Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew

7/27/2019 Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew

1/532


2/532

Matthew: Verse by Verse with

Jesus through the Gospel ofMatthew

Duncan Heaster

Carelinks Publishing

PO Box 152, Menai NSW 22! "ustralia

###$carelinks$net


3/532

%ntro&uction

'(er) true Christian has a sole*n &ut) to *ake a

serious stu&) o+ the os-el recor&s$ .he &e-th an&

nature o+ the stu&) #ill (ar) #i&el) bet#een in&i(i&uals/

+or each in&i(i&ual relationshi- #ith the 0or& esus is

uniue$ .hese notes are -art o+ *) -ath in seeking to

kno# Hi* through the *e&iu* o+ the #ritten #or&, an&

% onl) share the* #ith )ou in the ho-e the) *a) -la) a

-art in hel-ing )ou in so*e -art o+ )our kno#ing o+ Hi*$

But at the outset, be a#are that the #ritten #or& o+ the

os-el recor&s is not the onl) #a) to kno# esus$ He

*akes Hi*sel+ kno#n to us in (arious #a)s$ .he #ritten

#or& is but one o+ the*3 but #ithout it, the other #a)s

o+ the 0or&4s sel+3re(elation are unlikel) to be -ercei(e&

b) us as inten&e&$ Hence this book$

%4(e rea& a lot o+ theolog) an& Biblical stu&ies$ Much is

*a&e o+ the &i++erences bet#een the os-el recor&s,

an& there are (arious argu*ents about structure$ %*ake little re+erence to these things/ not because % a*

ignorant o+ the*, but because none o+ the theories

-resente& strike *e as (er) co*-elling$ "n& *ore

signi+icantl), because % +ail to -ercei(e in the genre o+

the os-el recor&s an) intention b) the authors nor the

ins-ire& "uthor behin& the*6 that the inter-retation o+

their #or&s &e-en&s u-on -erce-tion o+ structure$ Nor

&oes their inter-retation an& *eaning a--ear to beenhance& b) an) theories o+ ho# e$g$6 Matthe# *a)

ha(e borro#e& +ro* Mark or 784$

B) all *eans let *e kno# i+ %4(e got so*ething reall)

#rong in an) o+ *) thoughts$ oin *e in -ra)ing &ail) to

un&erstan& our 0or& esus, an& to un&erstan&, trust an&

obe) His #or&s$ 9ea& so*ething +ro* the os-els each

&a), an& *e&itate u-on it$ "n& thereb) *a) the #or&


4/532

beco*e +lesh in each o+ us, as it #as in Hi* to

-er+ection$

:or Hi*,

Duncan Heaster

&h;heaster$org
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


5/532

1:1 Book of the generation- Book, Gk. biblos, suggests a formal olume. !t

"oul# be that Matthew refers o$ly to the ge$ealogy- but i$ this "ase, biblos

har#ly seems the appropriate wor#. %he Gospels were tra$s"ripts of the Gospel

message prea"he# by e.g. Matthew, a$# as time we$t o$ a$# the &or# #i#$'t

retur$, u$#er i$spiratio$ they wrote #ow$ their sta$#ar# a""ou$ts of the goo#

$ews. %he Greek genesis tra$slate# ge$eratio$ is also tra$slate# $ature i$

its' other two o""urre$"es (James 1:)*+ *:. !f the book refers to the book of

the Gospel of Matthew, the i#ea "oul# be that this is a Gospel whi"h fo"uses

upo$ the $ature of Jesus. elate# wor#s o""ur ofte$ i$ the ge$ealogies- people

begat /Gk. gennao0 their #es"e$#a$ts, u$til Jesus was gennaoof Mary (Mt.1:1. Jesus as a perso$ ha# a ge$esis', 2e was ge$erate#' by Mary as 2is

a$"estors ha# bee$ ge$erate#' by the ge$eratio$s' of their a$"estors- the

whole "hapter is a huge blow to the i#ea that Jesus pre-e3iste# as a perso$

before 2is birth. 2is ge$eratio$' is prese$te# as bei$g of the same $ature as the

ge$eratio$' of 2is huma$ a$"estors.

Son of Abraham- %he oma$ emperors a$# Greek heroes sometimes tra"e# their

pe#igree ba"k to a go#- a$# therefore the ge$ealogy of Jesus, whom the Gospels

prese$t as the ultimate 4mperor, is 5uite ra#i"al i$ this regar#. 6or it tra"es the

pe#igree of Jesus ba"k to a ma$, 7braham. %he great$ess of Jesus was i$ his

huma$ity.

1:)Judah and his brothers- %he fa"t !saa" a$# Ja"ob ha# brothers is "arefully

omitte#- be"ause the #es"e$#a$ts of !shmael a$# 4sau were $ot "ou$te# as the

people of Go#.

1:* Phares and Zara- 8i$"e Jesus was #es"e$#e# through the li$e of 9hares, why

me$tio$ the birth of ara- seei$g that so ma$y #etails are omitte# i$ this

ge$ealogy, ee$ whole ge$eratio$s, why take spa"e to re"or# this; 9erhaps it

was be"ause ara was the first bor$, but 9hares got the birthright. 7$# the

ge$ealogies tea"h us how Go# #elights to work through the u$#erli$g, the

re


6/532

Rahab- 7 Ge$tile a$# a si$$er. Jesus was perfe"t, a$# yet the ge$ealogy shows

how 2e ha# mu"h agai$st 2im spiritually. e "a$'t blame our la"k of spirituality

upo$ our ba# ba"kgrou$#. @ote that there was so mu"h i$termarriage with

Ge$tiles like ahab a$# uth throughout !srael's history+ their sta$#i$g with Go#

was therefore $eer o$ the basis of eth$i" purity, but rather by "ultural i#e$tity

a$# Go#'s gra"e. Matthew's ge$ealogy features /u$usually, for Jewish ge$ealogies0 seeral wome$, who ha#be"ome the a$"estors of Messiah through u$usual relatio$ships. !t's almost as if the ge$ealogy is there i$ the form that

it is to pae the way for the a""ou$t of Mary's "o$"eptio$ of Jesus without a ma$.

1: David the king- &iterally the Cai# theki$g. %he others are$'t me$tio$e# as

bei$g ki$gs. %he impli"atio$ may be that Jesus was the promise# #es"e$#a$t of

Cai# a$# the promises of eter$al Di$gship ma#e to Cai#'s #es"e$#a$t are

therefore appli"able to Jesus.

Of Uriah- &iterally she of Eriah. 8he that that bee$ the wife of is a##e# by

some tra$slators i$ e3pla$atio$, but is$'t i$ the origi$al. hilst Go# forgets' si$

i$ the se$se that 2e $o lo$ger hol#s it agai$st us, the memory of those si$s is$'tobliterate#, a$# 2is wor# is full of su"h allusio$s to si$ whi"h although 2e has

forgie$ it a$# symboli"ally blotte# it out, it still remai$s withi$ Cii$e history.

e too "a$ forgie but forgetti$g' is$'t always possible, a$# is $o sig$ that we

hae faile# to forgie.

1:F Roboam Abia - icked Roboam begat wicked Abia; wicked Abia begat good Asa;

good Asa begat good Josaphat; good Josaphat begat wicked Joram. Perhaps the emphasis is

that spirituality isnt genetic, and neither is sinfulness. Jesus was perfect despite being from

such bad blood; and we likewise cant blame our failures on bad background. !either can

we assume that the children of the faithful will be righteous.

1:Joram begat O!ias- %hree ge$eratio$s are skippe# here. 8ee o$ 1:1F. 9erhaps

the omissio$ was be"ause Joram marrie# 7thaliah, #aughter of JeHebel the wife

of 7hab, a$# those ge$eratio$s were i#olaters. 7s we $ote o$ 1:1), "hil#re$ who

#o$'t worship the true Go# are forgotte$ i$ the ultimate "ourse of Cii$e history.

!$ this "ase, his i$i5uity was i$#ee# isite# upo$ the thir# ge$eratio$ (43. )I:*-

.e also see here a fulfilme$t of the prophe"y that 7hab's house woul# be

era#i"ate# () Di$gs A:.

1:11Je"honias- %he appare$t "o$tra#i"tio$ with 1 ?hro$. *:=, is sole# if we

u$#ersta$# this to be a refere$"e to Joa"hi$.

1:1)Jechonias begat Salathiel" #herefore the reference to Jechoniah being written

childless $Jer. %%&'() perhaps means that as Jeremiah goes on to comment !o man of his

seed shall prosper. *f our children arent spiritually prosperous, it is as if we were childless.

#hus we see that the whole purpose of ha+ing children is to raise a odly seed.

1:1 Sado"- a#ok. But there was a &eite at this time also "alle# a#ok (@eh.

1I:)1. !t "oul# be that this perso$ was #es"e$#e# from both Ju#ah a$# &ei

through a$ i$ter-tribal marriage of his pare$ts. !$ this "ase he woul#'e bee$ a

pote$tial ki$g-priest, prepari$g the way for us to u$#ersta$# Jesus as a ki$g-

priest.


7/532


8/532

amou$t to the AI years prophesie# for this same perio# by Ca$. A:)=- if we

take a ge$eratio$ to be *= years, whi"h it is i$ Job ):1. %he $umeri"al alue of

the 2ebrew wor# Cai# is 1, so it "oul# also be that Matthew is elo5ue$tly

#emo$strati$g that Jesus was i$#ee# the promise# see# of Cai#. !f i$#ee# si3 is

the $umber of ma$ a$# see$ represe$ts perfe"tio$, the$ 3 F N )- the

ge$eratio$s "ulmi$ate# i$ the perfe"t ma$, Jesus.

1:1 $ound %ith "hild of the &ol' S(irit- %he Greek seems to imply she was

u$#erstoo# /fou$#0 to be with a "hil# whi"h ha# "ome ek, out of, from, the

2oly 8pirit. %his "oul# be implyi$g that Joseph himself beliee# or per"eie# that

the "hil# was from the 2oly 8pirit. %his woul# e3plai$ why he sought $ot to

humiliate her publi"ally about the matter (1:1A.

