Matthew

1 When he was come down from the mountain, great multitudes followed him.

     The next two chapters are dedicated to recounting ten incredible miracles of Jesus that performed before the people. These demonstrations of power authenticate His teaching and announce His authority, deity and mission. The giving of the Old Law at Sinai was accompanied by astonishing supernatural signs, so it is fitting that the New Law be equally confirmed (see note on Mat 5:2). All of these miracles can be found in the other gospels, but Matthew organizes them in a section on their own and not in their chronological order.

     Compiling related subject matter in a single section is a common writer’s technique, but Matthew groups his testimony more intensely than the other Evangelists. The Sermon on the Mount summarized virtually the entire teaching ministry of Jesus in a single three-chapter monologue, while chapters 8-9 relate His miracles. Chapter 10 is the missionary chapter. It describes the commissioning of the disciples to preach in the cities of Galilee, but intersperses details and prophecies of the Twelve’s later evangelistic efforts in Gentile lands. Other examples of Matthew’s style are chapter 23, which compiles in one long condemnation the many errors of the scribes and Pharisees, while chapter 24 covers prophecies of the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the world.

2 And, behold, there came a leper and worshipped him, saying, Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean. 3 And Jesus put forth his hand, and touched him, saying, I will; be thou clean. And immediately his leprosy was cleansed.

     The ten miracles do not follow any particular pattern, but vary widely in form and range. This first miracle seems to correlate with Miriam’s punishment and later healing from that disease (Num 12:10-15), for under the Old Covenant there was nothing worse than contracting leprosy. Leprosy was a unique type of sin and the Law had solemn rules for the treatment of leprous persons (Lev 13-14). This scene of the Messiah cleansing a leper speaks of the arrival of that beautiful hope of promise – God taking away the sins of His people by marvelous acts of salvation in the establishment of the New Covenant (Is 27:9; Jer 31:34).

     The healing of the leper also parallels the appropriate action of a sinner who comes to Christ and asks for divine forgiveness. The leper, first acknowledging his unclean condition, then came to Christ for healing. Humbly and submissively he petitioned Jesus, “Lord, if it is within Your will for my life, please make me clean again” (see Mat 7:7-8). And with a simple touch and word, Jesus made him immediately and completely whole. He did not just “reckon” him to be clean, but made him truly clean (see Luke 5:12-14). God cannot commune with a man with sinful impurities; he must first be cleansed (see Num 19). Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow (Is 1:18).

4 And Jesus saith unto him, See thou tell no man; but go thy way, shew thyself to the priest, and offer the gift that Moses commanded, for a testimony unto them.

     Jesus never confessed openly to being the Messiah and forbade the disciples to reveal His identity (Mat 16:20). He also charged the devils to remain silent about His deity (Mark 3:11-12; Luke 4:41) and four times told the person He had healed to not proclaim that miracle (Luke 8:56; Mark 7:36-37; Mat 9:30; 12:16). I can think of two reasons for this curious mode of action. First, Jesus’ miracles always incited the wrath of the Pharisees and that often resulted in harsh consequences for the healed person (such as the blind man in John 9). Second, His miracles often provoked the fickle and emotionally-sensitive Jewish crowds to rash acts ranging from trying to lynch Him (Luke 4:29-30) to forcing Him to become their king (John 6:15). Their faulty concept of the prophesied Messiah had them looking for a powerful political figure that would deliver them from the Romans and return Israel to its former physical glory (see note Mat 15:21; 22:41). Because of these reactions, Jesus moved about constantly and withdraw after tense situations (Mat 12:15). In spite of Jesus’ instruction, the newly healed leper could not contain his joy, telling everyone he met of his miraculous healing (Mark 1:45; Luke 5:15). 

     For a testimony. Lepers were not allowed to participate in Judaism, but the Mosaic law did prescribe a careful sacerdotal ritual for any leper who was somehow healed (Lev 14). It required him to travel to Jerusalem and present himself to the priest and resulted in complete restoration into congregational worship and temple sacrifices. By observing the Mosaic rules, the cleansed leper was both substantiating his healing and demonstrating his obedience. Jesus could have healed the man simply by speaking the word, but instead, moved with compassion, He touched the man and healed him (Mark 1:41). According to the Law of Moses, that should have made Jesus unclean too. Another example that Jesus was not a normal man.

5 And when Jesus was entered into Capernaum, there came unto him a centurion, beseeching him, 6 And saying, Lord, my servant lieth at home sick of the palsy, grievously tormented. 7 And Jesus saith unto him, I will come and heal him. 8 The centurion answered and said, Lord, I am not worthy that thou shouldest come under my roof: but speak the word only, and my servant shall be healed. 9 For I am a man under authority, having soldiers under me: and I say to this man, Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it. 10 When Jesus heard it, he marvelled, and said to them that followed, Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel.

     The parallel account in Luke 7:1-10 says that the centurion had first asked the Jewish leaders to help his dying servant. Centurions were Roman captains in charge of the soldiers who policed the Jewish province. Although they were called soldiers, a centurion and his men functioned as policemen, firemen and emergency workers. They were stationed throughout the Roman Empire to keep peace and protect her citizens. The centurions mentioned in the New Testament are almost always portrayed as honorable and sincere men (Mat 27:54; Act 10:22; 23:17; 27:43).

     This particular centurion lived in Capernaum, a relatively new and modern city where Jesus also lived. He had obviously heard of Jesus’ astonishing ability to heal and work miracles among the Jews (Mat 4:13; Mat 23:1-24), but being a foreigner in Israel, he was not privileged with the Jewish religion and belief in the true God of heaven. Nevertheless, his faith in a God that had the power to heal his servant was impressive. It exceeded the faith of the Jews.

      Palsy refers to paralysis, and in this case it was accompanied by grievous suffering. The centurion was a compassionate man and took it upon himself to help his servant, even though as master of the house he could have disregarded the dying man and quickly installed another servant (Luke 7:2). He was also a humble, God-fearing man and spiritually-intelligent enough to recognize higher authority. Nevertheless, it is a remarkable testament to his faith that the centurion believed that Christ could heal and work miracles without even being present. To this point that had not happened.

     A popular theology teaches that Man does not have faith on his own, but that God puts faith in those He chooses. That idea flies in the face of passages such as these, for note that Jesus found faith in this Gentile but did not find it in Israel. I do believe that God works to better develop a man’s faith, and sometimes there is very little faith to begin with. But to say that belief, faith and volition are not human attributes is to make him equal to the animals and that is no exaggeration. The Creation account shows that God had a different plan in mind for humankind as beings which would glorify Him in a different way than animalkind. He created Man with the capacity to think, reason and choose. Using those tools coupled with the help of the Spirit, a man is able to increase his faith.

11 And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven. 12 But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

     By this prophecy, Jesus confirms that His work would extend salvation to the Gentiles just as the Old Testament prophets had predicted (Is 11:10; Mal 1:11; Luke 2:32). A few years later, the very first Gentile to receive salvation was a centurion (Acts 10:1). Jesus’ words have been spectacularly fulfilled, for the little mustard seed has since grown into a mighty tree – untold millions have entered the Kingdom from every nation and people under heaven.

     The children of the kingdom are the blood Jews who rejected Jesus as the Messiah and who God has therefore rejected as His chosen people (Mat 21:42-46). These verses picture the dual nature of the earthly Kingdom of Christ. The “visible” Kingdom is composed of general Christianity, all the churches and people who call themselves Christians. Many of these will not pass into the celestial Kingdom of the Father. They may have attended church faithfully and worked wonders in Christ’s name (Mat 7:21-24), but their disobedience and iniquity will earn them eternal punishment (Mat 13:41-43). The “invisible” Kingdom are those truly-saved, blood-bought and heaven-bound saints of Christ. Their identities are known only to God.

     A surprising number of Christian groups claim to not believe in Hell, that place of eternal torments for the wicked (both angelic and human). Yet the Scriptures describe it in severe detail. And Christ the Loving and Benevolent One warns about it more than any other. See Mat 13:30, 42, 50; Luke 13:24-30; Mat 25:30; Mark 9:43-48; Mat 25:46.

13 And Jesus said unto the centurion, Go thy way; and as thou hast believed, so be it done unto thee. And his servant was healed in the selfsame hour.

     The Scriptures say nothing more concerning this particular centurion. Did he later become a full-fledged Christian? I will say yes, for without doubt he was a seeker of God and truth (Mat 7:7). How could he forget this Man? I feel sure that he followed the life of Jesus after this powerful event. Given his great faith and reverent fear, surely he believed the accounts of His death and resurrection.

14 And when Jesus was come into Peter’s house, he saw his wife’s mother laid, and sick of a fever. 15 And he touched her hand, and the fever left her: and she arose, and ministered unto them.

     Peter was from Bethsaida (John 1:44), but seems to have taken residence in his wife’s hometown of Capernaum (Mat 17:24). The two towns were located close together on the shores of Galilee.

16 When the even was come, they brought unto him many that were possessed with devils: and he cast out the spirits with his word, and healed all that were sick:

     Jesus worked many kinds of miracles while on earth, but the two most common were healing the infirm and casting out evil spirits. Given so many references in the Gospels, one wonders why there were so many demon-possessed people in Israel. See my note on Mat 8:28.

     In these chapters we see Jesus with power to heal, cast out devils, control the forces of nature, know the inner thoughts of man, forgive sins and predict the future. Can a false prophet work miracles of healing like Jesus did? I think it very doubtful. Satan is a created being and can only operate as the Creator has allowed him. There is no hint that he has God’s ability to create nor even to act benevolently. Instead, his power is only to corrupt, distort, kill and tear down. True bodily healing, miracles of creation and other beneficial acts of the supernatural are possible only by God’s power. One of these ten miracles will demonstrate that healing a sick person and forgiving a man’s sins are equally divine actions. God alone can do them (Mat 9:4-6).

     Except for Jesus Christ, the world has never seen a person who could heal diseases by a simple word. That does not mean Satan will not try, by sleight of hand and deception, to impress mankind with every kind of miraculous act. The Devil is the ultimate counterfeiter and liar. Pharaoh’s magicians were able to duplicate Moses’ first three miracles, but their subsequent efforts failed spectacularly and finally they confessed, This is the finger of God (Ex 8:19). Did they actually make their rods become snakes, turn the water into blood and cause frogs to come up on the land? Or was it a clever magician’s trick, perhaps aided by Satan? I think it was the latter. The lack of miraculous acts by Satan and his henchmen throughout history favors that view.

     We read of several demon-possessed people in the NT, but none were able to do supernatural miracles. Some commentators opine that Satan instigated the mighty wind and waves that threatened the lives of Christ and His disciples. If so, God first allowed him that power (Job 1:12-22). As for so-called fortune-tellers, we know that Satan cannot really see into the future, or he would never have crucified Christ (1Cor 2:8). Of course, he knows his own plans for the future and those he might reveal for his wicked designs against God and His people. 

     Without doubt, Satan’s power is in the realm of corruption, decay and death. Yet, even then we do not see him with the authority to make someone physically sick at his will. In the case of Job for instance, God particularly granted him the ability to afflict Job with sickness. Satan and his demons are able to enter and control humans, but again only as God gives them permission. Once within a person, demons can exercise power over the body to restrict speech (Mat 9:32-33), or even speaking with the man’s tongue (Mat 8:29), etc. Satan does have great power in the spirit world which humans cannot see or fully understand. He is engaged in a terrible spiritual war against the human mind and soul. He can afflict our minds with trials of fear, depression, doubt and even mental illness. He can tempt us with a wide range of sins of flesh and spirit. These have huge influences and consequences in the physical, for what is within expresses itself without.

     If Satan can use deceptive acts for his corruptive purposes he certainly will and the Scriptures warn us to be wary of his devices. The apostle Paul alerted the early church concerning that Wicked…whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders (2Thes 2:8-9). Note that these are lying wonders, or false miracles. Some will say, “but what about all power and signs – aren’t these supernatural miracles of deceit?” Well, can Satan manipulate the physical laws of the universe so as to do miraculous acts like turning a tree into a house? Or is he restricted to act within the laws that God created back at the beginning? I don’t think there is any doubt that if Satan could indeed turn a tree into a house, he would do so. Then he would have some false prophet claim magical powers and lead men to worship him. Maybe Satan does have such power, but if so, God does not presently allow him to use it. Regardless, never in all recorded history do we read of any man who was able to perform truly miraculous deeds at his will. Yes, at various times in history supernatural signs and wonders did occur, but their scarcity argues against Satan having the authority to freely do supernatural miracles. Corruption and sin is his specialty.

17 That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities, and bare our sicknesses.

     This quotes Isaiah 53:4, Surely He hath borne our griefs and carried our sorrows, although it does not follow a word-for-word rendering of either the Masoretic or Septuagint texts. The ideas are similar however, and even more so when we understand that the Hebrew word for griefs is often translated diseases. While the Old Testament passage is typically understood in the spiritual sense of Christ bearing mankind’s sins and sorrows to the cross of Calvary (1Pet 2:24; Is 53:4 LXX), Matthew applies it to Jesus healing the physical infirmities of many. This illustrates a frequent feature of Old Testament prophecies, namely, a dual meaning or double fulfillment. Often (as here) there is both a physical and a spiritual aspect to the prophecy. Isaiah 42:7 for instance, foretells of Messiah opening blind eyes, releasing prisoners and freeing from darkness those in bondage. Those were fulfilled both physically and spiritually (literally and figuratively). The words infirmities and sicknesses (as also griefs and sorrows) can be understood in the spiritual sense or in the physical. Matthew here takes them in the latter sense. Jesus’ healing ministry is also foretold in Jeremiah 33:6 and Ezekiel 47:9.

18 Now when Jesus saw great multitudes about him, he gave commandment to depart unto the other side. 19 And a certain scribe came, and said unto him, Master, I will follow thee whithersoever thou goest. 20 And Jesus saith unto him, The foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head.

     Many people followed Jesus for the hope of physical gain and not for spiritual healing (see John 6:25-27). For that reason apparently, Jesus allowed only His closest disciples to daily accompany Him. This also prevented any political uprising from developing based on His ministry (John 6:15). Here was a scribe who promised to follow Christ wherever He went. Perhaps Jesus’ response reflects what He saw in this man’s heart: “If you follow Me, don’t expect an easy, comfortable life!” Has this changed for Christians today? Many live as if Jesus has given them the right to a calm and leisurely life of uninterrupted happiness. The New Testament paints a different picture, saying that those who would enter the Kingdom will suffer persecution and much tribulation (2Tim 3:12; Acts 14:22).

     The Son of man. This is Jesus’ earthly title of Himself. While He could have called Himself, the Son of God, He preferred to let His actions proclaim His identity. Besides, there was no dearth of witnesses announcing Him to be God’s Son. Satan and his demons so named Him (Mat 4:6; 8:9), as also did Peter and the disciples (Mat 14:33; 27:54). Finally, on the night before His death, Jesus testified to the high priest that He was the Son of God (Mat 26:63-64). For that blasphemy they crucified Him. Thirty times in the book of Matthew, Jesus refers to Himself as the Son of man (a common OT phrase that emphasizes humankind). There is however, a unique and powerful Messianic prophecy in Dan 7:13-14 that points to this very title of Christ. In a vision, Daniel saw a personage like the Son of man descending in the clouds of heaven and setting up an everlasting Kingdom. This fits with many other prophecies of the Christ as the seed of woman (Gen 3:15) but also Emmanuel (Mat 1:23).

21 And another of his disciples said unto him, Lord, suffer me first to go and bury my father. 22 But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead.

     Another man professed to be willing to follow Jesus, but there was something he wanted to do first. “Allow me to bury my father.” Superficially that seems a noble task, but it probably hides a key fact: the father was not yet dead. Quick burials were a necessity in that time, even on the same day of death, before the body began to stink. If the father was dead already, this disciple would have been even then at the burial. Actually, the procrastinating disciple was making excuses (which have a degree of validity) to put off following Christ. He wanted to wait until his father had passed away; perhaps an inheritance was at stake.

     Men and women continue to make the same excuse! “Give me a little more time, I’m not quite ready. It looks and sounds good, but I need to finish a few tasks before serving Christ.” Then, like the almost persuaded Herod Agrippa, they put off their decision until the world has gripped their hearts too firmly to be dislodged. The parallel passage adds a second, similar example of a man who wished to bid farewell to all his friends before following Christ (Luke 9:61-62). Would they not persuade him to forget his decision of folly?

     Let the dead bury their dead. It is impossible for a physically dead person to perform a burial. “Let the spiritually dead bury the physically dead, while you come follow Me.” Both literal and figurative language is used in the same sentence. Paul said something similar in 1Tim 5:6, She that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth. Some think this disciple could have been James or John, one of the sons of Zebedee, who may have died about this time (Mat 20:20), others think he was not a member of the Twelve.

23 And when he was entered into a ship, his disciples followed him. 24 And, behold, there arose a great tempest in the sea, insomuch that the ship was covered with the waves: but he was asleep.25 And his disciples came to him, and awoke him, saying, Lord, save us: we perish.26 And he saith unto them, Why are ye fearful, O ye of little faith? Then he arose, and rebuked the winds and the sea; and there was a great calm. 27 But the men marvelled, saying, What manner of man is this, that even the winds and the sea obey him!

     Only the Maker of the universe can control the weather like this. Although Matthew does not say so, the Psalms seem to foretell this event (Ps 89:9; 107:29). Those who have been on a storm-tossed sea can appreciate the power of this miracle! It is one thing for the winds to become instantly calm, but quite another for the waves to stop thrashing at His word. There was a great calm, such that the disciples marveled at His authority and power. The parallel passages are found in Mark 4:35-41 and Luke 8:22-25.

     O ye of little faith. I dare say that any person, being in the same condition, would be equally fearful! But the disciples were wise enough to petition the One who had the power to help, although He was Himself calmly sleeping. Perhaps that is a lesson for us today. In a later storm, Jesus used the same words in speaking to Peter (Mat 14:31).

28 And when he was come to the other side into the country of the Gergesenes, there met him two possessed with devils, coming out of the tombs, exceeding fierce, so that no man might pass by that way. 29 And, behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time? 30 And there was a good way off from them an herd of many swine feeding. 31 So the devils besought him, saying, If thou cast us out, suffer us to go away into the herd of swine. 32 And he said unto them, Go. And when they were come out, they went into the herd of swine: and, behold, the whole herd of swine ran violently down a steep place into the sea, and perished in the waters. 33 And they that kept them fled, and went their ways into the city, and told every thing, and what was befallen to the possessed of the devils.

     Matthew gives a shortened version of this event, omitting that one of the men followed Jesus to the boat and begged to go with Him (Luke 8:38-39). These demon possessed men were exceedingly violent and almost supernaturally strong (Mark 5:3-4). They lived naked among the tombs (Luke 8:27) and could neither be tamed nor chained for long. They were controlled by a legion of demons (Luke 8:30) and would threaten anyone who passed by, screaming out and gashing themselves with stones (Mark 5:5). This is the severest case of demon-possession ever known and it provokes several questions, such as where and how demons in-dwell humans, and whether they can empower their subjects with super-human strength and abilities. See the more detailed accounts of this event in Mark 5:1-20  and Luke 8:26-39. The word Gergesenes seems to be linked with 1Chr 12:4, while Gadarenes derives from Girgashite (1Chr 1:14).

     While Jesus referred to Himself as the Son of man (Mat 8:20), the demons called Him the Son of God. They knew Him because of their master, the Devil, who had tried to corrupt Him without success (Mat 4:4-11). They also knew that, due to their rebellion against God, their destiny had long been sealed (Jam 2:19), and that someday they would be thrown into the lake of eternal torments along with Satan and all things evil (Rev 19:20; 20:15). For that they ask, “Have you come to torment us before the time?” Until that day, the demons of Satan continue to exert their influence of provoking men unto iniquity, making evil men become even more evil and trying to get good men to become evil (Rev 12:12).

     The demon-possessed man ran to Jesus and worshipped Him (Mark 5:6), but it is doubtful that the Legion came of their own accord. Jesus had crossed the sea of Galilee to cast out these demons and He had arranged this encounter. The demons begged not to be sent out of the country (Mark 5:10), or into the deep (Luke 8:31, same word in Rev 9:11). They asked permission to enter into the swine instead, but that resulted poorly for them, as the whole herd of 2000 pigs immediately ran into the sea and died (Mar 5:13). Perhaps this illustrates that animals cannot be demon-possessed?

     Judging from the Gospels, demoniacs were fairly common in Palestine during Jesus’ time on earth. Before Christ, Satan seems to have been able to overpower men and even indwell children at his will. However, in the age of the Apostles demon-possession is hardly mentioned. The Epistles say nothing, and even the book of Acts has just one or two references. I believe the reason demon-possession is not nearly as common as it was before Christ is on account of Jesus’ victory over Satan at His death and resurrection. Before, the world was Satan’s and he held rightful ownership of it on account of sin (Mat 4:8-10). After His victorious resurrection Jesus gained the authority and title of the World (Rev 11:15) by paying for it in the only allowable currency, His own blood. In binding the strongman, Jesus took from Satan much of his power and all that Satan now does in the world must be approved by the new Ruler of the earth (see Rev 20). 

     Satan’s powers have been restricted. I believe that means he is only able to possess those who willfully allow themselves to be so used. If that is true, then children before the age of accountability may not be indwelt. Many would disagree, but it is my belief. Is it possible that this will change at the very end of the world, when widespread rejection of Christ will give Satan increased power to corrupt and deceive? The book of Revelation’s “loosing of Satan” hints that during the end-time era of the world Satan may again be permitted to move and indwell humans with greater latitude (Rev 20:3, Rev 20:7).   

     In saying that Jesus ransomed us or purchased us from Satan, I do not imply that He had to pay Satan something, but only that in forgiving us and bearing our sins He paid the cost of our redemption. Forgiveness always costs the forgiver something, usually in bearing the wrong of the evildoer without recompense. So it was with Christ when He forgave us our sins.

34 And, behold, the whole city came out to meet Jesus: and when they saw him, they besought him that he would depart out of their coasts.

      Mark and Luke add more details to this account, which makes it plain that the Apostles remembered well this particular act of Jesus. It was not your average miracle, nor does it compare with the other times that He cast out demons (see Mark 5:1-21; Luke 8:26-40). Jesus crossed the sea of Galilee for the sole purpose of healing these two demoniacs, but instead of gratefulness and acceptance for ridding their country of this terror, the people of that land were afraid of Him and asked Him to leave. Why were they afraid of Jesus? Because they were wicked men and they did not want His healing. Why else would there be a huge herd of swine in the land of Israel, where pigs were unclean animals and forbidden?

     I believe there is more to this account than meets the eye, for the details of this account are strikingly abnormal. The two men with a legion of demons; their absolutely impossible condition; the demons confessing the authority of Jesus; the people of the region rejecting Christ – which things are an allegory (Gal 4:24). The two men represent the Jews and the Gentiles races. For millennia the Gentiles lived among the tombs, neither seeking the God of heaven nor caring about Him (Mark 5:3-5; Acts 17:22-31). They were, by all standards, possessed with evil spirits. But Jesus crossed the sea to cast out their unclean spirits, to open their eyes to knowledge, and to give them a right mind. The Gentiles were a wild, savage race, which had devils long time, and ware no clothes (Luke 8:27). They were spiritually dead, aliens and strangers from the covenants of promise, without hope and without God (Eph 2:12). But after the death of Christ, the Holy Spirit was poured out upon the earth, and the Gentiles came to their spiritual senses. Their demons were cast out and they came from afar to sit at the feet of Jesus, clothed, and in his right mind (Luke 8:35).

     The people of that country represent the generation of Jews that saw Jesus’ miracles and heard His message, and yet rejected Him. They did not want His goodness and healing; they were wicked men who were consumed with selfish, immoral actions like raising pigs. They besought Him that He would depart out of their coasts. And He did. The second demoniac does not appear to have responded positively to Jesus casting out his demons, for he is not mentioned at all in the other Gospels. He represents the Jewish race in general, who Jesus also cleansed and from which a holy remnant sprang up to begin the Church of Jesus Christ. Yet, down through history, the Jews have underwhelmed in filling up their measure in the Kingdom of Christ.    

1 Judge not, that ye be not judged. 2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

     These verses are popularly invoked in such ways that allow disobedience and sin to continue unchecked in the church. “Who are we to judge?” It’s a common statement when someone chooses the wrong path or refuses to live within the church’s guidelines. In one sense they are correct, for on his own authority no man has the right to judge seeing that he himself has transgressed the law. On the other hand, Jesus commanded the Christian to declare what God has judged: Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment (John 7:24). See also John 8:1-11; Rom 2:1; 14:10. He that is spiritual judges all things (1Cor 2:10). Consistent with these truths, Paul reprimanded the Corinthian church for not judging (1Cor 6:1-5). See also 1Cor 5:1-13. Even the verses in this passage admit the validity of making judgments about a matter. Verse 6 implies that we evaluate a person and judge him to be holy, a dog, or even a pig.

     So what does judge not that ye be not judged mean? I believe this sets the tone for the whole the chapter. Within that context, we can at least make the following inferences:

• Don’t be characterized by a judgmental attitude of others. Rather, judge yourself (1Cor 11:31). Those quick to criticize others will find that others are quick to criticize them (v2). This is a common truth of life based upon the Golden Rule.
• Don’t judge others when you have something condemnatory in your own life. Take care of your problems first and then you will be able to help others with their problems. This seems to be the chief point Jesus is making (see verses 3-5).
• Don’t hold others to a higher standard than the one you apply to yourself. Jesus stressed this point on many occasions and did not hesitate to call these people hypocrites (v5). We will all stand before the Judge that will be no less lenient than the standard by which we judged others (v2).

     Wise applications of these three guidelines to everyday life are manifold. Even in church settings there are tendencies for gossip and character slandering, and there is also the constant concern to keep the church body pure from unforgiven sins. Some people tend to take offense where none was intended and such will in turn be held to the same measurement of offending others unintentionally.

     It is very important that we examine our motives any time we judge another. Are we justifying our own actions? Are we cultivating a spirit of pride and superiority by comparing ourselves with others? Or is our one concern for the church of Christ and our brothers. A judgmental person enjoys seeing the punishment carried out rather than seeing the erring brother restored to fellowship.

3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? 4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? 5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.

     The mental image of a person trying to remove a speck of dirt from somebody’s eye when he has a log protruding from his own eye is quite funny. Does Jesus speak with some humor here? I can imagine His listeners chuckled as they pictured it in their minds. Yet this very attitude and action was common among the Jewish people of Jesus’ day. It continues as a potential error today in varying degrees of gravity. The Pharisees were blatantly hypocritical in condemning others while they had the same sins in their own life. Things are not so different today. I have noticed that often people with the strongest words of condemnation or criticism don’t realize that they have the very same problem in their own life! This little observation is so consistently true that whenever I feel myself reacting strongly to the action or attitude of another, I uneasily suspect myself of projecting the same image.

     The mote and beam analogy should be read in context with Jesus’ words about judging others (v1-2). It is great arrogance to judge others when we ourselves are guilty of greater sins. Why is it that we are able to spy the smallest speck of fault in someone else and not see the great log of sin in ourselves? On the other hand, the church must not take this analogy as a reason to avoid judgment and discipline (v1). Each of us has faults, temptations and even sins. The church is to judge and remedy all situations that involve sinful conditions (1Cor 5:13) – not for the purpose of punishment but for repentance, reconciliation, forgiveness.

6 Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.

     Like the statement, Judge not that ye be not judged, this verse must be applied in wisdom and proper judgment. If we never offer pearls to swine, how will the sinner be saved? The admonition seems to be based, at least partially, on the futility of reasoning with a fool (Pro 9:7-8; Pro 23:9). Yet even in this, wisdom and judgment is required. Pro 26:4-5 says, Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him. Then it continues, Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.

     The analogy of dogs and swine to haters of truth and righteousness is aimed at those who have heard the Truth and have rejected it (Rom 1:18, 28; 2Pet 2:22). When Jesus sent out His disciples, He told them to depart from those cities where people would not listen to the Gospel (Mark 6:11; Luke 9:5). However, that doesn’t mean missionaries should never preach in areas where they are persecuted by the authorities. Historically those have been very fruitful mission fields. But there are people groups that are uninterested, cold and bitter towards the Gospel message even though they have been exposed to its goodness for centuries. It is better to send missionaries to more fertile fields ripe unto harvest than to deserts where only a few plants can be found. Interestingly, Jesus never shared the Gospel to non-seekers (Mat 10:14).

     On the individual level, this verse seems to caution against engaging the angry, vitriolic atheists of society who have specifically chosen to disbelieve God so that they can follow their own way without conscience. Jesus did not spend time trying to convince such people. He let them continue in their rebellion and error, and went out to find the honest seeker. So let the Christian concentrate on giving what is holy to those searching for the Way, those who God is actively calling and who need affirmation. And we do not take a single rejection by an unbeliever as reason to call him a swine.

7 Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you: 8 For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened. 9 Or what man is there of you, whom if his son ask bread, will he give him a stone? 10 Or if he ask a fish, will he give him a serpent?

     Quite a few verses affirm that God will always answer the Christian’s prayers (Mat 21:22; Mark 11:24; John 14:13; 16:23-24). This does not mean however, that God will answer every prayer in the way that we would wish. The next few verses explain that God knows what is truly best for us and He will give us good gifts that may not be what we expected. In other words, our petitions must be made according to His will (1John 5:14-15). Jesus set this example in Gethsemane when He prayed, not my will but Thine be done (Luke 22:42). Selfish petitions and prayers of pride will not be accepted (Jam 4:3; Luke 18:10-14). And the Christian who expects to receive from God must be doing His commandments (1John 3:22). In this way, Every one that asketh receiveth.

     In order to receive we must ask, and what’s more, we must seek and knock. A casual prayer will not do if we really want to receive. We must seek, and diligently; we must knock, and without ceasing (1Thes 5:17). In other words, persevere in prayer when we ask of God (Luke 18:1-5), taking caution to always pray according to His will. We should never, like Balaam, ask outside of the known will of God lest, like Balaam, God grants us our wish to our own hurt. If we do not care for one of His commands and so ask to be exempted from it, we are revealing our insubmissive inner self.

     In verse 11 petitions to God are likened to a son asking something of his father. A father wishes to give only what is good for his children, but sometimes the father will relent if a son asks persistently for something the father thinks is not good (remember the parable of the prodigal son). That is a dangerous situation. For a fuller discussion of the subject of prayer, see my note for John 14:13.

     Why does God want us to pray? He already knows our needs. Prayer is more than petition! Jesus prayed for hours on end, sometimes all night. Did God need to hear from Him? Prayer humbles the heart of man even as it moves the hand of God. He wants to hear our doubts and needs; He wants to give us good things.

11 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him?

     If a sinner father gives his children good things and not bad, how much more will God give good things to His children? The parallel passage reads, how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask Him (Luke 11:5-13). Having the Holy Spirit within is a sure recipe for asking in accordance with God’s will (see note on v7). Luke’s account likens a man persistently asking his friend for bread in the middle of the night to a man asking God for something (especially the Spirit). This implies that the work of holiness and entrance of the Spirit into a Christian’s life is not instantaneous, but gradual, and that at times we become discouraged at the slow pace of growth in our lives. Yet we should not faint (Luke 18:1-5), for fruit does not appear and mature on a tree in one day either. It gradually matures and ripens until finally the deep, mysterious work of development is accomplished, ready to be eaten and enjoyed. So too is the ripening of the fruit of our lives. It happens slowly and we must continue patiently, despite the setbacks, asking persistently that God would develop that fruit for His use. See the parable in Mark 4:26-29.

