Mateus 27
Leon Morris · Citado em PreceptAustin
Mateus 27
Morris - casting lots. This unspeakable humiliation: stripping the Lord of His clothing then gambling over His main garment, the last personal possession He owned, was in fulfillment of David's graphic and detailed crucifixion psalm (Psalm 22:17, 18). This specific event is one of the relatively few described in all four gospels. (Borrow The Defender's Study Bible page 1050ff) NET NOTE - Grk “by throwing the lot” (probably by using marked pebbles or broken pieces of pottery). A modern equivalent, “throwing dice,” was chosen here because of its association with gambling. According to L&N 6.219 a term for “dice” is particularly appropriate. Matthew Henry's Concise - Mt 27:35-44. It was usual to put shame upon malefactors, by a writing to notify the crime for which they suffered. So they set up one over Christ's head. This they designed for his reproach, but God so overruled it, that even his accusation was to his honour. There were crucified with him at the same time, two robbers. He was, at his death, numbered among the transgressors, that we, at our death, might be numbered among the saints. The taunts and jeers he received are here recorded. The enemies of Christ labour to make others believe that of religion and of the people of God, which they themselves know to be false. The chief priests and scribes, and the elders, upbraid Jesus with being the King of Israel. Many people could like the King of Israel well enough, if he would but come down from the cross; if they could but have his kingdom without the tribulation through which they must enter into it. But if no cross, then no Christ, no crown. Those that would reign with him, must be willing to suffer with him. Thus our Lord Jesus, having undertaken to satisfy the justice of God, did it, by submitting to the punishment of the worst of men. And in every minute particular recorded about the sufferings of Christ, we find some prediction in the Prophets or the Psalms fulfilled. Divided up (1266) diamerizo (dia = separation, intensifies meaning + merizo - divide) means to divide, part, share, separate into parts. Among classical writers it was used by Plato of a butcher who cuts animals into pieces. Friberg - (1) divide, separate; passive be separated off, be dispersed (Acts 2.3); (2) distribute, divide up, share (Lk 22.17); middle divide up among (Mt 27.35); (3) figuratively and passive be divided against, be opposed to (Lk 11.17) (Borrow Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament) The Septuagint uses diamerizo of dividing the earth (Genesis 10:25), the nations (Deuteronomy 32:8), land (Psalm 60:6; Ps 108:7; Isaiah 34:17; Ezekiel 47:21), plunder (Jdg5:30; Zechariah 14:1), and food (2Sa 6:19 [2Ki 6:19]). Diamerizo is used in all four gospels of dividing Jesus' garments - Matthew 27:35; Mark 15:24; Luke 23:34; John 19:24. DIAMERIZO - 11X/11V - distributing(1), divided(4), divided...among(1), divided up...among themselves(2), dividing up...among(1), share(1), sharing(1). Matt. 27:35; Mk. 15:24; Lk. 11:17; Lk. 11:18; Lk. 12:52; Lk. 12:53; Lk. 22:17; Lk. 23:34; Jn. 19:24; Acts 2:3; Acts 2:45 Lots (2819) kleros from kláo = to break) was first a specially marked small object, pebble or a piece of wood used in casting lots as in Acts 1:17, 26. The object was thrown down in order to aid the making decisions a practice based on pagan views of chance (Greeks and Romans), or in the case of believers using the lot and interpreting the result as guided by God (see Acts 1:26+ in choosing Judas' replacement). KLEROS - 11X/10V - allotted to your charge(1), inheritance(2), lot(1), lots(5), portion(1), share(1). Matt. 27:35; Mk. 15:24; Lk. 23:34; Jn. 19:24; Acts 1:17; Acts 1:26; Acts 8:21; Acts 26:18; Col. 1:12; 1 Pet. 5:3 TDNT - The basic sense of kleros is “lot” (in drawing lots), then “portion,” and finally “inheritance”… A first meaning in the NT is “lot,” as in Mk. 15:24 (with emphasis on the humiliation of Christ) and Acts 1:26 (with emphasis on seeking the will of God). The main sense, however, is “allotted portion.” Thus Judas has a share in the apostles’ ministry in Acts 1:17. Simon Magus has no share in God’s word or gift in Acts 8:21, and there is reference to an eschatological portion in Acts 26:18; Col. 1:12. Ignatius expands on this sense in Ephesians 11.2 etc. and Polycarp in Polycarp 12.2. In 1 Pet. 5:2, 3 what is meant is not the elders’ personal possessions, and certainly not offerings on their behalf, but the portions assigned to them (i.e., to their charge). (Kittel, G., Friedrich, G., & Bromiley, G. W. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Eerdmans) (Bolding added) Bob
Mateus 27
Morris: Before moving on to the treatment of Jesus at the hands of the Romans Matthew finishes the story of Judas. He tells of that man’s remorse and suicide and of the curious mental processes of the hierarchy who had not scrupled to use the money at their disposal to procure the arrest of Jesus so that he could be killed, but who did scruple to put this same money back into the temple treasury. Characteristically Matthew sees a fulfilment of prophecy in their ultimate use of the funds. The incident is found in this Gospel and in Acts 1 only. Stendahl thinks that Matthew’s placing of the death of Judas at this point “indicates that he understands the decision of the Sanhedrin as the crucial one” (in v. 3 Jesus is already spoken of as “condemned”). (See The Gospel According To Matthew) Charles Swindoll: As Matthew’s camera zooms in on the traitor, we find him in a no-man’s-land. Having betrayed Jesus, he could never return to that familiar circle of disciples that had been his family for the past three years. And since he had fulfilled his usefulness to the Jewish leaders by leading the soldiers to Jesus, they wanted nothing more to do with him. Judas stood in the place of an outcast. To make matters worse, as the sun rose over Jerusalem, it suddenly dawned on him what he had done: He had betrayed the Messiah into the hands of sinners. One expositor envisions that the sight of Jesus being brutalized and hauled away “was devastating to Judas, more than even his money-hungry mind, his sordid soul, and his seared conscience could deal with. He felt remorse as he began to experience the intense, excruciating pain that is unique to profound guilt.” (See Insights on Matthew 16–28 - Page 274) Donald Hagner: Did it simply dawn upon Judas that he had been responsible for the great injustice of the condemnation of a truly righteous and good man? At the same time, the narrative has an unmistakable inevitability about it. We can pity Judas, but we cannot make a hero out of him, nor alas even a believer. As the Son of Man fulfills the prophecies, so too do Judas and the Jewish priests, as they act freely out of their own unfortunate motives, unwittingly acting as instruments for the accomplishment of God’s purposes and the fulfillment of scripture. In no sense are we allowed to take Judas or the Jewish authorities as representing Jews or Judaism in general, let alone “the essence of Jewishness.” In such thinking lies the evil root of antiSemitism. (Quoted by Paul Apple Matthew 27:3-10) Let us beware of trusting to a late repentance.... ONE penitent thief was saved in the hour of death, that no man might despair, but ONLY ONE, that no man might presume. J C
Mateus 27
Morris: Judas’ remorse leads him to try to undo his pact with the chief priests. It is a futile course, however, for the cynical authorities have no interest in either Judas’ guilt (cf. Deut. 27:25) or in Jesus’ innocence. And so, with no apparent way out, Judas succumbs to despair and hangs himself (cf. 2Sa 17:23 for an OT incident that parallels the story of Judas) (See The Gospel According To Matthew) Innocent (121)(athoos from a = without + thoe = penalty) means having never been punished, free from guilt, unpunished, free from a thing, unharmed, not deserving punishment (from Liddell-Scott) Vine - primarily denotes "unpunished" (a, negative, thoe, "a penalty"); then, "innocent," Matt. 27:4, "innocent blood," i.e., the blood of an "innocent" person, the word "blood" being used both by synecdoche (a part standing for the whole), and by metonymy (one thing standing for another), i.e., for death by execution (some mss. have dikaion, "righteous"); Matt. 27:24, where Pilate speaks of himself as "innocent." (Vine's Expository Dictionary of Old Testament and New Testament Words) Gilbrant - Classical Greek There is a moderately wide semantic range attested by the adjective athōos among classical writers. Probably originating from a negating alpha (1) prefix plus the noun thōē, “penalty, punishment,” athōos can denote “unpunished, unpenalized” for something (Liddell-Scott). Second, the emphasis can be upon the condition of someone: “innocent, not deserving punishment, guiltless.” Third, in the active sense it can describe someone/thing as “causing no harm, harmless” (ibid.). Septuagint Usage There are over 50 occurrences of athōos in the Septuagint; when there is a corresponding Hebrew term it is usually one of two: nāqâh (niphal, piel), “be free of, exempt, innocent,” or nāqî, “free, innocent.” It can speak of being “released” from an oath (e.g., Genesis 24:41) and it particularly occurs in legal contexts with reference to “being free from responsibility” or “innocent” (e.g., Exodus 21:19,28; 23:7; cf. Job 10:14). The classical sense “cause no harm” is also attested (Numbers 5:19, curse not affecting an innocent woman accused of unfaithfulness; cf. 1 Samuel 25:26 [LXX 1 Kings 25:26]). The “innocent” are watched over by God, and it is especially heinous to kill an innocent person (Exodus 23:7). Note the proximity of dikaios (1337)in Deuteronomy 27:25; Susanna 53; Psalm 94:21 (LXX 93:21); 1 Samuel 19:5 (LXX 1 Kings 19:5); cf. 2 Samuel 3:28 (LXX 2 Kings 3:28); Jeremiah 2:34. “Innocent blood” is a recurring phrase describing the murder of the righteous (= innocent) by the wicked (e.g., 2 Kings 24:4 [LXX 4 Kings 24:4]; Jeremiah 19:4; 1 Maccabees 1:37; 2 Maccabees 1:8). “Innocence” acquires a positive religious meaning in some texts and stands in direct contradistinction to the wicked (Psalms 10:8 [LXX 9:29]; 15:5 [14:5]). The “innocent” are like the “faithful” of God (Psalm 18:25 [LXX 17:25]); they have “innocent (athōos) hands and a pure heart” (Psalm 24:4 [LXX 23:4]). At times innocence, lack of guilt, is set in cultic imagery (Psalms 26:6 [LXX 25:6]; 73:13 [72:13]). New Testament Usage - Somewhat surprisingly, given the use of athōos in the Septuagint to denote the faithful of God, it only appears twice in the Greek New Testament, both in Matthew chapter 27. Neither text is paralleled in the Synoptic tradition; however, an interesting variation in the manuscripts at 27:4 is informative. Some manuscripts (B1, L, O, Old Latin, and Vulgate and some versions) read dikaios instead of athōos. This suggests the association between the “righteous” and the “innocent” continued. Either text makes sense: Judas lamented that he had betrayed “innocent” blood (the life of the righteous one, Jesus). Obviously Matthew was influenced by the Septuagintal phraseology, “innocent blood” (see above). Later, in Matthew 27:24 Pilate washed his hands, thus symbolizing his innocent role in the death of Jesus (cf. Psalms 26:6 [LXX 25:6]; 73:13 [72:13]). This set the stage for the laying of the blame for the death of the “Blameless One” squarely upon the shoulders of the Jewish mob that cried for Barabbas rather than for their Messiah (cf. verse 25ff.; Acts 2:22-24). (Complete Biblical Library) ATHOOS - 2V - Matt. 27:4; Matt. 27:24 ATHOOS IN SEPTUAGINT -Gen. 24:41; Exod. 21:19; Exod. 21:28; Exod. 23:7; Num. 5:19; Num. 5:28; Num. 5:31; Num. 32:22; Deut. 24:5; Deut. 27:25; Jos. 2:17; Jos. 2:19; 1 Sam. 19:5; 1 Sam. 25:26; 1 Sam. 25:31; 2 Sam. 3:28; 2 Sam. 14:9; 1 Ki. 2:5; 2 Ki. 21:16; 2 Ki. 24:4; 2 Chr. 36:5; Est. 8:12; Job 9:28; Job 10:14; Job 12:6; Job 22:30; Ps. 10:8; Ps. 15:5; Ps. 18:25; Ps. 24:4; Ps. 26:6; Ps. 73:13; Ps. 94:21; Ps. 106:38; Jer. 2:34; Jer. 2:35; Jer. 7:6; Jer. 19:4; Jer. 22:3; Jer. 22:17; Jer. 26:15; Jer. 46:28; Blood (129) haima is literally the red fluid that circulates in the heart, arteries, capillaries, and veins of a vertebrate animal carrying nourishment and oxygen to and bringing away waste products from all parts of the body and thus is essential for the preservation of life. Haima gives us English words like hemorrhage (Gk - haimorragia from haimo- + rragia from regnuo - to burst) English derivatives inclue hematology (study of blood) and "leukemia" which is from leuco (white) plus haima (blood), which is fitting as leukemia is a disease that affects the white blood cells. Derivatives of haima are : haimatekchusía (130), shedding of blood; haimorroéō (131), to hemorrhage. Haima was used to describe “descent” or “family” in ancient times. “To shed blood” is to destroy life. The Sorrow Of Betrayal I have sinned by betraying innocent blood. — Matthew 27:4 Today's Scripture : Matthew 27:1-10 When I was a boy, my dad observed my spendthrift ways and often said that money burned a hole in my pocket. I suppose it’s not unlike the way those 30 pieces of silver burned a hole in Judas’ heart after he had betrayed Jesus for a little cash. Imagine how he must have felt as he watched his friend Jesus, with hands bound, being led to trial. Judas had seen those hands calm the stormy sea and touch the blind and lame. How often those loving hands had touched his own life! For Judas, the silver was no longer a reward but rather a reminder of what he had done to Jesus. With every step, the clanging coins sounded a dirge of condemnation, until in despair he admitted, “I have sinned by betraying innocent blood” (Matt. 27:4). When we make choices that betray Jesus, eventually our lives become filled with sorrow. Even well-intentioned followers find that their desire to love and serve Him is frequently on a collision course with the lure of cash or other seductions. But the things we have gained at His expense ultimately and inevitably become clanging symbols of sorrow and regret. Jesus is all the world to me, And true to Him I’ll be; O how could I this Friend deny, When He’s so true to me? —Thompson When faced with a choice, don’t betray your loving Leader. Killed With Kisses Jesus said to him, "Judas, are you betraying the Son of Man with a kiss?" — Luke 22:48 Today's Scripture : Matthew 27:3-10 If Judas the betrayer had truly repented, would Jesus have accepted him? I believe so. No one can out-sin the grace of God. Judas may have saddened our Lord more by hanging himself than by betraying Him. I think his act of despair meant that he didn’t believe our Lord would forgive Him. In the novel The Flight Of The Shadow, author George MacDonald tells a story of a young girl, Belorba Whichcote, who lived with her uncle. One morning she watched him take a piece of jewelry out of a cabinet drawer, hold it up briefly to the light, and then quickly put it back. After her uncle left the house for the day, Belorba looked in the drawer without his permission. Guilt immediately flooded her sensitive heart. She sat and nervously waited for his return. When he came back late that evening, she fell at his feet, confessed what she had done and how awful she felt. Then she sobbed, “Please, Uncle, will you kill me?” “Yes, yes,” her uncle replied. “I will kill you, my darling! This way! This way!” Then, stretching out his arms, he drew her in and covered her face with kisses. The pain of facing up to truth And saying "I am wrong" Is soothed by Christ's redeeming love, Which fills the heart with song. —D. De Haan Sin brings fear; confession brings freedom. Matthew 27:5 And he threw the pieces of silver into the temple sanctuary and departed; and he went away and hanged himself. and departed: Jdg 9:54 1Sa 31:4,5 2Sa 17:23 1Ki 16:18 Job 2:9 7:15 Ps 55:23 Ac 1:18,19 See James Stalker's chapter on Judas Iscariot Matthew 27 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Related Passages: Proverbs 10:2 Ill-gotten gains do not profit ("treasures of wickedness profit nothing") But righteousness delivers from death. Numbers 35:33-34 ‘So you shall not pollute the land in which you are; for blood pollutes the land and no expiation can be made for the land for the blood that is shed on it, except by the blood of him who shed it. 34 ‘You shall not defile the land in which you live, in the midst of which I dwell; for I the LORD am dwelling in the midst of the sons of Israel.’” Acts 1:16-20+ (SEE NOTES ON HOW JUDAS DIED) “Brethren, the Scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit foretold by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who became a guide to those who arrested Jesus. 17 “For he was counted among us and received his share in this ministry.” 18 (Now this man acquired a field with the price of his wickedness, and falling headlong, he burst open in the middle and all his intestines gushed out. 19 And it became known to all who were living in Jerusalem; so that in their own language that field was called Hakeldama, that is, Field of Blood.) 20 “For it is written in the book of Psalms, ‘LET HIS HOMESTEAD BE MADE DESOLATE, AND LET NO ONE DWELL IN IT’; and, ‘LET ANOTHER MAN TAKE HIS OFFICE.’ JUDAS' REMORSEFUL RESPONSE And he threw the pieces of silver into the temple sanctuary (naos) and departed (anachoreo) - Judas vainly attempted to "wash his hands" of the guilt by returning the silver. He reminds me of Pilate who also recognized Jesus' innocence and washed his hands in a vain attempt to wash away his guilt over the death of Christ which he authorized (Mt 27:24+). The "blood money" had already defiled Judas' hands and heart, so discarding the silver in the temple sanctuary served no penitential purpose for him. Sanctuary (naos) referred to the Central Shrine made up of the Holy Place and Holy of Holies as separate from the complete temple complex. Some writers made the absurd suggestion that Judas cast the silver into temple treasure as an act of charity. And he went away and hanged himself - Perhaps Judas knew this verse "‘Cursed is he who accepts a bribe to strike down an innocent person.’ And all the people shall say, ‘Amen.’" (Deut 27:25) Whether he knew it or not, he was cursed for Jesus said "woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been good for that man if he had not been born." (Mk 14:21+) Hanged is anagcho (apo - intensifies meaning + agcho - to strangle) found only here and meaning to choke or strangle oneself and thus to hang oneself.