%he #es"riptio$s of Mary as keepi$g thi$gs i$ her heart (&k. ):1A,=), a$# the

way it seems she #i#$'t tell Joseph about the 7$gel's isit, but i$stea#

imme#iately we$t #ow$ to 4lisabeth for three mo$thsO all these are i$#i"atio$s

that Mary, like ma$y se$sitie people, was a ery "lose# woma$. >$ly whe$

Mary was fou$# preg$a$t by Joseph (Mt. 1:1- s.w. to see, per"eie, be

obious was the situatio$ e3plai$e# to him by a$ 7$gel. !t seems 2is moe to

#ior"e her was base# o$ his $oti"i$g she was preg$a$t, a$# she ha#$'t gie$

a$y e3pla$atio$ to him. 8he arose after perhaps bei$g fa"e #ow$ o$ the

grou$# as the 7$gel spoke with her, a$# we$t imme#iately off to 4lisabeth. 7$#

the$, after three mo$ths she retur$s ei#e$tly preg$a$t (&k. 1:*A. Mary is

portraye# as somehow separate from the other mi$isteri$g wome$. !t woul#

hae bee$ psy"hologi"ally impossible, or at best ery har#, for the mother of the

&or# to ha$g arou$# with them. %he group #y$ami"s woul# hae bee$

impossible. &ikewise i$ 7"ts 1:1 we hae the wome$, a$# Mary the mother of

Jesus, as if she is separate from them. 8he followe# 2im to ?a$a, u$i$ite#, a$#

also to ?aper$aum. @e3t she is at the "ross riski$g her life, but she is$t amo$g

the wome$ who we$t to the grae. hy $ot; !t was surely $atural that she woul#

go there, a$# that the other wome$ woul# go with her to "omfort her. But she

was a lo$er+ either she we$t alo$e, as ! thi$k ! woul# hae trie# to, or she


9/532

):1 a$# as 2e will be at the #ay of


10/532

$ear not- 7 "ommo$ e3perie$"e of Joseph. %he three 7$geli" appeara$"es to him

whi"h are re"or#e# show him imme#iately respo$#i$g. 8u"h imme#ia"y of

respo$se is typi"al of Go#'s faithful sera$ts+ #elay i$ these "ases is so ofte$ a$

e3"use for i$a"tio$ a$# #isbelief. %he Greek(hobeois also use# of reere$"e

a$# awe before Go#. 9erhaps he u$#ersta$#ably thought that he "oul# i$ $o way

marry a$# sleep with a woma$ who ha# bee$ the "ha$$el of Go#'s 8pirit topro#u"e 2is o$ly begotte$ so$. %hose thoughts surely #i# "ross his mi$#,

whateer iew we take of(hobeohere. e see here the se$sitiity of Go# to

huma$ fears a$# feeli$gs+ 2e k$ows our thoughts a$# fears perfe"tly, a$# gies

the $ee#e# assura$"e. %he message that that whi"h is "o$"eie# of her isof

the 2oly 8pirit woul# therefore hae ha# the emphasis upo$ the wor# is,

"o$firmi$g Joseph i$ his per"eptio$ (see o$ 1:1- he ha# per"eie# /7V fou$#0

that the "hil# was of the 2oly 8pirit.

Take unto 'ou- %he impli"atio$ "oul# be that they were about to marry, whe$ it

be"ame appare$t Mary was preg$a$t. 2e imme#iately marrie# her (:), seeki$gto prote"t her from the shame of the situatio$, thereby gii$g the impressio$

that the "hil# was his.

1:)1 Save &is (eo(le from their sins- But the missio$ of Jesus was to sae the

worl# (J$. *:1F, to sae those e$ter i$to 2im (J$. 1I:A+ 7"ts ):)1+ om. 1I:1*.

%he worl# is ultimately the people of ?hrist whose si$s hae bee$ forgie$.

1:)) Sa'ing- %he prese$t te$se refle"ts the o$goi$g, lii$g $ature of Go#'s wor#.

>therwise, a past te$se woul# be re5uire#. hat was spoke$ is still bei$g spoke$

to ea"h i$#ii#ual Bible rea#er K liste$er.

1:)* *od %ith us- Go# meta us mea$s somewhat more tha$ simply Go# with

us. %he i#ea is also amo$g. Go# is $ow amo$g huma$ity through we who are

the bo#y of ?hrist.

1:)= &e "alled his name- %he obe#ie$"e of Joseph (i$ this "ase, to :)1 is

emphasiHe#. &ikewise ):)I,)1 7rise... a$# he arose.

):1 +ise men- 9robably Jews from Babylo$ who ha# see$ the similarity betwee$

the star a$# the Messia$i" star out of Ja"ob whom Balaam ha# prophesie#

(@um. ):1F. 9erhaps they are "alle# here magos, sor"erers, magi" me$,

be"ause this is the image they prese$te# to 2ero#, rather tha$ stati$g they wereJews i$ sear"h of Ju#ahs Messia$i" Di$g. Ca$iel ha# o$"e bee$ "ou$te# amo$gst

the wise me$ of Babylo$ (Ca$. ):.

):) %he star #i# $ot take them #ire"tly to Bethlehem. !t may hae #isappeare#

for a while, so they we$t to Jerusalem, assumi$g the ki$g was to be bor$ there.

%his woul# i$#i"ate they were ig$ora$t of Mi". =:), the prophe"y of Messiahs

birth i$ Bethlehem, or ha# at least faile# to i$terpret the prophe"y properly.

8eei$g that stars #o $ot moe a"ross the sky oer time i$ a way whi"h "a$ be

followe# o$ earth oer a perio# of #ays or weeks, its "lear that agai$ (see o$ :1,

thi$gs are bei$g #es"ribe# as they appeare# to a$ obserer o$ earth. !t "oul# bethat they first saw the star two years preiously (see o$ ):1.


11/532

Born ,ing- 8ome ki$gs be"ome ki$gs by reolutio$ or war, others are bor$ i$to a

ki$gly li$e. %hey "learly u$#erstoo# that this ki$g was i$ the ki$gly li$e of Ju#ah-

a #ire"t #es"e$#a$t of Cai#.

):* P7ll JerusalemP were Ptrouble#P, whereas the birth of Messiah was to be atime of


12/532

buil#i$g i$ Bethlehem. Cii$e gui#a$"e is rather similar i$ our lies.

):1I The' re)oi"ed- Be"ause the star ha# #isappeare# but ha# $ow reappeare#.

):11 *old/ frank"in"ense and m'rh- %hese three gifts are typi"ally what was

offere# to ki$gs a$# there are seeral refere$"es to ki$gs bei$g prese$te# withthese three thi$gs. %he e3te$t of the wise me$s "o$i"tio$ was therefore ery

great. %his is how mu"h it "a$ "ost us to a""ept that Jesus really is &or# a$# Di$g

of our lies- fi$a$"ial e3pe$se, risk, lo$g trael...

@ote the abse$"e of a$y refere$"e to Joseph. 2is amaHi$g obe#ie$"e a$#

imme#ia"y of respo$se to Go#'s wor# was$'t rewar#e# by a$y perma$e$t

re"og$itio$. 2e playe# his role without re"og$itio$, a$# this is the lesso$ to us i$

our largely u$re"og$iHe# a$# huma$ly u$appre"iate# lies.

):1) +arned- %he Greek implies to be a$swere#, so it seems they ha# praye#

to Go# for gui#a$"e- a$# $ow re"eie# it.

De(arted- 7s Joseph the $e3t $ight likewise ha# a$ 7$geli" message,

imme#iately respo$#e# a$# #eparte# to a$other "ou$try. %heir obe#ie$"e was

a$ e3ample for Joseph a$# Mary to follow.):1*,1 Joseph was tol# to arise a$#

take Jesus to 4gypt+ a$# he arose from sleep a$# #i# it. 7$# the same #ouble

arisi$g' o""urre# whe$ he left 4gypt to retur$ to !srael (Mt ):1*,1 "p. )I,)1.

):1* +ill seek- %he 2ebrew i#ea of seeki$g i$"lu#es the i#ea of worship- whi"h

was e3a"tly 2ero#s prete3t for wa$ti$g to lo"ate Jesus.

To destro'- !f Joseph ha#$t bee$ obe#ie$t, woul# Go#s whole pla$ i$ the &or#

Jesus hae bee$ #estroye#; 9resumably so, or else the whole impressio$ gie$

of "omma$# a$# obe#ie$"e woul# be mea$i$gless, for Joseph woul#e


13/532

retur$ to the la$# by Jews i$ the )Ith "e$tury+ but o$ the other ha$#, the

"orrespo$#e$"e betwee$ these prophe"ies a$# re"e$t history is so remarkable

that it "a$'t be


14/532

hae wept as Ja"ob wept for her so$ Joseph. Ja"obs weepi$g /o$ behalf of

a"hel0 for the #eath of Joseph K Jesus was ultimately mispla"e# be"ause Joseph

was safe i$ 4gypt. 7$# so the weepi$g of a"hel for the Bethlehem babies was

#o$e whilst Jesus was i$ fa"t safe i$ 4gypt. %his "oul# e3plai$ the sema$ti" li$k

betwee$ the 5uotatio$ of >ut of 4gypt hae ! "alle# My 8o$ a$# the$ this

5uotatio$ about a"hel weepi$g as Ja"ob wept for Joseph, whe$ i$ fa"t he wassafe i$ 4gypt. Jer. *1:1=,1 reports a"hel weepi$g for her "hil#re$ who ha#

bee$ lost, a$# the$ bei$g tol# to stop "ryi$g be"ause they woul# "ome agai$

from te Ge$tile la$# where they ha# bee$ take$. !$ other wor#s, she was bei$g

tol# that the "hil#re$ she thought were #ea# a$# go$e were a"tually alie- i$ a

Ge$tile la$#. hi"h was e3a"tly the "ase with Ja"obs mour$i$g for Joseph whi"h

is "learly the basis for the mour$i$g of a"hel here. But the$ the problem is

that the wome$ this erse is applie# to i$ Matthew ) ha# lost a"tual "hil#re$ by

real physi"al #eath. !ts all a ery "ompli"ate# argume$t, a$# ery for"e# a$#

u$satisfa"tory to ester$ eyes a$# ears be"ause the "o$te3t appears to always

be so i$appropriate a$# the fa"ts #o$t 5uite fit. >$ly parts of the pi"ture fit. Butthis is ery mu"h the style of Jewish midrash/"omme$tary0 o$ the >l#

%estame$t. !t probably woul#e bee$ more persuasie, i$teresti$g a$#

i$trigui$g to first "e$tury Jewish ears tha$ it is to ours i$ the )1st ?e$tury.

):1A +as dead behold a((ears- @ot appeare#. %he i$"o$siste$t use of

te$ses is$t the grammati"al mistake of a$ u$e#u"ate#, u$i$spire# writer. %his

#ei"e is "ommo$ i$ the Gospels. !t fo"uses atte$tio$ upo$ the 7$gel appeari$g,

a$# e$"ourages us to re-lie the mome$t, as if to say, 7$# wow, lo a$# behol#-

a$ 7$gel appearsQ. %he Gospels were i$itially i$te$#e# for publi" rea#i$g, ee$

performa$"e o$ street "or$ers, as the ma


15/532

same way. 2e makes "o$"essio$s to our weak$esses, a$# whilst the pla$ Bs, ?s

a$# Cs #o$t fit as s$ugly i$to 2is propheti" i$te$tio$s as pla$ 7 might hae

#o$e- they still fit. Be"ause 2e makes them fit. 7$# that i$ my opi$io$ e3plai$s

the slight se$se we get i$ some parts of the re"or# here that ee$ts are bei$g

ma#e to fit Bible prophe"ies. 7$# we see it i$ our ow$ lies. e may take a pla$

? or C, e.g. a sister may marry a$ u$belieer, a$# this #oes$t mea$ that Go#spurpose with her fi$ishes, but rather that /e.g.0 Bible tea"hi$g about marriage

$e wo$#ers whether

Joh$ maybe bega$ his mi$istry up to three a$# a half years before the baptism of

Jesus, seei$g his work was typi"al of the three a$# a half year 4li


16/532


17/532

#ays. !s. I:) 0ni2uit' is (ardoned- is the assura$"e that Jerusalems si$s at

2eHekiahs time (as outli$e# graphi"ally i$ !saiah 1 are forgie$- a$# o$ this

basis, there is the appeal i$ :*, to repe$t i$ pra"ti"e, to make the rough pla"es

smooth et". - for those erses are u$#erstoo# by Joh$ the Baptist as a$ appeal

for repe$ta$"e. @ote how forgie$ess was gra$te#, a$# the$ there was the

appeal to repe$t. @ot the other way arou$#. epe$ta$"e therefore is a "laimi$g

of a forgie$ess for spe"ifi" si$s whi"h has alrea#y bee$ pote$tially gra$te#,

espe"ially for those Pi$ ?hristP.