12 Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.

     The Golden Rule this has been called (Luke 6:31), or the Royal Law (Jam 2:8). It is a re-statement of the second commandment under both Covenants (Mat 22:40). Love is the fulfilling of the Law (Rom 13:10). This forms the concluding statement of the teaching given in the previous dozen verses. The manner in which we judge others determines the manner in which we will be judged, and the measure by which we give to others will determine the measure by which we receive from others (Mat 7:2).

13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: 14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

     The strait gate. The Greek word here means narrow, tight, confining – it contrasts with the wide, broad gate that leads to destruction. The gate to salvation is narrow and small because we must there leave all earthly baggage before walking the road that leads to life (Heb 12:1-2). The gate to destruction is wide – one can bring along all his selfish desires, pride and possessions. Uncomfortable as it may be, there is no avoiding the fact that Christ is here expressing the extreme difficulty of entering the Kingdom! Luke makes it even more serious: Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able (Luke 13:24). The Way of the Kingdom is not for weaklings or lazys; rather, forceful men and women of courage and valor strive to press their way into it (Mat 11:12; Acts 14:22). This truth does not square with the Calvinist ideas of Unconditional Election and Irresistible Grace. The example of Jacob wrestling all night with the Angel and refusing to give up until he received the blessing (see Gen 32:24-28) very clearly illustrates the call to give all diligence to secure our election (2Pet 1:10).

     The Sermon on the Mount has now stretched into 3 chapters. In it, Jesus gives a new and difficult rule: the Law of Christ. Now, so as to avoid any doubt, Jesus warns that this Way is narrow, difficult and long. Few there be that find it. Many will come in the name of Christ and broaden the way, explaining away certain principles and commands that are not popular socially. These are false prophets, ravening wolves that will not spare the flock (Act 20:29). How terrible that they will lead many astray by following their pernicious ways (2Pet 2:1-3).

15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. 16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? 17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. 19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. 20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

     Every person who has entered upon the strait and narrow way and has become a sheep in the flock of Christ must be aware that he will encounter false prophets, or wolves disguised as sheep that are intent upon killing and stealing (John 10:10). Every child of God must be constantly alert for the many lures and disguises of life-taking deceptions of Satan. It is everywhere warned about in the NT (Act 20:29-30; Rom 16:17-18; Eph 5:6; Col 2:8; 1John 4:1; Rev 3:11). This topic continues through the end of the chapter.

     According to these verses, false prophets are not so much recognized by what they say as by what they do. In other words, their fruits (read “works”) reveal their true identity (see note on Mat 12:14). If you try a little, you will discover that you can make the Bible read the way you want it to read. And that’s why there are all manner of errors, falsehoods and sins among the so-called churches of God today. These false prophets are popular because they teach what their people want to hear (2Tim 4:3), and they are betrayed by their own actions. Some false prophets know they are teaching lies; others sincerely teach untruth. It’s like two kinds of poison – it doesn’t really matter which one applies because both will kill you. Unsure if a teacher is a true prophet or a false one? Look at what he is eating: good pasture like every true sheep? Or is he eating other sheep?

     The picture of trees bearing fruit as a figure of salvation and good works has three aspects. First, there are many fruit-bearing trees, yet they always bear the same kind of fruit. An apple tree will not bear oranges and an orange tree will never bear apples. So too will the Christian bear Christ-fruit and a worldly person will bear world-fruit. Second, fruit trees do not all bear the same quality or quantity of fruit. So too will Christians vary in good works and faith. Sometimes God needs to prune the tree to get it to bear the fruit it should. And sometimes He just throws it in the fire (John 15:1-7). Third, just as it is impossible to know a good tree from a bad one in the winter time, so too the just and unjust are at times indistinguishable. Wait until summer and then it will become clear. These points hold true in the test of false teachers. See 2Pet 2.

21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

     If the warning of the strait gate has not quite convinced the apathetic person, the direct statements in the next few verses are absolutely compelling. The picture is of that day, the final judgment day, when many will suddenly discover that they have been deceived. They thought they were saved, but now realize they are eternally lost. Their earnest profession, Lord Lord, implies many words of praise but no accompanying works of doing the will of the Father. Many who have done great works in Jesus’ name will find themselves shut out of the Father’s Kingdom. Clearly then, casting out devils and doing wonderful works in the name of Christ do not qualify as spiritual fruits! The fruit which the Spirit cultivates in our lives will reveal who is the good and righteous man of God. Obedience is not optional (1John 2:3-6). However, do not confuse this fruit with the works of the Law (see Gal 5:22-23).  

     Almost all the commentaries I have read misunderstand what Jesus is warning about in these verses. Yet it seems very straightforward and simple! “Not everyone who professes to be a Christian is going to be saved, but the one who pleases Me. Many will profess to know Me, will preach about Me and do great deeds in My name, but on the Judgment Day I will reject them because they did not please Me. They were workers of iniquity, following their own heart and pleasure instead of living to please Me. The wise man will understand that in order to be saved, he must be careful to do all that I have taught.” The last sentence is the whole point of these verses. It is very common for false prophets to emphasize some of Christ’s teaching while rejecting or leaving undone much of it.

     Uncomfortable as it may sound, the fact is that many professing Christians, upon encountering eternity, will be sent to hell when they were expecting to be received in heaven. And why? For just one reason: their lives were stained with iniquity, laden down with unconfessed and unforgiven sins of flesh, soul and spirit. Yes, they had done many wonderful things in Christ’s name. They had attended church every Sunday, they had preached the name of Jesus, they had even cast out devils. But Jesus will say, Depart from Me, ye that work iniquity. There can be no greater stimulus to seeking and discovering all that doing the will of My Father entails. See Titus 1:16.

     These people had acted in Christ’s name, but His confession, I never knew you, means that their wonderful works were “counterfeit miracles, signs, and lying wonders” (2Thes 2:9); that is, they were either clever, fraudulent fakes like the magicians of pharaoh, or they were erroneously thought to be miraculous events. Certainly these signs did not come from Jesus. Deception is the reason these people find themselves outside the gates of heaven.

     The false teachers Jesus warned about (Mat 7:15) will lead many astray, deceiving them into believing a lie (Jer 9:4-5). Yet many will deceive themselves, thinking they are doers of the Word (Jam 1:22) when in fact they are ignoring or misapplying it unto their own destruction (2Pet 3:16). Let every one of us so walk as to be ever watchful against the wiles of the devil, for many will wake up in hell because of his exceedingly sly and deceptive methods. Not every one…but he that doeth the will of my Father will be saved. Let us check and recheck our lives. Let us be sure to be found faithfully doing His will on that day. The warning cannot be over-emphasized, for in the last days the very elect, if they are not careful, shall be deceived by the great signs and wonders of false prophets (Mat 24:24). But take into account Mark 9:38-39.

24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: 25 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock. 26 And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: 27 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.

     The Rock is Jesus Christ: His power, His will, His Word. The Christian will experience many tests of the Flesh, of Faith and of Love (see note Mat 4:2), but if his life is truly and firmly built upon Christ he cannot fail to withstand the attacks of the Devil (Eph 6:11; 1Cor 3:11). What a powerful analogy this makes! May we take heart and with full force work powerfully in the Kingdom. This life is a great, great proving, and only that which cannot be moved will survive! (Heb 12:27-28). That is the final proof of faith, the last test of the righteous soul (1Pet 1:7).

     Whosoever heareth these sayings of Mine. This forms the reason every man and woman should read the Scriptures. In His words we can find eternal life (John 8:31).

28 And it came to pass, when Jesus had ended these sayings, the people were astonished at his doctrine:

     Here concludes the greatest and highest rule of life ever seen in the history of the world and mankind. The Sermon on the Mount calls for a lifestyle radically opposite the general human tendency and is entirely counter-social to the world’s mores. Yet it is compellingly true. It calls to the soul like a beacon calls a ship into harbor. It is so clearly divine and authoritative, that it is folly to think it could have originated in the mind of a man. Adam Clarke says this in one of his final notes on the chapter:

"Let it be observed, that it is not the man who hears or believes these sayings of Christ, whose building shall stand, when the earth and its works are burnt up; but the man who DOES them. Many suppose that the law of Moses is abolished, merely because it is too strict, and impossible to be observed; and that the Gospel was brought in to liberate us from its obligations; but let all such know, that in the whole of the old covenant nothing can be found so exceedingly strict and holy as this sermon, which Christ lays down as the rule by which we are to walk."

     I add that while the Gospel is “strict,” it goes beyond the Old and offers a remedy for those who fail in keeping its commandments! O wonderful grace (Rom 11:33). Under the Old Covenant, there was no provision to forgiveness for the “greater” sins (Rom 7:24). The sacrifices and offerings were for sins committed in ignorance, or for errors in judgment, but to sin against the Ten Commandments was unforgivable. The penalty for breaking the first commandment was death (Lev 24:16); for breaking the second, death (Deut 17:3-5); for murder, death (Ex 21:12), for breaking the Sabbath, death (Ex 31:15), for adultery, death (Lev 20:10). In practice, those penalties were often not enforced, but the fact remains:  the Law held no place for mercy. Under the New Covenant, mercy rejoices over justice (James 2:13) and all sins are forgivable (Mat 12:31). But let us never presume upon that mercy (Rom 6:1), for there does come a moment when God will no more extend it to a perpetually unrepentant sinner (Heb 10:26).

29 For he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.

Or, as the officers who were sent by the Pharisees to arrest Jesus said when asked why they had come back empty-handed, Never man spake like this Man (John 7:46). The scribes and Pharisees were greatly respected by the Jews. The people followed their rules and believed their interpretations of the OT Scriptures. Yet Jesus taught as one having authority, exceeding that of the scribes and Pharisees. The Greek word here is exousia, which means “the right, authority, or jurisdictional power.” Jesus’ bearing, mannerism, words and deeds presented a powerful testimony to the veracity of His claim to be the Son of God sent to save His people from their sins.

     Today as we read Jesus’ teachings, the honest and seeking person will marvel still at the words that flowed from His mouth. They do indeed carry a weight of authority beyond any words ever spoken in the history of mankind. Who would dare to say, Heaven and earth shall pass away, but My words shall not pass away (Mat 24:35)? And yet 2000 years of time continue to prove Him right. Only God (or a madman) would proclaim, I am the way, the truth and the life, no man cometh unto the Father but by Me (John 14:6), or, Before Abraham was, I am (John 8:58). All were astonished at his understanding and answers (Luke 2:47). True wisemen today are astonished still.

1 Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven. 2 Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. 3 But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth: 4 That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly.

     Some manuscripts have “righteous deeds” instead of alms in verse one, but all have alms in verses 2-4. The former option better fits the structure of the next few verses, as Jesus gives three examples of the Pharisees’ self-righteous actions (alms, prayer, fasting). Each time He ends with: and thy Father which seeth in secret shall Himself reward thee (v4, v6, v18). My thought translation: “Do not your good deeds openly so that you are admired and honored by men, but do them quietly so that God will honor you.” Good works should be done to gain God’s approbation and not man’s admiration (Col 3:17). They should spring from a nature of cheerful giving rather than a required action (Rom 12:8; 2Cor 9:7). Do not be deceived by false teachers who say that Man should not even seek to do good works because to God they are only dirty rags. The Scriptures teach otherwise. Cornelius’ good works gained the Lord’s attention: Thy prayers and thine alms are come up for a memorial before God (Acts 10:4). On another occasion, Jesus recommended works that will be recompensed at the resurrection of the just (Luke 14:12-14).       

     The basis for this warning is the Beatitude of meekness. The Pharisees, notoriously greedy of men’s praise and self-exaltation, loved to practice “false humility.” Whether they literally sounded a trumpet just before dropping their money into the offering box is uncertain, but the picture does fit their reputation and character. Note that Jesus did not call the Pharisees by name, but for who they really were: hypocrites.

5 And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. 6 But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.

     The thought of suddenly blowing a trumpet so that everyone turns at just the moment to see you dropping your offering into the plate is such a blatant show of self-righteousness it makes one smile to think of it. The present example however, is just as ostentatious and self-promoting: going outside to the street-corner to pray so that everyone notices your piety and godliness! In Christianity today we could give different examples, but the general principle of egotism remains unchanged. Putting on a show of righteousness is useless in developing true holiness (Col 2:23) and succeeds only to cover up an unclean heart (Mat 23:27). Sincerity, true purity and faith unfeigned are inward marks that only God can see and judge aright (2Cor 6:6; 1Tim 1:5).

     To be seen of men. This was the Pharisees’ primary aim and they carried it out in a wide variety of ways (Mat 23:5). It is especially distasteful when egotism and self-righteousness enter the church, for it is so contrary to the Rule of Christ. Seeking the approval of men instead of God will always end badly for the hypocrite (Mat 16:23). True deeds of righteousness will not go unnoticed by the Father, who shall reward thee openly. Not before men but before the angels in heaven (Luke 12:8; Rev 3:5). Hypocrites, on the other hand, receive their paltry reward by receiving the notice of men.        

     Personal prayer is communion with God, so to go out and pray on the street only exalts self. To truly meet with God, shut out the noises of the world and seek Him alone and undistracted. Prayer has many purposes: to honor and magnify God, to give Him thanks, to petition for a personal need, to intercede for someone else’s need, to ask for guidance, etc.

7 But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking. 8 Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him.

     The Christian’s prayer should proceed from an understanding mind (1Cor 14:15) and a humble heart (Luke 18:10-14). Many religions stress repetitious prayers, sometimes in chanting the same words again and again, sometimes by changing a word or two each time. The Buddhists, Muslims and Catholics all err in this way, the latter add a further error when they repeat their “Ave Marias” endlessly to the wrong person.

     As the heathen do. This is a subtle re-naming of those hypocrites, the Pharisees. These were the false worshippers in Jesus’ time, while today there are others. I do not believe Jesus is teaching that the Christian should not pray long and often to God (see Luke 11:5-10), but says our prayers should be sincere, intelligent petitions and praises. Babbling on emptily has nothing to commend itself to God, nor will ritually repeating a prayer open the coffers of heaven. Besides, God already knows what we need. Nevertheless, God does desire the fervent and sanctified prayers of the saints! His hand is looking to move in support of the receptive, desiring heart; prayer moves God to act for men (Rev 8:2-5). He is abundantly willing and able to answer our prayers (Eph 3:20).

9 After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.

     The Lord’s Prayer. How special it is to the true believer in Christ! Although we are surely benefited by memorizing this prayer, Jesus did not intend it to be used as a ritual “form prayer” in Christianity. It is given in contrast to the hypocrites’ prayer (Mat 6:5-8). “Don’t pray like they do, loudly and in public, repeating the same words over and over again; as for you, pray after this manner.” Some have pointed out that the last half of the Lord’s Prayer has similarities to the temple inauguration prayer of Solomon (1Chr 29:10-13).

     The prayer has a humble, holy, worshipful address, but an eloquent, exalting end. And between are 7 distinct petitions, surrounded in solemn aspects of thanksgiving, honor, praise, humility and willingness. It is so simple in words, yet deeply profound in meaning. It produces in the seeking, willing heart the highest sense of awe, holiness and majesty, yet its loftiness is firmly connected to the present reality. It speaks of daily life as well as heavenly life. It is altogether a masterpiece of worship in the beauty of holiness (Ps 29:2)

     Our Father. Note the plural form, used also by ancient men of God when praying on behalf of their family or nation (Dan 9:4-19). It acknowledges God as both personally “mine” and “yours.” As a father, God loves us and will do everything to help us succeed (spiritually). He cares for us, hears us, yearns for us to be His obedient children. Nevertheless the concept of God as our Father is almost foreign to the Old Testament. It was Jesus who developed and taught that God is indeed a personal Father to the faithful. He is our Father in heaven, where He is ever watching and waiting to bless those whose hearts are set upon Him (2Chr 16:9).

     Hallowed be Thy name. His name is holy, righteous, just; it will be honored and revered. The Greek word for hallowed (hagiazo) is often translated sanctified (see note on John 17:19; Heb 10:10; 1Thes 5:23), yet is derived from the common word for holy (hagios). Ascribing holiness to God brings to mind the scene in the Revelation of the four living ones, which ceased not to say, Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty (Rev 4:8). The saints are comforted in knowing that their Father God is perfectly holy, but the same fact is a terror to them that do wickedly.

10 Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.

     Thy kingdom come. While there is just one true Kingdom, the Father’s Kingdom is a particular term that is often associated with the future and eternal aspect of the Kingdom of God (1Cor 15:24; Mat 26:29). Long ago, God had promised to make the children of Israel a kingdom of priests and an holy nation (Ex 19:6) if they followed His commandments. David was the model physical king in that Kingdom (1Kings 9:5; 2Chr 7:18; 2Chr 13:5), but the real King was and is the God of heaven (Ps 22:28; Ps 45:6). And the real son of David was Jesus Christ (Luke 1:33), who offers citizenship in this Kingdom to every true-hearted soul who believes in Him (Luke 22:29; 12:32).

     At the dawning of the New Covenant, John the Baptist came preaching that the Kingdom of heaven was at hand (Mat 3:2; Mat 4:17). While this Kingdom was in one sense a continuation of the Old, it was in essence the beginning of a New one. We might say it was a re-birthing of the old (John 3:3). The people of the new Kingdom were still the people of God (Mat 13:38), but they are re-defined to be the spiritual children of Abraham rather than his physical offspring (Gal 3:7, Gal 3:14, Gal 3:29). This giving of the Kingdom to another nation is pre-figured in the Old Testament by the rending of the Kingdom from Saul (1Sam 15:28), and directly stated by Jesus for the inclusion of the Gentiles (Mat 21:43). While this was a prominent article of prophecy (Isa 9:7, Dan 2:44, Dan 7:14, Dan 7:18, Dan 7:22), it was entirely missed by the Jews and even Jesus’ own disciples.

     The Second Covenant Kingdom is called “new” because it is so radically different from the Old Kingdom of Israel (see Jesus’ illustration in Mat 9:16-17). These differences are expounded often in the Gospels and Epistles, yet they continue to be misunderstood/misrepresented in many churches of Christianity (see Luke 17:20-21; John 18:36; Rom 14:17; 1Cor 15:50; Col 1:13; Acts 14:22). Another “new” aspect of the Kingdom of Christ is that it is everlasting (2Pet 1:11), for the saints continue to reign with Christ in the heavens after their physical death (2Tmi 4:18), and even after this physical world has passed away and time is no more (1Cor 15:24). These things the disciples did not understand all at once, but as the Holy Spirit led them deeper into the Truth of the Gospel (Luke 19:11; Acts 1:6).

     Dispensationalists often mis-apply the Scripture’s Kingdom details to their proposed Millennial Kingdom, which they think will be a future physical kingdom of Christ on earth. Multiple teachings of Christ make that interpretation impossible (Mat 16:28; Luke 10:11; 22:16), for the NT Kingdom officially began when its King ascended into heaven and took the throne (Heb 8:1; Heb 12:2; Rev 12:10). Yet, praying for the Kingdom to come is a relevant, ongoing desire, for even now Christ’s kingdom grows and ebbs from land to land and from time to time. Our constant prayer is that the Kingdom does come in more power and strength, as we ever look forward to the day that the earthly aspect of the Kingdom is transformed unchangeable into its eternal, heavenly state.

     Thy will be done. The Greek word will carries the meaning of “pleasure or wishes” (Rev 4:11). God’s eternal will or purpose cannot be denied or detained by anything or anyone, yet sometimes His wish or pleasure is not realized. It is not His will that any should perish (Mat 18:14; 2Pet 3:9), yet the gate that leads to life is narrow and few will find it (Mat 7:14). When Jesus prayed that God’s will would be done, He was submitting Himself to God’s will rather than His own (Luke 22:42). Though it was a trying and terrible experience for Him, Jesus was never closer to the center of God’s will than when He hung dying on the cross. The same is true for us.

11 Give us this day our daily bread.

     “Provide for our daily physical needs.” Jesus will return to this topic in more detail later on in the chapter. The wording of this petition implies simple, daily fare (Mat 6:31-34). Not rich and extravagant but good and healthy; not great storehouses but sufficient and timely – like the manna that God provided daily to the children of Israel as they travelled through the desert. Give me neither poverty nor riches; feed me with food convenient for me (Pro 30:8). While there is no doubt that God’s hand provides for His children, it would be an error to infer that they do not have to seek for it. The children of Israel had to go out every morning and gather the manna. Laziness is sin, whether in the spiritual sense or the physical. If any would not work, neither should he eat (2Thes 3:10-12).

12 And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.

     Forgiveness is the wonderful backbone of Gospel, but there are some prerequisites to receiving the pardon which God offers to Man. A particularly important one, judging by other passages, is to forgive from your hearts…every one his brother their trespasses (Mat 18:35). A humble, contrite confession (acknowledging guilt and asking for help) is also a necessary factor. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us (1John 1:9). We are inspired to forgive others by Jesus’ example (Eph 4:32). He loved us first, forgave us and died for us (1John 4:19; Rom 5:8). The verses following this prayer (Mat 6:14-15) repeats the implied warning to be sure that we have forgiven our fellowman. See also the parable of the unforgiving servant in Mat 18:23-35.

     Forgive us our debts. This word occurs elsewhere only in Rom 4:4. The parallel passage reads, forgive us our sins (Luke 11:4). The reminder in this model daily prayer to forgive others is certainly appropriate because forgiveness is not a one-time act. Forgiving another means that you agree to forever bear the damages of that offense. Every time it returns to your mind, it requires you to release anew the guilt of the offender and to re-commit to suffering the cost of that offense. Notice the present tense – as we forgive our debtors. Many times people say they have forgiven (and they truly did), but they fail to continue in complete forgiveness. No wonder then, when the symptoms of resentment, slander and bitterness begin to show themselves again.

13 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.

     God does not Himself tempt any man (James 1:13), but He does direct our paths in foreknowledge. This petition asks Him to guide our steps such that we avoid encountering temptation and adversity. Watch and pray that ye enter not into temptation (Mat 26:41). And it asks Him for deliverance from evil in those times that must pass those difficult tests (John 17:15; 1Cor 10:13; Jude 1:24). The Greek word for temptation here is peirasmos, which has a broader meaning than our english word – “hard experiences, trials, difficulty and distress.” It’s usage in the Septuagint aids understanding and perhaps Jesus particularly chose this word due to its Old Testament connotations. Study the few occurrences in Deut 4:34; 6:16; 7:19; 9:22; 29:3; Ps 95:8.

     Deliver us from evil. This prayer is the single comfort of power for the voluntarily defenseless sheep of Christ living amongst the violent and cruel wolves of the Dragon’s false church and world kingdoms (Mat 10:16). It should be our constant prayer. Deliver me, O Lord, from the evil man (Ps 140:1). Deliver us from this present evil world (Gal 1:4). Deliver me from every evil work (2Tim 4:18). Perils and troubles from within and without (2Cor 7:5) will confront the saints of the Kingdom.  

     Thine is the Kingdom. This ending does not appear in some manuscripts, making some scholars think it was not part of Matthew’s original autograph. It does have a firm basis in the Old Testament (1Chr 29:11; Ps 45:6; 103:19; 145:13) and so it cannot be quickly dismissed.

14 For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you: 15 But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

     The high warning of these verses is strengthened by repetition. Later Jesus will relate a parable that illustrates the importance of forgiving others (Mat 18:23-35). Like any personal vow, after the decision to forgive is made the actions of forgiveness must be performed. And repeated. Often its not an easy road, yet it follows the natural vein of this Sermon which demands the deepest acts of humility, love and mercy. Forgiveness and mercy are bound together (see note on Mat 5:7), just as their opposites (hatred and violence) also go hand in hand. See also Mark 11:25; Col 3:13. 

     “Forgive us our debts,” we pray (v12). And God who is rich in mercy will certainly forgive – if we in turn forgive others their trespasses against us. While the word debts carries the idea of an unpaid account, the word trespasses connotes offenses or faults. The two concepts are complements in the general meaning of sin.

16 Moreover when ye fast, be not, as the hypocrites, of a sad countenance: for they disfigure their faces, that they may appear unto men to fast. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. 17 But thou, when thou fastest, anoint thine head, and wash thy face; 18 That thou appear not unto men to fast, but unto thy Father which is in secret: and thy Father, which seeth in secret, shall reward thee openly.

     Like almsgiving and prayer, fasting had become a way of drawing attention to oneself in the Jewish religion. Interestingly, the Law contains not a word concerning fasting. The first mention of it in the Bible was in the days of the high priest Phineas, grandson of Aaron (Judges 20:26). From then on, fasting was commonly practiced by God’s people as an enhancement to urgent prayers for His intervention and to know His will (1Sam 7:6, 2Sam 12:16; 2Chr 20:3; Neh 1:4; Dan 9:3; Jonah 3:5). And God did honor such afflictions of the body as a token of the earnestness of the petitioner (Joel 2:12; Mat 17:21). The Pharisees however, seem to have elevated fasting to be an important act of godly devotion in their oral law. They ritualized fasting and kept a strict weekly schedule(Luke 18:12).  

     While Jesus did fast at times (Mat 4:2), He apparently did not follow the Pharisees’ rules on fasting – it was common knowledge that He did not command His disciples to fast (Mat 9:14-15). Nevertheless, the Apostles and early church seem to have regularly fasted when confronted with specific needs or doubts (Acts 13:2; 14:23; 1Cor 7:5; 2Cor 11:27). In spite of the absence of any New Testament command, the early church began to prescribe regular fast days. Fasting would fit well in meaning and purpose as an Ordinance, yet it is nowhere even softly commanded. Jesus did say that His people would fast after He left them (Luke 5:35) and mentioned that a certain demoniac could not be healed except by prayer and fasting (Mat 17:21).

     Fasting is meant to ‘get God’s attention’ as we seek His assistance and direction during our life on earth. By denying the body its natural desire and needs, the petitioner accentuates his prayer to God. Voluntary fasting before ordinations or important decisions are surely good and appropriate. These fasts are not a demonstration of self-righteousness, but an earnest, humble search and submission to the will of God.

19 Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal: 20 But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal: 21 For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.

     Investing in the Kingdom is far more profitable than earthly investments because the reward will be enjoyed eternally. The challenge is to keep those long-range rewards in our sights, because short-term profits are so highly valued by earthlings (2Cor 9:6). Heavenly treasures are the spiritual qualities that are being developed in the soul. God places in each child a soul of His own design and how we keep and develop that soul will continue forever in eternity. Laying up treasures for heavenly use is to educate and mature the soul to the Spirit of God.

     Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. So very true! Man cannot see the hearts of others – he’s not even very good at correctly evaluating his own heart (Jer 17:9). Do you really want to know your heart? Look at your life’s treasures. They will tell the story of what’s most important to you. Time is a treasure too. Look at where you are spending it, at what you are doing. How fervently are you serving Christ? The treasures you are accumulating reveal what is closest to your heart.

     It’s like the person who plans a move to another state or country – he sends ahead the important things that he cannot obtain there. And this is very true of the Christian, who is planning a move to his true country (Heb 11:16) of total and eternal beauty. Those which so die in the Lord are truly blessed, for they rest from their labours; and their works do follow them (Rev 14:13). These are the treasures of eternal, spiritual value – helping others, saving souls, doing good deeds, producing the fruits of the Spirit, increasing in the knowledge of God. The call is to use whatever talents and possessions you have on earth to gain such treasures in heaven.

     The parable of the talents in Mat 25:13-30 illustrates this important principle, picturing individual Christians appearing before the Throne where God evaluates the labors and works which have followed them. And when the lazy, excuse-making one appears with no works at all, he is cast into eternal darkness. The heresy which teaches that God hates man’s good works is everywhere destroyed by the Scriptures.

22 The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light. 23 But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness!

     The analogy of the single eye is perfectly situated between two related principles: Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also; and, No man can serve two masters. The eye is used in figurative contexts (as here) to represent knowledge and wisdom. In Ephesians 1:18 for instance, Paul uses the eye as a euphemism for the mind: The eyes of your understanding being enlightened (see also 2Chr 16:9; Ps 11:4; Pro 15:3; Rev 5:6). A single eye is one that is focused on the true and pure goal. Let thine eyes look right on…ponder the path of thy feet…turn not to the right hand or the left (Pro 4:25-27; Col 3:2). In contrast is the man with various (and often changing) pursuits and goals; he is called a double-minded man (Jam 1:8) because his mind waffles between God and the world. This will lead to a body full of darkness.

     God is not interested in Christians who call upon Him on Sunday but follow the world during the week. He wants us to follow Him in singleness of heart (Col 3:22), with every ounce of our soul, strength and mind (Luke 10:27). It is easy to say we trust in God when there really is no other option – “I’m trusting in God to heal my cancer.” The real test of trusting God is when there are options. “My supervisor instructed me to write a false report or else I will be fired.” Daniel trusted God when he heard the king’s command that forbade prayer to Jehovah for 30 days. The three hebrews trusted God when the king commanded them to disobey. Job professed to trust in God even if He were to slay him (Job 13:15). Singleness of heart!

     Many commentators struggle to find Jesus’ intended meaning here, especially with the statement, the light of the body is the eye. Yet, if Christians are the light of the world (Mat 5:14-16), then the enlightened eye is a spiritually awakened and wise person. The eye leads the body about – what it sees enlightens and influences the intellect and reason (see note for Rom 12:2). In Mat 15:17-19 Jesus explains that those things which defile a man are formed within and express themselves without. Our thoughts are largely formed by the influence of outward affections which enter by the senses, most notably the eye and ear. See also Luke 11:33-36.

24 No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.

     Trying to please two masters at the same time is an impossible, fatal ambition! Inevitably they will give conflicting commands and then the unfortunate man must decide which will receive his loyalty. In the physical world, he may not literally hate one and love the other, but he will be forced to choose one above the other. To God however, choosing the world over Him is hating and despising Him. He is a jealous God. He will not share His glory and honor with another (Is 42:8).

     While it is not possible to serve two masters, many Christians attempt to do so anyway! They try to follow both God and the World (1John 2:15), sometimes listening to Christ and sometimes to the World. These lukewarm Christians, if they continue long in such condition, will finally be rejected of God (Rev 3:16).

     Mammon, or money, cannot be our master, neither should we trust in uncertain riches (1Tim 6:17). The parallel passage in Luke 16:9-13 enlarges the topic in sobering seriousness. Jesus is not teaching against working for our food, clothing and shelter (2Thes 3:10), but He does warn that it cannot be the master of our life. There is hardly a more common temptation to man than gathering and trusting in wealth.

25 Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment? 26 Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they? 27 Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature? 28 And why take ye thought for raiment? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin: 29 And yet I say unto you, That even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. 30 Wherefore, if God so clothe the grass of the field, which to day is, and to morrow is cast into the oven, shall he not much more clothe you, O ye of little faith? 31 Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed? 32 (For after all these things do the Gentiles seek:) for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things.

