean “the place of the boat” and Bethabara “the home of the crossing.” We are told that the Jordan river could be waded across about 800 meters south of where John the Baptizer ministered in summer and early fall, but in winter and spring people needed a ferry. There is also an interesting entry in the work of a 7^th Century manuscript that reads:

“That sacred and honored place, where our Lord was baptized by John, is always flooded by water from the Jordan river. And as this traveler went to the place, he relates that he passed back and forth across the river, until he found in a sacred place where a large wooden cross had been fixed in the river bed, close to where the water comes up to the neck of the tallest man, or, during the time of great drought, when the waters are lower and only reach up to his breast; but when the river is flooded, the whole of the cross is covered over by the higher water. The site where the cross was placed, marks the spot where, as has been told, the Lord was baptized. It is on this west side of the river, and a strong man can sling a stone as far as the other bank on the east side. From the site of the above-mentioned cross, a stone bridge has been erected so that its arches reach the bank, across which men go to the cross and descend by a slope to the bank, then ascending as they return. At the edge of the river is a small square church, built, as is it said, on the spot where the garments of the Lord were cared for when He was baptized. This stands on four stone vaults, rising above the waters which flow below, but is not usable as a place of worship. It is protected above by slacked lime, and below as has been said, is supported by vaults and arches. This church is in the lower ground of the valley through which the river Jordan flows; while on the higher ground, overhanging it, a great monastery of monks is built on the brow of the opposite hill. There is also enclosed within the same wall as the monastery, a church in honor of St. John Baptist, built on squared stones.”⁶

It was my pleasure to personally visit this area, and most of these relics are now gone or have been moved. But it does make one wonder what it would be like if they were all still there, and could be proven to be the exact spot where our Lord was baptized, and the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove descended, and the voice of God spoke from above. There’s little doubt it would have become one of the most sacred spots in Christendom, and subject to all sorts of veneration and idol worship. That’s also why the cross of Jesus was never recovered. And what happened to His crown of thorns, the sponge with the sour vinegar, the nails that were in His hands and feet, and the house where He lived in Capernaum, etc., etc. My personal belief is that Jesus knew these things would become objects of idolatry and be worshiped instead of His Father in heaven. Besides, as He said to Thomas, “Great blessings belong to the people who believe without seeing!”⁷

According to historians, the location of John the Baptizer’s mission was some three days from Jerusalem and over four days from Nazareth. Once Jesus arrives, the conversation that took place does not occur between complete strangers. It is obvious that Jesus knew about John’s calling, and John knew about Jesus’ anointing. This should not come as a surprise since they were second cousins by way of their mothers, and grew up in the same area in Galilee. This suggests that as boys they got to know each other and share their feelings and dreams.

Verse 15: “Jesus answered, ‘Let it be this way for now. We should do whatever God says is right.’ Then John agreed.”

Christ’s statement concerning “do whatever God says is right” must be contingent upon the completed sequence of events. There are several verses in Jeremiah that have a play on words which refer to a king who would come named Adonai Tzidkenu, which means: “The LORD who makes things right for us.”⁸ This was not new. Several Testaments ascribed to the tribes of Israel, which the Jews had access to, and some of them were found quoted in the Dead Sea Scrolls, allow us to read about this coming Man of Righteousness: “After this will arise star out of the midst of Jacob, and a man will sprout out of my seed, which will walk as a shining sun of righteousness among the children of men, in peace, and meekness, and righteousness, and no sin shall be found in him. The heavens will open over him, to pour out the spirit of blessedness upon him from the Father,and he will distribute spirit of grace on you, and you will be his children in truth, walking in his first and last commandments. This is the offspring of the most high God, and the well-spring of life to all flesh. Then will the scepter of my kingdom shine bright, and out of your root will spring the vessel of planting, through whom will arise the rod of righteousness to the Gentiles, to judge and save all such as call upon him.”⁹

Not only does the writer indicate that Jesus would be the message of grace to the Jews, but that one would also follow who would spread the good news to the Gentiles. It is easy to see the apostle Paul being referenced here. In addition, His water baptism without the subsequent Spirit baptism would eliminate fulfillment of what God declared to be the right thing. In other words, this is what God required by the Law and it could be done no other way. John the Baptizer, as we know, was filled with the Spirit while still in Elizabeth’s womb, consequently his inference in verse 14 to being baptized by Christ, was with water not Spirit. So we can see that what was happening with John the Baptizer and Jesus was not part of some mystery cult, but it was already being written and talked about. This makes it even more of an enigma as to why the Jewish leaders did not recognize Jesus of Nazareth as the One they were waiting for. But we all know, had they done so, then our Lord would have never made it to the cross to die for our sins so we could inherit eternal life.