!s. I: .r' is the P"ryP of !s. I:). %he refere$"es to flesh bei$g as grass a$#

hai$g bee$ blow$ upo$ by Lahweh (:F are figures of


18/532

In the wilderness- John the aptist prepared a highway in the desert through bapti/ing

repentant people !'k. 0$#,1&. This highway was to be a path to 2hrist as well as the one (e

would travel. Those converted became a path to 2hrist for others. 3ne purpose of our calling

to the 4ospel is to assist others onto that same way. 5nd its worth reflecting that 2hrist can

only come once the way for (im is prepared- as if (is coming depends upon a certain levelof response to our preaching, especially to the Jews of the very last days.

Pre(are the %a' of the 3ord- %he 5uotatio$ from !saiah suggests that if the way

was prepare# by huma$ repe$ta$"e, the$ this woul# be the path oer whi"h the

&or#s glory woul# retur$ to io$ i$ the establishme$t of the Di$g#om. 8ee o$ *:)

re(ent. %he stro$g suggestio$ is that the &or#s "omi$g i$ glory was a possibility

if !srael ha# repe$te# at Joh$s prea"hi$g a$# a""epte# Jesus as their Messiah.

&k. *: goes o$ to say that if they ha# repe$te#, the$ the prophe"y that Pall flesh

shall see the salatio$ of Go#P woul# "ome true- a$# that is "learly la$guage of

the future Di$g#om of Go# o$ earth. 6or $ot ee$ all !srael saw K per"eie# theJesus K salatio$ of Go#, let alo$e Pall fleshP. %he term Pall fleshP is use#

fre5ue$tly i$ the >% about ma$ki$# ge$erally rather tha$


19/532

the$ Go# will prepare' that ma$'s way too (9s. *F:)*+ 11A:=, "o$firmi$g him i$

the way of es"ape.

&is (aths straight- %here is a #efi$ite allusio$ to the la$guage here i$ 7"ts 1*:1I,

where a ma$ is a""use# by 9aul of pererti$g Pthe right /s.w. straight0 ways of

the &or#P. 9aul "learly saw hismissio$ as likewise to prepare straight paths forthe &or# Jesus by prea"hi$g the Gospel of tra$sformatio$. %he impli"atio$ "oul#

be that Joh$s missio$ ultimately faile#, i$ that the &or# Jesus #i# $ot "ome to

io$ i$ glory. 9aul seems to imply that therefore that work is $ow pla"e# upo$ all

?hristia$ prea"hers+ we are to prepare the way so that the &or# "a$ "ome to

io$ a$# establish Go#s Di$g#om. he$ we rea# that 9aul i$stru"te# me$ Pi$

the way of the &or#P (7"ts 1:)= we hae the same i#ea- we are prepari$g the

way of the &or# Jesus. 4a"h perso$ who is truly "o$erte# is part of the &or#s

highway, a$# o$"e there is suffi"ie$t tra$sformatio$ of huma$ life, the way will

be rea#y e$ough for the &or# to retur$ upo$ it.

Just as the prea"hi$g of the Gospel was to make straight paths for the Messiah to

"ome (&k. *:, so we are to make ourpaths straight (2eb. 1):1*- as if somehow

we are the &or# Jesus+ 2is reelatio$ to this worl# at the se"o$# "omi$g will i$ a

se$se be our reelatio$. 2e$"e the fi$al isio$s of eelatio$ speak of the &or#s

se"o$# "omi$g i$ terms whi"h are appli"able to the "ommu$ity of those i$ 2im

/e.g. a "ity of people "omi$g #ow$ from 2eae$ to earth0. Joh$'s prea"hi$g was

i$ or#er to make /s.w. to bri$g forth fruit'0 2is /the &or#'s0 paths straight- but the

ways of the &or# are right /s.w. straight0 a$yway (7"ts 1*:1I. 8o how "oul#

Joh$'s prea"hi$g make the &or#'s ways straight K right, whe$ they alrea#y are;

Go# is so asso"iate# with 2is people that their straight$ess or "rooke#$ess

refle"ts upo$ 2im+ for they are 2is wit$esses i$ this worl#. 2is ways are their

ways. %his is the @.%. e5uiale$t of the >.%. "o$"ept of keepi$g K walki$g i$ the

way of the &or# (Ge$. 1:1A+ ) Di$gs )1:)). 9erhaps this is the thought behi$#

the e3hortatio$ of 2eb. 1):1* to make straight paths for our ow$ feet. e are to

bri$g our ways i$to harmo$y with the &or#'s ways+ for 2e is to be us, 2is ways

our ways. %hus !s. I:*, whi"h is bei$g 5uote# i$ &k. *:, speaks of 9repare ye

the way of the 3ord, whereas !s. ):1I speaks of 9repare ye the way of the

(eo(le. Let tragi"ally, the way K path of !srael was $ot the way K path of the &or#

(4H. 1:)=.

%here was a$ i$te$sity a$# "riti"al urge$"y about Joh$ a$# his message. Joh$

urge# people to make their path straight- usi$g a Greek wor# elsewhere

tra$slate# imme#iately, forthwith (&k. *: s.w. Mk. 1:1),) a$# ofte$.

Getti$g thi$gs straight i$ our lies is a 5uestio$ of imme#iate respo$se. 2e war$s

people to flee from the wrath to "ome (&k. *:F. %his was what their "ha$ge#

lies a$# baptisms were to be about- a fleei$g from the wrath to "ome. 2e

speaks as if that wrath to "ome is


20/532

those ee$ts woul# $ot hae "ome upo$ the ma


21/532


22/532

wor#s. %his of "ourse "omes as a result of a ge$ui$e agreeme$t with the "harge

of si$ a$# a ra#i"al re-thi$ki$g. !t is $ot therefore for us to #ema$# repe$ta$"e

from others i$ terms of e3ter$al appeara$"e. e "a$$ot


23/532


24/532

me$tio$ of Joh$ i$ 7"ts 1*:),)= appare$tly a##s $othi$g to his argume$t+ it

seems out of "o$te3t. But it surely i$#i"ates the #egree to whi"h Joh$ was $eer

far below the surfa"e i$ 9auls thi$ki$g.

*: !t seems likely that 9aul we$t to hear Joh$ the Baptist prea"h+ Pthere we$t

out to him all the la$# of Ju#ea a$# they of JerusalemP (Mk. 1:=, a$# at this time9aul was lii$g i$ Jerusalem. ! beliee 9aul hear# Joh$ a$# was "o$i"te# by him

of ?hrist. Joh$ prea"he# the $ee# to Pbri$g forth fruits meet u$to repe$ta$"eP

(Mt. *:+ a$# 9aul ma#e those his ow$ wat"hwor#s i$ his worl#-wi#e prea"hi$g

(7"ts ):)I- 9aul #es"ribes his prea"hi$g i$ la$guage whi"h is #ire"tly allu#i$g

to how Joh$ prea"he#. 7s Joh$ sai# that he was sentto baptiHe, but espe"ially to

wit$ess of ?hrist (J$. 1:**, so 9aul felt that he too was sent to ba(ti!e, but his

emphasis was more o$ the prea"hi$g of ?hrist tha$ physi"ally baptiHi$g (1 ?or.

1:1F.

$ruits- Bri$g forth therefore fruits meet for repe$ta$"eP must be "o$$e"te# with

our &or#s #es"riptio$ of the Ge$tile belieers as Pa $atio$ bri$gi$g forth the

(i$eyar# fruitsP of the Di$g#om (Mt. )1:*. %hese are #efi$e# i$ om. 1:1F:

P%he Di$g#om of Go# is... righteous$ess, a$# pea"e, a$# $ly whe$ there is $o fruit at all, i$ a$y aspe"t of spiritual life, will ?hrist

re


25/532


26/532

1o% also- ight $ow. Joh$ felt that the #ay of ?hrists


27/532

4li


28/532

fireP those who re


29/532


30/532

and stones is entioned by Jesus in Mt" 0:7% and doubtless those iages often erged in *is tortured

ind / although always to be brought into swift control by *is recollection of the -ord"

/ Jesus probably told the >ospel writers the record of *is teptations% and to bring hoe in words the

intensity of what *e underwent% *e could ha$e used the figurati$e approach seen in Matthew + and

uke +"

/ 9t sees unlikely that se$eral ties the .e$il led Jesus through the wilderness and streets ofJerusale and then scaled a pinnacle of the teple together% all in $iew of the in?uisiti$e Jews"

Josephus akes no record of anything like this happening / presuably it would ha$e caused a

a2or stir" Siilarly% if these teptations occurred se$eral ties within the forty days as well as at the

end of that period (which they did at least twice% seeing that Matthew and uke ha$e the in different

order)% how would Jesus ha$e had tie to walk to the nearest high ountain (which could ha$e been

*eron in the far north of 9srael)% clib to the top and back down again% return to the Judean

wilderness and then repeat the e&ercise *is teptations all occurred in the wilderness / *e was

there for forty days% tepted all the tie by the .e$il (he only departed at the end / Mt" +:11)" 9f Jesus

was tepted by the .e$il each day% and the teptations occurred only in the wilderness% then it

follows that Jesus could not ha$e left the wilderness to go to Jerusale or tra$el to a high ountain"

hese things therefore could not ha$e literally happened"

/ 9f the .e$il is a physical person who has no respect for >od8s -ord and is interested in aking

people sin% then why would Jesus ?uote Scripture to o$ercoe hi ccording to the popular $iew%

this would not send the .e$il away" @otice that Jesus ?uoted a


31/532

-e note that the >ospels go on to call 4eter 'Satan and Judas 'a .e$il / perhaps because both of

the offered the ord Jesus the sae teptations to iediate glory without the cross which 'Satan

did in the wilderness" hey would therefore ha$e been occasions of where Satan Breturned8 to the

ord as predicted at the close of the account of the wilderness teptations" good case can be ade

for Judas8 betrayal of the ord being rooted in his desire for an iediate Messianic Gingdo% and hisbitter disappointent and anger when he finally understood that the ord8s Gingdo was not to coe

about in that way" 9t8s been suggested that B9scariot8 is related to the atin sicarius% an assassin% which

would suggest that Judas Elike 4eterF was a zealot willing to use force and $iolence to bring about the

Gingdo of Jesus (3)"

John The wilderness temptations

he Jewish crowd wanted to

ake hi king (Jn" :1,)

Satan offers hi the kingship of the

EJewishF world

he Jews ask for iraculous

bread (Jn" :31)

Satan in$ites hi to ake iraculous

bread

he EJewishF disciples want

Jesus to go to Jerusale to

show *is power (Jn" 0:3)

Satan takes Jesus to Jerusale and

tepts *i to show *is power"

John8s >ospel oits any of the incidents and teaching accounts of the synoptics% but repeats their

essence in a different way (+)" 9t sees John8s e?ui$alent of the teptation narrati$es is his account in

