Ted Byler

commentary Romans 7

by

1 Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth? 2 For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. 3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man. 4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.

     The previous chapter likened man’s salvation experience to Christ’s death and resurrection – a man must crucify Self in order to rise again unto new life in Christ. Now Paul observes another analogy which attests that God’s people are no longer under the Law, but are married to Christ. The Jews could not fail to appreciate this evidence because it comes straight out of the Mosaic Law. Here’s the progression of these two analogies: “The one who has died unto sin is released from that bondage and is free to to be bound unto another, even unto righteousness (Rom 6); the Law’s statute concerning marriage authenticates this by way of analogy” (Rom 7).

     The Law admitted no condition where a woman could leave her husband and marry another – any woman who did so was an adulteress. A married woman was bound unto her husband for life; she was free to marry another only if her husband died. On the other hand, the Law did allow the husband to put away his wife and then she could remarry. That circumstance, while completely accordant with this analogy (see below), is not mentioned by the Apostle because his point lies elsewhere. Here is my paraphrase: “You Jews, who once were under the Law, have become dead to the Law by the death of Christ. Now you are free to marry another, even the same Christ who died and freed you from the Law; for He has been raised from the dead.”

     Why does Paul say, “You have become dead to the Law,” instead of saying, “The Law has died”? While both statements are true, I see three important reasons why the Apostle stated it this way in the present figure. First, the point of these chapters is not so much to prove to the Jews that their Law was dead, but to hold forth Jesus Christ as the culmination or final objective of the Law. He argues not for the negative, but the positive effect: “See here that Jesus our Messiah is the one and only Hope of Israel. We Jews that believe on the risen Christ are married to a new husband. Now His purpose can be truly fulfilled in us.”

     Secondly, the power of this analogy lies primarily in how it happened. The Law didn’t just die, or fade away; it was completed, fulfilled, ended by Christ (John 1:17; Rom 10:4; Mat 5:17), who taketh away (aneiro – literally, “slays”) the first that He might establish the second (see note for Heb 10:9). This fits the emphatic point of conclusion: Ye also are become dead to the Law by the body of Christ. It was Christ’s doing. Because of His death you are freed from the Law. The Law didn’t just up and die, thereby releasing Israel to marry Christ. No, the Law ended because Jesus died and initiated a new covenant which made the first old (Heb 8:13).

     Thirdly, by avoiding the statement, “the Law died,” Paul is able to maintain the long-established symbolic meanings contained in this figure. The Jews of the Old Covenant were not “married” to the Law, but to God. It is a symbolism found often in the Old Testament. My covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord (Jer 31:32; Is 54:5). The whole book of Hosea is written upon the figure of God and Israel in a marriage relationship, and the Apostle’s figure is carefully true to those meanings. Israel’s husband is never said (nor implied) to be the Law. No, her Husband who died and made them dead to the Law was none other than God (the Son). For Jesus Christ was the God of the Old Covenant that Israel had forsaken (see my note for 1Pet 1:11).

      The teaching here is quite plain, but is ignored down to the present day by some Jews (and even some Gentiles), who wish to be bound to selected portions of the Mosaic Law (see note Rom 4:11). If ye are become dead to the Law, then the Law is also dead to you. Christ came under the Law and kept the Law. With His death and resurrection, the Law  The New Testament Scriptures teach that Christ is the fulfillment of the Law (Mat 5:17-18). So Man is dead to the Law and the Law is dead to Man, who is therefore loosed from the Law of Moses so that he might be bound to the Law of Christ.

     The analogy of Marriage to the two Covenant relationships of God and Man is a fascinating study. In both testaments, God’s people are often likened to the woman in a marriage, while God is the husband. Under the Law, a woman was never allowed to put away her husband, but the husband was allowed to put away his wife by giving her a bill of divorcement, making them both free to marry again under the condition that the husband would never re-take her for his wife. The analogy is that Israel, although bound unto God for life, forsook Him and played the harlot. So God gave the adulteress a bill of divorcement and He will never take her back. He has chosen a new wife which has also chosen Him (see Isaiah 54). Furthermore, under Christ’s new Law neither the husband nor the wife is permitted to give a bill of divorcement. They are truly bound for life and that is beautifully true in the case of God and His New Covenant people. See Mat 5:32, 19:7-9; 1Cor 7:10-11.

5 For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death. 6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.

     This frames again the general point of the material in chapters 6-8 (see Rom 6:20-22; 8:2). Any person that is not in Christ, is in the flesh (Rom 8:9). Whether Jew or Gentile, under the Law or without Law, we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of the our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind (Eph 2:3). Our bodily members worked sinful actions and earned the wages of death. The Law expanded this knowledge in Man, for its many rules gave opportunity to many sins. Moreover, the Law could not truly heal man’s sickness of sin unto death. 

     The phrase, delivered from the Law (v6) is the same as being dead to the Law (v4). And Christ is the reason. Now we are alive to Christ and live by the Spirit according to the Law of Grace (Rom 8:4). We have been released from the old Law by death with Christ (Gal 2:19; Rom 6:6-9). While this is especially relevant for Jews, it is just as important for seeking Gentiles, for both groups have brought forth fruit unto death by disobedience to their respective laws – the law of Moses and the law of Conscience.

     The design of the Old Covenant was largely physical. While it reached to the inner man and weighty matters like mercy and trust, its first intention was to rule the outside, the flesh, and it did so by imposing many complex and burdensome rites and ceremonies. In contrast, the New Covenant was designed to be a spiritual constitution, for while it does have rules to govern the outer man, its first thought is to touch the soul. It does so by many beautiful spiritualities and promises. The way of the Law was to oblige righteousness of the outer man and so affect the inner man. The way of Christ is to make anew the inner man and so empower the outer man unto righteousness. This great Covenant shift, from the oldness of the letter (the Law) to the newness of Spirit was effected by Christ so that we serve Him. See the same two representations in 2Cor 3:6.

7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet. 8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.

     The words lust, covet and concupiscence in these verses are translated from the same word (epithumia). “I learned about coveting from the Law: ‘Thou shalt not covet.’ Sin then took this as opportunity to tempt me with all kinds of coveting.” The Law educated Man of the manifold intricacies of Sin; for by the Law is the knowledge of sin (Rom 3:20; Gal 3:24). It taught the gravity and consequence of sin by requiring strict justice for every transgression by the lex talionis – eye for eye and tooth for tooth. Personal responsibility was also a prominent feature of the Law, which imposed many rules and rites upon the people. There were offerings and sacrifices that could atone for mistakes and failures, but there was no forgiveness for the one who willfully broke the Law – he was to be put to death. In the end, the Law proved that Man will always fall short of perfect obedience, for the work of every man’s members brought forth fruit unto death (v5).

     What do we make of this? Is the Law bad or sinful? Nay. It is holy, and just, and good (v12). Rather, it is Sin that brings death within. Apparently, if a person would have kept the Law in perfection he would have earned his salvation. However, on account of the weakness of man’s flesh it resulted in death (v10). Sin, or the Flesh as it is later called, has deceived and slain every human who has ever lived (v11), even those who had never heard the commandment. They are not guilty of breaking the Law of Moses, but of breaking the Law of conscience (see note Rom 2:14). Those who are guilty of transgressing the Law, however, will face the greater consequence, for they were entrusted with greater knowledge and responsibility. Their transgressions of plainly written rules have shown sin to be exceeding sinful (v13).

     For without the Law sin is dead, meaning there can be no transgression of it (see note Rom 4:15). This must be understood in the context of Paul speaking to the Jews concerning their Mosaic Law, for sin in the general sense does exist outside of the Law and it is not dead. All humans, regardless of time or place, have a general sense of right and wrong built into their minds, a moral compass (see note Rom 2:12-14). The era of the Mosaic Law endured for about 1500 years, but it was instituted long after the world began (about 2,500 years according to Bible chronologists). Many godly men lived in the pre-Law era, and they were counted righteous without the Law. Job, Enoch, Melchizedek, Abraham, Noah and many more were mighty men of faith, but to our knowledge, they never held a written moral code in their hands. Clearly a different Covenant was in place at that time, concerning which we can only speculate by inferring from the Scriptures. There is no doubt that ancient Man was by nature more intelligent than present-day Man. The second law of thermodynamics agrees. Evolution’s ridiculous, anti-scientific idea that Man is increasing intellectually is demonstrably false. The pyramids of Egypt are just one example.

     It seems that the decline of natural human ability (observe the decline in lifespans) made a written Law more necessary. Before that time, I think Mankind were able (by conscience, superior analytical capacities and nearly faultless memory) to know God’s will on their own. And it seems that God spoke to them audibly and even visibly. Yet the history of ancient Man demonstrates this sad principle: the person with the greatest capacity for Good also possesses the greatest capacity for Evil. Exhibit A is Satan himself. And so we read of the Cainites, the Sodomites and the general population at the time of Noah. In one sense, God punishing Adam with natural death was good for Adam. Otherwise, he would have continued forever estranged from God. The same is true for Mankind in general. By limiting their lifespan, God was shortening the time of their proving, making it easier for them to pass the test.

     I think the same concept is in play when we consider the reasons that God instituted the Law of Moses. He wanted to make plainer, easier, more generally attainable to a greater quantity of people. Abraham attained righteousness without the Law, but there were not many Abrahams (as his own grand-children demonstrate). After 1500 years however, the Law had been twisted and distorted to serious human detriment. The time was ripe for Christ and the New Covenant. This sad retrogression will be repeated at the end of the present Covenant of Grace! The religious elite will distort its message, deny its real purpose and use it for personal gain. At the end of the Age, the World will see the dead bodies of those two great and famous witnesses, the Word and the Spirit, lying on the streets of the great cities of the world (Rev 11).

9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. 10 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. 11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me. 12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.

      Many commentators have marveled at Paul’s dexterity in presenting Christ to the self-righteous and vain-minded Jews (Tit 1:10), for he must inevitably show that the Law is no longer in effect; it is incomplete, weak and unable to save. Arriving at the most sensitive part of his argument, he carefully shifts the perspective from “you,” to “we,” to “I,” to soften any perceived accusatory tone. Notice the progression:

Ye also are become dead to the Law by the body of Christ that ye should be married to another (v4). For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins which were by the Law did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death. But now we are delivered from the Law (v5-6). Is the Law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the Law….I was alive without the Law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died (v7-9).

     Perhaps another reason that Paul changes to first person for the rest of the chapter is to speak on behalf of all Mankind, both Jews and Gentiles. For while his primary audience is the Jew (at least down to verse 14), the principles in this section are relevant for Gentiles also, both Christian and otherwise. For instance, it is universally true: Sin deceived me, and by it slew me. Any commandment opens the occasion for temptation and then to sin. Nevertheless, these particular verses primarily concern the commandments of the Mosaic Law, which were given so that the Jews might obtain Life, yet resulted in spiritual death. The Law was able to save he who perfectly kept it, but it could not regenerate (revive) he who transgressed it. Christ came for that very purpose (1Cor 15:45).

     I was alive without the Law once. This statement affirms the initial purity of the human soul and the innocence of children. As a child, Paul was alive spiritually, but when he reached the age of accountability and understood the commandment, he sinned and died spiritually. This is true of Gentiles as well, except that they sin and die on account of disobeying the law of Conscience (see Rom 2:15). The first death is universal.

     Verse 11 might allude to Eve’s testimony in Genesis 3:13 (see LXX and 2Cor 11:3). The unchurched person will not be tempted to the same degree as one that has been well taught in the Scriptures (see John 15:24). A friend related to me the story of how he told his young son not to step in the mud-puddles with his new shoes. “Where are the mud-puddles?” the son wanted to know. Mother sighed, “It would have been better if you would not have told him about mud-puddles!” But the cat was out of the bag and the temptations began in earnest. Ever since Adam and Eve it has been so, for it is part of God’s way to develop an honest, sincere relationship with the only being who can comprehend Him and choose/refuse to know Him.

     The Law is holy, just and good (also 1Tim 1:8). The problem isn’t the Law, the problem is Sin. However, the Law did not provide the means for a man to overcome his carnal nature. It’s goodness showed clearly the bounds of sin, it’s holiness called every sinner guilty, and its justice demanded the righteous penalty for each transgression. It could not, however, actually remedy the situation (Col 2:20-23). It was insufficient in that it could not cleanse the sinner from his sin (Rom 3:20; Gal 2:21; Heb 8:7). See previous note.

13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.

     Both the question and the answer are rather technical. For although he answers “No” here, Paul earlier said, “Yes; ye are become dead to the Law” (v4). I believe that Paul is making this distinction: “It wasn’t the good commandments of the Law that slew me, but Sin which the good Law provoked within me.” In other words, while the commandment did result in the spiritual death of all (v10), the real culprit was not the Law, but Sin…working death in me by that which is good. One cannot blame the Law (or God either) for Man’s failures. Earlier the Apostle addressed a similar objection, “Does the fact that many Israelites failed in Faith mean that God’s plan was in vain?” (Rom 3:3). No! God is good, holy and just, so His Law was good, holy and just.

     The real killer is Sin, showing itself to be exceedingly sinful by how fiercely it opposes the commandment and by how universally have yielded themselves to serve it.

14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

     The real reason that Man is sold under sin is not because of the Law, but on account of his own carnal nature. The Law is spiritual. The rites, rules and ceremonies had deeper, spiritual meanings which pre-figured the coming New Covenant of Christ. These were hidden in the Holy Scriptures by the finger of God for our marvelous spiritual benefit today (Rom 15:4; 1Cor 10:11; Heb 9:9). The second part of the Law, the Prophets, have the same spiritual purpose, for they were authored by the Holy Spirit Himself. Jesus said that the words He spake were essentially already written in the Law of Moses, and in the Prophets (Luke 24:44). The Old Testament is a virtual treasury of spiritual instruction, with thousands of stories, analogies, prophecies and types. These are high quality sermons that preach both doctrine and admonition in the present Kingdom of Christ. He that diminishes the Old Testament does so to his own spiritual detriment. This is another reason for the Apostle’s careful, detailed teaching on this important subject of the Jewish Law. He does not denigrate the Law and even avoided saying that it is dead; rather, he shows that it is good and holy, but that its day is past and the new day is dawning (2Pet 1:19).  

     Man’s fleshly nature is a serious impediment to attaining peace with God. He is carnal (sarkikos). The same word is translated, fleshly (1Pet 2:11) and its noun form, sarx, appears in verse 18. The fleshly nature of man is that inner passion of selfish desires that constantly demand bodily gratification. The flesh and the spirit, these are contrary the one to the other (Gal 5:17; Rom 8:4-5). The flesh incites me to do what I would not – what my spirit knows is wrong. The spirit indeed is willing, Jesus said, but the flesh is weak (Mat 26:41). It has ever been this way and will be unto the end of time, for this is that great test of life. The war within man is intense and unrelenting. Every person has lost multiple battles in the long conflict. All have sinned and fallen short. However, God knoweth our frame; He remembereth that we are dust (Ps 103:14). He does not demand perfect domination of the flesh nor flawless obedience to the Law of Christ, but rather a heart that is determined to constantly crucify those fleshly desires, to deny SElf and to put that old man to death daily – because he wants to please his new Master and Groom (Rom 7:6).

    This conflict between the flesh and the spirit within a man is true across all human-kind and throughout all ages, Jew or Gentile, under Law or without Law. Even the Christian must fight daily this inner spiritual battle with Self and Satan. Therefore, I believe that here Paul speaks as any one of us and not just as one who is “under the Law.” He speaks in first person and in the present tense, whereas the earlier personification under the Law ended in the past tense (v9-10). Notice too the change of meaning for nomos (law), which refers to the Mosaic Law in most of the chapter; however, in the latter verses nomos is a rule or principle of God (see v21).

     The war is waged in the mind – even Christians know that, and all too intimately. The flesh wants to be the ruler of the body, so it works, tempts and fights to enslave the whole person into serving Sin (Rom 7:23). This does not mean that sin literally dwells in the Christian (v17), or even that he is carnal (v14) and constantly doing the evil that he would not (v19). They that are in the flesh cannot please God. But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit (Rom 8:8-9). Christ has delivered the believer from the body of this death (v24). Nevertheless, this passage agrees with the rest of Scripture, that two laws are constantly at work within every believer and unbeliever, the law of God and the law of sin (v25). Indeed, this struggle is far more acute in the believer, for Satan will work more intently to corrupt anybody belonging to Christ.       

     Perhaps the Calvinist will use this verse to support his idea that Man is entirely and totally depraved. I am carnal. It does sound quite comprehensive. Later however, the Apostle clarifies his meaning, For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing (v18). The fallen, depraved part of Man is this fleshly, carnal nature we have inherited on account of sin coming into the world by the fall of Adam. However, every man is also born with an untarnished soul, a moral conscience, and the honest abilities to think, comprehend and choose. These two – the fleshly, selfish nature and the Godward nature – are strongly displayed in these verses. See notes in chapter five.

     Sold under sin. Slavery is the imagery here (as in Rom 6:16-20). By his choices and actions, every man has sold himself unto Satan. The prophet wrote, For your iniquities have ye sold yourselves…ye have sold yourselves for nought; and ye shall be redeemed without money (Isaiah 50:1; 52:3). Anciently, a debtor who could not repay was often sold (Mat 18:23-27), but the Law allowed the slave to be redeemed by another (Lev 25:47-48). And that is exactly what Christ did for us. With Paul, each person must say, I am carnal, sold under sin. Our nature is to sin. Jesus, with His own blood, bought those slaves from a very cruel master.

15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I. 16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good. 17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

     This passage does not describe the condition of a wanton rebel or an uncaring reprobate, but of a sincere seeker of God who is distraught by his failure to do what is right at all times. The good-intentioned Jew who thought to keep the Law and also the honest Gentile trying to live a good life will soon learn that they cannot be perfectly righteous. Even Christians know the reality of this inner conflict. However, let us not draw a false conclusion before the Apostle has finished his discourse. Thank God through Jesus Christ, the Christian CAN live in victory over sin (v25). While he will lose some battles, he is not doomed to a life of failures and wretchedness. All honest, submitted-unto-God believers will struggle at times to do what is good and right, but he WILL win as long as he perseveres in the faith of Christ. Even Peter and Barnabas unexpectedly failed, for fearing them which were of the circumcision, they ended up being carried away with their dissimulation (Gal 2:11-14), but they didn’t quit like Judas did.   

     Actually, temptations unto sin and struggles with the flesh are not in themselves worrying signs of being lost, or even of a precarious spiritual estate. According to the Scriptures, we should take them as as sign of sonship, of God’s love for us (Heb 12:3-7; James 1:2-4). God does not take away our temptations, nor does He keep evil from affecting us (how many martyrs have proven that). He does not take over our minds, fight our battles for us, or remove us from the World. However, He has given many beautiful, faithful promises, I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee (Heb 13:5); and lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world (Mat 28:20). Casting all your care upon Him; for He careth for you (1Pet 5:7). God will make a way of escape from every temptation (1Cor 10:13); He is able to make us stand firm (Rom 14:4). The prayerful words of the songwriter come to mind: “Lord, don’t move that mountain, but do give me the strength to climb it.” So, fear not, little flock; for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the Kingdom (Luke 12:32).

     Bible teachers and theologians have wrestled over this particular passage for centuries. Some think the Apostle testifies of his own personal struggle as a Christian, but how can that possibly be? Paul was a spectacular example of righteousness, almost unto perfection. Others say this passage represents the Jew under the Law, but surely that narrows the audience too much. The Calvinists claim Paul teaches here that every man is perpetually doomed to serve sin in this life and there is nothing he can do about it.

     Yet, what Paul is really saying here is nothing different from what he has been saying and will continue to say in the book of Romans: “There is a fierce war going on inside of each man. His natural flesh is constantly provoking him to sin, but his enlightened spirit prompts him to do good. So he must not let sin have dominion over him, but become a servant of righteousness” (Rom 6:14-22). So Paul is not testifying that he personally is constantly choosing to sin, but graphically acknowledging this war of the mind within every person and especially in the Saved. The one that honestly and humbly recognizes this fact has learned an important key to victory, for to ignore it (either as the Calvinists in their extremity or the Perfectionists in the opposite) is to concede the Devil a huge advantage. Elsewhere Paul also described this war and his own mind concerning failure and becoming a castaway (1Cor 9:25-27). 

     For that which I do I allow (ginosko) not (v15). This very common Greek word means “to know;” not just head-knowledge, but experiential and relational knowledge. It is nowhere else translated “allow” in the Greek Scriptures. However, the general sense of the verse does not substantially change regardless of which word is used. Paul says, “My members act contrary to my will; they do the evil things that I do not know, that I do not allow. If I admit that what I am doing is not right and that I should not be doing it, then I agree that the Law is true and good. And since I am doing wrong against my will, then it is not really I, but Sin within me that is doing it.”

     This re-states the conclusion in verse 13, that Sin (not the Law) worked death within each man. Do not, however, extrapolate this statement and ignore the body of Scriptural teaching on the subject. Man is always in control of his actions. He is not OBLIGATED to sin, nor does he HAVE to sin, but being deceived by Satan and the carried away by the flesh, he chooses to sin (Rom 7:11). God created Man with a mind capable of comprehending himself, his environment and his Maker. Remember chapter three, where Paul refuted those who said God could not condemn Man for they were only acting as God had created them – bent to sin, selfishness and doing wicked deeds. The Calvinist believes that Man is born a wicked beast; no light of knowledge, no ability to discern good and evil, no option to choose to do good. They say that God chooses to give faith and grace to certain of these miscreants, without having shown any particular goodness or tendency towards Him. The rest of Mankind, the unchosen to salvation, are not given faith to be saved.

     Every man is born an uncontaminated soul. He has the light of conscience and the ability to reason and understand. And he has the capability to will to do good. The actions of Adam however, have opened a new part in Man which is egocentric and vain. He knows all about the mud-puddles (see note v11). This is the flesh, the natural man that is bent to follow Self and reject the pattern designed by God. Here the Apostle distinguishes, for our benefit, between the Will of man and the Actions of man. The upright man wills to do good, but finds that his flesh is a powerful adversary urging him to do evil (see also 2Tim 2:26).

18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not. 19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do. 20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

     We have seen that the flesh is the fallen, corrupted, selfish part that came into existence by the sin of Adam. The flesh is determined to have dominion over the whole body. After their fall in the Garden, the eyes of Man’s mind were opened to a new world of good and evil, of moral choice and personal responsibility. And that very moment, a part of their spiritual being died and the whole world was changed. The flesh is a direct result of those first sins (see notes on Rom 5:12-13). The imagination of a man’s heart is evil from his youth (Gen 8:21). Jesus Christ, being fully human, also struggled with his flesh (Heb 4:15). However, God also created Man with powers of conscience, of reason, will and decision. These were not intrinsically corrupted by the Fall. Yet, the will of the believer will inevitably clash with his flesh during life. These verses set the stage for the next chapter, which speaks of the war between the flesh and the spirit even within the Christian.

     My belief is that Paul speaks for all Mankind here, even the believer who wants to do good and delights in the Law of God but ends up failing at times. However, other commentators have pointed out that even the pagan writers of old acknowledged this inner battle between knowing what is good and yet doing what is bad. Euripedes wrote, “We understand and know the good things, but we do not work them out…I know what sort of bad things I am going to do: but passion is stronger than my purposes. And this is to mortals a cause of very great evils.” And Ovid, “I desire one thing: the mind persuades another. I see and approve better things: I follow worse things.” These remarkable statements only add support to the point the Apostle has often made in this epistle: God has given all Mankind a conscience of right and wrong, yet all have failed to follow its voice. All are guilty before God; we have all taken our own way, there is none that doeth good, no not one (Rom 3:12).

     Beware of the sin doth so easily beset us, the Apostle warned (Heb 12:1), because this inner conflict stirs even stronger within the heart that has decided to follow Christ. However, let us troubled souls take heart, for all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution (2Tim 3:12). If there are no battles then there is no war, and without war there can be no chance of victory. Yes, we have peace with God, but the Christian can never make peace with the flesh! That dual nature within, the will of the flesh and the will to do the Law of God, are at enmity until the last breath of life (Rom 8:7). Dedicated warriors will not be denied the crown of Glory, but quitters and deserters will not even be present.

     In verse 20, Paul repeats what he said in verse 17 (see note there). “Actually, I’m not the one doing evil, but the sin inside me is doing it.” He is not making excuses nor denying that every man has full control of his actions. Instead, he is acknowledging the uncomfortable fact that we all struggle to do what is right on account of our fallen sinful nature.

21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me. 22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: 23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.

    The context hints that nomos (law) does not refer to the Mosaic Law, but to a general law or principle at work in all Mankind. Paul says, “This principle works within me: ‘I wish to do good, but am ever tempted to do evil.’ For while I inwardly delight in the Law of God, the members of my body want to follow the law of sin, which tries to make me its captive by warring against God’s law in my mind.”

     The Jews should have quickly identified with this truth, and even Christians know what it means to delight in the Law of God after the inward man, yet feel the flesh warring in his mind, trying to deceive him and make him a captive of Sin by the actions of his bodily members. The imagery is of a city under siege, in danger of falling captive to the enemy. It is essential to defend the walls and gates so that the enemy cannot enter in. This motif is visible in various New Testament passages (ie Eph 6:11-18; Rev 20:7-10). We are constantly at war in the body, struggling with Satan, Sin, and the World. The war begins in the mind and extends to our bodily members.

     The two laws at play here, the law of God and the law of sin, are central to the topic and they continue into the next chapter. Neither term refers exclusively to the Law of Moses, for consistently in this passage the law of God means the New Covenant (see also Rom 7:25; 8:7), and the law of sin refers to the desires of the flesh (which is part of the body). The Mosaic Law made this general law of sin more powerful (v13), but to say that this law of sin refers solely to the holy and just Mosaic Law would contradict the teaching of this chapter. Although the Law was incomplete it can hardly be called a law of sin (see note for v14). The two laws are named again in verse 25.

24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? 25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

     To this point in the Apostle’s description of Man’s dismal condition, the name of Christ has been conspicuously absent. Knowing what is good and determined to do it, yet doing the bad; affirming the goodness of the Law but transgressing it anyway – both Gentile and Jew have shown themselves to be weak and unfaithful. O wretch that I am, what can I do? Who can deliver me from the body of this death? Only Jesus Christ can, and that is the wonderful news for the troubled soul which Paul has personified in this passage. Paul could not deliver himself from this condemnation, nor could the Law deliver him (Rom 8:3), but Jesus Christ is able!

     The power of Christ at work in the believer results in a double blessing. First it brings soul-healing forgiveness and second it brings powerful new weapons to overcome the flesh and Sin. The mature Christian will not live in constant failure (Rom 6:1). He will not constantly do the evil that he would not (Rom 7:19) for Christ has come to deliver and empower. The next chapter will show this even more certainly. Yes there is a most severe battle ahead, but victory is attainable through Jesus Christ our Lord.

     This is beautifully portrayed by John’s vision of a great heavenly multitude arrayed in white robes praising the Lamb and casting their crowns at His feet. “Who are these?” John wondered. The angel answered, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb (Rev 7:14). Forget the bed of roses rhetoric! Every Christian is going to pass through his own life-test of tribulation, trial, struggle and persecution. The Devil knows he has only a short time and he furious with us for having chosen Christ (Rev 12:12). Do not be lulled into complacency.

     The body of this death. The meaning of this imagery is that our nature of flesh is contrary to our desire to serve God. The term depicts the scene of verse 23, where the members of the body are warring against the inner Man and attempting to make him captive to the law of sin. Crucify this body of sin (Rom 6:6), consider it dead (Rom 8:10; 6:11), mortify its deeds (Rom 8:13), walk not after its desires (Rom 8:4). In the Scriptures, the flesh is everywhere shown to be truly a body of death (Rom 7:18; 6:23; 8:8). How truly it is said, In my flesh dwelleth no good thing (Rom 7:25). How clearly it is seen that this is the part of Man that is fallen, this piece which Adam did not know before he sinned. Eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil made it a part of Mankind.

     The law of God and the law of sin. With the Spirit of God in our minds, the will of the earnest Christian is to serve the law of God, but the flesh is ever present, attempting to get us to serve instead the law of sin. Both the Jew who is trusting in the Law instead of Christ and also the Gentile who is trying to follow the Law of his conscience. Instead, walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh (Gal 5:16); the subject of the next chapter.

commentary Romans 6

by

1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?

     This chapter expounds the case of a person who has accepted the gift of God, but continues to yield his members to do works of iniquity. Through several lines of argument the answer is always emphatically the same: “God forbid. Having been set free from sin to become servants of God, you must not let sin reign in your bodies, for the wages of sin is death” (v22, 12, 23). The Apostle begins by posing the situation in the form of a question: “Since Christ has developed a solution for Mankind’s sin problem, namely the twin towers of God’s grace (Pardon and Power), then why not continue in sin so that His grace might abound even more?”

     How illogical! God’s grace is wonderful, all-powerful, fully effective, merciful and longsuffering, but those who presume that grace will always cover the sin they continue to commit daily, have done despite unto the Spirit of grace (Heb 10:29). By aligning themselves with the shameful pattern of the children of Israel, who rebelled, complained and tempted God again and again on their way to the land of Canaan, they stand to have their bodies also scattered in the wilderness (Heb 3:8-13). A Christian that has been baptized into close communion with Jesus Christ cannot live in sin.

     This Scriptural picture does not agree with the prominent teaching of many Protestant preachers that the grace of God is “unmerited and irresistible.” There is, perhaps, no doctrine that clashes so spectacularly with the unfailing, universal witness of the Scriptures. Always and without exception, Man has the ability to refuse God’s grace. Always and without exception, God’s grace comes upon men that have shown themselves worthy to receive it. Not that a man judicially merits God’s grace, but that he demonstrates a reverence for God and a desire to receive His grace. In the final analysis, that is all God is looking for: a humble, contrite heart that trembles at His Word (Is 66:2). His eyes are constantly searching the earth, seeking to show Himself strong on behalf of those with a heart bent toward Him (2Chr 16:9). See my notes at John 1:16 and 1Cor 1:4-5.

2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?

     Being dead to sin figuratively describes the proper attitude of a person who has been made righteous by the blood of Christ (Rom 5:9). Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body (Rom 6:12), mortify (put to death) all bodily lusts (Col 3:5). Dead to sin. Imagine the Devil trying to tempt a physically dead man to sin! That’s the way a Christian should respond when he is tempted. On the other hand, the strong language of Scripture illustrates that this is no easy battle, that a man must fight hard in this war for his soul. He must put off the old man with his deeds (Col 3:9), crucify the flesh with its affections and lusts (Gal 5:24); deny himself (Mark 8:34) and even hate even his own life (Luke 14:26).

     Paul says a little later, If Christ be in you, the body is dead (Rom 8:10; Col 3:3). Not literally of course, but the secret to living victorious over sin is to truly achieve this mind: The old me is dead, crucified with Christ; the life people now see in me is Christ (Gal 2:20). Preparing the mind to suffer for righteousness’ sake is absolutely key to overcoming temptation in this world where Satan’s corruption tactics have taken the most devious, surreptitious forms imaginable (see note for 1Pet 4:1; Heb 12:3). Jesus’ life was the embodiment of self-denial and submission to the will of God. It must also be so in the mind of a Christian if he is to truly cease from sin. So prepare yourself for the battle! There is nothing more important (Luke 14:27), yet there is probably nothing more neglected, less-esteemed and even forgotten. It must be a daily, even hourly, mental commitment. He that hasn’t fully set his mind to suffer, to consider his own body to be dead, is doomed to sail the sea of ups and downs and some will even end up shipwrecked on the dangerous shoals of selfish lusts (2Tim 3:12; 1Tim 1:19).

     The next verses expand on the figure of the Christian reckoning himself to be dead to the world and sin, but alive unto God (Rom 6:11). There is no stronger, more vivid language in the Scriptures than this picture of death and life, of crucifying the old man, of putting to death those bodily members that offend, of being dead with Christ. It depicts a bitter, continuing spiritual battle that the fearful and cowardly will not be able to win (Rev 22:7-8).

     It is important to recognize that being dead to sin and being dead by sin express two very different conditions. The first describes the Christian’s attitude toward sin and the second describes the condition of a person overcome by sin. Every man dies spiritually when he sins; he is dead (Rom 7:9). Those who accept the gift of Christ are born again (John 3:7), they are alive from the dead (Rom 6:13). These two phrases, the former a figurative expression and the latter a spiritual term, are seen together in Romans 8:13. The same figurative expression is used in the next chapter, but with a different object, Ye also are become dead to the Law (Rom 7:4).

3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? 4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. 5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:

      Many Scriptures describe baptism as being cleansed from sin (justified), but here it is presented as an identification with Christ, a sober pledge of allegiance where the new believer formally and publicly acknowledges that he has submitted himself to the Lordship of Jesus Christ. Being baptized into Jesus Christ means to share in His temptations, sufferings and death, which brings up the key point. We must be planted together with Him in the likeness of His death in order to be raised up in the likeness of His resurrection.

     Baptism is an all or nothing choice. One cannot be baptized into certain parts of the Christian faith but reserve some areas for self or other religions. No, baptism into Christ is baptism into death (1Cor 15:29). Not physical or spiritual death in this case, but death to sin, self and the world (see note for Mat 16:24). Sin cannot reign in the life of a person who has been baptized into death with Christ. Baptism is an outward marker point of a person leaving his old life behind and entering into new life with Christ, and that agrees with a wide range of figures: the old man and the new man (Col 3:10; Eph 4:24), being born again (John 3:3; 1John 5:1; 1Pet 1:23), being made a new creature (2Cor 5:17), having passed from death unto life (John 5:24), being translated from the power of darkness unto the Kingdom of light (Col 1:13), etc.

      Baptism as an identification with, and participation in, the sufferings of Christ is evident also in other passages (see Mat 20:22-23; Php 3:10; 1Pet 4:1-2). Baptism is both a funeral and a birthday; a soul has passed from death unto life (1John 3:14). The funeral is starkly in view here: baptized into His death…buried with Him…planted together in the likeness of His death…crucified with Him. The newly baptized Christian must continue in this present evil world, his life goes on, he is still surrounded by the same physical things he experienced before. Inwardly however, he is a new creature and all things take on new meaning and purpose (2Cor 5:17). In the process of salvation, baptism is a physical sign marking its beginning.

     Planted together (sumphutos). The Greek word is found only here in the NT (also Amos 9:13; Zech 11:2, LXX). Some versions translate, “united with Him,” attempting to derive the metaphorical meaning of the word. If we associate ourselves with Christ in death to self and the old man, we shall certainly be found worthy to be associated with Him in rising again (Rom 8:11). Planting seeds is a beautiful analogy of the resurrection of the body and is found in two other key passages. Jesus said, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone (John 12:24). The amazing birth of plants, flowering bushes and majestic trees from the death of one tiny seed wonderfully parallels the resurrection of the body. Later in 1Cor 15:35-38, the Apostle makes that very comparison.

     The likeness of His death. Which, perhaps, draws upon Psalms 17:15 (see also Rom 8:17). Most Christians will never come close to experiencing the same sufferings as Christ, but the more important correlation is to be like Christ in the manner He approached death, completely obedient and submissive to the Father’s will. If we have been planted together in the likeness of His death. It is a strong, serious picture, but the result is even stronger and very encouraging! We shall be also in the likeness of His resurrection. At that moment, the process of salvation is complete and full, final redemption will be accomplished, and we shall be like Him (1John 3:2), forever freed from sin.

     To enter into the arguments concerning the “correct” mode of baptism would serve to detract from the beautiful message here. Suffice to say that the Immersionist will suggest that the word “buried” implies the person is dunked under the water (also Col 2:12). The Sprinklist though, will cite verses such as 1Cor 10:2 to defend their viewpoint (see note on Baptist at Mat 3:6). The metaphor of being buried with Christ by baptism into His death is multi-faceted. You don’t bury live men, but a dead body – these would be the voluntarily dead to sin (v2) who have crucified the old man (v6) to become servants of Christ (v16).

6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. 7 For he that is dead is freed from sin.

      So the Christian needs to consider himself to be dead to sin (vs 2,11), but how? By crucifying the old man. This term appears three times in the Pauline epistles (also Eph 4:22; Col 3:9), each time in contrast to the new man or life (Rom 6:5; Eph 4:24; Col 3:10). Although we can infer what the old man is just by reading the present passage, the definition is spelled out in Ephesians 4:22 as one’s former conversation (manner of life); which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts. The body of sin, the flesh, the old man – these are synonymous terms for the sin-contaminated part of man which constantly wars against the spirit.

     The old man must die so that the new man can be born. This “death” is neither literal, physical or spiritual. Instead, as we mentioned in the note for verse 2, it’s a figurative expression that means to reckon oneself to be dead indeed unto sin (Rom 6:11). Jesus employed a similar metaphor when He said, He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for My sake shall find it (Mat 10:39). The pivotal aspect of this “dead to/lose your life” metaphor is that it is a condition of the mind, a drastic decision that will forever and completely affect you to the very core of your being! A dead man is not only totally dead, but he remains dead. Just so, the old man must die, so that we being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness (1Pet 2:24). The old man served sin, the new man lives unto holiness (Rom 6:22).

     These verses portray the death of the old man as a definite, past event, in parallel with the image of baptism. By other Scriptures however, and especially in the next chapter of Romans, we see that the old man is somehow still tempting the Christian to sin! What? Didn’t we just read here that the old man is DEAD? Again, it’s a metaphor, a figurativism. Nevertheless, the Apostle does elsewhere say that the old man must be put to death death daily (see Rom 8:13; Col 3:5; Gal 5:17; 1Cor 15:31). Surely that is also why he often likens it to a crucifixion – a long, tortuous, unrespectable death.

    The person who has crucified the old man is dead to sin (v1) freed (dikaioo) from sin (v7), does not serve (douleuo) sin (v6). While the end truth remains the same, dikaioo is virtually always translated justified (a dozen times in Romans alone). Being made righteous (justified) is a complementary action of dying to self. The former is Christ’s work and the latter is Man’s work. And the result is a New Man, reconciled, justified and fit for communion with God. He is free from sin and death (Rom 6:18; 8:2), and saved from the wrath to come. Peter wrote similarly, He that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin (1Pet 4:1). In other words, he that is truly crucifying his flesh has ceased sinning. They that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts (Gal 5:24).

8 Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him: 9 Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him.

     As we noticed in the previous verses, being dead with Christ refers to a condition of the mind (1Pet 4:1). The dead-to-sin, self-denying, flesh-crucified Christian has every reason to believe this two-faceted promise that he shall also live with Him. To live with Christ is first the privilege of reigning with Him in life (Rom 5:17), but even better is the promise that God will one day quicken his mortal body to eternally live with Christ in the heavens (Rom 8:11). Paul repeated this promise to Timothy during the last weeks of his life (2Tim 2:11).

     Death has no dominion over the free-from-sin and made righteous saint of God! It is a particularly encouraging thought to any true-hearted Christian who sees up close that the end of his life approaching, whether by martyrdom or natural causes. The Apostles saw Christ alive from the dead, walking, talking, eating. They, with us, have real reason to believe that God will raise up also all those who are dead with Him. Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power (Rev 20:6). The first resurrection is the death of the old man and birth of the new man (2Cor 5:17), and the second death refers to eternal punishment (Rev 20:14).

10 For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. 11 Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.

     These verses are basically a rephrasing of verses 6-7 with the added detail that Christ died unto sin once (Heb 9:28), but now lives forevermore unto God (Rev 1:18). This seemingly refers to Christ’s physical death, for now sin and death have no power over Him any longer. We who have not yet died physically should nevertheless consider ourselves to be dead also, but alive unto God. Again we see that the old man is “dead” so that the new man can “live.” This life is a quickly-passing trial and for those who are faithful, life everlasting awaits.

12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof. 13 Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God.

     The command is strong, Let not sin reign in your mortal body. When sin reigns in you, he controls you. You are enslaved (douleuoi, v6) to him, you obey him, you yield your members to do his unrighteous works. When Christ reigns in you, He controls you. You are enslaved to Him, you obey Him and yield yourself to doing His righteous works. These verses clearly speak of a situation over which we have control. We must decide who we will let reign over us; to whom will we yield our members. To say Man has no choice in the matter would render these verses meaningless.

     The body is mortal, meaning it is destined to die. But the real You is more than a mortal body, for you have control over your own body; you yield your members (melos) either to doing unrighteousness unto sin, or to doing righteous deeds unto God. The word melos is used to refer to parts of the human body (Mat 5:29-30; 1Cor 12:12-27; James 3:5-6), like hands, feet, eyes, tongue, etc. In Romans 7:23, a distinction is made between the mind and the other members of a body.

     The members of one’s body can be used for good deeds or for bad. They become instruments (holpa) for use on one side or the other. The Greek word is often used in contexts of soldiery (see John 18:3; Rom 13:12; 2Cor 10:4). To yield one’s body to either God’s use or to Satan’s use is a figure repeated through verse 19, and also in Romans 12:1 where the same Greek word is used. The body is controlled by the mind, will and emotions, and to these the Apostle appeals: “the Flesh, that old body of sin, wants you to yield your members to work iniquity, but don’t give in to him.” 

     Alive from the dead. This is the key point of this chapter which links to that great spiritual event of every born-again believer upon passing from death unto life (John 5:24-25). It is the resurrection of the spiritual part of man which was slain by sin (Rom 7:9). “Remember this, that once you were dead in sins, but now the Son has given you new life! (John 6:40). So you must not yield your bodies unto sinfulness, but to His service and will.”

14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace. 15 What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid. 16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?

     In the New Covenant era, seekers of God are no longer obliged to follow the Law of Moses, but to live according to the new law of Grace. These two Covenants are compared and contrasted all through the book of Romans and in this chapter Paul debunks the idea that to be free from the Law is freedom to live in sin. The Word of Christ teaches the stipulations of this new Covenant of Grace. While there are many impressive promises for those who accept Christ’s grace, there are also quite a few precepts, warnings and commandments. These are very solidly given; they are not optional!