Verse 16: “So Jesus was baptized. As soon as He came up out of the water, the sky opened, and John saw God’s Spirit coming down on Jesus like a dove. A voice from heaven then said, ‘This is my Son, the one I love. I am very pleased with Him.’”

The phrase “the sky opened” here does not mean that there were clouds in the sky that parted all at once, or that a split in the stratosphere was suddenly observed. This is the same phrase used, for instance, when someone is talking about rain. They might say, “The sky just opened up and the rain came down in buckets!” It has the sense of something suddenly appearing that was totally unexpected. When the voice spoke, there was every possibility that the words of the Psalmist must have come to mind for those standing there as witnesses, “Let me tell you about the Lord’s agreement: He said to me, ‘Today I have become your Father, and you are My son.’”¹⁰ And as Matthew was fond of saying, what happened this day on the banks of the Jordan River, made it easier to understand what was said to Isaiah: “Here is my servant, the one I support. He is the one I have chosen, and I am very pleased with Him, I have filled Him with my Spirit.”¹¹

As might be expected, the critics of this event would have their questions. In one polemic writing we read: “What was the purpose of this? What sort of god must be sanctified through removal of his impurity just like a human being? Moreover, it is written elsewhere in their books that a spirit had originally entered Mary when she became pregnant. Where, then, had the spirit gone? If you will answer that the spirit became impure in her womb, then it follows that she was impure like other women. Furthermore, there is a warning in their Torah that a man should be baptized only once, and one who does this more than once is considered a heretic. And yet this man, who one would think needed no further sanctity in light of the fact that his divinity made him holy, this Jesus was sanctified at the hands of a man. Indeed, he was sanctified three times. Initially, when he entered his mother’s womb there was a holy spirit; then, when he was baptized by John like all other men there was a holy spirit; finally, when he came out of the Jordan there was a Holy Spirit. Thus, there were three such occasions.”¹² It is clear that this skeptic had the truth right before him, yet because of bias and pride he failed to see that truth and accept it.

So we can see, this anonymous medieval German Jewish scholar was looking at Jesus’ baptism and using human logic to make sense of it. That in itself will always lead to confusion and misunderstanding. Jesus made it clear that He was allowing Himself to be baptized in order to make sure that His human form was initiated under the same guidelines as all those who followed Him would be initiated. This did not affect His divinity which needed no cleansing. But interestingly, the writer goes on to make some observations which shows the time period in which he lived and what he saw in the church as it existed in Europe at that time. He says, “Moreover, when people are baptized it is for the sake of the soul, for the body is considered an empty vessel before that. In that case, why do they baptize the crosses in their houses of abomination as well as other vessels used for their idolatry such as bells and chalices? Do they too have spirit and soul?”¹³

Not only was that a valid question in the middle ages, but it is a valid question even today. Then Matthew notes that the sky opened and the Spirit coming down in the form of a dove. Although Matthew does not stipulate it here, most Bible scholars believe there must have been some form of illumination that accompanied the Holy Spirit so as to highlight His descent. In fact, when Rabbis were discussing the Messiah, where it says: “He reveals deep and secret things; he knows what lies in the darkness; and light dwells with him¹⁴,”¹⁵ Rabbi Abba of Serungayya, which is a place near Tiberias, said: “This alludes to the royal Messiah.”¹⁶ Then Rabbi Simeon ben Lakish commenting on the Spirit of God hovering over the waters says, “This alludes to the spirit of Messiah, as you read, ‘And the Spirit of the Lord will rest on him.’¹⁷ For what reason will this Spirit eventually come? For the same reason that it hovered over the face of the waters, i.e., for the purpose of bringing repentance that is compared to water.”¹⁸ And then Rabbi Lakish speaks later about the purpose of clouds, “He raises clouds from the ends of the earth,”¹⁹ and says: “…it achieves awe-inspiring sights in the sky and causes the Holy Spirit to rest upon men, as you read, the vision of Isaiah²⁰.”²¹ It is clear that they knew from their own writings and by their own words. Why then were they so blind to the truth?