Mateus 27
Morris - One possible solution is that his prophecy was spoken by Jeremiah (note Matt. 27:9) and became a part of the Jewish oral tradition. It was later written by Zechariah. The prophet Jeremiah definitely was involved in the purchase of a field (Jer. 32:6ff.), and also with a potter’s house (Jer. 18:1ff.), and a burial ground (Jer. 19:1-12). Matthew may have been referring to these general facts as background for the specific prophecy written by Zechariah. (see Bible Exposition Commentary) Jeffrey Crabtree: Matthew again turned to the O.T. where he found some prophetic experiences that paralleled that of Judas and Jesus (vv. 9-10). Jeremiah visited a potter (Jer. 18:3), prophesied of a future burial site in the valley of Topheth, and purchased a potter’s flask (Jer. 19:1-13). Zechariah prophesied that he would be sold for thirty pieces of silver (Zech. 11:11- 13). The exegetical problems are that Matthew credits Jeremiah with the prophecy that is only in Zechariah and Zechariah does not mention purchasing property with the thirty pieces of silver. The solution appears to be that Matthew quoted Zechariah but merged subject matter from both Jeremiah and Zechariah (Keener, Background 125; Evans, Matthew 501), a common way of handling multiple Scripture texts in Matthew’s day (Blomberg 95). Though Matthew referred to two prophets, he only mentioned the most prominent of the two (Hendriksen 948). Mark does the same thing in his Gospel (Archer and Chirichingo 163). See Mark 1:2-3 where Mark credits Isaiah with both prophecies. Matthew referenced Zechariah in order to parallel the corrupt leadership of Zechariah’s day with the corrupt leadership of Jesus’ day. In both instances, the good Shepherd was rejected by His own and sold for a pitifully cheap price; then the thirty pieces of silver were thrown back into the temple. While Jeremiah and Zechariah were neither one foretelling a future Messianic event, there were points of contact in their experiences that Matthew understood as paralleling the circumstances involving Judas, Jesus, and Jewish leadership. (Quoted by Paul Apple, page 1294) NET NOTE - The problematic citing of Jeremiah for a text which appears to come from Zechariah has prompted certain scribes to alter it. Codex 22 has Ζαχαρίου (Zachariou, “Zechariah”) while Φ 33 omit the prophet’s name altogether. And codex 21 and the Latin ms l change the prophet’s name to “Isaiah,” in accordance with natural scribal proclivities to alter the text toward the most prominent OT prophet. But unquestionably the name Jeremiah is the wording of the original here, because it is supported by virtually all witnesses and because it is the harder reading. See below -- D. A. Carson, “Matthew,” Expositor's Bible Commentary for a discussion of the textual and especially hermeneutical problem. D. A. Carson has a lengthy explanation of this problematic passage: How did Matthew understand the OT texts he was quoting? The question is not easy, because the two dominant OT passages themselves can be variously explained. It appears that in Zechariah 11, the “buyers” (Zech 11:5) and the three shepherds (Zech 11:5, 8, 17) represent Israel’s leaders, who are slaughtering the sheep. God commands Zechariah to shepherd the “flock marked for slaughter” (Zech 11:7), and he tries to clean up the leadership by sacking the false shepherds. But he discovers that not only is the leadership corrupt, but the flock detests him (Zech 11:8). Thus Zechariah comes to understand the Lord’s decision to have no more pity on the people of the land (Zech 11:6). Zechariah decides to resign (Zech 11:9–10), exposing the flock to ravages. Because he has broken the contract, Zechariah cannot claim his pay (presumably from the “buyers”); but they pay him off with thirty pieces of silver (Zech 11:12). But now Yahweh tells Zechariah to throw this “handsome price at which they priced me” (probably ironical; see Notes) to the potter in the “house of the LORD,” i.e., the temple (Zech 11:13). Temple ritual required a constant supply of new vessels (cf. Lev 6:28); so a guild of potters worked somewhere in the temple precincts. Certainly Jeremiah could point to a potter as he preached and could purchase pottery somewhere near the temple (Jer 18:6; 19:1). The purpose of Zechariah’s action is uncertain. Because a yôṣēr (lit., “shaper”) was both a potter and a metal worker, it may be that the money in Zechariah 11:12–13 was thrown to the yôṣēr so that it would be melted down and turned into a figurine, a little “god.” The people did not want the Lord’s shepherd, and so they will be saddled with a silver figurine (cf. Eze 16:17; Hos 2:8)—betrayal money, in effect, since it pays off the good shepherd, who would have kept the people true to the Lord’s covenant and who has been rejected by the people. The result can only be catastrophic judgment (Zec 11:14–17). The parallel between Zechariah 11 and Matthew 26–27 is not exact. In Zechariah, the money is paid to the good shepherd; in Matthew, it is paid to Judas and returned to the Jewish leaders. In Zechariah, the money goes directly to the “potter” in the temple; in Matthew, after being thrown into the temple, it purchases “the potter’s field”—though at this point the influence of Jeremiah 19 has been introduced. Nevertheless, the central parallel is stunning: in both instances, Yahweh’s shepherd is rejected by the people of Israel and valued at the price of a slave. And in both instances, the money is flung into the temple and ends up purchasing something that pollutes. The reference to Jeremiah 19 provides equally telling parallels. The rulers have forsaken Yahweh and made Jerusalem a place of foreign gods (Jer 19:4); so the day is coming when this valley, where the prophecy is given and the potter’s jar smashed, will be called the Valley of Slaughter, symbolic of the ruin of Judah and Jerusalem (Jer 19:6–7). Similarly in Matthew, the rejection of Jesus (Yahweh) leads to a polluted field, a symbol of death and the destruction of the nation about to be buried as “foreigners.” (See The Expositor's Bible Commentary - Abridged Edition or borrow Expositor's Bible Commentary, page 124) QUESTION - Why does Matthew 27:9 attribute the prophecy to Jeremiah when it is from Zechariah? ANSWER - The Gospel of Matthew says that the temple leaders took the “blood money” that Judas Iscariot had returned to them and used it to buy a potter’s field to bury strangers in. Their action was a fulfillment of prophecy: “Then what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet was fulfilled: ‘They took the thirty pieces of silver, the price set on him by the people of Israel, and they used them to buy the potter’s field, as the Lord commanded me’” (Matthew 27:9–10). However, the prophecy that Matthew alludes to regarding 30 pieces of silver is most likely from Zechariah 11:12–13, which reads, “I told them, ‘If you think it best, give me my pay; but if not, keep it.’ So they paid me thirty pieces of silver. And the Lord said to me, ‘Throw it to the potter’—the handsome price at which they valued me! So I took the thirty pieces of silver and threw them to the potter at the house of the Lord.” Is this a case of an error in the Bible? Why would Matthew appear to attribute the prophecy of the 30 pieces of silver to Jeremiah instead of Zechariah? The most likely answer is found in the structure of the Hebrew Bible. The Hebrew Bible is divided into three sections called the Law, Writings, and Prophets. Jesus refers to these divisions in Luke 24:44. The collection of the Prophets began with the book of Jeremiah. The scrolls were sometimes referred to by the name of the first book, which in the case of the Prophets would be Jeremiah. So, when Matthew says that “Jeremiah says,” he means that the prophecy was found in the “Jeremiah Scroll.” Others have suggested the possibility that Matthew alludes to a composite of prophecies that included those of both Zechariah and Jeremiah. This is also possible, and Jeremiah did pay a visit to a potter’s house (Jeremiah 18), yet it is difficult to find a particular prediction in Jeremiah that would fit the reference to 30 pieces of silver. Another theory is that the name Jeremiah in Matthew 27:9 was ignorantly inserted by a later scribe or that a copyist inadvertently wrote “Jeremiah” instead of “Zechariah”; the latter is more likely if the scribes were using abbreviated forms of the names: in that case, it would be a simple matter of mistaking Ιριου for Ζριου. If a copyist transcribed an iota in place of a zeta, the error is explained. Still another suggestion has been that perhaps other writings from the prophet Jeremiah existed in Matthew’s time, and those writings mentioned the 30 pieces of silver. However, this is an argument from silence, since no such information is known or is elsewhere alluded to in Scripture or in history. The best solution is probably found in the understanding of how the Jewish people spoke of the parts of Scripture. It is also interesting that the one gospel writer to note this event was Matthew, who had previously worked as a tax collector. He would have been very familiar with monetary transactions and likely well aware of the purchase price of the Field of Blood, which he immediately connected with Zechariah’s prophecy of 30 pieces of silver. Matthew used this connection to show one of the ways the coming of Jesus fulfilled numerous predictions in the Old Testament, affirming Jesus as the true Messiah. Related Resources: Dr Gleason Archer - see page 350 - Why does Matthew 27:9 attribute to Jeremiah a prophecy from Zechariah? Is the Bible reliable? Is the Bible truly God’s Word? Why is it important to believe in Biblical inerrancy? R A Torrey - “MISTAKES” IN THE BIBLE The Bible is said not only to be full of contradictions, but also to contain mistakes. One of the “mistakes” most constantly referred to by critics is found in Matthew 27:9–10 (RV): “Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was valued, whom certain of the children of Israel did price, and gave them for the potter’s field, as the Lord appointed me.” Now the passage here referred to by Matthew is found in the prophecy ascribed in the Old Testament to Zechariah (Zechariah 11:11–13). At first sight this appears as if Matthew had made a mistake and ascribed to Jeremiah a prophecy that was really made by Zechariah. Even John Calvin seems to have thought that Matthew made a mistake. He says, “How the name of Jeremiah crept in I confess I do not know, nor do I give myself much trouble to inquire. The passage itself plainly shows the name of Jeremiah has been put down by mistake instead of Zechariah; for in Jeremiah we find nothing of this sort, nor anything that even approaches it.” This passage has been pressed as proof that the gospel narratives are not necessarily historical accounts of what actually occurred. Must we admit that Matthew was mistaken? There is not the slightest necessity. In the first place, in some manuscripts the word “Jeremiah” does not appear, but the passage reads: “Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by the prophet” without any mention as to who the prophet was. In still another reading, “Zechariah” appears instead of “Jeremiah.” Wescott and Hort do not accept the reading without “Jeremiah,” nor the reading which substitutes “Zechariah” for “Jeremiah,” but they do mention these readings, especially the first, as“noteworthy rejected readings.” Some of the earliest and best manuscripts omit the word “Jeremiah.” So the apparent mistake here may be due to the error of a copyist. However, the best textual critics all accept the reading “Jeremiah” in this passage, and it seems to the writer that this is probably the correct reading. If then in the gospel of Matthew as originally written Matthew used the word “Jeremiah” here, was it not a mistake? Not necessarily. That these words, or words very similar to them, are found in the prophecy which in our Old Testament bears the name of Zechariah is unquestionably true. But it does not follow at all from this that Jeremiah did not speak them, for it is a well-known fact that the later prophets of the Old Testament often quoted the predictions of earlier prophets. For example, Zechariah himself (1:4) quoted a prophecy known to be Jeremiah’s (see Jeremiah 18:11), and in the passage which we are now considering Zechariah may also have quoted from the prophecy of Jeremiah. There is no record in the book of Jeremiah of his having uttered this prophecy, but there is no reason whatever to think we have in Jeremiah all the prophecies that he uttered, and Zechariah may easily have had access to prophecies of Jeremiah not recorded in the book of Jeremiah. Furthermore it is to be noted that Zechariah himself says in Zechariah 7:7, “Should ye not hear the words which the LORD hath cried by the former prophets?” So it is evident that Zechariah regarded it as part of his mission to recall the prophecies of the prophets that had gone before him. He would be especially inclined to recall the prophecies of Jeremiah, for it was a saying among the Jews that “the spirit of Jeremiah was upon Zechariah.” So we see that this so-called mistake of Matthew does not appear to have been a mistake at all when we closely examine it. Matthew 27:10 AND THEY GAVE THEM FOR THE POTTER’S FIELD, AS THE LORD DIRECTED ME.” See James Stalker's chapter on Judas Iscariot Matthew 27 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries PRICE OF A POTTER'S FIELD AND THEY GAVE THEM FOR THE POTTER’S (kerameus) FIELD, AS THE LORD DIRECTED ME See comments under Mt 27:9. NET NOTE - The source of this citation is debated (see the NET NOTE above on Jeremiah in Mt 27:9 above for a related discussion). The quotation is most closely related to Zech 11:12–13, but the reference to Jeremiah in v. 9 as the source leads one to look there as well. There is no exact match for this text in Jeremiah, but there are some conceptual parallels: In Jer 18:2–6 the prophet visits a potter, and in Jer 32:6–15 he buys a field. D. A. Carson argues that Jer 19:1–13 is the source of the quotation augmented with various phrases drawn from Zech 11:12–13 (“Matthew,” EBC 8:563). W. D. Davies and D. C. Allison argue that the reference to Jeremiah is not meant to refer to one specific text from that prophet, but instead to signal that his writings as a whole are a source from which the quotation is drawn (Matthew [ICC], 3:568–69). Although the exact source of the citation is uncertain, it is reasonable to see texts from the books of Jeremiah and Zechariah both coming into play here. David Thompson (see full sermon): There are several things we want to observe here: 1) There may be serious consequences to what we make a decision to do, therefore, we had better think very carefully about those consequences before we act (i.e. sell out Jesus). 2) Judas had money and he had his sin; but what he did not have was happiness and fulfillment. 3) The wages for doing that which is satanic will always be death, not life. 4) Remorse and regret are not the same as real repentance. 5) The One a sinful person needs to run to is Jesus Christ, not religious leaders. 