     Take no thought. The phrase will appear three more times before the end of the chapter. It means to be concerned, worried, anxious. “Do not worry about how you will provide for this life’s physical needs.” This continues the topic of earthly treasure and mammon (Mat 6:19, 24). Obviously, the principle of trusting God to supply our earthly necessities (Php 4:19), needs to be balanced with common personal diligence (2Thes 3:10-12). As with so many principles, there are errors in the extremes! Some worry and fret about every detail and cannot act before every question has been solved. Jesus was sent into the wilderness by the Spirit and waited on God to supply His needs (Mat 4:3-4). He reproved Martha for being unnecessarily careful and troubled about many things (Luke 10:38-42), endlessly working to get every detail in perfect order. Yet, on the other hand, this passage cannot be teaching indifference in providing for the physical needs of our families. Laziness and neglect are not honorable attributes (see 1Tim 5:8). The principle here is nevertheless an important one, for it speaks to a very common temptation. Overly-much worry and preoccupation demonstrate a lack of trust in God, especially in regards to food and raiment. God will provide. Sometimes in miraculous ways, sometimes just by rewarding our work.

     Trusting in God’s provision has the potential for many spiritual blessings! I remember a remarkable testimony service not many years after the little church in Coyhaique, Chile was formed. There, Marcelo told a story of how, not many months after his family had begun to commit their ways to the Lord, God spoke very powerfully to them. They woke up the morning of their oldest son’s birthday completely out of money and food. In Chile, a birthday celebration is an essential part of life for even the simplest family, and this was his 16th. It was not insufficient income but poor management that had brought the family to such a situation. That morning for devotions, Marcelo and Susana read the story of Abraham and Isaac, and how God had provided a lamb for the sacrifice. They discussed their problem of no money for the birthday party, and what they should do. Susana was worried and Marcelo surely was too, but he was also learning to trust. “God will provide,” he told Susana, using the very words Abraham had said thousands of years earlier, “There’s nothing we can do. We cannot even buy food today.” That was the biggest disgrace of all, for it was just a week or so after Christmas and this had happened many times before, all the money had been used on gifts. In Chile, the Christmas tradition is that the family buys a lamb for the meal, but the Diaz family had decided against that luxury this year. Marcelo was too embarrassed to ask one of the brethren for a few pesos, for he well knew that this was a problem of his own making; years of unwise stewardship had brought them to this point. He was determined to change, but it was early in their walk of faith. They were still searching, still finding their feet on the path. The two finished their devotions with a prayer for God’s help, and got up to begin the day. It was a Saturday morning, and early, when a knock sounded at the door. Who could it be? It was Owen, and he had something for Marcelo. Jeff had told him to bring it in from the campo and give it to Marcelo…it was a lamb ready to be butchered. Marcelo tells the story with great emotion and detail to this day, how can any of us forget it? Nobody knew of the birthday except Marcelos, nobody knew they were out of money and food…but God did. And the gift of a lamb right after the story of Abraham receiving a lamb from God was the greatest confirmation of God’s care and providence! Coming at the perfect time in Marcelo and Susana’s spiritual lives, its value will never decrease in our eyes. Yes, “God will provide.”

     About four years later, Marcelo became the giver in a similar event. Israel and Daniela had newly moved to Coyhaique and both had given their hearts to the Lord only a few weeks before this story took place. Israel had been looking unsuccessfully for work for several months and slowly they were being pinched tighter and tighter. Finally the day came that they were completely out of money and food, not even a diaper remained for the baby. They didn’t know what to do except sit down and pray. Israel opened the Bible to Luke 12:29-31 and read those verses of promise. Now, the little church was not unaware of Israel’s unemployment, but they didn’t know the situation was serious. Nevertheless, a few days earlier they had decided to put together a “gift box” for the new family, and that very day Marcelo took it to them, arriving not ten minutes after Israel and Daniela’s prayer! It had everything they needed…even diapers for the baby. It was again a huge confirmation that “God will provide.”

     To cap off that meeting’s testimonies, brother Jeff told a story of his youth. He was on his way to a wedding in which he was a groomsman. They had stopped for fuel, but somehow the pump malfunctioned and gas had spewed out and all over his pants. They were ruined and smelled terribly, but what could he do? It was too late to find another pair and he was with other members of the wedding, so on down the highway they went. Suddenly up ahead they saw something fly off the back of an unknown truck and land in the road ahead of them. They stopped to see..it was a pair of pants: dress pants, size perfect, color perfect. I was at that wedding and to my eyes his clothes had been carefully chosen by him that very day. “Do not worry about what you shall eat or drink, nor yet for what you will wear…for your heavenly Father knows you need all these things.”

     But things do not always turn out that way, even for devout believers in Christ. Why? I can think of at least two reasons. First, if all our prayers were miraculously answered, where would faith fit in? Second, our every prayer is answered, but sometimes not in the way that we are expecting or wish. So do not fail to look for that answer. It may be surprising (Ps 55:22).   

     Another important aspect of trusting God to provide is illustrated in the comparison of Solomon’s glory to the lilies of the field. “Do not take great care to dress beautifully. Look at the flowers of the field, they don’t toil long in making elaborate raiment, yet even Solomon was not dressed more beautifully than they. If God clothes the flowers appropriately, surely He will provide you with appropriate clothes.” A good lesson for females and one that is especially needful in the present age of easy money. How easy to spend it unwisely on one’s physical appearance (see v21).
     In this passage, Jesus speaks to the temptations of both the rich and poor in this life. He depreciates the luxuries of the rich by comparing them with the lilies of the field, but He chides the poor for worrying about the necessities of life.

33 But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.

     This verse encapsulates the foundations of the Christian religion. The two great commandments are to love God, and to love one’s fellow man. That is to seek first the kingdom of God. For those who do, the physical needs of life will not be lacking.

     Interestingly, God gives each of us different tasks and works in “seeking first the Kingdom of God.” For Abraham, his job was to raise a son, and that was just about it. All those promises that God had given him? Make his name great, have descendants like the sand of the sea, inherit the land of Canaan, all the families of the world blessed in him – Abraham didn’t see even one of those in his lifetime. However, God did give him a son, and oh did he make the most of it.

     Jesus famously said, If any man come to me and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple (Luke 14:26). We are to love Christ so much that it is as if we hate our own flesh. In the same way, we are to seek God’s Kingdom so much that it is as if we don’t even care about food, clothing and shelter.

34 Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.

     This verse concludes the passage: “Don’t worry about tomorrow; each day brings enough trouble of its own.” As already mentioned, this does not mean the Christian should avoid making plans for the future, or not watch for signs of calamities like famine, economic difficulties and war. Providing for the physical needs of our own families (1Tim 5:8) takes at least some forethought. Rather, Jesus is teaching us not to worry and fret about the future, for He is able and willing to care for His people. God will supply our physical needs (not wants, needs) as we seek first His kingdom.

     Obviously, this is not the “wealth Gospel” that some false teachers today are advocating. However, it is a great comfort to know that God has promised to supply our needs if we follow His way. The “wealth Gospel” teachers say that we can know our spiritual condition by how wealthy and healthy we are because God has promised to bless us with these if we follow Him. This idea is strongly contradicted by the Scriptures, which depict the most-admired believers as poor and afflicted (Heb 11:36-40), not rich, sumptuously attired men of the world (Mat 11:7-11). Again, Jesus will supply our needs, not our selfish wants and wishes. He knows we need food and clothing (v32).

1 And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him:

The Sermon on the Mount is the title of the next 3 chapters, the greatest sermon ever preached. It is the Gospel of the Kingdom in one treatise and is unique to Matthew’s gospel. Much of the material is found in the other gospels, but not in a single, great address. The beatitudes, for instance, appear in Luke 6:17-49, which is called the Sermon on the Plain for its similarity to this one. The Sermon on the Mount is representative of the many sermons Jesus preached in the 3-1/2 years He traveled through the cities and towns of Judea preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom (Mat 4:23; Mat 9:35; Mat 24:14).

     This Sermon is the first general teaching lecture of That Prophet (John 1:21; 6:14) which God had foretold to Moses many years earlier. I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put My words in His mouth; and He shall speak unto them all that I shall command Him. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto My words which He shall speak in My name, I will require it of him (Deut 18:18-19). That is an astonishing prophecy of Jesus Christ. Moses repeated to the people the words he had heard from God, but the Son’s words were also the Father’s words. 

      Nevertheless, the giving of the Law by Moses has many other interesting parallels to Christ giving this Sermon. Both took place on a mountain; Moses at Mount Sinai and Jesus upon a mountain in Galilee. Both events were accompanied by miraculous signs validating their divine authority; the Old Covenant witnessed the Lord descending on mount Sinai in fearful power (Ex 19:16-20) and the New Covenant saw many people miraculously healed (Mat 8-9). On both occasions, God communicated His moral code for human life; the First Covenant was directed to the physical children of Abraham, but the New Covenant touches the spiritual children of Abraham. Both were initiated by the giving of a famous set of foundational principles for their respective Covenants; the Old began with the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:1-17) and the New begins with the Nine Blesseds. Additionally, as God’s lawgiver of the Old Covenant, Moses is uniquely a type of Christ, being the only person whom the Lord knew face to face…as a man speaketh unto his friend (Deut 34:10; Ex 34:11). He also came to typify Christ’s substitutionary sacrifice by offering to give his own soul for the sins of the people he had come to so greatly love (Ex 32:31-32).

     Anabaptists believe that the Sermon on the Mount is the very essence of the Gospel of the Kingdom that Christ was proclaiming in Israel (Mat 4:23). It is the new Kingdom’s charter, the New and Better Way (Heb 10:20), and is specifically directed for application in this present Age of Grace. The Beatitudes are not just flowery catch-phrases, they are the basic principles for life in the new Kingdom of Christ. Upon reading them, the honest seeker knows intuitively that, regardless of the difficulties in doing, this is the right way, the best way, God’s way. Yes, the Beatitudes form an ideal that most people and churches will never attain, yet if a church body is indeed a foretaste of heaven (see Rev 21), than this is the way the Kingdom on earth should appear and behave. These Beatitudes are so opposite man’s inclinations and so absolutely contrary to the “eye for an eye” law of retribution affirmed by the Old Covenant, and yet the blessings which result by faithfully and sincerely following them leave us with no doubt as to their truthfulness!

     Many Protestants miss the significance of the Sermon on the Mount, because its teachings are uncomfortable and difficult, even contrary to common sense, at least by the world’s definition. However, Jesus’ words here are among the simplest and easiest to understand in all the Bible! It is as the old adage says, “Easy to say, but difficult to do.” Dispensationalists have found a way to avoid the Sermon entirely. They claim that it is not directed to the present Church Age, but will be used in some future Millennial Kingdom reign of Christ. The sincere reader, however, cannot escape the conviction of this moment, this great milestone in the history of the world, for Jesus is here instituting a new set of laws, the greatest moral code the world has ever heard, the Law of Christ (Gal 6:2). It is everywhere consistent with the rest of the New Testament in regards to God’s will for His people in the Kingdom which Christ established in place of the old Israelite kingdom.

     The new Kingdom of heaven is an inner spiritual condition rather than an external, physical one. The difference becomes strikingly evident upon comparing the Ten Commandments as applied in both Covenants. Thou shalt not kill is re-applied to reach the deeper spiritual problem: anger and hatred (Mat 5:21-22). Thou shalt not commit adultery is newly defined to include lust and immoral thoughts (Mat 5:28). In fact, each of the ten commandments are refitted for good and appropriate application in the New Covenant. They have not been abolished or negated, but simply re-defined under the terms of the New Covenant. Thou shalt not bear false witness now extends to every idle word that man shall speak (Mat 12:36). Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain used to mean that all oaths were to be strictly performed, but in the New Covenant all oaths are to be avoided (Mat 5:33-34). The commandment against making a graven image to bow down and worship now includes more than literal idolatry, it extends to the worship of material possessions: he that layeth up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God. The list could go on, but the point is made. Each of the Ten Commandments have been newly expanded and re-defined in the spirit and intent of the New Covenant. For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the Law (Heb 7:12).

     Another example of the change from physical to spiritual can be seen in Mat 15:1-20, where Jesus changes the laws of uncleanness from being a physical condition to a spiritual one. The Law of Moses had strict laws which labeled some foods unclean and defined various actions of the body to be defiling. In the New Covenant, those laws do not continue in the physical sense, but they are re-expressed in spiritual considerations and truths (Mat 15:16-20). In the Old economy, God dwelt in a specially-built, physical temple that was inaccessible by the common man, but His temple in the New Covenant is the invisible, spiritual soul of the believer (1Cor 6:19).

     It is commonly thought that one reason God instituted the New Covenant is because the Old law was too difficult for Man to keep. That is false. The truth is that in all the histories of the nations of the world, there has never been a law so high and lofty, so stringent and strict, so exceedingly difficult to keep, as the one Jesus laid out in the Gospels! The Sermon on the Mount alone is altogether the highest code of conduct and worship ever proposed to mankind, and it can only have originated in the mind of God (Rom 8:4; Mat 5:20). It’s sacred and holy rules simply astonish the mind of every guile-less seeker.

     Most of the reformers of the 16th century could not accept that the Kingdom of God was spiritual in nature (Luke 17:21) and so they tried to marry the Church to Government, but with disastrous results. Jesus had no political aims at all, and neither did the early churches of Christianity. The Law of Christ speaks first to the heart of man, who then must act in the world according to those precepts.

2 And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying, 3 Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

The value that God places on humility in the New Kingdom cannot be over-stated! A man that is poor in spirit is meek and lowly, someone not given to pride and self-love; above all, he has the ability to correctly see himself from God’s perspective. He is deeply aware of his spiritual poverty and of God’s perfect holiness, and he recognizes his need of a Savior. Jesus says these are the real citizens in the Kingdom of Heaven! God dwells in a high and holy place, but His heart is with the man of contrite and humble spirit (Isa 57:15). True humility is a necessary quality for the man of love in 1Cor 13:1-13; while false humility is an outward show that actually exalts self in the eyes of others and yourself (Col 2:23). This first Beatitude resembles Pro 29:23, A man’s pride shall bring him low; but honour shall uphold the humble in spirit.

     Each of the Beatitudes have a close basis in OT passages, yet none are considered to be complete quotations. Jesus seems to have formulated this phrase, the poor in spirit, to help us remember what a humble person is. A poor person is someone with few possessions, and a man’s spirit is his innermost self; his attitude, will and emotions. The Lord is nigh unto them that are of a broken heart; and saveth such as be of a contrite spirit (Ps 34:18; 51:17). God has chosen the poor of this world rich in faith (Jam 2:5; 1Cor 1:26-29). The parallel passage in Luke 6:20 says only, Blessed are the poor. While a humble person is more likely to be found among the physically poor than the rich, that is not always the case. Zacchaeus was a rich man who humbled himself unto salvation.

     To be blessed is to be happy, fortunate, in a place of good favor. Yet for most of these Beatitudes, the condition of blessedness is found in situations that are normally considered to be cursed and unhappy. Who wishes to be poor, in mourning and persecution? Yet, such are blessed of the Father (Mat 25:34-35).

4 Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted.

They that mourn should consider themselves to be blessed? Not many will preach that over the pulpit! But the suffering, pilgrim church knows that chastisements (Heb 12:6-11), persecutions (Mat 5:10-11) and denying self (Mat 10:33; Luke 14:26-27) are necessary components of true Christianity (Mat 5:10-11; 2Tim 3:12; Rom 8:17-18; Php 1:29; 2Tim 2:12; 1Pet 4:1). If you find the Christian life to be easy, beware! According to the Word, it will not be so. The mark of authenticity for a Kingdom citizen is not good health, sufficient wealth and a peaceful life. Not one of the Beatitudes would so teach, and not one of the heroes of the faith found it to be so (Mat 10:34-36).

     This characteristic is opposite the ideals of the World, which places the highest value on pursuing happiness and pleasing Self. The Christian, on the other hand, should live soberly, appreciating the gravity of life and living accordingly. Some well-meaning church leaders have misunderstood this fact and teach their congregations to expect physical blessings of peace and happiness if they become Christians. In the last decade or so, many Christians cite Jeremiah 29:11 as their favorite verse: For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, saith the Lord, thoughts of peace, and not evil, and to give you an expected end. The prayer of Jabez in 1Chr 4:10 is another example. Yet, is it valid to use these Old Covenant verses when Jesus teaches that the New Kingdom is otherwise? Which hero of Christianity experienced a life of peace and ease? I am not saying that those OT verses should not be read or used, but that they need to be correctly applied in the New Covenant context, just as we do with the Ten Commandments. The New Covenant is primarily a spiritual condition, while the Old was planted upon physical and temporal considerations. The prayer of Jabez and Jer 29:11 can be beneficially used today if we apply them to our spiritual lives as opposed to our temporal lives. Suddenly they become right and meaningful! God does want to bless us, but with spiritual blessings of inner peace and the riches of the knowledge of His will (Col 1:9; Eph 3:16). Unfortunately, many Christians take those OT passages and mis-apply them for their physical lives, thinking that God’s primary hope is that they experience contentment, happiness and peace in life. It is not so taught anywhere in the New Testament.

     True repentance must be accompanied by mourning. A sinner who recognizes his need of a Saviour and is sorry for his sins will feel sorrow and sadness for his past errors. It will lead him to humbly bow and petition Christ for forgiveness (2Cor 7:10). Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted. This Beatitude can be found interwoven in that prophecy of Is 61:3, which foretold the time of the Messiah.

5 Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.

Meekness and humility (the poor in spirit) go hand in hand. It is not possible to have one without the other. Perhaps the difference between the two is that humility describes a man’s inner attitude, but meekness is the outward expression of that attitude. A meek person is gentle (2Cor 10:1; Tit 3:2; 1Pet 3:4) and shows his sincere love for others in action (Gal 5:22-23; 6:1; Col 3:12; 2Tim 2:25; Jam 3:13). The Scriptures hold up Jesus and Moses as men of meekness without peer (Num 12:3; Mat 11:29), yet they were men who spoke and acted with great authority. The world often mistakes meekness for weakness, but actually the opposite is true. Meekness is a sign of deep inner strength that is rooted in honest self-evaluation, enabling them that are exercised thereby the ability to control their actions and respond in kindness and love rather than in anger and disdain. That meekness is truly great strength has been demonstrated many times in the actions of our God-fearing Anabaptist forefathers, who were fearless in the face of torture and flames, never raising a finger in self-defense or angry retribution.

     In this verse, Jesus quotes Psalms 37:10-11, where the meek are contrasted with the wicked. The Psalmist says that the wicked person generally finds his life to be dangerous, violent and fleeting, but the meek man will generally be established and peaceable; he shall inherit the earth. The Psalms further describe a meek person as someone who fears God and who trusts and waits upon Him for protection and salvation (Ps 76:9; 147:6; 149:4). In the New Covenant however, the World will often respond to a meek person with slander and persecution.

     The OT prophets said the Messiah would defend and reprove with equity for the meek (Is 11:4; 29:19; 61:1; Zep 2:3). Jesus offered Himself (2Cor 10:1) as an example of meekness: Take My yoke upon you and become like Me, for I am meek and lowly in heart (Mat 11:29; 21:5; Php 2:6).

     A meek person submits to his Master and does what He asks. His opposite is the man of arrogance and pride. A meek person is not a boastful, loud or big talker, nor is he driven to achieve fame and recognition. Instead, a meek person lets his life speak for him and is content with his position (Heb 13:5), never exalting himself, but letting God do that if He so chooses (1Pet 5:6). He is happy to work in the shadows, completely content with letting others get the credit for his unseen labor in the Kingdom. He rests in the knowledge that God sees all and is the only Rewarder of good that really matters.

6 Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.

Righteousness is a characteristic of all true saints of God, whether they lived under the Old Covenant (Ps 11:7; 23:3; Pro 12:8; Is 64:5) or have been born under the New Covenant (1Cor 15:34; 1Tim 6:11; Tit 2:2; 1John 3:7). To hunger and thirst is to desire deeply. Jesus offered living water of life to thirsty seekers of truth (John 4:13-14; 6:35; 7:37). God’s people need to cultivate that inner urge to diligently seek God and unerringly follow after righteousness (1Tim 6:11). The prophets Amos and Isaiah used similar imagery to describe what happens to a country whose people no longer seek for God (Am 8:11; Is 55:1; 41:17).

     The Kingdom call to righteousness and holiness goes well beyond the Jewish idea of righteousness in the time of Christ (Mat 5:20). It begins within and is then expressed in actions (2Cor 6:17; 1John 3:7). It is sad that so many hunger and thirst after the things of this world rather than for the things of God. How can we develop this hunger for God and righteousness? By putting His will and Word first, and by denying Self and the World (Mat 6:33). While man can never be perfectly righteous on account of his frailty and sinful tendencies, that cannot be used as an excuse for not seeking to be righteous! Essentially that is what this Beatitude teaches: “Blessed is the one who strives to be righteous.” Some theologies find themselves at odds with this simple statement and resort to re-defining “righteousness” to fit their their doctrine. Their proof-text is Isaiah 64:6, by which they extrapolate Isaiah’s intercessory confession for backslidden Israel to be true of all mankind. Yet that interpretation conflicts spectacularly with many verses which teach that God rejoices to see a man choose to live righteously. See my note for that verse.

     They shall be filled. When a person is physically hungry, eating food will satisfy his appetite. But he needs to keep eating or he will become hungry again. So it is with spiritual hunger. The supply of spiritual food and water however, is limitless and everlasting (John 4:14), so the proverb is true: they shall be filled. See Ps 107:9.

7 Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.

A merciful person is one that chooses to forgive. He is kind and compassionate, not given to responding to a wrong with another wrong (Mat 6:14; 1Pet 3:9). Mercy and forgiveness undergird the later command to love one’s enemies and to bless those that curse and persecute (Mat 5:44; Eph 4:32). God is merciful (Ps 86:15) and for that mankind should be forever grateful because there is no hope of salvation otherwise. Mercy is pre-figured in many details of the OT and can be seen in the typological meanings of the Ark of the Covenant (Ex 25:17). God’s great mercy in redeeming Man is amazing! He paid what we never could pay. The picture of Rev 5:1-14 is one of mercy, sacrifice and love. A foundational OT passage for this Beatitude is Psalms 18:25.

     When God introduced Himself to Moses, He characterized Himself as both merciful and just (Ex 34:5-7), yet those two attributes are typically considered to be opposites. That is not accurate. In its purest form, mercy is the payment of what justice requires (Jam 2:13). If someone wrongs you, justice requires the wrongdoer to recompense you in like worth; mercy, however, requires you to pay for the wrong. For instance, if you forgive a debt, the debtor is free and you assume the full cost. If you forgive a slander, you release the slanderer from guilt, yet must continue to suffer the effects of the slander.

     This exposes another key difference between the Old and New Covenants, for while the OT law is all about justice (Heb 10:28), the NT is all about mercy. Under the Old Covenant, every wrong required recompense, and in fact, mercy was not allowed. The law regarding murder for example, did not permit mercy or some other form of punishment (see Deut 19:1-21). The foundations of the New Covenant, on the other hand, are mercy and love. Beginning with the unsearchable mercy of Christ (Eph 3:8), who Himself paid the price for our wrongs, the Christian is also to be merciful and forgiving (Mat 7:2).    

     So mercy and justice cannot be opposites. Instead, mercy pays what justice requires. God is both perfectly just and merciful. In a church setting this is important to understand. Mercy does not overlook a wrong, it pays for the wrong. Therefore, a person living in sin may not continue in that sin by citing the mercy of God (Rom 6:1). Justice requires payment, and unrepentant sin means a debt unpaid. Mercy has not been applied and an injustice remains. The biblical concept of mercy is often poorly understood in many Christian churches.

8 Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.

The pure in heart are those who have cleansed themselves from iniquity (Rev 7:14; Heb 10:22) and stand forth in excellence of holiness, purity, honesty and sincerity (1Pet 1:22; Heb 12:14). There is no hypocrisy in their faith or lives (1Tim 1:5; Rom 12:9; Rev 14:5), and their hearts and minds are kept pure from evil. See Psalms 24:3-4, the OT foundation for this Beatitude. The pure in heart possess a singleness of heart that has purposed to serve God alone (Col 3:22; Mat 6:2). They have cast out all ulterior motives, hidden agendas and evil imaginations (2Cor 10:5; Tit 1:15). Antonyms would include jealousy, malice and deceit.

     The pure in heart are so in all facets of their lives (James 3:17), but I think a key aspect of purity in the heart involves our inner motives and impulses. It is sad that churches so often struggle with men who’s hearts are not perfect in purity and it becomes doubly difficult when those men are leaders in the church. When decisions are based upon ulterior motives, vindictive thoughts, pet ideas and judgmental biases, truth and right are forced to groan. The counsels of the hearts (1Cor 4:5) will someday be brought to the light and then every man will either have praise of God or judgment.

     The contrast of the physical law of justice and duty of the Old Covenant to the spiritual law of mercy and love in the New Covenant is again made evident with this Beatitude. Being pure in heart goes deeper than outward actions and touches the inner intents and thoughts unseen to all except God (Heb 4:12). The actions of man are usually premeditated in the mind (Mat 15:19) and proceed from the intent and condition of the heart (Luke 6:45). In the Scriptures, the heart is the seat of the will and emotions while the mind corresponds to the intellect and conscience.

     As with many spiritual actions, purity of heart has a divine aspect and also a human component. After all, the Christian enters into a Covenant relationship with God and that indicates an agreement between two parties. No man can boast that he has made himself pure; that can only happen by coming to Christ in repentance and asking Him to wash us from our sins (1John 1:7; Rev 1:5). Nevertheless, every man who has within him the hope of sonship purifieth himself, even as He is pure (1John 3:1-3). The Spirit working with our spirit can create, at the end, a perfect man (Eph 4:13).

     Water is often associated with purity in the New Testament. Jesus spoke of living water that would last forever (John 4:14). A crystal-clear river of pure water will flow though heaven (Rev 22:1), a picture that contrasts with the Devil’s poisonous water (Rev 8:10-11).

9 Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.

Peace is one of the most important subjects in all of the Bible, as can be seen by the frequency in which it is found (more than 400 times). Interestingly though, this is the only occurrence of peacemaker in the Scriptures. In the Old Testament, peace was largely the physical absence of war and enemies. Unfortunately, peace was often elusive, as cruel and unstable kings oppressed the land and warred constantly. Nevertheless, peace was a blessing promised for those who lived according to God’s plan and Covenant (Deut 28; Ps 122:6-7; Jer 29:11). The prophets of old described the coming of Messiah as a tremendous reign of peace (Is 9:6-7; Mic 5:5; Hag 2:9; Zec 6:13), which the Jews erroneously thought He would enforce militarily. After Christ’s death and the coming of the Spirit, many sincere and God-fearing Jews suddenly saw those prophecies in their correct aspect. The Messiah would not bring peace by force (John 18:36), but by Covenant (Is 54:10; Eze 37:26). He would even include the Gentiles (Is 66:12; Zec 9:10) in His Kingdom. Moreover and in contrast to the Old Covenant, that peace would not be temporal and physical, but eternal and inward peace of the soul. It was a compelling and satisfying fulfillment to Scriptures that had long puzzled many honest seekers (Act 8:30-34; Heb 13:20).

     In the New Covenant, with its emphasis on things spiritual and eternal, peace is not defined by feelings of physical safety and contentment. Rather, it is that rest of soul which results from experiencing the forgiveness of sins and recognizing God’s acceptance! (Rom 5:1; 8:6). It is a condition of the inner person. The Christian knows that although earthly trials will trouble his soul, the true inner peace that Jesus gives cannot be taken away (John 14:27; 16:33) and that eternal life awaits him in the heavens. That is a peace which passes all understanding (Php 4:7). Peace comes with knowing God’s will and obeying it, which in the last analysis, is the most important work of man. As with every one of the Christian attributes, peace as an emotional feeling can be fraudulent and misleading. That is why we say authentic peace is not a feeling but a state of being, a condition of the person. Feelings of safety and contentment are emotions, but true peace is something deeper, something solidly based on faith and the promises of Christ.

     A false sense of peace is dangerous to the Christian and emotional feelings are a poor measure of one’s true spiritual condition! Jesus warns that many will think they are obeying God, but will discover that they were wrong, and to terrible results (Luke 13:23-28; Mat 7:20-23). They apparently felt at peace with their spiritual state, but it was a false, deceptive peace. True peace is based on faith in God, and true faith is based on obedience to God’s Word (Rom 5:1). The world offers temporal peace that comes with fame, fortune and security of mind, but that too is a false peace of emotional and physical feelings. Nevertheless many have been lulled into spiritual sleep by this anti-peace, which like the anti-christ, puts itself in the place of real peace and disguises itself such that it appears to be authentic.

     The New Covenant is called the Gospel of peace (Eph 6:15; Rom 10:15; 14:17), first because it brings peace between God and Man (Eph 2:14; Col 1:20), and second because those living in the New Covenant are peacemakers (Rom 14:19; 2Cor 13:11; Eph 4:3; 2Tim 2:22; Heb 12:14; Jam 3:18). A peacemaker works to unite people in conflict, so it is sad to see that one of the most difficult places to maintain peace is within a church. And yet, peace should naturally flow from those who are living the first beatitudes of humility, meekness and mercy. Conflict betrays a person’s lack of the same. On the other hand, some church leaders will allow sin to go unchecked for the sake of peace. That is not a valid outworking of, Blessed are the peacemakers. A Godly peacemaker cannot compromise other Bible principles for the sake of peace (see Mat 10:34-37). If it be possible…live peaceably with all men (Rom 12:18).

     Blessed are the peacemakers. The NT everywhere exhorts Christians to acts of peace and non-aggression, to relinquish their rights and even allow their belongings to be plundered. Nowhere is self-defense or pressing for one’s personal rights taught as permissible. In general, a soft answer turneth away wrath (Pro 15), but sometimes the wicked do wickedly and the righteous will suffer at their hands. Blessed are these peacemakers who being reviled, revile not again (1Pet 2:23). An OT passage that underlines this Beatitude is, Mark the perfect man, and behold the upright: for the end of that man is peace (Ps 37:37).

10 Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness’ sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

“The pilgrim church is like an anvil that has worn out many a hammer.” For two millennia now, red-blooded persecution has followed the true churches of the Kingdom, wherever and whenever they are established. The white horse of Christ and the Gospel is always followed by the red horse of Satan and persecution (Rev 6:1-4). It is shocking and sad that the very worst persecutions the saints of the Kingdom have experienced have come at the hands of the professing Church. The first persecutors were the Jews, who began by killing the righteous Stephen in Acts 7:57-60. They were soon followed by the Roman Caesars, who slaughtered the Christians in great numbers and for 200 years. With the first “christian” Roman emperor, Constantine, the churches thought that peace had finally come, but the resulting state-Church almost immediately began to oppress and persecute the kingdom saints once again. The Roman Catholic Church ruled the consciences of the people for well over 1000 years, suppressing any and all doctrines contrary to their religion. Many thousands of conscientious Christ-followers paid the ultimate price for their decision. With the Reformation in the 16th century, a great conflict both physical and theological broke over Europe, as Catholics and Protestants fought for supremacy and rule of the people. Caught in the middle were the peace churches, the Anabaptists, the Waldensians, the Brethren and others. These suffered immensely at the hands of Catholics and Protestants, and many more thousands were martyred for not pledging allegiance to the state churches. Some were able to save their families only by migrating to other lands, such as Poland, Russia and the Americas (see Broadbent’s, The Pilgrim Church). Reading the stories of these brave, dedicated-unto-death men and women is both humbling and inspiring. The Marty’rs Mirror (T.J. VanBraught) records many of their testimonies.