We do not know how much John the Baptizer knew firsthand, or how much Jesus explained to Him before He came down to be baptized, or how much Jesus told him before, during and after the baptism. But what does appear clear is the John the Baptizer understood his role, and both the voice from heaven and the voice on earth were enough to convince him that obedience to the Word was all God expected of him.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER THREE

Part IV

Verse 11: “I baptize you in water to show that you have changed your hearts and lives. But there is someone coming later who is able to do more than I can do. I am not good enough to even be the one who takes off His sandals. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.”

It is remarkable that in just two verses we see the use of “fire” in two totally different ways. One Jewish commentator makes this observation: “Fire is the most refined material on earth. God supervises these regions of the lower universe, as He punishes the sinners by fire, while saving those who love Him from the fire.”¹ The preposition here in Greek “en” has been translated elsewhere as “in,” “with,” and “among” Later on, Jesus’ exit up out of the water in verse 16 would indicate that He had been “in” the water thereby alluding to immersion as the form of water baptism He received from John the Baptizer. But John quickly shows that his baptism was just a preclude to something already on its way. And the One who was bringing it was of such stature and holiness, that he would not even qualify to be His servant.

In Jewish writings we find these customs related to servants’ duties: “If the slave tied his master’s sandals, or loosened his sandals, or carried his clothes behind him to the bathhouse, this means the slave is freed of any misconduct.”² Likewise, we read that Rabbis taught: “How is a heathen slave acquired by taking possession of him? If he carries his owner’s luggage behind him to the baths where he undresses him, washes him, anoints him, massages him, dresses him, and puts his shoes back on, he then becomes his property.”³ In other words, these are the duties expected of any servant, and only if that servant can adequately perform them should that servant be taken. These same qualifications for a servant’s work are mentioned by another revered Rabbi.⁴ There is also a comparison made between a servant and a student, showing just how inferior John the Baptizer rated himself compared to Jesus. It says: “All manner of service that a slave must render to his master, a student must render to his teacher, except for taking off his shoes.”⁵ In John’s eyes, even though he was a relative of Jesus, and the prophesied forerunner of the Messiah, still he did not feel himself to be on the level of a student in relationship to our Lord, even to the point of saying he was even unworthy to tie or untie Jesus’ sandals.

John the Baptizer then says, I only baptize with water, but the One greater than me will baptize you with the Holy Spirit. Isaiah spoke of a similar connection between water and Spirit: “I will pour water for thirsty people, and streams will flow through the desert. I will pour my Spirit on your children, and I will bless your family.”⁶ John the Baptizer may have had this scripture in mind when talking about his baptism and Jesus’ baptism. Were these terms foreign to the Jewish listener? If so, how did John the Baptizer expect them to then understand what he was talking about? However, if Rabbis already taught about baptism by water and fire, then it would be easier for them to get a better grasp of what John the Baptizer was implying. Should this not be the same message from any minister of the Gospel; I can baptize you in water, but only Jesus can baptize you in the Holy Spirit.

We find one answer in Jewish verbal teachings where it says: “A certain person of another sect said to Rabbi Abbahu: Your God is a priest, since it is written, That they accept my wave offering.⁷ Wave offerings, as a rule, were only given to Priests. Now, after God buried Moses,⁸ where did He bathe after His contact with a corpse?⁹ If you reply, ‘By using water: is it not written, Who hath measured the waters in the hollow of His hand?¹⁰ i.e. He could not bathe in water, especially when compared to how big He is. Or is the answer – ‘He bathed in fire?’ Since it is written, Behold the Lord will come in fire.’¹¹ ‘Is then purification by fire effective?’ On the contrary,’ he replied, ‘bathing for the purpose of purification should essentially be in fire, for it is written, And all that cannot stand the fire you will make them go through water.’¹² Essentially therefore, purification can also be by fire¹³.”¹⁴