6) Suicide was not the solution to Judas’ problem; real repentance was the solution. Potter's (2763)(kerameus from kerannumi - to mix) one who makes earthenware pots. Gilbrant - From the time of Homer (ca. Eighth Century B.C.) this noun is used to describe a “potter.” The Septuagint also uses it in this way (Isaiah 29:16; 45:9; Jeremiah 18:6), with special emphasis on God as the divine potter of Israel. In the New Testament Paul employed the same basic meaning in his treatise about God’s choice of Israel (Romans 9:21). However, it also is used in Matthew’s Gospel of the actual potter’s field (Matthew 27:7,10) that was purchased with the 30 pieces of silver cast aside by Judas. Some may note an apparent discrepancy in Matthew 27:9 which attributes Judas’ actions as a fulfillment of Jeremiah’s prophecy when the greater portion of the quotation seems to be from Zechariah 11:12,13. Actually, Matthew combined the prophetic symbolism from both Jeremiah and Zechariah, and as Jeremiah was the more prominent of the two he was given preference in the reference (cf. Jeremiah 19:1-13; 32:6-15; Zechariah 11:12,13). KERAMEUS - 3V - Matt. 27:7; Matt. 27:10; Rom. 9:21 KERAMEUS - Septuagint - 1 Chr. 4:23; Ps. 2:9; Isa. 29:16; Isa. 41:25; Isa. 45:9; Jer. 18:2; Jer. 18:3; Jer. 18:6; Lam. 4:2 J. Ligon Duncan: Judas’ Remorse and Suicide And what is Matthew doing? And once again he’s fingering the culprits. This is where this plot started. Judas didn’t think this up on his own. He had some promotion, he had some encouragement, he had some financial encouragement in this plot. And here comes the money right back to the ones who are in fact culpable in their complicity in this plot. And Judas’ anguished words of confession in verse 4 serve to accent Jesus’ innocence, his guiltlessness, his integrity, his impeccability. They show the perfect innocence of Christ. . . What is Matthew showing you here? He’s showing you the wickedness of the hearts of the religious leaders of the people of God. They’re only concerned about carrying out their own plot. Even as Jesus’ court trial highlights the judicial nature of Jesus’ death. So Judas’ confession highlights His innocence, and the attitude of the chief priest and elders shows their wickedness. They are the wicked ones in this circumstance. They ought to be undergoing the death penalty. You remember in Jewish law if you brought a false charge in a capital crime, you were liable to the penalty of that crime. They themselves should have been being led to the Roman cross. . . And so what is Matthew showing you? Not only the judicial nature of Jesus death, but His perfect innocence. Everything was turned upside down. This was a kangaroo court. It was a mock trial. It was something that was a mockery of judgment, and Matthew knows that you need to know that if you’re going to understand what happens to Jesus at the end of the passage. He’s an innocent man. John MacArthur in his sermon The Traitor's Suicide - Far and away the most dominant reason [for suicide] is what we could call retribution. People take their lives to inflict upon themselves a severe punishment which they believe they should receive. They have sinned. They imagine their guilt to be irremedial. There’s no remedy for it. They imagine that there’s no way they can come out from under the anxiety and the pressure of their own conscience. And because they feel themselves so guilty and so wrong and they lose all sense of self-value and self-worth, their self-image is devastated, they are total failures overwhelmed by guilt, they kill themselves as a ultimate punishment, seeing death self-inflicted as a way to deal with their own guilt. A guilt-ridden conscience then probably is a dominant factor in many, many suicides. It may not be the only factor but it is a dominant factor in many suicides. The guilt that a person feels may be real guilt as a result of real sin and real wrong and real evil, or it may be artificial. It may be unreal. It may be inflicted upon them by unrealistic standards established on them by their parents or peers or even by their own desires. . . Now Scripture obviously would infer in the case of Judas and in the case of Ahithophel, of course, that suicide was an act of an evil and deranged mind and is not a viable solution. It is a crime against God. It is a crime against self. Suicide is unacceptable. It is to rebelliously usurp sovereignty. It is to take a prerogative on oneself that belongs only to God who gives life and takes life. It is an act of sin. It is an act of unbelief. It is an act of lack of trust – lack of trust in the wisdom and purpose and plan of God. Even though it is a sin and a violation of the sixth commandment, “Thou shalt not murder,” and even thou it is a violation of the sovereignty of God and a rebellious act against Him and an evidence of a lack of faith and trust, frankly in the case of Judas it seems to me to have been inevitable. It does seem to have been inevitable. . . There’s no sense of seeking God. There’s no sense of seeking the Lord. It’s as if he sought not righteousness but relief. He sought not holiness but health. He sought not a Savior but a salve. He had feelings but there was no change in his heart about sin; there was no change in his mind about who Christ was; there was no desire for the truth; there was no belief in Jesus Christ as the Son of God and the Savior. He just wanted to get rid of his pain. He wanted to unload his guilt because he knew that he had betrayed an innocent man. And the essential wrongness of that went off in him like an explosion and created pain in every part of his being. And the blood money which he wanted so badly, the very same thing he longed for so greatly, when he finally got it, burned holes in his hands like hot lead. . . When he went back, he didn’t just throw the silver into the hieron. He didn’t just throw it into the whole place, into the courtyard where anybody could pick it up and put it in the receptacles and use it for whatever they wanted. He didn’t just throw it in there for poor people to put in their pockets. He threw it in the naos, he went right inside to the courtyard, right inside to the court of the women where the offerings were given, he went beyond that to the door of the holy place and the Holy of Holies, and he took that money and he threw it inside the holy place, the naos. Every time that word is used in the gospels it has reference to the sanctuary itself, the inner place, the holy place. He threw it in there. Why? Charity? No. Spite. There was only group of people who could go in there. Who was it? Priests. And he was saying to them, “If you won’t take it willingly and do something with it, I’ll force you to take it and do something with it.” And he threw it into a place where only the priests could go and therefore they had to deal with it. It was an act of spite. . . The testimony of the Sanhedrin, they can’t find anything against Him. The testimony of Judas, he can’t find anything against Him. The testimony of Pilate, He is an innocent man. The testimony of the Sanhedrin, this is blood money, the whole thing is illegal. We’ve said it; we’ve admitted it. The testimony of the whole population of Jerusalem 30 years later, it is the field of blood. Jesus died because of bribery. The whole testimony comes together. . . You have the law, the prophets, and the Psalms. It’s the Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes all the wisdom literature, Song of Solomon, but its heading is the Psalms. The category of the prophets in rabbinic tradition, in rabbinic manuscripts, and in the Talmud is always headed by the book of Jeremiah. So to a Jew the three sections of the Old Testament would be the law, Jeremiah and the Psalms. So when the writer refers to Jeremiah, he is simply taking the name that was at the top of the prophetic roll which was Jeremiah, because his prophecy was listed first, then came the major prophets and then the minor prophets. And it’s no different than what Jesus did when He referred to a whole category of wisdom literature as the Psalms, because that is the heading on that scroll as well. So there’s no contradiction. Prophecy was fulfilled. Matthew 27:11 Now Jesus stood before the governor, and the governor questioned Him, saying, “Are You the King of the Jews?” And Jesus said to him, “It is as you say.” Jesus stood: Mt 10:18,25 Mk 15:2 Lu 23:3 Jn 18:33-36 It is as you say: Mt 26:25,64 Mk 14:62 Jn 18:37 1Ti 6:13 See Trial and Crucifixion of Jesus - Parallel Passages Alfred Edersheim - Messianic Jew - The Morning of Good Friday (Mt 27:1, 2, 11–14; Mk 15:1–5; Lk 23:1–5;Jn 18:28–38;Lk 23:6–12; Mt 27:3–10;Mt 27:15–18; Mk 15:6–10; Lk 23:13–17; Jn 18:39, 40; Mt 27:19; Mt 27:20–31; Mk 15:11–20; Lk 23:18–25; Jn 19:1–16.) Matthew 27 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Related Passages: Mark 15:2+ Pilate questioned Him, “Are You the King of the Jews?” And He answered him, “It is as you say.” Luke 23:3+ So Pilate asked Him, saying, “Are You the King of the Jews?” And He answered him and said, “It is as you say.” John 18:33+ Therefore Pilate entered again into the Praetorium, and summoned Jesus and said to Him, “Are You the King of the Jews?” THE FIRST CIVIL TRIAL PILATE'S FIRST QUESTION Now Jesus stood before the governor (hegemon), and the governor (hegemon) questioned Him, saying, “Are You the King of the Jews?” - This is Pilate's first question of Jesus as they stood inside the Praetorium (which the Jews would not enter). It is prompted by the accusations of the Jews in Luke 23:2+ where "they began to accuse Him, saying, “We found this man misleading our nation and forbidding to pay taxes to Caesar, and saying that He Himself is Christ, a King.” It was the third accusation that grabbed Pilate's attention. And Jesus said to him, “It is as you say. - In John, Jesus adds “My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest” (John 18:36+) These were Jesus' last words to Pilate. His next words (assuming Pilate never came to faith in Jesus) will be "‘I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS" (Mt 7:23+). NET NOTE - “Are you the king of the Jews?” Pilate was interested in this charge because of its political implications of sedition against Rome. The reply “You say so” is somewhat enigmatic, like Jesus’ earlier reply to the Jewish leadership in Mt 26:64. Ray Fowler on Are You the King of the Jews? - The “You” in Pilate’s question is emphatic, perhaps even a little derisive. Pilate looks at this beat-up, bound prisoner before him and asks him, “Are You the king of the Jews?” (Quoted by Paul Apple page 1301) D. A. Carson: Matthew’s report, in which Pilate asks, “Are you the king of the Jews?” presupposes the background of Luke 23:2+ (ED: THE 3 ACCUSATIONS MADE BY THE JEWS) and John 18:28–33+. The Sanhedrin’s concern with Jesus’ “blasphemy” becomes his claim to kingship, a charge of treason with overtones of Zealot sedition, capped with a claim that Jesus refuses to pay taxes. In Roman trials, the magistrate normally heard the charges first, questioned the defendant and listened to his defense, sometimes permitted several such exchanges, and then retired with his advisers to decide on a verdict, which was then promptly carried out. The first step, the charge by the Jewish leaders, led to this particular formulation of Pilate’s question to Jesus. . . Mt 27:11 is important theologically as well as historically. It stands behind the inscription on the cross (Mt 27:37) and prepares the way for Christianity, which rests on the conviction that Jesus of Nazareth, who rose from the dead, is indeed the promised Messiah, the King of the Jews—basic themes in Matthew even in the prologue. In other words, the vindicated Lord is the crucified Messiah. (See Matthew) R. T. France: From the involvement of the crowd in most of this scene, it seems that the hearing took place in public; the bēma (see p. 1046, n. 5) was probably a raised platform in front of the governor’s residence. There Jesus stands before the seated governor (Mt 27:19), an ironic reversal of the destined position of Jesus as the seated judge of the world (Mt 25:31)....Jesus’ reply (which, like the question, is the same in all four gospels, though John 18:37+ adds “that I am a king”) is affirmative but qualified (ED: JESUS BEFORE SANHEDRIN, THE THIRD RELIGIOUS TRIAL), as in Mt 26:64+. Jesus would not wish to deny his kingly role as Messiah of Israel; his arrival at the city had been designed to assert it. But what Pilate would naturally construe as a political claim is for Jesus a truth at a different level. When he used the same formula, “You have said it,” in response to Caiaphas, he went on to explain how his messianic vision differed from that of the Sanhedrin (Mt 26:64+). This time, however, “You say it” is not followed by any explanation of why his “kingship” is no threat to Rome (for this see John 18:33–38+). To try to explain the finer points of messianic theology to a pagan administrator would no doubt have been futile (as Paul found later with Festus, Acts 25:17–20+; Acts 26:24+). At any rate, Jesus has clearly decided to let matters take their course; his enigmatic “You say it” is the last word Pilate will hear him utter. (See The Gospel of Matthew - Google Book or Borrow Gospel of Matthew page 1050) Matthew Henry's Concise - Mt 27:11-25. Having no malice against Jesus, Pilate urged him to clear himself, and laboured to get him discharged. The message from his wife was a warning. God has many ways of giving checks to sinners, in their sinful pursuits, and it is a great mercy to have such checks from Providence, from faithful friends, and from our own consciences. O do not this abominable thing which the Lord hates! is what we may hear said to us, when we are entering into temptation, if we will but regard it. Being overruled by the priests, the people made choice of Barabbas. Multitudes who choose the world, rather than God, for their ruler and portion, thus choose their own delusions. The Jews were so bent upon the death of Christ, that Pilate thought it would be dangerous to refuse. And this struggle shows the power of conscience even on the worst men. Yet all was so ordered to make it evident that Christ suffered for no fault of his own, but for the sins of his people. How vain for Pilate to expect to free himself from the guilt of the innocent blood of a righteous person, whom he was by his office bound to protect! The Jews' curse upon themselves has been awfully answered in the sufferings of their nation. None could bear the sin of others, except Him that had no sin of his own to answer for. And are we not all concerned? Is not Barabbas preferred to Jesus, when sinners reject salvation that they may retain their darling sins, which rob God of his glory, and murder their souls? The blood of Christ is now upon us for good, through mercy, by the Jews' rejection of it. O let us flee to it for refuge! Matthew 27:12 And while He was being accused by the chief priests and elders, He did not answer. Mt 27:14 Mt 26:63 Ps 38:13,14 Isa 53:7 Mk 15:3-5 Jn 19:9-11 Ac 8:32 1Pe 2:23 See Trial and Crucifixion of Jesus - Parallel Passages Matthew 27 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Related Passages: Mark 15:3-5 The chief priests began to accuse Him harshly. 