     In the case of our Anabaptist forefathers, persecution was primarily physical torture, as the executioners tore the body apart, limb by limb trying to get the “heretics” to recant their “false” doctrine. Meanwhile, today’s Anabaptists (and other like-minded Christians) are also experiencing persecution, but most likely not that torture unto death. Nevertheless, all that will live Godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution (2Tim 3:12). The last Beatitude will speak to that truth.

     The closest OT passages to the present Beatitude may be Psalms 119:161; 143:3.

11 Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.

The subject of this Blessed may seem similar to the previous verse (persecution), but there is an important difference. The previous verse spoke of bodily persecution, but the present one describes persecution by verbal mistreatment. While the two forms may seem disproportionate in severity, they are so only in outward appearance. Many have recanted their faith because of ridicules, criticisms and arguments they have suffered from families and friends, and the resulting spiritual death is no less serious than those who recant under physical torture.

     The OT hero David composed the original iteration of this Blessed in Psalms 71:10-12. It takes great strength of character to respond to false and evil accusations without anger or vengeance (1Cor 4:12). Jesus gave His example to follow when He endured wicked accusations, mockery and criticism (Mat 26:59-62; 27:38-44; Luke 23:2). The Apostles were also much reviled and persecuted. Paul was called a fool for believing in Christ, but could not be shamed into stopping to preach (Rom 1:16). Peter wrote, If ye be reproached for the name of Christ, happy are ye (1Pet 4:14; Luke 6:22). According to the early Christian writers, the churches were falsely accused of being cannibals, atheists and whore-mongerers by the Romans. Those claims were widely believed by the populace. That method has been repeated by enemies of the Kingdom churches down through history and may be even more effective at suppressing the truth than bodily persecution. Slander, gossip and false accusation are one of Satan’s top weapons against the Kingdom of Christ. In Greek, the word Devil is the same as false accuser (2Tim 3:3).

     At the conclusion of the Beatitudes, we are once again impressed by the inward, spiritual nature of the New Kingdom that Christ was preaching. So far we have read nothing concerning the Jewish law, nor of its Great Commandment, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, soul and mind (Mat 22:36-37). The listening Jews marveled at His gracious words (Luke 4:22) and wondered at the great difference between His message and the Pharisees (Mat 7:29). He taught the importance of right attitude and good character for all those who would follow Him, and conditioned the promises upon those concepts. This we see in the repetition of, “Blessed are those…for they shall see God.” Later, in a parable which demonstrates the importance of obeying His words, Jesus says, Come ye blessed of My Father, inherit the Kingdom prepared for you (Mat 25:34). There is no greater word of greeting man can hear than that.

12 Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.

Each of the Beatitudes concludes with a promise, and this verse is the last promise. Be exceeding glad. Athough completely counter to the loves of the Flesh, the true-hearted Christian can rejoice in trials (James 1:2), tribulations (Rom 5:3), afflictions (1Thes 1:6; 2Cor 8:2), chastisements (Heb 12:6-7) and persecutions (2Cor 12:10). The reason given to rejoice is that those in persecutions find themselves in holy, blessed company! The prophets and saints have ever been oppressed and afflicted (see Heb 12), and we, if Christ’s, will also be persecuted (John 15:20; Luke 21:12). In some way however, suffering and difficulties that we endure in this life are working in our favor to bless us with an exceeding and eternal weight of glory (2Cor 4:16-18).

13 Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men.

The people in Jesus’ kingdom are to be the salt of the earth, a light upon the hill to illuminate the world (v14). How truly have these analogies been fulfilled in the centuries of time since they were first spoken! The true churches of Jesus Christ have influenced the world for good as nothing else in all history, and even in the apostate churches individual men and women have found the Truth to set them free. Without argument, the best in literature, the arts, science and works of humanity have their origins under the banner of the Kingdom of Christ.

     The analogy of the Kingdom, or a church, or even a Christian, to being the salt of the earth seems to be based on the flavoring capabilities of salt with food. The Christian’s speech should be seasoned with salt (Col 4:6), meaning it should be in good taste, helpful, encouraging and kind to all who hear it. This important Christian quality may have been pre-figured by the OT sacrifices being salted before they were offered (see note on Mark 9:49). Salt is good only if it has savour (Luke 14:34). Just as lukewarm water is distasteful (Rev 3:16), so too is unsalty salt.

     This verse almost certainly contains a subtle prophecy of warning to the Jews (Luke 21:24), but the same consequences will befall the flavor-less churches at the end of the world (Luke 18:8). In a sense, the churches of the Kingdom are preserving the world from its programmed end, for that is a primary usage for salt. See Rev 11:2.

14 Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid. 15 Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house. 16 Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.

Darkness and Light. These two opposites are found often in spiritual contexts (see John 1:4-9; Eph 5:8; Col 1:13; Rom 1:21). Light is associated with knowledge (2Cor 4:6; 2Pet 1:19), and darkness to spiritual ignorance and the works of the flesh. As light entering a dark room allows everyone to see clearly, so too the lives and words of Christians should open vistas of understanding and comfort to a sin-troubled world (Php 2:15). Darkness obscures the true state of things, just as sin and the devil are constantly trying to obscure the knowledge of the truth. Those who reject God are hiding themselves in the darkness (John 3:19-20), while the repentant man will approach the Light to be healed (1Pet 2:9).

     Is it appropriate to hide the light of truth? Of course not! The Word of Life should be held forth for all to see (Php 2:16). The true Gospel simply cannot be hid, though countless rulers, governments and false religions have attempted to darken its beckoning light. Let us fear not, therefore, to let the Light that has shined first in our hearts shine also to all the world, so that others might also glorify our heavenly Father. Jesus Christ emits the full and perfect Light of Truth, and Christians are but reflectors of His glory. The moon does not shine of itself either, but reflects the light of the sun.

     That they may see your good works. Ignore the false teachers who claim a man’s good works are filthy rags! The Christian’s daily actions and speech are valuable and effective testimonies of the truth (1Pet 2:12), and they are meet for the Master’s use (2Tim 2:21). Contrary to the doctrine of many Protestant churches, the Christian is everywhere urged unto good works in the Scriptures (see Eph 2:10; Tit 3:8; Rev 20:12; 2Tim 3:17; 2Cor 5:10; Tit 2:14). The book of Romans carefully warns both Jew and Gentile that by good works a man can never earn his salvation, and that faith in Christ is essential to forgiveness and justification. But as James wrote, “show me a man who has true faith, and I will show you a man who has good works” (James 2:18). Upon studying each hero in the faith chapter, you will note that while each is commended for his faith, what stands out is his actions. Abraham is famous for his faith, but his action in offering up Isaac was an incredible work of faith. Let your light shine like Abraham! The Father is glorified by our good works.

17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

In the next few verses, Jesus will affirm the close link between the Old and New Covenants, never condemning or diminishing the Old, yet always presenting the New as the best and only way. The importance of the Old Covenant and its continued relevance in pointing Man to his God is evident. Paul said, “the Law is a schoolmaster that teaches of Christ” (Gal 3:24). Its laws, sacrifices and prophecies are beneficial even today as examples, types and shadows that testify of Him. It is fitting then, that Christ does not belittle or destroy it, but He does explain that the New Covenant will specify to greater degrees of righteousness and commitment. Examples of that begin in verse 21.

     Jesus did not come to destroy the Old Covenant, but to fulfill it (Acts 13:39). He did not make the Old Testament law useless, nor did He say its establishment was in vain (see note Rom 3:3). Rather, Christ completed and finished the Law, essentially fashioning it into a New and Better Covenant between God with man (Heb 10:20). Said concisely, Jesus Christ fulfilled the Law, as evidenced by His own perfect sacrifice which ended forever the temporary and imperfect animal sacrifices of the Old Covenant. Acting in character, Christ laid down His life; for love is the fulfilling of the Law (Rom 13:10). The Law and Prophets foreshadowed the finished covenant, and during its era, it supplied mankind with provisional atonement based upon the future action of Christ in atoning for the sins of the world. The Law set the requirements by which God and man might be reconciled, and Christ fulfilled those requirements and became the perfect Fulfillment of that Law. Christ is the end of the law for righteousness for everyone that believeth (Rom 10:4).

     “I am come to fulfil the Law and the Prophets.” No other prophet would have dared to pronounce such a bold statement! And no prophet could have accomplished it either. How those words must have stunned His listeners! Even today they are intensely divisive, for they force all who are seeking the Truth to evaluate and decide for themselves. Is this Man for real? Either He truly was the all-powerful, all-authoritative Son of God, or He was a deluded charlatan. There can be no middle road. For the honest seeker, a great leap of faith is not required to believe that He really had such authority, for Jesus backed up His statements and doctrines with infallible proofs.

     The inter-relationship of the Old Covenant with the New should be studied in conjunction with Scriptures such as Heb 8:13; Rom 3:31; 10:4; Gal 3:24. Historically, churches have varied widely on how to take the laws of the Old Testament. The Catholic church and the later general Protestant movement typically divide the OT law into sections, often called the “moral law,” the “ceremonial law,” and the “civil law.” They argue for the continued authoritative relevance of only the moral law. Anabaptists, meanwhile, argue for the dominance of Christ and the New Testament above every ceremony and law of the Old Covenant. They do not attempt to divide the Law and hold obligatory certain parts, but believe that only those OT laws which are repeated in the New should be taken as authoritative in the Kingdom of Christ. This belief naturally led the early Anabaptists to embrace the doctrines of non-retaliation, cultural distinction and the “two kingdoms” concept of the Church and the World.

     Attempts to divide the Law and the Prophets into moral, civil, ceremonial and judicial categories (or any similar divisions), are fraught with problems. The Protestant movement’s many disagreements attest to that fact. The OT is not easily sectioned into distinct groups. The Seventh Day Adventists, for instance, keep Old Testament commandments that other Protestant denominations say are obsolete. Then there are OT practices (like polygamy, killing, divorce, etc) that have been entirely reversed in the New Covenant. Clearly there is a true moral law of God which is absolute and unchanging through the Covenants, but the Anabaptist approach of allowing the New Testament (rather than the Old) to determine that law seems both safe and correct. Rather than attempting to put each Old Testament law into its correct division and thereby decide if it is applicable today or not, we find it more valuable to simply say that Christ fulfilled all the Law: the moral and civil laws by His perfect obedience, and the ceremonial law in that His life and work satisfied every OT shadow and type of Him.

     Matthew Poole, writing in favor of the Protestant position, says: “There are so many adversaries, Jews, Papists, Socinians, Anabaptists, Antinomians, etc, that make their advantages of this text for the establishing of their several errors…” It is not for nothing however, that the Old Testament is called “Old.” It’s day is past (Heb 8:13; 2Pet 1:19), and those who use it to establish “their several errors” stand either approved or judged by the body of New Testament Scripture.

     The law or the prophets. This phrase is used in the New Testament in reference to the Old Testament Scriptures as a whole. See Mat 7:12; Luke 16:16; Acts 13:15. In the next verse Jesus shortens it to the Law.

18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

Many have used this verse to affirm the perfect written accuracy of the Scriptures, for jot and tittle apparently refer to letter points of the Hebrew alphabet. Yet, is that really what Jesus is saying here? And are the Hebrew Scriptures completely free from any scribal errors? Jesus Himself did not quote the Old Testament with such precision. The real affirmation here concerns the meaning and purpose of every point of the Law and not the precise accuracy of its lettering. Even the smallest commandment and detail has (or had) value and intention. Not one rule or prophecy remains unfulfilled by the New Covenant (Is 55:11; Luke 16:17). 

     The Scriptures do not depend upon an infallible jot-and-tittle rendering of God’s Word in order to be absolute and authoritative. It is the content that matters, the message that is all-important. Spelling and grammar, even word variations and definitions – these will change the content only by manipulation and ulterior motives (2Cor 4:2; 2Pet 3:16). In the time of Christ, there were many variations among the Greek Septuagint manuscripts and Hebrew Proto-Masoretic manuscripts. Jesus quoted from both text families.

     Another point against the idea that Jesus was speaking about the perfect lettering of the Old Testament is that the Greek Septuagint was almost certainly more in use than Hebrew in the Jewish synagogues. Scholars say that the average Jew could not even speak the language of the Hebrew Bible. The “unlearned” Apostles all wrote in Greek, not Hebrew. God’s Word cannot be restricted to a single language, nor can it be bound to one infallible and perfect manuscript. While the Spirit did give the original message in all truth and precision, the hand of man is still found therein. Later copying, scribal updates and language translations are not perfect. Nevertheless, the meaning of God’s Word is not hard for the honest seeker to find.       

     Till all be fulfilled. This implies that the Law would cease to be in effect after Jesus fulfilled it.

19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

While the basic concept here is simple enough, in order to fully grasp the meaning of this passage it is essential to understand what is meant by the phrase, these least commandments. The Old Covenant commandments? Hardly, for Jesus just announced that He had come to fulfill that Law, and after His death and resurrection all those details were truly and accurately completed (Heb 8:13). Jesus is here preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom, in which He formulates the intentions and requirements of the New Covenant law (James 1:25). So these least commandments are New Covenant commandments.

     Essentially then, and in agreement with many other NT scriptures, this verse teaches that men will be held rigorously accountable for their actions and judged by their works. The punishments of the unsaved will vary according to their deeds (Luke 12:48), likewise the rewards of the righteous will vary according to their faithfulness to the commandments of Christ. He that dismisses the least commandment in the New Covenant will be held responsible for his errors. He shall be the least in the Kingdom. There will be some in heaven who did not do the full will of God, they did not keep all His commandments.

     Any person tempted to take this verse as a license to sin (1Pet 2:16) should consider the seriousness of the context. The bar of righteousness is set very high; not even the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees is sufficient! And breaking even the least commandment means being grouped with the least in the Kingdom. So no Christian should ever take this verse to think that God will overlook his disobedience. Rather, this verse describes those people who, for various reasons, are not fully aware of a particular commandment of Christ. It is similar to the sin not unto death that John speaks about (1John 5:16-17). The person who knows what is right but does not do it will be judged severely (James 4:17; Mat 21:28-32).

     Do and teach them. See James 1:22; Mat 7:24; Luke 6:46.

20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

 The Pharisees were famous for requiring strict adherence to the numerous laws of the Old Testament. They even added regulations and ceremonies for sabbath keeping, ritual washings, fastings, sacrifices, tithes, etc. However, they often invented ways to circumvent the laws that they did not want to keep, and Jesus reproached them for their hypocrisy (Mat 23:23-35; Rom 2:17-24; Mat 15:9). The Jews of Jesus’ day trusted in their genealogy and their works of righteousness for entrance into the presence of God, yet Jesus says their righteousness was not enough! How could this be? The Pharisees were the most religious and righteous people in the world, and not all of them were hypocrites (remember Saul of Tarsus). The issue is that every man has sinned and so is unrighteous. Works of righteousness can never undo earlier acts of unrighteousness. That is why man needs a Savior and that is why Jesus came to the world. The death of Christ empowers Him to take away man’s acts of disobedience (John 1:29) and wash his soul from every spot of sin (Rev 7:14).

     This statement is a prelude to what follows, a remarkable passage of comparisons and re-establishments of select Old and New Covenant laws. In each case an OC law is taken and established to a higher degree of righteousness (Mat 6:33; John 16:8), usually by extending its sphere of application beyond the physical actions of a man and into the spiritual core of his being. This new teaching of Jesus perfectly corresponds with the nine Blesseds and demonstrates again that while the Old Covenant designed to change/direct a man’s integrity by regulating his outward actions, the New Covenant designs to change/direct a man’s integrity by changing his inner being first. The Old worked from the outside to the inside, but the New works from the inside out. See my note on verse 1.

21 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:

Thou shalt not kill. The sixth of the Ten Commandments, and the most serious of all Old Testament sins if judged by its prescribed punishment, a murderer was to be put to death. This is the most difficult law to reconcile with the history of Israel, who often slew her enemies at God’s direction. The Old Testament is filled with stories of death matches and killings. The Protestant and Catholic approach is to qualify the commandment: “Thou shalt not kill without good cause.” Under that interpretation, taking a human life in self-defense, or in waging “just war,” or in police action, is permissible for Kingdom Christians – wherefore they cite the Old Testament (ie, Ex 22:2).

     Anabaptists and other peace churches categorically reject that idea, having no need to defend an old definition of the commandment. They cite the many examples and teachings of Jesus that are incompatible with any kind of killing or retaliation (Rom 12:21), and they answer the Old Testament example of God’s people killing their enemies by pointing out that here Jesus is changing the Law of the Old Covenant and fitting it to the New Covenant. These notes have pointed out that the Old Covenant was primarily a physical and temporal Kingdom. Thus, in addition to mandating structures and laws of worship, it also had civil laws and a judiciary, as well as systems of rule and government. In contrast, the New Covenant is primarily spiritual in nature. It is a Kingdom within you that has no need for politics, society and government. Jesus expanded each of the Ten Commandments and adapted them for application in this new spiritual Covenant.

     The right to take human life has never been given to Man, even in the Old Testament. It was God’s decision. And at the very foundation, that is the meaning of Thou shalt not kill (1John 3:15-16). God did command Israel to kill (according to His all-wise, all-knowing counsel), but He has never commanded the Church to kill or punish evildoers. That responsibility was not passed on to the New Testament churches, whether to its leaders, or to her individual members. We say this without possibility of argument, for not only is the NT entirely silent on any such arrangement, it teaches the very opposite: Love your enemies, do good to them that hate you (Luke 6:27). See complementary note on Mat 5:44. The command to not kill is a fundamental, unchanging moral law that is here re-established to a higher degree in the NT because of Christ’s new Covenant with Man.

22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

It was said by them of old time…but I say unto you. This pattern will continue until the end of the chapter, six times in all, as Jesus takes an Old Testament Law and expands it for application in the New Testament. The rule of Christ goes well beyond, Thou shalt not kill to outlaw anger, hatred and ridicule of a fellow man. Those were the causes of the very first murder recorded in the Bible and they spring from the same evil root. Hatred and murder are equals in 1John 3:15.

     Many ancient manuscripts do not contain the phrase, without a cause, nor is it found in the quotes of early church writers. It is doubtful that Jesus was permitting the exercise of anger “for a good reason.” If someone steals my cloak or does not return a borrowed item, am I justified in expressing anger? The rest of Scripture would judge the answer to be “no.” A man’s anger does not comport with God’s righteousness (James 1:20), and the Christian is everywhere commanded to put off anger, wrath, malice (Eph 4:31; Col 3:8; 1Pet 2:1). There may be a place for “righteous anger” (or passion) that does not result in calumny, violence, pride, etc (Eph 4:26), but typically anger is an emotional response to a personal wrong, and such anger will be rewarded with hell fire, if it is not followed by sincere repentance.

     My paraphrase translation: “Whosoever is angry with his brother will stand before the judgment for it. We know that anyone who scoffs and calls his brother an empty-head is taken to the Sanhedrin, but whosoever in hatred calls him a fool is in danger of hell fire.”

     So in addition to wicked actions, in the New Covenant even a man’s words, thoughts, inner emotions and motives will be judged! Every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the Day of Judgment (Mat 12:36). Paul calls the willfully ignorant Christian, thou fool (1Cor 15:36), but not in anger. Do not hyper-literalize this verse such that only the word “fool” is to be avoided. There are many other words and phrases just as worthy of judgment. Do not forget that the attitude is what counts. Many commentators innovate, wriggle and squirm around these verses, trying to make them less strict and serious. The honest man of love who believeth all things as written will rejoice in the truth (1Cor 13:6-7).  

     Hell fire. The Greek word is gehenna, which always refers to eternal hell (Mat 5:29; Mark 9:47; Luke 12:5). Note that the council and hell fire are set in parallel and yet are in no way equivalent terms. For that reason I think the statements concerning Raca and Fool are set to form another comparison between the Covenants. See my paraphrase translation above. The sentence has three parts, the first being the principle and the last two acting as supporting examples. For it is clear that while judgment and hell fire are equivalents, the council is not.

23 Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee; 24 Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift.

Sins related to anger cover large areas and reach deeply, even to the very soul of Man and sins of the spirit: anger, malice, hatred, jealousy, bitterness, unforgiveness, resentment, etc.

     “Don’t come to worship God if you have unresolved relationship problems with your fellowman,” Jesus says. “Take care of those issues first; forgive, be reconciled, clear yourselves of these sins and then go into the house of God to worship.” This agrees with the Lord’s Prayer, Forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors (Mat 6:12). The picture is drawn from Jewish life, and describes a man approaching the altar with his sacrifice and already handing it over to the priest when suddenly he remembers an unresolved conflict, perhaps an unforgiving attitude he has with another. Should he go ahead and give the offering to the priest and then go be reconciled, or stop all and first be reconciled? Jesus answers the question again in Mark 11:25-26.

25 Agree with thine adversary quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison. 26 Verily I say unto thee, Thou shalt by no means come out thence, till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing.

This illustration, perhaps, continues under the headline of, Thou shalt not kill and the underlying sins of the spirit: anger, malice, hatred, unforgiveness, etc. Courts, attorneys and judges are a sure recipe for lying, slander, more anger and hatred, and sometimes murder. Better to be taken advantage of then find yourself wallowing with the pigs in the mud. Jesus advice, and coming from Him we know it is true, is to agree with your adversary without going to court, even if it that means paying more than is right (Mat 5:40-41). It is unlikely that Jesus gave this as an rigid rule, but rather a generally true illustration. In the U.S., some lawsuits are unavoidable, yet sometimes it is better to throw yourself at the mercy of the judge rather than pay the exorbitant demands of a greedy adversary. In general and for the best and quickest emotional healing, agree with thine adversary quickly. Resolve your disagreements with fellowman and put them behind you without malice or an unforgiving attitude.

     Somewhat surprisingly, many commentators see a different meaning here, on the lines of: “Don’t come to God with unforgiven sin, but agree with your Adversary quickly and accept His terms immediately at His price lest He deliver you into eternal prison requiring the impossible payment of the uttermost farthing.” This, of course, is simply representative of the general Protestant difficulty with applying the principles of Christ’s sermon in their world view. The Anabaptist, armed with the knowledge that there are two very separate kingdoms on this earth, encounters no complication at all with Christ’s words.

27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: 28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

The seventh Commandment restricted sexual relations to married couples. In keeping with the spiritual nature of the New Covenant, Jesus requires that the inner self be cleansed too. Lustful thoughts and imaginations, pornography and sensual literature stain the heart of man with evil impulses that often become evil actions (Mat 15:19). The Law of Christ will purify a man’s way beginning within. Although he lived during the OT period, Job knew that this was true (Job 31:1; Ps 119:9). Sexual lust is also condemned in 2Peter 2:14 and 1John 2:15-17.

29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. 30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

While these two verses may stand in truth on their own, they are especially important in the present context of lust (v28). The Christian must take whatever action is necessary to avoid committing sin, even to the point of cutting off those members of his body that he cannot control! Not a literal amputation, but voluntary, self-inflicted removal of the body from evil situations. Example: if you have a problem with drunkenness, avoid those areas that sell liquor. If you are tempted with pornography, avoid those places in which it is available. If you cannot control your cellphone, get rid of it. Cut off from yourself those areas that tempt you to sin. Deny yourself things that you cannot control; avoid those actions that create wrong desires. It is a serious step, but remember the terrible alternative: It is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell (gehenna), the place of eternal damnation (Mat 5:22) and ever-burning lake of fire (Rev 20:15).

     There are accounts of well-meaning persons who have literally plucked out an eye and cut off a hand. They have missed the intent of this Law altogether. Literally plucking out even both eyes will not automatically cleanse one’s thought life. The Apostle wrote, “Put to death the members of your body that wish to commit immoral acts” (Col 3:5, Rom 6:12-14). As in His many parables and illustrations, Jesus here gives a striking example of this important command and He repeats it in Mat 18:7-9. It is sometimes appropriate to stand and resist the devil (James 4:7), but in other occasions it is better to flee fornication (1Cor 6:18). In other words, sometimes drastic measures are required to keep oneself pure from sin. Never has this principle been more important than in the present day. 

31 It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement:

The Old Testament permitted divorce and re-marriage with certain restrictions and in spite of it not being God’s good plan for mankind. Yet, because the people’s hearts were so hardened unto easy divorce (Mat 19:8), the Mosaic Law allowed a writing of divorcement. Once again, Jesus’ rule will make the New Covenant stricter and more righteous!

     In the Mosaic law, only men were allowed to initiate a divorce, but then as now, women held the power of pressuring their husbands and divorce was very common in the Old Testament period. The law of divorce did provide a certain protection for the woman’s place in a marriage, for it prohibited a man to remarry his original wife after writing her a bill of divorcement (Deut 24:4). Thus, the man had better not act rashly. There was no going back once the bill of divorcement was enacted.

     In the time of Christ, there were two interpretations of the law of divorce as found in Deut 24:1-4. Shammai Jews said that a man could only put away his wife if she had committed adultery, while Hillel Jews took a much more liberal interpretation and allowed divorce for any reason. Actually, the Old Testament rule on divorce could not have been based on adultery, for adulterers were supposed to be stoned (Lev 20:10).

     Jesus changed the rules concerning marriage and divorce in three key points. The Old Covenant permitted the husband to divorce his wife (Deut 24:1) and allowed both partners to remarry whoever they wanted (Deut 24:2), but it denied any reconciliation of divorced partners (Deut 24:3-4). In direct contrast, the New Covenant forbids divorce on all grounds saving for porneia, offers no condition for remarriage (Mat 5:32), and petitions in favor of reconciliation between divorced partners (1Cor 7:10-11). These differences in the application of law between the Covenants are, I believe, directly derived from the true moral definition of marriage (Mat 19:4-6), which has never changed since it was first given: “One man and one woman for life” (Gen 2:24). Jesus clearly teaches the true expression of marriage, while the Old Covenant worked upon a provisional expression due to the hardness of the Israelites.

     The symbolism of the Christian marriage bond to the relationship of Christ and the Church is evident in the New Testament (Eph 5:22-33), and the rule of no divorce is very consistent with that image. The marriage of Christ to His chosen bride, the true and pure Church, will never be annulled by a bill of divorcement from God. Nevertheless, divorce permitted under the Old Covenant yet disallowed under the New mirrors God’s action in putting away the unfaithful first wife (the Jews). Also consistent in the imagery of Christ and His Bride is the encouragement for reconciliation of estranged partners, for Christ stands ever ready to receive back the repentant sinner. It all corresponds perfectly with the true rule for marriage: One man and one woman for life. And perhaps the key reason that God did not allow marriage partners to be reconciled under the Old Law is to protect that symbolism. Where divorce is permitted, there should be no reconciliation of prior partners for that would signify multiple gods, or idolatry. Remarriage prohibited in the Old Covenant and yet permitted in the New is also consistent with the present conditions of those two covenants, for while no man can return to God by keeping the old Law, every man by keeping the new Law of Christ may return to Him.    

     Nevertheless, there are some scholars that argue for the continuance of Moses’ command that divorced persons must not “remarry” each other. This is wrong both Scripturally and logically:

1. There is only one marriage that God recognizes: when a man and woman pledge themselves and are joined in one flesh. According to Christ’s own words, every other union is adulterous. It is not a marriage in God’s eyes.
2. The divorce provision in Deut 24:1-5 was not part of God’s perfect will, nor was it in conformity with His stated moral law. It was made necessary because of rampant divorce within the nation of Israel (Mark 10:3-5). From the beginning the will of God for marriage is “One man, one woman, for life.”
3. It is clear that in the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus gives us a new commandment concerning divorce and remarriage, one that even His disciples found very difficult to accept (Mat 19:9-10). Jesus is abrogating Moses’ law for the non-changing moral law of God.
4. The Apostle Paul states unequivocally that those who have separated must remain unmarried or be reconciled to their first and rightful partner (1Cor 7:11).

32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

The teaching of this verse would be ever so simple except for one phrase that has given license to every interpretation imaginable. “Anyone who divorces his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causes her to commit adultery.” Except for this one phrase, nowhere else does the New Testament allow for any legitimate excuse for divorce. Those of us who believe the New Testament will never give conflicting doctrine will seek the truth honestly and reverently. In my opinion, the answer is not so difficult if we simply and objectively study the meaning of that phrase. The best commentator on Jesus’ words was the Apostle Paul, who strongly disallows divorce without comment of adultery (1Cor 7:10-15). Those who think that Christ does allow divorce in the event of adultery must somehow explain why His disciples thought His teaching was so terribly difficult to accept (Mat 19:9-10), when it was absolutely no different from the Pharisees’ own majority view on the matter! On the other hand, we would expect Jesus to more righteously establish the Old Testament law of divorce, for that is His pattern in the Sermon on the Mount.

     Saving for the cause of fornication. The Greek word is porneia, which is not adultery, nor is it translated adultery anywhere in the New Testament. The Greek word for adultery is moichao, and appears in this very verse: “Whoever divorces his wife, except for porneia, causes her to commit moichao.” The word porneia carries a more general meaning: fornication, harlotry, incest. It is extremely unlikely that porneia refers to adultery, and those translations which so render it do so erroneously. If Jesus had meant adultery, then He surely He would have used the appropriate and common Greek word (and one He had just used). Many conservative scholars (Ryrie, Laney) believe porneia is referring to the Jewish laws against marriage between close relatives (Lev 18:6-18). This corresponds exceptionally well in context with Jesus’ complete teaching on the subject in Mat 19:3-12. It also explains Matthew’s account of John the Baptist losing his head for telling Herod it was unlawful for him to marry his brother’s wife (Mat 14:4). Saving for the cause of fornication means that, in Herod’s case, he must put away his unlawful wife. The “exception clause” does apply. And finally, this goes hand in glove with the concept of marriage as a type of Christ and the Church, with a betrothal period that corresponds to this life, and the wedding at the entrance into heaven (Rev 19). Infidelity during this life after having promised oneself to Christ, results in NOT being at the great marriage feast. 

     Matthew wrote to the Jews, Mark to the Romans, and Luke to the Gentiles. The Romans had laws against polygamy but allowed a woman to divorce her husband. The Jews had opposite social customs. They practiced polygamy and did not permit a woman to divorce her husband. Additionally, the Jews had particular laws against marriage between close relatives, but the Romans had no formal laws governing inter-familial marriage, it being apparently universally condemned (1Cor 5:1). Given their intended audiences, it is certainly significant that Mark gives the case of a woman divorcing her husband (Mark 10:12) while Matthew does not, and this provides a likely reason why Matthew gives the case of divorce for incestuous marriage while Mark and Luke do not.

     The usage of porneia in Act 15:20 is another significant proof of this definition. Even a superficial reading leaves one wondering why fornication should be in that list. Surely fornication was just as wicked when found among the Gentile Christians as it was among the Jews? Yet, when we understand porneia in the Jewish sense given above, all becomes clear. Food offered to idols, incestuous relationships, eating the meat of strangled animals and drinking blood were all seriously offenses against the Law for Jews. Gentiles however, with little knowledge of the Law, would not have known that these were highly offensive to Jews.

     Another example of porneia in the context of incestuous relationships is 1Cor 5:1-5, where Paul reprimands a Jewish Christian for marrying his step-mother. Incest was not tolerated in Roman culture; it was a fornication that is not so much as named among the Gentiles (1Cor 5:1). Note also that porneia is singular in the present passage, while in more general passages it is plural (ex 1Cor 7:2).

     In addition to incestuous relationships, saving for the cause of porneia would include pre-marital sexual relations. If a husband discovered that his new wife was not a virgin, but had played the harlot before time in her father’s house (Deut 22:21), he could divorce her. Even at weddings today the man and woman are asked to affirm that they are free from previous marriages, and if one were to lie, it would constitute grounds for immediate separation. So again, consistent interpretation says that porneia refers to sexual sins and conditions that exist before the marriage. To say it refers to an act of adultery after marriage would make a mockery of Jesus’ teaching on the subject. See below.   

     A common contemporary interpretation of this passage asserts that divorce and remarriage are one-time acts of sin that can be forgiven, and that any new relationship is accepted by God as a valid marriage. This is certainly a forced view with an ulterior motive, for if true it would again make the Apostles’ statement concerning marriage (Mat 19:10) without sensible foundation. Technically, it would also make remarriage to be the act of adultery, rather than the physical act, an odd idea indeed. Sin has consequences that salvation does not remove, and repentance is more than verbal vows. Is divorce and remarriage the only sin that needs no act of repentance? A murderer serving time in prison will not see his sentence revoked by asking for salvation, neither will a thief be free from his debt by trusting in Christ. A divorced and remarried couple commits adultery each time they have sexual relations, and the only way to stop the sin is to stop the action. As stated in the note on the previous verse, marriage is a spiritual type symbolizing the marriage of Christ to the Church. There is only one rightful marriage partner and that is the first love of vows. All other relationships are adulterous. In the case of death, it is easy to see why a second marriage is allowable – the rightful marriage partner is not in this life.

     Some Greek scholars, wishing to find a loophole, say that the verb tenses in this verse indicate the adultery is not a continuing condition but a single event in the past. When pressed, however, they must admit that this is not entirely true, for in the Greek either punctiliar or continuing action could be intended. They choose punctiliar action because they wish it to be so, all while saying that they are basing that choice by context even when it is clear the grammar could be either. However, this argument completely misses the chief point, for Christ is neither making the adultery a one-time act in the past nor a continuing condition. Rather, He is clearly saying that each time a divorced and remarried couple comes together they commit adultery. The action is both punctiliar and continuing if and when the two have sexual relations. Any other interpretation ignores that the definition of adultery is having sex with an unlawful partner, and this holds true throughout an unlawful marriage. In other words, it is not the continuing state of unlawful marriage that forms the sin of adultery, but the periodic act of adultery within that marriage. The only remedy for such a situation is a return to one’s rightful partner, just as Paul describes in 1Cor 7:10-11.

     Jesus explains more about divorce/remarriage in Mat 19:3-12; Mark 10:2-12; Luke 16:18. See also 1Cor 7:10-15; 7:39-40; Rom 7:1-3.

33 Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths: 34 But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God’s throne: 35 Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King. 36 Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black. 37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.

In these verses Jesus expands upon the Third Commandment: Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain (Ex 20:7). Lying has always been a huge problem for the human race and the Jews were no exception. Oaths were a way of affirming the truthfulness of what a person said, but they had become so misused and regulated that the whole system was rendered without usefulness (Ecc 5:1-6). See Lev 19:12; Deut 5:11. Absolute truthfulness is the rule that Jesus requires. 

     Honesty is a commodity in short supply and Jesus re-establishes this law by completely overhauling the expression of this moral law. In these verses He is basically saying, “Don’t swear oaths attesting to the truthfulness of your speech, but rather be characterized by always speaking the truth: if you say, ‘yes’ then mean ‘yes’ and if you say, ‘no’ then mean ‘no’.” The usage of oaths can be seen in Heb 6:16, and James 5:12 essentially repeats the new rule.

     The third commandment permitted oaths, but they were not to be made in vain. Jews swore by heaven, Jerusalem, the temple, the gold of the temple, and who knows what else (Mat 23:16-22). Evidently even after such dire oaths their promises were still empty, so instead of helping to fix the problem of untruthfulness, the swearing of oaths actually added to the sin when they didn’t comply.

     In practice, the command to avoid all swearing and oaths surely refers to both ceremonial oaths before judges as well as personal oaths between men. Peter learned this the hard way (Mat 26:72). Nevertheless, the larger fact that vows were common and commanded under the Law but are entirely forbidden in the churches of the Kingdom makes for an interesting study.

38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:

This is the famous law of retribution, the lex talionis, which the Greeks and Romans also used. Again the change that Jesus introduces in the New Covenant is a major one. The Old Covenant allowed a man to sue for damages and demand a “like for like” repayment for all wrongs (Ex 21:1; Lev 24:20; Deut 19:21), but in the Kingdom of Heaven, Christians are asked to suffer wrongdoings and evil without recompense. It is such a radical change, that most Protestant commentators disavow it entirely. They will typically admit that Jesus is teaching non-retaliation, but do not believe that He was denying the right to defend oneself against evil. Nor do they recognize that Jesus is here re-instituting the law in a radically new form, but think that He is simply emphasizing the heart issue by citing verses like Lev 19:17-18. However, the large fact is inescapable, for Jesus’ teaching is stunningly new and radical. Nobody practiced meekness and non-retaliation to this degree. Yet in the New Kingdom it makes sense, for Mercy pays what Justice requires. See note on verse 7.

39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

The law of non-retaliation is so opposite the way of “self,” and so stunningly different from the Old Testament laws of retribution, that I can imagine Jesus’ listeners gasping in shock and looking about with their mouths hanging open. Yet intuitively the Christian realizes that this is the best way, and nobody better illustrated that than the Son of God on earth. The Apostles followed His example (Rom 12:17-21). And it is so logical in the new domain of God’s Kingdom! No longer does He have a single, chosen nation and government with all the necessary accompanying judicial rules. The new Kingdom is un-political, a-religious, and super-social. Whosoever will means that any man, woman, or child may become a citizen by following Jesus Christ (Mark 8:34-35). The Old Covenant laws of government, society and religion have no place in a Kingdom without a selected government and society. They have been fulfilled in Christ (Mat 5:17).

     Kingdom-Christians live in a society as ambassadors and citizens of another country (2Cor 5:20; Heb 11:16; Eph 2:19; Php 3:20). While obeying the laws of the governments, their first allegiance is to the law of Christ. For many, the most difficult rule in this charter is the law of non-retaliation, but note how naturally it flows from the principles and precepts found herein, beginning with the Blesseds (blessed are the meek, the peacemakers, the persecuted), and followed by the new expression of, Thou shalt not kill. It is not possible to be characterized by these beatitudes and be involved in vengeance and taking human life.

     Christians who support their governments militarily and politically end up pointing guns at each other across the battlelines of war. They are literally killing their real fellow-citizens by obeying the rule of some earthly kingdom. That is a seriously incongruous picture. The secondary scenario may be even worse, killing a non-Christian and forever depriving him of the possibility of salvation. In the Old Testament, those were matters that God decided and communicated directly to prophets and kings, but in the Kingdom of Christ, God has established a new standard based upon love, kindness and self-sacrifice. It is very different from the Old, and yet has been far more effective! A killing Christian is a contradiction of terms.

     On a personal note, I once found myself explaining the principle of the two Kingdoms and Christ’s rule of non-retaliation to a good Protestant friend in Chile who had always been taught to stand and fight for one’s country. I was surprised to find no common agreement at all with him, and not even compassion for a fellow-Christian from his denomination in Argentina. No, if the Argentinians were to start a war with Chile, he would have no problem killing members of his own church denomination! Just a few weeks later, I had virtually the same conversation with a very nominal Catholic. As I explained the Bible verses at play and the obvious principles that fell out, I watched his impassive expression for clues as to what he was thinking and to see if it was making any sense at all to him. He listened quietly and suddenly said, “You know, I never could figure out why Christians go to war and kill people, it just doesn’t seem very….Christian!”

     Resist not evil. Most Protestants say this law applies only on the personal level and that good Christians will fight for their countries’ interests. Jesus gives no hint that is true. Unlike the law of divorce, there isn’t even an exception clause! Intuitively this idea should strike any honest-thinking Christian as wrong. How can we as Christians expect to advance Christ’s Kingdom by fighting and killing the very ones we are called to win (John 18:36)? Forced conversions are no conversions at all. The true Kingdom of Christ is never advanced militarily, a fact that Martin Luther, John Calvin, Ulrich Zwingli and many others of the Reformers never learned.

     Non-retaliation does not stand on its own as a unique concept, but is firmly based upon the law of Love, the great Second Commandment (Mat 22:39). It puts others ahead of oneself, rates their needs more important than self-defense, and it recognizes the value of the soul above the value of personal rights. While the word non-retaliation sounds negative, defensive, and even an act of surrender, in practice it is not. It is pro-active, an offensive strategy that often ends up winning the battle! Many times, non-retaliation has broken the strongest heart and taken down the most hardened enemy, for this kind of “suffering love” is perhaps the powerful witness of all. It is the active message of the Cross, where Jesus refused to defend Himself and laid down His life.

     Obviously, resist not evil is not a blanket statement for all topics and times. We are called to resist Satan and the forces of darkness. The chief concept here is that we do not resist evil by returning evil, but we return good for those evils we experience.

40 And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also. 41 And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.

The subject of litigation amid hatred and vengeance was already addressed in Mat 5:25-26, where Jesus says that every effort should be made to avoid going to court at all. Again, a meek and non-retaliatory spirit is in order. Resist not evil. It is better to suffer wrong than to argue for your rights in a court room. Nevertheless, I don’t think Jesus is advocating that you offer the judge to give up your shirt also, but rather that you fully comply with what the judge requires. The picture is meant to contrast with the eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth rule of the OT. “Don’t begrudge what is just, if you have wronged someone, give even more than what is only required by law.”

     The picture of being compelled to walk a mile appears to be drawn from the right and practice of Roman soldiers in Israel of pressing into service any local man who happened to be passing by to carry his equipment for one mile. The proud Jews hated this practice but had no choice but to obey. An example is Simon of Cyrene, who was compelled to carry Jesus’ cross (Mat 27:32). It again calls the Christian to a life of giving and loving others. The NASB reads shirt and coat in the place of coat and cloke. Luke 6:29 reverses the two.

42 Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.

The parallel passage in Luke 6:30-38 adds that the one who gives generously will be rewarded generously. The Old Testament law also required a giving hand (Deut 15:7-10), but the Israelites had found many ways to avoid that distasteful rule. They would say that it applied only to a fellow Jew, or that they had given their alms to the Temple, etc. And at the foundation, the idea of freely giving is incompatible with the lex talionis.

     The Christian is a steward of God’s money, that is, the money that God has given him. Use it to benefit the Kingdom! As in most of Jesus’ teaching and parables, a hyper-literal keeping of the text is possible….but would miss the heart of the commandment. Jesus has been contrasting the Old law of retribution to the New law of non-retaliation and this verse is a further expression of the latter. The law of retribution required that wrongs be repaid like for like. The law of non-retaliation requires forgiveness and suffering, not avenging our wrongs, but letting God be the avenger (Rom 12:19-21).

     Let us keep the spirit of the law and not the letter. If a criminal asks for a murder weapon, we would never give him one! If you know the person who is asking for money will only use it to support his drug habit, don’t give it to him! Buy him a meal, clothes or a taxi ride, but giving him cash is not helping the Kingdom. Be a steward of God’s money.

     On a separate note, it is good for a needy person in the church to ask for help rather than expect to be noticed and given money. That frees those with better means to give without their generosity being evil spoken of, and the needy person is blessed in admitting his need and accepting assistance.

43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. 44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

If Jesus’ listeners were astonished at His new doctrine, what He now advocates must have completely floored them! Even today many doubt that Jesus actually means for us to love your enemies,…do good to them that hate…and persecute you. Society cannot exist in such a climate, they say, for evil-doers will rise unchecked to terrible powers of wickedness. We would point out that history shows evil-doers will rise unchecked in a lex talionis world too. Think Hitler, Stalin, and the cruel Roman emperors of long ago. That, however, is a completely different realm anyway. Jesus is not speaking to governments, but to individuals who choose to join His everlasting Kingdom. The Kingdom and the State are two separate domains whose appropriate intersection is controlled by Christ’s laws and commands. Dual-citizenship is not legal in secular countries of the world, so make your choice of Kingdoms now.

     The command to love one’s enemies is not surprising to those of us who believe the Beatitudes are for today. Blessed are the meek…the peacemakers…the merciful. Those attitudes naturally should be expected to extend to actions such as, Do good to them that hate you. Probably no doctrine was so unanimously held by the early church writers as non-retaliation. For the first 300 years of church history, all early texts show that war and killing were denounced by the Christian church. The change began when the Roman emperor Constantine converted to Christianity and not only reversed the state-mandated persecutions of Christians but made it politically and socially advantageous to be a Christian. The marriage of Church and State has had serious repercussions for the pilgrim church from that time forward. The picture in Rev 17:1-6 is an astonishing prophecy of that very fact. 

     Amazingly, some otherwise well-intentioned Christians believe that in war you can love your enemies and still kill them. “God is love and yet He kills people,” they say. But the comparison between God and man is entirely inappropriate, for the all-wise Creator of the universe is all-sovereign. There are many things He may do that we may not. As a pointed example, vengeance is God’s responsibility, not man’s (Rom 12:19). The error in this line of reasoning is self-evident and equal to the Pharisees negating unpopular Scriptural commands by using other Scriptures.    

     We have said often in these notes that the New Covenant principles of rule are outside the domain of government and politics. As citizens of the Kingdom of Heaven, Christians are to live by the law of non-retaliation, but governments of the world continue in their God-ordained responsibilities to check evil-doers (Rom 13:1-4). The Christians’ call to live a different rule should not be made to hinder the government’s rightful duties.

     And yet, a hyper-literal interpretation of the rule of non-retaliation could even aid evil-doers in their sins, and that is clearly wrong and harmful. Some well-meaning people have fallen into this error, and refuse to report crimes of burglary, drunkenness and violence to the authorities. They are aiding the criminal in his sin and exposing others to the risk of possible wickedness. Prison is not that bad. Many have testified to receiving Christ within its walls. Refusing all assistance in the carrying out of justice on the grounds of following Christ’s law of non-retaliation subverts the intent and spirit of the law. That fact however, cannot be used to release the Kingdom-citizen from the law of non-retaliation when working for the State. His first allegiance is to the laws of Christ’s Kingdom. It is absurd to think that any human institution’s rule of law may negate Christ’s law. Nevertheless, many Christians try to use this as an escape clause, joining the military and taking human lives at the will and command of the state. It is confusion.

45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.

If we seriously want to be counted as children of the Father, we should seriously follow the rules He has set forth for His children. Many are duped into thinking that heaven will be filled with children who apparently do not love Him! Those that keep His words are the ones that love Him (John 14:23); they are keeping His commandments and remain in His love (John 15:10). Otherwise they are cut off and burned (John 15:6).

46 For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? 47 And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?

Christ calls His followers to a higher level of love, a supreme love that the world cannot know. It is a love in action and not one of words.

48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

Be ye perfect. At the end of this new and lofty doctrine, Jesus encourages His followers to put them into practice. Luke 6:36 has it, Be ye merciful as your Father also is merciful. The difference is not great, for mercy is the theme of Jesus’ new teaching. Not the justice of the lex talionis, but the mercy of loving one’s fellowman. Obviously, full perfection is not attainable by Man. If it were, Christ’s perfect life and sacrificial death would not have been necessary. His work alone can make us perfect. The Greek word carries the idea of “maturity, complete, perfect.”  

1 Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil.

     The Synoptic Gospels describe Jesus’ baptism and wilderness temptation similarly and seem to link them topically. Certainly they signaled the beginning of Christ’s ministry. However, their real significance was far greater in the spiritual realm, for it was then that Satan realized for certain that Jesus was the promised One whose coming he had so long feared. The very seed of the woman that God had said would crush his cunning and evil head (Gen 3:15). Maybe one of Satan’s minions had reported to him the astonishing heavenly declaration when Jesus was baptized: This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased (Mat 3:17). Was it true? Satan would find out for himself, for he must corrupt this human as he had all others and thus wreck God’s prophecy. It seems that  Satan himself went to Jesus and subtly asked Him to prove His identity: IF you are the Son of God, command that these stones become bread (Mat 4:2).  

     It is evident from Luke 2:49 that Jesus had known from childhood He was the Son of God. Yet it was not until John baptized Him that He was finally proclaimed to be the Messiah, and the wilderness temptation affirmed that in the spirit-world. Taken together, these two events do fulfil all righteousness (Mat 3:15), for the celestial announcement at Jesus’ baptism prompted Satan to tempt Him, and that resulted in Christ being proven sinless, pure, righteous and triumphant. Satan slunk away, licking his wounds and watching for another opportunity Luke 4:13). All this happened unobserved by humans, being revealed to the Gospel writers years later.

     The Spirit had communicated to Jesus that He must go into the wilderness for this crucial event (Mark 1:12-13; Luke 4:1-2), this throwing down of the gauntlet in the great and mighty duel between Michael and the Dragon (Rev 12:7), between the Seed of the woman and the serpent. That battle would end with the crushing of Satan at the Cross (Heb 2:14) and the spoiling of his house (Mat 12:28-29), or the deliverance of blood-bought souls from Satan’s control (Eph 4:8-10). The war between Satan and God continues, but the big battle has been won and Satan knows that he has lost. His time has all but run out, soon he and his wicked ones will be sealed in everlasting chains of darkness forever.

2 And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he was afterward an hungred.

     Moses and Elijah had also fasted for forty days (Ex 34:28; 1Kings 19:8). The symbolic meaning of the number forty is testing (see glossary note on Rev 22:21). Matthew implies that Jesus was tempted at the conclusion of His fast, but Luke records that He was tempted throughout the whole 40 days (Luke 4:2; Mark 1:13). Probably the same three temptations came again and again, for that is the typical method of Satanic attack. And as the days went by, they surely became stronger. Did Satan approach Jesus in the form of a man, speaking to him audibly? Or was the “conversation” conducted in the spirit? Did he come as an angel of light (2Cor 11:14), or did he show his worldly, sensual self? The Bible does not say, but some of the interaction involved supernatural transportation and vision. Whether it took place in the mind and spiritual realm or in the physical world, the exchange was thoroughly real. 

     The three temptations of Christ seem to form three categories of testing. These in turn have correspondences in the Scriptures. The apostle John wrote, For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world (1John 2:16). Man exists in three parts: body, soul and spirit (1Thes 5:23). Each of these was severely tested. Jesus was tempted in all points just as we are (Heb 4:15).

• The first temptation was a test of the Flesh. His body and its appetites were tempted to sin – the lust of the flesh. This test is overcome by denying self and trusting wholly in God (Mat 16:24).
• The second temptation was a test of Faith, His soul was tempted to force God to honor Jesus’ own will instead of God’s will, thereby tempting God. This is ever our temptation in the lust of the eyes, which is anything that distracts the true faith of the soul from God in favor of creating personal, selfish paths of life. This temptation is overcome by believing and doing all that the Word of God says, just as Jesus did in His temptation.
• The third temptation was a test of Love. His spirit was tempted to worship Satan. This corresponds to the pride of life, a serious sin against the first and greatest commandment of all, Love the Lord thy God with all thy heart (Mat 22:37-38). The way of victory over Pride will follow humility, meekness and obedience.      

     The three temptations indicate that this was an all-out attempt by Satan to corrupt Jesus and thus make it impossible for Him to be the promised Seed (see note Gen 4:1). First he tried to get Jesus to use His God-powers for selfish reasons, cunningly choosing to exploit his hunger because he knew Jesus had not eaten for 40 days. Failing there, he tested the deep-seated human desire for pride and fame, suggesting that in front of the whole nation Jesus should throw Himself off the Temple and then miraculously save His own life. That would certainly gain the admiration and undying support of all Israel! This temptation was laid before Jesus in an even more tempting situation later on (Luke 23:39). Failing a second time to corrupt Jesus, Satan pulled out all the stops. Realizing that he had not dented Jesus’ spirit, he offered his greatest possession: his own throne to the kingdoms of the world. But Jesus could not be bought or bribed. His last words to Satan were said in such strength that the Devil knew that he had lost this battle.

     While it is doubtful that Jesus’ temptation was given as an example of how the Christian should combat temptation, it is nevertheless instructive to note how Jesus met each attack with Scripture (Eph 6:17). His powerful example of meditation, prayer and fasting is just as helpful.

     Apparently, the fact that Jesus was actually God by nature did not make it easier for Him to live the human life. For although He was given all the powers of heaven and earth, He still spent much time in prayer and communion with God. Never did He use his God-powers for selfish reasons, but he was tested in that area at the beginning and then all through life. Yet in my opinion, Jesus’ greatest temptation came at the end, when praying alone in dark Gethsemane He sweated as it were great drops of blood. For then Satan came to Jesus when He was at His weakest moment and attacked Him at His weakest points. When hungry, he had tempted Him with food; but when He was lonely and exhausted from many earlier devilish attacks, He tempted Him with saying “no” to God’s plan to lay down His life. Expect the same in your own life experiences!

3 And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread.

     This first temptation was a test of the Body. It must have recurred throughout the 40 long days that Jesus spent in the wilderness with no food. Hunger was surely a constant companion in that time and from stories of others who have experienced it, we know that urge can drive people to terrible acts of insanity, hallucinations and even to killing and eating other humans.     

     The Tempter. The apostle Paul calls Satan by this name in 1Thes 3:5 and the title reminds of the Accuser in Rev 12:10. In tempting Jesus to turn stones into bread, the Devil sought to exploit His human flesh in several ways:

• He attempts to create doubt: “IF you are God’s son…”
• He attempts to create an attitude of pride: “Show me that you are God’s son; prove it to me by turning these stones to bread.”
• He appeals to His flesh by using the strongest natural human instinct, hunger. If Jesus had satisfied His hunger supernaturally, He would not have been truly human, and that would have disqualified Him as a substitutionary sacrifice (see note on Php 2:8).
• He strikes at that part of a man most dear and precious of all – SELF. If Satan could get Jesus to use His God-powers for SELFish reasons, appeasing His hunger by supernatural means, He could not have been able to understood what it means to suffer as a human. Jesus Himself hath suffered being tempted, He is able to succour them that are tempted (Heb 2:18; 4:15).

4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

     Jesus met each temptation with Scripture, sustaining Himself by unshakeable faith in God’s Word (Ps 119:97-110), that sword of the Spirit (Eph 6:17). The Word accompanies Prayer as the two greatest offensive weapons at the Christian’s disposal in fighting spiritual battles. Notice that Jesus did not use God’s Word as if it were simply the good advice of some human writers (as liberals do today), but as if it really were the final, argument-ending authority that it is. There is perhaps, no greater proof of the divine inspiration of the Old Testament Scriptures than that Christ quoted it as the revealed word of God to Man. He did not allow Satan to corrupt God’s Word as Eve had allowed Satan to do in the Garden of Eden.

     The sin most basic to all three of the temptations that Christ faced was to reject God’s will and providence. This can be seen from the passage Jesus quoted in Deut 8:2-5, which sums up the reason God had led and provided for the Israelites forty years in a desolate, food-less wilderness. In this verse God is essentially saying, “Man should not trust in his own efforts to provide bread, but trust ever in the Word and Purpose of God.” Unfortunately, Israel failed that temptation many times and were denied entrance into the land of Canaan on account of that unbelief (Heb 4:11), which doesn’t mean they did not believe in God, but that they did not trust Him to provide for their needs. The final failure came when, even after God had miraculously provided for them on their long journey from Egypt to the Jordan, they so feared the enemies of the land that they rejected God’s plan and began to organize leaders to take them back to Egypt! If Jesus would have yielded to Satan’s temptation to turn those stones into bread, He would have been repeating the Israelites’ sin. He would have been failing to trust in God’s plan and providence, for remember that the Spirit had led Him into that wilderness. He also would have been rejecting God in favor of making His own way in the world. Jesus did not yield to this temptation! He was not as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright (Heb 12:16). And Esau had been hungry for only about one day.

5 Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple, 6 And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.

     The second temptation was a test of Faith, which the Devil developed in a very cunning and deceptive way. He came quoting Scripture (Ps 91:11-12), apparently telling the truth. How many Christians have fallen prey to this very trap! Satan specializes in giving false and/or misinterpretations of the Holy Scriptures. It is a grave error to emphasize one passage such that it overturns or cancels another. The Word of God is all Truth (2Tim 3:16), so it is simply not acceptable to select piecemeal the truths that you prefer. The Devil quoted one verse and challenged Christ to act upon it, but Jesus, rightly dividing the Word of Truth, exposed Satan’s misinterpretation in short order. Let us be ever wary of the Devil’s wicked tactics and follow Christ’s example.

     Imagine the stir among the crowds to see a man crashing to the ground from the pinnacle of the temple and then rising up unhurt! It would have been the talk of the town. Jesus had known He was the Son of God for quite some time and being human, he surely was tempted to be Messiah the easy way and win the hearts of the people by miraculous demonstrations of personal power. Who better to understand that than Satan? His own pride and self-love had caused his fall from God’s favor. But Jesus was unmoved and probably barely tempted with His human pride and egotism. Even at this early juncture He surely knew that His mission involved humility and lowliness, the rejection of nation and friend to bear the eventual disgrace of a pitiful death on the cross. Though He wished for another way, Jesus knew that He must yield Himself to God’s way (Mat 26:39-42). Satan would later virtually repeat this temptation by speaking through Peter, who rebuked the Lord for saying that He must be killed. Jesus answered, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto Me (Mat 16:21-23).

     Again, the heart of Satan’s temptation was to get Jesus to reject God’s will and plan, and to do things his own way. It has ever been Satan’s goal to entice man to follow his own desires rather than God’s desires, or as Jesus said in response to Peter, Thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men (Mat 16:23). Beware that just as Satan came quoting Scripture in tempting Jesus, so he will come to tempt you! It is a favorite tactic of his, to come as an angel of light (2Cor 11:14), with a Bible under one arm and giving honest-sounding and even Scripturally-based advice.

7 Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.

     Again Jesus quotes the book of Deuteronomy to repel Satan’s attack. To tempt is “to try, or put on trial, or to attempt proof of.” The Israelites tempted God at the waters of Massah (Deut 6:16) by demanding Moses to give them water or they would go back to Egypt (Ps 78:18). They became so angry and quarrelsome that Moses feared for his life. See the story in Exodus 17:1-7. Essentially, Israel “tempted God” by putting Him on trial. They required Him to act rather than ASKING Him to supply their need and trusting that He would provide.

     Satan tempted Christ to act similar to the children of Israel. Throwing Himself off the temple and trusting that God would save Him would seem to be the ultimate act of Faith. False! It would be a SELFISH act, a self-glorifying act, an act based in pride. To presume upon the grace of God is to require Him to deliver us. Who can require God to do anything? 

     Many are tempting God today too, even while thinking they are demonstrating “great faith.” I have heard people in their prayers “tell” God what He needs to do, essentially demanding that He work a miracle: “Lord, I pray that you heal Tom of his cancer. We believe that You are able, and we have faith that You are going to heal Him.” That is tempting God, it is trying to force Him to do something for personal benefit, such as hinging faith upon an event and making it a test or proof that God exists. We walk by faith, not by sight (2Cor 5:7; Gal 3:11; Hab 2:4).

     Another way to tempt God is to willfully allow ourselves to be in an evil or tempting environment and expecting Him to keep us from sin. The apostle Paul warned of the sin of tempting Christ in 1Cor 10:9.

8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;  9 And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me.

     The third temptation was a test of Love. Satan transported Christ (in the spirit) where He could see all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time (Luke 4:5). He saw kings and glorious lifestyles, merchants with their riches and ease, famous men honored by adoring crowds. All this could be His for the payment of one simple act: bow down and worship Satan.  

     If this tactic seems to speak of desperation, let us nevertheless remember that many people have succumbed to it. Some overtly choose Satan over God, but the majority have been deceived into doing so. The first commandment of all is to love God (Deut 6:13; Luke 10:27). Just as is true for every man who is born, two crowns were offered to Jesus. The one was a spectacular jewel of pleasure, pomp and power; it glistened and sparkled as Satan made it to turn this way and that in the light of the sun. The second crown was thorny, difficult and lonely, but the One who held it out was the famous One and Only, the God and King of the Universe, the Good and Honorable Judge of all men.

Life is a test of my love for Jesus! 

Do I keep His commandments, obey always His rule?
Am I reading His Word, striving to learn in His school?
Do I consciously deny my will, my Self, my affection?
Am I renouncing my loves, my desires, at His direction?
Do I love Him with all of my heart, my strength, my mind? 
Are my actions and words to His true counsel aligned?

"He that loves Me will keep My commandments," He said,
And then taught me submission as He suffered and bled.
Help me, O God, to be meek, to rely always on You,
Help me to never displease He who alone is all-true.
Your blood has redeemed me from Satan and sin,
Thank you, Lord Jesus, I love you, do come in!

-tb      

     Satan is the prince of this world (John 12:31), the power of the air (Eph 2:2), the god of this world (2Cor 4:4). He sat upon the throne of the wicked kingdoms of the world (Luke 4:6) and it was his ultimate possession. Yet, even his own throne was worth giving up if he could thereby avoid defeat. Clearly Satan realized now that this Man was the one he had feared and expected ever since that day in the Garden of Eden, when God had said that the seed of woman would crush his head. He had long known that by tempting each soul into sin he could destroy that possibility. And for millennia he succeeded in corrupting every single seed of woman that was ever born. But now One had come that he could not corrupt and he realized that desperate measures were required. And so he offered Jesus his entire realm and very throne (not that he actually meant to give it up). Jesus however, was not going to join forces with Satan no matter how enticing the offer. The devil finally had to admit his defeat.

10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.

     This is now Jesus’ third quote from the book of Deuteronomy in response to Satan’s temptation (see Deut 6:13; 10:20). It is the first and greatest commandment of both Covenants (Mat 22:36-38) and results in an insurmountable problem for those who do not believe in the deity of Christ. Jehovah’s Witnesses, for instance, maintain that it is a serious sin to worship anyone other than Jehovah-God. Yet Jesus accepted the worship of men many times during His ministry and even as a babe at birth they worshipped Him (Mat 2:11).

11 Then the devil leaveth him, and, behold, angels came and ministered unto him.

     After 40 days of lonely and difficult struggle, Jesus was refreshed in body and soul by angels. One can imagine the angels of heaven watching this battle of titans, the champion of Light and the champion of darkness fighting for the rights to Mankind. What immense consequences for the world and every human soul! And though God knew the outcome from the beginning, the fact that angels came and ministered to Jesus illustrates just how exhausting this battle was, for the Devil used every available weapon in his deadly arsenal to get Him to sin. Resist the devil and he shall flee from you (Jam 4:7).