Jn" :1/1+ of the Jews tepting Jesus to do a iraculous sign to pro$e *iself Messiah% and to

pro$ide anna in the wilderness" 9n this case% John is casting the Jews and their thinking in the role of

the 'Satan of the wilderness teptations" he following parallels between the wilderness teptations

and the ord8s e&perience as recorded in Jn" indicate how the B.e$il8 of teptation returned to the

ord Jesus / and note in passing how the e?ui$alent of BSatan8 is the Jews:

he Synoptics speak of how Satan Bcoes to8 and tepts and challenges the ord Jesus to clai

earthly political power% which BSatan8 can gi$e hi (Mt" +:6%7)" od

wanted; for according to the rabbinic Pesiqta Rabbati3% '-hen the Ging% the Messiah% re$eals

hiself% he will coe and stand on the roof of the teple" hese teptations repeated thesel$es%

as 'the .e$il departed for a season to return later / e"g" 9n the for of the relati$es of Jesus tepting

*i to go up to Jerusale and to soe draatic works to pro$e *is identity" 9t was the Jews who

repeatedly deanded fro Jesus a draatic 'sign fro *ea$en (Mt" 1:1; !!:16%3,; Mk" 6:11; 1=:!;

1!:1,; k" 11:1) / 'tepting hi to gi$e one" hey are the ones continuing the tepting of Jesus

which we first encounter in the record of *is wilderness teptations" *ence we can connect the


32/532


33/532

!" he teptation to take the kingdos to *iself would ha$e been far ore powerful if it cae fro

within 5hrist" Jesus8 ind would ha$e been full of Scripture% and in *is afflicted state of ind% caused

by *is fasting% it would be tepting to isinterpret passages to enable *i to use the to 2ustify

taking the easy way out of the situation *e was in"

Standing on a high ountain recalls #zekiel being shown what the Gingdo would be like fro a highountain (#z" +=:!)% and John% seeing 'the holy Jerusale fro 'a great and high ountain (Ie$"

!1:1=)" Jesus saw the world8s kingdos as they would be in the future (k" +:,)% i"e" 9n the Gingdo%

when 'the kingdos of this world are becoe the kingdos of our ord and of *is 5hrist (Ie$"

11:1,)" Maybe *e would ha$e thought of Moses at the end of += years8 wilderness wandering (cp" *is

forty days) looking out at the 4roised and (the Gingdo) fro Mount @ebo" 9t is ephasized in

.aniel (.an" +:10% !,% 3!; ,:!1) that 'the ost *igh ruleth in the kingdo of en% and gi$eth it to

whosoe$er he will; Jesus would ha$e known that only >od% not anyone else% could gi$e *i the

kingdo" herefore it would not ha$e been uch of a teptation if an e$il onster claied to be able

to gi$e Jesus the kingdo% when *e knew only >od had the power" *owe$er% Jesus knew that it was

*is (the ather8s) good pleasure to gi$e Jesus the kingdo% and it ust ha$e been suggested by the

'.e$il within Jesus that *e could take that kingdo iediately" fter all% *e could ha$e reasoned%

B>od has delegated all authority to e in prospect (Jn" ,:!%!0)8% to the e&tent that *e had power to

both gi$e *is life and take it again (Jn" 1=:16)% although ultiately all power was gi$en unto *i only

after *is death and resurrection (Mt" !6:16)" Jer" !0:,/6 and Jer" 3+:,/6 in the KK speak of how >od

has ade the earth and will gi$e it (>k" doso) to whoe$er *e wishes; and these are the $ery words

of the BSatan8 in uke8s record: '9 will gi$e (doso) it to you""" 9 gi$e it to whoe$er 9 wish" Dne could

say that this is a way of e&plaining how the ord Jesus was tepted to Bplay >od8 and seek e?uality

with >od / which teptation *e refused (as 4aul points out in 4hil" !)"

3" -ith *is failiarity with Scripture% 5hrist would ha$e seen the siilarities between *iself and

#li2ah% whose orale collapsed after += days in the wilderness (1 Gings 17:6) and Moses% who

forfeited his iediate inheritance of the land at the end of += years in the wilderness" Jesus at the

end of += days% was in a siilar position to the / faced with a real possibility of failure" Moses and#li2ah failed because of huan weakness / not because of a person called 'the .e$il" 9t was this

sae huan weakness% the BSatan8% or ad$ersary% that was tepting Jesus"

+" 'nd the .e$il said unto *i% 9f you are the Son of >od""" (k" +:3)" 9t ust ha$e been a constant

teptation within the ind of 5hrist to ?uestion whether *e really was the Son of >od% seeing that

e$eryone else thought *e was the son of Joseph (k" 3:!3; Jn" :+!) or illegitiate (so Jn" 7:!7

iplies)% and that the official teple records described hi as the son of Joseph (Mt" 1:1%1; k" 3:!3%

where 'supposed eans Breckoned by law8)" *e was the only huan being not to ha$e a huan

father" 4hilippians !:6 iplies that Jesus cae to appreciate that *e really was a an like us%

inferring it was tepting for *i to disbelie$e *e was the Son of >od% and to isunderstand *is own

nature"

," he teptations were controlled by >od for 5hrist8s spiritual education" he passages ?uoted by

Jesus to strengthen *iself against *is desires ('.e$il) are all fro the sae part of .euteronoy%

regarding 9srael8s e&perience in the wilderness" Jesus clearly saw a parallel between *is e&periences

and theirs (see below):

hus Jesus showed us how to read and study the -ord / *e thought *iself into the position of9srael in the wilderness% and therefore took the lessons that can be learnt fro their e&periences to*iself in *is wilderness trials" he description of the ord Jesus as being in the wilderness withbeasts and ngels (Mk" 1:13) is another connection with 9srael8s e&perience in the wilderness / theywere plagued there by 'wild beasts because of their disobedience (.t" 3!:17/!+ and conte&t)"


34/532

.euteronoy 6:! 'he ord thy

>od led thee these forty years

in the wilderness to huble

thee% and to pro$e thee% to know

what was in thine heart%

whether thou wouldest keep *is

coandents (word)% or no"

Matthew + C uke + 'Jesus led up of the

spirit 'forty days 'in the wilderness"

Jesus was pro$ed by the teptations"

Jesus o$ercae by ?uoting the

Scriptures that were in *is heart (4s"

117:11)% thus showing it was the

Scriptures that were in *is heart"

.euteronoy 6:3" 'nd he

hubled thee% and suffered

thee to hunger% and fed thee

with anna""" that *e ight

ake thee know that an doth

not li$e by bread only% but by

e$ery word"""of the ord"""

'*e was afterward an hungered" 9n

John anna is interpreted by Jesus

as representing the -ord of >od% which

Jesus li$ed by in the wilderness" Jesus

learnt that spiritually *e li$ed by the

-ord of >od" '*e answered"""it is

written% Man shall not li$e by bread

alone% but by e$ery word """of >od"%

.euteronoy 6:, 'hou shalt

also consider in thine heart%that% as a an chasteneth his

son% so the ord thy >od

chasteneth thee

Jesus no doubt reflected on *is

e&periences" >od chastened *is Son%Jesus / ! Sa" 0:1!; 4s" 67:3!"

Notes

(1) John hoas% Eureka: An Exposition of the Apocalypse (-est "*" welftree% Beptation of Jesus8% in 9"*" Marshall% ed"% Dictionary of esus and the Gospels (eicester:

9L4% 177!) p" 6!!" #rnst oheyer likewise noted that the account of the wilderness teptations reads $ery

uch as a disputation between two Iabbis / as if Jesus was arguing with a Jewish ind about the interpretation

of Scripture" See #rnst oheyer% !he "ord#s Prayer(ondon: 5ollins% 17,) p" !!+" *enry Gelly sees the record

as 'a typical rabbinical 'show/debate" Such debates were a for of idrash (editation on Scripture) that

displayed an authoritati$e figure responding to a series of challenges by citing the correct passage fro

Scripture / $atan: A %io&raphy (5abridge: 5""4"% !==) p" 60" here8s a passage in the alud ( $anhedrin

67b) where BSatan8 three ties tepts braha% and is rebuffed by braha8s ?uoting of Scripture" here8s

another e&aple in the Deuteronomy Rabbah11", where Moses likewise is portrayed as ha$ing a triple dialogue

with an ngel about agreeing to his death" he ore researchers e&plore the Jewish literature conteporary with

the >ospels% the ore it becoes apparent that the style of the >ospel records is siilar to that found in the

conteporary literature / and such a show trial was $ery uch Jewish rabbinic style" 'he >ospel tradition

presents uch of Jesus8 teaching in literary fors akin to those characteristic of rabbinic literature" Such 'fors

include iracle stories% parables% disputations% and 'cases% e&aples drawn fro real life situations / M"-ilco&% BSeitic 9nfluence Dn he @ew estaent8% in 5"" #$ans and S"#" 4orter% eds"% Dictionary of 'ew

!estament %ack&round (eicester: 9L4% !===) p" 1=7+"

(3) See Dscar 5ullann% !he $tate in the 'ew !estament(@ew Aork: Scribners8% 17,) p" 1,"

(+)

The Synoptic Gospels Johns Gospel

Mt" 1:17 the keys of the >ospel of the

Gingdo

Jn" !=:!1%!3

the ore literal accounts of the birth of

Jesus

Jn" 1:1/1+


35/532


36/532

he need for water baptis

he account of the breaking of bread

he any ?uotations fro the Dld

estaent% shown to be fulfilled in the ord

Jesus"

he synoptics each gi$e soe account of

the literal origin of Jesus through gi$ing

genealogies or soe reference to the"

Jn" 3:3/,

John8s $ersion is in John :+6/,6" *e stresses that one ustabsorb 5hrist into thesel$es in order to really ha$e the

eternal life which the bread and blood sybolize" 9t sees

John puts it this way in order to counter the tendency to think

that erely by partaking in the ritual of breaking bread%

belie$ers are thereby guaranteed eternal life"

John e&presses this in ore abstract language: 'he word

was ade flesh (Jn" 1:1+)"

John8s >ospel speaks of Jesus as if *e soehow e&isted in

the plan of >od fro the beginning% but 'becae flesh when

*e was born of Mary"

(,) his is actually the $iew of Joachi Jereias% 'ew !estament !heolo&y(@ew Aork: Scribners% 1701) p" 03"

Jesus in the Wilderness: A Study in the Language and Nature of Temptation

9t ay well be argued that the language of the wilderness teptations iplies there was physical

o$eent going on% e"g" the tepter cae to Jesus and led *i" -e now consider how such

language is rele$ant to internal desires within the huan ind"

And !hen the tempter came to "im###$

9 want to show that teptation and desire are often described in ters of physical o$eent% thus

enabling us to analyze the in a way which is easier to $isualize than to describe the in purely

abstract ters"

he ord 'was tepted in e$ery point like as we are (*eb" +:1,); and 'e$ery an is tepted when he

is drawn away of his own lusts (desires) and enticed (Jaes 1:1+)" or Jesus to be tepted like us%

*e had to go through the sae process of teptation as we do" So to soe e&tent *e also was'drawn away by the e$il desires / the B.e$il8 / which *e had within *i" his would e&plain why the

.e$il is described as taking Jesus into Jerusale and onto a ountain; this 'taking is the sae as

being 'drawn away in Jaes 1" his association of our natural desires with the idea of physical

o$eent is picked up fre?uently in the @ew estaent" 'ead us not into teptation (Mt" :13) is a

case in point" -e are led by our desires% as Jesus was to a sall e&tent in the wilderness; and yet

>od is e&pressed here as ultiately in control of these things" *e is greater than those desires% and is

able to stop the leading us% to 'keep us fro falling (note the connection of teptation and physical

o$eent again)" he world generally akes no resistance to being led by the .e$il / thus 'silly

woen are 'led capti$e""" led away with di$ers lusts""" led away with the error of the wicked (! i"