4 Then Pilate questioned Him again, saying, “Do You not answer? See how many charges they bring against You!” 5 But Jesus made no further answer; so Pilate was amazed. RELIGIOUS LEADERS (LIARS) MAKE ACCUSATIONS And while He was being accused (kategoreo - present tense - continually) by the chief priests (archiereus) and elders (presbuteros), He did not answer This corresponds to the Messianic prophecy of Isa. 53:7. Jesus did answer Pilate in private, but would not address the charges in the presence of the Jewish leaders or Herod. Leon Morris: Now we come to the accusation that we would expect. The Jewish leaders kept accusing him (the present infinitive points to a continuous process); they could not, of course, hand a man over to the Romans without laying charges against him. Matthew does not bother to say what these charges were; he leaves his readers to reason from such facts as Jesus’ admission that he was the Messiah (26:63-64) and Pilate’s question whether he was a king. There is not much doubt about the nature of the Jewish accusations, and Matthew does not stay to spell them out. All the more so in that Jesus answered nothing. In all the accounts of his trial he remained silent at some stage. Matthew lets us see that he was not in the slightest concerned about the matters the members of the Sanhedrin raised. The specific allegations did not matter; they were determined to have him executed, and to refute their accusations was irrelevant. If those charges were shown to be false, they would raise others. They were not concerned with justice but with an execution. In the trial before the Sanhedrin Jesus was silent when a variety of allegations were made, but he spoke when the high priest put to him a question he was perfectly entitled to put by virtue of his office. Similarly, he responded to Pilate when the governor asked the question he was bound to ask because of his office. But when Pilate drew attention to the accusations of these Jewish officials it was another matter; he did not reply to Pilate then. (SEE The Gospel According To Matthew - Google Book or BORROW Gospel According to Matthew page 700) Accused (2723) kategoreo from kata = against + agora = the assembly, a place of public speaking. Other sources have agoreuo = to speak. The prefixed preposition suggests animosity!) means to speak against a person before a public tribunal or bring an accusation in court. To accuse formally and before a tribunal, to bring a charge publicly. The idea is to speak openly against, to condemn or accuse mainly in a legal sense. The cognate word kategoria was a legal technical term that referred to the content of the accusation or charge made against someone. Note that all of the Gospel uses involve accusing Jesus (except John 5:45). Richards - These words (kategoria, kategoreo) were in everyday use as legal terms, involving criminal charges and accusations. KATEGOREO - 22V - accusation against(1), accuse(10), accused(3), accuses(2), accusing(3), bring against(1), charges they bring against(1), charges you make(1), make accusation(1), prosecute(1). Matt. 12:10; Matt. 27:12; Mk. 3:2; Mk. 15:3; Mk. 15:4; Lk. 6:7; Lk. 23:2; Lk. 23:10; Lk. 23:14; Jn. 5:45; Jn. 8:6; Acts 22:30; Acts 24:2; Acts 24:8; Acts 24:13; Acts 24:19; Acts 25:5; Acts 25:11; Acts 25:16; Acts 28:19; Rom. 2:15; Rev. 12:10 Matthew 27:13 Then Pilate *said to Him, “Do You not hear how many things they testify against You?” Do You not hear : Mt 26:62 Jn 18:35 Ac 22:24 See Trial and Crucifixion of Jesus - Parallel Passages Matthew 27 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries PILATE QUESTIONS JESUS CONCERNING THE JEW'S CHARGES Then Pilate *said to Him, “Do You not hear how many things they testify against You - Of course Jesus heard the false testimony. As an aside from Pilate's query to Jesus, it seems clear he was not buying the legitimacy of their accusations, a fact confirmed by his subsequent attempts to set Him free. Testify against is the rare word katamartureo (kata = against + martureo - witness) which means to make a statement as a witness against someone. All three uses (Mt 26:62, 27:13, Mk 14:60) refer to to the false testimony against Jesus when He was brought before Caiaphas (Mt 26:62+, Mk 14:60+) and Pilate. Jesus did not answer, nor did He defend himself against those who accused Him and wanted Him crucified. Thus He fulfilled His own words concerning His earthly life: “No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father” (John 10:18+). Daniel Doriani: A typical Roman hearing before a procurator included charges, the governor’s questions, the prisoner’s self-defense, then a verdict. But Jesus did not defend himself. He knew he had come to the time appointed for his sacrifice. Besides, it was pointless: his accusers had no interest in the truth in his case. Therefore, “when he was accused by the chief priests and the elders, he gave no answer” (Matt. 27:12). Pilate was astonished; did Jesus not hear the charges? They threatened a death sentence (Mt 27:13). Still, “Jesus made no reply, not even to a single charge—to the great amazement of the governor” (Mt 27:14). Somehow, Jesus’ silence convinced Pilate that he was innocent, not guilty. Pilate saw no fault when Jesus said nothing. Perhaps we should conclude that a vigorous self-defense is not always necessary. Some accusations are simply absurd. (Quoted by Paul Apple page 1302) R. T. France: While the hearing before the Sanhedrin established Jesus’ guilt in Jewish eyes and called for the death penalty, it is the Roman prefect who must actually implement that verdict, and this scene relates the formal trial and pronouncement of sentence. Yet that formal business takes up only a small part of the pericope, an apparently perfunctory examination by Pilate in Mt 27:11–14 and the sentencing in Mt 27:26. The intervening verses focus not on the trial of Jesus as such but on Pilate’s abortive attempt to find a convenient way to avoid pronouncing the sentence demanded on a man he has apparently concluded is not guilty from a Roman point of view but who is clearly anathema to the Jewish establishment. The narrative will focus on the primary responsibility of the Jewish leaders and people for Jesus’ death, but Pilate does not come out of it well; first he tries to evade his official responsibility, then, despite his wife’s warning, he cynically gives orders for an admittedly guiltless man to be executed. His theatrical abdication of responsibility (Mt 27:24) is not likely to convince anyone but himself. . .Matthew notes three reasons for this reluctance to convict. 1. First, Pilate is apparently impressed by Jesus’ silence under interrogation: his “surprise” probably indicates a favorable impression (see below). 2. Second, he has correctly assessed that the Jewish leaders’ desire to eliminate Jesus stems not from concern for Roman law and order but from their own religio-political self-interest (v. 18). 3. And third, his wife’s dream provides a supposedly supernatural attestation to Jesus’ innocence (v. 19). (BORROW The Gospel of Matthew page 1046 or see The Gospel of Matthew - Page 1048 - Google Books) Matthew 27:14 And He did not answer him with regard to even a single charge, so the governor was quite amazed. governor was quite amazed : Ps 71:7 Isa 8:18 Zec 3:8 1Co 4:9 See Trial and Crucifixion of Jesus - Parallel Passages Matthew 27 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries JESUS' SILENCE AMAZES PILATE And He did not answer him with regard to even a single charge (rhema) - Again (cf Mt 27:12 = "He made no answer") Jesus refused to reply to the charges, which recalls the prophecy in Isaiah 53:7+ "He was oppressed and He was afflicted, Yet He did not open His mouth; Like a lamb that is led to slaughter, And like a sheep that is silent before its shearers, So He did not open His mouth." A T Robertson on answer him - Jesus refused to answer the charges of the Jews (Matthew 27:12). Now he continued silent under the direct question of Pilate. The Greek is very precise besides the double negative. "He did not reply to him up to not even one word." This silent dignity amazed Pilate and yet he was strangely impressed. Charles
Mateus 27
Morris: We may conjecture that Barabbas would have had popular appeal, for Mark tells us that this man had been involved in a rebellion in which he had committed murder. It is possible that the reason why the crowd was there was that supporters of Barabbas had come together to ask for Barabbas to be the man released at the customary amnesty at Passover. For whatever reason, a crowd was assembled, and Pilate put to them the choice of Barabbas or Jesus. He may have thought that since Jesus had committed no crime and since he was said by some at least to be the Messiah, the people would want to have him set free. But perhaps he did not give sufficient consideration to the fact that a Jerusalem crowd was unlikely to call for a Galilean to be released when some of their own people were in custody. And it may well be that the Jewish leaders had made sure that some of their supporters were in the crowd urging the people to call for Barabbas. By adding that Jesus was “called Messiah,” (Christos) Pilate was quietly urging a consideration that he might well have thought would weigh heavily with many in the crowd. No answer from the crowd is recorded at this point; it may be that Pilate put the alternatives before the people and allowed them time to think about it. (See The Gospel According to Matthew - Page 703 - Google Books or borrow Gospel According to Matthew) NET NOTE - TECHNICAL NOTE - Again, as in v. 16, the name “Jesus” is supplied before “Barabbas” in Θ f1 700* pc sys Ormss (Θ 700* lack the article τόν [ton] before Βαραββᾶν [Barabban]). The same argument for accepting the inclusion of “Jesus” as original in the previous verse applies here as well. Christ (5547) Christos (See also Messiah - Anointed One) from chrio = to rub or anoint, consecrate to an office) describes one who has been anointed with oil, one who has been consecrated. The majority of the NT uses refer to Jesus (exceptions = "false Christs" - Mt 24:24, Mk 13:22). Christos describes one who has been anointed, symbolizing appointment to a task. It is used here as the title "Anointed One" and is the Greek synonym for "Messiah." Christos is used in the Septuagint describing everyone anointed with the holy oil, especially the priesthood (Lev. 4:5+, Lev 4:16+) and it is also a name applied to those who were acting as redeemers like Cyrus. Gilbrant writes that "Hamilton suggests a fourfold significance to such anointing (“māshach,” Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, 1:530): (1) separation unto God, (2) authorization by God, (3) divine enablement, and (4) the coming Deliverer. In regards to this final use he says, “Though this association with the term māshach is not as prevalent in the OT as often supposed, the prospect of a righteous, Spirit-filled ruler is increasingly discernible in the OT (cf. Isaiah 9:1-7+; Isa1 1:1-5+; Isa 61:1)” (ibid.). It was probably because of his role as a deliverer of God’s people, selected by the Lord for His purpose, that Cyrus, a Gentile emperor, was given the title of “messiah, anointed” (Isaiah 45:1). However, long after Cyrus, God’s people were still promised Messiah the prince, the one to fulfill all of the Biblical promises (Daniel 9:25,26+)." (Complete Biblical Library Greek-English Dictionary) David Jeremiah - INDECISION IS A DECISION MATTHEW 27:17 (Discovering God: 365 Daily Devotions - Page 364) Indecision is a decision. This thought sums up the choice Pontius Pilate made when he encountered Jesus Christ. Pilate believed he could postpone his decision about Jesus, but he was wrong because every action he took led to a choice, even though he sought to avoid one. When Jesus came before Pilate, the Roman governor of that distant outpost, He discovered a man who was torn. Even Pilate’s wife added to his confusion, warning her husband to “have nothing to do with that just Man” after having a dream about Him (Matthew 27:19). Pilate and Herod debated, and neither could find any wrong in Him. Yet the throng clamored for the release of Barabbas, so the expedient political decision was to send Jesus to His death. We all come to a point when we have to make a decision about Jesus. We must accept Him as our Savior, or we reject Him. Once we take Him as our Savior, we must choose to enthrone Him as our Lord. If we think we can postpone and not decide, we have decided already. I believe in my soul that there are more at this day being lost for want of decision than for any other thing. D. L. MOODY James Smith - BARABBAS OR JESUS Matthew 27:17 It was a solemn day when Jesus stood in silence before Pilate and the people, a day heavily laden with far-reaching consequences. It is always such a day when a soul is called upon to make its final decision for God or the world. Observe— I. Who they are. Barabbas and Jesus. 1. BARABBAS. One who also bears the name of Jesus. A law-breaker, a robber, and a murderer. An enemy to God and to all the best interests of society. 2. JESUS. The Son of God and the Friend of man. One who went about continually doing good. A sufferer for the salvation of others. II. What they are. They are representatives of two different kingdoms—of two different rulers that are opposed to each other. 1. THE BARABBAS KINGDOM. The kingdom of this present evil world—the kingdom of darkness governed by the prince of darkness. Their great business is to rob men of their time, of their affections, their wills, and their souls. They seek· to rob both God and man. 2. THE JESUS KINGDOM. Jesus represents the Kingdom of God. He stands for the sacrifice for sin, the eternal life which is the gift of God. He is the light and life of men, the substitute Redeemer. III. Where they are. They stand together before the people (v. 21), waiting for their individual choice. In one way or other they have been standing together before each generation ever since that day All to whom Christ is preached must make their choice. 1. YOU CANNOT HAVE BOTH. Barabbas and Christ are opposites, as diametrical as darkness and light. “Ye cannot serve God and Mammon.” Ye cannot love the world and love God also. Whosoever is the friend of the world is the enemy of God. There is no alternative, you must choose the one or the other. 2. YOUR ETERNAL DESTINY HANGS ON YOUR CHOICE. They said, “Barabbas,” and what followed? His blood is on them till this day. What do you say? In Christ there is life; in the Barabbas of this world there is death. Both life and death is set before you. “Choose life” (Deut. 30:15). “My heart is fixed, eternal God—fixed on Thee; And my immortal choice is made—Christ for me.” Matthew 27:18 For he knew that because of envy they had handed Him over. he: Ge 37:11 1Sa 18:7-11 Ps 106:16 Pr 27:4 Ec 4:4 Isa 26:11 Mk 15:10 Ac 5:17 7:9 13:45 Jas 4:5 envy: Pr 27:4 See Trial and Crucifixion of Jesus - Parallel Passages Matthew 27 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Related Passages: Proverbs 27:4 Wrath is fierce and anger is a flood, But who can stand before jealousy? Mark 15:10+ "For he was aware that the chief priests had handed Him over because of envy." THE MALIGNITY OF ENVY For he knew that because of envy (phthonos) they had handed Him over (paradidomi) In other words the chief priests were not loyal to Rome (as some of their accusations against Jesus may have suggested). Pilate saw through their ruse recognizing that their motive was envy of Jesus not loyalty to Rome. A T
Mateus 27