Also, a Greek philosopher and orator had some experiences and insights that related to the same subject. Since he was a contemporary of Jesus, no doubt some of the more learned Jewish scholars, such as Saul of Tarsus, may have certainly heard of his writings. At the request of an empress, he wrote a lengthy autobiography. In that book we find the following mention of water mixed with fire in a ceremony. On a visit to India he remembers seeing: “Indians purify themselves of unintentional mistakes. He tells that the sages of India call the well, the well of testing, and the fire, the fire of pardon.”¹⁵ He goes on to say, “…they anointed their heads with an amber-like drug, which imparted such a warmth to these Indians, that their bodies steamed and sweat ran off them as profusely as if they were washing themselves with fire; next they threw themselves into the water and, having taken such a bath, they took off for the temple with wreaths upon their heads and full of sacred song.”¹⁶ He continues: “Here are interests which no law has required of us, nor nature planted in us from birth, but to which we have devoted ourselves out of mere strength of character and courage. In behalf therefore of these, should anyone try to violate them, let the wise man pass through fire, let him bare his neck for the ax, for he will not be overcome by any such threats, nor driven to any sort of deception; but he will hold on to all he knows as firmly as if it were a religion in which he had been initiated.”¹⁷ And the prophet Zechariah mentions the role of fire, “The troubles will be like the fire a person uses to prove silver is pure. I will test them the way a person tests gold.”¹⁸

Again it shows that the teaching and ministry of John the Baptizer and Jesus were not some radical form of cultism with new and strange doctrines. Rather, they were sent to select what was true and filter out the heresies that crept into the written Word of God in order to show that it all pointed to God’s ultimate plan of redemption and salvation through the Messiah, Jesus of Nazareth. But it also provided an expectation that the baptism by fire provided by Jesus would be more purifying and energizing than the one by water. Today this fire baptism is spoken of as the baptism in the Holy Spirit that was accompanied by tongues of fire in the Upper Room on the Day of Pentecost. But among those who call themselves Pentecostals, there was for a long time dissent on whether the cleansing brought by the baptism of fire was to be exhibited externally or internally. In some cases, however, rather than one side winning out over the other, it appears that both sides have lost their enthusiasm for either one.

Verse 12: “He already holds the winnowing fork in His hand to clean the grain. He will separate the good grain from the straw, so He can clean up the grain on the threshing floor and store it away in his grainery. Then He will burn the useless straw with a fire that cannot be stopped.”

Here John the Baptizer mentions one of the instruments used by farmers in his day to clean the grain brought in from the field before it was stored or sold on the market to make flour. The farmer would wait until a strong wind came up, then after the grain had been trampled on to remove the husks covering the seed, he would then fill a winnowing fan, raise it with its long handle, and as he shook and tossed the grain up in the air the wind would blow away the lighter husks, which is called “chaff”, so the clean seed could drop back into the fan, making it easier to gather and make even cleaner.

We see that one well-known Jewish Rabbi speaks of this in his commentary: “You will winnow them: You will scatter them, as with a pitchfork, to the wind and a wind will carry them away by themselves to Gehinnom.”¹⁹ Then he comments on the use of the winnowing fork in the same context as John the Baptizer does here: “…concerning the conduct of the daughter of My people, a wind will come but not to sift the chaff from the threshing floor. I will sift them with a sieve, but not to cleanse them. That’s not what the wind is for. That is to say, not for good but for evil, but to send men, women, children, and livestock into exile.”²⁰ In other words, this winnowing was done as a form of judgment. And in a discussion by other Rabbis it was said: “If a wooden pitchfork, winnow-fan or rake (as well as a hair-comb) losses one of its teeth, and another tooth is made of metal, these can become unusable because they are susceptible to contamination.”²¹

After examining the Christology presented so far, we can see here that John the Baptizer had been given Christ’s whole mission in a nutshell. What John said in verse 11 has already transpired, and what he says in verse 12 will yet take place! Isaiah also made this clear: “These people and their works will both burn up, and no one will be able to put out that fire.”²² Zechariah also echos this same warning, “My anger will be like a hot fire—no one will be able to stop it.”²³ So those listening to John the Baptizer knew exactly what he was talking about and the inference he was making to a coming time of harvest, which by metaphor, means the judgment. It also contains a subliminal thought that God has established the rules and methods for judgment, and if that method is abandoned and someone tries to substitute their own ideas, it will not do the job intended, and may even contaminate the whole process.