3:; ! 4et" 3:10)" Jesus was not led by the .e$il / *is lusts which *e shared with us / to the sae

e&tent as these people were"


37/532


38/532

the and the Bself8 who they analyze and dialogue with in selfOe&aination" Much of our selfOtalk is$ague; that of the ord Jesus was specific and focused" *e was the an ultiately in touch with*iself"

/ he ?uotation of .t" :13 'Aou shalt fear the ord your >od (alone) was probably ade with .t"

:1+ in ind 'Aou shall not go after other gods" 4erhaps *e interpreted the pagan idols as the e$il

thoughts of *is heart" #arlier .t" :0%6 had warned that not repeating the aw would result in idol

worship / and 5hrist saw that *is neglect of the ather8s word would result in *is ser$ing *is e$il

desires" hus the purpose of the teptations was to pro$e whether 5hrist would really keep and apply

the word in *is heart (.t" 6:!)% as it was for 9srael in their wilderness"

/ >od alone has the power to gi$e the Gingdo (.an" +:3!)" hat Jesus was tepted to take if for

*iself (Mt" +:7) indicates *e was tepted to ake *iself e?ual to >od" 4hil" !: coents on this:

that although *e had the sae perfect ind as >od% *e did not consider e?uality with >od a thing to

be e$en considered" his shows (again) how conscious 5hrist was of *is sinless ind% and how this

tepted *i to proudly assue e?uality with >od" his was probably in the back of *is

consciousness as *e argued in Jn" 1=:3+/3 that en in the Dld estaent had been called >od% but

*e was not then taking that title to *iself as *e could ha$e done% but only calling *iself the $onof>od" *is appreciation of the any passages which functionally applied the @ae of Aahweh to *i

would ha$e tepted *i to use the nae in *is own right because of *is ultiate anifestation of

>od" 5hrist reflected that to whosoe$er )ewanted *e could gi$e the Gingdo (k" +:) / and *e

thought of gi$ing it to *iself" @ote how later *e proised to gi$e the cities of the Gingdo to us (Mt"

17:!6; k" 17:10)"

/ *is Bad$ersary8% *is own ind% ?uoted 4s" 71:11%1! to *iself (Mt" +:): '*e shall gi$e *is ngels

charge o$er you" his 4sal has priary reference to Joshua being protected by the ngel during

the wilderness wanderings when the apostate 9sraelites were consued by the destroyer ngel" he

specific reason for this protection is gi$en in 4s" 71:1; because he had reained in the tabernacle% no

doubt fro the oti$e of wanting to hear as uch as possible of >od8s word spoken by the ngel tohis aster Moses (#&" 33:11)" Dur ord was in a siilar position / dedicated to the word of >od% the

rest of 9srael apostate" 9t would ha$e been tepting to abuse the subse?uent ngelic power which *is

spirituality had ade a$ailable to *i"

/ here is the iplication that it took the ord += days to o$ercoe the .e$il% at which point the .e$il

departed" his is ore easily understandable in ters of an internal battle% than a literal struggle

against a supernatural being" nd the fact it took += days shows how hard was the struggle for the

ord"

/ he ord standing on a high ountain beholding the coing Gingdo of >od (1)points forward to an

identical scene in Ie$" !1:1=" here are other connections with Ie$elation / 'he kingdos of the

world P Ie$" 11:1,; $"7%1=P Ie$" !!:6%7; $",P Ie$" !1:!" 9t is alost as if the ord Jesus in gi$ing

Ie$elation was looking back to *is wilderness trials% re2oicing that what *e had been tepted to ha$e

then ille&itimately% was now *is and ours legitiately" he wilderness teptation was to take the

Gingdo and rule it for *iself rather than for >od; i"e" not to anifest >od% e$en if e&ternally there

would not be any e$ident difference between whether *e was anifesting >od in an acceptable spirit

or not" or these teptations to be real% it ust ha$e been possible that >od would ha$e allowed

5hrist to take the Gingdo; as *e would ha$e allowed the ord to use the ngels to rescue *i fro

his ordeal in >ethseane" hat >od was willing to accept a second best% to allow *is plan for

sal$ation to go as far as 5hrist8s freewill effort allowed it to% would ha$e been a treendous teptation

and yet stiulation to Jesus" *ence >od8s supree delight in the totality of 5hrist8s effort and $ictory%

as described% e"g"% in 9s" +7:,/7"


39/532

/ here can be little doubt that standing on a ountain looking out o$er >od8s Gingdo would ha$e

reinded 5hrist of Moses on @ebo% who for one slip was denied it all" nd that ust ha$e sobered

*i (.t" 3+:1)" nd ha$ing ?uoted .t" 6:3 to *iself about li$ing on the breadCword of >od% *is ind

would ha$e gone on to .t" 6:7 with its description of eating bread without scarceness in the Gingdo

/ i"e" feeding fully on spiritual things% in the allegory"

/ he ord was tepted to belie$e that *e would be iraculously preser$ed fro dashing *is foot

against a stone" his is an allusion to 4ro$" 3:!3% which proises that the ather will keep the Son in

who *e delights fro Bstubling in the way8" 4ro$" 3:+ is specifically applied to the ord Jesus in k"

!:,!" od8s Son% soehow

>od would preser$e *i fro sinning% and so *e could do as *e wished hank >od% and *i% that

*e put that thought so far behind *i"

Note

(1) 5hrist seeing 'all the kingdos of the world in a oent of tie (k" +:,) surely refers to the future Gingdo

of >od on earth / all the kingdos as they would be in the future (cp" Ie$" 11:1,)"

The Wilderness Temptations: Internal Struggle With Self-Doubt

The essence of the wilderness temptations appears to me to be connected with a tendency

within Jesus towards self-doubt; to )uestion whether (e really was 4od6s 7on. 5fter all,

everyone around (im thought (e had a human father. 8erhaps 'ary6s mid-life collapse of

faith involved her going )uiet over the visit of the 5ngel and her strange son6s Divine

begettal. 8erhaps it all seemed as a dream to her, especially if Joseph was dead or not on thescene. Jesus was so human that it must have been unreal for (im to imagine that actually, (is

mother was the only woman to have become pregnant directly from 4od. 5nd we all have the

essence of this temptation; to wonder whether in fact we really are any different from the

world around us, whether we have in any meaningful sense been born again, whether 4od

actually sees us as (is children; whether we will receive the salvation of 4ods children and

eternal entrance into (is family which is ours if we are now (is children. To have those

struggles isn6t sinful; for the ord endured these temptations without sinning. (ere, then, is

the evidence that the wilderness temptations hinged around (is own )uestioning of (is

Divine 7onship$

- The promise to receive 9the :ingdoms of the world and their glory6 was framed in the

language of 8s. %$,< ==. (ere 4od proclaims (is 7on to the world, and invites (is 7on to

95sk of me, and I will give to you the nations of the earth for your inheritance, and the ends

of the earth for your possession>. The 4reek words used are similar to the words of 9the

devil6 to Jesus. 2learly the ord was being tempted not only to misapply 7cripture, but also

to ?ust check that (e really was in fact 4od6s 7on.

- @Ifyou are the 7on of 4odA> was the repeated temptation the ord faced. Bither, as I

believe, the 9devil6 refers to the 9enemy6 of the ord6s internal temptations; or, if we are to

read the temptation records with reference to a literal person, then that person was unsure as

to the identity of Jesus. This latter option is another nail in the coffin for the orthodounderstanding of 9the devil6 as a personal, omnipotent fallen 5ngel who set out to target


40/532


41/532

- The temptation of the ord about the divorce and remarriage )uestion was also a moral

issue !'t. 0G$0-G&. John the aptist had lost his head for critici/ing (erods divorce and

remarriage; and surely the intention of the )uestion was to lead the ord into making a

statement which (erod would see as critical of his situation. The temptation for the ord was

perhaps to assert (imself as a :ing in opposition to (erod and thus proclaim (is political:ingdom there and then. ikewise the temptation whether to pay ta to ome or not !'k.

0%$01&. efusing to pay ta to ome was the classic issue raised by the Jewish

revolutionaries- for the ta was seen as funding anti-Jewish and pagan functions and rituals.

5gain, the essence of the temptation, as in the wilderness, was to proclaim (imself as :ing

of Israel and 7on of 4od there and then, rather than wait for (is death and resurrection to be

the true declaration of that 7onship !om. 0$1&.

- 8eter tempts the ord to consider that being 'essiah didn6t mean that (e had to suffer, and

that (e could start (is :ingdom there and then !'t. 0C$%0-%#&. 8erhaps the way the ord

called 8eter 9satan6 at that point was an intentional reference back to the wilderness struggles

with 9satan6.

:1 3ed -Jesus was le# of the 8pirit at 2is time of testi$g (Mt. :1+ a$# 9aul uses


42/532

we are to put ourseles to the test () ?or. 1*:=+ Go# put 7braham to the test

(2eb. 11:1F, false apostles were to be put to the test by the faithful (e. ):). !t

ought to be "lear that there is $othi$g si$ister $or si$ful about the i#ea of bei$g

put to the test $or of putti$g a$other to the test.

Stones be made bread- %his woul# $ot i$ itself hae bee$ a si$ if 2e ha# agree#to it. But it woul# hae bee$ "hoosi$g a lower leel, by breaki$g 2is fast. But the

$e3t temptatio$s were to a"tually si$. !f 2e ha# agree# to the first suggestio$,

obe#ie$"e to the $e3t o$es woul# hae bee$ har#er. !t "oul# ee$ be argue#

that to put the &or# to the test was permissible o$ a lower leel- for passages

like 9s. *: a$# Mal. *:1I almost e$"ourage it for those with a weak faith.

Gi#eo$ likewise put the &or# to the test a$# was a$swere#. But the &or# "hose

the higher leel: a$# 2e k$ew 8"ripture whi"h "oul# support it. But the fa"t 2e

"hose the highest leel first of all, mea$t that 2e was better able to take the

higher leel agai$, a$# to fi$ally oer"ome the thir# temptatio$, whi"h was

#efi$itely a "lear "hoi"e betwee$ right a$# wro$g. More tha$ this, a$ythi$g othertha$ a #esire to make the highest ma3imum "ommitme$t "a$ lea# to failure.

%he heart of the wise i$"li$es to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left

(4"". 1I:) @!V has bee$ u$#erstoo# as referri$g $ot so mu"h to right a$# wro$g,

goo# a$# eil, as to the highest goo# a$# lesser goo# ("p. how the left ha$# "a$

sta$# for simply lesser blessi$g rather tha$ outright eil, e.g. Ge$. :1*-)I.

%he fool i$"li$es to lower "ommitme$t. %he wise will always i$"li$e to the

ma3imum, wholehearte# leel.

:= Takes him up- The Greek is often used in a non-literal sense, with the idea of

receiving someone into an office or situation. The same word is used in :8 about the Lord

being taken up a high mountain. The idea may well be that e was imagining being

received into rulership of the !essianic "ingdom, and was wondering whether that would

be possible through accepting #the devil#, be it is own flesh or the $ewish system, who

humanly speaking seemed able to offer a path to this. Likewise #set him# later on in :%

carries the idea of being appointed, established in authority.

1$CBear you up- 8resumably this was to be taken literally- the 5ngels physically with (im

would have literally held (im under the arms if (e ?umped from the temple. 7o we see the

literal physical presence of the 5ngels in our lives. The eyes of 4od, an evident reference to

the 5ngels, are associated with the temple !0 :ings !'k. 0$0#&.