     Unfortunately, some have cherry-picked a select set of verses and built a theology of grace that is opposite to all law. And voila! With one wave of their magic wand, they make obedience to disappear from the new Covenant of Grace. Of course, they must ignore many categorical warnings that evil-doers will be judged, that those who disobey will be cast into the Lake of Fire, that only doers of the Word will be justified. How foolish to believe that the Bible is true concerning grace and justification in Christ, but not true when it warns against disobedience and selfish living. The prophet called such as these: “Rebellious people, lying children that refuse to hear the law of the Lord; which say to the prophets, ‘Don’t tell us right things; speak unto us smooth things and deceitful” (Isa 30:9-10).

     Until quite recently, most Bible commentators understood the Apostle to be comparing the state of Man when he was under the Law to how he now is under Grace (v14-15). However, a recent wave of Reformed Theology experts have thought to eliminate the very concept of law from Christ’s covenant. And conveniently almost all of the modern versions translate verses 14-15 to read: “you are not under law, but under grace” (NKJV). The modern reading and the experts’ tactic are proven to be illegitimate and counter-Scriptural by several simple facts. First, the context demands the definite article, for the subject of the Apostle in these chapters concern the the Old Covenant Law. And that’s why virtually all of the older versions (see KJV, Bishop’s, Coverdale, Tyndale) translate it, “the law.” This was not demanded by the text (although they surely will have arguments to justify the new translation), but a board decision to favor a pet doctrine. Second, the Scriptures affirm that the Christian is under a law, which is called the law of liberty (James 2:12), or the law of Christ (Gal 6:2), which Paul himself confessed to be under (1Cor 9:21). So living under grace cannot mean living lawlessly. In fact, that is plainly seen right here: Ye have obeyed from the heart (v17). Obedience is an absurdity without the existence of a law.

     The false doctrine of “free grace,” and its companion error of “irresistible grace,” are incompatible with the substance and tone of the teachings of Christ and the Apostles. God’s grace is freely offered to all, but not all will accept it. Man was designed and created with the ability to reason and choose for himself. Each person has the ability to refuse, for God does not force Himself upon man, which is why Paul warns: “You must not allow sin to have dominion over you; do not allow your members to sin.” The injunction would be meaningless if grace were irresistible. Again, we are either serving Satan or we are serving Christ. We identify which one is our master by the things that we do.

     I do not think that Paul meant for us to infer that during the Covenant of the Law sin had dominion (kurieuo – “ruled”) over the righteous doers of the Law in the sense that they could not help sinning, but rather that Sin ruled without remedy until Christ’s work of Atonement. This corresponds with the Apostle’s earlier statement: As sin hath reigned (basileuo) unto death (during the Age of the Law), even so might grace reign through righteousness (during the Age of Grace) unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord (Rom 5:21).

     In my opinion, some respectable commentators have incorrectly balanced the implications of the two covenants. For instance, Adam Clarke says the Mosaic Law “exacts obedience, without giving power to obey; that condemns every transgression and every unholy thought without providing for the extirpation of evil or the pardon of sin.” Would our good God impose such a Law? One that is impossible to keep and does not provide a means of pardon? May it never be! The Law of Moses was a good covenant (Rom 7:12; 1Tim 1:8), and did provide a means for man to seek God’s pardon such that he could commune with Him; Paul claimed to be blameless in its righteousness (Php 3:6). The Apostle is not denying the validity of the old Law in and for its era, but is manifesting the new and better Covenant of Grace which is authorized to immediately pardon the penitent soul and is purposed for obedience unto righteousness. See his full conclusion in Rom 6:22.

17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. 18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.

     Every one of us were once the servants (doulos) of sin, but having been made free from sin, we are now slaves (doulos)of righteousness. The words are strong, “You were set free from the bondage of sin in order to become enslaved to righteousness!” Made free (eleutheroo) from sin – the statement is thrice repeated in this chapter. The Greek is different in verse 7, but the same in verse 22. In this context of slaves and works of iniquity or righteousness, to be made free from sin is to be delivered or liberated from Satan and sin (see Rom 8:2; Gal 5:1). Jesus said, Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free (John 8:32). He was referring to Himself and to His teaching, for a few verses later He said, If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed (John 8:36). Freed from Satan and iniquity, but enslaved to Christ and righteousness, this is the way of Grace.

     Obedience, that word which many cannot bear, is on display once again. The form of doctrine that they were obeying for access into grace (Rom 5:2) was the very Word of God that Paul was teaching (see 1Thes 2:13). The word form shows again the contrast between the Law of Moses and the Law of Grace, for both are based upon the Word. The form of the new covenant however, is a spiritual experience of the heart that centers upon mercy and humility (see Mat 5:1).

19 I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh: for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness. 20 For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness. 21 What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? for the end of those things is death. 22 But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.

     Will you give your members up to be slaves to uncleanness? or to holiness? The Apostle acknowledges that our flesh is very weak (see Mat 26:41); we need much help to change from servants of iniquity to servants of righteousness. However, in repeating his earlier exhortation (Rom 6:13), Paul affirms again that living under Grace cannot be used to excuse unholy living. For the end of those things is death (v21). The Covenant of Grace is better than the Covenant of Law (Heb 8:6) in many ways, only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh (Gal 5:13; 1Pet 2:16). Man cannot serve two masters – he is either the servant of God or the servant of Satan (Mat 6:24).

     The grand purpose for man in Christ’s New Covenant of Grace is beautifully described in verse 22 as four succinct steps that make a powerful and fitting conclusion to the questions which predicated this chapter.

  1. But now being made free (eleutheroo) from sin. The word carries the sense of being delivered from the bondage of corruption (Rom 8:21; Gal 5:1).
  2. And become servants (douloo) to God. In the original its a verb: “enslaved.” Linked together we have: “Delivered from sin, enslaved to God.”
  3. Ye have your fruit unto holiness. If one is truly enslaved to God, then his members will certainly bear righteous fruit (1Pet 1:15).
  4. And the end (telos) everlasting life. Here the process of salvation is wonderfully complete; and we fly on eternal wings forever and ever. The beautiful butterfly was once an ugly worm too.

23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

    Two greater contrasts do not exist! So which will it be? Death or Life? (Deut 30:19). The book of Romans has shown that every man has worked for Satan and earned the wages of sin. And that is death. Not the death of the physical body, but spiritual death, which, at the end of all definition, is to be separated from God and goodness, and united to Satan and wickedness. Jesus Christ however, stands alive and whole at a burst-open grave, and He is offering the Gift of God to whosoever will (Rev 22:17). See my notes in Rom 5:15-18 for a deeper exploration of this gift. Wages are earnings from personal work, while a gift is something received from another. The wages of sin are fully deserved, and imply that the punishments of Hell are exactly that, no more and no less.

     Since spiritual death is the earned condition of a person who has sinned, the death of the body at the end of life changes nothing. The soul continues estranged from God and a slave unto Satan. Eternal life is gifted by God to all who choose faith in Jesus Christ. It too is a spiritual condition, so again the death of the body at the end of life changes nothing. The soul continues with the Lord forevermore (1Thes 4:17; Rev 22:5).

     Annihilists, who believe that the souls of the wicked cease to exist but the souls of the righteous have eternal life, are forced into a logical fallacy with regards to these two conditions or estates: the wages of sin unto death, or the gift of God unto eternal life. If the one has an end, so should the other. Death implies eternality, forever dead; but the Apostle is speaking of spiritual death, which we know by the Scriptures even occurs during life, with no other effect upon the person. He lives in the body, soul and spirit until the end of his days, when the body dies but the soul and spirit continue to exist, and go to the One who will decide their merits – eternal life, or the second death of eternal punishment in the Lake of Fire (Rev 14:11; Mark 9:44).

     The Scriptures uniformly present the future states of the wicked and righteous as unending existences in their respective places (ie Luke 16:19-31). Knowing that our God is good, just and all-wise, we are sure that He will only assign punishments that are deserved and each case will be weighed separately and judiciously (Luke 12:47). The same will be true for heavenly rewards (1Cor 3:12-15).

commentary Romans 5

by

1 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ: 2 By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

     The state of justification is being at peace with God – forgiven, cleansed, saved; reconciled to communion again with God. That is the work which Christ has wrought as the Mediator between God and Mankind (1Tim 2:15). We have access to this high position only by faith in the One who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification (Rom 4:25). And only the simplest aspects of faith are needed to gain entrance into this salvation: hear, believe and ask. Just the informed decision of the will to accept the gift that Christ is offering (Rom 10:10). No good works, no personal recognition, nothing of human honors or achievements. It is uniquely available and attainable by every and any person who has been born. Later will come opportunity for faith to mature and bear the fruit of the Spirit and works of Love. God isn’t in the business of saving good people, but sinners (Mark 2:17).

     In the commentary for Rom 4:3, we noted the harmony of teaching between James and Paul concerning faith and works. Here we see an additional point of concordance. The initial faith that is required to be saved and the mature faith of the saved are not equals. The initial act of faith is a decision of the will to accept Christ, but the continuing work of faith is to persevere in walking according to His commandments just as Abraham did. In the heart of a true believer, faith takes root, begins to grow, blossoms and then bears good fruit (Rom 1:17).

     This grace wherein we stand is the blessed condition of being at peace with God (v1), in full knowledge of His forgiveness, compassion and phileo love. In this blessed state, His mercies are new every morning (Lam 3:22-23). This station of grace is separate and distinct from that state a man might gain by doing the works of the Law. Again, believing is the means of access into this grace, for it is not attainable by human works (Rom 4:5). It is a gift that God offers to every man, without respect of persons. This has been the Apostle’s point in these chapters and it is particularly important for the Judaizers to hear it.

     I remember as a youth wondering why the Holy Spirit moved the New Testament writers to explain so often and in such repeated detail that following the Old Covenant is futile for those living in the present age of the New Covenant. It seemed so obvious that the New was meant to replace the Old. Surely that human inclination would die out with the Jews’ religion? But no! I am amazed at the allure of the Old Testament Law even today, as certain groups of Gentiles and Jews still think to become holy by keeping (in varying degrees) Old Testament commandments. They choose to be yoked again to that bondage which cannot gain this state of grace in spite of these strong chapters (and Gal 3:1-3). The Holy Spirit knew the future, and these Scriptures are strong evidences against the Judaizers present efforts to elevate the Law once again. The New Covenant of Grace has superseded the Old Covenant of Law forever and that is true of the people of that covenant too – the natural Jews. They will never be reconciled to God by keeping the Mosaic Law, so we should not encourage them in that fruitless pursuit. Point them to the one and only hope of Israel (1Cor 1:21-24).

3 And not only so, but we glory in tribulations also: knowing that tribulation worketh patience; 4 And patience, experience; and experience, hope: 5 And hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.

      The saints of the Kingdom glory (kauchaomai – rejoice, boast, glory) during their trials and sufferings, knowing that these work to purify and increase their heavenly experience (2Cor 4:17; 1Pet 4:12-14). In this we note another striking difference between the Age of Law and the Age of Grace. God’s interaction with Man in the Old Covenant was largely a physical experience, but the New Covenant is designed to emphasize a spiritual communion. Tribulation and trial were not met with joy under the Judaic Law, yet Jesus came preaching an entirely new Kingdom in which blessings are counted to the man who is persecuted for the sake of righteousness (see note Mat 5:1).A

     Nevertheless, Christians are often tempted to discouragement and wavering by physical trials and suffering (1Pet 1:6-7). The Apostle Paul was troubled on every side, persecuted and cast down, but he refused to fall into despair and distress (2Cor 4:8-9). These verses offer special comfort to the suffering soul of faith: “Remember this beautiful truth – the love of God is being poured out within your heart.” For the hardest part of suffering is feeling abandoned by God. Do not forget that in His greatest hour of need, Christ felt alone and forsaken in His suffering too. The work of the Holy Spirit in the heart of the Saved is key to this experience.

     Patience (hupomone). The contemporary meaning is Perseverance, that crowning jewel of faith. To sustain faith at all times and in every circumstance is the constant test of being a follower of Christ, for Perseverance is only developed through suffering and trials. The trying of your faith worketh patience (James 1:2-3). Pressing on in the face of pain and failure is the truest mark of that saving faith which overcometh the world (1John 5:4). Meanwhile, the lazy, weak-minded person will receive the Word joyfully at first, but being easily offended, in the time of temptation he falls away (Mat 13:21; Luke 8:13).

     Experience (dokime) or “proven character” (NASB). The word is elsewhere translated proof (2Cor 2:9; 13:3; Php 2:22), which better fits the progression of tribulations to perseverance to proof to hope. The one who lives by the Law of righteousness which is of faith will attain to this Hope which will never disappoint. Every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as He is pure (1John 3:3). This is not an uncertain, wishful hope, but an expectant, sure hope. It is called a hope because it is not yet reality. See the note on 1Cor 13:13.

     There is a distinct parallel between God’s love being shed abroad (ekcheo, “poured out”) and the Holy Spirit given to the believer. God’s great love wherewith He loved us (Eph 2:4) led to the works of Christ that resulted in a way that Man might be justified and so become a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit which has now been given unto us (study Acts 2:33; Mat 26:28; Acts 2:17-18; Luke 22:20). All the Apostle’s talk about being justified is leading to toward that head, of walking according to Spirit which lives within us (Rom 8:5-9).

6 For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. 7 For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die. 8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

     There is no precedent, whether literal, analogical or typological, to Christ the Omnipotent giving His life to save helpless Mankind. The very concept of God, or any King, offering himself as a ransom for his people is altogether unique and peerless in human history. Beyond that even, Christ died for all Mankind even they were without strength (asthenes). The Greek word is usually translated, “sick” or “feeble” (Mat 25:39; Luke 10:9; 1Cor 12:22). When we were sinners, dead in trespasses and sins (Eph 2:1), the Just died for the unjust (1Pet 3:18). There are scores of types and shadows in the Old Testament that describe aspects of Christ and the Atonement, but I do not know of one that foreshadows this particular truth. It was one of those mysteries that God, in His wisdom, had hidden from Man from the foundation of the World (1Cor 2:7).

    Jesus said, Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends (John 15:13). And that He did. God commendeth His love toward us…this kind of love is beyond human comprehension or achievement. Since God knows the future, He knows what the exhibition of His love will gain. A human cannot know if his love will result in anything of worth or merit.

     Jesus died for us in due time (kata kairon). “Just in time,” we might say, or, “At the appointed time.” The phrase is found in John 5:4 and several times in the Septuagint (see Is 60:22).

9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. 10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

      Earlier in this chapter the Apostle concluded that we are justified by faith (Rom 5:1); now he says we are justified by His blood. This displays the two parties of the New Covenant and their individual actions. Christ’s blood is the agent of justification, but He justifies those who demonstrate appropriate faith. The Scriptures also say we are justified by His grace (Rom 3:24; Titus 3:7), meaning that Man cannot earn justification by good works. Yet, as these Notes have attempted to show, that crystal revelation cannot be construed to eliminate any and all human participation in the salvation of his soul. Grace descends from above upon those of Faith below; then a man is justified (cleansed and made righteous) and reconciled (brought back into communion) with God. This is the grand purpose of God. 

     Every man will choose to walk upon one of two paths in this life: the narrow path of faith in Christ that leads to eternal glories, or the wide road of anti-faith that leads to everlasting destruction. Once we were enemies of Christ and destined for eternal wrath, but by Jesus’ incredible work of reconciliation man can now be justified by His blood – a symbolism for the sinless Son of God offering Himself as the perfect sacrifice and thereby gaining the power to take away the sins of Man so that he is able to appear in the presence of all-holy God.

     God designed an incredible parallel of these two paths of faith/anti-faith leading to their respective eternal destinies and placed it front and center in that terrible account of Christ dying on Calvary’s cross. It is recorded that two thieves were crucified with Him, one on either side. Both were wicked sinners, condemned to die a long, cruel and pitiless death. Both were helpless, utterly without strength, entirely unable to save themselves. They veritably represent every man and woman who has ever lived. One chose the way of anti-faith, railing at Christ and sacrileging His holy person, but the other chose Faith. He recognized his sinfulness and that he deserved this due reward of his deeds, yet he saw the opposite character in that beaten, bloodied, innocent Man upon the middle cross. And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into Thy kingdom. No good deeds could he offer, not counting this one action to identify himself with Christ in His weakest moment. Consider further this man’s choice. At first, we marvel that he chose to believe that this Christ could do anything for him at all. Dying in ridicule and ignominy, how could this lowly, lonely Man gain a Kingdom? On the other hand, what did the thief have to lose? He too would soon be dead, and he knew for certain where he must spend eternity. Unless Someone would help him? And upon that last, great Hope he threw all his soul. Against hope, he believed in hope (Rom 4:18). He confessed that he was a sinner and that Christ was sinless, and he asked for mercy. See the account in Luke 23:39-43.

     Some “doctors of the New Testament” read this verse narrowly to concoct their once saved/always saved doctrine. They say, “Being now justified equals certain salvation later.” But that goes against countless affirmations in the Holy Scriptures that a man must endure faithful unto the end or he will not be saved at the end. If ye stand fast in the Lord…If ye continue in the Faith grounded and settled…If ye do these things…If ye keep in memory….If ye continue in My word (1Thes 3:8; Col 1:23; 2Pet 1:10; John 8:31). The thief on the cross did take the five steps that constitute saving Faith, although he didn’t have to persevere long in good works. Nevertheless, his account fits the Scripture’s pattern of salvation as a life-long process, not a flash event. Bare believing cannot equal final salvation, for the devils also believe…and tremble (James 2:19). So while the spark begins with hearing and believing the Truth, the flame of salvation doesn’t appear until you accept the Truth; then its time to keep feeding the flame.

     Saved by His life – this is resurrection power (see note on Rom 4:25). A dead Savior cannot save anyone. This thought must have motivated Satan and his angels as they went about plotting to kill Christ. Somehow, it did not cross the Devil’s mind that Jesus would rise from the dead with more power than ever before. God hid that mystery from him (1Cor 2:8; Heb 2:14; Ps 2:2-4). Jesus Christ, our living King-Priest, continues to rule and intercede on behalf of His people from His heavenly throne (see notes for Heb 8).

11 And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement.

     Curiously enough, this is the only occurrence of the word atonement in the New Testament. Equally surprising, this Greek word (katallage) is found only once in the Septuagint, where it is translated “compensate” (Isaiah 9:5). In the NT, katallage occurs also in Romans 11:15 and 2Cor 5:18-19, but is translated reconciliation. Its verb form katallaso appears in verse 10, being reconciled to God (also 1Cor 7:11; 2Cor 5:18-20). By definition, this noun/verb pair means, “a change or adjustment of accounts,” and their root word (allaso) means to change, exchange, transform (see Thayer’s, Acts 6:14; Rom 1:23; 1Cor 15:51). Although katallage is not a common word, its root with other prefixes occurs frequently with the same general meaning. For examples, see parallage (James 1:17), diallagathai (Mat 5:24), antallagma(Ruth 4:7) and allagma (Lev 27:10).

     We have now received the atonement, or adjustment of accounts unto reconciliation. This is the precise contextual point of these chapters, which show that Abraham received an adjustment of righteousness on account of his faith which privileged him to stand in God’s presence. In the Old Testament, atonement was always “made,” as opposed to received. Since Christ has come, we have now received the atonement. The sacrifices of the Old Covenant were required to make an atonement for your souls (Ex 30:15) by the forgiveness of sins (Lev 5:10). However, the blood of bulls and goats cannot truly take away sins (Heb 10:4), so those atonements looked forward to the one atonement that can veritably remove sins. If justification is the state of being right with God (v1), then the atonement is the method or basis by which that can take place.     

     In the OT, the word atonement appears more than 80 times and translates the Hebrew words kaphar and kippur. However, the Greek words that the Septuagint uses (exilasmou, exhilaskomai) are never used in the New Testament (although see 1John 4:10 for hilasmos, which only lacks the prefix). After having studied every occurrence of these words in the Greek and Hebrew Scriptures, I believe the fundamental idea in offering a sacrifice of atonement under the Old Covenant is that it was a personal gift to God to show one’s desire to receive favor in his sight. Offered from a low position and with no intent of “satisfaction” or full repayment, it was a simple gift that hoped for a change of estate. This is the exact intent of kaphar in Gen 32:20, long before that word was used by Moses in the Judaic worship system. The atonements did not purge the sin, nor did it repay the sin; it covered the sin until such time that the sin could be repaid and purged. And that is the meaning of kaphar upon its first appearance in the Bible, where in Gen 6:14, Noah covered (kaphar) the Ark with kopher. Outside of this passage, kopher always means a sum of money used to ransom, bribe, or redeem. These singular occurrences of kaphar before the Mosaic Law add dimension to the meaning of the word and help us understand why God had Moses use it in deeply religious terms. Later, the prophets used kaphar in its fully realized spiritual sense, “to forgive, pardon, pacify,” for that is the result of an atonement sacrifice.

     The Day of Atonement (kippur) marked the most sacred ceremony in the Mosaic Law. While the kaphar was an offering by any common man (with priestly coaction) to solicit the favor/pardon of God, the kippur was a High Priestly ceremony that directly speaks of Christ offering Himself as the means whereby a man is able to solicit the favor/pardon of God and be fully reconciled (katallaso) to Him. We have now received the atonement. The kaphar was a true sacrifice in that it was voluntary and personal, but it could only cover the sins of one (the offerer). The kippur of Christ on the other hand, was infinitely more valuable in that it was intermediary, plenary and eternal. These three aspects directly contrast to the kaphar of a man under the Law, for note that the atonement of Christ was 1) Intermediary, being effective and available for not only the offerer, but for all Mankind. 2) Plenary; being far from just a covering of sins, it is able to remove the sins of the world. 3) Eternal; one offering of the perfect sacrifice effected full reconciliation forever.

12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

      Adam and Eve were perfectly created and placed in a perfectly created World. They were poised to live forever in harmony and beauty in the Garden of Eden with God. Their sin not only ended that dream, it drastically changed their lives and the lives of their children and children’s children even down to the present day. The entire Universe fell under the curse of decay and death, subjected by God unto vanity on account of Satan and sin (Rom 8:20-21). We see the effects of sin everywhere in the physical world and it rules all life under entropy and order-to-chaos laws.

     Sin also brought major changes to the spiritual world, although those effects are harder to understand. The day that Adam sinned, a part of him died (Gen 2:17). We might say he died spiritually, for that inward, invisible part of Man which is responsible for thought and decision was breached and poisoned. Protestant commentaries stress that physical death was the penalty for Adam’s sin and virtually ignore the fact that guilt is not assessed to the physical body but to the spirit/soul of a man. Nor did Adam physically die in the day that he ate the fruit. However, he did die spiritually in the very moment he transgressed the commandment (Rom 7:9). This “fallen” part of Man was passed on to Adam’s children, and to their children, on down to the present day. Contrary to Protestant belief, we were not all “in Adam” when he sinned and are therefore guilty of Adam’s sin. How preposterous is that notion! Yes, every man has been gravely and intrinsically affected by Adam’s sin, but only by inference and extrapolation can these verses be made to teach the Calvinist idea of “original sin.”

     Unlike Adam and Eve in their pre-sin estate, every person is now born with a sinful nature; he is inclined to sin, pre-disposed to please his own flesh. Left to itself, every ordered system in the physical realm tends to disorder. Left to himself, every man spiritually tends to disobey God and follow his own will. However, it is a serious overreach to infer that from birth all men are naturally and utterly depraved, sinful and spiritually dead, for that condition is a consequence of individual sin. Notice, Death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned. The spirit/soul of a man cannot be sinful or fallen before sin, so these cannot be part of this “sinful nature” that Adam’s sin brought into the world. We repeat, Adam did not pass the guilt of sin to other souls per pro, for the Scriptures are clear that only one’s own sin will estrange him from God. The soul that sinneth IT shall die (Eze 18:20). The Apostle also wrote, By man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead (1Cor 15:21)

     If it be true that Adam passed the guilt of sin to every man, then he is not responsible for his condition. He is a soul of Satan’s and is destined for punishment with Satan at life’s end regardless of whether HE sins or not. Adam sinned for him and he must bear the guilt of it. That would be most egregiously unfair and unlike God. Moreover, if a man’s own actions does not bring the guilt of sin, then Jesus’ death was not an act of mercy, but an act of fair play. God must rectify this unjust situation of a man guilty of sin without action or choice. Again, that does not fit God’s character. Everybody intrinsically knows that he is guilty of death on account of his own actions, for all have sinned (Rom 3:23).

     The difference is monumental. Is a soul born estranged from God or in union with God? It is universally believed that babies belong to God and not Satan; if a child dies before reaching the age of accountability he will go to heaven. That truth implies the soul of every man is NOT born guilty of the sin of Adam and is not utterly depraved and sinful. Instead, every soul is perfectly and sinlessly created and placed in the womb. It is only later that Satan’s corrupting ways will bring temptation, sin and death (James 1:13-15). Then and only then does the soul become estranged from God and that’s how Paul could say, “I was alive once, but sin came and I died” (Rom 7:9-11).

     A man’s own choices and actions cause his own guilt, that is only common sense. He alone is responsible for his sin and destiny. The most basic of all scientific laws, the Law of Cause and Effect, requires this to be true! Every effect had a cause, which itself was an effect of a cause, and which can be traced back in time unto the very beginning. The original cause by which Sin has come to exist in the world is the sin of Adam, that is what this passage says. While verses like Psalms 51:5 and 1Cor 15:21-22 are used to promote the “guilty from birth” notion, they are better fitted in the interpretation we have just given, which believes a man is born with a sinful physical nature, but not a sinful soul nature. The soul becomes corrupted and sinful on account of it’s own choice and actions.

    A young man once asked me the following hypothetical question. Given that Jesus never sinned and so was never corrupted, would He not have lived forever on the earth? I don’t think so. We said that Adam and Eve would never have died if they had not sinned, but that’s because they lived in an un-fallen World. Jesus was born into a fallen World, just like every other human since Adam and Eve. This is a key aspect of the salvation story: Jesus was born as a human into his fallen world for the purpose of saving it from destruction; He redeemed it by living a perfect life and giving His life as the one and only perfect Sacrifice. Moreover, Jesus’ body was subject to like passions of pain, hunger and sickness, so His body was fully human and would have died just like other humans. However, unlike all of Adam’s descendants, Jesus never died spiritually, and that makes His bodily death strikingly opposite that of Adam and his race. Jesus bore our sins, but He was not guilty of our sins.

13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.

      The section which spans verses 12-21 should be assimilated as a whole before dissection into study parts. The objective of this passage is to illustrate God’s plan for mankind by positioning in parallel several key events in the lives of the first man Adam, and Christ the last Adam (1Cor 15:45). This is advertised by the Apostle when he says that Adam is a figure of Him that was to come. He then compares the two in various ways and upon several topics, to show the commonality of all men, Jew and Gentile, to total bondage of sin and death under Satan’s rule.    

     “Sins against the Law were not imputed before the Law was given. Nevertheless, sin and death ruled over all men in that era from Adam to Moses, even though they didn’t sin in the same manner as had Adam, who is a figure of Him that was to come.” That is straightforward and logical, but what does it mean that not all men have sinned after the similitude of Adam?

     Adam was not just the first man, he was a special man. Created perfect in all ways and placed in a beautiful world of excellence where God came personally to walk and talk with him (Gen 3:8), there has only been one Adam and there never will be another. That alone makes him an interesting type of Christ. Nevertheless, the two paths of life that Adam and Christ chose are thoroughly different, for while Christ lived in full subjection to doing the will of the Father, Adam chose to take his own way. He rebelled against God and took the fruit that God had forbidden him to eat. For unlike Eve, Adam was not deceived by the Serpent’s lies; he ate that fruit even knowing he was disobeying God (1Tim 2:14). So Adam’s sin was disobeying God’s clear verbal direction, and a very glaring sin it was given that he did not have a fallen nature as all other men. On these two points, Adam’s transgression was different, for many have not directly disobeyed God’s verbal commandment and, excepting Adam and Christ, all have been born with a fallen, sinful nature. Nevertheless, death reigned over them too, even though they did not sin after the similitude of Adam. For all have transgressed the internal law of conscience that God has given them (Rom 2:14-15; 1:19-20).

     Disobedience results in guilt, sin and death (John 15:22, Rom 7:9-11), but how can one commit sin by not obeying a commandment he has not heard? (Rom 2:12). That is why before the Law, sins against it were not imputed. However, in the full picture, such persons are still sinners before God, being guilty of not diligently acquainting themselves with His laws of conscience. Even the citizens of a secular nation are required to learn the laws of the land, and they are responsible for offending any “unknown” law. Before Moses, each man was responsible to seek God and do His will according to the knowledge and conscience that is in him intrinsically. The man that seeketh shall find, but the man uninterested in the testimonies of God in nature, conscience and revelation is committing the sin of not doing what is right and good (James 4:17).

     Every person is born with certain basic concepts of God and his moral law. Perhaps some are created with greater capacities of knowledge and of them more will be required. Those who have never been introduced to the Word of God have an opportunity for salvation too, even though they have not heard of Christ in this life. The hazy references in 1Pet 3:19 and 1Pet 4:6 may explain how they do hear of Him. Nevertheless, how much more effective is the preaching of the Cross for salvation! (Rom 10:13-15).

     Some argue that this tends to repress evangelistic efforts, but that is false on two fronts. First, the righteousness of faith that Paul teaches is much easier to attain than following the law of conscience. Second, this is the same situation that God was faced with when He created the world. He knew many would rebel against His will and would be punished for their disobedience, yet He knew that the glorious awards for those who accepted His gift would far outweigh the negatives. And so He implemented His grand plan for the world and Man. For evangelists and missionaries, however, this should be a sobering thought. We must not simply awake people to the knowledge of the truth, but assist them in teaching and discipleship.

     So guilt passed upon all men in that all have sinned; some for disobeying as Adam had and others for not proving what is that acceptable and perfect will of God (Rom 12:2). Rebellion and Deception, all sins fall under one of these categories. The first is based on knowledge and the other is based on ignorance, but they both lead to death. The same two original sins, Adam’s rebellion and Eve’s deception, continue to be demonstrated today in all the world.

15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many. 16 And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification. 17 For if by one man’s offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)

      While it is readily apparent that these verses compare and contrast the first Adam with the last Adam, the parallels are not as sharply formed as we might wish. That might be due to the peculiarities of language and translation, or it may be an evidence of Paul’s claim not to be of eloquent speech (1Cor 2:1). On the other hand, this Apostle was known to speak of things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other Scriptures (2Pet 3:16).

     The general comparison is easily grasped, but the objects in the parallels seem to lack precision at times. The figure of comparison is Adam and Christ, and the point of contrast centers upon Adam’s offence and Christ’s gift. Both were single events with world-wide, long-standing effects. The one was an act of rebellion and selfishness, the other was an act of obedience and submission. The one caused overwhelming personal debt; the other was a gracious offer to pay the debt. The one gave reign to Satan, sin and death, the other gave reign to Christ, righteousness and life. The offence rules over all men; the gift avails only to those who accept it. 

     Here is my paraphrase translation:

(v15) “The offense and the gift are similar in that each were enacted by one man, but they are dissimilar in that while one man’s offense caused the spiritual death of all men, the grace of God acting in the other Man has caused the gift to abound unto all. (16) Neither does the result of the gift resemble the result of the offense; for after the sin the ruling was, ‘Guilty.’ The gift however, came after many sins, and the new ruling was, ‘Righteous.’ (17) If one man’s sin caused death to reign over all, so much more shall the recipients of abundant grace and the gift of righteousness reign in life by the other Man, even Jesus Christ. (18) So then, while the sin of one resulted in Man’s condemnation, the righteous judgment of One resulted in Man’s reinstatement unto life.”

     The interchange of gift (dorea), free gift (charisma) and grace (charis) is prominent in these verses. Dorea and charisma are used synonymously in the Scriptures (see 2Cor 9:15; Heb 6:4; Eph 4:7; Rom 6:23; 1Cor 12:4; 2Tim 1:6), but in this passage the translators chose to distinguish between the two by adding the word, “free,” which is not in the original, nor implied in any way. Inexplicably, the KJV translators even neglected to put the missing word in italics. My strong feeling is that they wished to favor their Bible-deficient idea that salvation is a unconditional gift given arbitrarily to people who haven’t even asked for it.

     My criticism is not for the purpose of clinging to that little part which Man does contribute to be saved, but to be true to the Apostle’s intent. This gift, which sharply contrasts with the offence, is of course, “The Salvation of Man.” And it is truly the greatest, most benevolent, most unmerited, most unfathomable gift in the history of Mankind. Who offers a throne to a peasant? Who forgives a debt of impossible worth? Who blesses a sinner with ETERNAL LIFE? It is an amazing, unspeakable, immeasurable gift by grace. We can only bow our heads in thankfulness, reverence and humility. Yes, there is a work that we must do, but the Big Work has been accomplished by God.

     Adam’s one sin was followed by God’s righteous decree of condemnation, which eventually extended to all men since all have sinned. After many sins however, the great mercy and kindness of God brought salvation by means of the gift of life through Jesus Christ (Rom 6:23). Adam’s sin resulted in death reigning over all mankind. Jesus Christ’s righteousness resulted in life reigning over all who receive His grace.

     Amazingly, the standard Protestant idea is that all men were “in Adam” when he sinned and so all are guilty of sin. Clarke says, “Death reigned over mankind during the period between Adam and Moses; therefore men did not die for their own transgressions, but in consequence of Adam’s one transgression.” And Guzik writes, “”He is not saying that death reigned over us all because we all sinned; he is saying that death reigned over us all because Adam sinned” (Morris)”. Wow. I can imagine Paul shaking his head at these comments and wondering, “But didn’t I just say, So death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned?” (v12). The Calvinistic proposal that Man is totally depraved and sinful by being “in Adam” when he sinned is simply not taught in this passage! Nor is it to be found elsewhere in the Scriptures. And neither does it comport to common sense, nor to the character of God. Why hang all mankind’s guilt on Adam when it is obvious that all of us have personally sinned? See my notes on 1Cor 15:21-22.

18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.

       Verse 18 expands on verse 16, with the comparison again centering on those two actions that have affected multitudes: the offence of Adam and the gift of Christ. This time however, the gift is only implied (the KJV has it in italics), and in its place we read, righteousness (dikaioma). This Greek word is translated justification in v16, but outside the book of Romans, and in more than 100 occasions, it is virtually always rendered, “statute, precept, judgment” (ie, Gen 26:5; Ps 19:8; Eze 18:9; Luke 1:6; Heb 9:1; Rev 15:4; Rom 1:32). The only exceptions are in Romans 2:26; 5:16; 5:18; 8:4 and Rev 19:8. The standard word for righteousness is dikaiosune, found about 100 times in the New Testament. In choosing dikaioma, the Apostle seems to convey the idea of a statute or judgment of Christ bringing spiritual life to Man. It is the righteous, just act of a Mediator (Heb 9:15) Several other Scriptures paint a similar picture and they too are found in context with the Mosaic Law. Colossians 2:14 describes an existing judgment against Man that was taken away by Christ, and Romans 8:3 describes God sending His Son into the world to condemn, or pass judgment, on sin.

     Paul’s Jewish audience would have understood these familiar Greek words according to their usage in the Septuagint, where dikaioma are honorable statutes and precepts of God, and dikaiosune are the just, pure actions of man or God. The essential truth here is this: By the sin of one came condemnation from God which eventually passed to all men; by the righteous and just life of the other came life. Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many (Heb 9:28).

     In these notes we have rejected the idea that Adam’s sin was imputed to all men in favor of the belief that every man is guilty on account of his own disobedience. Here we find an additional point in that consideration. For if this verse teaches that one man’s sin made every man guilty, then it also teaches that one man’s righteousness made every man justified. The fallacy of that idea is self-evident in the full light of Scripture, for Paul is working under the premise that the gift is not like the offence. See those points of contrast in our previous note. “Just as one man’s sin brought sin into the world and each man chose to sin for himself, so too one man’s righteousness brought salvation into the world for each man to choose that salvation for himself.”

19 For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

      The last contrast between Adam and Christ is on the topic of obedience. Though He were a Son, yet learned He obedience by the things which He suffered (Heb 5:8). Adam’s disobedience opened the world to Satan and sin, and thereby all men became sinners. The reason the Apostle here says many became sinners instead of all became sinners, is in order to maintain the parallel: Many were made sinners…many be made righteous. Notice the similar parallel in the previous verse, which showed all men becoming condemned and all men being presented with the opportunity of life.

     Shall be made righteous. Some understand this to be a simple declaration, like a “judicial” or “forensic” decree that does not actually, intrinsically, change the individual. Anabaptists (at least most of them) believe the soul of a saved person is veritably cleansed of all sin (1John 1:7) and he is truly a new creature. The Word of God is able to discern, divide and change the innermost elements of the soul and spirit (Heb 4:12).

     Being made righteous is a process with a beginning and an ending. It begins with believing and accepting the Gospel of Christ; it ends with a final act of redemption – body, soul and spirit – at the end of the present Age. The change from past to future in the verbs implies this last act of redemption/justification: “many shall be made righteous.” See note on Mat 19:28. The verb katastathesontai (be made) is elsewhere translated “appoint, ordain, set” (Acts 6:3; Luke 12:44; Heb 8:3; Tit 1:5), but see also 2Pet 1:8; Jam 3:6.

     For main-line Protestantism, the book of Romans is a theological dissertation on Salvation, while the Anabaptist view is that Romans gives the basic reasons for right living in the Kingdom of Christ. The differences in understanding of this chapter are particularly evident in the disparity of their initial premises. Protestantism sees the big picture as God saving selected persons from the utterly depraved masses flowing inexorably to their infernal abode in Hell. Therefore, they believe that Adam and Eve’s sin was passed to their children in the fullest sense – every person is born in depravity of spirit, soul, mind and volition. Man is born a wicked, guilty sinner estranged from God and is incapable to choose to believe in God or to do good because he doesn’t possess the basic faculties to do so. Christ came to save certain men, the elect, from Hell and He does so by depositing in the elect those basic faculties that Adam’s race lacks. So these are enabled to believe, while the rest of Adam’s race goes unknowingly and ignorantly unto eternal punishment.

     Anabaptism meanwhile, sees the big picture as God seeking whosoever will for salvation and eternal communion with Him. They believe that while Satan spoiled God’s perfect creation through Adam’s sin, each man is born innocent in spirit, soul, mind and volition. He is not a wicked guilty sinner at birth, but chooses to become one by his own decisions and actions. The necessary faculties for salvation have been “deposited” in every man from birth, so all possess the ability to choose faith in Christ unto salvation. Christ came to ransom Mankind from Satan’s clutches and to give him new power to reign in life in the never-ending Kingdom of Grace.

20 Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound: 21 That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.

      The Law was instituted by God as a way that Man could attain right-standing with Him. In truth, it was a provisional reconciliation, contingent upon a retroactive application of the sacrifice of Christ. Nevertheless, it would be imperious to infer that the Old Testament saints were unable to experience fellowship with God. Some of the greatest giants of faith and righteousness are found in that era when the commonwealth of Israel was the Kingdom of God’s design. Elsewhere, Paul says the Law was added because of transgressions, till the Seed should come to whom the promise was made (Gal 3:17-19). So the Law’s design was not to make men sinners, but to bring men to the knowledge of sin (Rom 3:20). Sin was already in the world when the Law came, but God does not impute sin without consciousness of it (Rom 5:13). Obviously, with the knowledge of sin came death (Rom 7:8), and this death prevailed and increased in the world until Christ. See our thoughts in Rom 4:3 for the reasons that God injected the Law into the world.

     It is my belief that these verses are not saying that grace abounded to Man during the time of the Law, but that God’s grace, in the form of Christ, came to Man at a time when sin abounded. The Jewish religion had largely devolved into a man-made social construct which benefited the influential and wealthy, while crushing the poor and lowly. At this time, when the world was without strength, dead in trespasses and sins, God sent His Son into the world (Rom 5:6-8; Eph 2:5).

     Under the Old Covenant, sin reigned unto death; under the New Covenant, grace reigns unto life (see also Rom 8:2). The characterization makes the two Covenants seem to be different as black is from white. Yet that assumption is not entirely correct, as we have already said. Rather, the coming of the New Covenant gives fuller credence to the Old. Yes, sin truly reigned in the past because the true Atonement was not yet offered, but sin reigns in many places and in many hearts under the present Covenant too. The saints of the Old and New are justified by the same blood of the perfect Lamb; they looked forward to that event and we look backward. They saw the pattern dimly in types and shadows and upon it they put their faith; we see the full, amazing story in detail, and upon it we also put our faith.

     Grace did much more abound. We began this chapter with grace (v2), and it is fitting that so it ends. The next chapter will explain this grace as it works in the heart of the believer. The privileged position of Grace is attained by faith in Jesus Christ through righteousness (dikaiosune). In this case, the Apostle apparently does not refer to the righteousness (dikaioma) of Christ in verse 18, but the gift of righteousness (dikaiosune) in verse 17, where we found it to be a euphemism for Salvation.

commentary Romans 4

by

1 What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found? 2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.

      In this chapter, the Apostle uses the example of Abraham, the father of the Jewish nation, to support the previous chapter’s conclusion that salvation is found only by following the Law of Faith (Rom 3:27), also called the righteousness of faith (Rom 4:13) and obedience of faith (Rom 16:26). Keeping the commandments in the Law of Moses cannot cleanse the soul from the blots of sin, for while the Law showed man’s failure to follow God, it could not award substantive forgiveness and purity. The worshipers could offer sacrifices and rituals which covered their transgressions, but those sins were not taken away. The Lamb of God, on the other hand, was manifested to take away our sins (1John 3:5) and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. So doing the deeds of the Law can never justify the soul of man (Rom 3:28; 10:4).