Some scholars see the mention here by the Rabbis of the following four items: grappling irons (to pull); pitch forks (to pitch); winnowing fans (to sift); and hair-combs (to separate), as also being elements of the Gospel of Jesus the Christ that was just about to be announced. And in particular, the winnowing fan,²⁴ was specifically tied to the concept of judging. By cleaning up the threshing floor, this also suggests Israel as a nation. In Isaiah we read: “My people, you will be like the grain crushed on my threshing floor. I have told you everything I heard from the Lord All-Powerful, the God of Israel.”²⁵ And for the record, according to the teaching of Rabbis, such winnowing was forbidden on the Sabbath.²⁶ But the most important part that John the Baptizer was wanting them to notice, was what happened to the chaff. Copies of Jewish verbal teachings states clearly: “The stubble and stalks must be burned. It conveys uncleanness by contact and when being carried.”²⁷ This echos what we read in Isaiah in the Song of the Vineyard about Jerusalem and the men of Judah: “Bad things will happen to them. Their descendants will be destroyed completely, just as fire burns straw and leaves. Their descendants will be like plants with rotten roots, whose flowers have all blown away like dust in the wind.”²⁸ Matthew does not tell us what reaction John the Baptizer received from these curious Pharisees and Sadducees, because he was anxious to get on with the real subject of his Gospel.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

by Dr. Robert R. Seyda

GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

CHAPTER THREE

Part III (con’t)

The Pharasees and Sadducees were almost direct opposites in their beliefs, yet so often we find them together in their opposition of Jesus. While the devil tempted Jesus in the wilderness with hunger, pride and greed, his method during our Lord’s ministry was through constant criticism, harassment, and resistance. He is more about who the Sadducees really were:

SADDUCEES: The name comes from the singular form of an adjective denoting someone as “an adherent of the Bene Ẓadoḳ,” the chief of the priesthood in the days of David and Solomon and who developed the Temple hierarchy all through the era of the First and Second Temples, down to the days of Ben Sira,¹ but who degenerated under the influence of Greek thought, especially during the rule of Seleucus, when to be a follower of the priestly aristocracy was tantamount to being a worldly-minded philosopher. The Sadducees represented views and practices of the Law and interests of Temple and priesthood directly opposite to those of the Pharisees. Over the course of time, the name applied to all the aristocratic circles connected with the high priests by marriage and other social relations, as only the highest noble families intermarried with the priests officiating at the Temple in Jerusalem. The Sadducees, says Josephus, have none but the rich on their side.² Rabbi Yehudah HaLevi also speaks of the Sadducees and their origin. He states: “…the next generation was that of the High Priest Simon the Just, and his disciples and colleagues. He was followed by Antigonos of Socho of great fame. Among his disciples were Tsadok and Boethos, who set down the foundations for the sects named after them as ‘Sadducees’ or ‘Boethusians.’” He goes on to say, “they were heretical sectarians who denied the World to Come; they are the heretics for whom we pray for their downfall in our prayers.”³ This is why they were so opposed to the teachings of Jesus on the world and life to come, especially the term, “eternal life.” One Christian Bishop in the 4^th Century AD acknowledged: “Sadducees, meaning ‘most righteous,’ are descended from the Samaritans and from a priest named Zadok. They denied the resurrection of the dead and did not recognize the existence of angels or spirits. But in all other respects they were Jews.”⁴ Some feel that this Bishop was incorrect about the name meaning “most righteous.” However, he may have been using that as a term to describe their attitude. In his section on Samaritans and the Samaritan Sects, this same Bishop goes on to explain: “…these did not stay true to their master’s teaching. They rejected the resurrection of the dead and held the same opinion as other Samaritans’. They do not admit the existence of angels, although their fellow Samaritans deny this. And they do not know the Holy Spirit, for they have not been deemed worthy of Him. All their observances are just like the Samaritans’. But they were Jews, not Samaritans; for they offered sacrifices in Jerusalem, and cooperated with Jews in everything else.”⁵ Another revered Rabbi adds this: “Antigonus of Soko received this traditional saying from Simon the Just who said: ‘Be not like hirelings who work for their master for the sake of receiving recompense; but be like servants who minister to their master without any thought of receiving a reward; and let the fear of Heaven be upon you’.”⁶ In looking at the teachings of the Sadducees, especially their questions of Jesus, we can see how they followed or ignored the teachings of their founders. In speaking of them, John the Baptizer did not choose the term “offspring of vipers” arbitrarily. He was well aware of the implications of such a phrase. The devil had been identified as the embodiment of a snake since the Garden of Eden. In other words, he was calling them children of the devil. Christ also added to this by giving them the same name when He told them that Satan the liar was their father. There was no intention here of claiming that Satan had somehow been able to plant his seed in their mothers’ wombs. Rather, both John and Jesus were referring to their innate tendency to lie and attempt to use falsehoods as the truth, despite what God already said about it, something the devil still does quite well. Could it be that John the Baptizer recalled what King David said: “Those wicked people started doing wrong as soon as they were born. They have been liars from birth. Their anger is as deadly as the poison of a snake. They shut their ears like a deaf cobra that does not listen to the music of the snake charmers, no matter how well they play.”⁷ John did not support the idea of cheap grace. He no doubt refused to baptize anyone who did not show contrition and repent of their sins with a vow to live better to the glory of God.