43/532


44/532

k$owle#ge, k$owi$g it must pro#u"e "ertai$ i$ter$al #esires withi$ us whi"h

tempt us. @ote how the temptatio$ to throw 2imself off the top of the temple

was a temptatio$ to misuse 7$geli" "are. 2e a$swere# it by a 5uotatio$ whi"h

has a$ 7$geli" "o$te3t: PLou (Jesus shall $ot tempt the &or# your Go#, as ye

tempte# 2im i$ MassahP (Ct. :1. 7t Massah the !sraelites put the 7$gel to the

test by 5uestio$i$g whether 2e "oul# proi#e water (43. 1F:)-F.

:F +ritten again- %he Greek effe"tiely mea$s >$ the other ha$#, it is also

writte$.... %he &or# Jesus #i# $ot try to re"o$"ile the two erses, 2e a""epte#

them as part of a #iale"ti" whereby this erse says that but this erse says this-

whi"h is typi"al 2ebrew reaso$i$g. Geek reaso$i$g woul# seek to e3plai$ that

this erse says this, but that is 5ualifie# by this other erse, so the truth is a

mi3ture betwee$ the two erses. %he 2ebrew style of reaso$i$g leaes appare$t

"o$tra#i"tio$s to the ester$, Greek reaso$i$g mi$#. But they are $ot this at all,


45/532


46/532

therefore withi$ the group of those to whom the light of the Gospel has bee$

reeale#. &ikewise the risi$g of the su$ i$ the parable of the sower (Mt. 1*:

s.w. woul# refer to the begi$$i$g of ?hrist's publi" mi$istry+ the arious types of

grou$# i$itially respo$#e# to Joh$'s message, but whe$ ?hrist's mi$istry was

reeale# ope$ly, i.e. the su$ spru$g up, the$ perse"utio$ bega$, a$# they fell

away.

:1F Re(ent-%he &or#'s first publi" wor# was the "halle$ge to "ha$ge. 2is

ope$i$g wor#s were surely "arefully "hose$ to erbatim repeat those of Joh$ (Mt.

*:). 2e wa$te# to show the "o$ti$uity of the message from Joh$ to 2imself. 6or

2e was buil#i$g upo$ Joh$'s work, whi"h ha# bee$ i$te$#e# to prepare the way

for 2im to "ome triumpha$tly to io$ oer the way' whi"h ha# bee$ prepare# i$

the hearts of repe$ta$t people. %he e3a"t repetitio$ of Joh$'s message "oul#

suggest that the &or# saw Joh$'s mi$istry as $ot hai$g bee$ respo$#e# to- a$#

therefore his message a$# appeal $ee#e# repeati$g.

At hand- Gk. approa"hi$g. %he i#ea was that Joh$ the Baptist ha# attempte# to

prepare the way, the highway, oer whi"h Messiah woul# "ome. 8o $ow, Messiah

was approa"hi$g. P%he ki$g#om of Go#P was a title for Messiah, seei$g that 2e

was the Di$g of the Di$g#om+ a$# the term is use# like that i$ 8"ripture too, e.g.

&k. 1F:)1. %he Di$g#om "oul# hae bee$ the$ establishe#, the glory of Lahweh

"oul# hae "ome to io$ if Joh$s work of prepari$g the roa# for it ha# bee$

su""essful. But ultimately, !srael woul# $ot. But the Greek "a$ also mea$ that

the Di$g#om was bei$g ma#e $ear', it was bei$g #raw$ $ear by repe$ta$"e-

whi"h is why the &or# was appeali$g for repe$ta$"e. %his is a sig$ifi"a$t theme

i$ Bible tea"hi$g- that the e3a"t "ale$#ar #ate of the Di$g#om's establishme$t is

#epe$#e$t upo$ the repe$ta$"e of !srael. %his repe$ta$"e appears a prere5uisite

to the &or#'s "omi$g i$ glory a$# the establishme$t of the Di$g#om. >ur fo"us

shoul# therefore be upo$ appeali$g to !srael to repe$t.

:1 &k. =:= gies more #etail. Cespite hai$g toile# all $ight a$# "aught

$othi$g, 9eter was able to sub#ue his $atural wis#om, his se$se of futility, a$#

the se$se of irritatio$ a$# superiority whi"h e3ists i$ the e3perie$"e# worki$g

ma$: P@eertheless (how mu"h that hi#esQ at th' %ord ! will let #ow$ the $etP

(&k. =:=. !t woul# seem that the parallel re"or# of this is fou$# i$ Mt. :1, whi"h

#es"ribes the "all of the #is"iples soo$ after ?hrists triumpha$t emerge$"e from

the wil#er$ess temptatio$s. e lear$ from J$. 1:1,) that it was 9eters brother,7$#rew, who first tol# 9eter about Jesus, a$# who brought him to meet Jesus first

of all. %he poi$t is that at the time of 9eters "all as he was fishi$g, he ha#

probably hear# ery few of ?hrists wor#s perso$ally. 2e ha# hear# about 2im,

a$# liste$e# to 2is wor#s for perhaps a few hours at #iffere$t times i$ the past.

8o where #i# he get this treme$#ous respe"t for the wor# of ?hrist from, whi"h

he #emo$strate# whe$ ?hrist "alle# him; %he a$swer must be that he me#itate#

#eeply o$ those wor#s that he ha# hear# a$# u$#erstoo#, a$# "ame to

appre"iate that the ma$ sayi$g them was worth gii$g all for. >ur far easier

a""ess to Go#s wor# #oes $ot seem to make us more me#itatie as i$#ii#uals.

e hae a""ess to heari$g Go#s wor# whi"h preious ge$eratio$s $eer ha#.e "a$ liste$ to it o$ a alkma$, hae tapes of well rea# 8"ripture playi$g at


47/532

home, a$alyHe it by "omputer, hear it su$g to us a""or#i$g to our taste i$ musi",

rea# it from po"ket Bibles as we work a$# trael... we "an a$# "ould #o all

these thi$gs. My se$se is that we


48/532

go' by Go# a$# 2is 8o$, we are thereby motiate# to let go' $ot o$ly others' si$s

a$# #ebts to us, but all the ties that bi$# us to the thi$gs of this life.

:)1 #ending their nets- %hey were i$te$#i$g to "o$ti$ue fishi$g. %here was

therefore $o theatri"ism atta"he# to their #ramati" leai$g of all.

:)) $ollo%ed &im-%hey be"ame 2is #is"iples, that is the mea$i$g of the i#iom.

%he way the &or# "alle# people i$ the mi#st of their #aily lies, a$# they

imme#iately left all a$# followe# 2im is surely re"or#e# to set a patter$ for all

future respo$se to 2im (Mt. :))+ Mk. 1:1. %hose fisherme$ who left their $ets

ha# hear# the message some time earlier, but the re"or# is frame# so as to

stress the imme#ia"y a$# totality of respo$se to 2im, i$ the mi#st of #aily life. !$

a #ay whe$ the "omple3ity of mo#er$ lii$g "a$ be"ome a$ e3"use to reek sele9niazomai/ 'to be oon struck% deri$ed fro the noun sele9ne9% the oon" 9t8s not true thatsoe ental illnesses coe fro being oon/struck"


49/532

u$usual i$ 2is ma$$er of speaki$g. Be"ause of the gra"ious wor#s a$# ma$$er

of speaki$g of Jesus, therefore Go# so highly e3alte# 2im (9s. =:). %he 6ather

was so impresse# with the wor#s of 2is 8o$. 4i#e$tly there must hae bee$

somethi$g totally outsta$#i$g about 2is use of la$guage. Go# highly e3alte# 2im

be"ause 2e so loe# righteous$ess a$# hate# wi"ke#$ess (9s. =:F, a$# yet

also be"ause of 2is ma$$er of speaki$g (9s. =:)+ so this love of righteous$essa$# hatre# of eil was what ma#e 2is wor#s so spe"ial.

=:1 The mountain- %he arti"le suggests a spe"ifi" o$e i$ mi$#- perhaps the great

mou$tai$ Jesus ha# i$ mi$# i$ :; Jesus taught up a mou$tai$, suggesti$g that

2is tea"hi$g is a""essible to those who make some effort to re"eie it. %he

8ermo$ o$ the Mou$t is the e5uiale$t of the gii$g of the &aw, also o$ a

mou$tai$. 7s Go# K the 7$gel gae the law to Moses, so Jesus #i# to the

#is"iples. %he #is"iples as"e$#i$g the mou$t to re"eie the tea"hi$g parallels

them with Moses, with the impli"atio$ they too were to relay it to !srael. !$stea#

of the people bei$g forbi##e$ to "ome up the mou$tai$, they were allowe# to-for by the e$# of the 8ermo$ we lear$ that the multitu#es were also there

(F:),)A a$# #es"e$#e# from the mou$tai$ (:1. %he abbis also satto tea"h-

but they taught always i$#oors. %he similarities a$# #iffere$"es are bei$g

emphasiHe# to #emo$strate how Jesus was i$ "o$ti$uity with Jewish "ulture a$#

yet also ra#i"ally #iffere$t. %he s"e$e of 43. )I is of Moses as"e$#i$g the mou$t

to re"eie the &aw, the first part of whi"h was the te$ "omma$#me$ts. %he

beatitu#es seem to be the @ew ?oe$a$ts e5uiale$t of the te$

"omma$#me$ts- see o$ =:)). %he &or#s sermo$ 5uotes or allu#es to all of the

te$ "omma$#me$ts (e3"lu#i$g the 8abbath a$# re#efi$es them (=:)1,)F. %he

way the &or# makes $o "omme$t upo$ the "omma$# to keep the 8abbath issurely sig$ifi"a$t. 8implisti"ally, o$e "oul# argue that 2e was suggesti$g that 2is

followers woul# $ot be bou$# by the 8abbath "omma$#me$t. But it was well

u$#erstoo# i$ the first "e$tury that priests o$ #uty were free from the 8abbath

legislatio$. %he hi$t "oul# therefore be that the &or# beliee# that be"ause 2is

obe#ie$t liste$ers were to lie their lies as the $ew priesthoo#, they were

therefore free from 8abbath legislatio$. %he &or# was surely ery "o$s"ious that

Joh$ ha# "ome to prepare the way for 2im, i$ terms of !saiah I. 7$# yet that

same prophe"y saw the goo# $ews bei$g #e"lare# to Jerusalem from a mou$tai$

(!s. I:A. 9erhaps the &or# was seeki$g to "o$s"iously fulfil this by goi$g up a

mou$tai$ a$# pro"laimi$g blesse#$ess a$# goo# $ews to spiritual Jerusalem. !t"oul# be further $ote# that the Gospel of Matthew features fie se"tio$s of

re"or#e# spee"hes of Jesus, ea"h "o$"lu#e# by the phrase he$ Jesus ha#

fi$ishe# these sayi$gs (Mt. F:)+ 11:1+ 1*:=*+ 1A:1+ ):1. !t may be that

Matthew is seeki$g to prese$t the Gospel as a $ew %orah, with fie books' to it


50/532


51/532

i$ faith, hol#i$g o$ to it i$ her heart (&k. :1=,)1. 8he was a mo#el for all who

hear the Gospel. !t "oul# ee$ be that the la$guage of &k. 1:*),**,*= is frame#

i$ su"h a way as to make Mary appear to be the first perso$ who hear# the

gospel about Jesus.