     As humans we can easily separate ourselves from Jesus and His wilderness temptations with the thought that He was God, with super-human powers to overcome temptations. Yet it appears that this is not entirely true, for in some way, Jesus the man experienced these temptations. He laid aside His divinity and conquering the Devil anyway. Did Jesus feel pain when they drove the nails in His hands? He didn’t have to; He was God. Did He get tired and hungry, lonely and sad? Did He feel the same temptations that we do? The Scriptures say that He did (Heb 4:14-16); that He lived fully a man, experienced the same feelings and temptations as any man. Otherwise, He could not have been the appropriate sacrifice for Man’s sin. Here in the wilderness He treaded the winepress alone; and of the people there was none with Me (Isa 63:3).

     The temptation in the wilderness was the first skirmish in the war between Christ and Satan for the souls of Mankind. Luke says that the devil left Christ only temporarily (Luke 4:13), for this battle was not over until Jesus rose victorious from the grave. Before Christ, Satan owned the souls of every man on account of their sin. And even now, when a person sins he rightfully becomes the property of Satan, destined to spend eternity in Satan’s abode, the Lake of Fire. But when Jesus the perfect and sinless Man died, He earned the right and power to redeem (or buy, ransom) from Satan’s control those souls whom He chooses for Himself. Eph 4:8-10 describes very briefly Satan’s tremendous defeat when Jesus descended into Hades and wrested from Satan’s power the chosen of the Old Covenant. Jesus’ death as a sinless and perfect Man gave Him full and just authority over Satan. The Devil was defeated and Jesus earned the right and authority to spoil his house (Mat 12:29).

     It thus greatly behooves us as moral beings to seek, find, and urgently and wholly do whatever is required so that the Saviour Jesus Christ will choose us to be redeemed from the clutches of our rightful master, Satan. For Jesus is not obligated to redeem any man. All have sinned and justly have fallen into the hands of the evil one who enticed them. Yet God has formulated a plan of salvation, a way in which a man might escape the due reward for his guilt and sinfulness. How essential it is that we diligently seek for ourselves and find the one and only way that leads to Life Eternal! But Satan is a terrible adversary, and he has strewn the way with pitfalls, deceptions, counterfeits and false doctrines that can obscure the path and so keep sincere seekers from finding the Way of Escape! Oh how important and consequential are each man’s intelligent and rational choices!

12 Now when Jesus had heard that John was cast into prison, he departed into Galilee;

     According to the Gospel of John, the Baptist was imprisoned about a year after Christ’s wilderness temptation (sometime between John 3:24 and John 5:33-35). Apparently the Synoptics skip over that year of time and begin just after John the Baptist was cast into prison (see my notes on John 2:1 and John 3:24). The Gospel of John supplies many interesting details of that year, as well as later events the Synoptics had not mentioned.

13 And leaving Nazareth, he came and dwelt in Capernaum, which is upon the sea coast, in the borders of Zabulon and Nephthalim: 14 That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, 15 The land of Zabulon, and the land of Nephthalim, by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles; 16 The people which sat in darkness saw great light; and to them which sat in the region and shadow of death light is sprung up.

     Galilee was a region in Palestine to the north of Jerusalem that stretched from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River. In the heart of Galilee was the small town of Nazareth, some 70 miles north of Jerusalem in the Valley of Jezreel, famously known also as the valley of Armageddon (see note on Rev 16:12). Born in Bethlehem and raised in Nazareth, at 30 years of age Jesus moved to Capernaum, a town on the shores of Lake Galilee about 30 miles northeast of Nazareth. Capernaum was one of the chief cities in Galilee (30,000 inhabitants?), with synagogues, Roman soldiers and much commerce. Luke describes in more detail Jesus’ rejection by his hometown of Nazareth and consequent move to Capernaum (Luke 4:14-31).

    Zebulun and Naphtali were two rather insignificant neighbor tribes in the regions of Galilee and thus removed some distance from Jerusalem, the center of Judaism. With this quote from Isaiah 9:1-2, Matthew adds yet another prophetic OT evidence that Jesus is the Messiah. It is a striking fulfillment, describing the Great Light coming to these small Galilean tribes. Long a region of war and strife, and also an area popular for Gentile settlers due to its strategic location for the entrance of foreign goods and commerce, this region naturally came to be called, Galilee of the Gentiles. And yet, Galilee would become Jesus’ chief place of residence; His special area of teaching and working miracles. How outrageous it surely sounded to those righteous Pharisees in Jerusalem, for Galileans spoke differently (Mat 26:73) and were denigrated by pure-blooded Jews of “blessed and chosen” Judah (John 1:46).

     By darkness is meant a spiritual lethargy and ignorance, and by Light we understand a life-giving illumination of the Truth (John 1:5; 8:12). These definitions are found throughout the Scriptures. The fulfillment of this prophecy is found to be a mixture of the literal and the spiritual. The people and the location are physical, but the Light shining in the darkness concerns the spiritual realm. This is a normal and common conjunction of many OT prophecies.

17 From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

     As John the Baptist did at the first, Jesus came preaching that the Gospel of the Kingdom was at hand (Mat 4:23). While Christ’s message was in one sense a continuation of the Baptist’s preaching, it contained much new truth that John could only anticipate by pointing people forward to the Messiah’s better ministry (Acts 19:4). The Kingdom of heaven did not come in power until after Christ’s resurrection (Mark 9:1), but it began with John (Mat 11:13).

18 And Jesus, walking by the sea of Galilee, saw two brethren, Simon called Peter, and Andrew his brother, casting a net into the sea: for they were fishers. 19 And he saith unto them, Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men. 20 And they straightway left their nets, and followed him.

     The sea of Galilee is also called the sea of Gennesaret and the sea of Tiberias. Capernaum was located on the northern shore. Peter and Andrew were working when Jesus called them to service and that seems to be a common occurrence: Saul was looking for his father’s animals when Samuel came to anoint him King of Israel and David was keeping his father’s sheep. Elisha was plowing in the field and Moses was caring for his father-in-law’s sheep.

     The brothers did not hesitate, but immediately left their nets and followed Christ. Their response contrasts sharply with that of the rich young ruler, who went away sadly when Christ invited him to come and follow Me (Mat 19:21).

     Fishers of men…Jesus loved to use words in thought-provoking and attention-grabbing ways. His parables and metaphorical expressions teach clearly and powerfully, and they are more easily remembered by their simple and fluid structure.

21 And going on from thence, he saw other two brethren, James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, in a ship with Zebedee their father, mending their nets; and he called them. 22 And they immediately left the ship and their father, and followed him.

     The calling of the four principal Apostles (Peter, Andrew, James and John) was not as anonymous and arbitrary as it may appear at first reading. According to the book of John, these four plus Philip and Nathanael had earlier met and spent time with Jesus immediately following His baptism at the Jordan river by John the Baptist (John 1:35-42). Roughly a year had passed since that moment, when these six men had entertained strong hope that Jesus was the Messiah (John 1:43-49). In that background, it makes sense that they would immediately leave their nets and follow Him at His call. They weren’t following just any man’s call, but One that they knew and trusted.

     The manner in which Jesus chose each of the twelve is not exactly described, but it does seem that some were called later on out of the larger group of disciples. We also do not know if they left their families for the entire 3-1/2 years, or if they returned at times. It does appear, however, that the last year or so they stayed with Him almost exclusively.

23 And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people. 24 And his fame went throughout all Syria: and they brought unto him all sick people that were taken with divers diseases and torments, and those which were possessed with devils, and those which were lunatick, and those that had the palsy; and he healed them. 25 And there followed him great multitudes of people from Galilee, and from Decapolis, and from Jerusalem, and from Judaea, and from beyond Jordan.

     Jesus became known throughout the land as a righteous man, a prophet, one who spoke with authority and could even heal the sick. Some believed Him to be the Messiah, others thought not, for everyone knew that Messiah was to be a mighty King who would deliver the people from the Romans with great military skill and terrible acts of war. Jesus the Nazarene had not shown the slightest inclination to fight, or even to motivate the nation to war; no, He could not be the Messiah, these said.

     Yet when Messiah came, would He do more miracles than what this Man was doing? (John 7:31). Jesus healed sick people no matter what their illness or disease. Arthritis and chronic pains (torments), paraplegics and those with unusable limbs (palsy), epileptics and sufferers from seizures (lunatick), the blind, deaf and dumb – all were healed at His spoken word or gentle touch. Two of the most stunning examples were His healing a man born blind (John 9:32) and a man paralyzed upon a bed (Mat 9:1-6), but He also could read thoughts, command the weather and multiply food.

     Possessed with devils. Better, “the demon-possessed” (daimonizomai), for the word “devil” derives from diabolos. Demons are the fallen angels that followed Satan in his prideful rebellion against God.

1 In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea,

     With this verse we jump forward about 25 years to the beginning of Jesus’ ministry (Acts 1:22). The gospels of Mark and John begin at this point. Luke however, mentions a few details of Jesus’ life as a youth in the region of Galilee – how His family regularly attended the festivals in Jerusalem and how at age twelve He astonished the doctors of the Law with His answers (Luke 2:41-51). From an early age, Jesus was known as a sincere, studious young man (Luke 2:52). His earthly father was a carpenter (Mat 13:55) and Jesus was taught in the same occupation (Mark 6:3). He was probably a quiet individual, not particularly outstanding in demeanor or works if we can judge by the poor response of His boyhood acquaintances to His message (Mark 3:21). Even His brothers and sisters did not immediately believe on Him (John 7:1-5; Mat 12:46-50). Things changed dramatically when Jesus began His ministry. Suddenly His speech was authoritative and compelling (Mark 1:22), His intellect and knowledge far superior to that of the scribes (John 7:15) and His deeds and doctrine without rival in the history of the world.

     The details of John the Baptist’s birth can be found in the first chapter of Luke. He was a cousin to Jesus and very near to the same age. His father was a priest with important duties in the temple and many were probably expecting great things from this young man whose birth had amazed the nation (Luke 1:65-66). Following the command of the angel, his parents named him John (Luke 1:13) and taught him that no strong drink should ever touch his lips (Luke 1:15). The relationship of John and Jesus compares to the Old Testament characters of Jonathan and David. Both John and Jonathan gave up their ambitions and lives in astonishing deference to someone they recognized to be greater.

     Why did God choose to name him John? The Greek word is Ioannes (Iωαννης), but is transliterated from the Hebrew, Johanan (Yhow-Chanan) which means “Jehovah of grace,” or, “Jehovah is merciful.” The wilderness of Judaea refers to the country regions away from the populated city areas, for the ministry of John the Baptist was an unconventional one. The rabbis and teachers were centered in Jerusalem, but John’s message and attitude drew multitudes from far and wide.

     The wilderness of Judaea refers to the country regions away from the big cities like Jerusalem. The ministry of John the Baptist was an unconventional one, for all the rabbis and teachers were centered in Jerusalem. But John was different both in attitude and message, and many were drawn to him. Coming out of “religious” Jerusalem, people came in great quantities to hear him (Mat 3:5).

2 And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

    John the Baptist’s message was a call to repentance in connection with the coming of the Messiah. Traveling throughout the land of Israel, he proclaimed the imminent establishment of the kingdom of heaven (see Luke 3). John’s mother had likely told him the remarkable circumstances of his birth, and probably the miracle birth of his almost-twin cousin, Jesus of Nazareth. While Jesus was of humble birth and uncertain education, John was born into priestly lineage and his father served in the temple (Luke 1:5-11). He was thus very familiar with Jerusalem, the Judaic religion and the scribes and Pharisees. He would have been taught from little the OT Scriptures and would have studied the prophets under the most learned and influential of his day.

     John’s proclamation of the coming kingdom links to Daniel’s 490 year-old prophecy that the God of heaven would set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed (Dan 2:44; 7:13-14). Like the Magi, he had probably calculated the years of that Messianic prophecy (Dan 9:24-27) and knew that the time of fulfillment was definitely at hand. The Jews’ belief in Daniel and the prophets at the time of Christ is not certainly known, but clearly there was a sense of fear and urgency among the people. The fervent tenor of his preaching show that John was convinced that the coming of Messiah was near. To him, the axe was already chopping the base of the tree, the threshing floor already spread with raw wheat. The sandal-steps of that One coming after him could already be heard (Mat 3:10-12). The urgency and certainty of his belief rang so strong in his message and life that all were shaken by him, some unto repentance, some only to a grudging admiration (as Herod and the Pharisees).   

     Repent ye. In Luke’s words, John preached the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins (Luke 3:3). Repentance is an intellectual decision that results in actions of permanent, life-changing moment. It must be preceded by the conviction or realization of sin (John 6:44) and that is why preaching is so important. Then, after conviction of sin has seized the heart, a sincere desire to change must result in a conscious decision to make right past sins and determine to stop sinning. And finally, constant action to keep oneself in this condition validates the mental choice to repent (John 8:11). If the intellectual decision is not followed by corresponding life actions, then true repentance has not taken place. Repentance is a complete change of direction, beginning in the mind and then in action; those two should not be reversed.

     Unfortunately, it commonly happens that repentance is initiated with good intentions, but never acted upon such that it extends effectively into a change of life. The Baptist warned the Pharisees and Sadducees of that danger later in this chapter (Mat 3:8). Clearly, repentance is more than just asking forgiveness, but it does begin there. The reason John urged repentance was because the Kingdom was at hand. It was due and imminent, and every person must get himself ready for its appearing. The OT prophecies constantly read on the Sabbaths warned of that great and terrible day, and they surely must have gripped every soul who heard John speak.

     The kingdom of heaven. This term appears more than 30 times in the book of Matthew, but not once outside of it in the New Testament. By comparing the parallel usages of the two, I believe that the kingdom of heaven is interchangeable with the kingdom of God, a term used more than 60 times in the NT, but only appearing five times in Matthew. The common denominator of the two terms is the Kingdom’s origin: it is from heaven, that is from God. The seeds of the Kingdom began to be planted with John’s proclamation that it was at hand (Luke 16:16), but it did not truly come in power until after Jesus’ resurrection (Mark 9:1; Mat 16:28).

     Many of the parables begin with, The kingdom of heaven is like unto…, which is followed by a figurative description of Christ in His Kingdom-Church. The word kingdom is an appropriate title for Christ’s people, for He is indeed a King, and we are subjects of Him, serving under His rule and submitting to His will. Unlike a worldly kingdom, the Kingdom of heaven crosses political borders and ethnic differences, neither can it be contained geographically. It is first a spiritual Kingdom – it is within you (Luke 17:21; Rom 14:17), but that must not imply the Kingdom does not exist in the physical world. History has never seen a more powerful force than the Kingdom of Heaven.

     A whole book could be written about the Kingdom of Heaven using only the OT prophets’ descriptions. The Kingdom is world-wide, everlasting, glorious, prosperous, righteous, holy, happy and just. It’s laws are placed in the heart and God is the teacher. This lofty ideal is even now being perfectly fulfilled in its heavenly aspect, yet is only intermittently achieved in its earthly one.

3 For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight. 4 And the same John had his raiment of camel’s hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins; and his meat was locusts and wild honey.

     The prophets Isaiah and Malachi had foretold that the Messiah would be preceded by an Elijah-like messenger who would prepare the people for His coming (Isa 40:3-5; Mal 4:5-6). The scribes and Pharisees thought it would be Elijah himself, either risen from the grave or reincarnated (Mat 17:10-13) and Herod even worried that Jesus was John the Baptist risen from the dead (Mark 6:14-16). Elijah the Tishbite also wore a leathern girdle (2Kings 1:8). And Jesus confirmed that John was indeed this Elias, which was for to come (Mat 11:14). He was not however, Elijah in the flesh but a prophet come in the spirit and power of Elias (Luke 1:17). See also note on John 1:21. In keeping with his radical commitment to God, John lived completely without thought for human comforts – and even what we think are human necessities. He ate locusts and wild honey, and wore only the most simple and coarsest of garments. His raiment of camel’s hair was the rough sackcloth that OT kings and prophets would wear to beseech God. How opposite the soft and corpulent religious leaders in Jerusalem! (see Mat 11:7-9). No wonder the people came in droves to hear his message of repentance.    

     Curiously, John did not live long enough to see Messiah’s kingdom come in power. In fact, he saw very few of Christ’s miracles and he personally heard none of His messages (that we are aware of at least). Early in Jesus’ ministry, perhaps about a year after His baptism, John was arrested by Herod for his bold preaching (Mat 14:3-4; John 3:24). He died alone, in prison, a largely forgotten man only about 32 years old. Yet Jesus said of him, Verily I say you, among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist (see Mat 11:1-19). It is evident from the many lengthy references to him in the Gospels that the influence and teaching of John was great throughout the land of Israel. About half of twelve Apostles began as disciples of John the Baptist. He is called the “forerunner,” because he came before Christ; we could call Paul the “afterrunner” because as one born out of season he came after Christ. The remarkable ministries of John the Baptist and Paul of Tarsus are without human rival in the history of the world. Both died in prison, both executed by the axe, both felt alone and rejected at the time (Mat 11:2-3; 2Tim 4:16).

     Prepare ye the way of the Lord. This is a common Messianic theme in the OT, especially in the book of Isaiah, where mountains are said to become plains, waste places to become fertile, rough areas to be made smooth, and highways are constructed throughout the land (Is 11:15-16; 40:4; 41:15; 49:11; 51:3; 58:12).

5 Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan, 6 And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins.

         John was of priestly lineage, so he would have been familiar with the Temple at Jerusalem. His ministry however, did not take place within the walls of that great city. Instead, he preached in the wilderness with such notable power that all Judea went out to hear him. His outdoor “cathedral” was the banks of the Jordan River and His message of repentance was accompanied by a new sign – Baptism. The Jews followed the many water purifications and washings of the Mosaic Law, but the Pharisees had added even more by their “oral law.” According to Josephus, the Essenes (and other Jewish groups) practiced daily ritual immersions in specially made stone baths, but John’s river-baptism for the repentance of sins was an entirely new thing in Israel.

The Ordinance of Baptism

     Baptism is one of the seven ordinances of the Christian Faith, along with Marriage, Communion, Feetwashing, Headship Veiling, Anointing with Oil, and the Holy Kiss. These physical ceremonies illustrate important designs of God for Mankind and their purpose is to teach and remind the body of Christ to live according to the principles embodied therein. They are called “ordinances” because, although commandments of God, they do not derive from the great law of Christ, “Love God and thy neighbor also.” The human mind can easily and naturally trace every righteous principle of the Bible to a firm foundation in the Law of Love (Mat 22:37-40). The ordinances however, are not part of that divine set of principles that God has pre-installed in the human mind. Instead, they are simple somatic customs that were delivered to the churches in the God-breathed Scriptures by the Apostles (1Cor 11:2). They must be taught and handed down generation to generation, for they do not come naturally to the mind. The Old Covenant had hundreds of ordinances; the New Covenant has just seven that apply in every culture, time and place. 

     Each ordinance teaches essential spiritual truths for the living Church of Jesus Christ. Baptism has three, and they are tremendous, new spiritual benefits for the world of men that came with the establishment of the New Covenant. They are: 1) The remission of sins, 2) Personal identification with Christ, and 3) The indwelling of the Holy Spirit. These three significations of baptism are spelled out in a key verse: Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost (Acts 2:38).

     Under the Old Covenant, God would “overlook” a man’s sins if he kept its laws and ceremonies, but the New Covenant promises the complete removal of a man’s sins. Similarly, while the Spirit would come upon a man in the Old Testament only now and then, now He comes to dwell in the heart of every believer. And finally, this new position and power is found only by full, personal surrender to the Lordship of Jesus Christ, the Son of God made flesh. These foundational spiritual facts are the very backbone of God’s promises to the New Covenant people of Christ and consequently embodied in Christian baptism.

     While the ceremony of baptism is intricately involved in these powerful actions, exactly how is a matter of wide dispute in Christianity. Some think sins are not remitted until the actual water of baptism washes them away, while others see baptism as a physical sign or public announcement that these spiritual events have taken place in the believer. The modes and rituals of the baptismal ceremony are also an area of debate in many denominations, with some groups sprinkling the water, while others pour or immerse. And then there is the dispute over the age of baptism – some will baptize infants, while others stress that baptism must be personal and voluntary. We will explore those topics in this paper.

     The Apostles and elders of the everlasting Church of God administered the ordinance of Baptism to a select group of people – those who believed in Jesus Christ. This is the lone, indispensable requisite for baptism. To believe in Christ is: 1) Understanding and accepting the Word of His Gospel. 2) Recognizing and repenting from your sins and asking Jesus to forgive them. 3) Committing to live according to the will of the Master (Acts 8:12, 37). The link between baptism and salvation is very strong: He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned (Mark 16:16). On the other hand, a super-majority of New Testament passages proclaim salvation to be a work of faith in the heart (Rom 10:8-13) without mentioning baptism. The action of the water upon the body is secondary to the internal action of the Spirit.

Identification with Christ and His Body

     Peter, at the close of his famous sermon upon the day of Pentecost, counseled the heart-pricked Jews to…Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus (Acts 2:38). Baptism is a public demonstration of belief in Jesus Christ. It is an outward expression of total commitment and submission to His divine will. The children of Israel were baptized unto Moses (1Cor 10:1-2). They identified with him and followed him; they submitted to the rules of the Mosaic covenant and lived as citizens in the commonwealth of Israel. New Testament Baptism however, is a sober pledge of allegiance to Jesus Christ and His Kingdom. It is a public identification with His sufferings, an announcement of loyalty to His Lordship in life unto death. Here are some key verses that show this point. 

• For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus (Gal 3:27-28).
• For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body (1Cor 12:13).
• Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into His death? (Rom 6:3).
• Buried with Him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with Him through the faith of the operation of God (Col 2:12).
• But Jesus answered and said, Ye know not what ye ask. Are ye able to drink of the cup that I shall drink of, and to be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with? They say unto him, We are able. (Mat 20:22).

     Baptism is a sober, serious decision to yield full loyalty to Christ. It is an all or nothing choice. One cannot be baptized into Christ but reserve a part for other allegiances. Baptism unto Christ is unto death. In a sense, baptism is both a funeral and and a birthday in one ceremony – a soul has passed from death unto life (1John 3:14; Col 1:13; John 5:24), he is born again (1Pet 1:23; John 3:3), a new creature (2Cor 5:17; Col 3:10; Eph 4:24). On the other hand, baptism signals that a soul has died with Christ (Gal 2:20; Rom 6:6-8) and to self, sin and the world; it is a funeral for that old man of sin (see note at Mat 16:24). Baptism announces to all that you have left behind that old life and entered into new life with Christ.

      The funeral is described in strong terms: 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, in the same body, surrounded by the same physical things he experienced before. Inwardly however, he is a new creature and all things have new meanings and purposes. He that is not ashamed to associate with Christ in every point of life shall be found worthy to be associated with Him in rising again (Rom 8:11). Jesus faced death in obedience and submission; it is essential that we do the same.

     Baptism is identifying with Christ, who then identifies us as members of His Church and Kingdom. By one Spirit are we all baptized into one body (1Cor 12:13). It follows then, that the baptismal ceremony should be administered by the appointed elders of the local church. Four of the seven ordinances are rituals that are presided by leaders of the local church: Marriage, Communion, Anointing with oil and Baptism. In a sense, the ceremony of baptism celebrates the union of a single soul with Christ, while Communion is the union of many souls in the church body with Christ. The former signifies the beginning of life with Christ while the latter signifies continuing life with Christ. 

The Remission of Sins

     Peter’s advice to the Jews in Acts 2:38 was more than a recommendation to believe on Christ and identify with His Gospel. Repent, and be baptized…for the remission of sins(Acts 2:38). This was a new thing on the earth, but foretold in amazing prophecies of the Old Testament centuries before Christ (Is 27:9; Rom 11:27). The following verses establish the connection between the ordinance of Baptism and the inner cleansing of the soul which comes only by the forgiveness of Christ.

• And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord (Acts 22:16).
• Therefore we are buried with Him by baptism into death…even so we also should walk in newness of life (Rom 6:4).
• The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ (1Pet 3:21).
• Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water (Heb 10:22).
• Christ also loved the church, and gave Himself for it; that He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word…holy and without blemish (Eph 5:25-27).

       The term “forgiveness of sins” is sometimes thrown out as if it were a simple declaration of absolution, yet the facts shout a different story. Authentic forgiveness is very expensive. To forgive is to agree to assume the full cost of the debt or transgression incurred. In the case of God, the cost of forgiveness was the death of His only begotten Son, who was delivered into the hands of sinful men to be horribly treated and killed (Luke 24:7; Acts 2:23). Yet, with His stripes we are healed (Is 53:5). Jesus assumed the cost of our transgressions – He bare our sins in His own body (1Pet 2:24). There is a world of meaning in Christ’s words, This is My body, which is broken for you (1Cor 11:24; Luke 22:19).

     This is the center-point of Salvation – having the guilt of sin removed by Jesus Christ, who has gained all power to cancel our debts by His death and resurrection (Mat 28:18). Accordingly, the forgiveness of sins is also the center-point of Christian baptism, which illustrates the washing away of a person’s guilt by Jesus’ blood (1Pet 1:18-19). 

     The Apostle Peter made a connection between the water of Baptism and the water of the Great Flood of Noah’s day (1Pet 3:20-22). Just as a few souls in the Ark were then saved by water, even so now the water of baptism saves us – not that the water physically washes away the filth of the flesh, but by removing the guilt of sins from the conscience. Again we return to the center-point of salvation; having our sins forgiven and its guilt removed – or in Peter’s words, the answer of a good conscience toward God. The figure of the great flood agrees, for the waters of the Flood did not actually save Noah’s family, but entering into the ark of safety. In fact, the same water which “saved” the family of Noah destroyed the wicked and the world that then existed. This fits the spiritual meaning of water as the Word of God, which sanctifies the saved (Eph 5:25) but condemns the disobedient (John 12:48).

The Indwelling of the Holy Spirit

     The third point of baptism is the culmination: Repent, and be baptized…and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost (Acts 2:38). After a soul has identified with Christ and is purified by the sprinkling of His own blood, it becomes an acceptable, sanctified dwelling place for the Holy Ghost (1Cor 6:19). This is a tremendous change from the Old Covenant, for the blood of bulls and goats can never remove sins. The souls of mankind before Christ depended on His future sacrifice (Heb 11:39-40), but now each Christian has the power of the Holy Spirit at all times.

• For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence (Acts 1:5).
• They were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them (Acts 19:1-6).
• I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but He that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire (Mat 3:11).
• Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit (John 3:5-6).
• Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy He saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost (Titus 3:5).

     The three tremendous spiritual steps of Baptism find their summit with the coming of the Holy Spirit to live forever in the heart of the believer (Eph 1:13-14). He that does not have the Spirit of Christ within cannot be identified with Him (Rom 8:9). The ceremony of Baptism is a sign of the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit. After that ye heard the Word of Truth…and believed, ye were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise (Eph 1:13). John baptized with water, but Jesus baptizes with the Holy Ghost (John 1:33).

     It would be wrong to infer however, that the Spirit enters the person only upon, or after, receiving the water of baptism. The Apostles were baptized in the days of John the Baptist, but received the Spirit when Jesus breathed upon them after His resurrection (John 20:22). The rest of the disciples would wait until Pentecost to receive the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:1-8). The Samaritans (half-Jews) were baptized by Philip, but did not receive the Holy Spirit until after the Apostles came from Jerusalem and laid their hand upon them (Acts 8:5-18). On the other hand, the first Gentiles to enter the Kingdom received the Holy Spirit before being baptized (Acts 11:15-18; 10:47). Apparently Apollos had the Spirit when Aquila and Priscilla found him preaching the Gospel knowing only the baptism of John, for he was not re-baptized after they taught him the way of God more perfectly (Acts 18:24-28). Paul though, did re-baptize a group who knew only the baptism of John and then they received the Holy Spirit (Acts 19:1-6).

     The lack of a clear Bible recipe is a warning against dogmatic statements concerning baptism. Nevertheless, on this the Scriptures are emphatic – baptism is a critical, weighty event (Mark 16:16; Acts 22:16). Just as with the other ordinances, to be baptized is a physical demonstration that the individual accepts the profound, spiritual truths embodied in the baptismal ceremony. Keeping the ordinance of the covered/uncovered head demonstrates that the individual understands and accepts the truths that accompany the physical act. So too, in observing the physical act of baptism the individual demonstrates that he/she understands and accepts the sober truths that it teaches.

The requisites for Baptism

     Today, some Christians struggle to confirm their own baptism. Years later, they might question their sincerity at the time of their baptism, or their understanding, or the techniques of the church. Some wonder if they were truly saved before being baptized. These are valid questions that should be seriously considered, yet they often arise in persons who are struggling spiritually for other reasons. That is, persons who are looking for causes that would explain why they are not growing in the faith, or why they cannot defeat a particular besetting sin, or why they do not feel close to God, etc.

     Certainly there are occasions where re-baptism is advisable, but caution is also in order here. Baptism is not a magic ceremony where the potion must be perfectly mixed and the exact words chanted, and poof…sins are washed away and the Holy Spirit comes in. The requisites for Baptism are simple actions of the heart and mind – believe, repent, confess (Mark 16:16; Acts 2:38; Matt 3:6). These are the same requirements that the Scriptures show are unto salvation; the free, voluntary exercise of the human will – confess and believe in thy heart (Rom 10:9-10). This proves that the baptism of infants cannot avail.

     At its foundation, baptism is a public declaration of an individual’s voluntary decision to enter into a long-term covenant relationship with Christ. The basic tenants of the Faith have been taught, understood and accepted, and he/she has already taken the steps unto salvation. The local church is responsible to verify these things before administering the rite of baptism. Nevertheless, some teach that baptism should immediately follow initial profession of belief in Christ. Yet, as the first-century Didache says: “Having first taught all these things, baptize…” Baptism must follow good, careful instruction. The Great Commission commands, Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost (Mat 28:19).

Pouring or Immersion?

      One of the great disputes in the Christian Church is whether the ceremony of baptism should be by pouring or immersion. Some think it is important to discover and follow the method of John the Baptist. Did he take them out into the river and immerse the entire body beneath the water? Or enter the river and pour water over their heads? The New Testament does not answer the question. Surely, if the exact mode of baptism were important, it would be given clearly in Scripture. The ordinances of the Law were carefully described and strictly commanded, but that is not true for any of the Christian ordinances. Instead, each time the New Testament gives a more general rule, but in command form. Repent, and be baptized.

     Immersionists invoke the baptism of John as proof for their belief that the only acceptable baptism is by immersion, while Pourists counter with chronicles like the Philippian jailor and Cornelius (Acts 16:30-33). Notably, the very early testimony of the Didache (ca A.D. 80) shows that the mode of baptism was not a divisive issue in the Apostolic Church. “Now concerning baptism, baptize thus: Having first taught all these things, baptize ye into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, in living water. And if thou hast not living water, baptize into other water; and if thou canst not in cold, then in warm (water). But if thou hast neither, pour water thrice upon the head in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” (Philip Schaf translation, pg 184). This testimony affirms both immersion and pouring. Perhaps as the churches were forced underground, pouring became the standard.