     The Apostle now asks a question of weighty consequence in this Jewish dispute: did Abraham become righteous by doing the works of the Law? God has blessed no man with greater promises than faithful Abraham, who became the father of many nations (Gen 17:4). However, even Abraham was not rewarded/justified by God on account of his good works (ergon, see Rom 2:6-8). That is firstly evident because the Law had not yet been given when Abraham received the blessings, and secondly because the Scripture, in a remarkable passage, says that Abraham’s faith was counted to him for righteousness (Gen 15:6). At God’s command, Abraham offered up Isaac, believing that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead (Heb 11:17-19). That is serious faith.

     Abraham…hath found. This isn’t saying that he discovered something new, but that he obtained it (same word so translated in Heb 9:12). Abraham’s faith gained for him righteousness in God’s eyes. It was not a full cleansing of the soul of all sin, for that incredible action was not yet available (see note on Romans 3:21-26). Nevertheless, God counted Abraham’s faith of sufficient value to reckon him as righteous and, consequently, conditioned for communion with God. Therefore is he called the friend of God (James 2:23; 2Chr 20:7). And in the final analysis, that is the purpose of justification; we have peace with God (Rom 5:1, see note Rom 3:28).

    But not before God. I think Paul adds this phrase as a quick aside to his main point. Let’s suppose Abraham was justified by works. Then he might have reason to receive the glory of men, but not God, whose works of righteousness outdo the works of man farther than the east is from the west. Any man who attempts to compare his good works with God’s is going to utterly fail.

3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.

     The KJV translators did not consistently render the Greek logizomai in this chapter. Verses 3-5 have counted, but verses 4, 9-10 have reckoned, and verses 6, 8, 11, 22-24 have imputed. Only twice in the other thirty occasions it is found in the NT is it translated “imputed,” and inexplicably, one of those quotes the same OT phrase that verse 3 quotes (compare James 2:23). The situation is compounded by the differences of meaning in those words. To impute is to “attribute, credit or assign,” while to reckon is to “consider or regard as,” and to (ac)count is to “accrue or calculate.”

    The reason for the varied translations seems linked to the fairly wide usage of logizomai in the Greek Scriptures, where it is translated, “reckon, (ac)count, impute, reason, suppose, think, consider, number, esteem, devise.” Thankfully, these differences only minimally influence our understanding of Paul’s principal point, that God took Abraham’s faith and counted it as righteousness. In other words, Abraham did not earn righteousness by his good works but found (v1) it by his faith in God.

     The same word is used in the opposite action: Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute (logizomai) sin (v8). This implies the following complement: God counts a man to be guilty, He also counts a man to be righteous. It is a unilateral action of God and is, of course, wholly based in His character of perfect justice, mercy, wisdom, knowledge, righteousness and goodness. If it were based upon the good works of man, nobody would be saved. It would be foolish though, to infer that Abraham’s works of obedience did not have worth and did not factor into God’s decision to bless him beyond all others. The Scriptures everywhere affirm that God does indeed consider a man’s works in weighing out His grace to him. His hand pours out more upon hearts that are more attuned to Him. For God is not unrighteous to forget a man’s work (Heb 6:10), but will abundantly pardon even the wicked man that forsakes his evil ways (Is 55:7).  

     Abraham believed God. There is a substantial weight of meaning in that little sentence. Reading his story, we are mightily compelled to see that his believing involved hearing, obeying, and persevering therein (Gen 22:16). Indeed, we are so impressed by Abraham’s immediate, implicit and constant obedience to God’s commandments that his other attributes fade from view. Apparently in a night vision, God told him to go sacrifice up his beloved son; Abraham didn’t waffle or wait, but rose up early in the morning and did as he was told (Gen 22:3). 

     The work of faith is the faith that saves (1Thes 1:3); it is not attained by doing the works of the Law. As with Abraham so with us – faith requires volition, decision and corresponding action. The work that God requires of all men is to believe on Him whom He hath sent (John 6:29) – not just confessing with the mouth, but believing unto doing (see note Rom 3:3). Salvation is a process, and every process has a definite beginning. But if you abandon the process, or incorrectly follow the process, it will not be finished and you will not arrive at the desired result. Baking a cake is a process. You mix in all the appropriate ingredients, heat the oven to the correct temperature and bake the batter for the right amount of time. Beautiful! If you do not follow the correct steps of process, you will instead say, Yuck!

    This is how the Apostle James can use the same example of Abraham and quote the same verse in saying, Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only (Jas 2:24). Both Paul and James speak the truth about Salvation, but they are speaking of different aspects of the process. Paul points out that works cannot earn a man his salvation, it comes by believing; James points out that a man cannot just believe, but must show by his works that he believes. Using our analogy of baking a cake, you don’t begin by baking the flour and later adding the ingredients! And you don’t begin the process of salvation with works, and then adding believing. The conspicuous fact that Abraham is the Biblical model of both Faith and Works makes sense when salvation is viewed as a process instead of an event.

     So Paul and James are not in conflict here. Yet, as always, one must grasp the broader context of the respective passages before fixing the conclusion. Remember that Paul’s chief point in these chapters is to persuade the Jews to quit trusting in the Law for their righteousness and choose Christ only (just as he testified in Php 3:4-9). This was a major, contentious issue in the first decades of the Church Age. Paul says, “Even Abraham your father was not justified by doing the works of the Law.” On the other hand, James’ chief point is to show that bare believing in God is not enough (Jas 2:19); one must work and act upon his confession of faith, or else his statement of belief is dead, worthless, unfinished (Jas 2:26). Paul teaches this same truth everywhere in his epistles. Perhaps the best example is his treatise par excellence on Christian Love, in which he shows the preeminent superiority of works of love over any other human endeavor. He concludes that Agape love is greater even than faith (1Cor 13:13). How so? Because Paul’s definition of Agape love is precisely James’ portrait of Works. And that was Abraham’s way of life.

     Again, the works that cannot justify a man are the works of the Law (Rom 3:28; 9:32). Indeed, no work of man can cleanse him of sin (see note Rom 3:20). Paul however, is not discouraging a man from doing works of Love, but discouraging him from doing works of the Law. Likewise, James is not encouraging a man to do the works of the Law, but encouraging him to do the works of Love (James 2:24; Gal 5:6). Consistently then, James cites Abraham and Rahab (antecedents of the Law) as examples of works of faith leading to justification.

     As with any literary work, a reader must first understand the writer’s terms before he can understand his message. Conflicts between Paul and James are only encountered when using flawed or incomplete definitions of Faith and Grace. Faith is not some elixir placed in the soul of the elect, but an ability seed that God has designed and placed in the mind of every man. It is a conscious decision which results in an action that is pleasing to God (Heb 11:6). Grace meanwhile, is not God’s unmerited favor poured out arbitrarily upon certain men without their knowledge or choice even while they continue to live in wickedness (Jude 1:4), but God’s Pardon and Power in the lives of those who have chosen to yield their wills to their Savior. That is the DNA helix of the New Covenant.

     If Abraham’s faith gained him right-standing with God, why did God send the Law? Why didn’t He continue in this same righteousness of faith for man’s justification? It’s a tough but critical question. The answer helps to color our understanding of faith, grace and justification. First, we should not infer from this verse that Abraham was justified in the same manner and to the same degree as persons under the New Covenant. Until the death and resurrection of the Son of God, full and authentic forgiveness and justification was neither available nor possible. Even the saints of the Old Covenant were not made perfect until the Perfecter came (study Heb 11:13, 39-40). That’s why Jesus said that Abraham rejoiced to see [His] day (John 8:56, and note for Mat 27:53). This fact is supported by the word choice of the verse in question: it was counted unto him for righteousness. God reckoned Abraham to be righteous while he yet lived, but he was not truly made righteous until that Christ-only action was performed. And that is not so different from our own experience in the New Covenant. For while we are forgiven, redeemed and born again immediately upon placing our faith in Christ, a fuller realization awaits the soul in the heavens, when Redemption is completed (Luke 21:28) and all things are truly made new (Rev 21:5).

     Another reason God interposed the Age of Law instead of continuing in the Abrahamic mode of righteousness is that the latter is more difficult. Witness the example of the children of Israel passing through the wilderness (Rom 3:1-3). They saw the mighty miracles of God in their deliverance from Egypt, they experienced the awesome display of power at the Red Sea, the pillar of cloud and fire leading the way, the water flowing from the Rock, the manna, etc. Yet they complained and distrusted, rebelled and rejected the works of God! All this happened before the giving of the Law at Sinai, where they so wickedly turned from Jehovah that they had Aaron make them a new god to worship. Amazing unbelief, incredible anti-faith. These all died in the wilderness, and could not enter into the Promised Land on account of their unbelief (Heb 3:15-19).

     Finally, in all this discussion of imputing, justification, works and faith, let us not lose sight of the God’s momentous motive to justify a man in the New Covenant, which is to cleanse him completely so that he is fit to be the living temple where God can come to dwell. This is earthshaking, the Real Deal, the Big Change, that was the prominent result of Christ’s earthly mission. The gift of the Holy Spirit within each true believer changes everything (John 16:7). The Spirit did move mightily in the Old Testament, but now that true Atonement is available, God and His Son comes to make their abode in each cleansed and purified human temple (John 14:23; 1Cor 6:19). The presence of the Holy Spirit helps us to understand the Scriptures, to discern what is right and wrong, to better know Christ and the Father, and to do the will of God (Rom 8:26). He doesn’t “take control” of the believer, but is a quiet but potent advantage to gaining that righteousness which is of faith. The power of the Holy Spirit is a principle theme in the book of Romans; we come to the peak in chapter eight.

4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. 5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

      A paraphrase translation of verses 4-5: “He that can present acceptable works earns his reward; it is not gifted but paid. But he that cannot present acceptable works and instead trusts in God who is able to make the ungodly holy, his faith is counted to be righteousness.” Notice here that grace means “gift,” for it is contrasted with debt (also in 1Pet 3:7; Acts 20:24), and that the only acceptable works which are valid for justification is the Atoning work of Christ.

     Those who would offer their good works as a way to buy salvation are doomed to fail, for sins cannot be undone by doing good deeds. Even a human court of law would agree. So Abraham did not, could not, work and so earn his righteousness (Rom 11:35); it was imputed/counted/reckoned unto him because of his faith in God. Perhaps the distinction is subtle but it is nevertheless important: Abraham gained (did not earn) salvation by his faith. No man can earn by his works the righteousness that would save him, but he can attain that righteousness from God by his faith. And by “Faith” we mean the process of saving faith (see note Mat 14:31).

     Calvinists have made this passage to say that works and obedience are not necessary for salvation, but the teaching of many other passages renders that notion entirely untenable. Just two chapters earlier Paul said that every man that worketh good will receive glory, honor and peace, but that tribulation and anguish will befall every soul of man that doeth evil (Rom 2:6-10). Good works will unerringly accompany salvation; they are a key part of saving faith. The Apostle records that he had received grace and apostleship for the purpose of calling men unto obedience to the faith (Rom 1:5). Calvinists choose to ignore the obvious intent of this chapter by magnifying one of its details: namely, that contrary to the teaching of Judaism and many other religions, personal holiness cannot be earned by works. God reckons a man to be holy on account of his personal faith in Christ. He takes a man’s faith and imputes it as righteousness to his account.

     Initial faith, or believing, does not finish a man’s salvation, but qualifies him for salvation. From Genesis to Revelation, the Scriptures show that Man receives God’s grace because he did something. There is not one exception! In the example of Abraham, God said: I am thy shield, and thy exceeding great reward (Gen 15:1). He didn’t say “gift,” “freedom,” “grace,” etc, but reward. A reward is given for a certain achievement or on account of come action. In my opinion, the most dangerous of all “Christian” beliefs is the idea that God’s grace of salvation is gifted irrespective of a man’s choice or action in the matter. The companion belief is just a dangerous, that God places faith in certain men and justifies them without their knowledge or choice and these are the elect. God is righteous, fair and wise; He would never act so arbitrarily or unjustly.

     A God that can govern/exist only in a setting where He alone decides and acts would be a diminutive, limited being not at all like the God of the Scriptures who designed and created Man for companionship – voluntary, optional, free-will fellowship, for that is the very highest kind. The God that can rule and ultimately prevail in such a setting is truly the Omnipotent, Omniscient One.

     That justifieth the ungodly. All have sinned, all have taken their own ways, all are ungodly (Rom 3:10-12), but Christ came to save sinful men – not the willful, uncaring evildoer, but the sorry, humble and repentant sinner. These are the ones that gain righteousness, these are the ones that God justifies.

6 Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works, 7 Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. 8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.

      There is probably no better description of the state of justification than this Davidic declaration: Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven…to whom the Lord will not impute sin (Ps 32:1-2). Such an one is at peace with God, for his soul is completely cleansed and his sins have been taken away. He is a fit temple for the Holy Spirit. Yet, the very notion of guilt being removed is beyond human comprehension; it is impossible. Once guilty, always guilty. No work of man can undo that sin, neither can any work of the Law wash away the mark of sin. How exceedingly happy, then, is the man who receives this blessedness!

     Righteousness without works restates the case of Abraham, who found righteousness by his faith and not by works, which firstly refers to the deeds of the Law (see next verses) and secondly to any other works of man. Following the Law will not result in justification. Righteousness is only imputed to persons in proportion to their own faith in Christ. If that be taken by the Protestants to be a “works-based” salvation, so be it, for that is what the Scriptures affirm.

     Forgiveness of sin is never free. He who forgives a debt is agreeing to suffer the consequences/damages incurred by the debtor – forever. In the case of Mankind’s sins against God, Jesus agreed to be Man’s sinbearer. From Adam unto the very last man who asks for God’s forgiveness, the Son of God has promised to take away their sins and bear them Himself. The mechanics of this Atonement are difficult to comprehend, for in God’s own perfect world of Justice, invoking Mercy cannot be overlooking an offense. There must be some in-kind balancing of the scales, or the case is an injustice. Even our human minds are intrinsically affronted to see a judge pardon a guilty man. However, this all makes wonderful sense of Paul’s statement that Abraham’s faith was reckoned to him for righteousness. For a fuller discussion of forgiveness, see notes at 1Peter 2:24 and Matthew 18:35.

9 Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness. 10 How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. 11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also: 12 And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumcised.

      Since faith was counted for righteousness to Abraham before the Law was given, it was obviously not tied to doing works of the Law. Even circumcision, the most important of all Jewish rites, was not yet in existence. From this fact the Apostle extracts that God had planned for Abraham to be the father of all them that believe, both of the circumcision and the uncircumcision. This is yet another powerful evidence that Paul holds before the Jews who had converted to Christ, yet who thought it was necessary to go on keeping the Law. Abraham wasn’t even circumcised when God reckoned him to be righteous. So your arguments that doing the works of the Law are necessary are ruined. 

     God prescribed the rite of circumcision as a seal or evidence that Abraham would receive the blessings that He had promised to him. From that time on, the family of Abraham kept this physical ceremony; it became the topmost proof of Jewish identity. Of course, the real significance of this sign was God’s oath that Abraham would become the father of many nations and that in his seed all the nations of the world would be blessed (Gen 17:4-5; 22:18; 26:4). So when this all came to pass with the coming of Abraham’s greatest “son,” Jesus Christ, then the significance of circumcision was fulfilled. For the blessings of the New Covenant are open to all peoples, kindreds and nations.

     In the New Covenant, literal circumcision is not necessary (1Cor 7:19; Gal 5:6), but spiritual circumcision of the heart (Rom 2:29; Col 2:11). This is a emphatic fact that upends the idea of some that certain Old Testament rules and laws continue mandatory in the New Covenant. Today for instance, some Christians keep the Sabbath day instead of Sunday. Their primary argument is the Fourth Commandment of the Law, which they often claim pre-dates the Law since it is found in Genesis. Well, the circumcision commandment also pre-dates the Law, yet none of them argue that it continues in force (see note for Gal 5:2).  

     Abraham is the father of all men of true Faith, the uncircumcised and the circumcised; but only if they also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham. Again the Calvinist idea that no work is necessary to attain salvation is shown to be faulty. Every man, Jew or Gentile, must be found faithfully doing the will of God or he will not receive the promises. That is abundantly clear from these verses.

13 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. 14 For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect:

      Another crucial fact argues against the Christian Jews’ faith in the Law: God’s promises were given to Abraham before the Law existed, when he was 99 years old and still uncircumcised (Gen 17). This opens up the distinct possibility that the promises were not fulfilled to Abraham’s seed physically by the Law of Moses, but spiritually through Christ (Gal 3:16, 29). For clearly, the promises did not result from Abraham fulfilling the righteousness of the Law, but through this righteousness of faith that Abraham has found (see previous verses). These two modes of righteousness clash throughout the book of Romans (Rom 2:6; 4:11; 8:4; 9:31; 10:5), and are strongly contrasted in Paul’s hope to be found in Him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the Law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith (Php 3:9).

     With the New Covenant, God instituted the righteousness of Faith which has its roots in events that pre-date the Law. In one sense then, this mode of righteousness bypasses the era of the Law, and the Abrahamic promises can thus be extended to all of his seed in the spiritual sense. This will be the subject of chapter 9 and is a major theme of the book of Galatians. And it parallels the case of Christ, who came a priest after the order of Melchisedek (pre-Law), thus bypassing the Aaronic line (Heb 7). However, this does not mean the Law was an unfortunate experiment in human history, for in that era before the Atonement of Christ and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, finding God by following the Mosaic Covenant was an easier task than than finding Him through the righteousness of faith (see note for v3). 

     The promises were either fulfilled in the coming of the Judaic Covenant or they came to fruition in the New Covenant. Which is it? Well, the Scriptures show that the promises were given to Abraham based upon the righteousness of faith in God, not the righteousness that is found by keeping the Law (study also Gal 3:17-19). Moreover, if the promises were fulfilled in the now extinct Law of Moses, then they also have come to be made of none effect. Clearly that is not the case.

     In what sense did Abraham become the heir of the world (kosmos)? Well, Jesus said that the meek in His Kingdom will inherit the earth (ge), but the best inheritance is an eternal home in the world (aion) to come  Luke 18:30; Eph 3:21). The natural Jews were given the land of Israel, but the spiritual Jews were given the whole world. In parallel with that, Abraham was given the land of Canaan, but the real country which he sought after was heavenly (Heb 11:16).

15 Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression. 16 Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,

      Three categories, or estates, of being an heir of the promises are presented in these verses: Man under the Law, Man ignorant of the Law, Man in the righteousness of faith. The first ends in wrath, for we have seen that while the Law brings the knowledge of sin to Man (Rom 3:20; 7:7-9) it cannot cleanse his corrupted soul (Gal 3:21; Heb 10:4). The second ends short of receiving the promises too, for while sin is not imputed where there is no law (Rom 5:13), ignorance cannot attain salvation (Eph 4:18); even the Gentiles were given a law of nature to follow (Rom 2:14). The third condition is blessed, which is the righteousness of faith that makes the promises sure to Abraham and all his seed according to faith.

     That it might be by grace. Meaning that the promises are gifted and not earned, which is a restatement of Romans 4:4. Abraham received the promises of faith apart from the Law; clearly then, they are awarded by grace, and not by doing the works of the Law. The Law did give man an opportunity to earn his salvation, but no man could attain it. That fact was demonstrated in chapter 3. Under the New Covenant, salvation is gifted by God to those who follow the righteousness that derives from faith. These are the only ones who will receive the Abrahamic promises (Gal 3:14). Even the salvation of the faithful Old Covenant saints was contingent upon the ratification of this mode of righteousness.

     The Law worketh wrath, but that should not be taken to mean that the Law was bad or wrong (see Rom 3:31; 7:7).

17 (As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were. 18 Who against hope believed in hope, that he might become the father of many nations; according to that which was spoken, So shall thy seed be.

      God’s blessings to Abraham are exceedingly great (see Gen 13:14-16; 17:3-9). Abraham became a father of many nations, before Him whom he believed. The final phrase draws attention to something Abraham did, for God did not arbitrarily choose to bless him! No, Abraham’s life was one of fervent devotion and full obedience to God. At His call, Abraham left his family and country, his destination unknown and his means of living uncertain (Heb 11:8). Abraham’s remarkable faith gained him God’s favor, for he wholly followed Him without question and at all times, no matter the personal cost. And the last, great evaluation was to ask him to go and sacrifice the very son that God had promised him. What a test that must have been! Surely Abraham would have preferred to die himself rather than kill his beloved son – but that was not what God had asked. It was after that then that God, by solemn oath, confirmed the promises to Abraham (Gen 22:16-18; Heb 6:13-14). For now I know that thou fearest [Me], seeing thou has not withheld thy son, thine only son from Me (Gen 22:12)

     At His spoken word, God is able to accomplish what He wills. Abraham’s faith was so great that he apparently believed that God would raise Isaac from the dead (Heb 11:19)! God’s spoken Word called the World into existence from nothing (Heb 11:3); it raised up children of Abraham from Gentile stones. How true it is that, in the events which resulted in the New Covenant, God quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things that be not as though they were. An example of that is God speaking in past tense when he called Abraham “a father of many nations,” many long centuries before that became a reality.

     Against hope believed in hope. Against all human expectation, Abraham believed anyway. Sarah had passed the age of child-bearing and her womb was dead, but God said that she would bear him a son. Against hope, Abraham believed God and followed Him fully. Sarah, meanwhile, doubted (Gen 18:11-12). In the Greek, the word hope carries the sense of expecting, trusting, assurance. It is one of the top three Christian qualities (1Cor 13:13). In Heb 10:23 the same word is translated “faith”).

19 And being not weak in faith, he considered not his own body now dead, when he was about an hundred years old, neither yet the deadness of Sarah’s womb: 20 He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God; 21 And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform. 22 And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.

     After God’s promise to Abraham that his seed would be as the dust of the earth for number (Gen 13:15-16) much time passed and nothing happened. Abraham waited patiently, continuing to trust God. Year after year his faith did not weaken; he was fully persuaded that God would perform what he had promised. As Abraham neared his 100th year, God came and re-affirmed His promise once again. By then Sarah had passed the age of child-bearing, for it had ceased to be with Sarah after the manner of women (Gen 18:11). And then God fulfilled His promise. Isaac was born to Sarah even though it wasn’t physically possible for her to bear a child! And therefore was Abraham’s faith became the means of his righteousness (v22).

     This does not accord with Calvinistic theology, which says that justification is God imputing Christ’s righteousness to the believer (i.e. Jesus’ obedience and good works are credited to the elect). That idea is found nowhere in the Word of God and must be dismissed as spurious and anti-Biblical. Notice here that Abraham’s own faith was credited to him as righteousness (Gen 15:6; Rom 4:3). We believe that justification is the perfect cleansing of a sinner’s soul by God based upon his personal faith in Christ. That is the true gift of righteousness (Rom 5:17); not covering up man’s sins by the cloak of Jesus’ righteousness, but the actual sanctification (making holy) of those who demonstrate by their faith that they are worthy to receive this grace.

     Let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as He is righteous (1John 3:7). With the heart man believeth unto righteousness (Rom 10:10). Awake to righteousness and sin not (1Cor 15:34). That the righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit (Rom 8:4). The man who seeks divine justification must yield himself a servant unto righteousness and be found so doing when the Master returns. This topic is developed at length in chapter six. Here in chapter four, Paul shows that no man can be perfectly righteous, so no man can earn salvation by his works. Abraham’s righteousness fell short, but God reckoned him to be righteous on account of his faith. To be justified is to be made righteous, for God is able to call into being those things that are not (Rom 4:17). Amazing grace, indeed.

23 Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him; 24 But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead; 25 Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.

     The pattern of Abraham being counted righteous on account of his faith is true in the New Covenant era, but with an important distinction: we believe on Him that raised up Jesus. Today, we have the added blessedness of knowing that Christ our Savior accomplished the all-important work of atonement which enabled mercy to triumph over justice (James 2:13). By Christ’s sinless death He gained the just and righteous authority to overpower Satan and buy back all those souls that He chooses to save (Col 2:13-15). God wrought man’s salvation in full justice (Rom 3:26), for His mercy was sponsored by the sacrifice of His Son. That is the amazing mechanism of God’s righteousness.

     Jesus Christ, God’s only Son, was delivered for our offences, and raised again for our justification. The two-fold work in the Atonement of Christ for Mankind is directly implied. He was first delivered (paradidomi – surrendered, delivered over to another) as the perfect Sacrifice to redeem us from the clutches of Satan, but He was raised to life with the power to cleanse us from all sin (1John 1:9; 3:5). This double action is repeated in the next chapter: we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son and saved by His life (Rom 5:10). Together, these two inseparable works result in the possibility of full reconciliation between God and Man (Rom 5:10). We say “possibility” because many will choose not to be justified and will count the blood of the covenant to be an unclean thing (Heb 10:29). There is no hope of eternal life for these, but fearful judgment and fiery indignation (Heb 10:27).

     Justification is by faith (man’s part) and by His blood (God’s part). See Romans 5:1,9. The goal of justification is to cleanse the soul of sin and make it fit for deepest communion with God. Salvation has to do with being redeemed and saved from the Devil. The beautiful truth is that God has performed His promises and the Way of Salvation has been made freely available to every man, woman and child. Christ died for our sins and was raised again for our justification. The Covenant has been duly formed and all has been made ready. It remains for Man to take advantage of this wonderful opportunity and to press into it (Luke 13:24), seeking by all means to attain unto the resurrection of the dead (Php 3:11).

commentary Romans 3

by

1 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? 2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.

     After showing that Jews are not privileged automatically by blood and that circumcision profits nothing if one does not keep the Law (Rom 2:25), the Apostle acknowledges certain advantages that Jews do enjoy. First and most importantly, the divine Word of God was communicated to their race and nation; through the centuries of time the Holy Spirit moved righteous prophets and leaders to record God’s words unto Mankind (2Pet 1:21). Second, God specially blessed the Israelites with “the promises, the covenants, the Law and the adoption” (Rom 9:4). The Jews had a Godly heritage filled with mighty heroes of faith and power. They also had a marvelous history of experiencing God’s mercies and deliverances – these were facts to admire, to convince the mind of God’s power and to encourage the soul to seek Him. Unfortunately, they became points of pride and false confidence among the Jews of Paul’s day.

     Present-day Anabaptists would be wise to learn from the example of the Jews! We too have a goodly heritage filled with examples of unshakeable faith; men and women of God who loved not their lives unto death, but went to the stake, to the torture chamber and to the river. Today’s Anabaptists, however, are too often found willing to compromise with the world and the same false churches that once killed their forefathers.

3 For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? 4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.

     Many Israelites proved to be faithless, even after God had miraculously provided for them and worked wonders of deliverance. They murmured against God, disobeyed His statutes and tempted Him. For their faithlessness (or unbelief), God swore that they would not enter into His rest. An extended passage in Hebrews 3:12-4:11 describes this sad example. Did God withdraw His faithfulness from all Israel because of the unfaithfulness of some? No! He remains faithful to those who follow His Covenant, and these will receive the promises.

     The faith of God. God is the object of faith and does not possess faith in the human sense. However, He is faithful, reliable and true (Rev 19:11), which is the apparent intention of this phrase. He is the faithful God (Deut 7:9). In the Greek, the root word for faith and unbelief is the same (pistis, apistia) and that is true throughout the Scriptures. However, “unfaith” is not a word, so the Greek antonyms are not seen in the English translation.

     Did not believe (apisteo) is the verb form of the same Greek root word that is usually translated faith, and its antonym is pisteuo. For that reason some versions (NIV) translate this phrase, did not have faith. The Biblical terms faith and believe have the same Greek words, but one is a noun and the other a verb. That doesn’t mean “having faith” and “believing” are equivalent terms, but without doubt they are related. Faith has a not by sight component (2Cor 5:7; Heb 11:1). To believe, on the other hand, usually results from seeing with the eyes (John 2:23; 4:48; 20:29). Additionally, faith must be corroborated by actions that demonstrate one’s stated belief, and it also must be maintained unto term. The Israelites in the wilderness failed at this point.

     Some theologians and scholars claim that God puts faith into the individual and then he can be saved. By this they attempt to make sure that no work can be attributed to man which might mean salvation was earned instead of gifted by grace. Their idea is seriously flawed and entirely discordant with the character of God, who would have all men to be saved (2Pet 3:9). If salvation were entirely a matter of God putting faith in a man, why does He not put faith in all men? The fact is, God does not put saving faith in certain men, but has put the necessary components of Faith in all men. It is up to every man to choose to have faith in Christ or to reject Him. The Faith that saves comes by hearing the Gospel (Gal 3:2; Rom 10:17). Certainly God is the source and origin of all Faith (Gal 5:22), but make no mistake, saving Faith must be developed voluntarily in the human mind and heart. Believe and be saved (Luke 8:12) is man’s part. I say that the faith these theologians propose is a fake of deceit; fake because God secretly did it Himself, and deceit because it really isn’t faith at all (see note for Heb 11:1).   

     The quote is from David’s prayer of repentance as recorded in the Septuagint, Against thee only have I sinned, and done evil before thee: that thou mightest be justified in Thy sayings, and mightest overcome when Thou art judged (Ps 51:4, LXX). David recognized that his actions had transgressed the sayings of God given to Moses in the Law. His confession showed that God was just and righteous, yea, that God would always prevail over all foes in matters of truth and righteousness. “Your sayings show You to be holy and righteous, therefore You will prevail over every accusation.”

5 But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? (I speak as a man) 6 God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world? 7 For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner? 8 And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just. 9 What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin; 10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

     The main thrust of this chapter is to show that every man (except for Christ) has fallen into sin and failed to fully follow after God. Instead, all have taken their own way in the world and all are guilty of sin. A facetious person however, might attempt to say God is unjust for judging Man, seeing that everyone is simply acting as all men have always acted. The present verses address that false charge. My paraphrase of verses 3-10:

What about those Jews in the wilderness who proved to be faithless? Does their unfaithfulness indicate that God’s faithful guidance was in vain? Absolutely not! God is always right and true, independent of Man’s faith. For it is written: “Your Word shows You to be righteous and just, so that when You are accused You always come forth victorious.”

What shall we conclude upon seeing God’s righteousness in the face of Man’s constant unrighteousness – is God unjust for punishing Mankind? That cannot be, for “God will judge the world in perfect righteousness.”

Some even say (it is slanderously claimed that I teach this), “Since God is shown to be so perfectly righteous by my unrighteousness, then surely He will not judge me for being a sinner! So why not do evil, seeing that the goodness of God is made more evident by my wicked acts?” The condemnation of these teachers is coming, and it will be deservedly just.

Should we then conclude that Gentiles are better advantaged than Jews? No, for we have proven both to be equally guilty of sin. As it is written, “There is none that is righteous, no, not even one.”

     The Apostle frustrates the theology of many Protestants by verbalizing their faulty argument: “A man is unrighteous because he is Man; he is totally depraved and has no choice but to sin. How then can God judge him for sinning? He cannot! Besides, God’s glory is enhanced by man’s wickedness, for it shows Him to be so much better than they. Man’s works are filthy rags and have nothing to do with salvation, so let us do evil, that good may come.” The gravity of this false teaching cannot be over-emphasized. Paul says their damnation is just. Any theology which concludes that God does not look with favor upon man’s good works is not rightly dividing the Word of Truth. The Apostle speaks more about this error in Romans 9:18-21.

     God does not make men sinners, nor does He call them righteous when they are not. He has carefully explained how He judges the righteous and the wicked (see especially the detailed account in Ezekiel 33:11-20). The righteous man will die if he begins to forsake his righteous ways and commit iniquity, and the wicked man will live if he forsakes his wicked ways and lives righteously. That is the way of Faith! Hearing, believing, accepting, doing and persevering.

     Obviously, no man can live a sinless life, so indeed there is not one wholly righteous person. Everyone must humbly request the services of the Advocate, whose forgiveness is equally effective for the wicked who decides to turn from his evil ways as for the righteous man who returns after falling (1John 2:1). Here is the great power and advantage of the New Covenant, for under the Old there was not sufficient basis for God to forgive man’s sins. The sacrifices served as an interim measure which looked forward to the moment that the sufficient Sacrifice was made.

11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. 12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one. 13 Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips: 14 Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: 15 Their feet are swift to shed blood: 16 Destruction and misery are in their ways: 17 And the way of peace have they not known: 18 There is no fear of God before their eyes.

     This is a recitation of the Septuagint version of Psalms 14:1-3, “The fool has said in his heart, There is no God. They have corrupted themselves, and become abominable in their devices; there is none that does goodness, there is not even so much as one. The Lord looked down from heaven upon the sons of men, to see if there were any that understood, or sought after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become good for nothing, there is none that does good, no not one. Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips: whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness; their feet are swift to shed blood: destruction and misery are in their ways; and the way of peace they have not known: there is no fear of God before their eyes.”

     The Masoretic text is missing the last sentence, which is nevertheless found elsewhere in virtually verbatim form (see Ps 53:1-3; 5:9; 140:3; 10:7; 36:1 and Is 59:7-8). All of these passages show the universality of sin in Mankind and especially condemn the Jews (to whom they were written). They bolster Paul’s next point, that man cannot be saved by following the Mosaic Law. If even the prophets and upright under the Law admit that none are truly righteous and that all have left the way of truth to follow wickedness, what can we conclude but that the Law could not save them?

     On the other hand, God said Noah was righteous before Me (Gen 7:1), and counted Abraham to be righteousness (Gen 15:6). Furthermore, He indicated that Noah, Daniel and Job were capable of delivering their souls by their righteousness (Eze 14:14). The Psalms are filled with references to “the righteous man” (ie Ps 1:6; 14:5; 68:3; 94:21, etc). These men were true seekers of God without a doubt. So we must be careful to read these verses in their present context and not erroneously extrapolate them to unintended meanings.  

     Nevertheless, it stands unequivocally evident that all men have corrupted their way upon the earth (Gen 6:12), and that none is perfectly righteous, no, not even one. All have sinned, even Noah, Daniel and Job. For there is not a just man upon the earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not (Ec 7:20). That is the crucial point, for God cannot abide in the presence of sin. He is perfectly holy, righteous and just. In order for God and mankind to be reconciled in full fellowship, this discrepancy must be rectified. In like manner we understand, There is none that doeth good (v12) to mean that there is not one person that has perfectly done good, outside of Jesus Christ.

19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

     The Law of Moses was the framework for God’s Covenant with man under the Old Testament and its significance in that era cannot be over-stated. The people were required to keep not just the moral rules of the Ten Commandments but also the multitudinous details contained in many rites, assemblies and feasts. The Law ruled, and by it all the world (became) guilty before God. This apparently means “all the Jewish world,” for “the Law speaks to them who are under the Law.” The nations of the world are excluded. And that is consistent with the Apostle’s conclusion earlier in this epistle, where he finds all the world guilty before God under two frames: the Jew for not keeping the Law and the Gentiles for not keeping the law of their conscience (Rom 2:12). Again, there were people in both groups that God did call “righteous,” but not one of them was perfectly righteous.  

     During the times of this ignorance, God did not require of other nations the same level of righteousness, but now that true knowledge has been communicated and committed to all, He requires all men every where to repent (Acts 17:30). The next chapters will compare the two Covenants (the Law of Moses and the Law of Faith) to show that in reality, even the Old Covenant law was, at its core, a law of faith. It will also become evident that the Law of Faith supersedes and fulfills the Old Law.

20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

     The Law did not provide a practical remedy for Sin (Rom 8:3-4), although it did propose one. If a man were to perfectly keep every detail of the Law, he be wholly righteous. Yet, that has been shown to be impossible, for no man was able to keep the Law. Even if he were to keep the whole Law but offend in one point, he is guilty of all (James 2:10). So, truly the Apostle says of the Law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God (v19). By the Law the whole world has come to the knowledge that no man can be justified by doing the deeds of the Law.

     The Old Covenant did provide an interim solution to the sin problem in the form of cleansing rituals and sacrifices. Those acts of penitence provided a covering for those sins, but it is not possible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sin (Heb 10:4). The souls of the Old Testament saints would have to wait until the acceptable kind of blood was shed and then their sins could be truly taken away (Heb 11:40). Appropriately, the Hebrew word kaphar means “to atone, to cover.” The ark of Noah was covered (kaphar) with pitch so that it would not sink on its watery journey to the new world.

     Performing the deeds of the Law cannot justify a man because doing good works will never undo bad deeds already committed. And every man is guilty of bad deeds, especially the Jews (see v10-18). Paul said to the Antiochian Jews, Ye could not be justified by the Law of Moses…but by (Christ) all that believe are justified from all things (Acts 13:39). To be justified and to be saved are essentially synonymous actions of God. Justification (dikaiosis) seems to emphasize the very act of cleansing a man’s soul of sinfulness, for the word means, “to be made righteous” (see Rom 2:13). Salvation (soteria) emphasizes the condition of being accepted in the beloved, grafted into the vine of Christ, for the word means “to be healed, preserved, made whole.”

21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; 22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: 23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; 24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:

      The core concept of these verses is: “The righteousness of God coupled with the Law could not cleanse (justify) any man of his sins, but now the righteousness of God without the Law has come; namely, Jesus Christ who the Law and Prophets foretold. And by faith in Him any man can be cleansed completely (justified freely) by His grace on account of the ransom that Christ has paid.”

     Two key aspects of the Atonement are here portrayed: 1) The taking away of sin from a man’s soul and, 2) the deliverance of a man’s soul from the power of Satan. These dual concepts correspond to two actions Christ performed at His death and resurrection (see Rom 4:25). They are essential for Man to be reconciled to God. See my treatise on the Atonement for this subject.   

     The New Covenant righteousness, which came without the Law, was nevertheless witnessed by the Law and the Prophets (v21). These types, shadows and prophecies were hidden from Jewish understanding until after Christ’s resurrection. But with the transforming of their minds came the knowledge of new truths, and their hearts burned within them as the Scriptures were opened unto spectacular confirmation (Luke 24:27, 32). The New Testament is filled with analogies, symbols and spiritual language from the Law and the Prophets. However, our modern, western minds often miss their beauty and meaning. Careful, deep study will find beautiful treasures in the Word (Mat 13:52).

     For there is no difference. Jew or Gentile, all have sinned and fallen short. The Scripture hath concluded all under sin (Gal 3:22). Thus, no man can save himself. His sins have disqualified him. He can do nothing to re-instate himself into righteousness. From his perspective, his condition is hopeless.

     Justified freely by His grace. These are wonderful words to the ears of every man. Man is not required to earn his cleansing from sin. Praise God, for no man would then be saved (see previous verses). Only by ignoring the rest of Scripture might a person infer from this verse that man does nothing at all, and that God arbitrarily decides to make one man holy but chooses to leave another man unholy. Through faith in His blood a man is chosen for salvation (v25). Faith is a work that man must accomplish or he will not receive God’s grace, he will not be justified, he will not be redeemed (1Thes 1:3; John 6:29; Mat 14:31). This is the law of Faith (v27) that the Apostle Paul holds forth to his readers in this chapter. A law requires acts of obedience, a faith requires acts of evidence. A covenant is an two-party agreement. Both sides agree to its terms and both sides must work to keep the terms. God is always faithful and will always keep His side.

     Grace is often falsely construed to be a quality in God that allows Him to disregard a man’s sinfulness. “Saved by grace.” Actually, grace is God’s power in the life of a person who has shown himself to be worthy. Not that he has earned God’s grace, but that he has shown his heart to be after God (2Chr 16:9). It is absurdity to think that God would create a World in which Man can act as he wishes and “be saved by grace.” That is essentially the theology of many Protestants. The Scriptures show that God chose to save Noah because he deserved it (Gen 6:8) and that is true for every person in any age. See Rom 11:6.

     Some commentators have thought Paul and James disagreed on whether it is faith that justifies a man, or his works. That is not true. The works that Paul say cannot justify man are the works of the Law (Rom 3:28; 9:32), while the works that James says do justify a man are the good works that evidence his confession of belief on Christ (James 2:24). See my note for Romans 4:3.

25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; 26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

      The wide variation among Bible versions demonstrates the difficulty of translating these two verses from the original language. The largest point of discrepancy is the meaning of the Greek word hilasterion, which the KJV translates “propitiation,” while the NIV renders it, “sacrifice of atonement.” Those translations stray far from the actual usage of that word elsewhere in the Greek Scriptures. In Hebrews 9:5 it is translated mercy seat in reference to the lid upon the Ark of the Covenant and that is its common meaning in the Septuagint (see Ex 25:17-22).

     According to Webster’s old English dictionary, a propitiation is “the act of appeasing wrath…atoning sacrifice offered to God to assuage His wrath and render Him propitious to sinners.” While that idea was undoubtedly part of the Judaic sacrificial offerings (see note on Rom 5:11), the fact is that nowhere in the Greek Bible, Old or New Testament, does hilasterion even approximate that usage or definition. According to Strong’s, the word is formed from hilaskomai and thusiasterion. The first word means “to be favorably disposed or merciful,” and the second word signifies an “altar.” The Septuagint translators consistently used hilasterion to render the Hebrew word for mercy seat (kapporeth), which is related to kaphar (to atone or cover). So Paul’s Jewish audience would certainly have heard, “mercy seat,” and not, “propitiation.”

     Obviously, Jesus is not the literal mercy seat in the Jewish temple, so the translators sought to give the spiritual meaning of the term. While that technique is common in the other Bible translations, it is very out of character for the KJV, which follows a word-for-word rendering that requires the reader to study out deeper meanings. For that reason alone the KJV will always hold the topmost position in Bible translations. Consider for example, the words of Psalm 18:2, “God is the horn of my salvation.” What does it mean? Fortunately for us, the KJV consistently translates that word throughout the Old Testament, so by comparative reading we quickly understand that the Psalmist means, “power” (see Ps 148:14; Jer 48:25). In fact, I would guess that any English speaking person familiar with the Bible knew immediately the figurative meaning of “horn.” Yet, when I learned Spanish, I was shocked and disappointed that Spanish Bibles do not read “horn” in those passages, but “power.” Without going to the original Hebrew, a Spanish person will never know of this symbolism. It was a calculated action by later updaters, for the original Casiodoro Bible does read, “horn.” The KJV is a beautiful, largely literal translation of the original Scriptures. Our appreciation for it is deepened by minor anomalies such as this one in Rom 3:25.