Morris - The crowd was not left to make up its mind by itself. The crowd never is. There are always people who try to manipulate public opinion (ED: SOUNDS LIKE A DESCRIPTION OF MAINSTREAM MEDIA IN AMERICA!!!), and in this case they were the chief priests and the elders, the Jewish leaders who had brought the accusation against Jesus. There was no doubt which answer they wanted. Matthew gives no indication as to the methods employed to convince the crowds, but tells his readers that they were successful. The crowds were persuaded. (See The Gospel According to Matthew - Page 704 - Google Books or borrow Gospel According to Matthew page 704) Persuaded (3982) peitho means literally to persuade or induce by words to believe (Acts 19:26, Mt 27:20, Ro 14:14). Peitho takes on various shades of meaning and the following discussion is an attempt to give an overview of the NT uses and some of the enlightening uses in the Old Testament (Septuagint). The NIDNTT adds that "The range of meaning of the verb (peitho) may be ascertained by looking at its tenses with regard to the beginning, end and duration of the action concerned." PEITHO -52V assure(1), confident(3), convinced(7), followed(2), have confidence(2), having confidence(2), listen(1), obey(3), obeying(1), persuade(4), persuaded(8), persuading(1), put...trust(1), put confidence(1), put...confidence(1), relied(1), seeking the favor(1), sure(2), took...advice(1), trust(2), trusted(1), trusting(1), trusts(1), urging(1), win...over(1), won over(2). - Matt. 27:20; Matt. 27:43; Matt. 28:14; Lk. 11:22; Lk. 16:31; Lk. 18:9; Lk. 20:6; Acts 5:36; Acts 5:37; Acts 5:40; Acts 12:20; Acts 13:43; Acts 14:19; Acts 17:4; Acts 18:4; Acts 19:8; Acts 19:26; Acts 21:14; Acts 23:21; Acts 26:26; Acts 26:28; Acts 27:11; Acts 28:23; Acts 28:24; Rom. 2:8; Rom. 2:19; Rom. 8:38; Rom. 14:14; Rom. 15:14; 2 Co. 1:9; 2 Co. 2:3; 2 Co. 5:11; 2 Co. 10:7; Gal. 1:10; Gal. 5:7; Gal. 5:10; Phil. 1:6; Phil. 1:14; Phil. 1:25; Phil. 2:24; Phil. 3:3; Phil. 3:4; 2 Thess. 3:4; 2 Tim. 1:5; 2 Tim. 1:12; Phlm. 1:21; Heb. 2:13; Heb. 6:9; Heb. 13:17; Heb. 13:18; Jas. 3:3; 1 Jn. 3:19 Beware Of Envy! A sound heart is life to the body, but envy is rottenness to the bones. — Proverbs 14:30 Today's Scripture : 1 Samuel 18:1-16 Envy may be defined as “resentment at the success or happiness of others.” Many cultures regard envy lightly. A home remodeling company in Washington, DC, ran an ad that actually appealed to this vice. It used such phrases as “living room lust” and “kitchen envy.” It went on to state that you could become the envy of your neighborhood while enhancing the value of your home. The Bible views envy quite differently, calling it “rottenness to the bones” (Proverbs 14:30). It was out of envy that the religious leaders sought to kill Jesus (Matthew 27:20). And in Galatians 5:19-26, envy is listed among the life-destroying “works of the flesh.” In 1 Samuel 18, we read that envy contributed to the downfall of King Saul. He had begun his rule well, but because he disobeyed God’s command he was rejected as king (15:23). Instead of humbly accepting God’s decision, he became consumed with envy and hatred toward David (18:8-9). From then on, Saul distanced himself from God and even sought counsel from a medium (28:7). In the end, he took his own life after a shameful defeat by the Philistines (31:4-5). Envy had destroyed him. When other people find success But you do not advance, Do you congratulate their gain Or wish you had their chance? —Sper When you turn green with envy you are ripe for trouble. Fickle Followers The multitudes....cried out, saying: “Hosanna to the Son of David!” — Matthew 21:9 Today's Scripture : Matthew 27:15-23 If you follow sports at all, you know that sports fans can change like the weather. A team’s star player can hear 70,000 cheering voices if he does well—or 70,000 booing voices if he messes up. Sports figures easily fall from grace because people are fickle—eager to follow the one who makes them feel good, yet willing to turn against that same person if all does not go well. Scripture contains an example of fickleness that is far more serious. A great multitude in Jerusalem praised, honored, and cheered Jesus on the Sunday He entered the city riding on a donkey (Matt. 21:6-11). But just a few days later, some of those same people may have been in the crowd calling for Jesus’ crucifixion (27:20-23). On Sunday they worshiped Him, but on Friday they didn’t want Him around anymore. Let’s not waver in our relationship with the Lord. Sometimes we worship Jesus heartily on Sunday, but the very next day we live as if we find His presence intrusive. Or we tell Him on Sunday that we love Him, but then we fail to obey Him throughout the week. Let’s not be fickle followers Who say they love the Lord But live each day ignoring Him And His life-giving Word. —Sper Worshiping God should be a full-time experience. Matthew 27:21 But the governor said to them, “Which of the two do you want me to release for you?” And they said, “Barabbas.” See Trial and Crucifixion of Jesus - Parallel Passages Matthew 27 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries PILATE ON THE HORNS OF A DILEMMA The phrase "on the horns of a dilemma" means "to be divided between two seemingly equal options and to be undecided as to which option to choose: “When Mary was offered two equally attractive jobs, she found herself on the horns of a dilemma.” But the governor (hegemon) said to them, “Which of the two do you want (thelo) me to release (apoluo) for you?” - So in one ear are the warning words from his wife and in the other ear the raucous words of the riled up rabble. He should have never even asked the crowd, but should have followed his wife's sage advice and released Jesus. He made the wrong choice and would rue his choice throughout eternity! And they said, “Barabbas.”- See the parallel passages above. David Turner suggests that by now "Jesus’s popularity with the crowd has evaporated (Mt 21:9, 11, 26; 26:5), probably because the crowd’s hope that Jesus was a political-military Messiah was dashed by his arrest. Jesus’s messianic credentials have now been discredited. This crowd may be composed of Jerusalem residents instead of the Passover pilgrims who had praised Jesus when he entered Jerusalem (Blomberg 1992a: 412). (See Matthew - Page 654 - Google Books) (ED: ANOTHER REASON FOR JESUS' DECLINE IN POPULARITY COULD HAVE BEEN THE HATEFUL RHETORIC SPEWED OUT BY THE JEWISH LEADERS WHICH SURELY WOULD HAVE HAD AN IMPACT ON THE EMOTIONAL TENOR OF THE CROWD.) The Jackal or the Lamb “Which of the two do you want me to release to you?” They said, “Barabbas!” — Matthew 27:21 Today's Scripture : Matthew 27:15-26 The crowd had gathered, and they wanted someone released. In Jesus’ day, it was customary during Passover for a prisoner to be set free in commemoration of the Jews’ deliverance from bondage in Egypt. Pilate was no political novice. So he gave the mob a choice: the One who raised Lazarus from the dead or the one whose sword had probably sent many to an early grave. The choice seemed obvious. But the people chose the murderer Barabbas. Mob rule always prefers the wild, the rebel, the maniacal. It chooses the jackals: the Barabbases, the Stalins, and the Hitlers of the world. It rejects the lowly, the humble, the servants, the lambs. What if we had been there? Whom would we have chosen? We would like to believe that we would have chosen Jesus. But would we? The voice of the crowd is so powerful. A few days before the trial, the crowd had shouted, “Hosanna to the Son of David!” Now the people were crying out, “Crucify Him!” The pressure of the multitude can confuse us, frighten us, and carry us away. The world will try to pressure us To fit into its mold, But with God’s help we can resist If to His truth we hold. —Sper To resist the pressures of the world, rely on the power of the Lord. Matthew 27:22 Pilate *said to them, “Then what shall I do with Jesus who is called Christ?” They all *said, “Crucify Him!” What: Mt 27:17 Job 31:31 Ps 22:8,9 Isa 49:7 53:2,3 Zec 11:8 Mk 14:55 Mk 15:12-14 Lu 23:20-24 Jn 19:14-15 Ac 13:38 See Trial and Crucifixion of Jesus - Parallel Passages Matthew 27 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Related Passages: Mark 15:12-13+ Answering again, Pilate said to them, “Then what shall I do with Him Whom you call the King of the Jews?” 13 They shouted back, “Crucify Him!” Luke 23:20-21+ Pilate, wanting to release Jesus, addressed them again. 21 but they kept on calling out, saying, “Crucify, crucify Him!” | The King of the Jews JEWISH CROWD CRIES CRUCIFY CHRIST Pilate *said to them, “Then what shall I do with Jesus (Iesous) Who is called Christ (Christos)?” They all *said, “Crucify (stauroo - aorist imperative ~ Do it now!) Him!” - The religious leaders would have been happy with Jesus dead by any means, but crucifixion was especially useful to discredit Jesus for Dt 21:23NET+ stated "the one who is left exposed on a tree is cursed by God." In short, crucifixion would imply to the religious leaders that Jesus was under God's curse. And to some they were correct for Paul wrote "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for (huper = IN OUR PLACE = SUBSTITUTION) us–for it is written, “CURSED IS EVERYONE WHO HANGS ON A TREE”" (Gal 3:13+) NET NOTE - Grk “Him—be crucified!” The third person imperative is difficult to translate because English has no corresponding third person form for the imperative. The traditional translation “Let him be crucified” sounds as if the crowd is giving consent or permission. “He must be crucified” is closer, but it is more natural in English to convert the passive to active and simply say “Crucify him.” Crucifixion was the cruelest form of punishment practiced by the Romans. Roman citizens could not normally undergo it. It was reserved for the worst crimes, like treason and evasion of due process in a capital case. The Roman historian Cicero called it “a cruel and disgusting penalty” (Against Verres 2.5.63–66 §§163–70); Josephus (J. W. 7.6.4 [7.203]) called it the worst of deaths. W M Taylor - CHRIST BEFORE PILATE—PILATE BEFORE CHRIST (Click for full sermon - from Great Sermons) Excerpt: The canvas is large, and the figures, all of which are on the line of sight, are of life size. The scene is in the pavement or open court before the governor’s palace, which was called in the Hebrew tongue Gabbatha, and in which, after all his efforts to wriggle out of the responsibility of dealing with the case, Pilate ultimately gave up Jesus to be crucified. At one end of the court, on a raised bench, and drest in a white toga, Pilate sits. On either side of him are Jews, each of whom has a marked and special individuality. The two on his left are gazing with intense eagerness at Christ. They are evidently puzzled, and know not well what to make of the mysterious prisoner. On his right, standing on one of the seats, and with his back against the wall, is a Scribe, whose countenance is expressive of uttermost contempt, and just in front of this haughty fellow are some Pharisees, one of whom is on his feet, and passionately urging that Jesus should be put to death, presumably on the ground that, if Pilate should let Him go, he would make it evident that he was not Cæsar’s friend. Before them again is a usurer, sleek, fat and self-satisfied, clearly taking great comfort to himself in the assurance that, however the matter may be settled, his well-filled money-bags will be undisturbed. Beyond him stands the Christ in a robe of seamless white, and with His wrists firmly bound; while behind, kept in place by a Roman soldier, standing with his back to the spectator, and making a barricade with his spear, which he holds horizontally, is a motley group of onlookers, not unlike that which we may still see any day in one of our criminal courts. Of these, one more furious than the rest is wildly gesticulating, and crying, as we may judge from his whole attitude, “Crucify Him! crucify Him!” and another, a little to the Savior’s left, but in the second row behind Him, is leaning forward with mockery in his leering look, and making almost as if he would spit upon the saintly one. There is but one really compassionate face in the crowd, and that is a face of a woman who, with an infant in her arms, most fitly represents those gentle daughters of Jerusalem who followed Jesus to Calvary with tears. Then, over the heads of the on-lookers, and out of the upper part of the doorway into the court, we get a glimpse of the quiet light of the morning as it sleeps upon the walls and turrets of the adjacent buildings. All these figures are so distinctly seen that you feel you could recognize them again if you met them anywhere; and a strange sense of reality comes upon you as you look at them, so that you forget that they are only painted, and imagine that you are gazing on living and breathing men. Robert
Mateus 27
Morris - It is noteworthy that Judas, who betrayed Jesus, admitted he had betrayed "innocent (athoos) blood" (Matthew 27:4); Pilate, who condemned Him to die, admitted he was condemning "this just person" (ED: NOTE dikaios IS NOT IN BEST MANUSCRIPTS); and the centurion, who carried out the execution, admitted that Jesus was "the Son of God" (Matthew 27:54). Christ was, indeed, the spotless "Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world" (John 1:29). (Borrow The Defender's Study Bible page 1050ff) Accomplishing (profiting) (5623) opheleo from ophéllo = heap up or from ophelos = increase, profit) means to provide assistance, with emphasis upon the resulting benefit. To help, to be of benefit, to be of use, to be an advantage, to be advantageous. Passive sense - to have benefit from, to profit. To be useful or profitable. It is used usually with the sense of gain, profit in both a material and non-material sense. Riot (uproar) (2351) thorubos from throeo - to be troubled, disturbed) describes a noise, uproar, clamor, disturbance. It is a noisy tumult, a state of commotion and noise and confusion, with potential for a riot. Louw-Nida adds thorubos is "disorderly behavior of people in violent opposition to authority." In Mark 5:38 thorubos describes the noise produced by people wailing and mourning. The related verb turbazo is used in Lk 10:41+ of Jesus' description of Martha's mind as "bothered" - she had both inward anxiety and outward agitation. THORUBOS - 7V - Matt. 26:5; Matt. 27:24; Mk. 5:38; Mk. 14:2; Acts 20:1; Acts 21:34; Acts 24:18. David Jeremiah - CLEAN HANDS MATTHEW 27:24 (See Discovering God: 365 Daily Devotions - Page 118) Harry Truman coined the phrase “The buck stops here” with a sign bearing this inscription conspicuously placed on his desk in the Oval Office. President Truman made it clear that he understood his responsibility as chief executive —he alone was morally and legally accountable for the actions of his office and his nation. Pontius Pilate would never have had a similar motto. Pushed and pressured by the many influences that played on his weak mind, Pilate chose the most expedient route, siding with the agitated crowd. Pilate hoped he could somehow avert the responsibility for his bad choice by symbolically washing his hands of the blood of Christ. Instead, he is remembered for sending Jesus to the cross. When Christians accept responsibility for all we say and do, God is pleased. We may have a majority going against us, as Pilate did, but God rewards those who accept responsibility for their choices. God pays in joy that is fire-proof, famine-proof and devil-proof. BILLY SUNDAY C H
Mateus 27
Morris - This drink was a drugged wine, given to those being crucified to partially stupefy them and thereby reduce the excruciating pain. (Borrow The Defender's Study Bible page 1050ff) He came to suffer, and he intended to go through with all that he had undertaken. He would do nothing that would blunt the edge of the sacrificial knife.
Mateus 27
Morris - These leering spectators are likened to ravenous beasts in Psalm 22:12,13,16,21 (see below). No doubt they will remember this scene forever in the fires of hell (ED: POSSIBLY HELL BUT SEE RESPONSE BY ONE IN Mt 27:54 = "“Truly this was the Son of God!”). (Borrow The Defender's Study Bible page 1052ff) Psalm 22:12 Many bulls have surrounded me; Strong bulls of Bashan have encircled me. Psalm 22:13 They open wide their mouth at me, As a ravening and a roaring lion. Psalm 22:16 For dogs have surrounded me; A band of evildoers has encompassed me; They pierced my hands and my feet. Psalm 22:21 Save me from the lion’s mouth; From the horns of the wild oxen You answer me.
Mateus 27
Morris - John adds the words "of Nazareth." All four gospel writers mention this inscription. By compiling the accounts, the complete form may have been, "This is Jesus of Nazareth the King of the Jews" (John 19:19). (Borrow The Defender's Study Bible page 1052ff)
Mateus 27
Morris - These religious leaders, mocking Him, were unwittingly fulfilling Psalm 22:8 which had predicted just such a reaction. (Borrow The Defender's Study Bible page 1052ff) C H
Mateus 27
Morris - darkness. Jesus was "the light of the world" (John 8:12), but during these three hours of supernatural darkness (the time frame would not allow this event to be explained by a solar eclipse), the world's light was extinguished while He was being made "sin for us" (2 Corinthians 5:21). This was the "night season" prophesied in Psalm 22:2. The gospels reveal nothing of what took place during those three hours of the darkness of hell itself. Christ, hanged on a tree, was being made the Curse for us (Galatians 3:13; Deuteronomy 21:23; Genesis 3:16-19). In order for Christ to suffer the full punishment for sin, He had to suffer the infinite agony equivalent to "everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power" (2 Thessalonians 1:8,9). (Borrow The Defender's Study Bible page 1052ff) Believer's Study Bible - The "sixth hour" reckoned according to Hebrew time would be 12 o'clock noon. A strange darkness engulfs the land. A natural eclipse, unlikely at Passover, does not completely explain the phenomenon. The darkness signifies a miracle of God designed to draw attention to the darkness of the hour when men crucified the Savior of love. The Lord's cry from the cross, a mixture of Aramaic and Hebrew quoting Ps. 22:1, is in many respects as impenetrable as the darkness of the hour. All that is involved can never be known. This much can be ascertained: in that black hour the judgment of the sins of the entire world was placed upon Jesus in isolation. He alone must drink the cup of God's indignation against sin. (The Believer's Study Bible) Walter Wilson makes an interesting observation on the phenomena that accompanied Jesus' death - A noteworthy rhetorical feature of Mt 27:45–56 concerns the significant number of verbal inclusiones it creates with the opening sections of the gospel. For example, the astrological phenomenon attending Jesus’s death (Mt 27:45) recalls the astrological phenomenon attending his birth (Mt 2:2, 9). The report in Mt 27:46 that Jesus “cried out with a loud voice” (ἀνεβόησεν … φωνῇ μεγάλῃ) recalls the one “crying out [φωνὴ βοῶντος] in the wilderness” (Mt 3:3), that is, John the Baptist (Mt 3:1), who is identified with Elijah (Mt 11:14; cf. 17:11–12), who is mentioned by name in Mt 27:47. The opening of the earth (i.e., the tombs) in Mt 27:52 corresponds to the opening of the heavens in 3:16 (also with ἀνοίγω) when Jesus is baptized by John, while the confessional statement in Mt 27:54 recalls the voice that speaks from the heavens in Mt 3:17 (both with υἱός). Finally, the group of Gentile confessors in Mt 27:54 matches the group of Gentile worshippers (i.e., the magi) in Mt 2:11. Together these features give the impression that with this story, we have reached a culminating moment in the life and ministry of Jesus. The fact that extraordinary events occur at both his birth and his death also has the rhetorical force of enhancing the divine dimensions of his life more generally, especially given that such events occur in heaven as well as on the earth. (See The Gospel of Matthew, vol. 2: Matthew 14–28) Matthew Henry's Concise - Mt 27:45-50. During the three hours which the darkness continued, Jesus was in agony, wrestling with the powers of darkness, and suffering his Father's displeasure against the sin of man, for which he was now making his soul an offering. Never were there three such hours since the day God created man upon the earth, never such a dark and awful scene; it was the turning point of that great affair, man's redemption and salvation. Jesus uttered a complaint from Psalms 22:1. Hereby he teaches of what use the word of God is to direct us in prayer, and recommends the use of Scripture expressions in prayer. The believer may have tasted some drops of bitterness, but he can only form a very feeble idea of the greatness of Christ's sufferings. Yet, hence he learns something of the Saviour's love to sinners; hence he gets deeper conviction of the vileness and evil of sin, and of what he owes to Christ, who delivers him from the wrath to come. His enemies wickedly ridiculed his complaint. Many of the reproaches cast upon the word of God and the people of God, arise, as here, from gross mistakes. Christ, just before he expired, spake in his full strength, to show that his life was not forced from him, but was freely delivered into his Father's hands. He had strength to bid defiance to the powers of death: and to show that by the eternal Spirit he offered himself, being the Priest as well as the Sacrifice, he cried with a loud voice. Then he yielded up the ghost. The Son of God upon the cross, did die by the violence of the pain he was put to. His soul was separated from his body, and so his body was left really and truly dead. It was certain that Christ did die, for it was needful that he should die. He had undertaken to make himself an offering for sin, and he did it when he willingly gave up his life. Land (earth)(1093) ge means earth, the planet on which we live (Mt 5:18, 35). In Acts 17:26 "The face of the earth" refers to the planet earth. In Ps 1:4 the phrase "wicked...are like chaff the wind drives away" in the Septuagint reads "the ungodly...the wind scatters from the face of the earth (ge)." In Acts 13:47 Paul quoting Isaiah 42:6 recalls Jehovah's original intention for Israel to evangelize the entire world declaring "I have placed you as a light for the Gentiles, that you may bring salvation to the end of the earth (figuratively = "global gospelization!")." As an aside, it is interesting that most of the NT uses of ge (67/250 uses) occur in the last book of the Bible, the Revelation, when God will pour out His righteous wrath upon the earth and those who dwell thereon! In Mt 28:18 Jesus says “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth (ge)." Of all the 223 NT uses 165x ge is translated "earth" GE - USES IN MATTHEW - Matt. 2:6; Matt. 2:20; Matt. 2:21; Matt. 4:15; Matt. 5:5; Matt. 5:13; Matt. 5:18; Matt. 5:35; Matt. 6:10; Matt. 6:19; Matt. 9:6; Matt. 9:26; Matt. 9:31; Matt. 10:15; Matt. 10:29; Matt. 10:34; Matt. 11:24; Matt. 11:25; Matt. 12:40; Matt. 12:42; Matt. 13:5; Matt. 13:8; Matt. 13:23; Matt. 14:24; Matt. 14:34; Matt. 15:35; Matt. 16:19; Matt. 17:25; Matt. 18:18; Matt. 18:19; Matt. 23:9; Matt. 23:35; Matt. 24:30; Matt. 24:35; Matt. 25:18; Matt. 25:25; Matt. 27:45; Matt. 27:51; Matt. 28:18 John
Mateus 27
Morris - the ninth hour. The "ninth hour" was the time of the evening oblation, the time of sacrifice and prayer. Elijah sacrificed and prayed against the prophets of Baal at this time (1 Kings 18:29,36). It was also when Daniel prayed (Daniel 9:20,21) and Ezra (Ezra 9:4,5). Peter and John prayed at the ninth hour (Acts 3:1) and so did Cornelius (Acts 10:3,4). All were heard, and all their prayers marvelously answered, except that of Christ. God cannot "behold evil" (Habakkuk 1:13). WHY HAVE YOU FORSAKEN ME? There are seven "words" from the cross, three before this (Luke 23:34; John 19:26,27; Luke 23:43) and three after (John 19:28; John 19:30; Luke 23:46). This central word is the only one recorded by Matthew and Mark (15:34). In the middle of this central word is the word "Why." The answer as to why the only perfectly righteous Man should have to endure the very greatest sufferings can only be that He loved us. There was no other way to save us from our sins; any further meaning is hidden in "the mind of the Lord" (Romans 11:33-36) and "the ages to come" (Ephesians 2:7). Because Christ was forsaken by His Father, God will never leave us or forsake us (Psalm 37:25; Hebrews 13:5).(Borrow The Defender's Study Bible page 1052ff) QUESTION - Why did Jesus say, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (WATCH VIDEO) ANSWER - “And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46, KJV). This cry is a fulfillment of Psalm 22:1, one of many parallels between that psalm and the specific events of the crucifixion. It is difficult to understand in what sense Jesus was “forsaken” by God. It is certain that God approved His work. It is certain that Jesus was innocent. He had done nothing to forfeit the favor of God. As God’s own Son—holy, harmless, undefiled, and obedient—God still loved Him. In none of these senses could God have forsaken Him. The prophet Isaiah says this about the Messiah: “Surely he took up our pain and bore our suffering, yet we considered him punished by God, stricken by him, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was on him, and by his wounds we are healed” (Isaiah 53:4–5). Jesus redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us (Galatians 3:13). He was made a sin-offering, and He died in our place, on our account, that He might bring us near to God. It was this, doubtless, that intensified His sufferings and part of why Jesus said, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” It was the manifestation of God’s hatred of sin, in some unexplained way, that Jesus experienced in that terrible hour. The suffering He endured was due to us, and it is that suffering by which we can be saved from eternal death. In those awful moments, as evil men were allowed to do whatever they wanted to Jesus, our Lord expressed His feelings of abandonment. God placed the sins of the world on His Son, and Jesus for a time felt the desolation of being unconscious of His Father’s presence. It was at this time that “God made Him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in Him we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Corinthians 5:21). There is another possible reason for Jesus to cry out, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” It could be that Jesus’ intent in quoting Psalm 22:1 was to point His hearers to that psalm. When they read Psalm 22, they would no doubt see the many fulfilled prophecies included in that song of David. Even while experiencing the agony of the cross, Jesus was teaching the crowds and proving yet again that He was the Messiah who fulfilled the Scriptures. A W
Mateus 27
Morris - The "loud voice" was undoubtedly the great victory cry: "It is finished!" (John 19:30). He had not only suffered the terrible physical pain, but also the essence of hell itself. Thus, He could now merely commit His Spirit into the hands of His Father (Luke 23:46). The death of Christ was uniquely volitional. No other man or woman can simply decide to die and then yield up the ghost, but Christ did. "No man taketh it from me," He said, "but I lay it down of myself" (John 10:18). (Borrow The Defender's Study Bible page 1052ff) Cried out (2896) krazo refers to a loud cry or vociferation, and is a strong word expressing deep emotion. Krazo is one of those onomatopoeic words, the very pronunciation of which imitates the hoarse cry of the raven (listen), and can be an inarticulate and brutish sound or an exclamation of fear or pain. Abbott-Smith says "generally used of inarticulate cries, to scream, cry out (Aesch., etc.)" It is used of the cry of an animal, the barking of a dog and two men in a quarrel, trying to bawl each other down (so Aristophanes, Knights, 1017)" 'The prophet in awful earnestness, and as with a scream of anguish, cries over Israel' (Morison)" Krazō was also a technical, rabbinic term to refer to the loud summons of a prophet, needing to be heard. In Lk 18:39+ the blind beggar cried "to cry clamorously; to scream or shriek." (You can almost hear hid shrieking! He is motivated because he is blind and thinks this Man might help him see!) It is notable that this same verb krazo is used 3 times in the Septuagint translation of Psalm 22 - Ps. 22:2; Ps. 22:5; Ps. 22:24; Psalm 22:2 O my God, I cry by day, but You do not answer; And by night, but I have no rest. Psalm 22:5 To You they cried out and were delivered; In You they trusted and were not disappointed. Psalm 22:24 For He has not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted; Nor has He hidden His face from him; But when he cried to Him for help, He heard. Krazo - 54x/53v - cried(20), cries(2), cry(5), crying(12), screaming(1), screams(1), shout(1), shouted(4), shouting(8). Matt. 8:29; Matt. 9:27; Matt. 14:26; Matt. 14:30; Matt. 15:22; Matt. 15:23; Matt. 20:30; Matt. 20:31; Matt. 21:9; Matt. 21:15; Matt. 27:23; Matt. 27:50; Mk. 3:11; Mk. 5:5; Mk. 5:7; Mk. 9:24; Mk. 9:26; Mk. 10:47; Mk. 10:48; Mk. 11:9; Mk. 15:13; Mk. 15:14; Lk. 9:39; Lk. 19:40; Jn. 1:15; Jn. 7:28; Jn. 7:37; Jn. 12:44; Acts 7:57; Acts 7:60; Acts 14:14; Acts 16:17; Acts 19:28; Acts 19:32; Acts 19:34; Acts 21:28; Acts 21:36; Acts 23:6; Acts 24:21; Rom. 8:15; Rom. 9:27; Gal. 4:6; Jas. 5:4; Rev. 6:10; Rev. 7:2; Rev. 7:10; Rev. 10:3; Rev. 12:2; Rev. 14:15; Rev. 18:2; Rev. 18:18; Rev. 18:19; Rev. 19:17 His Pain For Our Gain He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us. — 2 Corinthians 5:21 Today's Scripture : Matthew 27:27-50 Every year I hear about people who have their hands and feet nailed to a cross for a brief time to imitate the crucifixion of Christ. These misguided souls may mean well, but their futile self-torture is only a tiny fraction of the Lord’s physical pain—and nothing of His deep spiritual agony. After a night of humiliating abuse and vicious scourging, which was enough to kill some people, Jesus was wracked with horrendous pain during His 6 hours on the cross. But far worse was the agony in His soul. During the 3 hours of darkness, He endured the God-forsakenness of hell. The prophet Isaiah declared the suffering Servant to be absolutely without fault, but said, “It pleased the Lord to bruise Him” and to “make His soul an offering for sin” (Isa. 53:10). The apostle Paul said that God made the sinless One “to be sin for us” (2 Cor. 5:21). Not until Jesus knew He had endured the full measure of God’s judgment against our sins did He say, “It is finished!” (Mt. 27:50; Jn. 19:30). The Lord was crucified for us; He gave His life so we would gain Eternal life and endless joy In heaven where there is no pain. —Sper Christ endured the agony of the cross so we could enjoy the glory of heaven. QUESTION - What time was Jesus crucified? What time did Jesus die on the cross? NOTE: SEE MORE IN DEPTH DISCUSSION OF TIMING OF EVENTS THIRD HOUR, SIXTH HOUR, NINTH HOUR ANSWER - The gospel writers make several references regarding the time of Jesus’ crucifixion. Putting all those references together gives us an idea of the time of day that Jesus died. In this article, we will use the NASB because it presents a literal translation of the time references recorded in the original Greek. We know that Jesus was arrested at night and was brought to Pilate the next morning. Matthew 27:1–2 tells us, “Now when morning came, all the chief priests and the elders of the people conferred together against Jesus to put Him to death; and they bound Him, and led Him away and delivered Him to Pilate the governor.” There was a series of hearings before Pilate and Herod, who was in Jerusalem for the Passover (see Luke 23:6–15). But Pilate had to make the final decision. Pilate had wanted to set Jesus free (Luke 23:20), but ultimately felt it more advantageous to appease the crowd. “When Pilate saw that he was accomplishing nothing, but rather that a riot was starting, he took water and washed his hands in front of the crowd, saying, ‘I am innocent of this Man’s blood; see to that yourselves.’ And all the people said, ‘His blood shall be on us and on our children!’ Then he released Barabbas for them; but after having Jesus scourged, he handed Him over to be crucified” (Matthew 27:24–26). Matthew provides some clues as to the time Jesus was crucified: “Now from the sixth hour darkness fell upon all the land until the ninth hour. About the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, ‘Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?’ that is, ‘My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?’ And some of those who were standing there, when they heard it, began saying, ‘This man is calling for Elijah.’ Immediately one of them ran, and taking a sponge, he filled it with sour wine and put it on a reed, and gave Him a drink. But the rest of them said, ‘Let us see whether Elijah will come to save Him.’ And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice, and yielded up His spirit. And behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth shook and the rocks were split” (Matthew 27:45–51). So according to Matthew, Jesus died “about the ninth hour.” Luke 23:44–47 agrees with Matthew about the darkness at the sixth hour and Jesus’ death about the ninth hour. Mark 15:25 adds further information: “It was the third hour when they crucified Him,” and the rest of the account agrees with Matthew and Luke about the times of darkness and Jesus’ death. So, putting Synoptic Gospels’ accounts together, Jesus was crucified at the third hour. Darkness descended at the sixth hour until the ninth hour, and Jesus died about the ninth hour. Jesus was on the cross for about six hours, three of those in total darkness. In modern reckoning, a new day starts at midnight, so the third hour would be 3:00 AM. However, the Jewish day started at sundown, but hours were counted from sunup, which would be roughly 6:00 AM. So the third hour when Jesus was crucified would be three hours after sunup, or about 9:00 AM. The sixth hour when darkness descended would be roughly noon, and the ninth hour when Jesus died would be about 3:00 PM. This is all rather straightforward, except that John seems to record something different. John 19:13–14 says, “Therefore when Pilate heard these words, he brought Jesus out, and sat down on the judgment seat at a place called The Pavement, but in Hebrew, Gabbatha. Now it was the day of preparation for the Passover; it was about the sixth hour.” John seems to place the hearing before Pilate “about” noon, which would conflict with Mark, who records that Jesus was crucified at the third hour or 9:00 AM. There are several possible solutions to the seeming discrepancy. Some have suggested that John is counting hours from midnight (the “Roman” method), so the sixth hour would be about 6:00 AM. This solves the problem of chronology; however, D. A. Carson, citing research by Henry Morris, thinks this unlikely, as this reckoning was normally reserved for Roman legal documents (BORROW The Gospel according to John PAGE 604). Merrill Tenney points out that this “Roman” method would be inconsistent with John’s other notations of time (NIV Bible Commentary, Volume 2, New Testament, “John,” Zondervan, 1994, p. 363). Andreas Kostenberger also notes that John appears to use the traditional sunup-to-sundown frame of reference when referring to time in John 1:39 where the tenth hour seems to refer to late afternoon (4:00 PM), not 10:00 AM (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament, “John,” Baker Academic, 2004, p. 74–75). So the “Roman time” solution seems to be unlikely. Another proposed solution is to attribute John’s mention of the sixth hour to a scribal error. In this theory, an early copyist of John mistakenly wrote Ϝ (the Greek numeral digamma, or 6) instead of Γ (the Greek numeral gamma, or 3). This would make John and Mark to be in complete agreement; however, Carson points out that there is absolutely no manuscript evidence for this variant (op cit, p. 606). Therefore, this solution rests upon conjecture entirely. Kostenberger, although he does not necessarily endorse the idea, suggests that John may be making a theological point here and is not attempting to give a literal indication of the time (op cit, p. 536). The Paschal lamb selection would normally take place at noon on the day before Passover. Therefore, when Jesus was selected for crucifixion, John makes reference to noon (the sixth hour) to emphasize the fact that the Lamb of God had been selected. However, this solution has its own chronological difficulties. The “day of preparation” mentioned in John 19:14 is most likely preparation for the Passover Sabbath, not the Passover Feast that would require the lamb to be selected. The fact that Jesus had already eaten the Passover with His disciples would seem to indicate that the meal itself has already occurred. Kostenberger (p. 538) and Carson (p. 605) prefer a solution based on the imprecise methods of ancient timekeeping. Before the use of watches and other precise timekeeping devices, the day was usually divided up into three-hour blocks, and people often estimated and rounded off the time. If it was mid-morning, say 10:30, one person might have rounded down and called it the third hour (9:00 AM); another person might have rounded up and called it the sixth hour (noon). In this solution, there is no discrepancy, just a difference in the way each writer estimated the time. (Even in modern times with digital clocks that tell time down to the second, we often round to the nearest quarter or half hour.) According to this solution, the choice between the third and the sixth hour would be a matter of personal estimation. It is possible that John and Mark “rounded off” the times in keeping with custom. In the final analysis, this may be a case of expecting modern scientific precision from an ancient book. Carson puts it this way: “More than likely we are in danger of insisting on a degree of precision in both Mark and John which, in the days before watches, could not have been achieved. The reckoning of time for most people, who could not very well carry sundials and astronomical charts, was necessarily approximate. If the sun was moving toward mid-heaven, two different observers might well have glanced up and decided respectively that it was ‘the third hour’ or ‘about the sixth hour’” (BORROW The Gospel according to John PAGE 604). Taking all the evidence together, Jesus was crucified at some time in the morning, and He died at some time in the afternoon. He would have spent somewhere between three and six hours on the cross, with a good portion of that time in total darkness. The gospel writers were not overly interested in precision in this matter. They were far more concerned with the theological implications, which they faithfully recorded. Related Resource Why was Jesus crucified? Matthew 27:51 And behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth shook and the rocks were split. the veil: Ex 26:31-37 40:21 Lev 16:2,12-15 21:23 2Ch 3:14 Isa 25:7 Mk 15:38 Lu 23:45 Eph 2:13-18 Heb 6:19 Heb 10:19-22 the earth: Mt 28:2 Ps 18:7,15 Mic 1:3,4 Na 1:3-5 Hab 3:10,13 Heb 12:25-27 Rev 11:13,19 See Trial and Crucifixion of Jesus - Parallel Passages Matthew 27 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Related Passages: Mark 15:38+ And the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. Luke 23:45+ because the sun was obscured; and the veil of the temple was torn in two. Hebrews 6:19-20 This hope we have as an anchor of the soul, a hope both sure and steadfast and one which enters within the veil, 20 where Jesus has entered as a forerunner for us, having become a high priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek. Hebrews 9:6-14 Now when these things have been so prepared, the priests are continually entering the outer tabernacle performing the divine worship, 7 but into the second, only the high priest enters once a year, not without taking blood, which he offers for himself and for the sins of the people committed in ignorance. 8 The Holy Spirit is signifying this, that the way into the holy place has not yet been disclosed while the outer tabernacle is still standing, 9 which is a symbol for the present time. Accordingly both gifts and sacrifices are offered which cannot make the worshiper perfect in conscience, 10 since they relate only to food and drink and various washings, regulations for the body imposed until a time of reformation. 11 But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation; 12 and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption. 13 For if the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling those who have been defiled sanctify for the cleansing of the flesh, 14 how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? SPLIT ROCKS FORESHADOW JESUS' RESURRECTION And behold (idou) or “Lo and behold!" serves to call attention to the following event. The tearing of the veil marks the end of the Old Covenant and the need to approach God through blood sacrifices.
Mateus 27
Morris - This veil was a heavy curtain separating the Holy Place in the temple from the Holy of Holies, behind which the glory of God met with the high priest just once each year, on the Day of Atonement. For it to be torn in two, especially from top to bottom, even in an earthquake, would seem to require a miracle, possibly an unseen angelic hand. Symbolically, this tearing of the veil would mean that Christ had now opened the way for all to enter directly into the presence of God. We now may have "boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh" (Hebrews 10:19,20). (Borrow The Defender's Study Bible page 1052ff) NET NOTE - The referent of this term, καταπέτασμα (katapetasma), is not entirely clear. It could refer to the curtain separating the holy of holies from the holy place (Josephus, J. W. 5.5.5 [5.219]), or it could refer to one at the entrance of the temple court (Josephus, J. W. 5.5.4 [5.212]). Many argue that the inner curtain is meant because another term, κάλυμμα (kalumma), is also used for the outer curtain. Others see a reference to the outer curtain as more likely because of the public nature of this sign. Either way, the symbolism means that access to God has been opened up. It also pictures a judgment that includes the sacrifices. We have an open way through Christ to the throne of grace, or mercy-seat now, and to the throne of glory hereafter. Matthew Henry's Concise - Mt 27:51-56. The rending of the veil signified that Christ, by his death, opened a way to God. We have an open way through Christ to the throne of grace, or mercy-seat now, and to the throne of glory hereafter. When we duly consider Christ's death, our hard and rocky hearts should be rent; the heart, and not the garments. That heart is harder than a rock that will not yield, that will not melt, where Jesus Christ is plainly set forth crucified. The graves were opened, and many bodies of saints which slept, arose. To whom they appeared, in what manner, and how they disappeared, we are not told; and we must not desire to be wise above what is written. The dreadful appearances of God in his providence, sometimes work strangely for the conviction and awakening of sinners. This was expressed in the terror that fell upon the centurion and the Roman soldiers. We may reflect with comfort on the abundant testimonies given to the character of Jesus; and, seeking to give no just cause of offence, we may leave it to the Lord to clear our characters, if we live to Him. Let us, with an eye of faith, behold Christ and him crucified, and be affected with that great love wherewith he loved us. But his friends could give no more than a look; they beheld him, but could not help him. Never were the horrid nature and effects of sin so tremendously displayed, as on that day when the beloved Son of the Father hung upon the cross, suffering for sin, the Just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God. Let us yield ourselves willingly to his service. Behold (2400) idou is the second person singular aorist middle imperative of eidon which means to see, perceive, look at. In the NT idou is used as a demonstrative particle that draws attention to what follows. Idou in the middle voice means "you yourself look, see, perceive!" The aorist imperative is a command emphasizing "Do it now! Don't delay!" In 2Cor 5:17 Paul uses idou, to get his reader's attention as he introduces the truth that the one who in now in Christ is a qualitatively new person. (see also notes above on "behold")
Mateus 27
Morris - Not only had the light of the world gone out, but also the earth's great foundation Rock had been smitten (compare Exodus 17:6). But the veil had been rent and the graves of the saints were opened. The saints whose bodies were raised could only have been the men and women who had died in faith before the first coming of Christ. Until Christ set them free, their souls had been resting in that division of Hades called "Abraham's bosom" (Luke 16:22). However, when "he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive" after He had "descended first into the lower parts of the earth" (Ephesians 4:8,9). (Borrow The Defender's Study Bible page 1052ff) QUESTION - What is the meaning of those who were raised to life at Jesus’ death (Matthew 27:52-53)? ANSWER - Matthew 27:50-53 records, “And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice, and yielded up His spirit. And behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth shook and the rocks were split. The tombs were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; and coming out of the tombs after His resurrection they entered the holy city and appeared to many.” This event occurred as a testimony to the immortal power ascribed to Jesus Christ alone (1 Timothy 6:14-16). Only God has the power of life and death (1 Samuel 2:6; Deuteronomy 32:29). Therefore, the resurrection is the cornerstone of Christianity. All other religions and their respective leaders do not serve a risen Lord. By overcoming death, Jesus Christ immediately receives precedence because He came back to life when everyone else did not. The resurrection has given us a reason to tell others about Him and place trust in God (1 Corinthians 15:14). The resurrection has given us assurance that our sins are forgiven (1 Corinthians 15:17). Paul clearly says in this verse that no resurrection equals zero forgiveness of our sins. And, finally, the resurrection has given us a reason to have hope today (1 Corinthians 15:20-28). If Christ was not raised from the dead, then Christians would be no better off spiritually than non-Christians. But the fact is that God did raise "Jesus our Lord from the dead, who was delivered up because of our offenses, and was raised because of our justification" (Romans 4:24-25). The raising of the saints fits into the overall rhetorical devices and strategies used by Matthew in his gospel. Examining Ezekiel 37 and the bones raised to life in connection with this story reveals that an Old Testament prophecy was fulfilled in the raising of these saints. Additionally, the raising of the saints relates directly to the coming kingdom. The raising of a few and not all of the saints shows that Jesus has power to resurrect, but also points forward to the second coming and judgment of Jesus Christ, which will include all those whose names are written in the Book Life by faith in the grace of God. Knowing that Jesus has died and conquered death through His resurrection ought to hasten our desire to repent and trust Him alone for salvation so we too can one day be resurrected “in the twinkling of an eye” (1 Corinthians 15:52). Related Resources: Is the resurrection of Jesus Christ true? Where was Jesus for the three days between His death and resurrection? Why should I believe in Christ’s resurrection? How many people were raised from the dead in the Bible? Norman Geisler - When Cultists Ask page 305 MATTHEW 27:52–53—Is the opening of the graves in this verse evidence of the bodily assumption of Mary, as some Catholic scholars claim? MISINTERPRETATION: Roman Catholic scholar Ludwig Ott argues that the fact that the graves were opened after Jesus’ resurrection and many saints emerged shows the “probability” of the bodily assumption of Mary. For if “the justified of the Old Covenant were called to perfection of salvation immediately after the conclusion of the redemptive work of Christ, then it is possible and probable that the Mother of the Lord was called to it also” (Ott, 1960, 209). CORRECTING THE MISINTERPRETATION: The fact that some saints arose immediately after Jesus’ resurrection in no way indicates that Mary (who was still alive at the time) was bodily assumed into heaven. The text speaks only of being raised from the graves, not of ascension into heaven. Many scholars believe these saints, such as Lazarus, were only resuscitated in mortal bodies, not permanently resurrected in immortal bodies. Mary is not mentioned in the group that was raised, nor is there any mention anywhere in Scripture of her being raised any time later. So the belief that Mary was bodily assumed into heaven has no real basis in this text or any text of Scripture. It is significant that Catholic authorities admit that “the idea of the bodily assumption of Mary is first expressed in certain transitus-narratives of the fifth and sixth centuries.” They acknowledge that these are apocryphal (Ibid., 209–10) Matthew 27:53 and coming out of the tombs after His resurrection they entered the holy city and appeared to many. holy: Mt 4:5 Ne 11:1 Isa 48:2 Da 9:24 Rev 11:2 21:2 22:19 See Trial and Crucifixion of Jesus - Parallel Passages Matthew 27 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD The events of Matthew 27:52-53 are only described by Matthew. And coming out of the tombs after His resurrection (egersis) they entered the holy city and appeared (emphanizo) to many - Jesus Himself has not yet been raised, so the resurrection of the saints did not actually occur until after Jesus was raised, even though the account in Mt 27:52 at first reading suggests that their resurrection coincides with his death. The phrase appeared to many implies that the "many" understood in some way that these were previously dead people now walking around alive. How did they know they were resurrected? Were they glorified (I doubt that)? Or were they people that the many knew prior to their death (possibly)? The Greek word for resurrection is egersis (from egeiro) and is used only here in the Bible. Egersis is strictly speaking an action of waking or rousing and then a coming back to life, an awakening from the dead, a reanimation of the dead. Egersis is used in classical Greek from the Fifth Century B.C. (especially by Hippocrates) to mean “rousing or stimulation of the spirit.” It is used in reference to the erection of walls or buildings, recovery from sickness, rising from sleep or from sitting (see Lxx use in Ps 139:2). The more common term for resurrection is anastasis. C H
Mateus 27