     Both immersion and pouring are also found in several New Testament baptismal allusions, first to a burial (Rom 6:4; Col 2:12) and second to important ceremonies in the Law (Acts 10:45; Heb 9:19; 1Pet 1:2; Heb 10:22). In the former allusion, the person is described as “buried” in the water, while the latter imagery refers to the application of blood to purify the unclean and ratify the Covenant. Israel passing through the Red Sea is also likened unto baptism (1Cor 10:1-2) and also the Ark passing through the waters of the great flood (1Pet 3:20-21). These figures do not correspond well with immersion, but see my notes in those passages.

     Perhaps a detail at the first Communion service helps to understand the acceptable mode of baptism. Peter refused Christ’s first attempt to wash his feet, but after Jesus explained, he asked to be washed all over. But Jesus said, He that is washed (louo)needeth not save to wash (nipto)his feet. In other words, washing the feet was the same as washing the entire body (see John 13:8-10), because the act is symbolic of a deeper spiritual truth. This does not imply that the ceremony of baptism is optional, but that its true significance lies in the spiritual realm. It is not the action of the water upon the body that cleanses and saves, but the prior work of faith within. Baptism is but a symbol (or testimony) that this more important, inner action of the Spirit has taken place.

     Some attempt to define baptism by studying the Greek word, but baptizo simply means “to wash,” and is found in a variety of contexts, such as the washing of hands before a meal (see Mark 7:4; Luke 11:38; Heb 9:10). More commonly, nipto is used in washing the face, hands, or feet (Mat 15:2; Mark 7:3; John 9:7; 13:5), as well as louo (John 13:10; Acts 9:37; 16:33; Heb 10:22; 2Pet 2:22; Rev 1:5). In Acts 22:16, baptize appears in conjunction with apolouo (to be completely washed).

     There is no direct connection of baptism to Judaism’s ceremonial washings, which are typically found in both Greek testaments as nipto, louo and plumo. On the other hand, the Septuagint contains baptizo only twice, both times in contexts outside of the Law’s washings (Is 21:4; 2Kgs 5:14), while the New Testament contains baptizo more than 60 times, almost always in connection with Christian baptism. The related word bapto is never found in baptism texts (Luke 16:24; John 13:26; Rev 19:13), but occurs in the Septuagint as the English word, dip (see Gen 37:31; Lev 4:6; Lev 14:6; Num 19:18; Ex 12:22; Deut 33:24; Josh 3:15; Job 9:31; Ruth 2:14; 1Sam 14:27; 2Ki 5:14) and also as dyed (Eze 23:15), which compare to Rev 19:13. Those passages describe dipping a finger, one’s feet, a bird, a piece of bread, etc.

     Naaman the Gentile went and dipped himself (baptizo) in the river (2Kings 5:14), yet Elisha’s command was to go and wash (louo) in the Jordan (2Kings 5:10). This event seems to predict the future day when Gentiles would be baptized in the Jordan river in becoming spiritual children of Abraham and thus heirs of the promise.

Ordinance or Sacrament?

     It is presently popular to argue whether Baptism is an ordinance or a sacrament. The uninitiated in this debate will be surprised to learn that there is a big difference in these two terms, at least as defined by proponents of sacramentalism. In my view, the ordinances are commandments to be simplistically obeyed, being authentic physical reminders of foundational, invisible truths of the Kingdom Way. By observing them the churches of Christ are better enabled to live as He intended. Sacramentalists meanwhile, diminish these symbolic meanings and stress that baptism is a potent occasion of divine grace. Ideas of what and how vary, but the supernatural element at baptism is the center of attention. Many believe that baptism is the very moment that sins are washed away and the Spirit enters into the person.

     Actually, the dispute is superficial at best. Baptism is commanded, so of course it is an ordinance. It is also a “sacrament,” for he that obeys the ordinances will receive the accompanying graces. God’s grace to mankind doesn’t come in one big bucket-load, but in measures of Power and Pardon throughout life (Eph 4:7; 2Pet 3:18). Keeping the ordinances is the definite way to receiving more of God’s grace, just as not keeping them will definitely limit His power and pardon in your life. Let us appreciate the symbolic meanings of the ordinances along with the real spiritual power and pardon that result from keeping them.

     The real dispute is whether baptism is the literal moment the Spirit comes to dwell within. Strict sacramentalists typically believe this, yet we have seen that the Scriptures describe the Spirit coming before, at, and after, baptism. We should rather be concerned with carefully following the appropriate steps: Believe-Repent-Be baptized. It’s an important sequence. If we do them, then we have reason to trust that God will work in us according to what He has said. It is necessary, of course, to assure that each of the three steps truly follow the dictates of Scripture. To win a contest, one has to compete according to the rules (2Tim 2:5).

     Most Christians agree with this three step formula. Some however, carry the physical action of baptism too far, and end up making baptism a heaven-depriving event if it was not performed in the exact manner that they believe God wanted. I firmly believe that our perfect and just God expects us to carefully follow all of His commandments “just as He has shown us in pattern upon the Mount” (Heb 8:5). Yet, He has not shown us an exact pattern for the rite of baptism. Rather, and as with the other six ordinances, the Scriptures leave the fine details to the churches.

7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?

     The Pharisees and Sadducees were the religious leaders of the day. Notoriously self-righteous and judgmental, they had only an outward show of piety. Within they were wicked and evil (Mat 23:27) and few actually came to be baptized. In general they rejected John’s message (Mat 21:23-27) and were in attendance only to assess the situation and to justify themselves (Luke 7:29-30; John 1:19-24). John did not address them kindly, but cut them to the heart with words of truth that they must accept or reject. Perhaps some of them did repent. Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea were Jewish leaders.

     The Sadducees could be called the liberals of Judaism and compare to today’s Materialists, for while they believed in an all-powerful God, they did not believe in the immortality of the human soul nor the resurrection of man and eternal rewards. The Pharisees, on the other hand, were strict and unbending Religionists who held that personal righteousness was achievable by human effort. This, they taught, was absolute adherence to the letter of the Law according to the traditions and rituals of the Mosaic Law.

     The Pharisees had developed an “oral tradition” which interpreted the Old Testament law into every-day life situations. Since they were not written down, various minor disputes among the scribes were common, but two general schools of interpretation emerged, called the “house of Hillel” and the “house of Shammai.” These oral traditions covered every contingency and circumstance, possible or impossible, that a Jew might encounter. And they were strictly enforced. It was indeed a heavy and undue burden they imposed upon the people. Amazingly, the Pharisees placed their oral traditions (later written down as the Mishnah sometime after the fall of Jerusalem) above that of the Old Testament Scriptures. They taught that their interpretations of the Law were divinely inspired and fully authoritative to better explain the meanings and intentions of Moses.

     Who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come? By this statement (and Mat 3:10-12), I infer that a key aspect of John’s message warned of imminent judgment. And much of the people listened and repented. This judgment would not be physical however, and neither was the coming kingdom a literal reign. A religious, spiritual revolution was on the horizon, a new and vastly different kingdom of spiritual proportions that would take hold of the lives and natures of millions of men and women down through history.

     Generation of vipers. John may have taken this imagery from Isaiah 59:5, a prophetic chapter explaining why God will not listen to the prayers of His chosen people. It is due to their sins which have separated them from God. Their lies, deceits and injustices have stopped Him from working on their behalf. His favor is no longer over them. Later, Jesus will use John’s term to describe the Pharisees (Mat 12:34; 23:33).

8 Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance: 9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.

     In general, the Jewish leaders were a corrupt and wicked bunch who were ruled by selfish motives and personal gain. They had become wealthy and influential at the top and they were not open to change. But John the Baptist was not intimidated, nor did he soften his message. He preached true repentance and its accompanying evidence, good fruits (Luke 3:8; Rom 6:22). Repentance that is not demonstrated by a changed life is counterfeit.

     The Jews believed that salvation depended upon being a Jew and they were not entirely wrong in doing so. The Old Covenant was extended only to the physical seed of Abraham, although a Gentile might enter the Jewish commonwealth as a stranger and thus be saved. However, it was an easy step for Jews to think that just being a blood Jew was sufficient and that God would save every Jew no matter how he misbehaved and disobeyed. See John 8:39-44; Rom 3:1-3.

     God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham. Ironically, John’s words in a sense became true just a few years later when, after Christ’s resurrection, the door of salvation was opened to the Gentiles and every nation and blood by way of adoption. The Christian becomes a spiritual child of Abraham by faith (Gal 3:7). And since he is of Abraham’s seed then he is heir of the promise (Gal 3:29). The blood Jew has been pushed aside and now there is equal access to God by all nations and tongues (Rom 2:28; Col 3:11).

     It is unclear if John is saying that God can easily turn stones into blood Jews, or that God could more easily make stones to be children of Abraham than to make these self-righteous Jews true children.

10 And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.

     The tree as figurative of people and nations is common in the Scriptures. The Psalmist compared the godly man to a tree planted alongside the river, bearing fruit and prospering for the benefit of all (Ps 1:1-3). Jesus likened spiritual teachers to good trees and corrupt trees (Mat 7:17-20; 12:33), and employed the figure of an unfruitful fig tree in a parable (Luke 13:6-9). The apostle Paul used the olive tree to illustrate the general state of the Jews and Gentiles (Rom 11:17-20, see also Is 61:3; Ps 92:12; Judges 9; Eze 31; Dan 4; Rev 9:4). A review of these passages will show that trees are often associated with moral choice. A live, fruitful tree represents a useful and Godly man, while dry, barren trees are fit only to be burned (Jude 12).

     The tree that is about to be cut down and cast into the fire may be a reference to the Jewish nation, but it is also true of any individual, Jew or Gentile. The Kingdom would soon be taken from the Jews and given to a nation expected to bring forth righteous fruits (Mat 21:43), however, any church or unrepentant Christian will join them in the fire if there is no good fruit in their lives. The analogy is sobering and appropriate.

11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:

     Here John compares his mission and baptizing efforts to the works of the coming Messiah, heightening even greater expectations for the new Kingdom at hand. He foretells three ways in which the Messiah would surpass him: in might, in worthiness and in empowering believers. John physically baptized in the Jordan River, calling the people to a sincere repentance unto life-changing fruits of good service. However, his baptism looked forward to Christ and was not accompanied by the gift of the Holy Spirit (see Acts 19:1-6). Jesus Himself did not baptize, although His disciples did (John 4:2); yet neither did they baptize with the Spirit until Jesus’ ascension into heaven. After His resurrection, Jesus repeated John’s prophecy to His disciples (Acts 1:4-5), which was fully realized at Pentecost, when the Spirit was poured out on the believers (Acts 2:1-8, 17-18). A second confirmation occurred when the Gentiles were officially extended grace to enter the Kingdom (Acts 11:11-18). The disciples remembered John’s words when those amazing events took place (see Acts 11:15-16).

     Fire is often used as a symbol of the Holy Spirit. A pillar of fire led Israel through the wilderness (Ex 13:21) and the seven Spirits of God are seen as burning lamps of fire in Rev 4:5. So it is appropriate that when the Spirit fell upon the believers at Pentecost, He was seen as a cloven tongue of fire upon each head (Act 2:3). Does John indicate that Messiah would baptize twice (with the Spirit AND with fire)? Or that His one baptism would be accompanied by the Spirit and fire (fire being a symbol of the Spirit)? The apostle Paul confessed one baptism (Eph 4:5). On the other hand, Jesus spoke of a baptism in relation to suffering (Mat 20:22-23), of which fire is a fitting expression (see my glossary at Rev 22:21). Thus, one true baptism into Christ will result in the indwelling presence of the Spirit, but also suffering and persecution (2Tim 3:12).    

     Various inferences have led to several errors based on the idea of two Christian baptisms: one of water and one of fire (typically called the baptism of the Spirit). This second baptism is usually linked with speaking in tongues and sometimes with “sanctification,” which is thought to be higher level of salvation or “second work of grace.” John clearly does not speak of such ideas here. Those who advocate a secondary baptism of the Holy Spirit invariably demand evidence of it by an episode of speaking in tongues, ironically though, they never demand cloven tongues of fire to appear! Speaking in tongues is easily counterfeited, tongues of fire are not.

     That there is a baptism of the Holy Spirit should not be denied, as the term is repeated in all the Gospels and the Acts (Mark 1:8; Luke 3:16; John 1:33; Acts 1:5). In those passages it is a prophetic phrase looking forward to the coming of the Spirit into the individual hearts of believers. It is called a baptism because it initiates the convert into the spiritual Kingdom of God just as baptism by water initiates him into the visible church on earth. The Spirit is often depicted as poured out (as in baptism) upon the people of God (Is 44:3; Joel 2:28; Acts 2:18) and the Scriptures link closely the Holy Spirit’s entrance into the heart of the believer with physical baptism. In Acts 2:38, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit seems to follow baptism, while in Acts 10:47 His coming preceded baptism.

     I conclude that “baptism with the Holy Spirit” refers to the power of the Spirit coming to dwell in each believer’s heart. It has nothing to do with speaking in tongues or a second work of grace. Water baptism is a physical event for the benefit of the new believer and the visible church. It shows the coming of the Spirit to live in the heart of the believer, which is a spiritual event that may or may not coincide in time with water baptism. The baptism of the Spirit was initially confirmed by a descending dove and by tongues of fire on the head, but those evidences are no longer in keeping with God’s will and plan which emphasizes Faith and not sight. Significantly, baptism is never mentioned in the famous chapter on tongues, 1Cor 14. See my notes there.

12 Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.

     These verses are based on Mal 3:1-3; 4:1-2 which foretell in figurative detail the Kingdom of Heaven and its Messenger. Those who adopt the Futurist view typically place the fulfillment of Malachi’s prophecies in a future Millennial kingdom. In so doing, they miss the clear connection of John the Baptist’s message, that Jesus would fulfill this prophecy at His first coming when He came baptizing with the Holy Ghost and with fire, purging the children of Israel of bad while gathering the good wheat into a new and better Covenant. Many OT prophecies are spiritually fulfilled in the New Covenant which John was announcing, so to assign this to some later dispensation involving Israel and the Old Covenant lacks foundation.

     The contrasting interpretation techniques of the Futurist and Historicist views of eschatology are conspicuously illustrated in how the two understand and interpret this prophecy. It is commonly thought the difference is simply that Futurists interpret the prophets literally and the Historicists figuratively, but that is demonstrably false. Neither camps interpret literally. A literal interpretation would have Jesus out threshing wheat with a pitchfork. No, both camps interpret this prophecy figuratively: the harvest is one of souls, not wheat; the chaff is the wicked, the unquenchable fire is the judgment. The primary difference of interpretation between Futurists and Historicists is a matter of time. The former will place all fulfillments in the future, while the latter will find fulfillments primarily in the past and present. Another general difference is that Futurists tend to apply prophecy as affecting the physical realm, while Historicists tend to seek a spiritual application. The figurative/literal argument does not hold up to scrutiny on either side.

     Beyond time, realm and application, another reason I do not agree with the Futurist view of eschatology is the seemingly purposeless and confused trail of events they propose. God’s plans and motives are not like that. While He may cloud His plans to some degree for a time, they make logical sense and fit His overall Purpose and Will. However, many events in the Futurist scheme simply do not make sense theologically or logically! The Rapture, the seven-year covenant of Antichrist, the 1000 year reign, Armageddon, the Mark of the Beast, etc. Is God out to torment and kill everyone, and make sure that most people are cruelly persecuted and impossibly deceived? How does that all fit into His plan of Redemption? Sadly, many Anabaptists who claim to believe in non-resistance, the free-will of man and the importance of living by faith in Christ, somehow believe that God will throw those all away in the future dispensation! 

     Perhaps the urgency of John’s words has been lost. His message is, “Repent right now! Messiah’s kingdom is appearing on the horizon (Mat 3:2), and even now the axe is chopping at the root of the tree, even now He stands at the threshing floor, His winnowing fork in hand and poised to purge His people.” Certainly the majority of his audience understood and believed that Messiah’s Kingdom was so near that they must get themselves ready.

13 Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him. 14 But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?

     Somehow John knew that Jesus was more noble than he, even though Jesus had not yet worked one miracle, nor spoken one message. By the parallel passage in John 1:29-33, we are given to understand that the Holy Spirit revealed to John by a certain sign the identity of the Messiah he had been proclaiming throughout Israel. The sign was a dove descending upon Him, apparently which John alone could see. On the hand, John also knew within himself that he was not the Messiah (Mat 3:11).

15 And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.

     Jesus’ baptism was immediately followed by the coming of Satan to tempt Him in the wilderness, and His words seem to recognize that: “We must do this in order to fulfill all righteousness.”  Jesus passed the great wilderness tests, thereby demonstrating to the spiritual powers (both good and bad) that He was that Righteous Servant the prophets had foretold (Is 53:11). See note on Mat 4:1. Obviously, Jesus did not need baptism, for He had never sinned. It does, however give additional credence to John’s ministry and it displays His humility which led to God’s voice of approval. 

16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: 17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

     The Spirit of God resting upon the Messiah was foretold in Isaiah 11:2 and visibly confirmed by the likeness of a dove descending upon Him (John 1:32). Note that it was not an actual dove, but a theophany of the Spirit. The dove as a symbol of the Holy Spirit is deeply rooted in the Jewish Scriptures. The Shekinah glory of God dwelt between the outstretched wings of the two dove-like cherubim positioned above the Ark of the Covenant (Ex 25:20-22). And in 2Sam 22:11, the Spirit of God is described as moving, protecting and watching His people from wings on high: He rode upon a cherub, and did fly: and He was seen upon the wings of the wind. A dove is symbolic of purity, gentleness and beauty (Mat 10:16; Song 6:9).

     The Gospel of John implies that only Jesus and John heard the voice and saw the Spirit descend. The voice from heaven expresses the fulfillment of another OT prophecy (Isa 42:1) which will appear later in more detail (Mat 12:18). My beloved Son – see note in John 1:18.

1 Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem,

Bethlehem was a small but ancient town located only about 6 miles south of Jerusalem. It was near there that Rachel died and was buried (Gen 35:19; 1Sam 10:2), and it became the ancestral hometown of David (Luke 2:11) from at least the time of Boaz (1Sam 17:12; Ruth 1:2). It was also called Ephrath (Gen 48:7) and Bethlehemjudah (Judges 17:7; Mic 5:2).

     Herod the king. This was Herod the Great, the first of a short line of rulers installed by the Romans (Augustus was the present Emperor) over the Jewish region upon the fall of the Hasmonean line. He is famous for the impressive re-construction of the Jerusalem Temple, but also for being one of the most cruel and wicked kings of all time (see note Dan 11:36). He was an Idumean, or Edomite (descendant of Esau), and thus a half-Jew, who killed his favorite wife and many of his own children. Using information from Josephus, Herod ruled about 37 years and died at about the time of the Passover, probably in 1 B.C. (see note Luke 3:23). The Israelite kingdom was then parceled into four regions, each with its own ruler (Luke 3:1). Three were sons of Herod the Great (Archelaus, Antipas and Philip). Two Agrippas who ruled in Palestine were also in the Herodian line, which ended with the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.

     Fixing unequivocally the year of Jesus’ birth is not possible with the information we have been given in the Scriptures. Luke gives the best indication, saying He was about 30 years of age when His public ministry began (Luke 3:23), and then linking that with the 15th year of Tiberius Caesar (Luke 3:1). That would put His birth about the year 2 B.C. Most present-day scholars date His birth in 6 B.C. However, their system hangs upon Josephus’ statement that Herod the Great died after a lunar eclipse, which they take to be the partial eclipse in 4 B.C. But a full lunar eclipse occurred in 1 B.C., and many historians put Herod’s death in that year. All agree that Jesus was born at the very end of Herod the Great’s reign. Given the above, I incline to believe that Jesus was born in 2 B.C. and died at age 34 in the year A.D. 33.

     Wise men from east. The Greek word here is magos, which has been understood in various ways (philosopher, astronomer, scientist, priest). In Acts 13:6 the word is translated sorcerer. Who really were the Magi and how did they know the a certain star signified the King of the Jews? And why was this King so important that they would travel great distance to honor Him with gifts and worship? The answers remain mysterious, but various clues raise intriguing possibilities. First, although it is often said that the Magi were simply astrologers, or men who studied the heavens, the only support for that idea is inferred from the fact that they were following a star. The book of Daniel, which was written to the east of Jerusalem in Babylon, references a tribe or priesthood called the Chaldeans, who were known as the wise men, the astrologers, the magicians, the soothsayers (Dan 2:27). Daniel, the ultimate wise man, became the Master of this elite group in the highest days of the Babylonian Kingdom (Dan 5:11).

     I infer then, that these Magi were acquainted with the writings of one of their own ancients, a certain Daniel who had an astonishing career as a Wiseman in the courts of at least four eastern kings. Daniel described how an angel pinpointed the date of the coming of Messiah the Prince (Dan 9:24-25) and it seems likely that the Magi counted the years and knew that the time was near. They may have also used Balaam’s prophecy in Num 24:17 as a source of information regarding the star, for Balaam was an eastern prophet of God. While the above is entirely possible, all we know for certain is that the Magi were notable men from the east who somehow had learned that the Messiah was about to be born. David, in a Messianic prophecy, mentions eastern kings bearing gifts to the King in Jerusalem (Psa 72:10).

     Some think the Magi were pagan idol-worshippers, but that is not at all certain. There were many Jews living in Babylon who had not returned from that captivity. They could also have been descendants of Jethro, Job or Rechab. I incline to believe that these were true seekers of God, perhaps not according to full knowledge, but sincere nonetheless. God had mercy on Saul of Tarsus when he went about erroneously seeking the Truth, why not these men too?

2 Saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him.

What did this star look like, and how could the wisemen follow it? The Greek word, aster, normally means a star of the heavens, but how does a star lead the way and stand over the place where Jesus was (Mat 2:9)? Maybe it was a supernatural light that hovered and moved low to the ground, like the pillar of fire led the Israelites through the wilderness. That would explain how the star could have disappeared for a time and then reappeared (see Mat 2:9-10). Why then, was the star only visible to the Magi?

     On the other hand, the Magi may have simply observed a new light in the heavens, perhaps a supernova or comet, which they associated with the King their ancient writings had foretold (see note v1). Jerusalem was the natural place to inquire where this Jewish king would be born and it appears that the Magi arrived there expecting to find the city rejoicing. But nobody seemed to know anything about a baby prince and all Jerusalem was stirred up by their tidings.

     How striking that the Son of God was born un-noticed and undetected by the nation with every reason and means to have been expecting His birth! Daniel’s prophecy marking 490 years to Messiah the Prince (Dan 9:24-27) should have been on the lips of everyone, for that time was at hand. And yet, Christ’s birth was not totally unobserved by the Jewish nation. Simeon and Anna recognized Him (Luke 2:25). Nonetheless, it is striking that wisemen from a far-away land first brought attention of His birth to the Jewish leaders, who do not seem to have been seeking and waiting for Him at all. Herod, meanwhile, did seek Him, but only for the purpose of killing Him!

     The Magi almost certainly had the book of Daniel in their possession. Adam Clarke cites the Roman historian Tacitus as mentioning that because of ancient books the eastern people all believed that Judea would “possess the dominion.” Josephus, Suetonius and Philo also speak of a general belief that a great ruler was to shortly appear in Judea.  

3 When Herod the king had heard these things, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him. 4 And when he had gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together, he demanded of them where Christ should be born.

Herod was by now an old man, and would shortly die of a horrible disease. Throughout his 37 year reign, he was paranoid of throne-usurpers and had killed most of his own sons because he suspected them of plotting to overthrow him. Upon hearing of a recently-born King of the Jews he was instantly alert to a new threat and seems to have immediately understood that this King was the Messiah foretold of old by the Prophets. The Greek word Christos means “anointed,” which is equivalent to the Hebrew word Messiah in Dan 9:25.

5 And they said unto him, In Bethlehem of Judaea: for thus it is written by the prophet, 6 And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Juda, art not the least among the princes of Juda: for out of thee shall come a Governor, that shall rule my people Israel.

This prophecy comes from Micah 5:2, where the word ruler corresponds to Governor in the present passage. “This One shall rule My people Israel.” The Greek word for rule is poimaino, which matches the Septuagint of Micah 5:4 that describes Christ shepherding His flock (see John 21:16; Act 20:28; 1Cor 9:7; 1Pet 5:2). That word does not fit the standard description of an earthly ruler or king, but it perfectly corresponds with the rule of Christ over His people. It is found four times in the book of Revelation in that same usage (Rev 2:27; 7:17; 12:5; 19:15). Many versions translate shepherd instead of rule, which conforms to the OT picture of the Messiah as a Shepherd (Ps 23:1-6; Isa 40:11; Eze 37:24).

7 Then Herod, when he had privily called the wise men, enquired of them diligently what time the star appeared.

Herod the Great was one of the craftiest kings of all time. He was adept at flattery, intrigue and double-crossing (see note, Dan 11:36), but this time he was the one completely outsmarted. Although he carefully determined all the details and successfully deceived the Magi into thinking that he too wanted to worship this new King, the wisemen did not return to report the whereabouts of Christ.

8 And he sent them to Bethlehem, and said, Go and search diligently for the young child; and when ye have found him, bring me word again, that I may come and worship him also. 9 When they had heard the king, they departed; and, lo, the star, which they saw in the east, went before them, till it came and stood over where the young child was.

The Magi’s great joy at again seeing the star implies that it had disappeared for the entire time of their journey. They seem to have seen it at home in the east and knew by their prophecies that it was the star of the long-awaited King of the Jews who would set up a kingdom never to be destroyed (Dan 2:44). So they traveled to Judea to honor Him and naturally inquired in Jerusalem, where new information indicated they should depart for the little town of Bethlehem some six miles to the south. Restarting their journey, they were overjoyed to see that the star went before them and guided them directly to the house where Jesus was.

     Even today there are many “stars” that will lead a sincere “wiseman” to the truth of the Gospel! Evidences for God are everywhere we look, in nature, in philosophy, in ancient literature, in logic, in ethics, etc.

10 When they saw the star, they rejoiced with exceeding great joy. 11 And when they were come into the house, they saw the young child with Mary his mother, and fell down, and worshipped him: and when they had opened their treasures, they presented unto him gifts; gold, and frankincense, and myrrh.

Frankincense was a sweet-smelling incense used in sacrificial offerings, while myrrh was used in ointments and as a burial perfume. Gold, besides being very valuable, is a sign of purity and divinity. The three gifts seem to particularly foretell the mission of this King: His perfectly pure life (1Pet 1:18-19) ended in a sacrificial death (John 19:39) as an offering for sin which resulted in an alleviating, sweet-smelling odor of atonement to God for the sins of man. Frankincense was required to be added to most of the Old Testament sacrifices, but it was not allowed for the sin offering (Lev 5:11). See also Isaiah 60:6, Mark 15:23.

     Although the Scriptures are entirely silent on the subject, a tradition has developed that there were three wisemen, kings of the orient, and they have even been given names. These verses strongly hint that the wisemen were sincere seekers of the truth and not wicked pagans. God was concerned enough for their safety that He warned them to not return to Herod. This detail seems to be predicted in Isaiah 52:15.

12 And being warned of God in a dream that they should not return to Herod, they departed into their own country another way. 13 And when they were departed, behold, the angel of the Lord appeareth to Joseph in a dream, saying, Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and be thou there until I bring thee word: for Herod will seek the young child to destroy him.

The dream came to Joseph and not Mary, which indicates that he fully believed in Jesus’ identity by now. And since Joseph was the one who would be most involved in making the long trip to Egypt, it was important that he heard the command. The warning was so urgent that they left Bethlehem at night. Perhaps the very night of his dream, Joseph awakened his family and fled. Egypt had a large population of practicing Jews and it was not exceedingly far away. Herod had no jurisdiction there, but it was part of the greater Roman Empire.

14 When he arose, he took the young child and his mother by night, and departed into Egypt: 15 And was there until the death of Herod: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son.

God could have protected the babe in some other way, but He chose to have Joseph flee into Egypt for a time. We could ask why He did not strike down Herod instead of uprooting Joseph and Mary. After all, Herod was going to die of a terrible disease in just a few months anyway. Pondering that question will help to understand many similar scenarios in history of very wicked men acting very wickedly against God’s people. Pharaoh’s behavior with Moses is another example. The lesson I take from these is that God’s method is not to remove evil men and circumstances from affecting His people, but to intervene by miracles of protection and ways of escape.

     The quote comes from Hosea 11:1, When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called My son out of Egypt. Some have criticized Matthew for taking this to be a Messianic prophecy of Christ, when it appears to be a statement of fact remembering how Jacob was forced by famine to take refuge in Egypt and his later return to Israel. However, that it might be fulfilled refers to a fulfillment of an OT type, not an OT prophecy. There are many details and parallels contained in the Law that describe and predict the coming Messiah and every one was fulfilled by Jesus Christ (Mat 5:17-18). While some were singular Messianic prophecies, many more were events and actions that looked forward in types and shadows to the Christ. The OT sacrifices, for instance, typified the atonement of Christ, as did the ram which Abraham first killed as a burnt offering. The life of Joseph in Egypt has many parallels that were fulfilled by Jesus too, and the path that King David walked out of Jerusalem when he was betrayed by Absalom was the same road that Jesus walked to Gethsemane many years later (see my note 2Sam 15:1). There are hundreds of Old Testament events that were pre-designed by God as hidden parallels to be fulfilled by the life and work of Jesus Christ.

     Here the typological parallel involves Israel leaving the promised land and being sustained in Egypt, to later return by the hand of God. Besides this obvious analogy, the word Israel has Messianic connotations and was first given by God as a new name for the patriarch Jacob (Gen 32:28). It means, “a prince of God who will prevail.” Another interesting play on the word is found in Exodus 4:22-23, where God says, Israel is My son, even My first born. Thus, the validity of Matthew noting this as a fulfillment of the OT prophets is clearly appropriate; not as a unique prophetic statement, but as a typological detail.

16 Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently enquired of the wise men.

Herod was exceedingly angry when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men. Really though, it was He that sitteth in the heavens who laughed at Herod and made him look small. Read the highly Messianic second psalm to appreciate the full prediction of this very scene (especially Psa 2:2-4). Some secular historians doubt this event because Josephus does not mention it in his Jewish history of the Herodian period. Yet there is no reason to disbelieve, for it exactly fits Herod’s brutal and conniving character. Throughout his cruel reign, he had killed many of his family and friends who he suspected were wanting his throne, and at the very end he increased in wickedness. According to Josephus, just a few days before his death Herod ordered the murder of his son and heir, Antipater, and commanded his men to kill a bunch of notable Israelites so that there would be mourning throughout the land on the day of his death. Rather than doubt Matthew’s account, secular historians should more readily accept it upon recognizing its consistency with Herod’s actions. Likely, Josephus does not mention the slaughter of the innocents because it was simply one atrocity lost in a host of similar atrocities.

     Two years old and younger. From this we can be relatively sure that the Magi had first seen the star about 2 years before. Probably however, it had appeared even less than a year earlier, for it seems unlikely that it would have taken the wisemen so long to arrive. Herod, not wanting to take any chances, widened his net to make sure that the baby Jesus was not somehow overlooked. Scholars generally understand the phrase to indicate any child from 24 months old and younger.