Verse 9: “I know what you are thinking. You can’t wait to say, ‘but Abraham is our father!’ That means nothing to me. Let me tell you something, God could make sons for Abraham from these stones.”

John the Baptizer’s anger here is not against Abraham or his progeny, but rather the egotistical claims of the Pharisees and Sadducees that as children of Abraham they were in no need of repentance. To show his utter contempt for such thinking, John the Baptizer stated rather sarcastically: “God could carve children of Abraham out of stone,” who also would have no need for repentance because they would be cold and heartless. What John implied is that whether these Pharisee’s or Sadducee’s were made by God out of human flesh or out of the pebbles along the beach, neither one stood above the other by simply claiming their kinship with Abraham; both would still need repentance in order to receive God’s forgiveness. They were in John the Baptizer’s eyes, not better than dead idols. The idea of ancestral or inherited righteousness to dismiss any need for being born again should be equally denounced today.

One renown Jewish convert to Christianity and great Biblical scholar made this statement: “For, no principle was more fully established in the popular conviction, than that all Israel had part in the World to Come, and this, specifically, because of their connection with Abraham. This appears not only in the New Testament,⁸ but from the writings of Philo, Josephus, and in many Rabbinic passages. In fact, ‘The merits of the Fathers,’ is one of the most common phrases in the mouth of the Rabbis.⁹ Abraham was represented as sitting at the gate of Gehenna, to deliver any Israelite who otherwise might have been consigned to its terrors. In fact, by their being descendants of Abraham all the children of Israel were nobles, infinitely higher than any person not born a Jew, even converts from paganism. The Jewish convert mention earlier goes on to say: “‘What,’ exclaims the Talmud, ‘shall the born Israelite stand upon the earth, and the proselyte be in heaven?’ In fact, the ships on the sea were preserved through the merit of Abraham; the rain descended on account of it. For his sake alone had Moses been allowed to ascend into heaven, and to receive the Law; for his sake the sin of the golden calf had been forgiven; his righteousness had on many occasions been the support of Israel’s cause; Daniel had been heard for the sake of Abraham; nay, his merit availed even for the wicked. In its extravagance the Midrash thus punctuates Abraham’s effect: “If your children were even morally dead bodies, without blood vessels or bones, your merit would still be efficient to save them!’”¹⁰

My father often told how his father, a Lutheran pastor, reacted when he informed him that he had been born again and become a Pentecostal believer. His father said: “Born again! You don’t need to be born again! You were born a Lutheran, christened as a child in the Lutheran Church, and raised a Lutheran and went through Lutheran catechism. That’s all you need to get to heaven!” Thankfully, later they reconciled and his father admitted that my dad’s born again experience had done wonders for his life. One Jewish writer tells us that the use of “stones” and “sons” in our text is a good alliteration to preserve a wordplay found in Hebrew that the Greek totally ignores. “Sons” in Hebrew is banim, “stones” is written abanim.¹¹ We can see a similar play on words in the writings of Amos: “ADONAI asked, ‘Amos, what do you see?’ I answered, ‘A basket of summer fruit.’ Then ADONAI said to me, ‘The harvest has come for my people, I will never again overlook their offenses.”¹² To put this in English prose and make it more understandable we could say: “The basket held the last fruit of the harvest being offered by God’s people as an act of repentance in order to receive forgiveness, and at the same time it represented as God’s last act of forgiveness being given to His people.”

Verse 10: “The ax is now ready to cut down the trees. Every tree that does not produce good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire.”

The grammatical reference to the word “tree” as used in this verse, shows that the ax has already been placed and is laying next to the tree’s roots ready for use; just waiting for someone to come along and pick it up and put it to use. Jesus employed this same metaphor in His teaching.¹³ Since John the Baptizer was sent to herald the coming of the Messiah, the One with the ax was in fact already on His way. It can be expressed as follows: John the Baptizer was giving the Jews an opportunity to turn from their sins and begin to live for God in all their ways, because there was One to succeed him who would put an ax to their hypocritical way of living.

What John the Baptizer says here has a tone reminiscent of what the prophet Malachi said: “The Lord All-Powerful says, ‘I am sending my messenger to prepare the way for me. Then suddenly, the Lord you are looking for will come to His temple. Yes, the messenger you are waiting for, the one who will tell about my agreement, is really coming! No one can prepare for that time or stand against him when he comes. He will be like a burning fire. He will be like the strong soap people use to make things clean. He will make the Levites clean. He will make them pure, like silver is made pure with fire! He will make them pure like gold and silver. Then they will bring gifts to the Lord, and they will do things the right way. Then the Lord will accept the gifts from Judah and Jerusalem. It will be as it was in the past—as the time long ago. Then I will bring you to justice. I will be an expert witness and testify about the evil things people do. I will speak out against those who do evil magic or commit adultery. I will speak out against those who make false promises and cheat their workers and don’t pay them the money they promised. I will testify against those who don’t help strangers, or widows and orphans. And I will testify against those who don’t respect me.’ This is what the Lord All-Powerful said.”¹⁴

This warning, certainly went against the traditional thinking of that day. In Jewish writings on the coming of the Messiah, we find this comment: “Never allow your lips to utter any evil words and thereby sin in the very flesh which has been sanctified with the seal of the holy covenant, for by so doing you are in danger of being thrown into a burning pit made for evil and wrong-doing, the ruler of which is called Council Assembly [Duma] and is always operated by angels of destruction, keeping watch out for those who keep the covenant over whom they have no power to injure or afflict.”¹⁵ In other words, if you keep the covenant, destroying angels cannot touch you. Therefore you need not fear the place called Gehenna.

We also find in the Jewish Book of Light examples of the two classes of those who keep the covenant and those who break it. They explain: “Examples and instances of these two classes of individuals are found in the history of mankind. In the first category, were the famed teacher Hillel, president of the school of Jerusalem at the beginning of the Christian era, with his colleague Schammai. Their only object was the research of truth and the advancement of the divine glory, and though their disputes were very keen and sharp, yet friendship and good will always existed between them. In the second group, as an example, are Korah and his party and their contention with Aaron for supremacy, which resulted in their destruction and descent into Hell, the limbo and native place of dissension and discord.”¹⁶ Finally in the same Book of Light we find a quote from a respected Rabbi who says: “…hell itself will vanish; suffering, sin, temptation and death will be outlived by humanity and then be followed by an eternal feast, a Sabbath without end.”¹⁷

So we can see why those who felt as though they were keeping the covenant were offended by John the Baptizer’s warning that they too were headed for Gehenna’s fire if they did not repent and accept the new covenant that would be brought by the Messiah who would follow him. As a young boy growing up during World War II, I often heard the phrase, “Foxhole confessions.” It was coined to represent what happened when soldiers found themselves hiding in their foxholes which they dug as a means of protection, and as mortar shells came pounding in and gun fire screamed over their heads they would pray: “Oh God, get me out of this and I will serve you for the rest of my life.” The phrase foxhole confession became a stigma in that many who prayed those prayers never did what they promised God they would do. This is repeated today, but not in foxholes, but in automobile accidents, being lost and marooned in a snow storm, facing some dilemma at work or at home, etc. There is no need to wait for tragedy or terror to bring one to their knees in confession, but recognizing that one’s hope of eternal life can be secured by faith in Christ, then no matter what happens all is well with one’s soul.