     In the original languages, the term mercy seat is related to mercy, forgiveness and grace. Jesus Christ is a hilasterion in that He is the means whereby we might obtain mercy. Some scholars stress the point that Jesus’ death averted the wrath of God upon sinners and in that sense the Atonement appeased God. I don’t disagree. Yes, God’s wrath will fall upon all those wicked men who are not saved by the blood of His Son (Rev 6:17; Rom 5:9; 1Thes 1:10), but that is not the central truth or meaning of hilasterion.

     The Ark of the Covenant was made of three parts, the Ark (or chest), the Mercy Seat (lid) and the Cherubim (statue of angels) above. The final two articles, the Mercy Seat and the Cherubim, were made of one beaten piece of gold. Only the High Priest was allowed to view the Ark of the Covenant, and just once every year, upon the observance of the most sacred, solemn rite in the Judaic worship system, which is known as the Day of Atonement. The ceremony required the High Priest to take the blood of a bullock and a goat behind the vail into the Holy of Holies and sprinkle it seven times upon the mercy seat. I remember my Grandpa teaching on this beautiful Old Testament shadow of the cross, “The Passover typifies the blood of Christ shed,” he would say, “But the Atonement typifies the blood of Christ accepted at the heavenly throne of God.” The death of Christ opened the heavenly doors of mercy and grace unto Mankind.      

My thought translation of these verses:

“Whom God has set forth to be a Mercyseat (means of obtaining mercy) by faith in His blood, and thereby show His righteousness by the forgiveness of sins previously committed, through the longsuffering of God. This action declares even now His righteousness in that He is just and the Justifier of the one that has faith in Jesus.”

God, not acting in accordance to the just merits of man’s deeds but according to His longsuffering and mercy, has ordained a Mercyseat whereby a man can be forgiven of the sins he has committed. That is the meaning of this verse, in my view, for it conforms perfectly with the context of this passage and especially the next verse.

     The remission of sins that are past. Not the sins of the present and future as the Calvinists teach, but past sins – sins that are past. It is utterly anti-Biblical to think that upon a person’s initial salvation, God would sign a waiver affirming that this man has already achieved eternal life and that no sinful act will ever separate Him from God. Again, the structural basis of a Covenant is a pact between two parties (a man and God) agreeing to certain terms that both will respect and keep. See Mat 21:43.

     Which believeth in Jesus. The Greek is in noun form and so would probably be better translated, “which has faith in Jesus.”

27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith. 28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

      We saw in the note on the previous verse that God, acting in longsuffering and mercy, has provided a Mercyseat whereby man can be forgiven of his sins. Where is boasting then? It is excluded. Why? Because justification has been shown to be an act of God’s mercy entirely apart from doing the deeds of the Law. No man can boast that he has earned his salvation or has saved himself (Eph 2:9). Some of Paul’s audience were nevertheless trying to gain salvation by following the Old Covenant (Rom 2:17; 3:19-20; 9:31-32). Therefore, his next case will be to show that even under the Old Covenant a man was actually not justified by his works alone, but that faith was also required. The life of Abraham is a prime example.

     Justification is simply the full forgiveness of a man’s sins such that he can enter again into right communion with his Maker. It means that a man has been cleansed, purified and made holy before God. In purest sense, justification is entirely God’s work and he has fore-ordained and communicated to us the criteria for choosing who will be justified – him which believeth in Jesus (v26). Or, in the words of the present verse, those who follow the Law of Faith, which is a completely new Way, entirely separate from following the deeds of the Law. This is the fully-mature Faith that saves, and not just a general profession of belief in Christ. It is a Law of Faith, the New Covenant, a code of principles and stipulations, the faith which was once delivered unto the saints (Jude 1:3; Rom 1:5). See my notes for Mat 14:31.      In his German translation of the Bible, the heretic Martin Luther famously added a word to this verse that is not found in the Greek: A man is justified by faith alone without the deeds of the Law. When confronted by his Catholic enemies of this interpolation his argument included the following:

“If your papists wish to make a great fuss about the word “alone”, say this to him: ‘Dr. Martin Luther will have it so and he says that a papist and an ass are the same thing.’ I will it, I command it; my will is reason enough. I can exegete the psalms and prophets, and they cannot. I can translate, and they cannot. I can read Holy Scriptures, and they cannot. I can pray, they cannot…Please do not give these asses any other answer to their useless braying about that word “sola” than simply, ‘Luther will have it so, and he says that he is a doctor above all the papal doctors.’ I will, from now on, hold them in contempt, and have already held them in contempt, as long as they are the kind of people that they are – asses, I should say. And there are brazen idiots among them who have never learned their own art of sophistry – like Dr. Schmidt and Snot-Nose, and such like them” (Martin Luther, “Open letter on Translating”).

     Luther rejected all good works on the part of a Christian. He wrote, “There is no scandal greater, more dangerous, more venomous, than a good outward life, manifested by good works and a pious mode of life. That is the grand portal, the highway, that leads to damnation.” Dig into Luther’s writings (which are not readily available in English) and you will be shocked and disgusted at his arrogant attitude, filthy mouth, blasphemous statements, heretical teaching and wicked lifestyle. He is a disgrace to Christianity.

29 Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also: 30 Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith. 31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

     There is one God who justifies all, Jew and Gentile, by this same Law of Faith. Paul then asks, “Has the Old Testament Law been shown to be of no good use?” Not at all. The Law was good and right for its time, and even now continues to be highly useful in pointing both Jew and Gentile to the one and only God of creation. But now, Christ’s Law of Faith has superseded the Law of Moses (Heb 8:13). Christ fulfilled the Law; the types and shadows of the Law are evidences of that. Far from being made void then, the Law is established. 

commentary Romans 2

by

1 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things. 2 But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things.

     He who condemns another for a sin that he also is committing only judges himself. That fact is asserted forcefully in this chapter (see Rom 2:21-23), and the cogent result is to distinctly advise all men of the weight of their sins (Rom 3:23). Jews and Greeks are equally inexcusable, equally guilty before the Judge: the Jews failed to follow the Law that they were given by God, and the Gentiles failed to follow the law of their conscience, also given to them by God.

     This is true in the legal sense also. No man is able to pronounce another to be “guilty of sin” because both are sinners. The judge must recuse, for his judgment is inadmissible on the grounds of similar trespass and guilt. God’s judgment, on the other hand, is perfect, righteous and according to truth, for He alone is absolutely good and sinless. This concept is important to retain fresh in the mind for those involved in church administration and also in personal relationships. Judging another to be guilty of sin is serious business (Rom 14:4). The correct approach is to eschew offering my judgment in favor of rightly and soberly sharing God’s judgment (see note Mat 7:1). For example, do not condemn the one living in adultery by offering your own views, but specify rather what God has said in His Word (Heb 13:4, for one example).

     The Christian’s commission is to preach and do the Law of Christ, not to sit as judge of others (James 4:11). Certainly the church is tasked with making determinations of sin, for we have been given the book of His law and charged to know it and keep it (John 12:48). So in that sense we do judge (1Cor 5:3), but always according to righteous judgment (John 7:24). However, the ground and manner of human judgment is limited (as we have tried to explain above). Judge nothing before the time, for Christ will bring to light the hidden things of darkness and every intention of men’s hearts (1Cor 4:5). That judgment is far more serious than any censure of church or man. Let us then be careful to warn the wayward of that awful and inescapable tribunal.

3 And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God? 4 Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?

     Hypocrisy is perhaps the most serious condition of sin to be found in any person or church. People who teach the importance of living a righteous life and require it of others must themselves live in such manner, or the judgment of God will fall upon them with great weight (Mat 21:44). Virtually the entire 23rd chapter of Matthew is dedicated to Jesus’ condemnation of the self-righteous, hypocritical Pharisees.

     Hypocrisy is actually a form of rebellion. These people possess full knowledge of the truth yet do not regard it. Instead, they reveal just how little they value the mercy and goodness of God, which has been revealed in shining clarity by the blood of Christ shed for the forgiveness of their sins. The condition of willfully living in sin is soberly expressed in Hebrews 10:26, which describes the sore punishment of the man who treads underfoot the law of Christ and disgraces His holy covenant (Heb 10:29-31). Thinkest… that thou shalt escape the judgment of God? Answer: I tell you NAY: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish (Luke 13:3).

5 But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God; 6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds:

     Every hypocrite, and every rebellious man, and also every deceived person are in high danger of hell-fire. All three are in the same category. They know the Truth but are not doing it. Their continuing willful acts of sin simply increase their debt of sin unto greater and greater punishment, just as the good acts of the righteous are laying up for them treasures in heaven (Mat 6:20). The next few verses will more fully develop this dichotomy.

     Two words in this verse should be especially alarming for any wavering Christian: “thy hardened and unrepentant heart.” Breaking free of those two chains is a very difficult battle! Once indulged and tolerated for a time, the pleasures of sin grip the heart ever more tightly, and if it is not soon broken, by and by it becomes impossible to renew them again unto repentance (Heb 6:6). The Devil works relentlessly and cleverly to choke out the Word once sown by tempting the Christian with all manner of lusts, cares and deceit (Mark 4:19). So take heed for your soul, the Apostle warns in Heb 3:13, lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin. The heat of the sun slowly turns soft mud into hard bricks, so also will the constant exposure of a tender soul to acts of wickedness eventually make it hard as stone. The Pharisees are a case in point. Their continued hypocrisy hardened their hearts until they became abject reprobates to all truth and Christ. The Christian must take this warning seriously and personally, for it is very hard to view oneself without bias in the severe light of reality and truth (see 1Cor 11:28).  

     At the last day, the righteous wrath of God will be revealed in judgment against all men who have disregarded His call to repentance and salvation. He will appear in wondrous glory to render just recompense to every man according to his deeds. (Mat 25:46). This sober warning has been virtually negated by many self-appointed, so-called theologians, who have by many devious tricks explained away those verses which warn of Hell and Eternal Judgment. If the Word of God was intended to be understandable, then they are fatally wrong and have deceived many into selling their souls eternally unto Satan. I recall the story of a man who dreamed he had died and gone to Hell, where he found all to be so terrible true: fire, torment, wailing and regret. Inert bodies lay everywhere, face down in the never-dying embers, and he ran from one to the next, looking intently into every face. Finally someone asked him what he was doing, and he said, “I’m looking for that preacher who told me there was no such place as this. He’s here too, I know.”

7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life: 8 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,

     Two classes of people are here described. Those who seek to inherit eternal life by following the path of Faith, and those who choose to follow the path of anti-Faith. Do the deeds we have done in the flesh matter to God? Calvinists say NO, but these verses emphatically say, YES. 

     The Greek noun ergon (works, deeds) is repeated in verses 6-7, so we translate:  “God will render to every man according to his deeds: To them who by persevering in good deeds seek for glory, honor and immortality He will give eternal life, but to them who are contentious and disobedient to the truth in following unrighteousness He will render indignation and wrath.” These last two words are used many times in the Greek Scriptures to describe the hot vengeance of God against all unrighteousness. Each is found six times in the Revelation in contexts of God’s great wrath falling upon all who do wickedly. To not obey the truth is to experience the vengeance of flaming fire and the punishment of everlasting destruction at the coming of the Lord (2Thes 1:7-10). 

     How terrible are those two words, “good deeds,” to the minds of many well-intentioned but truth-flawed Christians! Their Protestant theologies make them recoil with horror at the thought of a man seeking to do “good works.” They immediately equate “good works” with “earning one’s salvation,” in spite of the clear fact that this verse doesn’t say that, nor is it what Anabaptists believe. No man can earn his salvation by doing good works because his sins have disqualified him; it is utterly impossible for him to earn salvation. Good deeds cannot undo bad deeds. Just as a man who has killed another is forever a murderer, so too every man is forever a sinner. And no sinner will ever inherit eternal life.

The only hope of any man to be saved is to find someone to save him – he must have a Savior. Nevertheless, a man’s good deeds are not odious in the sight of God! Re-read Isaiah 64:6 and the surrounding verses if you have heard that text quoted in support of the afore-mentioned fallacy. The Scriptures say that God created man to do good works (Eph 2:10), and that if any man does not evidence them, he will be cast out in the end (Mat 25:30). Good works are everywhere commanded in all sobriety (2Cor 5:10; 1Pet 2:12; Titus 3:8; James 3:13). It is a constantly-encountered Gospel truth that cannot be countervailed, no matter how oft-repeated are the slurs against it.

9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile; 10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:

     The two choices presented in the previous verses are repeated, but now the Apostle applies them universally to every soul of man, that is, Jews and Gentiles alike. The Jew first – the Apostle repeats his earlier words (Rom 1:16), which recognizes once again the latent, endemic difficulty of Christian Jews in the Apostolic era to accept Gentile believers into the churches of Christ unless they kept the Law of Moses. This epistle, in particular, proves to the Jewish Christians that God no longer requires men to keep that Law, but now commandeth all men every where to repent (Acts 17:30). The blood Jews had been given much and so were under greater responsibility (Luke 12:48); they had been entrusted with the very oracles of God (Rom 3:2). He that ignores God’s gifts will find that they have been taken away (Mat 13:12) and given unto another (Mat 21:43).

     Notice that the criteria of verses 7-8 are intoned again: He that doeth evil; he that worketh good, and again the words are the same, although they are verbs this time (katergazomai). God loves to see His people doing good works. It shows that His creation is performing just as He had planned. Calvinists will quibble and object, but they’re actually arguing with Jesus; I just said it in my own words. Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven (Mat 5:13-18; also 1Pet 2:12; Titus 2:10).

     The book of Romans is supposedly the basic text for Reformed Theology, yet at the very beginning the Apostle Paul refutes one of their topmost planks – that works play no role in our final salvation. Dozens of affirmations in the New Testament Scriptures demand that to be called, FALSE DOCTRINE (for example, Mat 16:27; 1Pet 1:17; 2Thes 1:8; 2Cor 5:10; Heb 5:9; Rev 20:12-13). Of course, the Bible also says that we are saved by grace through faith and that our calling is not according to our works (see Eph 2:8-9; Rom 4:2-6; 2Tim 1:9; Rom 11:6; Titus 3:4-5). These seemingly contradictory passages are very easily reconciled by simply reading them more carefully – the latter ones patently speak of a man’s initial salvation, while the former ones describe the state of salvation. No man will be saved by his works; but the man who is saved will work. See note for previous verse.

11 For there is no respect of persons with God.

     In the New Covenant Age, God does not make difference between the Jew and Greek. This was divinely revealed to Peter by way of special revelation in a thrice-repeated dream accompanied by miraculous signs (Acts 10). It is a concept especially important for some of Paul’s Jewish readers, who thought to avoid judgment by simply being a Jew, one of God’s chosen people (1Pet 1:17; Eph 6:9; Col 3:25). This chapter persuasively demonstrates to the Jewish people that God’s judgments are no longer based upon parentage or any other idea of favoritism. The Truth applies equally to all. Show meritorious character by persevering in well-doing and you will be rewarded with eternal life; show dishonorable character by following unrighteousness and you will reap indignation and wrath.

12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;

     We have just read that every soul of man will be judged according to his deeds done in the body, whether Jew or Greek. The Gentiles, although not having the Law of Moses, had nonetheless sinned by transgressing the law of their conscience and their souls will perish even though they did not have that Law. The Jews, having the Law of Moses, did not obey it and shall likewise perish. Both are guilty before God, but are judged according to separate law sets.

     The word law (nomos) is used in four senses in the New Testament. Usually the intended sense is made obvious by the context, but on some occasions a more careful reading is required. Nomos appears 21 times in this chapter alone and will be frequently found in the coming chapters. Although there are some exceptions, in the book of Romans the word virtually always refers to the Law of Moses, for the purpose of this epistle is to convince the Jews that their Law cannot bring them salvation.

Here are the four meanings of the word law in the Scriptures:

  1. The Law of the Old Testament (John 8:5).
  2. The Law of the New Testament (Gal 6:2).
  3. The Law of God, eternal and never-changing (Rom 8:7).
  4. Law in a variety of general senses, the conscience being the most common (Rom 2:15; Rom 7:23).

     The Law of the Moses was the basic set of rules that God had decided for His Covenant with the people of Israel. When disobedience and high complacency continued without remedy, that covenant came to an end and Christ instituted the New Covenant with updated laws (see note on Mat 5:1).

13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

     This statement exposes the false notion of some (like Luther) that the Apostle James describes a different Gospel than Paul. Compare James 1:22-25 with Romans 2:13. They are virtually identical. The fundamental truth that James taught is that a Christian must act upon his confession or else his faith is defective. It’s not saving faith. Unfortunately, many evangelicals rely only on selective verses in the Pauline epistles (like Rom 10:9), and fail to hear him fully. The present verse is very strong: hearing and believing alone is not sufficient for justification. It is imperative that one act upon his belief and do what has been commanded (1Tim 4:16). This is the Faith that saves, and this is the wise man whose works shall stand in the last storm (Mat 7:24-27).

     Here, for the first of many times, we encounter the word justified (dikaioo) in the book of Romans. Protestant theologians have devised a special meaning for this word in their theology of salvation, but one which does not conform with its varied usages in the Greek Scriptures. Yet Paul didn’t here coin a new word to teach a new truth; he used an old word to expound an old truth. The adjective form (dikaios) is even more widely used, and appears in this verse too. A study of the Septuagint and New Testament indicates that to be justified is to be made righteous or holy. See Gen 38:26 and Mat 11:19 for first occurrences of dikaioo in the Testaments. Calvinists however, have added a subtle element to the definition that significantly changes its meaning. In their view, to be justified is to be declared righteous or holy. For the difference of one word, the meaning is utterly transformed and now they can claim that justification is only a juridical declaration! Would God declare a man to be righteous when in actuality he is not? The Anabaptist belief is that through the sacrificial death of Christ, God has the authority and power to make a man righteous by taking away his sins (John 1:29; Is 53:4). Jesus didn’t just declare the leper to be clean, but truly cleansed him wholly (Mark 1:40-42).

     Justified and sanctified are virtually synonyms (see 1Cor 6:11). Perhaps justification emphasizes the initial, judicial aspect of salvation, whereas sanctification emphasizes the continuing operation of salvation. 1) What justification does God offer for delivering the elect from the bonds of Satan? The death of His Son justifies their redemption (Rom 4:25; 5:9). 2) What is the means of their sanctification? The body of the Son of God (1Cor 1:30; Heb 10:10). Clearly the two terms have the same grounds.

14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: 15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)

     These verses compare the Gentile who lives honorably according to the law of his conscience with the Jew who does not keep the Law of Moses. Since there is no respect of persons with God (v11), He will judge each person with righteous equity, taking into account each one’s level of knowledge and ability. The Gentile who respects the law of his conscience, written into his heart at birth, will be judged according to that law. The Jew will be judged according to his obedience to the Law of Moses, which he has been highly privileged to receive. After His resurrection Jesus announced His victory to the souls in Hades (see notes Mat 27:52-53; Eph 4:8-10) and some believe at that time He preached to the souls of the dead who never had knowledge of the Law (see notes 1Pet 3:19-20; 4:6).

     The mind of every person, no matter where he lives or when he was born, is pre-printed with a simple knowledge of eternity, and right and wrong (Ecc 3:11). It is the law written in their hearts (see 2Cor 3:2-3; Heb 8:10-11). As a child matures, the conscience within his mind will be influenced and re-shaped (usually negatively) by exterior experiences and environments (Tit 1:15). However, the greatest but simplest of all rules, “Love God, love thy neighbor,” is an intrinsic, universal rule set that comes preinstalled in the human mind. It’s like the BIOS, or basic instruction set, that a programmer installs in the deepest memory bank of a computer. Even the atheist was born with this law, or conscience, in his mind.

     Except for, Remember the sabbath day to keep it holy, the Ten Commandments encapsulate this universal law that a Gentile might do by nature (phusis). The Apostle’s conclusion at the end of this chapter essentially re-states the fact: Uncircumcision (the Gentiles) which is by nature (phusis), if it fulfill the Law, judges the circumcision (the Jews) that transgress the Law (Rom 2:27).

     Their thoughts. The word is logismos – the reasonings of their mind. The mind is constantly evaluating conditions and interpreting words and deeds. It is judging everything, accusing or else excusing according to the law of their conscience which, for the Gentile, is the only law-set to guide those reasonings. For the Christian, the conscience is an important warning-device that must be re-calibrated to the Word of God (see note for 1Cor 8:10). To have a good conscience before God is absolutely essential (1Tim 1:19; 1Pet 3:21; 2Tim 1:3).

16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.

     The hidden, concealed deeds of every person will be exposed for all to see in the day that God comes to judge the world (v6; 1Cor 4:5). This warning is especially ruinous for hypocrites, who are a major target in this chapter. Maybe their sins will not be seen in this life, and maybe they will be seen but ignored; however, they will surely be shown and known at the beginning of the next life (1Tim 5:24; Mat 10:26).

     The Apostle Paul was a highly gifted persuader. He could show the truth of the matter with such compelling exposition that he rarely needed to go on defense. This forced his opponents to go low and attack his person – his speech, presence, authority and apostleship (2Cor 10:10). Paul responded to these attacks with impressive tact, sometimes acknowledging his weaknesses but appealing to God’s calling upon him, and sometimes with simple fact injections that could not be denied. So here, in saying, according to my gospel, I think he is affirming that his teaching is nothing less than the Gospel of Christ. To question Paul’s authority would be to question Christ. It’s a subtle, appropriate preface to the next verses, in which Paul confronts the harshest adversaries of Christ, bar none.

     Down to the present day, ethnic Jews have demonstrated a hardness of heart that borders on insanity (see note for Rom 11:29). God told the prophet Isaiah, Now go, write it before them in a table, and note it in a book, that it may be for the time to come for ever and ever: That this is a rebellious people, lying children, children that will not hear the law of the LORD (Is 30:8-9). Those shocking words continue to be demonstrated in natural Israel to astonishing extents.

17 Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God, 18 And knowest his will, and approvest the things that are more excellent, being instructed out of the law; 19 And art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them which are in darkness, 20 An instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, which hast the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law. 21 Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal? 22 Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege? 23 Thou that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonourest thou God? 24 For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written.

     Here Paul refers to the same self-righteous hypocrites that Jesus had so strongly condemned when He walked this earth. Blind guides, He called them. The Jews were filled with self-importance and their consciences were so cauterized they could not see their miserable spiritual condition. They had the Oracles of knowledge and truth in their very hands and yet did not obey its precepts. Instead, they went about teaching everyone their own interpretation of the Law, while circumventing it themselves (Mat 23:2-4). Will such persons escape the judgment of God? (v3). Absolutely not! In fact, as noted in verse 10, the Jews are subject to a higher standard on account of having received so much (Rom 9:4).

     The Jews rested in the Law and boasted of God, but that faith was very out of balance. They thought themselves to be so special! Absolutely, undeniably destined to be saved because God Himself had said so – He had chosen them by sworn promise. So they sneered openly at the Gentile dogs and basked in their meticulous genealogies which proved to them that they were blessed children of Abraham. Somehow they blissfully ignoring the fact that God had strictly warned generation after generation that His choice of them was conditional. If ye will obey My voice indeed, and keep My covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto Me above all people: for all the earth is Mine (Ex 19:5; Ex 15:26). The extreme spiritual pride of the Pharisees is revealed in their audacious response to the blind man that Jesus had healed: Thou wast altogether born in sins, and dost thou teach us? (John 9:34). Apparently, the scribes were sure that they were not born in sins and that they were erudite instructors according to knowledge.

     It is sadly ironic that this false confidence of the Jews was reborn in Christianity a few centuries after Paul wrote this. Augustine, a former Gnostic himself, began to promulgate in the church those heretical ideas of the Gnostics concerning human sin and free grace. And centuries later, Luther and Calvin adopted Augustine’s theology. Jewry and what is now called “Reformed Theology” share this basic belief: “God has chosen me, therefore I am unconditionally, irrevocably destined to be saved.” Yet, God cannot deny Himself (2Tim 2:13). He will always act and be true to who He is – righteous, fair, just, holy, but also kind, merciful and forgiving. To extend grace to active rebel is to act contrary to His nature, it denies who He is.     

     Paul overtly implies that the Jews practiced robbery (klepto), adultery (moicheuo) and sacrilege (hierosuleo). Was that true? Yes; Jesus had said the same of them. Of course, the Pharisees did not openly steal, fornicate and “rob temples” (the literal translation of hierosuleo). Instead, they connived “lawful” ways to devour widow’s houses and steal from their own parents by invoking Corban (Mat 23:14; Mark 7:9-13). They also invented a way to commit “legal adultery,” (see below) and robbed the Temple by finding ways to avoid giving to God what the Law required. They extracted exorbitant charges and fees from the common people who came to offer “approved” sacrifices in the Temple. This is the true meaning of legalism – to twist the Word of God so that it doesn’t mean what it plainly says. The following is extracted from Adam Clarke’s commentary on Rom 2:21.

“That the Jewish priesthood was exceedingly corrupt in the time of the apostle, and that they were so long before, is fully evident from the sacred writings and from Josephus.  The high-priesthood was a matter of commerce, and was bought and sold like other commodities…They said and did not; and laid heavy burdens upon others, which they would not touch with their own fingers, Mat 23:3-4. They made the house of God a den of thieves, Mat 21:13; John 2:16. They were guilty of adultery by unjust divorces, Mat 19:9. Their polygamy was scandalous: even their rabbins, when they came to any place, would exclaim, Who will be my wife for a day?  As to idolatry, they were perfectly saved from it ever since the Babylonish captivity but to this succeeded sacrilege, as is most evident in the profanation of the temple, by their commerce transacted even within its courts; and their teaching the people that even their aged parents might be left to starve, provided the children made a present to the temple of that which should have gone for their support.  According to Josephus, Bell. Jud. l. vi. c. 26, They were guilty of theft, treachery, adultery, sacrilege, rapine, and murder.  And he adds, that new ways of wickedness were invented by them; and that of all their abominations the temple was the receptacle.”

     This agrees with Malachi 3, which is a long, astonishingly clear prophecy of the Messiah coming unto His own and finding them cursed with a curse, a nation of adulterers, sorcerers, and false swearers who have robbed Me. Paul’s letter to the Romans was written to Christians, the body of Christ made up of Jews and Gentiles, so his point can hardly be missed: “You Jews have chosen Christ and have left behind the spiritual adultery and hypocrisy of your fleshly brethren. Surely you are not thinking of re-joining the blasphemers by returning to boast in the Law!”

     While this passage is piercingly directed to the non-believing Jews, the general truth taught herein falls just as hard upon the Christian hypocrite who outwardly appears pious and righteous, but whose inner heart is full of wickedness and spiritual adultery. For the sin of hypocrisy is tremendously damaging to the churches of Christ (see note for 1Pet 2:1).

25 For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision.

     Circumcision is spiritually beneficial for the Jew who keeps the Law, but worthless if he does not keep the Law. The advantage of circumcision (the word is often used as a euphemism for “Judaism”) is that they had been given the ancient Sacred Texts of the One True God (Rom 3:1-2). These held the very keys to eternal life, the master key being Jesus Christ Himself (see John 5:29). But now that the Law of Moses has ended, circumcision and all of the other Old Covenant rites, rules and ceremonies have been done away by the Ruler of the New Covenant (Heb 8:13). It was a hard, slow process for Jewish Christians to come to this knowledge and it is remarkable that Paul, a circumcised Hebrew of the Hebrews himself, came so quickly to see the truth in this crucial matter (see note for Gal 2:12).

     The fact that Paul reminded the churches so often that circumcision is no longer required in the New Covenant reveals just how divisive this issue was in the early churches of the Kingdom (see Gal 5:1-6; 1Cor 7:19; Gal 6:15; Col 3:11). Before Christ, the token of circumcision was sensible, for God had just one family, the Jews by blood after their father Abraham. But now that the Covenant has been extended to all nations, people and races according to the same faith that Abraham had, the rite of circumcision on the eighth day is made obsolete. For more on this subject, see my note for Gal 5:2. 

     While circumcision profits nothing for the believer, Jewish or Gentile, the principle which Paul here references has several New Testament correlations. Baptism, which some liken to circumcision given that both are initiations into their respective covenants, is beneficial for the Christian who keeps the commandments of Christ, but profits nothing if he returns to a life of wickedness and disobedience. Another example is Praise in the worship service, which ascends a pleasing odor to the throne of God when offered up by holy, obedient Christians, yet the same Praise is abhorrent to Him if offered up by rebellious hypocrites (Is 1:13).

26 Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision? 27 And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law?

     The circumcised but law-breaking Jews demonstrate that circumcision is not a substitute for inward devotion to God (v29). In fact, Paul says, a circumcised Jew that does not keep the Law is no better off than a uncircumcised Gentile. And that makes good sense. However, his next point, which is basically the converse of foregoing statement, was surely more difficult for the Jews to accept: “An uncircumcised Gentile who keeps the Law is counted by God to be circumcised, and even rises up to judge the circumcised transgressors.” Wow. That narrows the profitability of circumcision considerably.

    By nature (phusis). Earlier Paul said that Gentiles which had never heard the Law (or the Gospel) yet live an honest life might still be received by God (see Rom 2:14-15). Now he adds circumcision into the mix. Even that all-important Jewish rite cannot rise to the crucial level of importance of heart-obedience to God’s statutes, or the righteousness (dikaioma) of the Law (v26). Dikaioma should probably be translated “statutes” (as in Rom 1:32) and plainly does not refer to the whole Law that God gave to Moses, but to the basic law of the conscience (see note Rom 2:15).

     The Scriptures do not explain exactly how a person who has never heard the Gospel can be saved by simply keeping the law of his conscience, but this we do know:  an honest person who perseveres in doing good (v7) without knowing about Christ is a rarity. Yes, the power and majesty of God can be inferred by a man studying His creation (Rom 1:20), but hearing the Gospel preached is a far more effective stimulant for salvation.

     Cornelius is an example of a Gentile who feared God (Acts 10) and salvation came to his house. The Roman centurion is another (Mat 8:5). And actually, there are many testimonies in the New Covenant age in which the Holy Spirit has miraculously worked in the lives of seeking men and women. I have personally experienced events where God clearly organized the lives of truth-seekers, bringing them from afar into environments which were teaching the Way of Truth. If you are a missionary (and we all are), then pray that the Lord of the harvest would send into your little world men and women whose hearts are feeling around for God (Acts 17:27).

28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: 29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.

     Given the afore-stated truths concerning circumcision, it follows that to be a Jew in the present age of the Gospel is a determination not based upon physical attributes and lineage, but is established by looking inwardly, by evaluating the heart and spirit. The Apostle is plainly teaching that under the terms of the New Covenant, there is no longer Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision (Col 3:11). In the new Kingdom of Christ, he says, the real Jew is any person that has had his heart circumcised. What does that mean? He explains in another place: In (Christ) ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh (Col 2:11).

     In other words, the spiritual significance of circumcision is cutting away sinful practices, it is denying the desires of the flesh, purging away selfishness from the soul and spirit. In a word, it is dedicating oneself to living a holy life (1Pet 1:15). Even the Prophets somehow knew that the physical rite of circumcision carried a deeper spiritual meaning. Circumcise yourselves to the Lord, and take away the foreskins of your heart, ye men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem: lest My fury come forth like fire, and burn that none can quench it, because of the evil of your doings (Jer 4:4).

    So the true Jew is a Christian, whether he happens to be a natural Jew or not. Any person who claims to be a Jew because he is of the lineage of Abraham is an imposter (Php 3:3). No, the Scripture’s criteria for being a child of Abraham is to have the faith of Abraham (Gal 3:7; 3:29). That shouldn’t be all that hard to imagine, for God is able to raise up children unto Abraham from dead stones (Mat 3:9).

     The chief goal of every true Jew is to obey the Law of Christ, but in the spirit and not in the letter. Meaning, not according to the Jews’ lawyerizing and strict letter-of-the-rule legalisms. That was the high crime of the Pharisees, who created all manner of exceptions and loopholes to the Mosaic Law so that they could avoid its more difficult, more important rules. Beware to not repeat their error! Jesus warned them (and us) to keep the spirit of the Law, but to not leave undone the minor parts either (Mat 23:23). The ditches are deep on both sides of the correct path and both are traps for the disobedient – the self-righteous hypocrite on one side and the lazy libertarian on the other. See Rom 7:6; 2Cor 3:6.

     Whose praise is not of men, but of God. This last phrase might have stung a little, for the Jews absolutely loved the praise of men (Mat 23:5; John 12:43). I don’t believe Paul was implying that the Christian Jews were that sort of people, but he does seem to be asking them again, “Why are you so set on circumcision and keeping the Law when your fellow countrymen are just doing it for the praise of men?”

commentary Matthew 28

by

1 In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.

    Each of the Gospels fix the time of Jesus’ resurrection at first light on Sunday morning. Upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning… at the rising of the sun (Luke 24:1; Mark 16:2); the first day of the week…early, when it was yet dark (John 20:1). These loyal women were up early, walking to the tomb as the rising sun began to lighten the eastern sky. One can almost imagine the first rays of the sun touching the huge stone and rolling it back for all to see that it was empty!

     At this very moment, Jewish priests were performing the wave offering of Firstfruits in accordance with the Mosaic law concerning the Passover/Unleavened Bread convocation (Lev 23:5-14). The way that God commanded the priests to determine the day for this ceremony is unique among the Old Testament rituals. Instead of upon a set date (ie, the 17th day of the 1st month), the ritual of Firstfruits was required to be performed upon a particular day (the first Sunday) within a certain feast-week (Unleavened Bread). Given by God thousands of years earlier, this simple and little known offering perfectly matches the details of Jesus’ death (see note on Mat 26:2). It appears that Noah’s Ark touched land in the new world on this exact day also (see note on Gen 8:4).

     Many of the greatest events in the life of the Messiah correspond typologically with a ceremony, a feast, or an offering designed by God’s hand in the Mosaic Law. On the 10th day of the month Jesus entered Jerusalem mounted on a donkey, the same day that each family was to select a perfect lamb for the Passover (Ex 12:3). For four days the scribes and Pharisees proved Him, trying to find a blemish in Jesus’ life and teaching, and on that lurid day of His betrayal, Jews everywhere were carefully cleaning and removing from their homes any spot of leaven. At the very moment He hung dying on the cross, the Passover lambs were being slain in the temple; Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us (1Cor 5:7). The day His body rested in the tomb, all Judaism was observing the holy high day Sabbath, and at the hour of His resurrection the priests were offering the Firstfruits (a type of resurrection). Later, on the exact day of the coming of the Holy Spirit, the Old Testament ceremony of Pentecost was being celebrated. Amazing details, yet many more could be given.

     The women had prepared sweet spices the night before, but after sundown so as not to profane the Sabbath (Mark 16:1; Luke 23:56). Then, early in the morning, they went to the tomb to anoint His body. Matthew describes the experience of the two Marys (Mat 27:61), but Luke names several other women who also went to the tomb that morning (Luke 24:10). Coming from several homes, they arrived in separate companies and at slightly different times. Mary and Martha for example, lived outside the city walls in Bethany. They came not knowing how they would move the great stone from mouth of the sepulchre (Mark 16:3) and unaware that the chief priests had installed a guard at the tomb. John’s more detailed account gives only Mary Magdalene’s experience (John 20:1-18), probably because she was the first to see Him risen from the dead.

     In spite of the clear language in the Gospel accounts, some propose that the women went to the tomb at nightfall instead of sunrise. Their idea is that the women set out for the tomb as soon as the Sabbath day had ended and they were free to work (Saturday evening). The only motivation for this exercise is to create time for Jesus to be in the grave for three days and three nights according to His words in Matthew 12:40. While I applaud all efforts to be Biblical, there is a better way to understand Jesus’ sign (see our note for Mat 12:40). The simple record of the Gospel is that the women watched His burial Friday evening and stayed in their homes on Saturday. Sunday they went to the tomb as it began to dawn…at the rising of the sun (Mark 16:1-2; Mat 28:1; Luke 23:54-56; John 20:1; Luke 24:1). The idea that the women went to the tomb and found it empty at nightfall is absolutely untenable with the Gospel accounts. The Greek word translated began to dawn, is a form of the common word phos, which means “light.” The women came to the tomb “as it began to grow light.”

     A Wednesday or Thursday crucifixion just does not fit the Scriptural records and also conflicts with the early church’s testimony of a Friday crucifixion. Nevertheless, Matthew 28:1 is a primary verse used to advance that idea. In the end of the sabbath, they say that is Saturday evening. The next phrase however, explains further: as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week (also Mark 16:1). Very obviously, that is Sunday morning. Unfortunately, these well-meaning readers use long-shot speculations and erroneous statements to create “clear” proofs for their pet interpretations. Reader beware. The simple reading of the Word will seldom (if ever) be overturned by Greek word studies! In this case the speculators are severely wrong, for a deeper knowledge of Judaism and the Greek language does not confute the simple reading, but actually clarifies it. One benefit of having four Gospels is to avoid misinterpretations, yet even then there are those who will not learn (see note John 20:1).

     The re-interpreters have falsely exploited the fact that in the original Greek of Mat 28:1, the word sabbath is in plural form. This, they inform us, means that there were two sabbaths upon consecutive days. Yet, the plural form of the Greek word sabbath is common usage, being a basic part of Jewish culture of that day. The Jews had no names for the days of the week and instead called each day of the week by its number from the sabbath:  the first of the sabbath, the second of the sabbath, the third of the sabbath, etc. So when Matthew wrote, “At the end of the sabbaths,” he literally meant, “at the end of the days of the sabbath.” In English we would say, “The week being ended, as it began to dawn toward the first of the new week…” Thus, the Greek word for “week” is the same word for sabbath (sabbaton, see Luke 18:12) and that explains Matthew’s wording. Young’s literal translation shows this: “And on the eve of the sabbaths, at the dawn, toward the first of the sabbaths…” Adam Clarke clarifies that “on the eve” (KJV, in the end) should be translated “after the end,” and he cites several ancient Greek writings which use the same grammatical construction in this sense.

     It is eminently clear to me that the women came to the tomb at first light on Sunday morning and they found the tomb empty. They did not witness the moment of Jesus’ resurrection, which motivates some to propose that He had risen during the night, or even upon the Sabbath day before. The gospel of Mark though, cuts off all argument: Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week (Mark 16:9). Matthew’s account contains a proof as well, for it says that as the women were returning to the city, the frightened guards were arriving at the chief priests with a story that would worry the rulers even more (Mat 28:11). The inference is strong that the resurrection had just taken place, for the guards would not have waited much time to give their report. They were in danger of their lives. John’s gospel also indicates that Jesus’ resurrection had taken place moments before the women arrived that morning, for Jesus forbade Mary Magdalene to touch Him because He had not yet ascended to the Father (John 20:17), yet not long after He allowed the women to touch His feet (Mat 28:9; also John 20:20, 27).

     Luke, meanwhile, gives the clearest succession of days: Jesus died and was buried on Friday, for that day was the preparation, and the sabbath drew on (Luke 23:54). The women watched His burial and returned to their homes to prepare ointments; they rested the next day according to the commandment (Luke 23:55-56) and then early the following day they went to the tomb (Luke 24:1). He was thus three days in the grave: parts of Friday and Sunday plus all day on Saturday. 

2 And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it. 3 His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow: 4 And for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men.

     It is unclear if the women saw these things, or if they had already taken place before they arrived. The other Gospels do not mention the guard or an earthquake. My impression is that the stone was already rolled away (Mark 16:3-4) and the keepers had just fled. The women saw only the angel sitting upon the stone and the watch was even then going to report what had happened to the chief priests (Mat 28:11). From Mark’s account, it is also possible that the angel who spoke to the women was not the one that had frightened the watch, but appeared to them inside the tomb.

     From the description, this was not your average angel. He is a notable and powerful being with features similar to the angel in Daniel’s vision (Dan 10:6), Ezekiel’s cherubim (Eze 1:13-14) and John’s vision of Christ (Rev 1:14-16). By the other Gospels, we understand that there were several angels at the tomb.

5 And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified. 6 He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay.

     Matthew gives only a brief sketch of how the disciples learned that Jesus had risen from the grave. Using the other Gospels we can better piece together the comings and goings of the women, and also the appearances of angels and Jesus Himself. Almost certainly more than one group of women went to the tomb that morning and they did not all arrive at the same time. Mark’s record shows that one group of women came to the tomb wondering, Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre? And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away: for it was very great. And entering into the sepulchre, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed in a long white garment; and they were affrighted (Mark 16:3-5).

     Luke is very similar, except that the two men appeared a little after the women entered the tomb: And they entered in, and found not the body of the Lord Jesus. And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout, behold, two men stood by them in shining garments, and they were afraid (Luke 24:3-4). Some have made a big deal of the fact that Mark mentions one angel but Luke describes two angels. Yet that is easily accounted for by considering the various women’s experiences and the fact that angels can choose to be seen or remain invisible. The gospel of John follows only Mary Magdalene’s experience. She also saw two angels, one at the head and the other at the feet where Jesus’ body had lain (John 20:12). A little while later, John and Peter came to the empty tomb, and while they saw the grave clothes strewn about, there were no angels.

7 And go quickly, and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead; and, behold, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him: lo, I have told you. 8 And they departed quickly from the sepulchre with fear and great joy; and did run to bring his disciples word.

     The twelve disciples still sat in shock in their Jerusalem quarters, discouraged, demoralized and extremely disappointed. Their hope was dead, for they had trusted that it had been He which should have redeemed Israel (Luke 24:21). Now, suddenly, He was gone; killed in an unthinkable, lowly manner, disgraced and cruelly mocked by the Jews. Neither they nor the women expected to find Jesus alive in three days. So slow were they to believe in His resurrection that even when presented with an empty tomb Mary thought that the gardener had removed His body. And the two on the road to Emmaeus thought the women had simply seen a vision of angels. (Luke 24:23). Even after hearing the women say they had seen Jesus risen from the dead the disciples took them for idle tales (Luke 24:11). They were even skeptical upon seeing Him in person, willing to believe it was His ghost rather than the actual body of Jesus! They needed to watch Him eat, touch Him and note the marks in His hands and side.