     While Herod and the Magi apparently thought that the appearance of the star corresponded exactly with the date of Jesus’ birth, that may not have been the case. The star could have appeared earlier in order to give the Magi time to arrive shortly after His birth. Nevertheless, the best correlation of the Gospel accounts is that Jesus was indeed a little more than 1 year old at this time, which might make us wonder why Joseph and Mary were still in Bethlehem a year after Jesus’ birth. And yet that doesn’t seem so strange when we remember that both parents were descendants of David and probably had close relatives there. It is more likely however, that they had not been the whole year in Bethlehem, for according to Luke’s account, which probably follows Mary’s own testimony, the family returned to Nazareth about 40 days after His birth (see Luke 2:39). So the visit by the wisemen must have taken place after that time, since Matthew describes their night flight into Egypt as originating from Bethlehem and they would not have gone to Jerusalem for His dedication knowing that Herod was seeking to kill Him.

     So the probable sequence of events is that the family remained in Bethlehem until the temple dedication (40 days after His birth) and then returned to Galilee. About a year later they returned to Bethlehem, probably after one of the yearly Passovers which they faithfully attended (Luke 2:41), and at that time the wisemen arrived seeking the newly born King.

17 Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying, 18 In Rama was there a voice heard, lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not.

The quote is from Jeremiah 31:15, which is part of a two-chapter long prophecy I consider to be the centerpiece of the book of Jeremiah. The subject centers upon the future return of the children of Israel from their captivity in Babylon and their joy at having David for their eternal king. As with the OT quote given in v15, the present passage had an earlier intention, but is now shown to have a typological fulfillment in events in the life of Jesus. Initially, Jeremiah the prophet drew the literary figure of Rachel lamenting for her children to describe the impending fall of Jerusalem to Nebuchadnezzar, Rama being the gathering place from which the Jewish captives began their long journey to captivity in Babylon (Jer 40:1).

     Rachel is the appropriate ancestral figure to mourn her children because she was the mother of Benjamin and Joseph (Ephraim and Manasseh). Jerusalem and Rama were located in the tribe of Benjamin (Josh 18:25). Bethlehem was in Judah, nevertheless, several times in the OT Rachel is associated with Bethlehem (Ruth 4:11; 1Sam 10:2; Jer 31:15), apparently because she died and was buried there (see note Mat 2:1).

19 But when Herod was dead, behold, an angel of the Lord appeareth in a dream to Joseph in Egypt,

The source for dating the death of Herod the Great is the Jewish historian Josephus, but his record is insufficient to fix the exact year. He says that Herod died after a lunar eclipse about the time of the Passover, but several years could fit that scenario. Many present-day historians think Josephus’ eclipse took place in 4 B.C., which would make Jesus’ birth about 5 B.C., but some scholars argue that Herod died in 1 B.C., which better fits Luke 3:23. See my note for Mat 2:1.

     It is not certainly known how soon after Jesus’ birth that Herod died, but all agree it was not long. In the last 3-4 years of his life, Herod became increasingly paranoid of plots against his throne. His sons Alexander and Aristobulus, were executed on grounds of treason and a year or so later, he accused another son, Antipater, of plotting to kill him. He too was put to death.

20 Saying, Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and go into the land of Israel: for they are dead which sought the young child’s life. 21 And he arose, and took the young child and his mother, and came into the land of Israel. 22 But when he heard that Archelaus did reign in Judaea in the room of his father Herod, he was afraid to go thither: notwithstanding, being warned of God in a dream, he turned aside into the parts of Galilee:

After Herod’s death, his kingdom was divided among 3 of his sons (Philip, Antipas, and Archelaus) and a son-in-law. The cruel Archelaus ruled Jerusalem until his atrocities prompted Caesar to remove him just a few years later. The milder Antipas ruled in Galilee.

23 And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene.

Nazareth was a small town in the region of Galilee located in the tiny tribe of Zebulun (Mat 4:13) and about a day’s journey to the southeast of the sea of Galilee. It was an insignificant and lowly town with no OT history whatsoever, and its chief fame was a reputation for poverty and backwardness such that even the guileless Nathanael, when told that Jesus was a Nazarene remarked, Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth? (John 1:46). Jesus was often and derisively associated with his hometown. He is called Jesus of Nazareth no less than 19 times in the NT, including Pilate’s infamous title on the cross: Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews (John 19:19). The Greek words are the same, and perhaps a clearer translation would be “Jesus the Nazarene.”

     There is no OT passage which directly states that Jesus would be called a Nazarene, and there is a variety of interpretations. Note that in contrast to the previous 5 times that Matthew has quoted the Old Testament, he does not refer to a particular prophet, but that which was spoken by the prophets (plural form). For that reason, I believe he refers to several OT predictions that the Messiah would be a meek and lowly person (see Ps 22:6-8; 69:11; 69:19; Is 49:7; 53:2-4; Dan 9:26). Clearly the connection to Jesus being called a Nazarene is that He lived in Nazareth, and so the followers of Jesus are called in Acts 24:5. The negative associations of Nazareth have already been shown (see John 1:46; 7:52) and the idea of the Messiah coming from the menial town of Nazareth was deeply contrary to the Jewish concept of the Messiah. Matthew endeavors to show that the prophets had foretold the Messiah would be of poor and humble origins.

     R.C.W. Lenski, a highly-respected Greek scholar, explains that the structure of the Greek requires both a plural origin and indirect quotation, just as we have given above. In other words, Jesus lived in Nazareth to fulfill the many prophesies that describe the Messiah as a lowly, despised, rejected and suffering servant. Jesus constantly bore this reproach by His enemies, that He was only a Nazarene from Galilee and everyone knows that out of Galilee ariseth no prophet.

     Some have related the word Nazarene with the Nazarite vow of the OT (see Num 6), and another idea develops the close relation of the Hebrew words “Nazareth” and “Branch” (see Is 11:1). It is certainly true that the Nazarite vow has parallels with the dedication and sanctification of Jesus as the Son of God come to do the will of the Father on earth.   

1 The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.

     The Gospel according to Matthew, one of the 12 Apostles also known as Levi (Mark 2:14), is thought to have been written 5-10 years after Jesus ascended into heaven, making it one of the first books of the Bible to be written. Matthew was a Jew, originally a publican (tax collector) before he responded to Jesus’ call to discipleship (Mat 10:3). Since his Gospel initially targeted a Jewish audience, his account is also valuable to understand the culture and customs of the Jews at the time of Christ.

     According to the testimony of many early church writers (and none to the contrary), the book of Matthew was originally written in Hebrew (more exactly, Aramaic) and later translated into koine Greek. However, most recent scholars believe the original language was Greek, for the Septuagint was widely used in Judaism. It is even possible that the general Jewish population did not speak Aramaic, but Greek (see note for Mat 27:46). On the other hand, if Matthew did write in Hebrew, it would help explain the origins of the book of Mark, which agrees closely to Matthew in the main yet gives some details differently. So perhaps Peter used Matthew’s Hebrew version as a base text and then dictated to Mark the Gospel that bears his name. The evidences that a Hebrew version of Matthew ever existed are extremely scant. And analyses of the language, grammar and idioms of Matthew do not show signs that it was translated. Perhaps the early church writers were mistaken.  

     The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, or, “The genealogical record of Jesus Christ” (see Gen 5:1). Following the traditional Jewish method, Matthew traces Jesus’ lineage beginning with Abraham unto David and then following the successors to his throne right up to Joseph, the husband of Mary (v16). Luke’s genealogy however, appears to follow Mary’s more humble lineage. It begins much earlier with Adam and passes through Abraham and David just as Matthew’s record; then it takes a new route, following a different son of David (Nathan) which bypasses all the kings of Israel/Judah beginning with Solomon.      

The origins and purposes of these genealogies are a matter of much discussion and mystery. The most probable explanation, in my opinion, is that Matthew’s Gospel traces Jesus’ legal ancestry to king David and patriarch Abraham (a crucial point in the Jewish concept of the Messiah), while Luke’s Gospel traces His genetic line all the way back to Adam (more important to Luke’s Gentile audience). Of course, if Luke does follow Jesus’ genetic line, then he must follow Mary’s lineage and not Joseph’s (who was not Jesus’ genetic father). Opponents of this idea point out that Luke fails to advertise that he is giving Mary’s genealogy and even names Joseph, not Mary, as Jesus’ immediate antecedent. Proponents counter with the Law’s rule that female inheritors should bear the name of their father (Num 27:1-11) and point out that Mary was a prominent source for Luke’s gospel (see Luke 1). Early testimony in church literature affirms her to be a descendant of king David (see Ignatius’ Epistle to the Ephesians and Justin Martyr’s Dialogue with Trypho).   

     There are two notable features in Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus that seem a-typical. First, he mentions four women (Luke has none), and second, he omits some names in order to count generations instead of each father-son relation (see note v2). For the Jews however, the witness of Jesus’ genealogy incontrovertibly demonstrated that He was born in the Messianic kingly line – a son of David (2Sam 7:12-13) and a son of Abraham (Gen 22:18). The Scriptures had prophesied that the Messiah would be a direct descendant of these two great men of the Jewish faith and there the Jews looked for Him.

     The four women in this genealogy stand out in striking fashion, for not one of them was a true Jew after the flesh. No mention of Sarah or Rebecca, but Tamar the Canaanite (as inferred from Gen 38), Rahab of Jericho fame, Ruth the Moabitess, and Bathsheba the Hittite (inferred from 2Sam 11:3). While two of these women turned out to be remarkable women of faith, they were first known for adulterous relationships. Perhaps that detail is aimed at the Jewish audience, who were fanatical in attaching salvation exclusively to those of Jewish blood (Mat 3:9), and perhaps it speaks of the marriage of Christ to His Church (Gentile and Jew alike). For the Jew however, it highlights this inescapable and embarrassing fact:  the Old Testament accounts show that between Abraham and David there were multiple examples of non-Jewish blood entering the kingly line. So while Matthew’s genealogy shows Jesus to be a direct descendant of Abraham, he also notes that line was not as pure as the Jews would wish.

     The chronologies of Matthew and Luke are identical from Abraham to David, but there they separate until the time of the Babylonian Captivity, where they converge for two generations before separating once again. The diligent student will find that the divergence is due to Solomon’s disobedience and wickedness, and the convergence is due to the word of God by the prophet Jeremiah against Jehoiachin, proclaiming that king childless and thereby requiring an adoption to keep the kingly line intact (see note v12).  

     The most striking detail however, is that this thousands-of-years-long pedigree abruptly ends with its most illustrious character. It is indeed an act of God that the most famous, world-changing figure in all history has no genealogical record of neither descendants nor relatives. Jesus culminated that long royal line such that it ended forever, at least in its physical realization. For with the household of Joseph and Mary the registers of the genealogical line of Jesus the Messiah stops. Of course, Jesus Himself never married and had no earthly sons; but not even the descendants of his brothers and sisters are known!

     The differences in the Matthew and Luke’s genealogies seem to be the following:

• Matthew traces Jesus’ lineage through Joseph, while Luke follows Mary’s lineage
• Matthew’s line is legally ancestral, the very succession of kings that would have reigned from David to Christ.
• Luke’s line is direct and genetic, the true physical succession of fathers all the way back to Adam.
• Matthew’s genealogy begins at Abraham and progresses through David, proving to the Jews that Jesus was the Messiah.
• Luke’s genealogy works backward from Jesus directly to Adam, proving to the Gentiles the genetic link between the first and last Adam.
• Luke follows David’s son Nathan, effectively cutting off Solomon and all the kings of Israel and Judah due to Solomon’s sin.
• The convergence of the two chronologies at Shealtiel necessitate an adoption by Jehoiachin, who by the word of the Lord was childless.
• Luke includes no women in his genealogy, but Matthew mentions four – all are Gentiles.
• Matthew counts 3 divisions of 14 generations from Abraham to Jesus.

2 Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren; 3 And Judas begat Phares and Zara of Thamar; and Phares begat Esrom; and Esrom begat Aram; 4 And Aram begat Aminadab; and Aminadab begat Naasson; and Naasson begat Salmon;

    Many in this list were not the first-born and some were adopted sons or from levirate marriages. Presumably that is not the case with Luke’s blood-line genealogy. The Old Testament names are spelled differently: Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Judah, Perez, Hezron, Ram, Amminadab, Nahshon, Salmon, Boaz, Obed, Jesse, David, Solomon, Rehoboam, Abijah, Asa, Jehoshaphat, Jehoram, (Ahaziah, Joash, Amaziah), Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, Hezekiah, Manasseh, Amon, Josiah, (Jehoahaz, Jehoiakim), Jehoiachin, Shealtiel, Zerubabbel, Abiud, Eliakim, Azor, Sadoc, Achim, Eliud, Eleazar, Matthan, Jacob, Joseph, Jesus the Christ.

There are 42 generations in Matthew’s list, which does not include the above names in parenthesis. Since the reason for this genealogy was to show the Jews that Jesus was truly a son of David, it is almost beyond doubt that Matthew took much of this material directly from the temple records. The strictest Pharisee could not argue against those! Genealogies were extremely important in Judaism, for they proved one’s rights as a Jew to participate in the community and Temple. According to Josephus, many Jewish families kept their own genealogies at home to correspond with the temple records and confirm their ancestry. And, he says, in the case of the priests, those genealogies included women.

     Given the above facts, I believe the missing names and division of generations at fourteen were a feature of the temple genealogies which served to strengthen Matthew’s assertion that Jesus was a son of David – especially given the general opinion that He was not (John 7:41-42). And since the complete lineage of Jesus up to the time of the Babylonian Captivity can be found by piecing together various passages of the Old Testament, there is additional and ample proof of His ancestry. Commentator Adam Clarke counts only 41 generations in the list and says a name is missing in the KJV (see note v11).

     A minority of scholars (see Arthur Hervey’s meticulous work) argue that both Matthew and Luke relate the genealogy of Joseph, but generally agree that Matthew gives Jesus’ regal lineage and Luke gives Jesus’ blood lineage. Their theory is primarily based on Matthan and Matthat being the same person in the respective genealogies; namely, that he was Jesus’ great-grandfather who begat Jacob (who was allegedly childless). Consequently Heli, by levirate marriage, had a son in the name of his brother Jacob. That son was Joseph the purported father of Jesus.

     Phares and Zara of Thamar are the twin sons of Judah. Why are both listed when only one is in the lineage of David? Some commentators believe Matthew is drawing attention to the symbolism of that account (Gen 38:27-30), for the two sons seem to represent the Jews and Gentiles. On the other hand, this phrase may have been simply another feature of the temple genealogies.

5 And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab; and Booz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse; 6 And Jesse begat David the king; and David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias;

     Some commentators believe there is a missing name or two between Salmon and Boaz, thinking it unlikely that Rahab could be the great-great-grandmother of David, who according to most chronologists was born roughly 350 years after the fall of Jericho. However, if we allow those early men to have had their respective generational sons in old age (about 100 years old), then the lineage could be complete. And certainly it was common in those days of multiple wives and natural longevity to have sons in old age. Abraham had 6 sons after the age of 135. 

     There is no Old Testament text that corroborates Matthew’s assertion that Rahab was the wife of Salmon (1Chr 2:11; Ruth 4:21) and one wonders where he obtained that interesting information. While Jewish targums and midrashes did opine that Rahab the Jerichoan harlot became the wife of a prince in Israel, there is no further mention of her outside the book of Joshua (Josh 2:1, 6:25). 

7 And Solomon begat Roboam; and Roboam begat Abia; and Abia begat Asa;

     Here the lineages of Matthew and Luke diverge, with Matthew following David’s son Solomon and Luke following David’s son Nathan (note Zech 12:11-14). God was highly displeased with Solomon’s conduct and by the mouth of the prophet Ahijah took the kingdom of Israel from the seed of Solomon, while leaving his posterity one tribe on account of his father David (1Kings 11). The rending of the kingdom from the Davidic line through Solomon took place in the very generation that the two genealogies of Jesus divide. It resulted in Solomon and his seed being completely left out of the Messianic line in Luke’s gospel. I do not believe that is a coincidence. The wisest man in the world did not measure very high on the important scale of character valor.

8 And Asa begat Josaphat; and Josaphat begat Joram; and Joram begat Ozias; 9 And Ozias begat Joatham; and Joatham begat Achaz; and Achaz begat Ezekias; 10 And Ezekias begat Manasses; and Manasses begat Amon; and Amon begat Josias;

Joram begat Ozias, or using the OT spelling, Jehoram begat Uzziah. There were however, three additional kings between Jehoram and Uzziah, so that the father-son line goes: Jehoram, Ahaziah, Joash, Amaziah, Uzziah. They were descendants of Queen Athaliah and were particularly wicked kings with short reigns. Precisely why Matthew left these three kings out is unknown, although if we are correct in maintaining that Matthew was giving the temple genealogy, then we know it was not an error of omission.

11 And Josias begat Jechonias and his brethren, about the time they were carried away to Babylon:

    The actual father-son line here is confusing even in the Old Testament accounts, for after good king Josiah’s untimely death, several of his brothers and/or uncles reigned in quick succession. Thus it says that Josiah begat Jechoniah and his brethren – not necessarily brothers, but relatives. From the scattered OT references to this period, the most likely scenario is that four of Josiah’s brothers/uncles/sons reigned (or at least attempted to reign) in short order after his death: Jehoahaz, Johanan, Jehoiakim and Shallum. This was during the time of the Babylonian siege of Jerusalem and Nebuchadnezzar deposed most of these young men quickly and put another in his place. The last “king” installed by Nebuchadnezzar was Zedekiah (also called Mattaniah). He is believed to be either Josiah’s brother or an adopted son. Jehoiakim, who reigned 11 years, was the father of Jehoiachin, who was put on the throne after Jehoiakim was carried captive into Babylon. Jehoiachin reigned just 3 months before he too was taken into Babylon, where he remained in prison until the death of Nebuchadnezzar.

     From this history it appears that Josias begat Jechonias and his brethren means the following: Josiah begat Jehoiakim and his brothers, all of which occupied the throne. The Jechonias of the next verse however, cannot be Jehoiakim, for he did not beget Salathiel, but his son Jeconiah did (1Chr 3:17; 2Kings 24:6). Counting Jeconiah (Jehoiachin), the section adds up to fourteen generations and 42 in total. The confusion is probably due to the close spelling and sound of Jehoiakim and Jehoiachin. According to Clarke, some ancient manuscripts add the name: “And Josiah begat Jehoiakim and Jehoiakim begat Jehoiachin.” And a footnote in the KJV remarks: “some read, Josias begat Jakim, and Jakim begat Jechonias.” It is possible that an early copyist mistook the two names as one and accidentally omitted Jakim. Irenaeus (ca A.D. 180) mentions that Matthew’s genealogy includes Jehoiakim (Against Heresies, Bk3 Ch21). If that be true, the text should read: “Josias begat Jakim and his brethren, and Jakim begat Jechonias about the time they were carried away to Babylon: and after they were brought to Babylon, Jechonias begat Salathiel…”

12 And after they were brought to Babylon, Jechonias begat Salathiel; and Salathiel begat Zorobabel;

     Jechonias (Jehoiachin) was taken from Jerusalem and imprisoned in Babylon for many years – until the death of Nebuchadnezzar (Jer 52:31-32). Also called Coniah, he was the last of the kings according to the word of the Lord through Jeremiah (Jer 22:24-30).

     Salathiel begat Zorobabel. The genealogies of Matthew and Luke diverged at David, but here they meet again for 2 generations, only to diverge once again. Luke records that Neri begat Salathiel who begat Zorobabel who begat Rhesa (Luke 3:27), while Matthew says Jehoiachin begat Salathiel who begat Zorobabel who begat Abiud. The divergence after Zorobabel is not problematic – the lineages simply follow different sons – but the initial convergence at Salathiel is abnormal. How can Salathiel have two fathers? Only by adoption or a levirate marriage. Apparently Neri was the genetic father of Salathiel (per Luke), but Jehoiachin was his adoptive father (per Matthew). For by the Word of the Lord, the wicked king Jehoiachin would be childless (Jer 22:30).

     Chronologists have proposed various explanations for these anomalies, for the main Old Testament text (1Chr 3:16-19) seems to have suffered some corruptions.        

13 And Zorobabel begat Abiud; and Abiud begat Eliakim; and Eliakim begat Azor; 14 And Azor begat Sadoc; and Sadoc begat Achim; and Achim begat Eliud; 15 And Eliud begat Eleazar; and Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob;

     These names are too late in time to be in the OT genealogies, yet they must have existed in the Jewish genealogical records when Matthew wrote his Gospel. The many critics of Christianity from among the Jews lodged no objection to Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus, which indicates that his record was verifiable and accepted. And as far as I am aware, no such accusation is ever referenced in the early church writings, although the Jews tried all kinds of other arguments to rationalize their rejection of Jesus as their Messiah. So it is significant that they never attempted to disallow Jesus as the Messiah on account of Him not being a true descendant in the Davidic and Abrahamic line.

     None of the sons of Zorobabel recorded in 1Chr 3:19-20 were named Abiud. Did he have other children? Did one of the sons have two names? Or does the genealogy skip over a few generations here, as it did in earlier sections? Note that Luke has twenty generations between Zorobabel and Joseph, where Matthew has only eleven.

16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

     The lineage is simple, but does not correspond with Luke’s genealogy, which has Joseph being the son of Heli (Luke 3:23). The common explanation of the latter Scripture is that Joseph was the son-in-law of Heli. See our comments at Mat 1:1.

17 So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations; and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generations.

    Approximate time from Abraham to David was 850 years; from David to the Babylonian captivity, 450 years; from the captivity to Christ, 450 years. Yet each of these periods had fourteen generations, resulting in a total of forty-two generations from Abraham to David (see note v11). In symbolic contexts of the Scripture, the number 42 signifies pilgrimage, suffering and perseverance. In the book of Revelation, the Kingdom of Christ on earth is given 42 months of pilgrimage, during which it is persecuted and tested by the Beast (Rev 13). The 42 months equal 3-1/2 years, another symbolic representation of the time-period of the Church Age (Rev 12:14; Dan 12:7). The Scriptures also name 42 encampments as the children of Israel journeyed from Egypt to Canaan.

     The meaning of generation in this context is uncertain, for according to the OT genealogies, there were more than 14 father-son pairs in the middle segment of this genealogy (Ahaziah, Joash, Amaziah) and there may have been un-named fathers in the first segment (between Salmon and Boaz). The average generational age however, is consistent between the last two segments at roughly 30 years, while the first segment was double that. However, many fathers in that era had sons in old age, even double that of later periods. Abraham for instance, was 100 when he had Isaac, who was 60 when he had Jacob, who was about 90 when he had Judah. 

18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.

Matthew’s account continues from Joseph’s perspective, describing his thoughts and actions after the birth of Jesus. This is in contrast to the book of Luke, where the genealogy and birth account is based upon Mary’s perspective.

     A Jewish marriage was preceded by a betrothal period which lasted between 6 and 12 months. During that time, the woman continued to live at her father’s house. Evidently there were no sexual relations during this time, although the couple was considered to be legally married and a divorce was required to separate the two even though the marriage ceremony had not taken place.

     The birth of Jesus was carefully crafted by God to show both His deity and His humanity. He could have been supernaturally conceived by an un-espoused virgin, but that would have opened the door to claims of illegitimacy and deprived Him of an earthly family. On the other hand, He could have been supernaturally conceived by a married woman, but that would have left His divine conception and true deity in doubt. To be born to an espoused virgin satisfied those objections until such moment that His works and words could be added to the body of evidence proving His divine identity.

     Mary was found with child of the Holy Ghost (Luke 1:35); not that the Holy Spirit was God the Son’s literal father, but that the Spirit was the moving power which brought about the supernatural conception and birth of Jesus the man. The second person of the Trinity is eternal and has always existed. He was made flesh (John 1:14) as Jesus the Nazarene, also called the Christ, (Mat 16:20), the Son of God (Mat 27:54), the Son of man (Mat 9:6). The dual nature of Jesus Christ is a delicate topic, but is certainly taught in the Scriptures. Jesus was fully human, born of woman and with all the physical characteristics of a man, but His true being is eternal and divine. His unique title, the only begotten Son (John 3:16) has reference primarily to this once-only birth of a God-man. 

19 Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily.

     Mary must have told Joseph of the angel Gabriel’s visit and her supernatural conception (Luke 1:26-38), yet he was still in a very difficult position. Her story was incredible, how could she be telling the truth? Was it not more likely that she was covering for a sin she knew was punishable by death? On the other hand, even if her story were true, what about his friends and family? They would think him to be a fornicator.

     However, Joseph was a just man. The same word is used to describe Simeon in Luke 1:6. He was a God-fearing, righteous and good person. Considering her story, Joseph realized that the best action would be to divorce her privately – meaning he would not expose Mary as an adulteress, nor would he be taken for a fornicator. According to the Law, an adulteress was to be stoned, but it also allowed the husband to divorce his wife (Deut 24:1), apparently for little reason (Mat 19:3). Joseph decided the best action was to simply divorce her without saying why.

     Joseph was a descendant in the Davidic line (Luke 2:4) and a carpenter by trade (Mat 13:55) who lived in the hill country of the Galilee (Luke 2:39). Early church writers believed he was an older man, perhaps a widower, when he married Mary, a much younger woman. Early Catholicism offers various speculative writings about Joseph, but they are clearly unauthoritative texts. In the Bible, we read nothing more about Joseph after the notable trip to Jerusalem when Jesus was twelve years old (Luke 2:42). He was probably no longer living during Jesus’ ministry, for at the cross He asked John to care for His mother (John 19:26-27). 

     Put her away privily, or divorce her quietly (NIV). Some versions imply that Joseph intended to release her from the betrothal and send her away. In addition to being an impossible scenario, it is also a poor translation. The Greek word here for put away is apoluo, the same word translated divorce later in this book (Mat 5:31; Mat 19:3). Sending Mary away without a divorce would hardly have kept her from being a publick example. A never-married woman living with a child? No, Joseph planned a bill of divorcement, but not one that laid upon her the charge of adultery.

20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.

  Joseph’s decision to divorce Mary was suddenly changed when an angel appeared to him and completely confirmed Mary’s astonishing story. However, his own reputation must have suffered in public estimation, for Mary was pregnant and they were yet unmarried.

21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.

The angel instructed Joseph to name this special child, JESUS (Luke 2:21), which is the Greek form of the well-known Hebrew name, Joshua, meaning “Deliverer, Savior.” It was a fitting name for, He shall save His people from their sins. The OT Joshua became famous for leading the children of Israel into the Promised Land. As a young man, he was Moses’ right-hand minister, a devout and fervent man who led the Israelites in an early attack against Amalek (Ex 17:9) and who ascended Mt Sinai with Moses to receive the two tables of stone (Ex 32:17). Joshua and Caleb were the only two spies who did not give an evil report of Canaan.

     There are two other Joshuas mentioned in the OT and both have interesting details that point to the most famous Joshua of all. The first was Joshua a Bethshemite (see 1Sam 6) and the second was the high priest Joshua, a leader among the Jews at the time of their return from the Babylonian Captivity. A messianic prophecy centered upon this man’s name can be found in Zech 3:1-9.

22 Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, 23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

This Messianic prophecy from Isaiah 7:14 is one of the most compelling and important prophetic details of the Old Testament, for it predicts that the Messiah would be a Divine being and not a mere man – which is the meaning of the word Emmanuel. It foretells the incarnation of the Son of God, of Deity being manifested in human flesh (John 1:14). This unique action was announced by a unique event, a virgin conceived without knowing a man (Luke 1:34). The virgin birth fulfills perfectly the very first Messianic prophecy of all, given by God to Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden (Gen 3:15). In it, He said that the Redeemer would be born of the seed of the woman. Man, the normal and common lineage-bearer, is excluded from the coming Savior. Jesus was truly of woman’s seed and not man’s. There is reason to believe that Eve understood by this word from God that the One who would come to bruise the serpent’s head would need to be a God-man, for when she bore her first-born son Cain, she said, I have gotten a man: even Jehovah (see note Gen 4:1). Daniel also hints at the spectacular birth of the Messiah, likening Christ to a stone cut out of a mountain without hands (Dan 2:34).

     Threatened by Jesus’ clear fulfillment of this prophecy, later Jewish rabbis and commentators have persuaded some Christian commentators to believe that the Hebrew word translated virgin (almah) in Isaiah 7:14 refers to any young woman, married or unmarried. A word study will reveal that they are certainly wrong on this point (see note Isa 7:14). Besides, Matthew was a Jew who knew the OT Scriptures and he certainly understood Isaiah to mean that the Messiah would be born of a virgin. Another fact that completely destroys the Jewish rabbis’ re-definition of almah is that their own Greek translation of the OT Scriptures, the Septuagint, uses the very same word that Matthew used (parthenos), and it is the standard Greek word for a virgin.   

     All this was done, that it might be fulfilled... which refers to Matthew’s testimony concerning Jesus’ name, His virgin birth, the incarnation and His Davidic lineage, which was a key part of Isaiah’s original prophecy. At that time in history, Judah was at the point of disappearing altogether. The joined forces of Syria and Israel had crushed the land of Judah mercilessly, killing or carrying captive 300,000 people. They were even then gathered to destroy the last remaining Judahite stronghold, the city of Jerusalem. If that happened, the Davidic line of kings would end and God’s promise would fail (Gen 49:10; 1Kings 8:25). So God sent Isaiah with a message to King Ahaz, informing him that in spite of the seemingly impossible odds, Jerusalem would prevail. As a sign that this would certainly come to pass, He said: Here ye now, O house of David…Behold a virgin shall conceive and bear a son; and shall call his name Immanuel. Butter and honey shall he eat, that he many know to refuse the evil, and choose the good. For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings (Is 7:13-16). Notice that the prophecy is not addressed to Ahaz nor to the inhabitants of Jerusalem but to the house of David. The kingly line would not be broken, God says, until a virgin would conceive and bear a man-child. And with the birth of that Child and King, the Davidic line on earth abruptly ended! The endless genealogies of the physical Jews (1Tim 1:4) do not continue after Jesus Christ, who reigns on, world without end, upon the spiritual throne of David in the heavenlies.

    The latter half of Isaiah’s prophecy is not so clear upon an initial reading. The key to understanding comes by remembering that God had told Isaiah to take his young son, Shearjashub, with him to this meeting with Ahaz (Is 7:3). The prophetic message is hidden in an object-lesson, or play on words, involving two children: Isaiah’s son and a future virgin’s son. The first two sentences in the prophecy were to be fulfilled 850 years later, but the last sentence was to be fulfilled before Shearjashub was old enough to choose between good and evil. Both prophecies accurately came to pass. If anyone wonders why God would conceal a prophecy within a sign, study 1Cor 2:6-8.

24 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife: 25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.

These details we learn only from the gospel of Matthew, which will be found to contain many citations of OT prophecy concerning the Messiah. Chronologically, the first 4 prophecies concerning Christ are recorded only in the book of Matthew, all in relation to His birth. A principle purpose of this primary Gospel to the Jews is to show that Jesus the Nazarene fulfills both the prophecies of the Prophets and the typological details of the Law.

     The books of Mark and John do not have any of the material found in the first three chapters of Matthew. The book of Luke does relate Jesus’ birth and genealogy, but they clearly originate from separate sources. The two early accounts are complementary but not exact, giving different historical details and personal thoughts.