Thirst after righteousness- %he "hara"teristi"s of the blesse# i$ the first fourbeatitu#es are that they will be spiritually poor (:*, mour$i$g (ofte$ use# i$

"o$$e"tio$ with "o$tritio$ for si$, humble#, a$# thirsti$g to be more righteous

tha$ they are. Pighteous$essP "oul# mea$


52/532

could and would take over the work of the priesthood. abbi (illel @ehorted his students to

become disciples of 5aron, 9peacelovers and peacemakers6 !m5b0$0%&> !5s )uoted in 4e/a

Mermes, The Authentic Gospel of Jesus!ondon$ 8enguin, %FF1& p. #01&.

,:1= PersecuteO Rto dri$e awayR (s"w" Mt" 1:!3; !3:3+)% aybe carrying the idea of e&counication"


53/532

works so that me$ may see the light. 2e sai# Plet 'our light shineP - a$# then

me$ will see your goo# works a$# glorify the 6ather.

>$e "hara"teristi" of salt is that it "reates thirst. e are mistake$ if we assume

that all those people out there are


54/532

from the $omi$al "hur"h, a$# the se"ular worl# i$ ge$eral. epeate#ly Jesus

speaks of PtheyP a$# PyouP+ a$# yet 2e also spoke of the ha$#ful of 9alesti$ia$

peasa$ts who really graspe# 2is tea"hi$g as bei$g the salt of the earth /!srael;0

a$# the light of the /whole Ge$tile0 worl#. !t was their separate$ess from the

worl# that was to be a part of the worl#s salatio$. 8o Jesus was "ertai$ly $ot

tea"hi$g a bu$ker me$tality, a$ isla$# e3iste$"e, but rather a rea"hi$g out i$tothe worl# of others for their salatio$. %he true ra#i"alism is the ra#i"alism of

loe- loe lie# out i$ or#i$ary life. hether we strie for absolute truthful$ess,

what pla"e we seek at a feast, the struggle to gra$t real a$# total forgie$ess-

this is the ra#i"alism of loe.

%he beatitu#es were spoke$ ge$erally of all belieers, but PLou are the salt of

the earthP was spoke$ spe"ifi"ally to the #is"iples. e "a$ u$#ersta$# the earth

as the la$#- of !srael. %he &or# pi$$e# 2is hopes for the whole la$# of !srael o$

that ba$# of rather u$likely me$, most of them se"ular, $o$-religious Jews. !t was

i$ their power to "ha$ge a$# prepare the whole la$# for 2im. %he ery metaphorof salt was well "hose$- for salt was "heap a$# "ommo$. !t was by their ery

earthli$ess a$# huma$ity that their missio$ was to su""ee#,


55/532

the true io$ for the e$lighte$me$t of both !srael a$# the worl#. %his is similar to

2is i$itatio$ for them to see themseles as Moses, who alo$e Psaw Go#P, a$#

shari$g i$ the perse"utio$s of the prophets. %his high "alli$g e"hoes #ow$ to us-

we who like to thi$k that we are $ot amo$gst Go#s great heroes, a$# who prefer

to leae the #ramati" a"ts of faith to our lea#ers a$# high profile members. But

the "alli$g is to ea"h of us, to be of $o less sig$ifi"a$"e tha$ them, $ot to hi#ebehi$# the gra$# religious symbols of faith su"h as the temple a$# the "ity of

Jerusalem- but to be those thi$gs i$ #aily life. Ju#aism u$#erstoo# the &eiti"al

priesthoo# as the light of the Jewish a$# Ge$tile worl#s. %he %estame$t of &ei

1:* "laime# of the priesthoo#: P6or as the heae$ is purer i$ the &or#'s sight

tha$ the earth, so also be ye, the lights of !srael, (purer tha$ all the Ge$tiles /or

i$ a$other ma$us"ript Pye who are the lights of !srael, shall be as the su$ a$#

moo$P0P. 7$# yet as so ofte$ i$ the 8ermo$, the &or# applies the la$guage of

priesthoo# to his se"ular, spiritually poor liste$ers.

Be hid- 7gai$ there appears the i#ea that if we hi#e who we are from others,the$ we are $ot really ?hristia$. 7 "ity o$ a hill "a$$ot possibly be "oere#. !t is

totally publi". %here must be a$ eleme$t about our #is"ipleship whi"h is likewise

absolutely ope$ a$# obious to the worl#. he$ the &or# retur$s, it woul# be

stra$ge i$#ee# if our $eighbours were sho"ke# to k$ow that we were a"tually

o$e of 2is people. %he same wor# is use# about the ma$ who hi# the tale$t of

the Gospel (Mt. )=:)=. %he relea$"e of this emphasis i$ the first "e$tury worl#

was that it was appare$tly easier to merely 5uietly asse$t to ?hristia$ tea"hi$g,

rather tha$ "ome out i$ the ope$ about it. %he same wor# is use# of how Joseph

of 7rimathea se"retly, hi##e$ly, beliee#, for fear of the Jews (J$. 1A:*. But i$

the e$#, he "ame out, as we all are lea# to #o by proi#e$tial "ir"umsta$"e a$#our ow$ growi$g "o$i"tio$ of ?hrist.

All those who prea"h 2im are like a "ity that "a$$ot be hi##e$ (Mt. =:1+


56/532


57/532


58/532

2ebrew letters of similar appeara$"e. Jewish tra#itio$ me$tio$s the letter


59/532

that there will be some i$ the Di$g#om who simply were$t ery obe#ie$t i$ this

their #ay of probatio$. 7#mitte#ly, these #etails are "apable of other

i$terpretatio$s. But bear these poi$ts i$ mi$#, espe"ially if you eer struggle

with the appare$t harsh$ess of some ?hristia$s you may meet.

.alled great- !t is Jesus 2imself who shall be "alle# great (the same two wor#suse# i$ &k. 1:*) P2e shall be greata$# shall be "alledthe 8o$ of the 2ighestP.

%he o$e who woul# #o a$# tea"h supremely woul# be Jesus. 2ere, as so ofte$,

the &or# makes a$ obli5ue refere$"e to 2imself (as i$ me$tio$i$g that some

see# woul# bri$g forth o$e hu$#re# fol#. %he fa"t we tea"h others to #o

righteous$ess will be a fa"tor i$ our a""epta$"e (Mt. =:1A+ although $ot the o$ly

o$e. 7gai$ we see the impli"atio$ that we are to somehow tea"h others, to

e$gage with others, i$ or#er to be a""eptable.

=:)I 56"eed-%he &or# asks us to e6"eedthe righteous$ess of the 9harisees

(Mt. =:)I. By righteous$ess he refers to their "harity, for whi"h they were well

k$ow$. !$ a##itio$ to tithi$g te$ per"e$t of absolutely eerythi$g, they gae a

fifth of their i$"ome to "harity su"h as wi#ows, orpha$s, $ewly-we##e# "ouples

et". !$ a##itio$ they ma#e a$o$ymous gifts i$ a 5uiet room of the %emple. 2ow

#oes our gii$g "ompare to that; 7$# the &or# "halle$ges us that u$less we

e6"eedthat, ye shall i$ $o "ase e$ter i$to the ki$g#om of heae$. a#i"al,

"halle$gi$g wor#s- that are har# to re-i$terpret or get arou$#. 7$# yet surely the

a$swer is that super-abou$#i$g (7V e3"ee#i$g righteous$ess is o$ly attai$able

by bei$g


60/532

letters woul# hae bee$ readto the brethre$ a$# sisters. 2e$"e the great

importa$"e of tea"hers' i$ the early "hur"hes, those who "oul# faithfully rea#

a$# tra$smit to others what ha# bee$ writte$.

=:)1-) e are all brothers a$# sisters, ea"h of us a#opte# i$to the Cii$e

family, ea"h of us free# slaes, re


61/532


62/532


63/532


64/532

like$e# to the parable of the irgi$s about the


65/532


66/532


67/532


68/532

2e k$ew a$# refle"te# upo$ those peoples moral $ee#, they were 5uestio$s to

2im that #ema$#e# a$swers, rather tha$ a tha$ki$g Go# that 2e was $ot like

other me$ were. efle"t o$ the "hara"ters of the &or#s parables. %hey "oer the

whole gamut of first "e$tury 9alesti$ia$ life- labourers a$# el#er so$s a$#

offi"ials a$# mums a$# #a#s. %hey were s$apshots of typi"al huma$ behaiour,

a$# as su"h they are essays i$ the way Jesus #iag$ose# the huma$ "o$#itio$+how mu"h 2e ha# refle"te# upo$ people a$# so"iety, a$# per"eie# our tragi"

$ee# as $obo#y else has. 2e i$ites the Healous sai$t to "ut off the arious limbs

of the bo#y (for they all"ause offe$"e at some timeQ, so that he might e$ter the

Di$g#om. %o the Jewish mi$#, imagi$i$g su"h a s"e$e woul# hae "reate# the

impressio$ of priestly a"tio$. %he se$sitie rea#er is i$ite# to see himself as

Pthe offeri$g a$# the priest .

=:*) +hosoever- %he &or# has i$ iew the guilty 9harisees of the 2illel s"hool

who were twisti$g Ct. ):1- to mea$ that o$e "oul# #ior"e for a$y reaso$ so

lo$g as a #ior"e paper was writte$. Jesus at this poi$t is $ot a##ressi$g the9harisees but 2is pote$tial followers. 2e is probably "iti$g this well k$ow$

"o$troersy i$ or#er to #emo$strate how moties behi$# a$ a"tio$ are what are

"ulpable. 2e is i$iti$g 2is hearers to "o$si#er the motie for #ior"e a$#

per"eie that as all importa$t, rather tha$ the fa"t of #ior"e. %his is why !

suggest the key wor# i$ this erse is logos, tra$slate# P"auseP. !t is the logosof

for$i"atio$ whi"h is the reaso$ for #ior"e (see o$ =:*F. %he thi$ki$g, reaso$i$g,

i#ea of for$i"atio$ is what lea#s to #ior"e. %his i$terpretatio$ makes the &or#s

reaso$i$g here flow seamlessly a$# #ire"tly o$ from 2is tea"hi$g i$ pre"e#i$g

erses about the root of se3ual si$ bei$g i$ the mi$#. 8o the &or# is i$#ee#

sayi$g that the 2illel s"hool of thought- that #ior"e was possible for a$y triialreaso$- was wro$g. But as always, 2e moes the fo"us to a higher a$# more

#ema$#i$g leel. 2e implies that Pfor$i"atio$P is the Bibli"al


69/532


70/532

o$e. e $ote how #eeply the &or#s tea"hi$g is "o$"er$e# with i$ter$al thought

pro"esses. hateer is more tha$ a simple yes-$o way of speaki$g i$oles

somethi$g from the eil o$e+ a$# we weasel our way with wor#s a$# mea$i$gs

o$ly whe$ we are u$#er temptatio$ to be si$ful. But that is a #eeply i$ter$al,

psy"hologi"al situatio$, #eep, #eep withi$ the huma$ heart.