     While the fact that the disciples were not expecting Jesus to rise from the dead lends credibility to their witness accounts of His resurrection, it must be asked how they could have been so blind to that event after all the prophetic teaching He had given them on the subject (see Mat 17:22-23; 20:17-19). To answer that we should first note that this was something God had withheld from their understanding (John 20:9). Second, given that Jesus frequently spoke in parables which the disciples often could not understand, it is likely that they attributed Jesus’ prophecies concerning His death and resurrection to more of the same spiritually-intended language beyond their mental grasp (see Mat 16:21-23). And finally, the twelve Apostles were not the most intelligent, sharp-minded individuals Jesus could have chosen. He chose honest, humble, God-seeking, uneducated and unrefined men to be witnesses of His ministry. It was extremely hard for them to accept the new covenant truths He was teaching. They simply could not think outside of their pre-conceived ideas that the Messiah would deliver them from the Romans in power and strength, not die an ignoble death at the hands of their enemies! It took special, specific teaching by the risen Christ to the eleven to open their eyes to His purpose in dying on the cross (Luke 24:45).

     He goeth before you into Galilee. The disciples evidently stayed in Jerusalem until the Feast of Unleavened Bread was finished (John 20:26), and then went to Galilee where Jesus appeared to seven of the disciples while fishing (John 21:1-14). Later He showed Himself to the eleven on a mountain He had chosen (Mat 28:16). Then they went back to Jerusalem for Pentecost, where Jesus bestowed the Holy Spirit in the same upper room that He had shared with them the day before He died.

9 And as they went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the feet, and worshipped him.

     Reconstructing the exact details of the women’s experiences on this tumultuous day is difficult because different groups were moving between their homes, the tomb and the disciples’ hideout. Apparently the women did not feel threatened by the Jewish authorities, but the disciples were in hiding for fear (John 20:19). Half a dozen women, if not more, were involved: Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and John, Joanna, Salome, Jesus’ mother, Martha and Mary of Bethany (Luke 24:10). The Psalmist had written, weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning (Ps 30:5). And so it would be for these women, the first humans to whom Jesus chose to reveal Himself – even before the Eleven. It is a wonder, for the Judaic religion was strongly skewed to benefit the male. In the greater picture though, how appropriate that the first witness of the Savior be the Woman, for she first fell into sin by the deceits of Satan. Furthermore, Christ came into the world through the seed of the Woman (no man involved) and to her the promise was first given (Gen 3:15). It is fitting then that she would be first to see the Victor alive again. 
     Here is a possible reconstruction of events at Jesus’ resurrection:

  1. Jesus is hastily buried Friday evening by Joseph and Nicodemus. Many of the women who saw His crucifixion also witnessed His burial (Mat 27:60-61). These made plans to meet together at the tomb as soon as possible to anoint His body more carefully.
  2. Early on Sunday morning, just as the day was dawning, the groups of women went to the grave. Some wondered how they would move the stone (Mark 16:3), unaware that an angel had just rolled it away to reveal an empty grave! The keepers had fled in terror.
  3. Arriving at the tomb, the first group of women were greeted by the silent scene of a gaping entrance – the huge stone had been rolled to one side. They entered the tomb and were much perplexed at not finding the body of Jesus (Luke 24:2-4). Thinking that someone had stolen His body, Mary Magdalene left the group and ran to tell the disciples (John 20:2).
  4. The other women continued at the tomb, wondering what might have happened. They may have explored the tomb further, for these tombs often had numerous niches to hold the bodies of the whole family. Suddenly two angels appeared and one spoke to them, explaining that Jesus had risen from the dead and that they should go and tell the disciples.
  5. The women obeyed, runnning from the tomb back into the city. They did not see Mary Magdalene, who was ahead of them and reported first to the disciples of Jesus’ missing body. Peter and John immediately ran to the tomb, they did not see the group of women bringing the angel’s message either, probably because they took a different route. Or maybe the disciples had not all spent the night at the same place.
  6. Mary, Peter and John ran at full speed to the tomb, but John was the faster runner. The two men are amazed by the scene, finding the grave clothes but no body. They do not see any angels. They leave the tomb wondering what it all meant.
  7. Mary arrived a little later, but remained longer than Peter and John at the tomb, alone and weeping. Stooping down to look into the tomb again, she suddenly saw two angels appear right where Jesus’ body had lain. At that moment, Jesus spoke from behind her and Mary became the first to see the risen Lord (Mark 16:9). Overjoyed with excitement, she ran off again to tell the disciples. Some of them have a hard time believing her story.
  8. The other women, enroute to tell the disciples their story of seeing two angels at the empty tomb, were unaware that Peter and John have already been told. On the way, Jesus suddenly appeared to them and greeted them. Many manuscripts do not have the first part of Mat 28:9, And as they went to tell His disciples (see NASB, NIV). It is possible then, that Jesus did not appear to these women until later.

     A slightly modified reconstruction has Mary Magdalene arriving earlier and alone at the tomb. Seeing it empty, she runs to tell John and Peter, who go to see for themselves with Mary following. They also see that the tomb is empty and leave wondering about it. Mary stays at the tomb, distraught and weeping, when Jesus suddenly appears and speaks to her. She runs back to tell the disciples what she has witnessed. Meanwhile, the other women arrive at the tomb, where an angel announces that Jesus has risen from the dead. Not knowing that Mary, John and Peter have already been to the tomb, these women run with to the disciples with the news. On the way Jesus meets them and they worship Him.

10 Then said Jesus unto them, Be not afraid: go tell my brethren that they go into Galilee, and there shall they see me.

     The disciples would see Jesus that evening (John 20:19), but it was in Galilee that He spake to them many things pertaining to the Kingdom of God (Acts 1:3; 13:31). There they would also witness Him ascending back into heaven. See verses 16-20. Perhaps around this time Jesus appeared to Peter alone, an event mentioned in Luke 24:34 and 1Cor 15:5, but of which there is no further account in the Scriptures.

11 Now when they were going, behold, some of the watch came into the city, and shewed unto the chief priests all the things that were done. 12 And when they were assembled with the elders, and had taken counsel, they gave large money unto the soldiers, 13 Saying, Say ye, His disciples came by night, and stole him away while we slept. 14 And if this come to the governor’s ears, we will persuade him, and secure you. 15 So they took the money, and did as they were taught: and this saying is commonly reported among the Jews until this day.

     The soldiers had no choice but to accept the elders’ advice. If they went to Pilate with this news, they risked being put to death for failing in their duty. Would Pilate believe their tale of angels opening the tomb and stealing the body? And so they collaborated with the Jews to keep quiet. Pilate was only in Jerusalem to keep peace during the Passover. In a few days he would be leaving for his home in Caesarea. We will persuade him, and secure you, the Jews told the men. It was not an empty promise, for the Roman governors were known to take bribes. Felix, for example, kept Paul in prison because he hoped to obtain money from him (Act 24:26).

      The Jews’ story is the most popular argument of skeptics to discount the resurrection of Jesus Christ even today, yet common sense declares it entirely impossible that the 11 disciples would go to their individual violent deaths preaching something they knew was a lie. One famous skeptic proposed that Mary Magdalene stole His body, yet that highly improbable idea does not account for the fact that the Apostles testified to have seen Him on multiple occasions alive from the dead: talking, walking and eating. Indeed, one of them would not be convinced even by an empty grave; he must see Him and touch the nail prints before he would believe that Jesus had risen from the grave (John 20:25). He too would turn from skeptic to fervent belief. One tradition says that doubting Thomas was stabbed to death while preaching the resurrection of Christ in far-away India about 40 years later. No, these men were absolutely sure that Jesus was alive; there was not the slightest doubt in their minds. With their own eyes they witnessed Him risen from the dead, they had heard Him speak and had touched His resurrected body (1John 1:1).

16 Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them. 17 And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted.

     Some think this was the same mountain where He had preached the Sermon on the Mount (Mat 5-7), and that more than five hundred men assembled there to see Him (1Cor 15:6). Luke gives more details surrounding the first appearances of Jesus to His disciples (Luke 24:13-47). John records that Jesus appeared twice to the disciples in Jerusalem before they returned to Galilee (John 20:19, 26).

     But some doubted. Thomas, who was absent the first time Jesus appeared to the disciples, was one of these (John 20:26-29). Fears and doubts are major obstacles to saving Faith and originate in the intellect and/or emotions. Satan is very adept at manipulating these areas of Mankind’s minds to keep them from believing and following Christ.

18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

     Jesus did not receive His God-powers in the sense of being granted or bestowed with supernatural Power. Rather, He possessed them by nature, by being the son of God. At the Cross however, He gained a new authority or power over Satan and his kingdom of darkness. See this described in Rev 12. At that moment, the throne of the New Kingdom was set up (Dan 9:7), and He will rule in it forever and ever (Is 9:6-7). See also Eph 1:20-22. This tremendous victory over Satan meant that Christ could justly announce to His disciples, All power is given unto Me in heaven and in earth.

19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

     The Greek is better translated, “Go and make disciples of all peoples, baptizing them in the names of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and teaching them to keep and obey all the things that I have commanded you.” The parallel passage says, Go ye into all the world and preach the Gospel to every creature (Mark 16:15-16). This is the missionary mandate which the Apostles received and followed. Their working results are remarkable and without peer in the histories of the world. 

     Unto the end of the world (Gk – aion). Some translations read, unto the end of the age. The Apostles (and early church writers) used the term aion when referring to the literal, physical end of the world such as described in 2Pet 3:10-12. The same expression is used in Mat 13:40 in describing the final destruction of the earth and judgment of all mankind. Three words should be studied in this subject: the world in the social sense of an age, era or generation (aion), the world in the cosmic sense of the creation of earth and heavens, the universe (cosmos), and the world in the physical sense of land and territory (ge). These terms are used almost interchangeably in the New Testament, but do have individually unique connotations. 

     The false doctrine of Preterism is abruptly halted by Jesus’ promise to be with His people to the end of the age, for Preterists claim that the age ended at the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70.

     Those who reject the doctrine of the Trinity are also greatly convicted by these verses. They say that Jesus was only a man or angel and that the Holy Spirit is not a person but the power or spirit of God. Why then baptize into the names of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, if one is not God and the other is just a concept? It is folly to so manipulate the Scriptures.

commentary Matthew 27

by

1 When the morning was come, all the chief priests and elders of the people took counsel against Jesus to put him to death:

     Jesus had been taken from the Garden to the house of Annas, where He was grilled by some of the chief priests until the Sanhedrin could be hastily assembled in the middle of the night at the house of Caiaphas, the official high priest. There, He was cruelly treated and mocked by the Jews, but the official vote apparently did not take place until early morning as they led Him to Pilate (Mark 15:1).

     Some scholars think that the Sanhedrin was required to meet at the temple, which would make this night court illegal. They propose that the Jews met briefly at the temple and then led Him bound to Pilate. Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea were either not present during these councils, or were silent in the face of overwhelming opposition. Probably the latter is true.

2 And when they had bound him, they led him away, and delivered him to Pontius Pilate the governor.

     At this time, Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea under Emperor Tiberius and Herod Antipas was in charge of the Galilean region (Luke 3:1). The fact that his soldiers had killed some Galilean Jews while they were offering sacrifices (Luke 13:1) hints that Pilate was a cruel governor, and cared little for the Jews’ religion (see note John 18:29). While the Jews delivered Him to Pontius Pilate, they would not enter his court to avoid being defiled and so disqualified to eat the Passover that evening (John 18:28).

     Determined to force a trial of Jesus in the Roman courts, the chief priest’s initial complaint to Pilate was that He was perverting the nation and forbidding to give tribute to Caesar (Luke 23:2). Pilate however, did not take the bait. He was wise to their lying tactics by this time and immediately he suspected sinister motives and hypocrisy. After all, the Pharisees themselves were highly critical of Rome and detested paying taxes; why the sudden loyalty? Pilate quickly understood that Jesus was being unjustly accused because they were envious of Him (Mat 27:18). He had no intention of being an accessory to their crimes and so attempted to have Him freed.

     Notice that the Sanhedrin had condemned Him to death for blasphemy, but before Pilate they manufactured a charge of plotting against Caesar. They knew Pilate would never receive a charge of religious blasphemy to be tried in his court. Above all, the Jewish rulers wanted to see Jesus crucified by the Romans, for nothing would so dishonor Him before the people (see John 18:31-32).

3 Then Judas, which had betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself, and brought again the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, 4 Saying, I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood. And they said, What is that to us? see thou to that.

      Perhaps this hints that Judas did not expect Jesus to be arrested. After all, for 3 years now Jesus had easily escaped their clutches, often by miraculous means. The alternate view is that Judas, in a petulant moment of bitterness, took offense at Christ’s reprimand and sought revenge by betraying him. Now he suddenly saw his actions in their full sinfulness and was sorry (see note Mat 26:25). Matthew alone records Judas’ regret and following suicide, although it is mentioned by Luke in the book of Acts (Act 1:16-19).

     The Jewish leaders refused to help Judas with his guilty conscience. What miserable guides they were! While the text says Judas repented himself, that does not mean he sought forgiveness for his actions. He was sorry for what he had done and recognized that he had sinned, but he was not repentant unto redemptive action. His suicide shows that to be true.

5 And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself. 6 And the chief priests took the silver pieces, and said, It is not lawful for to put them into the treasury, because it is the price of blood. 7 And they took counsel, and bought with them the potter’s field, to bury strangers in. 8 Wherefore that field was called, The field of blood, unto this day.

     This is an interesting detail. The Greek word for temple here is naos, which refers to the inner sanctuary. Another word, hieron, is used for the temple buildings. Did Judas throw the money into the very temple itself? Only priests were allowed there. Scholars have wrestled with the language, with many believing it means he threw the money towards the temple, or perhaps into the outer court. I’m not so sure. Judas was very distraught, as his immediate suicide shows. A person of that mind would have no qualms to break another rule.

     Peter’s sin was great; he denied Christ three times. Judas’ sin was also great; he betrayed Christ to the Jews. Judas’ greater sin though, was that he did not seek forgiveness as Peter did. Instead, he gave up the relationship and went and hanged himself. Some see a contradiction between the two descriptions of Judas’ death (see Act 1:16-18). Maybe his attempt at hanging resulted in disembowelment. A popular and convenient resolution is that Judas hung himself on a tree overlooking the valley of Hinnom (the origin of the word Gehenna – Hell). The rope or tree broke, causing him to fall onto the rocks below.

     Luke says that Judas bought the field, but Matthew says the chief priests bought it. Perhaps Judas had made a deal for this field before, but didn’t have enough money to complete the purchase. The thirty pieces of silver (a sum equal to just one month’s work) seemed to him “easy money” to finish the deal. However, when Judas saw that Jesus was dead, he was overcome with remorse and threw his ill-gotten gain into the temple. Ever the picture of righteousness and piety, the priests did not know what to do with this blood money. Then they discovered that it had been destined to a particular seller. Seeing an easy way out, they completed the sale and assigned the property to be used as a graveyard for strangers (an unknown person who happened to die in Jerusalem). It became known to all as the field of blood (Act 1:19).

     The very money which delivered Jesus to death was used to buy a place of rest for strangers (including Gentiles). It is surely a prophecy by types of that momentous spiritual event.

  • Thirty pieces of silver was the price fixed by the Law that a man must pay for the wrongful death of a slave (Ex 21:32).
  • In the Old Testament, the typological meaning of silver is redemption.
  • The silver was cast into the temple sanctuary, where the atonement is pre-figured in the rites and ceremonies of the Law.
  • The silver provided a place of soul-rest for the unwanted and unknown.

9 Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was valued, whom they of the children of Israel did value; 10 And gave them for the potter’s field, as the Lord appointed me.

     This prophetic detail is found only in the book of Matthew. “And taking the thirty pieces of silver, for that was the value the children of Israel had esteemed for Him, they bought the potter’s field just as the Lord had told me to do.” The quote is a paraphrase of the Masoretic text of Zechariah 11:12-13, which is notable for three reasons: first, because the Septuagint is the preferred Old Testament source of the Gospel writers; second, because the passage is attributed to Jeremiah instead of Zechariah and third, because the quotation does not closely match the base text.

     The view of some scholars is that Matthew refers to the section of Scriptures called “the latter Prophets,” which was often called “Jeremiah” because that was the title of its first book. Others however, believe that Jeremy was a later insertion in the text or an early copy error, for the spelling of the two words is fairly similar.

     I favor the first option for an additional reason. While the prophecy is generally based on Zechariah 11:12-13, that passage is only vaguely understood without the input of two other key passages, both found in the book of Jeremiah. The first describes Jeremiah’s visit to a potter, where we learn that the potter is actually God (Jer 18:1-10). The second describes Jeremiah redeeming a field just before the city of Jerusalem fell to the Babylonians (Jer 32). The following paragraphs show that incorporating these meaningful details into Zechariah’s report will bring clarity to the meaning of the prophecy and also to its fulfillment. This also gives reason for Matthew’s rough quotation of the base text. 

     As for Zechariah, God had instructed him to become a shepherd in order to develop an object lesson whose meaning would remain obscure until the coming of the Messiah. The flock of the slaughter (Zec 11:4) represents the scattered multitudes at the first coming of Christ (Mat 9:26) who were so cruelly treated and oppressed by their own shepherds (Zech 11:5, compare Mat 23:13-14). At that time there would be a great proving in the land. Those who were found worthy would take root and become the new people of God under a better Covenant with all Israel (Zech 11:6-11). By the word of the Lord, Zechariah suddenly broke his staff, Beauty, and quit his job as shepherd. So the people payed him what they valued his labor to be worth, thirty pieces of silver, which Zechariah took and cast to the potter in the house of the Lord (Zec 11:12-13). Then he broke the second staff, Bands, which signified the end of the house of Israel (Zec 11:14).

     There is a wealth of typological meaning in this passage. Thirty pieces (three is the number of the Trinity) of silver (an OT symbol for salvation), point to that unfathomable act of Christ in dying to redeem sinful man. In life He was lowly esteemed by mankind, for the thirty pieces were thrown away – but directly into the naos of the Lord. There it was esteemed of priceless value, accepted by God as the appropriate price to buy back Mankind. The blood money was given to the Potter, an apparent term for God the Father (Is 64:8), for throughout the Bible the Creator is likened to a potter who fashions and forms vessels in the way that pleases him (Is 45:9; Jer 18:1-6; Lam 4:2; Rom 9:20-21).

     The Potter takes a lump of clay and begins to work, forming it carefully into the shape that He desires. At first only His great mind knows the work that He has planned, but slowly His creation begins to take shape under His forming hand. Before the God-seekers marvelling eyes, His creation is at last finished, a work of beauty, goodness, wisdom and promise. How true of the salvation events surrounding the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ! Tantalizing details and prophetic hints are scattered all through the prophets and in the teaching of Jesus’ ministry, but it was not until all was finished that the whole purpose of God was revealed, to be forever admired and discussed. Like Esau before him, Judas threw his salvation away (as did all Mankind), but the Potter in the house of the Lord made something new from the same piece of rejected clay. That stone so lightly esteemed and rejected by the builders has become the chief corner stone, elect and precious (1Pet 2:6-7).

     The above ideas only scratch the surface of the many levels of this prophecy and the typological details of Christ’s death and resurrection. The son of Man goeth as it is written of Him (Mat 26:24). Many times the prophets did not understand what God told them to do or write, but they were faithful and obedient to record the words as the Spirit’s direction (2Pet 1:21).

11 And Jesus stood before the governor: and the governor asked him, saying, Art thou the King of the Jews? And Jesus said unto him, Thou sayest.

     All four Gospels record Pilate asking this question (Mark 15:2; Luke 23:3; John 18:33), which sprang from the Jewish elders’ accusation that Jesus was perverting the nation and forbidding to give tribute to Caesar (Luke 23:2). Their plan was to have Rome crucify Him in order to make a spectacle of His death, thereby discrediting Him in the eyes of the people. While all the Gospels have full accounts of Jesus before Pilate, the fourth Gospel is the most detailed (John 18:28-19:16). It particularly reveals Pilate’s personal struggle about what to do with Jesus; three times he told the Jewish mob, I find no fault in Him (John 18:38; 19:4; 19:6; Luke 23:22). Pilate knew that Jesus was innocent, just and honest, and that His accusers were jealous hypocrites. However, he was not strong enough to withstand the Jews’ rabid cry for crucifixion. History says that Pilate never recovered; a few years later, like Judas, he took his own life. See note John 18:39.

     Thou sayest. Three times Jesus answered with these words. He had responded similarly to Judas (Mat 26:25) and the high priest (Mat 26:64). Pontius Pilate was impressed by Jesus’ bearing and simple quietness. Upon learning His supposed crime was that He made himself the Son of God (John 19:7), he tried very hard to free Him (Acts 3:13). It even seems that Pilate believed Jesus was the son of God, for he became more and more afraid (John 19:8). Reading the accounts, Jesus appears before Pilate as the One in control of the unfolding events and that bothered Pilate (John 19:11-12). After finally giving in to the mob and condemning Jesus to death, Pilate did manage a minor win – he irked the Jewish elders by writing their very accusation as a title over Jesus’ head while He hung on the cross: the King of the Jews (John 19:19-22; Luke 23:38).

12 And when he was accused of the chief priests and elders, he answered nothing. 13 Then said Pilate unto him, Hearest thou not how many things they witness against thee? 14 And he answered him to never a word; insomuch that the governor marvelled greatly.

     Jesus’ silence before His accusers was a fulfillment of messianic prophecies such as Is 53:7 and Ps 38:12-14. The final, great part of His mission was to die, not defend Himself against their lies. His silence won Pilate’s admiration and support. He saw right through the Jews’ feigned allegiance to Rome and knew that they had brought Him on account of envy. How was Jesus’ countenance before the accusations? Did He look at His accusers, or keep His eyes on the ground? Was His face marked by pain and suffering, or unfathomable tranquility?

     Luke records that Pilate at this time sent Jesus to Herod, who interviewed Him and then returned Him to Pilate (Luke 23:6-12). It seems that Pilate tried to push a difficult situation onto Herod, but it did not work. Both Pilate and Herod were in Jerusalem over the Passover gathering for peacekeeping reasons. Pilate normally lived in the Roman port city of Caesarea, while Herod Antipas ruled from Tiberias, a Roman-developed city on the shores of lake Galilee (see note John 18:29). Jesus had lived most of His life in the region of Galilee and Herod had for a long time wished to interrogate Him and watch Him work some miracles (Luke 13:1-2; 23:8). Ever since he had put John the Baptist to death Herod had worried about Jesus, who he thought might be John come back to life (Mat 14:1-12). While Jesus did answer some of Pilate’s questions, He refused to respond to Herod, perhaps because Pilate’s motives were nobler than Herod’s. Nevertheless, Herod did not find fault with Jesus either and sent Him back to Pilate as an act of courtesy. The two rulers became friends by this episode (Luke 23:12).

15 Now at that feast the governor was wont to release unto the people a prisoner, whom they would. 16 And they had then a notable prisoner, called Barabbas. 17 Therefore when they were gathered together, Pilate said unto them, Whom will ye that I release unto you? Barabbas, or Jesus which is called Christ? 18 For he knew that for envy they had delivered him.

     Evidently the Romans, in an effort to create goodwill with the Jewish populace, had released a Jewish prisoner at a previous Passover. The Jews had come to expect it as a yearly action (Mark 15:8). With the Jewish multitude already gathered in the Roman hall, Pilate apparently saw an opportunity to have Jesus released. Speaking directly to the crowds, he offered them a choice of prisoners to set free (Mark 15:9-10). Jesus the Nazarene or Barabbas the robber. Barabbas was a thief and murderer who was in jail for inciting an insurrection in Jerusalem (Mark 15:7; Luke 23:19; John 18:40). Not only did Pilate’s plan fail, it made the situation even more precarious. The chief priests moved quickly, inciting the multitude to demand Barabbas’ release and Jesus’ immediate crucifixion (Mat 27:20; Mark 15:11-13). Pilate, needing to content the people and avoid escalating into a full-blown tumult, gave in and delivered Him up to be crucified (Mark 15:15). Luke’s parallel account gives a very similar record of events (Luke 23:16-25).

     When they were gathered together. According to John’s Gospel, the Jews would not enter the praetorium because they did not want to be defiled and consequently barred from eating the Passover (John 18:28). So Pilate had to come out of the Hall to hear their complaint in the open air (John 18:29). He initially tried to defuse the situation by telling the chief priests and elders to take care of the matter themselves (John 18:31), but the Jews wanted Jesus to be publicly executed and insisted that Pilate do so immediately, if not sooner. So Jesus was taken into the judgment hall, where Pilate questioned Him without His accusers being present (John 18:33-37).

     It was at this time that Pilate uttered his famous and cynical question, What is truth? Then he went out to the Jews and gave them his verdict of “not guilty” (John 18:38). Continuing through John’s account, it appears that during the trial, Pilate went out to talk to the Jews several times. Each time he appeared the mob began to yell and shout. Then, when Jesus Himself appeared wearing a crown of thorns and a kingly robe, the chief priests and elders began shouting, Crucify Him, crucify Him (John 19:5-6). Once more Pilate took Jesus back into the judgment hall, this time questioning His origin and purpose. Jesus’ answers made Pilate afraid and even more convinced that He was innocent (John 19:9-11). He took Jesus out to the Jews again, to a place called the Pavement (John 19:13). Upon seeing Him, the Jewish leaders lost all restraint, Away with Him, crucify Him (Joh 19:15), they shouted again and again. The gathered Jewish mob, ever ready to provoke and aggravate their Roman rulers, joined in and threatened such a tumult that Pilate agreed to their demands (John 19:16).

19 When he was set down on the judgment seat, his wife sent unto him, saying, Have thou nothing to do with that just man: for I have suffered many things this day in a dream because of him.

     Only Matthew records this detail. It is shrouded in mystery. Did Pilate’s wife know Jesus? How did she discover He was standing before her husband? Maybe she simply connected the tumult about a Jewish prisoner with her recent miserable night of bad dreams. And maybe she was even then watching Jesus before Pilate and feared that her dreams were a bad omen of the present moment and so sent a messenger to warn her husband. Some think God sent an angel to specifically warn her in a dream about Jesus, much like the angel that came to warn Joseph when Herod thought to kill baby Jesus (Mat 2:13). This seems unlikely. Jesus’ death was in God’s plan, would He tell someone not to carry it out?

     The Greeks believed and feared the power of the gods, who would bring evil upon men that did not act honorably and justly. So if Jesus really were a son of the gods, of course Pilate was afraid. His wife’s warning simply added to his misapprehension.

20 But the chief priests and elders persuaded the multitude that they should ask Barabbas, and destroy Jesus. 21 The governor answered and said unto them, Whether of the twain will ye that I release unto you? They said, Barabbas. 22 Pilate saith unto them, What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ? They all say unto him, Let him be crucified. 23 And the governor said, Why, what evil hath he done? But they cried out the more, saying, Let him be crucified.

     It is remarkable that the Jewish multitude, which just a few days earlier had welcomed Jesus into Jerusalem with palms and singing (Mat 21:8-10), should now be found shouting against Him. Remember however, that this multitude had followed the chief priests and elders from Caiaphas to Pilate (Luke 23:1). These were wicked, blood-thirsty men, the kind that uncannily appear at ungodly events to see what new evil they might find. The multitude that had welcomed Jesus was primarily His disciples (Luke 19:37). Certainly there were some Jesus-sympathizers among the multitudes at Pilate’s court, but it was predominantly a Pharisaical crowd of politically-motivated Jews. In persuading the multitude to ask for Barabbas, they gained more supporters, for the Jews chafed under the Roman’s rule. Besides, Barabbas was nearer to the Jewish idea of the Messiah than was Jesus the Nazarene. Barabbas was a fighter, someone who could free them from Rome and return Israel to power.

     The Jewish mob’s insistence that Jesus be crucified is difficult to imagine. What had He done to deserve such hatred and rejection? Even the hardened Roman governor was shaken by their rabid hatred of this simple, harmless Man. Pilate was not a Jew. He did not even pretend to understand their complicated laws and customs. All he knew was that Jesus had done something to provoke their anger. He became alarmed however, when he heard that Jesus claimed to be the Son of God (John 19:8) and actually seemed to be in command (John 19:10-12).

     Pilate strongly believed that Jesus was completely innocent and that the Jews were scheming to have Him crucified on account of envy and hatred. Why, what evil hath He done?  Pilate asked. But the Jews, by this time beyond rationality and sense, simply kept shouting, Away with Him, crucify Him (John 19:15). The incensed mob grew only more wild and threatening. No wonder Pilate felt trapped in his course of action.

     There is a notable parallel in the crowd’s decision to take Barabbas over Jesus, for all through history Mankind is choosing to follow one of two possible masters. The first is the simple, peaceable, righteous Jesus Christ, but the second is the murderous, rebellious robber, Barabbas Satan. To follow the first One is to give up self, sin and the world; to follow the second one is to live for self, sin and the world. To follow the first will lead to glorious victory and eternal life, but to follow the second will lead to fearful torment and everlasting punishment.

     The Jewish mob rejected Jesus as their King and chose Barabbas to be their ruler. The meaning of the name Barabbas contributes to this analogy: “the son of a father.” That could be any man, or it could stand for all mankind. For by the death of the one perfect Man, the rest are set free from the bondage and sentence of eternal death.

24 When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it.

     The Law provided that if a man was found murdered but the killer was not discoverable, the elders should declare their freedom from carrying out the law of capital punishment by a ceremony of washing the hands (Deut 21:6-7). Evidently that custom became part of the Gentile community as well, as a way to show one’s innocence. See also Ps 26:6. Crucifixion however, was a Roman method of execution, it did not figure in Judaism.

25 Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children.

     It is bad enough to hear the Jews accept the guilt of killing an innocent man, but this was the Son of God. Shocking wickedness. Although they had no authority to speak in the place of their posterity, their words have proven to be eerily, prophetically true. For at this time God ended His covenant with the natural Israel (see the parable of the householder, Mat 21:33) and ever since the Jews have been the most hardened of all races unto saving Faith. That is especially astonishing when one considers that Jesus was a Jew and is so evidently revealed as the Messiah by their own Scriptures. In choosing Barabbas, the Jews chose the devil; in rejecting Jesus, they rejected God; in accepting His blood upon their hands, they rejected His blood over their sins.

     The Romans crucified Jesus upon a single cross, but at the destruction of Jerusalem they crucified so many fleeing Jews that they ran out of space for crosses. So they hung three or four men upon the same cross. His blood be on us, and on our children. It is almost certainly true that in the entire history of the world, no human tribe has suffered more deaths and discrimination than the Jews. Nevertheless, while the plotting Jews had instigated His murder, the Gentiles were the ones who crucified Him. Pilate held the power to free Christ, but he sent his soldiers to do the deed. So both groups are guilty of His death.

     The real reason the Jews continue to be a hated and afflicted race above all others is because they are an obstinate, selfish and rebellious people. For that, some will call me a racist and anti-semite. So be it. I choose to be factually correct, not politically correct. A person’s genes contribute much to the tendencies, personality and mindset of the individual. Jews are by nature more gifted intellectually and that is to their great benefit, but they must overcome the negative tendencies of their race’s disposition. And history records their marked failure in that regard. My own experiences with Jews has only corroborated these facts. All nations are under the curse, but there is a special curse hanging over the Jews; not specifically for crucifying their God, but for rejecting Him again and again and again. There is salvation if they look to the One upon the tree, but not many do. Instead, their existence as a nation and race is a perpetual witness of the calamities and judgments that are destined for all those who refuse the only Name whereby salvation is attained (Acts 4:12).

26 Then released he Barabbas unto them: and when he had scourged Jesus, he delivered him to be crucified.

     Scourging was an exceptionally cruel and painful punishment. The whip was thin and long, with little bits of bone and stone embedded in it. When wielded by experienced hands it could rip the flesh to shreds, causing paralysis and even death. While Matthew and Mark make only simple mention of Jesus’ scourging, the gospel of John shows that it was an attempt by Pilate to placate the blood-thirsty Jews so that they would assent to His release (John 19:1-4). The Gospel of Luke accords with John’s account, for although he does not state exactly when the scourging took place, he notes the same reason as John for Jesus’ scourging: Pilate hoped to get the Jews to accept that punishment instead of crucifixion (Luke 23:22). So while the first two Gospels mention Jesus’ scourging in connection with His earlier prophesy (Mat 20:19; Mark 10:34), the last two describe it in relation to the efforts of Pilate to have Him released. John’s gives the correct chronology, while the Synoptics’ focus is topical. 

     Then released he Barabbas unto them…and delivered Jesus to be crucified. The parallel account says, And he released unto them, him that for sedition and murder was cast into prison, whom they had desired; but he delivered Jesus to their will (Luke 23:25). Those words have echoed through the halls of Jewish history ever since. Spiritually speaking, a wicked, violent robber and murderer runs loose in that race and the righteous, peaceable Life-giver has been put to death. Of course, that is true for every nation that rejects God’s son, but it has been spectacularly evident in that nation so blessed by the ancients.

     In another spiritual truth, just as Jesus was crucified and Barabbas released, so too is released from bondage every man, woman and child who accepts Jesus’ death for their own sins.

27 Then the soldiers of the governor took Jesus into the common hall, and gathered unto him the whole band of soldiers. 28 And they stripped him, and put on him a scarlet robe. 29 And when they had platted a crown of thorns, they put it upon his head, and a reed in his right hand: and they bowed the knee before him, and mocked him, saying, Hail, King of the Jews! 30 And they spit upon him, and took the reed, and smote him on the head. 31 And after that they had mocked him, they took the robe off from him, and put his own raiment on him, and led him away to crucify him.

     The Greek word for the common hall (praitorion) is not consistently translated in the KJV. In Mark 15:16 it is Praetorium, in John 18:28; 19:9; Act 23:35 it is judgment hall, and in Php 1:13 it is palace. It evidently refers to the ruler’s courtroom or place of meeting with the people and is not specific to one building called the Praetorium. It is linked to the Roman government, not the Jewish Sanhedrin.

     The Jews had earlier mocked and misused Jesus at their trial and now the Gentile soldiers resort to the same. They dressed Him up like a king with regal robe, but put a crown of thorns on His head and a simple reed in His hand as a sceptre. Then they bowed down before Him in mocking allegiance. It is likely that Jesus was mistreated first by Herod’s men (Luke 23:11-12) and later by Pilate’s soldiers. How great the reality of this contrast: Jesus and His followers wear crowns of thorns in this life, but in the next they will exchange those marks of opprobrium for golden crowns of victory! (Rev 4:4).

     While Matthew says they put on Him a scarlet robe, Mark 15:17 and John 19:2 say it was a purple robe. Perhaps that reflects the separate scornings before Pilate and Herod, who mocked Him and arrayed Him in a gorgeous robe and sent Him again to Pilate (Luke 23:11). Or it could have been a single, two-toned robe (purple and scarlet), for both are colors of royalty and the rich. The two words are found together in that context on several occasions (Rev 17:3-4; 18:12-16). Scarlet is a euphemism for blood in Is 1:18 and Rahab was told to put a scarlet cord in her window to escape death (Josh 2:18). Scarlet, hyssop and cedar wood were to be thrown into the red heifer sacrifice (Num 19:6); these three were present at the crucifixion (see my notes in Num 19).

     Through terrible mistreatment and ugly mocking, Jesus did nothing (1Pet 2:23). The prophets spoke in graphic, perfect description of this moment. Isaiah 50:6 says, I gave My back to the smiters, and My cheeks to them that plucked off the hair: I hid not My face from shame and spitting. The Psalmist wrote, The plowers plowed upon My back, they made long their furrows (Ps 129:3). All they that see Me laugh Me to scorn: they shoot out the lip, they shake the head (Ps 22:7). For dogs have compassed Me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed Me: they pierced My hands and My feet (Ps 22:16).

32 And as they came out, they found a man of Cyrene, Simon by name: him they compelled to bear his cross. 33 And when they were come unto a place called Golgotha, that is to say, a place of a skull,

     Jerusalem had a special place for executions located outside the city and by the main road, where all who entered the main gate would see (John 19:20). Golgotha is the Aramaic form of Calvary (Luke 23:33), and answers typologically to the place that many of the animal sacrifices of the Old Testament were to be offered (Heb 13:11-12). Jesus set out bearing His cross (John 19:16-17), but was unable to continue. He was exhausted from the sleepless night and the scourging had severely weakened Him; besides, He was by nature not a powerful man (Is 53:2). So the Roman soldiers laid hands on a man entering the city from the other direction (Luke 23:26) and compelled him to bear the cross of Jesus.

     This man’s name was Simon. He was from Cyrene, a region of Libya on the Mediterranean Sea near present-day Benghazi. There is every reason to believe that this experience so powerfully impacted Simon that he became a follower of Christ. His sons’ names are also recorded in the Scriptures, Alexander and Rufus (Mark 15:21), which are Christian names that appear in other parts of the New Testament (Rom 16:13; Acts 4:6; 19:33, 1Tim 1:20). Very early in the Christian era, Egypt became an important area of evangelistic growth. The family of Simon may have returned to their country as early witnesses for Christ and along with the Ethiopian eunuch and others, the missionary church in North Africa grew impressively (Acts 2:10; 6:9; 13:1).

     At this point, Jesus gave a prophetic sermonette to the women who followed Him as He left the city to be crucified (Luke 23:27-31). And not many years later, many Jewish women would leave this city weeping for their dead loved ones and families. More than one million Jews died in the judgment of A.D. 70, and the 100,000 who survived the siege were forced to march away into slavery. Most died on the way (see Josephus).

34 They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted thereof, he would not drink. 35 And they crucified him, and parted his garments, casting lots: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots.

     And they crucified Him. These simple words convey nothing of the world of pain, humiliation and suffering that this manner of death entailed. Crucifixion was a Roman method of execution that was reserved for the worst of criminals. Someone has said it’s inventor had a brilliant but incredibly cruel mind to have concocted such an excruciating, slow and shameful death. Typically, the victim’s clothes were stripped off and he was forced to lie naked on a T-shaped wooden frame, where his hands and feet were crudely nailed in place. The whole frame was then stood upright and dropped into a hole to create a shocking public spectacle. With his extremities immobilized, the sufferer was exposed to ridicule and physical torments with no way to even minorly protect himself. Because of the nails, his every movement would cause immediate pain, yet death might not come for several days. Meanwhile, birds and dogs would tear at his flesh and even at night, sleep was impossible. As an act of mercy (!) sometimes soldiers would beat the man’s legs with a heavy club until they were broken and this would hasten his death. Crucifixion was the worst death a man could experience. The chief priests and scribes could have stoned Jesus, or have killed Him by sword, but no; they wanted Him to die in public disgrace, to show all that they were the rulers of Israelite nation.

     Just before He was nailed to the cross, someone tried to give Jesus a pain-killing drink, but He refused it. Some say the soldiers gave it to Him, some think the women brought it (Luke 23:27). Gall and myrrh were bitter, drug-like substances mixed with vinegar wine (Mark 15:23) that was apparently intended to dull the pain. This was foretold in Psalms 69:19-21. Later, the soldiers offered Him wine in order to revive Him (Mat 27:48; John 19:28-30). While Jesus refused the first drink after He had tasted it, He accepted the second drink.

     Evidently there were four soldiers at the cross, but Jesus’ garments numbered five. And so they cast lots to determine who would get His coat (see note John 19:23). David’s prophetic Psalms 22, which contains several allusions to Christ’s death, foretells this detail (Ps 22:18).

36 And sitting down they watched him there; 37 And set up over his head his accusation written, THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS.

     The soldiers were to guard the prisoners until they died. For that unhappy job, they were apparently allowed to keep for themselves the victims’ clothes. At Pilate’s command, they put a title on the wooden frame above his head:  Jesus, the King of the Jews. The chief priests and scribes were not pleased. They went to Pilate and asked him to change it to: He said, I am King of the Jews. Pilate refused (John 19:19-21).

     Some Bible critics have made a big deal of the differences in the title as recorded in the four Gospels (see Mark 15:26; Luke 23:38; John 19:19). It is a feeble criticism. In my opinion, the credibility of the Evangelists is advanced by the slight differences. Clearly they did not connive to make their stories match.

38 Then were there two thieves crucified with him, one on the right hand, and another on the left.

     This reading implies that Jesus was already crucified when the two thieves were brought to Golgotha, but using the other Gospels, it appears that the three went out of the city together and Jesus was the first to be crucified (Mark 15:27; Luke 23:32-33; John 19:18). Being sentenced to die between two common criminals caused the Scripture [to be] fulfilled which saith, And He was numbered with the transgressors (Mark 15:28). The prophecy comes from Isaiah 53:12, one of the clearest and longest OT prophecies describing the death of Jesus the Christ. That passage burns forever in the Jews’ own sacred writings, convincing and convicting them of their sinful error in rejecting the Messiah for which they had waited so many long centuries. Judaism’s explanation of Isaiah 52-53 is that the subject is Israel the nation, not their Messiah. Yet even the simplest reader will see insurmountable difficulties with that idea.

39 And they that passed by reviled him, wagging their heads, 40 And saying, Thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days, save thyself. If thou be the Son of God, come down from the cross.

     The place Jesus was crucified was just outside the city gate. All those entering or leaving Jerusalem saw Him and read the title above His head (John 19:20). Some of these wise passersby made witty remarks and derogatory statements that only revealed their ignorance and poor powers of reasoning. They had seen Jesus restore a man’s withered hand in an instant, watched as a man born blind was suddenly able to see perfectly, and heard how a man dead and buried for three days was raised to life; they had marveled how Jesus slipped miraculously through the fingers of the chief priests each time they tried to arrest Him, they had heard Him silence the sagest of the scribes and Pharisees with His ultimate wisdom. How could they now conclude that He no longer had this power? A truly wise person would have suspected that things were not as they seemed. He would have been filled with alarm and foreboding. However, there seems to have been no wise men in Jerusalem.   

     By Luke’s account, it would appear that many of these revilers were chief priests and rulers (Luke 23:35), not everyday Jews. They had heard the false witnesses make this same charge before the Sanhedrin (Mat 26:61). Furthermore, even these events were predicted of the Messiah in Psalms 22:7; 109:25. Again we marvel at their stubbornness, although when the Spirit-filled Peter showed them these facts, they were pricked in their hearts (Acts 2:36-37).

41 Likewise also the chief priests mocking him, with the scribes and elders, said, 42 He saved others; himself he cannot save. If he be the King of Israel, let him now come down from the cross, and we will believe him. 43 He trusted in God; let him deliver him now, if he will have him: for he said, I am the Son of God.

     These are terrible, blasphemous, sacrilegious, slanderous words. They admit He had worked tremendous miracles and deeds to help the suffering of others, yet they cruelly killed Him. This reveals just how far the upper echelons of Jewish leaders had fallen. To envision the chief priests, the scribes and elders taunting and ridiculing a simple, defenseless Man as He hung dying on a cross is an astonishing commentary on their character. It seems they knew He was right and good while they were wrong and bad, and they rejoiced in having succeeded in their wickedness. Certainly they were the very hands of the Devil. Yet they and the Devil would soon discover that they had been outsmarted again. For He did save Himself. And even more spectacularly than coming down from the cross; He came back from the grave.

     Today many are saying the same thing to Christ. “If the Bible is true, show me some miracle and I will believe.” Or, “I will believe there’s a God if He gives me a million dollars.” Jesus did not answer the Jewish doubters, neither does He answer the cynics today. If they will not believe the Bible, neither will they believe a miracle, even if it were someone rising from the dead (Luke 16:30-31).

     Verse 43 is another quote from Messianic Psalms 22: He trusted on the Lord that He would deliver Him: let Him deliver Him, seeing He delighted in Him (Psa 22:8). They said, “He claimed to be the Son of God; let God save Him then, if this Jesus really is His Son.” Nasty words. Jesus suffered physically, socially, spiritually. As His disciples, we should not expect anything different. Sometimes the Truth seems obscured and disregarded even by God, but only for a time and to bring about a greater good.

44 The thieves also, which were crucified with him, cast the same in his teeth.

     These two criminals were apparently Jews, because the chief priests did not want them to desecrate their Sabbath the next day (see note, John 19:31). According to Luke though, one of the thieves was saved even in these pressing moments! Perhaps as he watched Jesus and heard the chief priests, he became convinced that Jesus was innocent. More likely, this thief already knew about Jesus and the Kingdom that He preached, for in humility he asked, Lord, remember me when Thou comest into Thy kingdom. And Jesus answered in those never-to-be-forgotten words: Verily I say unto thee, to day shalt thou be with Me in paradise (Luke 23:39-43).

45 Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour.

     The Romans counted time as we do, meaning the sixth hour was 6AM. The Jews though (as Matthew), divided the day into twelve hours, beginning at sunrise (about 6AM) until sunset (6PM). The first hour of the day was 6AM, so the sixth hour was noon in Jewish time. With the absence of watches in that era, time was not very precise. It was therefore common to generalize using the expressions “third hour” for the morning hours, “sixth hour” for the noon hours, and “ninth hour” for the evening hours. John apparently gives the Roman time (6AM) as the approximate hour when Jesus appeared before Pilate (John 19:14) and that corresponds well with Mark’s record that Jesus was crucified at the Jews’ third hour (Mark 15:25), which would strictly be 9AM, but could refer to the morning hours until 11AM.

     The unusual darkness began at the sixth hour, or about noon, and lasted until His death at the ninth hour (Mat 27:45; Mark 15:33; Luke 23:44). This was a supernatural darkness such as the one that God brought upon the land of Egypt by the hand of Moses (Ex 10:21-23). It was not a solar eclipse caused by the moon, for the Passover was always at full moon, when it is impossible for the moon to come between the earth and sun. The darkness extended over all the land, but apparently not so deep a darkness to have affected normal daytime activities, nor did it affect those at the crucifixion. There is an interesting prophecy in Amos 8:8-10 that speaks of the sun going down at noon and the earth becoming dark at clear day, it is as the mourning of an only son. The prophecy continues to describe Israel wandering from sea to sea because they have lost the Word of the Lord.

46 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? 47 Some of them that stood there, when they heard that, said, This man calleth for Elias.

     The Jewish ninth hour would be 3PM, the approximate time of His death. It is unusual for a dying man to cry out with a loud voice, which Jesus did again just as He expired (Mat 27:50). It greatly affected the centurion who observed these events (Mat 27:54).

     My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me? Surely these are the saddest, most agonizing words ever spoken. It is one of several utterances at the Cross with basis in Psalms 22. Non-trinitarians say Jesus’ words here show that He was not God, but that is false. They do show that Jesus and God are not literally the same Being, which is consistent with the general picture of God the Father and God the Son in the Scriptures. The very concept of Redemption (salvation) requires that Jesus be God. A human being can never redeem or buy back himself – he is the one being redeemed. It is a contradiction. Christ redeemed Humankind, who at the beginning belonged to Him (as their Creator). They had fallen into the captivity of Satan, but Jesus bought them back by His sacrificial death. That is redemption. It cannot be effected by any man, even a sinless one, for he has no intrinsic power to change his being or position. A sinless man might offer himself for ONE other human, but not the entire human race. Only God, infinitely good and infinitely valuable could do that very deed.

     Some trinitarians say Jesus’ humanity was speaking here, but I think not. Rather, I see Jesus describing His true feelings of being alone and separated from God. Though fully God, He was also a Man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief (Is 53:3). Christ the God-Man suffered tremendous anguish and distress of soul when in Gethsemane the burden of Man’s sin was laid upon His sinless, perfect being. Certainly God was very near to Him even now, but in being made a curse for us (Gal 3:13; 2Cor 5:21) and bearing the sins of world He felt very alone and forsaken (Is 59:16; 63:3).

     In accepting to bear the cost of Man’s offenses against God, Jesus felt separated from His Father. My God, why hast thou forsaken Me? The deep, spiritual suffering that Jesus endured when He tasted death for every man (Heb 2:9), far exceeded the physical pains that His body experienced. The wages of sin is death; spiritual death, which in the end is eternal separation from God. I do not think that Jesus suffered spiritual death, but the suffering He endured plainly indicates that the cost of forgiveness was neither cheap nor easy. We do not understand the spiritual realm, and that makes it difficult to fully sympathize with His inner turmoil. Nevertheless, we are made to see and hear His anguish by these words. And then to realize that He did it for each one of us – sinful, self-centered, lowly and seemingly unlovable souls. It is humbling, powerful and worthy of our utmost honor and thanksgiving. See note on Mat 26:38.

     Abram’s horror of darkness (Gen 15:12) during the profoundly symbolic ritual of dividing and sacrificing the emblems of the first covenant typifies Christ’s suffering at this time. Both took place about the setting of the sun, at the inception of a new covenant between God and man.

     Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani. These words from Psalms 22:1 are generally thought to be transliterated from Aramaic, the common language of the Jews since the time of the Babylonian Captivity. Why then did the people misunderstand Him? Eli is the Aramaic word for God, not Elijah. A growing segment of Bible scholars think that the general Jewish population at the time of Christ no longer spoke Aramaic but Greek, which would explain their misunderstanding. We do know that the Septuagint Scriptures were commonly used in Judaism because most of the New Testament quotations cite from that Greek source.

     Others propose (in spite of grave difficulties) that the words are transliterated from the Hebrew text used at times by the Jewish rabbis and scribes. Hebrew and Aramaic are similar but not identical, which could explain why the people didn’t understand Him. On the other hand, maybe the people were still mocking Him. They only pretended to misunderstand His prayer to God as a request for Elias to come and save Him. Remember that the Jews expected Elijah to come before the Messiah. Jesus had explained to His disciples that John the Baptist was Elijah (Mat 11:14; 17:10-14).

     The Gospels record seven sayings of Jesus on the cross. This is the only one that Matthew and Mark have that is not found in Luke and John. Here they are in probable order:

  1. Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do (Luke 23:34).
  2. Woman, behold thy son…Behold thy mother! (John 19:26-27).
  3. Verily I say unto thee, today shalt thou be with Me in paradise (Luke 23:43).
  4. I thirst (John 19:28).
  5. My God, My God, why has Thou forsaken Me? (Mat 27:46; Mark 15:34).
  6. It is finished (John 19:30).
  7. Father, into Thy hands I commend My spirit. (Luke 23:46).

48 And straightway one of them ran, and took a spunge, and filled it with vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave him to drink. 49 The rest said, Let be, let us see whether Elias will come to save him.

     While Mark’s account is almost identical (Mark 15:35-36), the fourth gospel says they gave Jesus something to drink because He was thirsty (John 19:28). Probably He drank more than once, for at the crucifixion site there was set a vessel full of vinegar (John 19:29). The vinegar was probably wine mixed with water, which was a common drink.

     Hearing His desperate words, one of them ran to give Him a drink. The rest of the bystanders however, angrily continued to ridicule Him, “Let Him alone! Let Elijah come and save Him!” But when He cried out to God and died, the mockers fell silent. And when the earth shook and the rocks rent, some went away smoting their breasts for what had been done (Luke 23:48).

50 Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost. 51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;

     It is correct to say that Jesus did not die, but by an act of will He yielded up the ghost. Luke records His words, Father, into Thy hands I commend My spirit: and having said thus, He gave up the ghost (Luke 23:46). He did not die from pain and exhaustion, but bowed His head because His work on earth was finished (John 19:30). No man took His life; He had the power to lay down His life and take it up again (John 10:17-18). This could never be said of man, nor seen in any man; God only has this authority.

     At the moment of Jesus’ death, a striking and foreboding sign shook the very soul of the Israelite nation. The veil of the temple was torn in two from the top to the bottom, and that most sacred of all places, the Holy of Holies which hid the Ark of the Covenant and was forbidden to all except the high priest once a year, was laid open to the eyes of the common priests. The veil was a thick, expensive and highly decorated curtain of four layers (Ex 26:31-33). Perhaps it was torn by the earthquake, or maybe a supernatural hand did it, like the one that wrote on Belshazzar’s wall (Dan 5:5).

     The Jewish temple was designed by God to foreshadow and typify many spiritual realities that the human eye cannot see. The Holy of Holies is a type of heaven and the veil symbolizes the great barrier between God and Man (Heb 10:19-20; Eph 2:14). The rending of the vail at the death of Christ is a physical demonstration of several key spiritual events that took place at the death of Christ.

  • It confirmed that the Reconciliation was made (Zech 9:11), the acceptable blood of the atonement had been shed (Heb 13:20), the long-awaited moment of salvation had come (Rev 5:5-9).
  • It marked the moment that the First Covenant became old (Heb 8:13) and the beginning of the New Covenant (Heb 12:24).
  • It offered a new hope, that Mankind is now facilitated to draw close to God, even in this life (Heb 10:19-22).
  • It announced the fulfillment of Christ’s words in Matthew 21:43, for now the Kingdom was taken from Israel and given to people bearing appropriate fruits. This is fore-shadowed by Saul tearing Samuel’s garment in 1Samuel 15:26-29.
  • It showed that Jesus Christ had opened up the way to heaven. The souls of the saints were now delivered from Sheol and taken to Paradise.
  • It signified that the presence of God had left the Holy of Holies. Saul was afraid of David because the Lord was with him and was departed from Saul (1Sam 18:12).
  • It was rent from the top to the bottom, which indicates that these events had a heavenly origin.
  • Once a year, on the Day of Atonement, the high priest would pass behind the vail into the Holy of Holies to perform the prescribed rituals. The rent vail marked the completion and fulfillment of all the Old Testament types and symbolisms (Luke 24:27, 45-46).

     The ninth hour was the time of the evening sacrifice and priests were probably present in the holy place on this special Passover day. They would have witnessed the shocking sight of the veil parting in two and would have recoiled in fear at seeing directly into the forbidden place. A tradition says that a rope was tied around the high priest’s leg when he entered the Holy of Holies in case he was struck dead while inside, but nobody died this day except the sacrifice Victim.

     The earth did quake and the rocks rent. The earthquake also announced that a tremendous spiritual event had taken place, an event that men’s eyes might have seen, but that their hearts did not understand. It was the extreme sacrifice, so long-planned and even foretold from the beginning of Creation and typified in the OT sacrifices. Done, fulfilled, completed; It is finished, Jesus said. And with that affirmation, the physical earth suddenly agreed. According to the Scriptures, the final Day of the Lord will also be accompanied by an earthquake – the most devastating one the world will ever see.

52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, 53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

     The gospel of Matthew alone records these details which fulfill the previously obscure features of Daniel 12:1-3, a prophecy which describes Michael (symbolic name for Jesus Christ in Rev 12:3) standing up at the end of the Jewish covenant for the fall and rising again of many in Israel (Luke 2:34). The angel told Daniel, At that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book. And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. The appearance of dead saints in the holy city was a visible confirmation of a tremendous event that took place in the spiritual realm at the victory of Christ over Satan at His death and resurrection. Until that time, the souls of those who died went to Sheol (Hades in Greek), but when Christ died on the Cross their salvation was effected. Jesus delivered from Sheol all those souls of the Old Covenant which He chose to redeem and these He took with Him to Paradise (Mat 12:29; 1Pet 3:19; Eph 4:9). Now when a Christian dies, he goes straight to be with Christ in Paradise, just as He promised the thief on the cross.

     Some have linked the opening of the tombs with the earthquake (v52), but I think that is erroneously inferred. The saints came out of the graves after His resurrection (v53), three days later. As usual, Matthew records the event topically, not chronologically. When Jesus bowed His head and died, the Devil and his angels rejoiced; they thought they had won. Yet that seemingly weak moment of Christ was instead the moment of His greatest power! At His death, a tremendous lightning bolt struck in the heart of the spiritual realm (Luke 10:18) and Satan was suddenly and unexpectedly defeated (Rev 12:9; Heb 2:14).

     God said concerning the Messiah: By the blood of Thy covenant, I have sent forth Thy prisoners from the pit wherein is no water (Zech 9:11). The dead saints of the Old Covenant appearing in Jerusalem was a physical affirmation of a spiritual reality: the translation of the righteous Old Testament souls to be with their Savior. See note John 20:17. It was a resurrection, but not that final one which will reunite the body with the soul and spirit in an eternal, celestial body. Apparently their appearance in the Holy City was not only visible but also verbal, for how else could they have been identified?

54 Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God.

     When the Roman soldier saw the powerful way that Jesus died and felt the earth shudder beneath his feet at Christ’s words, he was convinced that a righteous man had been put to death (Luke 23:47). The centurion had probably witnessed many deaths, but he had never seen a weak and dying man cry out in a strong voice and yield up the ghost as this Man had done (Mark 15:39). Having heard the mob’s taunting and Jesus’ response, it seems to have struck him suddenly: they had been terribly wrong! This was no imposter, truly this was the Son of God. Luke adds, And all the people that came together to that sight, beholding the things which were done, smote their breasts, and returned (Luke 23:48).

55 And many women were there beholding afar off, which followed Jesus from Galilee, ministering unto him: 56 Among which was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of Zebedee’s children.

     Faithful women, and not just a few, stayed at Golgotha until the moment of His death. Three are mentioned by name, probably because they would become the first witnesses of His resurrection. Meanwhile, His disciples were so scattered and fearful that we know of only one who dared appear at Calvary: John the Beloved (John 19:26).

     Mary Magdalene was a woman who followed Jesus after He had cast out of her seven devils (Mark 16:9; Luke 8:2). She became the first human being to see Christ risen from the grave (John 20:11-18). Mary the mother of James the less (Mark 15:40), was a sister to Jesus’ mother Mary, who was also at the cross (John 19:25). Adding Mary the sister of Lazarus and Martha means that there were at least four Marys at the crucifixion. The last woman mentioned is the mother of Zebedee’s children, who famously asked Jesus to allow her two sons, James and John, to sit on each side of Him in His kingdom (Mat 20:20-24). This woman’s name was probably Salome (Mark 15:40). See note for John 19:25.

     It is possible that Mary the mother of James and Joses refers to Jesus’ mother (see Mat 13:55), yet it seems unlikely that the Evangelists would say she was the mother of James (the less) and Joses instead of Jesus’ mother. We also know that the father of James the Less was Alphaeus/Cleophas (Mat 10:3; John 19:25). While it may seem strange that two sisters be named Mary, in an age of multiple marriages and naming one’s children after relatives, it would not have been so unusual. Under the above scenario, James the Less and Joses were cousins of Jesus, and that is supported by verses such as Mat 13:55; 1Cor 9:5; Gal 1:19; James 1:1. The epistle of James then, was written by James the Less, and not James the son of Zebedee (Mark 3:17).

57 When the even was come, there came a rich man of Arimathaea, named Joseph, who also himself was Jesus’ disciple: 58 He went to Pilate, and begged the body of Jesus. Then Pilate commanded the body to be delivered.

     Before this, the Jews had asked Pilate to have the legs of the crucified broken so that they would die more quickly. Jesus was already dead when the soldiers arrived (John 19:31-34). By other Scriptures we learn that Joseph of Arimathaea was a rich man (Mat 27:57), an honorable counselor (Mark 15:43), a good man and a just (Luke 23:50), a disciple of Jesus, but secretly for fear of the Jews (John 19:38). History is silent concerning his later life, but he has become famous for this courageous action.

      Pilate was surprised to hear that Jesus was already dead. Probably the Jews who requested the leg-breaking had just left Pilate when Joseph entered asking for Jesus’ body. So Pilate called the centurion to make sure that Jesus was dead (Mark 15:43-45) and then gave permission for Joseph to take the body.

     The Jews had not asked out of compassion that Jesus’ legs be broken, but so that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the Sabbath (John 19:31). The OT law said that a criminal’s body should not be allowed to hang on a tree overnight (Deut 21:22-23, but I do not think this was the Jews’ motivation. The Romans had performed the execution. It seems to have been a matter of aesthetics, a million Jews from outside Jerusalem were in town for the Passover and they didn’t want stinking dead bodies defiling the feast.

     John was at the cross when the soldiers came with a heavy club to break the legs of the crucified men. This would hasten the death of the victim, which otherwise might live for several days. The soldiers broke the legs of the two thieves, but when they came to Jesus and saw that He was dead already, they brake not His legs (John 19:33). However, one of the soldiers took a spear and pierced His side, evidently to make sure that He was not faking death (John 19:34). John witnessed that out of His pierced side flowed blood and water, a sight that is altogether unexplainable medically. John seems to acknowledge its singularity by affirming that he truly saw it with his own eyes and that he is positive it happened (John 19:35).

59 And when Joseph had taken the body, he wrapped it in a clean linen cloth, 60 And laid it in his own new tomb, which he had hewn out in the rock: and he rolled a great stone to the door of the sepulchre, and departed.

     Isaiah had prophesied that the Messiah would make His grave with the wicked and the rich in His death (Is 53:9). The first detail was fulfilled by His crucifixion between two thieves, but the second detail can scarcely be imagined. Jesus was a poor man. Furthermore, His dishonorable and sudden death by crucifixion made a decent burial very, very improbable. However, God raised up two rich men to step out in bold action against their fellow Sanhedrin members and to go care for the body of Jesus. The first was Joseph of Arimathea and the second was Nicodemus, which at the first came to Jesus by night (John 19:39). Amazingly, it was not His disciples nor His family that carried out the funeral arrangements, but two prominent men of the Jewish ruling class that God had prepared for this unique fulfillment of OT prophecy.

     The picture of these two powerful and famous men laboring together, anointing the body of Jesus and wrapping it in linen clothes and spices is very striking (John 19:39-40). Their sacrifice was not minor! By breaking with the other Sanhedrin members they were almost certainly ostracized forever. Their feast of Unleavened Bread was ruined and their names in elitist Israel were besmirched. And they spared not in expenses! The mixture of myrrh and aloes amounted to a hundred pounds and the sepulchre was Joseph’s own new tomb (v60, John 19:41). Incredibly, their secret faith was strengthened by witnessing His shocking yet powerful death. The faith of Jesus’ disciples, meanwhile, was at its lowest ebb. Unlike the disciples, these men were not present when Jesus stooped to wash His disciples’ feet, but their actions embody the servant’s attitude of unselfishly helping a fellowman when nobody else would lift a hand.

     So while the world of Judaism sat around the passover table eating lamb with their families, these two men accepted a task which was the most defiling in all the Old Testament law: touching a dead body (see Num 19). For that, they would become unclean for one week and would have to pass through several steps before the temple priests to recover the right to appear in the Congregation after the week was up. The whole Feast of Unleavened Bread was lost to them. Yet, in their hearts these men knew that something more important than the Feast of Unleavened Bread was happening; and Someone greater than the Passover was here (Luke 11:31-32). With all due reverence and honor these two men, themselves among the 70 most powerful and notable in all Judaism, lovingly cared for the body of Christ. Like Mary who is remembered all through Christendom for anointing the feet of Jesus (Mat 26:13), Joseph of Arimathaea and Nicodemus are remembered for doing at last what they should have done first, confessing that Jesus the lowly Nazarene is the Messiah, the Son of God.

61 And there was Mary Magdalene, and the other Mary, sitting over against the sepulchre.

     The women are mentioned again because two days later they would come to this tomb and discover that Jesus was alive (Mat 28:1). The other Mary is probably not Jesus’ mother, but the mother of James and Joses (Mat 27:56). The place was very near to Calvary and set in a garden (John 19:41). The two Marys appear to have been all day with Jesus. They were the last of His disciples to leave Him that night and they would be the first to see Him again.

62 Now the next day, that followed the day of the preparation, the chief priests and Pharisees came together unto Pilate,

     The day of preparation was the day preceding the weekly Sabbath. It was so called because the Jews were not permitted to prepare food on the sabbath. All four of the Gospels say that Jesus was crucified the day before the sabbath (Mark 15:42; Luke 23:54; John 19:31), but scholars disagree if this was the normal Saturday sabbath or the special sabbath of the 15th Nisan. Advocates for a Wednesday or Thursday crucifixion make this day of preparation refer to 15th Nisan “sabbath,” which was required to be observed on the first day of Unleavened Bread, regardless which day of the week it happened to fall upon. After careful study, I think this interpretation is very doubtful. First, there were seven festival holy days throughout the year, but they were never called or considered “sabbaths” (see note John 13:1). Second, two gospels directly state that this was the preparation of the sabbath (Mark 15:42; Luke 23:54) and the other two strongly imply the same (John 19:42; Mat 27:62). Any doubt should be removed by John 19:31, where John explains that this year the 15th Nisan fell upon the normal sabbath, making that sabbath day…an high day (John 19:31). When one puts the Gospel accounts together, they agree perfectly that this preparation was for the Sabbath and also the Passover, because they both fell upon the same day (John 19:14, 31, 42). There is just no good argument against the above facts. And so, Jesus was crucified on Friday, remained in the grave on the Sabbath, and rose at first light on Sunday morning.

     The holy festival day commanded by the OT law for the Jewish passover was to take place the day following the passover meal, so the chronology is perfect between the Jewish passover and the details of Jesus’ death and resurrection. Obviously, this means that Jesus did not eat the regular passover meal with His disciples. Some commentators take issue with that (but see our notes on Mat 26:17).

     Amazingly, the chief priests and elders met again with Pilate directly upon this holy, high day Sabbath. While in their minds it was an emergency meeting, how hypocritical of them to work with Pilate to cover their evil actions on the Sabbath when they had criticized Jesus so harshly for doing good on that holy day!

63 Saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while he was yet alive, After three days I will rise again. 64 Command therefore that the sepulchre be made sure until the third day, lest his disciples come by night, and steal him away, and say unto the people, He is risen from the dead: so the last error shall be worse than the first. 65 Pilate said unto them, Ye have a watch: go your way, make it as sure as ye can. 66 So they went, and made the sepulchre sure, sealing the stone, and setting a watch.

     These Jews were not sleeping when Jesus was preaching! Now His words of Mat 12:40 were haunting them and they determined to do all in their power to keep Him in the grave. His disciples meanwhile, forgot His prophetic words until after the resurrection. The matter was so important to the Jewish leaders that they violated their sabbath laws to address this urgent, unforeseen possibility. What if His disciples stole His body and deceived the people into thinking He had risen from the dead just as He had predicted? Terrible! And so they made every effort to keep Him dead and buried, but to no avail. Their careful guard made the matter so much worse, for now they had not even the excuse that His disciples stole His body! Yet, lacking any other credible answer, that is the very thing they said (Mat 28:11-15). It is ironic that the Jews’ great attempt to disprove the resurrection of Christ ended up providing even better evidence that it took place!

     Pilate knew that the Sanhedrin had delivered Jesus to him out of envy. He had listened to Jesus’ noble answers and observed His bearing. He recognized that Jesus was a unique individual and he had personally examined Him. Three times he professed to have found no fault in Him. His wife had warned him to be very careful with that Just man, and so he had tried mightily to release Jesus. So when Pilate heard of His spectacular death by the centurion’s report, he was surely filled with foreboding. Now he hears even more frightening words from the Sanhedrin: Jesus had prophesied that He would rise from the dead in 3 days! His worst fears were being realized – he had helped to kill one of the gods (for he probably thought of Jesus in relation to his own religion). No wonder he agreed to give a guard and wished them to make it as secure as possible. Matthew is the only Gospel to record these events. Evidently an official wax seal was placed on the stone so that any tampering would be noticed (Daniel 6:17).

commentary Matthew 26

by

1 And it came to pass, when Jesus had finished all these sayings, he said unto his disciples, 2 Ye know that after two days is the feast of the passover, and the Son of man is betrayed to be crucified.

     If Jesus was crucified on Friday (which I believe), then at this moment it was probably Wednesday after nightfall. The sayings of the previous two chapters took place on the Mount of Olives (Mat 24:3), where Jesus would spend the nights during the last week of His life (see note for Mat 21:1; Luke 21:37-38).

     In the NT, the feast of the Passover is also called the feast of Unleavened Bread, but the two are technically different events (Luke 22:1, Mark 14:1). The Passover was simply a family supper of lamb, prepared and eaten as the Mosaic Law prescribed. The seven-day feast of Unleavened Bread began the very next day. Together, these two feasts formed the most important festival event on the Jewish calendar, and were instituted by God to celebrate the day that the Israelites came out of Egypt, carrying the spoils of their enemies with them. The prescribed details of the Passover, although given 1500 years prior, were carefully designed by God to foreshadow this very time that Jesus and His disciples gathered together. Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us (1Cor 5:7)

    The Passover was the first feast of the Jewish calendar. The rituals commanded in the Law actually made its beginning 4 days before the feast day, on the tenth day of the first month (Ex 12:3), when each family would carefully separate a perfect, unblemished lamb from their flock. In the week that Jesus died, that would have been Monday, two days prior to this verse, and the very day of Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem (see note on Mat 21:1). For four days, each family was to keep their lamb alive in a separate place, observing and watching for imperfections. On the evening of the 14th day of the first month the lamb was to be killed. That was the very time and day that Jesus died on the cross, and the four days prior parallel the daily testing that He passed before all the Jews (chapters 21-22).

     The next day, the 15th, marked the official beginning of the seven-day feast of Unleavened Bread. Jewish days began at sundown, and since the Passover was to be eaten at even  (Ex 12:6) the supper itself was often eaten during the first hours of the 15th, though the lamb was always killed on the 14th. The first day of Unleavened Bread (the 15th) was to be observed as a sabbath, regardless of whether it fell upon a Saturday or not. The people were to assemble a holy convocation, and refrain from all work on that day (Ex 12:16). In the year of Jesus’ death, the 15th happened to fall on the normal sabbath day, making it a high day (John 19:31).

     Additionally, the Law commanded a special ceremony for the day following the first Saturday-sabbath within the feast of Unleavened Bread. This ceremony was called Firstfruits, and was to be observed in the Temple at daybreak. The finger of God designed this to be the very Sunday, at the very same time of day, that Jesus rose from the grave! Note that only certain years would this day fall on the 3rd day following the Passover feast, but it was all pre-ordained by God that Messiah the Lamb would die this year.

     The Son of man is betrayed to be crucified. Again Jesus told the disciples plainly that He would be given over to the Jews to be killed, yet they did not understand. Maybe they thought He was speaking spiritually, as He so often did. Maybe they thought of the first time He had told them this, and remembered how He had denounced Peter for reprimanding Him (Mat 16:21-23).

3 Then assembled together the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders of the people, unto the palace of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas, 4 And consulted that they might take Jesus by subtilty, and kill him.

     After three days of uninterrupted failure on the part of the Jewish leaders to overthrow Jesus the Nazarene in the eyes of the people, the chief rulers had had enough. They plotted to kill Him, this time in earnest. But they would have to move quickly, because they did not want to have Him killed during the feast, which was just a few days away. This assembly included the highest rulers in Israel, and took place in the palace of the high priest (Mat 26:58). The High Priest was supposed to be the eldest son in the Aaronic line (known as the Levites), but at the time of Jesus the Romans had taken away the right of the Jews to select their own High Priest and the person changed often (see note John 11:49).

     By subtility. That is, without inciting the people (Luke 22:6). They could not arrest Him while He was teaching, because everyone admired Him and came to hear Him. They must do it secretly and quickly, to avoid an uproar among the people. And they mostly succeeded, arresting Him at night and assembling the Sanhedrin very early in the morning to condemn Him and then send Him off to Pilate to be executed. The whole thing, from Judas’ betrayal to His death on the cross, took place in about 14 hours.

5 But they said, Not on the feast day, lest there be an uproar among the people.

     The word “day” is not in the Greek, and should be left out:  “Not during the feast.” The feast (or “festival” in contemporary English) officially began on the 15th Nisan and lasted seven days. The Passover lamb was killed and eaten the day before the Feast began, on the 14th Nisan. Unlike the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread (which was a holy sabbath), the Passover day had no work restrictions or special rules until the afternoon, when the lamb was to be killed and eaten. Jesus was apprehended in the Garden of Gethsemane at midnight on the 14th Nisan (remember that the Jews began their day at evening), and died in the late afternoon of the 14th Nisan, at the very hour that the Paschal lamb was being offered in the Temple.

     The Synoptic Gospels contrast with John, implying that Jesus ate the Jewish Passover with His disciples the day before He died, which would put the crucifixion on the 15th Nisan (see our harmony of the Gospel accounts in Mat 26:17). Here however, Matthew himself disposes of the idea that Jesus was arrested on the day after the Passover meal, because that would have been on the feast. It would also have been upon the holy convocation festival day, when no work was allowed. And this year it was extra-special, for it fell directly upon the regular sabbath-day, making it an high day sabbath. Although it is of questionable accuracy, the Jewish record says that “Yeshua was killed on the evening of Passover, the day before the Sabbath” (Babylonian Talmud, folio 43).

     According to Clarke, it was common to punish criminals during the feasts, but in the case of Jesus it would have been dangerous, for He had become very popular among the people. The Jewish rulers risked an uproar. As many as three million Jews crowded into Jerusalem at the time of the Passover, coming from all over the Roman world.

6 Now when Jesus was in Bethany, in the house of Simon the leper,

     At least twice in Jesus’ ministry, a woman is seen anointing Jesus with ointment. Only Luke records the first one, which took place at a Pharisee’s house in Galilee earlier in His ministry (Luke 7:36-50). The second anointing took place during the last week of His ministry as described by Matthew, Mark and John. Matthew and Mark say it took place in Bethany at the house of Simon the leper, but do not name the woman (Mark 14:3-9). John notes that the woman was Mary, the sister of Martha and Lazarus who lived in Bethany, and says it happened six days before the Passover (John 12:1-8).

     Because Matthew 26:2 seems to indicate that the anointing took place two days before the Passover, some scholars propose two separate anointings just four days apart. Yet it seems unlikely that Judas Iscariot would pronounce the same complaints and Jesus would give the same reprimand so close together. I believe Matthew, Mark, and John all relate the same event, but that while John gives the correct chronology (the anointing happened 6 days before the Passover), Matthew and Mark record the occasion topically and connect it with Judas’ decision to betray Jesus. For it was Judas who was indignant at Mary for wasting expensive ointment (John 12:4-8), and although the Gospels do not directly say so, it appears that this very incident triggered his decision to betray Christ to the chief priests. So Mary anointed Jesus upon His arrival in Jerusalem six days before the feast. Judas meanwhile, after four days of lingering bitterness and indignation for being reprimanded by Christ, decided to become a traitor (two days before the Passover according to Matthew). See also our notes for John 12:1-3.

7 There came unto him a woman having an alabaster box of very precious ointment, and poured it on his head, as he sat at meat.

     The woman was Mary, the sister of Martha and Lazarus (John 12:3). This took place not many days after Jesus had raised Lazarus from the dead. Some think Mary was thanking Christ for that unthinkable miracle. The ointment was very expensive, worth about one year’s wages for a working man (John 12:5).

     The gospel of John says she also anointed His feet, which some think contradicts Mark and Matthew’s account. Yet according to Luke 7:46, anointing the head was not uncommon (Luke 7:46). The head and feet appear together in the NT on several occasions and have symbolic implications. The head symbolizes power and authority; the feet are used symbolically of dominion. The Mighty Angel of Rev 10:1 has a rainbow upon His head and pillars of fire for feet. See also 1Cor 12:21; Eph 1:22; Rev 12:1.

     The alabaster box was probably a flask or jar made of alabaster. Mary brake the box (Mark 14:3), and the house was filled with the odour of the ointment (John 12:3). Spikenard was a very expensive and well-favored perfume/ointment used by kings and the very rich; where did Mary get it? (see Song 1:12; 4:14). Jesus said this anointing predicted His burial (Mat 16:12), and there are indeed several interesting parallels: 

  • Like the alabaster box, Jesus’ body was broken for us (1Cor 11:24).
  • Like the very costly ointment, Jesus’ precious blood was poured out (1Pet 1:19).
  • Like Mary’s beautiful act, Jesus’ death was an action of pure love (Rom 5:8).
  • Like the expensive ointment, Jesus’ blood cost the Father very much (1Pet 1:19).
  • Like the room filled with fragrance, so the world is filled with the savour of His knowledge, grace and victory (2Cor 2:14)
  • Sadly, just as Mary’s anointing was criticized by some, so is Christ’s death often cause of strife and criticism (1Cor 1:23)
  • Yet where-ever the Gospel is preached, the truth of God’s love is told and retold down to this very day (Mat 26:13).

8 But when his disciples saw it, they had indignation, saying, To what purpose is this waste? 9 For this ointment might have been sold for much, and given to the poor.

     It appears that Judas Iscariot was the one with critical thoughts toward Mary. These he articulated among the disciples (John 12:4). It also seems that he could not accept Jesus’ reprimand (Mat 26:10-11; John 12:7-8), and his unforgiving, vindictive attitude caused him to betray his own master.

     The “waste” could be either monetary or in the quantity of ointment, for both were excessive (John 12:3-5). To use a whole pound of perfume for one person at one occasion appeared entirely too extravagant for Judas and probably the rest of the disciples too. Think of using a year’s worth of money on one sprinkling of perfume! But clearly, Mary did not skimp when it came to expressing her love for Christ. Like the woman who contributed her only mite to God, Mary gave everything. What motivated her act of love? The Gospels are clear that the disciples did not understand when Jesus explained that He must be crucified and die (v2); but did Mary’s heart faintly grasp it? Jesus answer hints that perhaps she had. She did it for my burial (v12). Whatever the case, Mary’s devotion and self-sacrifice are clear examples for the believer to appreciate.

     It is an unfortunately common ploy, even among Christians, to denigrate or dismiss someone’s good deed by proposing that a more righteous deed should have been done. While all along they themselves have done neither!

10 When Jesus understood it, he said unto them, Why trouble ye the woman? for she hath wrought a good work upon me. 11 For ye have the poor always with you; but me ye have not always. 12 For in that she hath poured this ointment on my body, she did it for my burial.

     Jesus had earlier said of Mary, that she hath chosen that good part, which shall not be taken away from her (Luke 10:42). On that occasion, Mary had been too busy conversing with Jesus to be concerned with helping her sister prepare the meal, and Martha asked Jesus to force her to help.

13 Verily I say unto you, Wheresoever this gospel shall be preached in the whole world, there shall also this, that this woman hath done, be told for a memorial of her.

     What a prophetic promise! And how truly it has been fulfilled. That a simple Israelite woman would be remembered as long as the world stands for this one deed is incredible. Yet, above all the great stories of emperors, conquerors and intellectuals, the story of Mary anointing the head and feet of Jesus is known and admired! It has been told over and over down through the years, blessing and encouraging many. For if a cup of water given in the name of disciple merits a reward (Mat 10:42), how much more the anointing of Jesus for His burial?

     In the time of Jesus, a Jewish woman not only had a hard life, she had few rights under the OT law. The coming of Christ and the Gospels began to change things. Jesus often recognized and exalted the deeds and faith of women. It was a group of women who followed Him to the cross and they became the first witnesses of His resurrection. My personal favorite is the Gentile woman who, in spite of being opposed by all, refused to give up until Christ blessed her (Mat 15:21-28).

14 Then one of the twelve, called Judas Iscariot, went unto the chief priests, 15 And said unto them, What will ye give me, and I will deliver him unto you? And they covenanted with him for thirty pieces of silver. 16 And from that time he sought opportunity to betray him.

     The chief priests could not believe their good fortune. Judas, one of the Jesus’ elite inner group, was offering a way to implement their earlier scheme to have Him killed. It needed to be done carefully, for He was a very popular figure in one segment of the population. They needed to apprehend Him quietly to avoid making a scene (Mat 26:3-5), but they also needed to depreciate His rising reputation to avoid provoking a revolt (John 12:19) Jesus was betrayed for thirty pieces of silver, a fact that was foretold by the OT prophets (see note Mat 27:3, Zech 11:12). Joseph, who is a type of Christ’s perfection and sinlessness, was sold for twenty pieces of silver (Gen 37:28). The symbolic meanings of these numbers might add to the signification of these types.

     According to Josephus, one shekel of silver was worth about 4 denarii (or pence), which would make the total 120 pence. The ointment with which Mary anointed Jesus, which had provoked Judas’ outrage, was worth 300 pence. One penny was worth about one day’s wages (Mat 20:2). The blood money amount seems low; how could Judas so meanly value his Master? The contrast in Mary’s gift and Judas’ graft illustrates the true follower of Jesus giving his very best and doing his utmost to honor the Master, while the insincere follower gives Him the seconds that are left over in his life. Perhaps without even realizing it, they count His blood to be a cheap thing (Heb 10:29). Many begin with Christ, but end betraying the Lord.

     There is an astonishing parallel between Jesus’ betrayal and disgrace before the people and David’s betrayal by Absalom in 2Samuel 16. Read our notes in that chapter.

17 Now the first day of the feast of unleavened bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the passover?

     The disciples came to Jesus on the 13th Nisan, the day before the Passover lamb was required to be slain and eaten. The text implies that it was on the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread (also Mark 14:12; Luke 22:7), but technically speaking it could not have been, for the official first day of that feast began on the 15th, or one day after the Passover. 

     The first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread was a holy, festival day during which no servile work (see note John 13:1) was permitted and all Jewish males were called by holy convocation to the Temple (Ex 12:14-20). This particular year, the first day happened to fall upon the normal sabbath day, making it a high day. When the Gospels say, the first day of Unleavened Bread, they refer to the unofficial first day of that Feast, for there were several ceremonies that were required to be performed in the days prior. One of these was a careful ritual whereby all leaven was removed from the house two days before the special sabbath day that officially marked the beginning of the Feast of Unleavened Bread (see below). And so, far from being erroneous, this verse is accurate to the Jewish customs in observing the Feast. Strictly speaking, the Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread were two separate ceremonial events, but since the Passover ended on the 14th and the Unleavened Bread began the 15th, the whole Passover/Unleavened Bread celebration was called, the Feast of Unleavened Bread, or simply, the Passover (Luke 22:1).

     In the Law, the Passover began with the careful selection of an unblemished lamb on the 10th of the month, four days before it was killed and eaten (Ex 12:3). This corresponds to the day that Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a donkey, and also to the days of testing and proving that He passed in the temple with the scribes and Pharisees. The main preparations for the Passover however, began on the night of the 13th, when by special family ritual the house was prepared for the next day’s ceremony. The chief purpose of the ritual was to remove all leaven from their houses for seven days according to the Law (Ex 12:15). In effect this became 8 days, for the leaven was removed the day before the Feast of Unleavened Bread began (note that the evening of the 13th was legally the 14th because the Jewish day began at nightfall). To the present day, the real preparations for the Passover take place on the 13th Nisan, when bitter herbs and other specialties are purchased and prepared, and the house is carefully searched and cleaned (often by candelight at evening) to make sure that all leaven has been completely purged. Even the cracks of the cupboards are thoroughly swept and any utensils that have had leaven in them are either boiled or put outside until the Feast of Unleavened Bread is over. Every room of the house is checked and swept clean, and if any chametz is found, it is burned. In some Jewish quarters, a special seder meal is eaten that same evening, followed by a ritual known as the “fast of the firstborn.” In the year that Jesus died, the 13th would have fallen on Thursday, the day before His passion. John’s account, which was written 40-50 years after the Synoptics, seems to have purposely clarified parts of the earlier Gospels. And notably, the Last Supper and day of Jesus’ crucifixion is one of the topics he elucidates.

     The famous disagreement of the Synoptic Gospels with John over the day that Jesus was crucified has been a topic of considerable dispute. At issue is that John carefully and emphatically describes Jesus’ death as occurring at the same time that the Passover lambs were slain in the temple (afternoon of 14th Nisan), yet the Synoptics say Jesus and His disciples ate the Passover. Current scholarship has assigned higher value to the Synoptics and declared that John did not intend to say that Jesus died on the Passover. I have read these treatises and find them deficient, first by dismissing John’s very clear historical details and second by ignoring the traditional events surrounding the Jewish Passover that clear up the Synoptics’ account. There are too many specifics in John that require a Passover crucifixion (John 13:1-2; 13:29; 18:28; 19:14). See also my note on John 13:1.

     The following facts convince me that Jesus died on 14th Nisan, the same day and time that the Passover lambs were killed in the temple just as the Apostle John has shown. First, the typology and the year-date/day combination as detailed by John are overwhelming. Can anyone sincerely believe that the Jewish leaders would have so violated the Sabbath (the high day Unleavened Bread Sabbath!) by convening two Sanhedrin meetings and three Roman governor meetings upon it, and then having Jesus killed that day? Even the Synoptics say that the Jews had decided to be sure not to arrest Him during the feast (Mat 26:5; Mark 14:2). It is incredible to think that they would have gotten up from their Passover meals and followed Judas in direct violation of this holy, high day Sabbath which had already begun about 6 hours earlier at sundown! Moreover, this would conflict with the Synoptics themselves, for they all say that Jesus did not die on a Sabbath day (Luke 23:54; Mark 15:42; Mat 27:62).

     Why then do the Synoptics say that Jesus observed the Passover with His disciples the day before He died? How can these things be? Following are two ways to harmonize John with the Synoptics such that both give an accurate, single account. While some of these conclusions are my own, I am largely indebted to Adam Clarke’s notes on Mat 26:75.

  1. At the Last Supper on the 13th Nisan, Jesus and His disciples observed the full requirements of the Jewish Passover, but one day earlier than the rest of the Jews.
    1. At the Last Supper on the 13th Nisan, Jesus did not observe the Jewish Passover, but the new Christian “Passover,” the Holy Communion of the New Covenant which was to replace forever the Passover of the Old Covenant.

     The arguments for option one are as follows. There are reasons to believe that the Jews permitted the Passover meal to be observed on both the 13th and 14th Nisan this particular year. The Jewish calendar was not like our own and needed to be re-calibrated often. By an official ceremony, the Passover date was fixed about two weeks before by a senate which convened at the end of every month to establish the appearance of the new moon marking the beginning of each month. When enough approved witnesses testified that they had seen the new moon, the first day of the month was ratified and the calendar dates for the feasts were fixed. Sometimes, perhaps because of bad weather, there were no witnesses for the new moon and the senate was forced to calculate the first day of the month using the previous full moon as reference. But if later witnesses came and proved the senate wrong, the calendar had to be changed. In these cases the Jews allowed both days to serve as acceptable feast days. Thus it came to be that the Passover was observed on both the 13th and 14th Nisan. Several ancient Jewish authorities meticulously describe these processes, yet do not give the particular years in which they were employed. A second reason has been advanced that would allow for the official Passover to be observed on both the 13th and 14th Nisan. It is proposed that the Jewish population had grown so much that there was not enough time to slay and process over a quarter million lambs (Josephus’ number) at the brazen altar of the temple in the 3-4 hours mandated by the Law. It is supposed that the Jews had expanded the time period to include the evening before, such that the lambs would have been slain on two occasions, on the 13th Nisan and the 14th Nisan.

     The second option argues that Jesus did not eat the normal Jewish Passover, but a special one at which He instituted the ordinances of communion and feetwashing. This new Christian “Passover” was the Holy Communion of the New Covenant which was to replace forever the Old Covenant Passover. At the death of Christ, the Law officially ended and the Era of Grace began. The significance is this: the Passover of the old and the Communion of the New point to the same event, one looking forward and the other looking back. So while the Synoptics rightly associate Christ’s death to the last Passover, John highlights the first Communion and clarifies that the actual Jewish Passover ceremony took place while Jesus was dying on the Cross. Thus, John says before the feast of the Passover Jesus held a supper with His disciples (John 13:1-2; 13:29; 18:28; 19:14), the same supper at which the Synoptics agree that He officiated the first communion. The “Passover” that Jesus so desired to eat (Luke 22:15) was a spiritual, mystical one at which He substituted bread and wine for the lamb. And ever since, nothing has been so universally held sacred among the varied Christian divisions and denominations as the rite of Communion. The Synoptics would then give an accurate account of the disciples preparing for the normal Passover lamb on the 13th Nisan exactly according to the tradition we described above. Perhaps they had lamb and bitter herbs, perhaps not; none of the Gospels are clear on that. This option brings out the types and prophecies of the death of Christ contained in the Passover, for after showing the links between the two, John says that at the Last Supper Jesus instituted Communion and Feetwashing to replace forever the old rites of the Passover.

18 And he said, Go into the city to such a man, and say unto him, The Master saith, My time is at hand; I will keep the passover at thy house with my disciples. 19 And the disciples did as Jesus had appointed them; and they made ready the passover.

     The other Gospels supply more details, saying that Jesus sent Peter and John ahead into Jerusalem (Luke 22:7-13) with instructions to follow a man whom they would see walking with a pitcher of water. At the house where the man stopped, they should tell the owner that the Master wanted to use his guestchamber to eat the passover with His disciples (Mark 14:12-17). The manner in which the house was obtained must be counted a miracle which parallels the way Jesus obtained the colt for His triumphal entry into Jerusalem a few days earlier (Luke 19:28-34).

     My time is at hand. Why did Jesus wish the disciples to tell the man this? See Mark 1:15; 2Tim 4:6; Rev 1:3.

     Made ready the Passover. Meaning (to my mind) that they bought the special herbs and unleavened bread, and prepared the room by carefully searching out and disposing all leaven. This practice is still done today on the day before the lamb is killed and eaten (see note on v17). Those who believe that Jesus ate the Jewish Passover on the same night of His betrayal understand it differently. To them, that Peter and John made ready the Passover means they ceremonially slaughtered the lamb in the temple and roasted it according to the prescribed manner. It should be noted however, that the Greek verb for made ready (hetoimazo) is never associated with preparing the Lamb, or any other sacrifice for that matter, even though it is a fairly common word in both the New Testament and the Septuagint.

20 Now when the even was come, he sat down with the twelve. 21 And as they did eat, he said, Verily I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me. 22 And they were exceeding sorrowful, and began every one of them to say unto him, Lord, is it I?

     There is little in the Gospel accounts that might be taken to describe a typical Passover meal at this Last Supper. Rather, it seems to have been a normal Jewish meal of broth, bread and wine, in which Jesus sat down with the twelve (Mark 14:18; Luke 22:14; John 13:4). The Law however, says the Passover was to be eaten standing up, clothed for service and with staff in hand (Ex 12:11). Scholars who advocate that Jesus ate the Passover lamb believe the Jews no longer followed that rule. The meal-time custom of the day was to recline on one’s side upon low couches around the table, with the feet away and the head close to the table (as John 13:23).

     Jesus’ stunning revelation that someone in that very room was going to betray Him is given much attention by all four Gospels (Mark 14:17-21; Luke 22:21-22; John 13:18-30), but John’s detailed account most clearly describes the Twelve’s reactions. While Jesus’ words were clear, the disciples somehow did not grasp that that very night one of them would betray Him. They also did not understand that He was going to be crucified, although He had told them plainly (Mat 26:2). How did they not see these things? Apparently God, who had carefully designed all these events, kept their minds from understanding, for it was not intended that the disciples interfere, either with Judas’ betrayal or with Jesus’ crucifixion. Earlier, the hands of the wicked Jews were supernaturally withheld when they had tried to arrest Christ, for His hour had not yet come (John 7:30; 8:20). And so, nobody stopped Judas as he left the table to begin his wicked deed (see note John 13:29).

     Is it I? This self-examination of every disciple before the Lord pre-figures the spiritual self-examination that is commanded before each Communion service (see note v26). This time the disciples did not look sideways at their brother, suspecting this one or that, but each one was honestly troubled for his own heart. And it is a vital concern for every person: who can know what is in the depths of a man’s heart? (Jer 17:9). The case of Judas illustrates that a man can know Christ, even be His follower, and then betray Him!

23 And he answered and said, He that dippeth his hand with me in the dish, the same shall betray me. 24 The Son of man goeth as it is written of him: but woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! it had been good for that man if he had not been born.

     In those days, people did not use plates, forks and spoons. Instead, everyone ate from the same dish. If there were too many people to be able to reach one dish, more dishes were added. By saying that His betrayer was even then eating at the same table, Jesus was loosely quoting David, who wrote of his betrayer Ahithophel, Yea, mine own familiar friend, in whom I trusted, which did eat of my bread, hath lifted up his heel against me (Ps 41:9). This is more clearly seen in the Fourth Gospel (see John 13:18).

     Judas’ sin was great. The punishment he must eternally endure for betraying the Lord make it better that he had not been born. This is true of every man who puts his hand to the plow and then looks back (Luke 9:62). The false doctrines regarding Hell cannot stand before this verse, for it depicts Judas and like unrepentant sinners with no hope of restoration nor end to their suffering. If there were an end, it could not be said that it would be better for that man to not have been born. Judas did not repent of his sin, so this decree against him is merited. Peter sin was also great; he denied three times that he even knew a Jesus of Nazareth. Yet Peter repented and was forgiven (see note Mat 27:5).

      As it is written of Him. Jesus’ betrayal and death is probably most strikingly foretold in Isaiah 53, but see also Dan 9:26, Ps 22:1-31, and 2Sam 16. Of course, the Apostles did not understand this until after His death and resurrection, but then it struck them like a lightning bolt. The Old Testament Scriptures were suddenly opened to them in blazing truth that grew ever brighter as they progressed in experience and knowledge (2Pet 1:19). It was so compellingly strong that all but one would give his life for boldly preaching Jesus Christ. But at this point, the disciples’ minds did not grasp those truths. Peter even tried to correct Jesus when He told them about His coming death (Mat 16:21-23).

25 Then Judas, which betrayed him, answered and said, Master, is it I? He said unto him, Thou hast said.

     From our privileged vantage point looking back at Judas’ terrible deed, we are appalled to hear him so callously ask, “Lord, is it I?”

     Of course he knew that Jesus was speaking of him! He had already conspired with the chief priests. He was minutes away from acting on his plan. It is possible that Judas didn’t expect Jesus to be arrested. For more than three years now, He had made fools out of all who tried to trap Him, whether by word or force. Maybe Judas, a secret thief according to John 12:6, saw a way to make some easy money. On the other hand, the manner in which Judas betrayed Jesus can hardly be explained within that theory. More likely, Judas was angry at Jesus for criticizing him a few days earlier and sought for revenge.

     John describes more graphically Judas being exposed as the betrayer. Jesus, as He served the Communion bread, said, “The one to whom I give this piece of bread is he that will betray Me.” Then He gave it to Judas (John 13:21-26). And after eating the bread, Satan entered Judas’ heart (John 13:27, compare with 1Cor 11:27-32). This illustrates the difference between Judas’ betrayal and Peter’s denial. Judas allowed Satan to corrupt his heart and coerce him to desist from his decision to follow Christ; that led him directly to his sinful end. Peter, though he failed miserably in temptation, did not allow Satan to change his heart.

     Thou hast said. This is the first of three times in the next few hours that Jesus will say these words. First to Judas, then to the Jewish high priest (Mat 26:64) and finally to Pontius Pilate (Mat 27:11). See also Mark 15:2; Luke 22:70; 23:3; John 18:37. “Yes, it is so; it is even as you have said.”    

     Bible commentators have wrestled with the circumstances and implications involving Judas Iscariot. Jesus himself had chosen the Twelve; why then did He choose Judas? And was Judas an evil-hearted man always? What caused Judas to betray Christ? I believe that at the beginning Judas was a sincere, honest follower of Christ. Not one of the Apostles suspected Judas when Jesus said one of them would betray Him. Peter didn’t lean over to John and say, “It wouldn’t surprise me that He’s talking about Judas. He doesn’t seem quite like the rest of us…” No, Judas was an honest seeker. Yet like all men, he had his “besetting sins,” and one of those we know was greed. Additionally, the Gospels imply that he was prone to take offense. I believe that Judas allowed Jesus’ rebuke (John 12:2-8) to fester in his heart. The root of bitterness that he cultivated eventually brought forth the wish for revenge and retaliation (see note on Mat 26:6; John 13:26).

26 And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body.

     These verses describe the origins of the Christian ordinance of Communion. The parallel accounts are in Mark 14:22-26 and Luke 22:15-20. The gospel of John does not mention the Communion, but does record the ordinance of Feetwashing, which is missing in the other Gospels. The fourth Gospel is filled with details, events and information that the previous three had not included. Although omitting the event, John’s Gospel contains the best explanation of the symbolisms and spiritual purposes for the rite of Communion (John 6:51-58) which the Apostles only later associated with Jesus’ mystical words at the Last Supper, This is My body, which is broken for you. Interestingly Paul, the only Apostle who was not at this first Communion, presents the best case for it to be a perpetual ordinance in the body of Christ (see 1Cor 11:23-31).

     On the night before His death, Jesus shared a last, private meal with the Twelve, telling them many things in fairly plain language that they nevertheless did not grasp at the time. John records 5 whole chapters of Jesus’ final discourses with the Apostles, which especially concern His departure and the coming of the Spirit. His speech however, was sufficiently mixed with figurative language to temporarily veil the imminent future from them. 

     The Jewish Passover and the Christian Communion are ceremonies representing the same monumental event: the death of the Son of God for the sins of the world. For 1500 years, the Old Covenant ceremony of Passover looked forward in prophetic types and symbolism to this day, but now the New Covenant ritual of Communion looks back in commemoration. The Passover was an elaborate affair with many precise requirements: a particular day and time, the exact kind of food, how it must be prepared and eaten, meticulous details and prohibitions, etc. The Communion however, has no rules at all for its observance. In fact, the Gospels seem to be written to avoid commanding any details. No particular date nor time of day is specified and even the emblems are imprecisely given. Should the bread be leavened or unleavened? Jesus used unleavened bread, for the Jews removed all leaven from their houses the day before the Passover lamb was slain and were not permitted to use leaven for the next 8 days. Yet nothing is said about using unleavened bread in the Communion – even early church history is generally silent. And the wine…or is to be wine? In all four accounts it is called the cup. Some scholars have made a case for using water, following its symbolic meaning in passages like John 4:14. Jewish Passover tradition and Jesus’ later reference to the fruit of the vine (Luke 22:18) indicate that wine was the beverage used at the first Communion. Yet the question remains, is the emblem the fruit of the vine, or the cup, or both?

     Communion is a deeply meaningful and solemn ceremony which signifies the very basis of our salvation and perseverance in the Savior (John 15:4). The bread and the wine are symbols of Christ’s body and blood, the necessary foods that maintain spiritual life (John 6:51). These spiritual foods are not Christ’s literal body and blood, but His Word and His shed blood whereby forgiveness and cleansing is made available to the sons of Adam. The cup is a symbol of suffering for doing the will of God (Mat 26:39); it signifies the result of those accepting the primary emblems.

     In a sense, Communion is a periodic renewal of Baptism. Salvation results from believing that Christ the Son of God died for our sins and accepting His sacrifice in my life. This confession is physically demonstrated by Baptism (just once). The Communion affirms continued faith in one’s baptism by periodic commemoration of that monumental transaction whereby we have salvation and the future hope of glory.

     The early churches met every Sunday to break bread, or, eat the Lord’s supper (1Cor 11:20; Acts 2:42; 20:7). This pattern continued in Catholicism, early Anabaptism and even certain denominations today. Others, like most present-day Anabaptists, have a special service two or three times a year for the observance of Communion and Feetwashing (John 13:3-17). The meeting is dedicated entirely to commemorating those two ordinances. A particular benefit of periodically (as opposed to weekly) sharing the bread and cup is to practice “closed communion,” which is the custom of breaking bread only with those of like faith and practice. The Communion service is unique as an ordinance in that it is designed to be observed as a church body; not individually nor by family, but collectively as a brotherhood of believers united in faith and mutual love. See our notes in 1Cor 11:27-33.

     This is My body. The bread is not the literal body of Christ, but a symbol of it. The Catholics, and even some Protestants, believe that the bread and wine in some mystical way become the physical body and blood of Jesus. There is no possible benefit to such an Old Covenant based notion. The New Covenant is a spiritual reality. Yes, it is lived in the physical, but the soul is a spiritual entity that cannot be perceived by the physical senses. The Sermon on the Mount depicts the great change from the physical Old Testament to the spiritual New Testament. See especially our notes in Mat 5:1. 

     Taking the Communion as a spiritual metaphor does not decrease its significance in commemorating Jesus’ death. Rather, it enhances the meaning and importance of the ceremony. As a metaphor, Take, eat; this is My body, indicates that a deeper, essential spiritual action is necessary far beyond the literal eating of bread. It teaches and reminds the saints of God to identify with Christ in all aspects of faith and love (Php 3:10), and to rely entirely on Him for spiritual sustenance (Mat 4:4).

     This is My body. As with other metaphors that Jesus used (I am the door…the good shepherd…the vine, etc), the meaning of Communion is destroyed by literalism. Literally eating Jesus’ body serves no purpose in God’s plan for reconciliation and relationship with those He created in His own image. Nevertheless, for many Communion has become a virtual ceremony for supernatural empowerment, some deep mystical rite of secret spiritual potentials rather than what it was intended to be: a beautiful aid for Christians to consecrate and memorialize that all-important event of Christ the Son of God dying on the cross in my place.

     All through His ministry, Jesus taught with parables, figurative expressions and symbolic language. It is no surprise that He did so one last time with the institution of Communion and Feetwashing. Nor is it coincidental that Jesus chose a family supper as the background for this ordinance, for the church body is likened to a family often in the Scriptures. Five (the number of grace) themes emerge strongly in the observance of Communion.

  • It is a memorial of the work of Jesus Christ in redeeming mankind from their sins (1Cor 11:23-25).
    • It is a re-commitment to lay down one’s will to do God’s will, to bear sufferings as Christ did (Mat 26:42; Php 3:10)
    • It is a time set aside for each Christian to re-examine his life to be sure that no weights or sins have crept in (1Cor 11:27-30).
    • It is a communion, or fellowship, of the local church body with Christ (1Cor 10:16-21).
    • It remembers and announces the imminent return of the Lord for His own (1Cor 11:26).

     All of these are daily aspects in the life of every true Christian and also of the local church. The Communion ceremony is an effective way to illustrate them and encourage their completion. Communion is presented again and again in the Scriptures as between Christ and the church body as a whole (Eph 5:32; John 17:21), although there is close communion between the individual and Christ as well. Ye(plural)are the body (1Cor 12:27).

27 And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; 28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

     Luke indicates there were two cups at the first Communion, one before supper and one after (Luke 22:17-20). The Pesach Mishna describes the seder of Passover with several cups of wine mixed with water. The cup as an emblem in the Communion service symbolizes suffering, commitment and submission to the will of God (see note v39), while the fruit of the vine symbolizes Christ’s shed blood.

     Scholars do not agree on the meaning of the word, testament (diatheke). Some say it means a covenant between two parties (Heb 8:1-13) while others say it is a will which takes effect at death (Heb 9:15-17, but see our notes there). I see Jesus drawing a parallel between the Old Covenant given at Mount Sinai, where blood was sprinkled upon the people to ratify the book of the Covenant (Ex 24:8), and the New Covenant given upon another place called Golgotha, where His own blood sprinkled upon the people ratified their names in the Book of Life. See 1Cor 11:25; Zech 9:11.

     There is a point of textual interest in this verse. In both Matthew and Mark, the word new is not found in the Greek text that most modern versions like the NIV and NASB follow. Why would the same word be missing from both books, seeing that it is found in Luke and the Textus Receptus of Matthew and Mark? Study Mat 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20. This textual detail adds support to the belief of many that Matthew was the foundation text for the book of Mark. Additionally, some scholars believe Matthew was first written in Hebrew, although the text has never been found (see my note for Mat 1:1).

29 But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.

     In the Scriptures, the Kingdom of heaven (or the Kingdom of God) are general terms that refer to both the Kingdom of Christ on earth and the heavenly state of the blessed after the world has ended (see note Mat 3:2). The Kingdom began when Jesus ascended into heaven after His resurrection, where He sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high to reign for ever and ever (Dan 2:44; Luke 1:33; Mat 16:28; Eph 1:20-21; Heb 1:3). The Father’s kingdom however, seems to refer more specifically to the future, heavenly aspect of the never-ending Kingdom of Christ. Jesus is now reigning from a heavenly throne over a spiritual Kingdom (Heb 8:1; Rom 5:17; 1Pet 3:22; Heb 10:12-13) that spans heaven and earth (Eph 3:15), but someday the earthly aspect of Christ’s Kingdom will end, even as the apostle Paul describes: Then cometh the end, when He shall have delivered up the Kingdom to God, even the Father (1Cor 15:24). And then shall the righteous shine forth in the kingdom of their Father (Mat 13:43; 25:34).

     The death of the World itself does not end the Kingdom of Christ, but signals a unique and transcendental metamorphic event at which all earthy things of eternal value will become heavenly (Php 3:21; Rom 8:21;1Cor 15:52; 2Pet 3:13). Jesus said, In my Father’s house are many mansions (John 14:2). It should be noted that the parallel passages (Mark 14:25; Luke 22:18) have the Kingdom of God instead of the Father’s Kingdom. Some therefore believe the three terms are entirely interchangeable and do not recognize the distinction we have assigned to the Father’s Kingdom.

     Regardless, it is clear that here Jesus predicts His imminent death by a specific sign: He would not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day He would drink it new with you in My Father’s Kingdom. According to the Greek dictionary, the word new (kainos) indicates “a different kind, of a new or novel sort.” A different Greek word (neos) is used to express new in relation to time. Jesus had promised that in the Kingdom, the Twelve would sit with Him, eating and drinking at His table and judging the twelve tribes of Israel (Mat 19:28). Luke has placed that passage at this very time and place (Luke 22:29-30). The implication is that with these words, Christ was saying the moment for Him to take the Kingdom had come. While the Scriptures do not directly say that Jesus drank wine with the disciples after His resurrection, it is strongly implied that He did (Luke 24:41-43; Acts 1:3; John 21:12).

     It would be injudicious to conclude from these passages that the heavenly experience will have literal thrones, tables, food and wine. I do not say it is impossible that these will be in heaven, but caution is certainly in order. The true eternal state of the blessed is not something the human mind can comprehend (1Cor 2:9; 2Cor 12:4). Physical bodies will be transformed into celestial bodies (1Cor 15:35-54; Php 3:21) and the present heavens and the earth will be made new (2Pet 3:13). Peter also used the word kainos instead of neos, which indicates that the new earth will be a different, novel kind of earth, not an earth simply remade as the present one. The Scriptures describe heaven using language that we can understand. That’s why the heavenly pictures of the Revelation have harps and palms, thrones and crowns, and linen garments and white horses. Will those items be literally found in heaven? I’m not one to say no, but I do believe the better approach is to take them as figurative, understandable descriptions of a spiritual reality that is incomprehensible to the present human mind.

30 And when they had sung an hymn, they went out into the mount of Olives.

     The gospel of Luke records at this point Peter’s vow to die for Christ (Luke 22:33-34). Likely, their conversation began before they went out to the mount of Olives and continued on the way. John’s Gospel records much dialogue between Jesus and the Apostles as they moved from the Upper Room and passed through the streets of Jerusalem and out of the city that night. See note John 18:1.

     According to the Pesach Mishna, it was customary to recite the Psalms of chapters 113-118 at the Passover feast. Remember however, that the mishnas were written several hundred years after Christ, so it is not possible to certainly know if they accurately reflect the customs of Jesus’ day. Commentators often assume that they do and tend to write misleadingly to that effect. They virtually never alert their readers to the possibility of divergence.

     If, as I believe, the Last Supper took place the night before the normal Passover, this hymn might have been associated with the ritual and meal of that evening, when all leaven was removed from the house (see note Mat 26:17). On the other hand, they might have sung the normal, Passover hymns. After all, Jesus made this the “Passover,” even though it did not fall upon the 14th Nisan. Although it is enticing to speculate (as some have done) that the Apostles recited at this point the highly messianic Ps 118, the Gospels do not confirm that. In the original Greek there is no noun, so literally it reads: “After singing, they went out…” Perhaps they did recite Ps 118, perhaps Jesus led them to Is 53. The text does not say.

31 Then saith Jesus unto them, All ye shall be offended because of me this night: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be scattered abroad. 32 But after I am risen again, I will go before you into Galilee.

     Jesus’ closest disciples all forsook Him that very night, a fact that He foretold by quoting the prophet: Awake, O sword, against My Shepherd, and against the Man that is My fellow, saith the LORD of hosts: smite the Shepherd and the sheep will be scattered (Zech 13:7). This prophecy was strikingly fulfilled. In just a few hours the Messiah would be arrested and smitten, and all of His followers would be scattered and hiding in fear. Even more striking is the revelation that the Messiah would be a Man and yet God (My Fellow).

     Christ also affirms that He would rise again and go before the disciples into Galilee to meet them there. After the crucifixion, the disciples remained in Jerusalem until the Feast of Unleavened Bread was finished (John 20:26). There He appeared to the women first and then to ten of the Apostles (John 20:19). A week later, He appeared to the Eleven (John 20:26), after which they travelled to Galilee and He appeared to seven of the disciples while fishing (John 21:1-14). He also met with them on a mountain He had chosen (Mat 28:16). Sometime afterward, they went back to Jerusalem for Pentecost, where Jesus bestowed upon them the Holy Spirit in the same upper room that He had shared with them the day before He died.

33 Peter answered and said unto him, Though all men shall be offended because of thee, yet will I never be offended. 34 Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, That this night, before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice.

     All four Gospels record this striking development. The parallel accounts are in Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34; John 13:38. Only a few hours before, Jesus had dropped a bombshell: one of His disciples was going to betray Him and deliver Him up to the Jews. Now He drops another: all of them would be offended that very night; they would all forsake Him. So much had happened this day that the disciples were probably overwhelmed, their heads spinning with questions. Peter was first to respond, asserting that he would never lose faith in Jesus, and would follow Him even unto death. The rest fervently agreed.

     Just a few hours later however, they would remember Jesus’ words with shock and bitter tears. Peter’s vow to never deny His Lord has echoed through the centuries for all to know and learn from. The Twelve would discover that it is easy to believe Jesus is the Christ when He is standing with you; but much harder when He has been suddenly taken away, apparently subdued by the very powers He had ruled and controlled at will. What a lesson for Christians today.

     Yet what a contrast in the after-effects involving Peter’s denial and Judas’ betrayal! After Jesus’ ascension into heaven, Peter became the point man for bringing the Gospel to the Gentiles, traveling far and to boldly proclaim Jesus the Nazarene as the Messiah of God. In the end, he lived up to his vow: he died on a cross for His Lord, crucified upside down because he did not think himself worthy to participate in the same manner of death as his Savior. The account of Peter denying Christ yet returning to be mightily used by God gives courage to Christians who have fallen into sin but are feeling God’s call to return to His control. Peter’s over-confidence in his own power and will is a warning for all Christians today. The Devil is far more powerful than man. We must have the power of Christ in us to defeat him!

    Luke adds that Jesus said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he might sift you as wheat (Luke 22:31-32). The analogy is to the good and bad being separating like the good wheat grain from the chaff (Mat 3:12). In Luke, the pronoun “you” is in the plural, which indicates that Jesus was speaking to all His disciples. This was testing time for the Apostles. Judas failed and was lost, Simon failed and was saved, Thomas too doubted at first but then believed.

35 Peter said unto him, Though I should die with thee, yet will I not deny thee. Likewise also said all the disciples.

     Several times Jesus had informed His disciples that He must go up to Jerusalem and be killed by the Jews, but that He would rise again three days later. Somehow His disciples did understand, but the scribes and Pharisees remembered after they had killed Him (see Mat 27:63). At this juncture, the gospel of Luke appends a short prophetic discourse in which Jesus again explains His imminent death and that it would dramatically change the lives of the Apostles: “Now is the time for courage and faith, for this that was written must yet be accomplished in Me: And he was reckoned among the transgressors. For the things concerning Me have reached the end. Remember that when I sent you into the cities of Israel without money, food, or shoes, you did not lack anything? Even so now you will lack nothing if you have faith in My words, that I will arise from the dead just as I have told you. Nevertheless, this time is utterly unlike what you experienced in Judah. Then I told you to go unprepared, but now it is a time to take money, swords and coats” (Luke 22:35-38).

     Again the disciples misunderstood, but their minds seized upon one of His words. “Look,” they said, “We have two swords!” Two swords for twelve men? And yet the Lord responds, “That is sufficient.”

     Jesus was instructing His disciples to buy swords and garments. He was preparing them for what was going to take place. Later it would help them to understand that this was a different hour in His ministry, a stunning, surreal time so strange and difficult. Their whole world was about to come crashing down around them. “What I am doing now you don’t understand, but later you will” (John 13:7). The perfect foreknowledge of Christ is seen often in the Gospel records of those last few hours that Christ was alone with His Apostles. He chose His words so that later they would be powerful faith-building evidences of His identity and mission.

36 Then cometh Jesus with them unto a place called Gethsemane, and saith unto the disciples, Sit ye here, while I go and pray yonder.

     Gethsemane was apparently a specific place on Mount Olivet. The picture is extremely powerful and moving: Jesus kneeling alone in prayer, caught in some awful and mysterious agony, suffering alone under a springtime tree on a dark and windswept night. Alone He wrestled with His mission, alone He sweated as it were great drops of blood (Luke 22:44; Is 29:16; 63:1-6). Gethsemane was His greatest trial, the beginning of that unfathomable task: to lay down His boundless power and authority and allow Himself to be spitefully abused by the powers of evil, taking upon His perfect, sinless soul all the dirty, sinful deeds of Man and bearing those sins to a miserable, lonely death, uncared for and unappreciated by the very ones He was dying for. If ever there was loneliness, it was this. Forsaken even by God, He felt; with nobody to understand and sympathize, nobody to help bear the emotions, pain and suffering. Gethsemane was a place of greatest agony, sorrow and internal struggle this world has ever known. A place where the fate of mankind hung in the balance as one Man fought the ultimate battle to save him.

     It was reading these verses that brought me to believe that when Jesus said He would spend three days and three nights in the heart of the earth (Mat 12:40), He was including Gethsemane. We count a partial day as one day, so beginning with these terrible hours in Gethsemane, Jesus spent Thursday night, Friday, Friday night, Saturday, Saturday night and Sunday in the heart of the earth – in the hands of wicked men and the spiritual powers of darkness (Luke 22:53). See note John 19:13.

37 And he took with him Peter and the two sons of Zebedee, and began to be sorrowful and very heavy. 38 Then saith he unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death: tarry ye here, and watch with me.

         Peter, James and John were Jesus’ closest earthly friends. He had chosen them to witness His transfiguration (Mat 17:1-13) and they only saw Him raise Jarius’ daughter from the dead (Mark 5:37-43). Now Jesus asks them to accompany Him in the time of His greatest trial and distress. But they could not watch with Him even an hour (Mat 26:40). Tarry ye here, and watch with Me, Jesus asked them. These are key activities that He asks of us too. The Greek word for tarry is often translated abide (see John 5:38; 15:4-7).

     As Jesus prayed, He began to be sorrowful and very heavy (lupeo, ademoneo). These words indicate a sorrow and anguish to the extreme, a veritable torture of the soul. Was not this the beginning of Jesus bearing our sins? Of accepting the offenses against His name that our sins have caused? To release a person from his sins, the forgiver must accept the offenses committed against him and bear those sins forever. Each of the Gospels adds a little to this incredible scene of Jesus enduring tremendous sorrow and distress of soul. The burden of Mankind’s rebellions, blasphemies and offenses were laid upon Him this night, when God made His soul an offering for sin (Is 53:10). The Greek words describing Jesus’ mystical, unfathomable inner anguish are the most profound ones available: sorrowful, very heavy, sore amazed, exceeding sorrowful even unto death, in an agony (Mat 26:37-38; Mark 14:33-34; Luke 22:44). The conflict within His soul was so great that His body showed it. Sweat began dripping off His face as He prayed more earnestly (Luke 22:44) that God would deliver Him from this hour of suffering. It was not a battle with Satan or some other foreign power, but a battle with Self, for He must lay down His own wishes and do the will of the Father.

     The coming death of His body was not what troubled Him, but that incomprehensible act of God, who made Him to be sin for us, who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him (2Cor 5:21). Our limited knowledge of God and the spiritual realm makes it impossible to understand what this means, yet the Scriptures are clear that in some deep, spiritual way Jesus suffered in order to redeem those His chosen ones from Satan’s grasp (1Pet 3:18). The sentence for sin is death, which is eternal separation from God and spiritual death in Hell (Rom 6:23; Mat 25:46). Jesus’ death has made it possible to be free from that inexorable law. Justin Martyr’s masterful exposition of Psalms 22:14-15 relates it to this very moment in Gethsemane: I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint: my heart is like wax; it is melted in the midst of my bowels. My strength is dried up like a potsherd; and my tongue cleaveth to my jaws; and thou hast brought me into the dust of death (Dialogue, ch103).

     The details of the Atonement are disputed by students and theologians. Was His death the payment of a debt? A satisfaction of God’s justice? An act of mercy? The ransom price to rescue Mankind? Was Jesus made sin, or a sin offering for us? Did He experience our punishment? Did He suffer as our substitute? Those questions are not crucially important, but how we answer them does color our concept of God and Sin. Regardless, the terrible spiritual agony that Jesus experienced at Gethsemane indicates a sinister, incomprehensible event was required to fulfill the conditions of our redemption. I believe that in it was in this dark garden, that the sinless Man accepted His mission to become our sin-bearer (see note for 1Pet 2:24).

     To make Jesus’ suffering simply a vicarious physical death confuses terms and demeans His sacrifice (any human could give his life to save someone else). It confuses the terms by postulating that Jesus’ physical death is equal to mankind’s spiritual death. Sin and guilt are spiritual conditions that permanently mark the inner Man as a result of a bad action or thought. As such, sin and guilt cannot be physically transferred to another person. Adam did not physically die the day that he ate the forbidden fruit, but he did die spiritually that very day. Are we to believe that Jesus’ extreme anguish of soul was concern for His approaching death when He knew that just three days later He would be alive again? No. Clearly some terrible, spiritual suffering began in Gethsemane when He accepted to bear the sins of the world.

     Jesus came to make reconciliation for iniquity (Dan 9:24), which required that God laid on Him the iniquity of us all (Isa 53:6). He bore our sins in His own body (1Pet 2:24). The Greek word there is soma, not sarx (flesh). He suffered and died as a sacrifice (Heb 9:28), as our sin-bearer (Is 53:4). Forgiveness is never free, nor does it have an end. When a person forgives another a debt of money, he not only releases the debtor from the obligation to repay, he agrees daily to himself bear the cost. Because of Jesus’ acts of mercy, God will forgive us (Eph 4:32); because the Savior has accepted to bear our offenses, God’s holiness and justice are maintained untarnished and unblemished.

39 And he went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.

     This is a model prayer for every suffering Christian! Jesus fully submitted Himself to the will of God, even while asking that God would intervene and make things easier. This act of humbling Himself to do God’s will brought Him the greatest honor and glory (Php 2:8-9; Heb 5:7-9). So will it be for His followers.

     Let this cup pass from Me. This was the hour that the power of darkness seemingly possessed His soul (Luke 22:53). Jesus knew it was the will of the Father that He suffer and die to make atonement for the sins of the people (Is 53:10; Luke 9:22; John 12:27). But He naturally recoiled at the thought. His prayer shows just how difficult it was for Him to agree to perform that terrible task. It also shows His obedience and willingness to do all that was required for the plan of salvation to be completed. Finally, His prayer shows how deeply He cared for and loved us, how highly He valued a real relationship with Man, and how much He was willing to sacrifice for that to be accomplished.

     The cup is one of the emblems of Communion (Mat 26:27-28; Luke 22:20; 1Cor 10:16; 11:25). Jesus used the phrase, “drink of the cup” as a metaphor of enduring pain, suffering some bitter experience at the hand of God (Ps 75:8; Is 51:22; John 18:11; Rev 14:10; 16:19). In taking the cup at Communion, the Christian is identifying with Christ’s sufferings (Php 3:10) and signifying that he is willing to submit his will to do all that Christ asks (John 18:11). See note on Mat 26:26.

     Some theologians link the cup to God’s wrath and anger against sin. They think that Jesus suffered the wrath of God when He bore the sins of mankind in His own body (see Poole). While I do not profess to understand the full spiritual details of Jesus bearing man’s sins and so satisfying that debt, it is very difficult for me to believe that Jesus experienced God’s wrath. His absence, yes (Mat 27:46); but His fury against sin? That does not sound like the Just One. Jesus was not the sinner but the sin-bearer. See notes at Mat 18:35; 20:28.

40 And he cometh unto the disciples, and findeth them asleep, and saith unto Peter, What, could ye not watch with me one hour? 41 Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak. 42 He went away again the second time, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if this cup may not pass away from me, except I drink it, thy will be done.

     Jesus had asked Peter, James and John to accompany Him alone to Gethsemane. There He shared with them that His soul was exceedingly sorrowful, even to the point of death. He asked them to pray with Him during this time of trial and distress. The disciples began well, but the hour was late and they were tired. Before an hour had passed, they were sound asleep.

     Watch and pray. Jesus uses this event to teach about overcoming temptation. Within every man, a great war is being waged between the things of the flesh and the things of the Spirit (Rom 8:5; Gal 5:17; Rom 7:23). As Paul said, the will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not (Rom 7:18). The answer and example that Jesus gives is: “Be vigilant and alert, and pray without fainting for strength.”

    Why did Jesus speak specifically to Peter? (Mark 14:37). Did Peter think these three failures to stay awake and pray with his Master was the fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy that before the night was over he would deny Him three times?

     This reminder to Watch reminds us of Jesus’ triple call to Watch given during the Olivet Discourse (Mat 24:42-43; 25:13). Three times Jesus had to wake the disciples; they had fallen asleep! The end of the world will find many sleeping spiritually.

43 And he came and found them asleep again: for their eyes were heavy. 44 And he left them, and went away again, and prayed the third time, saying the same words.

     Three times Jesus knelt to pray, three times He tried to get His closest earthly friends to join Him. In Biblical numerology, three is the number of the Triune God. Jesus prayed the same words three times, which signifies that the Trinity was in harmony concerning the plan of salvation.

     The disciples fell asleep because, in spite of the extraordinary events of the last 24 hours, they did not discern that this hour would mark the end of their time with Jesus on the earth. So too will it be at the end of the world. Even Christians will be caught unawares, sleeping when they should have been praying (see the parable of the ten virgins). Alexander Bruce writes:

“The breakdown of the disciples at the final crisis was due in part also to the want of clear perceptions of truth. They did not understand the doctrine concerning Christ. They believed their Master to be the Christ, the Son of the living God; but their faith was twined around a false theory of Messiah’s mission and career. In that theory the cross had no place. So long as the cross was only spoken about, their theory remained firmly rooted in their minds, and the words of their Master were speedily forgotten. But when the cross at length actually came, when the things which Jesus had foretold began to be fulfilled, then their theory went down like a tree suddenly smitten by a whirlwind, carrying the woodbine plant of their faith along with it. From the moment that Jesus was apprehended, all that remained of faith in their minds was simply a regret that they had been mistaken: “We trusted that it had been He who should have redeemed Israel.” How could any one act heroically in such circumstances?”

45 Then cometh he to his disciples, and saith unto them, Sleep on now, and take your rest: behold, the hour is at hand, and the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners. 46 Rise, let us be going: behold, he is at hand that doth betray me.

     Many versions treat Jesus’ first words to His disciples as a question, and this does make better sense of the passage (the original Greek had no punctuation marks). Using the parallel passages (Mark 14:41; Luke 22:46), we can paraphrase: “Returning to His disciples Jesus said, ‘Again I find you sound asleep? Resting when you should be praying? But you have slept enough now; behold, the hour has come that the Son of man must be betrayed into the hands of sinners. Get up, let us face the one who is to betray Me, for he is now here.'”

47 And while he yet spake, lo, Judas, one of the twelve, came, and with him a great multitude with swords and staves, from the chief priests and elders of the people. 48 Now he that betrayed him gave them a sign, saying, Whomsoever I shall kiss, that same is he: hold him fast. 49 And forthwith he came to Jesus, and said, Hail, master; and kissed him.

     What a strange choice for a sign! A kiss of friendship. We earlier speculated that perhaps Judas did not expect Jesus to be taken, for He had always easily escaped (see v25). That might explain the kiss, but Jesus quickly showed that He saw straight through Judas’ plans. Jesus said unto him, Judas, betrayest thou the Son of man with a kiss? (Luke 22:48). The words of David come to mind: Yea, mine own familiar friend, in whom I trusted, which did eat of my bread, hath lifted up his heel against me (Ps 41:9). Joab’s treacherous act of murdering Amasa involved a kiss of friendship too (2Sam 20:8-10).

     The sight of Jesus’ own disciple betraying Him with a kiss is jarring, yet the similarity to common Christian hypocrisy is no less jolting. Many say, “Lord, Lord, we love You,” but their actions continue in direct opposition to their words of affection and praise. They come to church on Sunday, singing songs and giving earnest testimonies, but then go out into the world and betray Him with their deeds. Christ knew Judas thoroughly, and He knows each one of us just as thoroughly. It is madness and highest stupidity to think that our praise and adoration can cover up disobedience to His commandments. True love is more than words; it is demonstrated by actions. Like Joab murdering Amasa while kissing him is the person who professes to love Christ while disobeying Him. He is in fact, crucifying the son of God afresh according to Heb 6:4-6.

50 And Jesus said unto him, Friend, wherefore art thou come? Then came they, and laid hands on Jesus, and took him.

     This is the third time in recent chapters that Jesus has addressed a selfish person as, Friend (see Mat 20:13; Mat 22:12). Christ acted honorably and justly always, even speaking kindly to His tormentors (Luke 23:34). John adds that at His words, the rough crowd fell backwards to the ground (John 18:6).

51 And, behold, one of them which were with Jesus stretched out his hand, and drew his sword, and struck a servant of the high priest’s, and smote off his ear. 52 Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.

     According to John 18:10, Peter was the one who wielded the sword and cut off the servant’s ear. The man’s name was Malchus. Jesus immediately touched and healed him (Luke 22:51). Did he later become a Christian? Jesus had told the Apostles just a few hours earlier that the time had come for them to buy swords (Luke 22:34-39), but when Peter used his sword, Christ reprimanded him. Reading that passage, it is clear that Jesus was not commanding the disciples to defend themselves, but was speaking prophetically. A great change was about to take place. The kingdom of Christ on earth would face persecution, affliction and death (see note Mat 10:34).

     Put up again thy sword into his place. Someone has famously said that when He disarmed Peter, Jesus disarmed all His followers from that moment forward. Non-retaliation is one of the great differences between the Old and New Covenants which Jesus taught from the beginning of His ministry. At the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus “upgraded the rules” regarding Kingdom-Christians and the sword (Mat 5:38-44). The early churches of Christ took note, sincerely following His teaching on violence, war and self-defense. For three centuries all Christianity followed the rule of non-resistance and refused to participate in violence and war. The change began with the Catholic apostasy upon the fusion of the Church with the Roman state in the time of the emperor Constantine. Since then, the churches of Christ were divided into two general groups, the Peace churches and the State churches. 

     Meekness, self-sacrifice and peace are characteristics that shape well the Gospel of Jesus Christ. It is confusion and contradiction to see the Kingdom of Christ wielding the sword, whether directly or through political powers. From the Catholic church to the reformers like Luther, Zwingli and Calvin, the result has always been bitterness, chaos and an increase in sinful activity. The New Kingdom is not of this world, else Peter and the rest of her citizens would take up the sword (John 18:36; Rev 13:10).

     Commentators who do not confess the doctrine of non-resistance are forced into odd interpretations of this passage. In general, they see Jesus warning the individual to not use the sword in vengeance, but that violence in self-defense or in support of the secular arm is acceptable. How can that be so? Peter was clearly wielding the sword in self-defense.

53 Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels? 54 But how then shall the scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be?

     The reason Christians should not defend themselves is because God has said He will take vengeance upon the wicked and defend the innocent. The word presently in the KJV means “at this very moment.” Jesus could have called for twelve legions of angels and the Father would have immediately sent them, but He had determined to drink the bitter cup to the end. He was not overpowered by Satan, but chose to lay down His power and life. Twelve is the number of the elect, the chosen of God.

     From the types and shadows of the Law to the revelations of the Prophets, the Old Testament foretells a Deliverer-Savior who would die for the people, a Messiah who must be cut off, but not for Himself (Dan 9:26), the very Son of God who would be despised and rejected of men…smitten of God…wounded for our transgressions…brought as a lamb to the slaughter…his soul an offering for sin (Is 53:1-12). See also Ps 22. Jesus opened these Scriptures to the Apostles (Luke 24:44-46) and the Holy Spirit continues to expound them in great measure.

55 In that same hour said Jesus to the multitudes, Are ye come out as against a thief with swords and staves for to take me? I sat daily with you teaching in the temple, and ye laid no hold on me. 56 But all this was done, that the scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled. Then all the disciples forsook him, and fled.

     They did not, could not take Him in the temple during the daytime because He spoke with authority (John 7:32, 45-46), and the people admired Him greatly (Mark 11:18). His arrest must be done secretly and quickly, before His supporters could react. Unknowingly, the Pharisees were fulfilling the Scripture in carrying their Savior to death. Therefore did Jesus give Himself into their hands, and let them bind Him (John 18:12). The eleven disciples, completely forgetting their fervent promises of just a few hours earlier to follow Him to the death, forsook Him and fled. Some of them followed secretly to see what would happen, but not one was willing to go with Him to die.

     Yet, what mighty change the eleven would evidence after they saw Him alive from the dead! All of them would go forth in astonishing conviction and power, proclaiming the Gospel until their own lives were taken by other wicked men. Atheists and Bible critics have no answer to such proof of Jesus’ resurrection. Perhaps one maniac might die in proclaiming a lie, but eleven men who were so weak that all fled in fear? Impossible. These men were invigorated with a Power and a Message beyond natural sources and means. 

57 And they that had laid hold on Jesus led him away to Caiaphas the high priest, where the scribes and the elders were assembled. 58 But Peter followed him afar off unto the high priest’s palace, and went in, and sat with the servants, to see the end.

     Here the Gospel of John explains that the band of Jews took Jesus first to Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas the high priest (John 18:13-14), who then sent him bound unto Caiaphas (John 18:24). Annas was evidently a very important person in Jewish politics and religion, having been the high priest himself earlier; Luke says both were high priests (Luke 3:2). John and Peter followed Jesus to see the end (Mat 26:58; Luke 22:54; John 18:15). Because John knew the high priest (John 18:15), he was able to enter the courtyard to watch and hear the proceedings. Peter had to wait outside until John spoke to the doorkeeper on his behalf (John 18:16).

59 Now the chief priests, and elders, and all the council, sought false witness against Jesus, to put him to death; 60 But found none: yea, though many false witnesses came, yet found they none. At the last came two false witnesses, 61 And said, This fellow said, I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days.

     It seems that the Sanhedrin was used to producing false witnesses to sanction its pre-determined course of action (see also Stephen’s martyrdom in Act 6:11-13). They had forsaken the law of Justice for the ever-changing law of doing “what was good for the people,” even if that meant the innocent must occasionally die (John 18:14). And so this fraudulent council, having decided that Jesus was bad for the people, determined to have Him put to death.

     Oddly enough, this time the Sanhedrin had problems producing two false witnesses. According to the OT law, two or three witnesses of wicked deeds were required before any man could be condemned to death (Deut 17:6-7; 19:15). They needed a charge of blasphemy, for that was grounds for the death sentence (v65), but the witnesses began to disagree with each other and argue over His exact words (Mark 14:59). This was however, the best accusation they could muster.

     The Jews had asked Jesus several times to give them a sign proving that He was heaven-sent, but Jesus would not oblige them (Mat 12:38-40). The miracles of healing, prediction, raising the dead and controlling the weather were enough. If they wouldn’t believe those, neither would they believe a sign from heaven (Luke 16:31). On another occasion (John 2:18), He answered with a cryptic sign: Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up (John 2:19). The Jews took Him to be speaking of the literal temple in Jerusalem (John 20:20), but He was referring to His own body (John 2:21).

     The basis for the men’s charge of blasphemy is not easily seen, even in their misquotation of His statement that He could destroy and rebuild the temple in three days. Perhaps a Jew might take that as threatening language, but blasphemy against God?    

62 And the high priest arose, and said unto him, Answerest thou nothing? what is it which these witness against thee? 63 But Jesus held his peace. And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God.

     Jesus did not answer because He was following God’s plan. He must die for the sins of the world. All through His ministry, Jesus was able to take the chief priests’ hard questions and two-edged tests and completely confound them. No doubt He could have utterly put them to silenced here again, but He answered them not a word. This was a different hour. This time He must give Himself into their hands to be killed. And so, Jesus held His peace, fulfilling the words of Isaiah the prophet concerning the Messiah: As a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so He openeth not His mouth (Is 53:7), and also David’s words in Ps 109:1-5.

     Throughout these mock trials, Jesus refrained from correcting His accusers’ misstatements. How difficult to hear someone misrepresent our words! Yet the worst trial was still to come. While He hung on the cross, this same statement was mockingly repeated to Him: Thou that destroyest the temple and buildest it in three days, save thyself. If thou be the Son of God, come down from the cross (Mat 27:39-40). How easily and quickly He could have proven their words wrong! But He bore the shame soundlessly (Heb 12:2). Even later before Pilate and Herod, Jesus spoke only a few sentences (Mat 27:11-14; Luke 23:9).

     I adjure thee by the living God. The Greek word, frequently found in the Septuagint, is often used to put a person under oath. “Swear to me by the living God that you are the Messiah, the son of God” (compare Gen 24:37; Mark 5:7). They asked this in order to charge Him with blasphemy (John 10:33). They had seen His miracles, heard His authoritative teaching, knew that He could forgive sins; do they really need to hear from His mouth that He is the Messiah? Only so they can kill Him by proclaiming Him guilty of blasphemy. That’s why, when He solemnly affirmed that yes, He is the Messiah, they went berserk. They hated Him, were determined to put Him to death. Wickedness and error hates goodness and truth!  

     The Christ. Which is to say in the Hebrew tongue, the Messiah. See the parallel accounts in Mark 14:61; Luke 22:70.

64 Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

     Thou hath said. See note Mat 26:25. The parallel accounts add some details, showing that Jesus knew that any answer He gave would make no difference. They had already determined to kill Him (Mark 14:61-64; Luke 22:67-71). Nevertheless, here Jesus confessed outright to being the Son of God and gave them a warning. One day they themselves would see Him sitting on the right hand of power and coming to judge the World. In one moment the tables will be turned; He will be the Judge and they must come before Him to be examined.

     This great confession of Jesus, that He was the Messiah, is highly steeped in messianic language from the Jewish Scriptures. The High Priest immediately understood them. For that, he promptly pronounced His confession to be blasphemous. See Ps 110:1; Dan 7:13.

     The Greek translation of hereafter is difficult. The NIV has “in the future.” Others render it, “from now on” or “henceforth.” The same Greek construction is found in Mat 23:39; 26:29; John 1:51; 13:19. Luke’s account also has hereafter, but not from the same Greek (Luke 22:69), and again some translations have, “from now on.” It is true that immediately after Jesus’ resurrection He ascended into heaven and took the throne of the Kingdom, but the Jewish leaders did not see Him sitting there until after they died. And while all will see His coming in the clouds of heaven, that will take place at the End, at the consummation of the earthly aspect of the Kingdom of Christ. Not many months later this same council would hear from Stephen a similar testimony (Acts 7:54-60).

65 Then the high priest rent his clothes, saying, He hath spoken blasphemy; what further need have we of witnesses? behold, now ye have heard his blasphemy. 66 What think ye? They answered and said, He is guilty of death.

     Jesus had said the same thing earlier (Mat 16:27; 24:30; 25:31), although without directly professing to be the Son of God. His works and doctrine made that profession and ably proved it to be true. See this illustrated in His confrontation with the Jews in John 10:36-38. Mark’s account gives the Sanhedrin more reason (if only slightly) to charge Him with blasphemy. His answer, I am (Mark 14:62), is God’s own name (Ex 3:14). See note for John 8:58.

     The Old Testament forbade the high priest to rend his clothes (Lev 21:10). The Scriptures do not give another instance of that happening. Kings and prophets would rend their clothes as a sign of deep grief, but never the high priest. It seems that the high priest was so incensed by Jesus’ declaration that one day He would come to judge them, that his anger and hatred boiled over and he lost control of himself.

     That the judge should become the accuser shows how far removed this court was from examining fairly the case before them. Yet a semblance of order surrounded the proceedings, for Lev 24:16 does call for the sentence of death upon any person who blasphemes God. This was the legal avenue whereby the court prosecuted Jesus’ crucifixion.

67 Then did they spit in his face, and buffeted him; and others smote him with the palms of their hands, 68 Saying, Prophesy unto us, thou Christ, Who is he that smote thee?

     They could not contain their hatred and jealousy, and although there was no place in justice for these atrocities, they began to abuse Him, spitting in His face, hitting Him with their hands and mocking Him with vicious words (Job 16:9-10). These highly dignified doctors of the Law acted like a mob of hooligans. See it foretold in Isaiah 50:6; 53:3. Jesus did not return one word against their humiliating acts, so they became emboldened to mock Him even more. Blindfolding Him, they struck Him and demanded that He give the name of the aggressor (Mark 14:65; Luke 22:64).

69 Now Peter sat without in the palace: and a damsel came unto him, saying, Thou also wast with Jesus of Galilee. 70 But he denied before them all, saying, I know not what thou sayest. 71 And when he was gone out into the porch, another maid saw him, and said unto them that were there, This fellow was also with Jesus of Nazareth. 72 And again he denied with an oath, I do not know the man. 73 And after a while came unto him they that stood by, and said to Peter, Surely thou also art one of them; for thy speech bewrayeth thee. 74 Then began he to curse and to swear, saying, I know not the man. And immediately the cock crew. 75 And Peter remembered the word of Jesus, which said unto him, Before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice. And he went out, and wept bitterly.

     By John’s gospel we learn that Peter and John had been able to enter the courtyard of the high priest, where they cautiously observed this shocking spectacle unfold (John 18:15-16; Luke 22:61). They were surely dismayed and stunned at the sudden turn of events. Just a few hours before, Jesus was invincible. What had happened? They did not understand.

     Many of Jesus’ disciples were from the region of Galilee, so when the people heard Peter speaking with a Galilean accent they began to suspect him of being a follower of Jesus who had infiltrated their company (Mark 14:70; Luke 22:59). And John 18:26 reveals that one of his accusers was a servant of the man whose ear Peter had just cut off in the garden of Gethsemane! Peter began to feel the heat of their suspicions. After the third person accused him of being a disciple of Jesus, he began to emphatically curse and swear that he did not even know the Man.

     Just as he finished saying the words, the rooster crowed. The sound penetrated Peter’s enflamed brain and he suddenly remembered his promise to Jesus to follow Him to the death, as well as Jesus reply, This night, before the cock crow, thou shalt deny Me thrice (Mat 26:34). Shaken to the core, Peter took a quick glance at the beaten form of his Master, and at that instant the Lord turned and looked upon Peter (Luke 22:61). What was in that look? Sadness? Condemnation? Forgiveness? Understanding? Whatever the case, Jesus and Peter communicated as much in their eyes as they could have with words. Immediately Peter was sorry, very sorry for his failure. He went out, and wept bitterly.

     Unlike Judas, Peter’s repentance extended to more than words. His boldness and commitment were renewed when Jesus rose from the grave. No Apostle more fervently preached Christ than Peter after the Holy Spirit entered his life. The special, personal talk Jesus had with Peter alone on the shores of lake Galilee a few weeks later (see John 21:15-19) forms a beautiful contrast to this moment in Caiaphas’ court.

     The gospel of Mark adds a small detail: This day, even in this night, before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice (Mark 14:30). Then it records Peter’s first denial after the cock crew once (Mark 14:68), and again after his third denial (Mark 14:72). Peter himself is thought to be a primary source for Mark’s account.

commentary Matthew 25

by

1 Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom.

     This chapter continues the prophetic tone of the previous chapter, which ended with the Parable of the Two Servants. Chapter 25 presents three more parables that concern the end of the world and the final judgment. Again and again the destinies of the righteous and the wicked are depicted in stark contrasts. The key verse of the chapter is found in the summation: And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal (Mat 25:46). Here is a quick list of the parables:

  1. The Parable of the Ten Virgins, which illustrates the importance of living always ready for Christ’s return (Mat 25:1-13).
  2. The Parable of the Talents, which teaches concerning the future rewards of the righteous and wicked at His return (Mat 25:14-30).
  3. The Parable of the Sheep and the Goats, which describes the separation of good and bad at His return as determined by a man’s work during his life on earth (Mat 25:31-46).

2 And five of them were wise, and five were foolish. 3 They that were foolish took their lamps, and took no oil with them: 4 But the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps.

     The parable of the ten virgins is based on a Jewish wedding celebration. It ends with the same warning as the previous two parables: Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh (Mat 25:13). Under Jewish custom, weddings were held at the home of the bride. After careful preparations for the celebration were finished, the bride and her friends would wait for the coming of the bridegroom and his friends. The two companies would meet and go together into the wedding feast.

     In the parable, Jesus is the Bridegroom (Mat 9:15) and the ten virgins represent the churches of Christ at the era of the End (2Cor 11:2). The wedding is the Marriage Supper of the Lamb (Rev 19:7). At nightfall, the ten virgins went out to await the coming of the Bridegroom. Some did not take extra oil for their lamps. Nobody expected Him to tarry so long in coming. When He finally did come, they had all fallen asleep! Startled awake, the five wise virgins quickly trimmed their lamps and arose to meet Him. But the five foolish virgins were out of oil and could not raise the flame on their dying lamps. They ran to get oil and then hurried to the house…too late! The doors were shut and the marriage celebration had already begun.

     Ten is a number often used figuratively to represent the whole (see glossary Rev 22:20), but I am also compelled to remember the account of Lot and the destruction of Sodom, for ten was the lowest limit of faith for which God would spare the city (Gen 18:32). The parable says that five were wise and five were foolish; in the symbolic sense, five is the number of grace. The picture should be sobering to every Christian, for the ten virgins denote the seemingly authentic Christians of the Kingdom. The ten were all chaste virgins, and had went out together to greet the Bridegroom. They had all received God’s grace and the oil of the Spirit; they all identified themselves with the Bridegroom and had taken the time to go out and wait for Him. Each of the ten seemed to be a true participant in the Wedding Party; all were associated with the Gospel, attended services, sang praises and prayed.

     Yet, there was one serious difference. The five foolish virgins were not prepared for a long wait. Their lamps began to go out. Like the unfaithful steward who wearied in waiting for his Lord’s return (Luke 12:40-48), these foolish virgins were deceived by the cares of this world and the deceitfulness of sin (Mat 13:22). They wist not that the Spirit of the Lord had departed from them (Judges 16:20). There are many Scriptural parallels in this parable: the wise and foolish carpenters of Mat 7:24-27, the faint-hearted ones who did not keep their garments clean of Rev 16:15, and the deceived workers of Mat 7:21-23 are just a few.

     The five foolish virgins had begun with oil in their lamps, but slowly they became lazy and selfish. Their works of love had all but ceased. They had the World in their hearts instead of the Spirit. These are the dismal Ephesians that the apostle John described in Rev 2:1-7, whose candlestick was ready to be removed for not persevering in doing the first works. The parable of the ten virgins speaks in strong language, not to the unsaved and uncaring of the world, but to Kingdom citizens who are faltering and wavering upon the line between Christ and the World! At the time of the end, saving faith will found in very low quantity in the churches of Christ. There will be a general laziness, a soothing sense of safety and contentment, a little folding of the hands to sleep….(Pro 6:10).

5 While the bridegroom tarried, they all slumbered and slept.

     The Bridegroom tarried so long that the ten virgins began to feel tired, and they all slumbered and slept. In the original language, the two words describe different conditions: “they became drowsy and fell asleep.” This seems to indicate that the five wise virgins were drowsy but the foolish ones had fallen completely asleep. In the Scriptures, to sleep often means to be spiritually deadened and living in sin (see 1Cor 11:30; 1Thes 5:6-7). It is high time to awake out of sleep, for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed (Rom 13:11).

     Even the five wise virgins were caught by surprise when the Bridegroom came, but they did have a sufficient supply of oil (the Spirit) which allowed them to trim their lamps and go out to meet Him. Their sleepy state indicates that the bridegroom had tarried far longer than they expected and that is what the Scriptures say will happen in the last days. Many will even begin to say that He will not return at all (2Pet 3:3-4). Remember that God is not constrained by time! One day to Him is as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day. These parables are given to dismiss all doubts and to warn us to be always vigilant and ready for His return.

     Some commentators dismiss the clear implication that the ten virgins had fallen asleep. Barnes does not believe it possible that half of the Christian church should be found unworthy. Why then didn’t Jesus say just one virgin had forgotten to take oil? The fact is that the Scriptures everywhere warn of great deception at the end, of apostasy so serious that even the very elect are in grave spiritual danger (Mat 24:24). The book of Jude is dedicated entirely to warn of false brethren who have crept unaware into the churches and defile the body of Christ. See also the sobering figure of judgment in Ezekiel 5.

6 And at midnight there was a cry made, Behold, the bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him. 7 Then all those virgins arose, and trimmed their lamps. 8 And the foolish said unto the wise, Give us of your oil; for our lamps are gone out. 9 But the wise answered, saying, Not so; lest there be not enough for us and you: but go ye rather to them that sell, and buy for yourselves. 10 And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage: and the door was shut.

     Christ will return at a time when He is least expected, at midnight, when even those who know He is coming will be caught sleeping (Mat 24:44). This is the crucial lesson of the parable, that Jesus will delay His return so long that many will be found spiritually sleeping. Engrossed in their own pursuits and living in deceived estate (Luke 21:34), these are not the World’s unsaved but the apparently genuine, visible virgins of Christ. Like the Laodicean church, they believe themselves to be spiritually rich and in need of nothing (Rev 3:17); instead, many of them are spiritually destitute. When the cry is made they are entirely unprepared. 

     Our lamps are gone out. The foolish virgins were caught unprepared. When the moment comes that Jesus requires a man’s soul, whether by death or by His return, there will be no time for repentance. Each one will be personally responsible! The fading light of a lamp parallels the hope of salvation dying with the fading of a life. The lamp of the wicked shall be put out (Pro 13:9).

     The foolish virgins envied the prudent ones and begged them to share the oil in their vessels. Oil is a common Biblical type of the Holy Spirit, the down-payment of a future inheritance (Eph 1:14) at the final resurrection of the body. No person will receive eternal life by the efforts of another, neither will simple association with the saints be sufficient for salvation. Every person must make the necessary steps to be saved, sealed and ready.

11 Afterward came also the other virgins, saying, Lord, Lord, open to us. 12 But he answered and said, Verily I say unto you, I know you not.

     The closed-door scene is separately described in Luke, after someone asked Jesus if only a few would be saved (Luke 13:23-28). He answered that many would seek to enter the Kingdom but would not be able, and then gave the parable of the lost outside the door saying, Lord, Lord, open unto us. But He will say, I know you not whence ye are; depart from Me, all ye workers of iniquity (Luke 13:27). The compromising Christians of Mat 7:21-23 who were denied entrance into heaven also said, Lord, Lord. And His response is very similar: I never knew you; depart from Me. The seriousness of completely following Christ cannot be over-emphasized. Many will discover that they were foolishly choosing to allow other things to distract them the only thing that is truly important: eternal life for their eternal soul.

     God’s testimony concerning two famous Old Testament characters illustrate this essential concept. Solomon is well-known for being the world’s wisest man, but his testimony is dreadfully stained by God’s assessment: Solomon…went not fully after the Lord, as did David his father (1Kings 11:6). Solomon and his descendants were cut out of the genealogical line of Jesus on account of his sins (see our notes for Mat 1). On the other hand is the example of Caleb, who refused to be swept up by overwhelming peer pressure and received this amazing approbation of God: My servant Caleb…hath followed Me fully, him will I bring into the land…and his seed shall possess it (Num 14:24). Caleb and Joshua were the only Israelites to enter Canaan from the original group of perhaps one million souls who had left Egypt.

13 Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh.

     Here is the third time in this great sermon that Jesus warns His people to be watchful (Mat 24:42-44; Mat 25:13). While given in connection with the second coming of Christ in the clouds of heaven, these warnings are also important for all Christians who live and die before His coming. Death often comes suddenly and unexpectedly; sometimes its coming is well-advertised. Either way, the unseen moment will fall abruptly upon every man – the door of salvation will swing shut, forever. Live so as not to be taken unawares.

     Watch. Those that love His appearing must be vigilant, alert, awake and watching (2Tim 4:8; Heb 9:28). The Greek word is used in several endtime passages (Mark 13:34-35, Luke 12:37-39, Rev 3:3; 16:15). Jesus will use it again when He tries to get His sleepy disciples to stay awake with Him (Mat 26:40-41). Other uses of the word are in 1Cor 16:13; Col 4:2; 1Thes 5:6, 1Pet 5:8).

     The Groom and Bride represent Christ and the Church often in the Scriptures, but in this parable the Bride does not appear. The reason is apparently to avoid a conflict of types, for in this case the equally valid symbolism of ten virgins represent the Church. The message is better conveyed in this way.

14 For the kingdom of heaven is as a man travelling into a far country, who called his own servants, and delivered unto them his goods.

     This parable is found only in Matthew, although Luke records a similar one in the house of Zacchaeus shortly before Jesus entered Jerusalem for the last time (Luke 19:11-27). The parables are complementary and teach the importance of personal responsibility. Each person is expected to use his God-given talents and gifts for His honor and glory. Studying the two parables together adds some interesting details concerning the signification of the talents and pounds, and also the quantities given to each one.

     Again Christ hints that His return would not be in the immediate future, for the nobleman journeyed to a far country and returned after a long time (Mat 25:19). This is contrary to the preterist belief that Jesus would return to earth just a few years after He left. Luke’s parable is even more specific to Christ’s work: A certain Nobleman went into a far country to receive for Himself a kingdom and to return (Luke 19:12). After His death, Jesus ascended into heaven where He took the throne of His Kingdom (Heb 8:1) and will reign forever and ever (1Cor 15:24-25).

     In this parable, the servants represent Mankind and the Lord of those servants is God. The talents represent the abilities and assets that God has given to every living person, and the increase of those talents are a man’s labor in the Kingdom. The Lord’s return to settle accounts with the servants corresponds to the final Day of Judgment, and the unprofitable servant cast into outer darkness is a reference to the eternal punishment of the wicked.

15 And unto one he gave five talents, to another two, and to another one; to every man according to his several ability; and straightway took his journey.

     In the days of Christ’s ministry, a talent was a certain weight of money (gold or silver). The Greek word is found only in this parable and in Mat 18:24. In his similar (but not parallel) account, Luke has pounds, which was also a weight of money. A talent (talanton) weighed about 120 pounds, while a pound (mina) weighed about 2lbs.

     The talents were given to each one in varying quantities (five, two, and one), but the pounds  in Luke 19:13 were given uniformly; each person received one pound. The two parables illustrate the same truth but from different perspectives. The talents show that God gives grace and develops our faith in varying measures (Rom 12:3; Eph 4:7) and that each person will be held accountable for their stewardship of those gifts in direct relation to the amounts they were given (Jam 3:1). The pounds illustrate the common, single gift given to every human soul: the ability to choose to serve God or to reject Him. That choice is not based upon the several abilities of each person, for from the wisest to the simplest and from the richest to the poorest, every soul is given the same privilege of choosing Christ. And choices in life will either increases or decreases one’s profitability in the Kingdom. This varying fruitfulness is also seen in the Parable of the Sower, where some brought forth an hundredfold, some sixtyfold and some thirtyfold (Mat 13:8).

     Every person has been given talents that are useful in the Kingdom of heaven. Some have many talents, some have few; some may have just one talent. This parable illustrates that the amount of talents a person receives is not as important as what he does with those talents. In other words, Jesus is not as interested in the quantity of our service, as He is the quality of our service. Yes, there must be quantity or there can be no quality, but the servant with two talents was not expected to achieve five talents. To me, that means that each person should focus on the quality of his service, and then the quantity will take care of itself. Wisely use the talent that God gave you in ways that will best build His Kingdom and leave the quantity up to God.

     Some people think they have no talents. They are wrong! Most have hands to help the poor, most have voices to sing and share the Gospel, almost everyone has a smile to lighten someone’s load. All have life stories that can encourage and stimulate others to follow Christ. Use the mountain of talents God has given you! Do not hide them in the ground.

     Note the kindness and wisdom of the Lord in giving talents to His servants. Kindness in that He was the Lord and they but slaves; wisdom in that He gave to each one according to his ability. In other words, He gave amounts that each could safely steward: not too much, to avoid discouragement; but not too little, to keep from laziness.

16 Then he that had received the five talents went and traded with the same, and made them other five talents. 17 And likewise he that had received two, he also gained other two. 18 But he that had received one went and digged in the earth, and hid his lord’s money.

     If the parable of the ten virgins teaches the importance of being always ready for Christ’s return, then the parable of the talents teaches what being ready means. Jesus basically says, “Live wisely, such that my Kingdom is a better place and not a poorer one.” God expects the young and old alike to evaluate their choices and do what is wise and best for God instead of what is good for Self. As Mat 24:46 says, Blessed is that servant, whom his Lord when He cometh shall find so doing. Verily I say unto you, That he shall make him ruler over all his goods.

     This man went out and put his Lord’s money to work. He used the assets and abilities that God gave Him to be a profitable servant in the Kingdom. When we do something in life, like starting a business, building a new house, moving to a new location, taking a new job, etc, do we consider in our decisions what is making the best use of the talents God that has entrusted to us for building up His kingdom?

     Sometimes it’s what we are not doing rather than what we are doing. Are we afraid to step out and work for Christ? To identify with Him, to seek the things of His Kingdom? The pouting, complaining, lazy servant would not use his talents for God, and instead lived a selfish, unprofitable life.

19 After a long time the lord of those servants cometh, and reckoneth with them. 20 And so he that had received five talents came and brought other five talents, saying, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me five talents: behold, I have gained beside them five talents more. 21 His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord. 22 He also that had received two talents came and said, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me two talents: behold, I have gained two other talents beside them. 23 His lord said unto him, Well done, good and faithful servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.

     On the Day of Judgment, the Lord will examine the works of men to see of what sort it is (1Cor 3:13). How have we used our time, wealth, intelligence, opportunities? All of these are gifts from God. Have we used them for the benefit of Christ and His Kingdom? Or have we selfishly used them for personal gratification?

     Enter thou into the joy of thy Lord. This must be a reference to the wonderful heavenly joys that the faithful will experience forever in the presence of Christ. The phrase parallels the words of Christ in the next parable: Come ye blessed of my Father, inherit the Kingdom prepared for you (Mat 25:34). The human mind cannot comprehend the things that God has prepared for them that truly love Him (1Cor 2:9). The fate of the unprofitable servant however, is eternal anguish and pain (v30).

24 Then he which had received the one talent came and said, Lord, I knew thee that thou art an hard man, reaping where thou hast not sown, and gathering where thou hast not strawed: 25 And I was afraid, and went and hid thy talent in the earth: lo, there thou hast that is thine.

     Here is the heart of the parable. The profitable servants had recognized their Lord to be worthy of respect and obedience. They were happy for the opportunity to work for Him and trusted that He would reward them fairly. They acted positively upon their belief in Him and their efforts bore fruit for their Lord. On the other hand, the unprofitable servant refused to do anything with his talent, supposedly because his Lord was hard, shrewd and unfair.

     Whose assessment of God’s character was right? The day of reckoning revealed all: God is shown to be just, good and fair. The lazy servant’s understanding of God was wrong. His limited knowledge led him to incorrect conclusions. Today, atheists often conclude that God must be evil because He allows evil, but Christians are often guilty of the same error. Some conclude that God is unfair in dealing with Man because of their difficulties, others think He is too loving to send a sinner to hell. The human mind is far too frail and limited to comprehend God and His ways (Is 55:9), so it is absurd to think that a man is capable of judging the character of God. Believing that God is unfair does not affect the truth of the matter.

     Parenthetically, the unprofitable servant’s incorrect and slanderous assessment of God’s character is very like the criticism many successful people receive from others! The final judgment will reveal the truth, for good or bad.

     The unprofitable servant refused to use the talent his Lord had given him. While this could also have happened to the man with five talents (see the parable of the pounds), it does seem that within Christianity those with few talents are especially quick to excuse their lack of effort. “You’re asking me to teach Sunday School? I can’t speak, besides, I have to take care of my child during the service.” The response of the unprofitable servant reveals several reasons some Christians do not use God’s goods for His service:

  • He was slothful, selfish and unwilling to work for God. Others were laboring in the kingdom, but he sat at home.
  • He was bitter and jealous. He grouched at his own limitations (just one talent!?) and criticized the profitable servants.
  • He was a chronic excuse-maker. It was someone else’s fault that he was unprofitable.

     The unprofitable servant is judged for his wicked actions. He was living for self and not for God. By not actively building in Christ’s Kingdom, he chooses self over God. His excuse is that he was afraid . In reality, he was simply lazy and unwilling. If he were truly afraid of God, he should have labored hard to show himself approved of Him (2Tim 2:15). God has given every person the power to choose His paths, so every man will be held personally accountable for his choices and resulting actions. Neglect is not a valid excuse (Heb 2:3).

26 His lord answered and said unto him, Thou wicked and slothful servant, thou knewest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather where I have not strawed: 27 Thou oughtest therefore to have put my money to the exchangers, and then at my coming I should have received mine own with usury.

     The man’s excuse exposes his error. If the Lord really was strict and harsh, the servant should have been even more careful to obey! An obedience-based fear is nonetheless obedient. On the other hand, to completely neglect (or bury) one’s talents is unacceptable. Laziness, wickedness and disobedience are children of the same evil father. The Scriptures show that every man’s work will determine his future reward (1Cor 3:13-15; Rev 20:12-14).

     The Lord would have accepted the man simply putting the money to earn interest, but the unprofitable servant didn’t even do that – he hid the talent in the ground. At just 6 percent interest, the talent would have doubled in value in less than 30 years. The Old Testament Law forbade the Israelites to charge interest when they loaned money to fellow Jews, but they could charge interest to non-Israelites (Ex 22:25; Lev 25:35-37; Deut 23:19-20). The reason for the law was to keep the rich from oppressing the poor (Pro 28:8), but in the new Kingdom, the rich should be giving and sharing with the poor.

     The New Testament Scriptures are silent on the subject on earning interest, and therefore our actions should be guided by the first law of Love. The ever-greedy Jews found ways to loan money to their countrymen without interest and still enrich their coffers. They would take animals, land use and other possessions instead of charging interest. Perhaps that is why the law is not repeated in the New Covenant. A Christian man with available funds does well to loan money to a fellow-Christian for business reasons, but if the need is for daily food, clothing and shelter, he should give and not loan! Loans among Christians can end up being contentious and so must be prudently administered. It is the Lord’s money anyway. A wise steward will invest for the Kingdom of Heaven’s sake, not just to increase his own wealth.

28 Take therefore the talent from him, and give it unto him which hath ten talents. 29 For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath.

     This principle is demonstrated often in life, if we stop to think about it. A person cannot remain on an even plateau for long. He will either be climbing higher in his relationship with Christ, or slipping downhill. The one who allows little sins in his life will find that those sins will take him much farther than he ever expected to go, and the spiritual life that he does have will become progressively weaker. But the one who cultivates his relationship with Christ will find that there is no end to the abundance, joy and satisfaction of following Him. The work of the Spirit in both processes is the real difference. The sinner will restrict the Spirit’s power, but the Christian will give Him more and more authority to rule in his life. Jesus said almost the same words in Mat 13:12 as He explained why the Pharisees were not able to understand the Gospel.

30 And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

     How important to use our abilities and assets for Christ! Occupy til I come, Jesus says (Luke 19:13). Work wisely and ambitiously in the Kingdom and not for personal enjoyment. How easily we become so engrossed in the details of living that we forget to look at the big picture. Or maybe we see the big picture, but the unknowns and questions scare us into hiding our talent. Remember, there are no acceptable excuses before God! He expects profitability, usefulness, ambition.

     Unfortunately, in some churches it is dangerous to try to use one’s talents for the Kingdom. A person who wants to be a SS teacher, or a board member, or donate money to build a new school, or be a deacon, etc, is criticized for “showing off.” Sometimes it almost seems like we approve of people hiding their talents in the ground instead of trying to develop and use them for the Kingdom of heaven. True, there are wrong reasons for coveting earnestly the best gifts, as Paul says in 1Cor 12:31. Talents should never be used to elevate self, to impress others and to find earthly fame. But there is no fault in seeking to be useful and profitable in the Kingdom of God. It is a sensitive topic. The first rule is to be the kind of person that God wants and let Him plan your life. The person who lives by this rule will find there is so much to be done in that field that there is no time for unhealthy ambitions!

31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: 32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: 33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.

     This picture describes the final judgment of mankind, when the Son of man shall come in His glory (see 2Thes 1:7-10). A-millennialists (Historicists) believe this will take place at the end of the world, when Christ will suddenly appear in the clouds of heaven and the Judgment will convene (2Cor 5:10). Every person who drew breath will then be called before the Throne to either be rewarded or punished for his deeds (Rev 20:11-15). The Pre-millennialist (Dispensationalist) idea is much more complex, for they have several judgments and several ends. However, the majority belief is that these verses describe a preliminary judgment at the end of the Gospel Age (at the beginning of the 1000-year reign), not the end-of-the-world judgment. Preterists, who do not believe in a future second coming of Christ, either make this a figurative picture of what happens to each person after they die, or find some event in the destruction of Jerusalem.

     To me, the natural reading of this passage describes a single, final, visible return of Christ to this earth with the angels of heaven to end the world and the Age of Grace, and to usher in eternity. Christians and unbelievers will be living normally on the earth when suddenly Christ will appear to judge and end the World. This two-chapter prophecy generally answers the disciple’s question, What shall be the sign of Thy coming, and of the end of the world? (Mat 24:3). Significantly, it contains nary a hint of dispensationalism’s stages and events spread out over a millennium of time after the Church and Spirit are removed from the earth. Rather, the Second Coming of Christ will be a sudden, unexpected and final judgment of all that is evil. The Great White Throne will be set up. Satan and all the wicked will be cast into hell; those that are Christ’s will dwell with Him forever.

     Notice the tremendous contrast between Christ’s humiliating death by wicked hands at His first coming and His powerful, glorious, terrible appearance at His second coming. Then He came in meekness and humility, but now the Son of man shall come in His glory.

34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: 35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: 36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. 37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? 38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? 39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? 40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

     Inherit the Kingdom. The Scriptures often use this term to describe the Christian’s entrance into heaven (Luke 18:18, 10:25; 1Cor 15:50; Eph 1:11, 1:14, 5:5). It is appropriate, for no person is able to earn (or gain) eternal life by his own works. Rather, he has received the gift by means of adoption into the family of God.

     From the foundation of the world. The plan of God for mankind was pre-planned before the world began (Tit 1:2). There are no unexpected events, no unforeseen problems, no last-minute adjustments. All has been fore-ordained and fore-known. This truth does not remove from each person the responsibility to consciously choose his own paths, but it does mean that God knows the end from the beginning and therefore knows the path that each one will take.

     Heavenly rewards are based on how well we spread God’s love, not upon strict observance of a theology or creed. Living action that speaks to the heart is true love! There are two great commandments upon which all else hangs: Love God; Love your fellow man (Mat 22:37-39). What we believe is important, but far more important is what we do because we believe. Knowledge alone is never enough (Mat 7:22-23). Menno Simons expressed this truth of Working Love like this:

“True evangelical faith is of such a nature that it cannot lie dormant, but spreads itself out in all kinds of righteousness and fruits of love; it dies to flesh and blood; it destroys all lusts and forbidden desires; it seeks, serves, and fears God in its inmost soul; it clothes the naked, it feeds the hungry; it comforts the sorrowful, it shelters the destitute; it aids and consoles the sad; it does good to those who do it harm; it serves those that harm it; it prays for those who persecute it; it teaches, admonishes, and judges us with the Word of the Lord; it seeks those who are lost; it binds up what is wounded; it heals the sick; it saves what is strong (good and sound); it becomes all things to all people. The persecution, suffering, and anguish that come to it for the sake of the Lord’s truth have become a glorious joy and comfort to it.”

     Who are these that the righteous had fed and clothed? Not angels sent to test them, but real flesh-and-blood people who were in need! Doing good and helping our fellow man is doing good to Christ. Can we see ourselves serving Jesus when we are helping our brother or sister?

41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: 42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: 43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. 44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? 45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.

     The righteous are rewarded according to their good works and the wicked are rewarded for their evil deeds (Rom 2:5-11). Many theologians say that works have no place in our salvation, but these verses demonstrate that no practicing evil-doer will inherit eternal life. We recognize that works alone cannot save, but the Bible everywhere describes the Judgment Day scene as a test of what we have done with our talents here on earth. Good works will be present in every person who is deemed worthy of eternal life. True saving faith is belief+actions. We may split up these into parts, but they are both required for salvation. These two must abide in us, they must endure unto the end, the same shall be saved (Mat 24:13). Yes, actions may count for good deeds, and yes, believing in God might be defined as faith; but the two must be mixed in appropriate quantities to result in the faith that saves. See my note on Mat 14:31.

46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

     The doctrine of everlasting punishment is not popular in many Christian circles, yet eternal life with Christ is very popular! The same word in the phrase, life eternal, is used in everlasting punishment (aionios). If everlasting punishment has an end, then eternal life also must end. Annihilation of the wicked cannot be everlasting punishment, for the soul that no longer exists also no longer suffers. In another passage, Jesus describes the undying torment of the wicked in extremely strong and clear language (Mark 9:47-48).

     Those who argue that there is no place of eternal torment invariably recite, God is love, and then re-define those passages like Ps 7:11, God is angry with the wicked every day. To their own hurt they do wrest the Scriptures (2Pet 3:16), being no different from the wicked and slothful servant in the previous parable (Mat 25:26). That servant also made up false tales about the character of the Lord, and then lived in a manner conducive to his erroneous doctrine; he was confined to outer darkness for his wickedness.

     It is said that a certain Jewish rabbi upon his death-bed began to weep, saying, “If they were carrying me before a king of flesh and blood, who is here today and tomorrow in the grave, even then I should weep. Yet, if he be angry with me, I know that his anger cannot last for ever. He could put me in prison, but his prison would not be everlasting. He might condemn me to death, but that death will not be eternal. And perchance I could soothe him with words or bribe him with riches. But no! I am now set to go before the King of kings, the holy, righteous and blessed God, who liveth and endureth forever and ever and ever; who, if He be angry with me, His anger will last for ever; if He put me in prison, His bondage will be everlasting; if He condemn me to death, that death will be eternal; whom I cannot soothe with words nor bribe with riches. Alas! Before me are two ways, the one to hell and the other to paradise. I know not to which they are carrying me. Shall I not weep?” (paraphrased from Clarke’s citation of the Talmud).