Morris - after His resurrection. The Old Testament saints could only receive their glorified resurrection bodies after Christ had been raised, for Christ must "become the firstfruits of them that slept" (1 Corinthians 15:20). Although this is apparently the only specific reference to the resurrection of these pre Christian-era believers, no other interpretation seems plausible. Evidently their new bodies were seen by people on the earth during the brief period between Christ's resurrection and His initial ascent to heaven (John 20:17). (Borrow The Defender's Study Bible page 1052ff) Appeared (Made clear) (1718) emphanizo from en = in, into + phaino = show, make visible, make conspicuous) means to make visible, to lay something open to view (clear or plain) so all can see (Jn 14:22, cp Ex 33:13 = idea is "reveal Yourself to me", Mt 27:53, He 9:24). To provide information so as to make clear, to explain or to inform (Acts 23:22, He 11:14, Jn 14:21 Isa 3:9). To present evidence or bring charges as in a formal judicial report (Acts 24:1, 25:2, Esther 2:22) NIDNTT writes that in secular Greek emphanizo "is used basically in the sense of to manifest, exhibit, and passively to become visible. The word also connotes the ideas of making plain (Plato, Sophocles), declaring or explaining (Aristotle). The adjective emphanēs connotes the idea of visible, open, manifest. Emphanizo - 10v - Matt. 27:53; Jn. 14:21; Jn. 14:22; Acts 23:15; Acts 23:22; Acts 24:1; Acts 25:2; Acts 25:15; Heb. 9:24; Heb. 11:14 Matthew 27:54 Now the centurion, and those who were with him keeping guard over Jesus, when they saw the earthquake and the things that were happening, became very frightened and said, “Truly this was the Son of God!” the centurion: Mt 27:36 8:5 Ac 10:1 21:32 23:17,23 27:1,43 saw: Mk 15:39 Lu 23:47-49 feared: 2Ki 1:13,14 Ac 2:37 16:29,30 Rev 11:13 Truly: Mt 27:40,43 26:63 Lu 22:70 Jn 19:7 Ro 1:4 See Trial and Crucifixion of Jesus - Parallel Passages Matthew 27 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Related Passages: Mark 15:39+ When the centurion, who was standing right in front of Him, saw the way He breathed His last, he said, "Truly this man was the Son of God!" What caused the reaction of the centurion? Matthew 27:54 says (1) saw the earthquake and (2) things that had happened (cf Lk 23:47) and (3) the way He breathed His last. This pagan Roman centurion had several reactions (2 only found in Luke's account) to Jesus' death - (1) He began praising God (2) he declared Jesus was certainly innocent, (3) he became frightened (Mt 27:54) and (4) he declared Him to be the Son of God. How could a pagan Roman soldier recognize Jesus was the Son of God? The only way he could have done this is the same way that Peter was able to do it in Mt 16:17, where Jesus explained "flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven." THE SOLDIERS' ACCURATE ACCLAMATION Now the centurion (Hekatontarches), and those who were with him keeping guard (tereo) over Jesus, when they saw the earthquake (seismos) and the things that were happening, became very frightened (phobeo - experienced sheer terror and state of panic) and said, “Truly (alethos) this was the Son of God!” - The centurion and the other soldiers that were guarding Jesus became very frightened. In other words, the Roman soldiers began to experience sheer terror and a state of panic like the disciples on the sea of Galilee during the storm and they saw Jews walking on the water (phobeo in Mt 14:27+, cf phobeo in Mt 17:6-7+). Note that saying is in the plural indicating the declaration of Son of God was not just from the centurion but also from the soldiers. Jesus Acknowledged by Gentiles from Crib to Cross Truly (alethos) this was the Son of God!” - This declaration by the soldiers (said = legontes = present tense, plural, masculine) was the antithesis of the soldier's derogatory taunts in (Mt 27:27-31+) and the Jewish taunts the soldiers had heard in Mt 27:40+ and Mt 27:43+ (= He said "I am the Son of God") and is the definitive reply of Gentiles to the Jewish high priest's words "tell us whether You are the Christ, the Son of God.” (Mt 26:63+) Note that while several of the soldiers had declared "Truly this man was the Son of God," the Gospels record that only the Centurion actually praised God "Now when the centurion saw what had happened, he began praising God, saying, “Certainly this man was innocent.” (Lk 23:47+) What was the fate of the other soldiers? We do not know but here Luke records that a mocker is turned into a praiser! A pagan testifies to two profound theological truths that all the erudite, legalistic, hypocritical religious leaders could not see and/or refused to acknowledge -- (1) that Jesus was innocent and (2) that "Truly this was the Son of God." He did not go so far as to say Jesus was sinless, but the word Luke uses for innocent is dikaios which means righteous, the very word Pilate's wife had used when she warned her husband "Have nothing to do with that RIGHTEOUS (dikaios) Man." (Mt 27:19) John refers to our "Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous (dikaios). (1 Jn 2:1, cf 1Jn 2:29, Rev 15:3+) Peter uses dikaios in his summary of the crucifixion writing "Christ also died for sins once for all, the just (dikaios) for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit." (1 Peter 3:18). Here we see a dramatic irony of the Gentiles acknowledging Jesus on the Cross as the Son of God (cf Pilate's wife Mt 27:19), the very title that the Jewish authorities had rejected! It is only fitting that Jesus' end would mirror His beginning, when it was also Gentiles who acknowledged and fell to the ground and worshiped Jesus in the crib as the King of the Jews (Mt 2:2, 11+)! Keep in mind the centurion and those who were with him had sat through three hours of supernatural darkness. One can only imagine how they processed this divinely orchestrated cosmic phenomenon! Then superimposed on that frightening heavenly sign, God then sent an tumultuous earthly sign in the form of an earthquake that split rocks. What was happening? I submit that all creation was giving witness to the Creator. Heaven and earth were bearing witness to the divinity of Jesus! (cp "I call heaven and earth to witness..." in Dt 4:26, Dt 30:19, cf 2 Ki 19:15, 2 Chr 2:12). And the centurion and his associates acknowledged that indeed "Truly, this was the Son of God." Note they did not say "this is" which would have implied they understood that though Jesus was physically dead, He was still alive. I tend to agree with Norman Crawford's more cautious comment regarding the state of the centurion's soul - We must await the day when the saved will be all joined in the Father's house to know with certainty if this man was saved, but it may well be that he saw in Christ his Saviour God....The thief was a Jew and the centurion a Gentile, giving an example of blessing reaching out to all men from the cross. (What the Bible teaches – Luke) R T France - Whatever the soldiers themselves meant by it, for Matthew’s readers this declaration is a climactic theological moment. God has twice declared that Jesus is His Son (Mt 3:17; 17:5); demons have recognized Him as such (Mt 4:3, 6; 8:29); Jesus has said so himself (Mt 11:25–27; cf. 24:36), has frequently referred to God as his “Father,” and has even on two occasions hinted publicly that he is God’s “Son” (Mt 21:37–39; 22:42–45); the disciples have hailed him as “God’s son” in a moment of crisis (Mt 14:33 a declaration very similar to this one), and Peter has included this title in his considered estimate of Jesus (Mt 16:16). But right up to the time of Jesus’ trial no human observer outside the disciple group has used such language of Jesus, and at the Sanhedrin hearing it has formed part of the basis of his condemnation (Mt 26:63), subsequently providing the ammunition for Jewish mockery of this preposterous claim (Mt 27:40, 43). Now, however, people right outside the community of faith have recognized and declared the truth, and so reversed that mockery, and the fact that they are not even Jews reinforces Matthew’s message that the new ekklēsia is not to be restricted to the children of Abraham. Like the other centurion we met earlier in the gospel, this officer and his men have displayed faith beyond that of “anyone in Israel” (Mt 8:10), and so they too represent the many who will come from east and west to join the Jewish patriarchs in the kingdom of heaven (Mt 8:11–12). (See The Gospel of Matthew - Google Books) those men should confess what the chief priests and scribes and elders denied
Mateus 27
Morris writes "This was an action of some generosity (ED:ON PART OF Joseph), for a rock tomb was expensive, and it was not permitted to bury a criminal in a family grave (Sanh. 6:5; cf. Daube, pp. 310-11); the tomb could probably not be used afterward for anyone else. Matthew goes on to tell us that the Jewish leaders recalled Jesus’ prophecy that he would rise from the dead and persuaded Pilate to secure the tomb until the third day after the crucifixion. (See The Gospel According To Matthew - Google Book or BORROW The Gospel According To Matthew page 726) D. A. Carson: Tombs were of various kinds. Many were sealed with some sort of boulder wedged into place to discourage wild animals and grave robbers. But an expensive tomb consisted of an antechamber hewn out of the rock face, with a low passage (cf. “bent over,” Jn 20:5, 11) leading into the burial chamber, which was sealed with a cut disk-shaped stone that rolled in a slot cut into the rock. The slot was on an incline, making the grave easy to seal but difficult to open. Several men might be needed to roll the stone back up the incline. This sort of tomb is presupposed in the gospel records. (See Matthew - Google Book - borrow Expositor's Bible Commentary abridged)
Mateus 27
Morris - new tomb. There is more here than meets the eye. Joseph was a rich man who lived in Arimathea, so why would he build a new tomb in Jerusalem, especially one in the rock on a hillside close to Golgotha within easy earshot of the cries of crucified criminals? It could hardly have been planned for himself; all indications point to his having prepared it ahead of time to receive the body of Jesus (Mark 15:42-47; Luke 23:50-56; John 19:38-42). (Borrow The Defender's Study Bible page 1054ff) NET NOTE - hewn out - That is, cut or carved into an outcropping of natural rock, resulting in a cave-like structure (see L&N 19.25). S Lewis Johnson on new tomb (in a garden) - he was buried in a garden. Well after all, all of our troubles began in a garden, in the Garden of Eden. There the first Adam sinned and died spiritually. It is in a second garden that the Son of man is placed, and from which on Sunday morning there shall come forth the new man, the Lord Jesus, the last Adam and the whole story ultimately finds its conclusion in the garden of God in paradise in which there is a new heaven, new earth and new Jerusalem. The garden. A new tomb. God was transforming the activities of men by sovereign providence so that they would ultimately glorify the son. Matthew 27:61 And Mary Magdalene was there, and the other Mary, sitting opposite the grave. Mary Magdalene: Mt 27:56 See Trial and Crucifixion of Jesus - Parallel Passages Matthew 27 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Related Passages: Mark 15:47+ Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses were looking on to see where He was laid. Luke 23:55-56+ (LUKE GIVES AN ADDITIONAL DETAIL CONCERNING THESE TWO WOMEN) Now the women who had come with Him out of Galilee followed, and saw the tomb and how His body was laid. 56 (LUKE GIVES AN ADDITIONAL DETAIL CONCERNING THESE TWO WOMEN) Then they returned and prepared spices and perfumes. And on the Sabbath they rested according to the commandment. THE LOVE OF TWO MARYS And Mary Magdalene was there, and the other Mary, sitting opposite the grave - See note above. These women followed Jesus body in life and now in death! What incredible devotion by these courageous women. How did the two Marys know the location of the tomb? The location of the tomb was known to the disciple Joseph. Somehow the location was communicated to the two Marys. They had been present at the cross and could have following Joseph and Nicodemus. (See possible harmony of the narratives of the resurrection of Christ) It is interesting to note that the only people at the tomb of Jesus as the sun set that Friday were two Pharisees, Joseph and Nicodemus, who had up until now been secret disciples and these two women Mary Magdalene and the other Mary. The apostles are nowhere to be found THOUGHT - These women came with Jesus, so surely these women were His disciples. They counted the cost, leaving their homes in Galilee to follow Him. It was the women disciples who were at the foot of the cross when Jesus died. It was women who were first to the open tomb. Sitting opposite the grave This fact is important because it excludes the skeptics explanation of an empty tomb saying they returned to the wrong tomb Sunday morning. (See Who Moved the Stone? by Frank Morison) That is absurd! Luke 24:1+ says "But on the first day of the week, at early dawn, they came to the tomb bringing the spices which they had prepared." If you read the Bible without chapter breaks, Luke 23:56+ leaves no doubt that the they in Luke 24:1+ is the women. Luke 24:10+ gives their specific identification. Remember that the chapter breaks are not inspired but were compiled by Stephen Langton in 1205 AD. Bruce Barton points out that "No mourning was permitted for those executed under Roman law. The women followed with broken but silent grief and watched the burial....they planned to return after the Sabbath with their own spices to anoint Jesus' body (Mt 28:1)." (See Life Application New Testament Commentary)
Mateus 27
Morris - They wanted help until the third day, for that was the time specified in the prophecies, and if the disciples stole the body after that time they could point out that Jesus’ words had not been fulfilled. But if the body was stolen within that time, the disciples could claim that he was raised from the dead. They wanted help until the third day, for that was the time specified in the prophecies, and if the disciples stole the body after that time they could point out that Jesus’ words had not been fulfilled. But if the body was stolen within that time, the disciples could claim that he was raised from the dead. It is, of course, true that the disciples would have had a difficult time claiming a resurrection when all they had was a dead body, but the leaders did not want to give them the opportunity. If such a claim were made, they thought, “the last error will be greater than the first.” Presumably they saw Jesus’ claim to messiahship as the first error and a claim to resurrection as a possible last. They were castigating his teaching and specifically they called his prophecy of his resurrection an error and held that a claim to resurrection would be an even greater error. They did not consider for a moment that there was any element of truth in what Jesus had said. (See The Gospel According To Matthew - Google Book or BORROW The Gospel According To Matthew PAGE 730)
Mateus 27
Morris - The chief priests and Pharisees evidently took the Lord's promise to rise on the third day more seriously than His disciples (Matthew 27:63,64). However, they did not believe this was possible (especially the Sadducean priests who did not believe in the resurrection), so they must have assumed the disciples would try to steal the body. Their paranoia, however, served only to strengthen the evidence for the resurrection. Their firm preparations to prevent the theft of the body merely eliminated that possibility as a plausible explanation for the empty tomb three days later. (Borrow The Defender's Study Bible page 1054ff) Make secure (805)(asphalizo from asphales = certain, secure) means to make sake, fast. In classical Greek, asphalizō primarily means “to secure.” Several ideas generate from this. From as far back as the Second Century B.C. the word was used to describe the act of “seizure” (securing an object, securing the person of, arresting). In rare instances “fortify” is a legitimate translation of a usage during the classical period. Gilbrant - In the Septuagint we find asphalizō most often used in the sense of “protecting, safeguarding, making secure against harm” (Isaiah 41:10, “...and have established thee [safeguard, watch over] with my just right hand”; Wisdom of Solomon 4:17, “ . . . The Lord has set him in safety”; 10:12, “ . . . kept him safe from those that lay in wait”). Asphalizō is also used in speaking of the “reconstruction” (repair, make secure, shut up, close) of the gates of Jerusalem (Nehemiah 3:15). The New Testament finds asphalizō used in the sense of “confinement” in Acts 16:24. In its only other occurrences it means “to guard,” or “to make secure” (in reference to the tomb of Jesus). Asphalizo - 4v - fastened(1), made...secure(1), made secure(1), make...secure(1). Matt. 27:64; Matt. 27:65; Matt. 27:66; Acts 16:24. Septuagint - Isaiah 41:10, Neh 3:15. Guard (2892)(koustodia) is basically a transliteration of Latin custodia and means a guard, keeper, watcher or sentinel. Used only 3x - Matt. 27:65; Matt. 27:66; Matt. 28:11 (no uses in Lxx). Gilbrant adds that koustodia "can refer to the act of setting a guard or to the group of men doing the guarding. In this case it means a group of soldiers who are acting as sentries. Day and night were divided into a set of watches, and soldiers would stand guard or watch for these predetermined times. Such a group of soldiers was stationed to guard the tomb of Jesus as recorded in Matthew 27:66: “So they went, and made the sepulchre sure, sealing the stone, and setting a watch.” (Complete Biblical Library) Put a seal (4972 ) sphragizo from sphragis = seal, engraved object used to make a mark - denoting ownership, approval, or closure of something normally done by pressing into heated wax usually attached to a document or letter) means to set a seal upon or to mark with a seal. To mark so as to certify that something is so. Seals were used to make something secure, to serve as a guarantee of the correctness of the contents, to indicate authenticity, to indicate ownership. Sacrificial animals were examined and sealed if perfect. Jars, sacks of fruit or grain were sealed. To mark with a seal as a means of identification in Greek secular writings was used to mark all kinds of animals, so that the mark denoting ownership also carries with it the protection of the owner. Wayne Detzler writes that sphragizo was "largely a commercial or business term, referring to sealing a building shut. In order to guarantee property against theft, a seal was placed on it. Or sometimes it took the form of a mark or a brand, as on livestock. When a merchant bought a sack of grain, a seal would be placed on the sack until the full payment was made. This was a guarantee of coming payment. Later the seal became a mark of royalty. Any communiqué from the crown was sealed by the king. After dabbing hot wax on the document, the king would seal it by pressing his ring into the wax. Before long, the engraved ring was called "a seal." In the religious sphere, a sacrificial lamb which was found to be suitable was also sealed, marked as suitable. In the Septuagint Greek Old Testament, a seal was a signet ring. This ring was used to indicate a sale (Jer. 32:10). Royalty also used the seal to authenticate its orders (Esther 3:10; 8:8). Though the precise word for "sealing" is not used, Isaiah 44:5 speaks of people who had "for Jehovah" tattooed on their hands as a mark of religious sacrifice (Borrow New Testament Words in Today's Language) John