=:* he$ the &or# Jesus gae 2is "omma$#me$ts as a$ elaboratio$ of Moses

&aw, that &aw was still i$ for"e. 2e #i#$t say he$ !m #ea#, this is how you

shoul# behae.... 2e was showi$g us a higher leel+ but i$ the i$terim perio#

u$til the &aw was take$ out of the way, 2e was ope$i$g up the "hoi"eof taki$g

that higher leel, ee$ though maki$g use of the "o$"essio$s whi"h Moses

offere# woul# $ot hae bee$ a si$ #uri$g that perio#. %hus 2e spoke of $ot

i$sisti$g o$ Pa$ eye for a$ eyeP+ ee$ though i$ "ertai$ rare "ases the &aw #i#

allow for this. 2e was sayi$g: Lou "a$ keep Moses &aw, a$# take a$ eye for a$

eye. But there is a higher leel: to simply forgie.

=:*A Resist not evil- %he Greek term for resisti$g eil o""urs o$ly i$ 4ph. :1*.

e are i$ this life to arm ourseles spiritually, so that we may be able to resist i$

the eil #ay. !f 9aul is allu#i$g to this part of the 8ermo$, the poi$t woul# be that

we are $ot to resist eil i$ this life, be"ause our time to ultimately resist it will be

i$ the last #ay. %he$, alo$g with the &or# 2imself, we will resist a$# oer"ome

eil through the establishme$t of the Di$g#om o$ earth. om. 1*:) is likely

a$other allusio$ to Presist $ot eilP- if we PresistP /s.w.0 Goer$me$ts whom Go#

has put i$ power, the$ we are resisti$g Go#. %his mea$s that 9aul fully

u$#erstoo# that the powers that be are i$#ee# PeilP, but they are $ot to be

proa"tiely resiste# by those i$ ?hrist. %he time for that will "ome, but is $ot

$ow. e are, howeer, to Presist the #eilP (James :F+ 1 9et. =:A. 8urely Presist

$ot eilP is i$ iew. e are to resist si$ withi$ us, but $ot eil i$ its politi"al form

arou$# us. 7gai$, as so ofte$ i$ the Bible, we see that the fo"us for our spiritual

struggle is withi$ rather tha$ without. 7s always i$ the 8ermo$, the e3ample of

Jesus was the maki$g of the wor# i$to flesh. James =: seems to make this poi$t,

by poi$ti$g out that Jesus #i# $ot a$# i$ a se$se #oes $ot resist eil #o$e agai$st

2im: Lou hae "o$#em$e#, you hae mur#ere# the righteous o$e. 2e #oes$'t

resist you. 7$# yet 2e will


71/532


72/532

=:) *ive- &uke says that the ord taught that we should @give, and it shall be given unto you;

good measure, pressed down, shaken together, running over, shall they give into your bosom. or

with what measure ye mete it shall be measured to you again> !k. C$#; and then we will be given to in a generous measure,

because with what measure we use in our giving, we will receive. Thinking it through, (e means

surely that @giving>, by (is definition, means a generous, well packed, abundant giving; for that is

2hristian giving. 5nd note that the contet of k. C$#< is the ord talking about not being critical and

?udgmental of others, but rather forgiving and accepting them. It is our giving in this sense which is

to be so full and generous. 3nly 4od6s grace giving can inspire this attitude within us, as we live

hemmed in by the people of a materialistic, mean world, where nobody takes up a cross for anyone

else. This is why 8aul makes a play on the word 9grace6 when writing to the 2orinthians about giving;

for charis, @grace>, means 9giving6. (e urges them to not receive 4od6s grace in vain, but rather,

motivated by it, to give grace to others !% 2or. C$0;


73/532

salatio$. %here woul# be $o poi$t i$ prayi$g for forgie$ess for the obiously

impe$ite$t u$less Go# might a"tually gra$t it. %his ope$s huge possibilities a$#

pote$tials to us. Go# is willi$g to forgie people for the sake of the prayers a$#

efforts of others (Mk. ):=. Jesus is$t simply telli$g us to aguely pray for our

e$emies be"ause it is psy"hologi"ally goo# for us a$# eases our pai$ a bit.

Ge$ui$e prayer for abusers really has the possibility of bei$g hear#- for Go# iswilli$g to sae people for the sake of our prayers. >therwise, this e3hortatio$ to

#o goo# to abusers through prayi$g for their blessi$g woul# be rather

mea$i$gless. ?ursi$g likewise te$#e# to "arry the se$se of May you be

"o$#em$e# at the #ay of


74/532


75/532

)I:+ 1 ?or. *:. %here is a re%ard(s.w. wages for those who rise to the leel of

loi$g the totally u$respo$sie (Mt. =:, or prea"hi$g i$ situatio$s 5uite agai$st

their $atural i$"li$atio$ (1 ?or. A:1. Salvationitself is$t gie$ o$ this basis of

works+ but the $ature of our eter$al e3iste$"e i$ the Di$g#om will be a refle"tio$

of our use of the gift of free#om i$ this life. !$ that se$se the


76/532


77/532

2imself a$# applies it to the wise ma$: P%he #is"retio$ of a ma$ maketh him

slow to a$ger+ a$# it is his glory to pass oer a tra$sgressio$P. 7$# thus 9hi$ehas

was "omme$#e# for bei$g P


78/532

the rewar# is gie$ i$ 2eae$ right $ow (Mt. =:1) Pgreat isyour rewar# i$

2eae$P, s.w. J$. :* Phe that reaps re"eies wages K rewar#, a$# gathers fruit

u$to life eter$alP+ Mt. =:+ :1,),=,1. Let the &or# "omes from 2eae$ to gie

us the rewar#s after we hae bee$ resurre"te# at the last #ay (Mt. )I:+ e.

11:1+ )):1). 8o if we will be gie$ a$ eter$al rewar# for our works, it follows

that there is a re"ompe$se for us $ote# i$ the books of 2eae$ at the ery poi$twe #o the goo# #ee#. But there will be $o su"h re"ompe$se for thi$gs whi"h are

ope$ly see$ of me$, or a$ythi$g whi"h is "o$s"iously #o$e so as to be see$ by

me$. !$ the reality of life, the har#est thi$g about goo# #ee#s is whe$ we se$se

$obo#y appre"iates us, that we are hol#i$g the fort alo$e, that we hae $o

re"og$itio$. >$ o$e ha$#, re"og$itio$ for labour is hugely importa$t to our basi"

psy"hologi"al makeup- a$# employers hae all "ome to realiHe that. !t is o$ly by

appre"iati$g the pri$"iple of eter$al blessi$g for bei$g unre"og$iHe# that we "a$

lie the way Jesus asks of us. !t is my obseratio$ i$ the life of belieers that

ofte$ the &or#s most Healous sera$ts are margi$aliHe#, falsely a""use#,

re


79/532


80/532


81/532


82/532


83/532


84/532


85/532

:11 *ive us this da' our dail' bread-%hishas lo$g bee$ re"og$iHe# as a$

i$a#e5uate tra$slatio$ of a ery stra$ge Greek phrase. %he a#r will we rise up to

the "halle$ge to trust i$ Go#s #ay by #ay proisio$, a$# share whats left oer;

PGie us this #ay our brea#-for-to#ayP really $ee#s to be praye# by us #aily. &ets

gie full weight to the &or#s "omma$# to pray for o$ly Pour #aily brea#P, the

#aily ratio$s gra$te# to a sol#ier o$ a"tie #uty. !ts almost impossible to

tra$slate this term a#e5uately i$ 4$glish. !$ the former E88 a$# ?ommu$ist4ast Germa$y (CC, there was the i#ea that $obo#y i$ a 8o"ialist state shoul#

go hu$gry. 7$# so if you were hu$gry i$ a restaura$t after eati$g, you ha# the

right to ask for some foo#, beyo$# what you pai# for. !$ the former 4ast

Germa$y, the term Sttigungsbeilage was use# for this i$ restaura$ts- the

portio$ of $e"essity. !ts this foo# we shoul# ask Go# for- the foo# to keep us

alie, the foo# whi"h a 8o"ialist restaura$t woul# gie you for free. e shoul#$t

be thi$ki$g i$ terms of a$ythi$g more tha$ this. !ts a$ elo5ue$t essay i$ what

our attitu#e to wealth, materialism a$# lo$g term self-proisio$ ought to be.

%o steal is to take the @ame of Lahweh "alle# upo$ us i$ ai$ (9ro. *I:A, a$#

therefore we ask to be gie$ onl'our #aily brea# a$# $o more (@!V+ $ot somu"h that if we are fou$# out, the @ame will be brought i$to #isrepute, but


86/532


87/532


88/532

"ome upo$ the sai$ts. %he &or# Jesus "a$ keep us from Pthe hour of trial

/(eirasmos0 whi"h is "omi$g o$ the whole worl#P (e. *:1I. he$ the #is"iples

were bi##e$ pray that they e$ter $ot i$to temptatio$ (Mk. 1:*-(eirasmos

agai$, they were bei$g aske# to pray the mo#el prayer with passio$ate

"o$"e$tratio$ a$# mea$i$g. Let those me$ i$ Gethsema$e were a$# are

represe$tatie of the latter #ay sai$ts who are bi##e$ pray that they may es"apePall those thi$gsP , the hour of trial K(eirasmos whi"h is "omi$g, a$# to sta$#

a""eptably before the 8o$ of ma$ at 2is "omi$g. e ought to be prayi$g

fere$tly for this #eliera$"e+ but ! wo$#er how ma$y of us are; 6or the #ays of

the fi$al tribulatio$ will be shorte$e# for the sake of the ele"t- i.e., for the sake of

their prayers (Mk. 1*:1A,)I. %he fi$al tribulatio$ of the last #ays will be the

supreme struggle betwee$ the flesh a$# spirit, betwee$ the belieer a$# the

worl#, betwee$ ?hrist a$# the Bibli"al #eil+ a$# we are to pray that we will be

#eliere# i"torious from that struggle. %hus P&ea# us $ot i$to the testP (Mt.

:1* "oul# i$ this "o$te3t be u$#erstoo# as a plea to sae us from e$teri$g i$to

the time of fi$al tribulatio$- l# %estame$t or i$ the Jewish writi$gs.


89/532


90/532


91/532


92/532

Rust "orru(ts- James =:) allu#es here a$# states that wealth is alrea#y ruste#

a$# motheate$. 8o this perhaps was the &or#'s i#ea here, although the grammar

is u$"lear. %he i#ea of gol# is that it #oes$'t rust. hat appears to be perma$e$t

material wealth is $ot, a$# is alrea#y ruste# i$ Go#'s eyes.

Break through- &iterally, #ig through'. elea$t to the earth houses of the erypoorest people. %he &or#'s retur$ is goi$g to break up the house of those $ot

looki$g for 2is retur$ (Mt. ):* s.w.. !t may be that thiees' is a$ i$te$sie

plural referri$g to the great thief, whom Jesus like$s to 2imself i$ Mt. ):*. !$

this "ase 2e woul# be sayi$g that 2e will take huma$ wealth a$yway at the last

#ay- so we shoul# gie it to 2im $ow a$# $ot seek it.

Be"ause we k$ow people (a$# brethre$ who are ri"her a$# more wealth-seeki$g

tha$ we are, its fatally easy to "o$"lu#e that therefore we are$t ri"h, therefore

we are$t materialisti". %his is part of the subtle s$are of materialism+ that we all

thi$k that this is a$ area where were $ot #oi$g too ba#ly+ that really, we #o$t

"are thatmu"h where we lie, or what the fur$itures like, or whether we hae

mo$ey to take a holi#ay... But remember, our attitu#e to materialism is the

litmus test of all our spirituality. @o$e of us shoul# be so 5ui"k to say that were

>D i$ this area. P&ay $ot up for y

Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew

Documents

Transcript of Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew