January 21, 2014: Matthew Chapter 23

The Gospel According to Matthew Chapter 23

Originally posted January 30, 2008

(Please note, when Charles Stopford e-mailed these studies out to the First United Methodist congregation in 2008, I did not receive Chapters 21 and 22.)

Matthew Chapter 23:1-36 Denunciation of the Scribes and Pharisees

This extended section consists of a series of severe criticisms of the Scribes and Pharisees preceded by warnings concerning them to the crowds (still in the Temple) and Jesus' disciples. We may find the language rather strong but it is not unlike what we read in the Dead Sea Scrolls, written by the Essenes against the Temple Priests, and in other early Jewish literature, including the Prophets. The language in our text is considered rather mild by comparison. We should also remember that whatever Jesus said has been filtered through Matthew's own community's experience with a hostile Synagogue leadership of the late 1st Century and addresses the reluctance of some community members to abandon customs and practices of the Synagogue.

vss. 1-12 Addressed to the crowds and the disciples

1. Moses' Seat is both figurative and actual. It refers to the authority of the one who teaches in the Synagogue. Sitting was the usual position of the teacher, as we saw in the Sermon on the Mount where Jesus sits down and teaches (5:1). In excavations of ancient Synagogues, such as the one on the Island of Delos, Moses' Seat was in the front, facing the congregation.

2. Jesus says to follow whatever the Scribes and Pharisees teach (from Moses' Seat), but not what they do. We read in Chapter 22 of three  instances of Jesus confirming the rightness of their teaching. The problem was not their teaching of Torah; it is how they interpreted the text. Rather than holding to the Law with regard to holiness (ritual cleanliness), they placed upon themselves and others the heavy burdens of their oral tradition without variation. In Matthew's time they apparently criticized church members who did "do as they did." We should remember that the aim of the Pharisees, with no order of the Priesthood in existence, was to establish a "Priesthood of Believers" whereby all Synagogue Jews would practice the Priestly code of holiness. It was a noble enterprise but rejected by the church as superfluous to being faithful to God.

3. After the destruction of the Temple and the dispersal of the Pharisees into Gentile territory, there was a need for Jews to distinguish themselves from the Gentiles. Part of this was the way they dressed. Phylacteries are the small leather boxes containing parts of Torah which we see today's Orthodox or Hassidic Jews wearing on their arms and foreheads during prayer (Deut. 6:8). Fringes were tassels attached to robes and prayer shawls (Num. 15:38-39; Deut. 22:12).

4. The place of honor at a banquet would be a natural location for a community leader such as a Pharisee. It is a custom the church and most organizations follow in our own day. The best seats on the Sabbath would be in front of the Synagogue facing the congregation, where teachers and leaders sat.

5. Being addressed by one's title was an expression of respect. As Jews were finding their place in larger cities, towns and villages, those with authority, such as the Pharisees, would always be addressed by their title, in this case "Rabbi" which literally means "My Great One," came to mean teacher. This custom further distinguishes the Jews from the surrounding culture, pointing out Jewish community leaders. We do the same thing in greeting or addressing dignitaries. I doubt we would walk up to the President and say, "Hi George," and we probably don't call our Doctor by his or her first name.

6. The title "Father" is used for Elijah and Elisha (2 Kings 2:12;13:14) and in Jesus' time for certain highly revered teachers and Holy Men. The custom was adopted by the Rabbis of Matthew's time. Such a restriction is not a prohibition against addressing one's biological father as father.

7. In the Synagogue an "Instructor" would be a "Teacher of Righteousness," another title along with Rabbi and Father. All of these references revolve around a system of separation by title and clothing to distinguish rank among members of the Jewish community. Apparently some of these customary Jewish manners of address and distinguishing dress were being adopted by leaders in the Church. Matthew confronts this issue  by reminding the members and leaders that theirs is to be a community of servants, that before God there are to be no distinctions of importance or rank, no requirement of special place or honors paid, no deference at all. All are equal in God's eyes and, as the early term for Christians, "little children," implies, the virtue of humility should prevail among them. For Matthew only God is called Father, as Jesus did. Only Jesus is the Rabbi, Teacher, and Instructor.

vss. 13-36 Woes Times Seven

Again, we need to approach these texts with caution, remembering that Matthew is using them as "polemic," an argument refuting or attacking the practice or doctrine of another. Polemic is found throughout the New Testament and in the writings of early church leaders. Here the Woes represent debate concerning practices in Jesus' time which have become troublesome in Matthew's community as the church distances itself from the Synagogue and its influences. Also present in these Woes is the factor of Judgment.  The Church represents God's Kingdom while the Synagogue (particularly in its leadership) represents the Kingdom of Satan. We will see this understanding expressed more fully in John's Gospel. All of these Woes represent a clash between the two kingdoms.

vss.13-14: The religious practices of ritual cleanliness required to maintain one's status of holiness before God were impossible to keep in the normal course of one's daily life. Therefore, from the Pharisaic point of view, these practices barred entry into God's Kingdom for the ordinary person. Even  though the Scribes and Pharisees will not enter, they seek to bar others from entry.

vs.15: The Pharisees, even in Jesus time were involved in the evangelistic enterprise, sending their missionaries among the Gentiles. In Matthew's time (and place) there were parallel efforts to convert the Gentiles. The competition, as we will see in Paul's missionary journeys, was brisk and dangerous. Building on the first Woe, the Pharisees go to great lengths to make one such convert, but having succeeded they make that convert a "child of hell." This would be so because the Pharisees would require the Gentile convert to be obedient to the Mosaic Law and the oral tradition.  Many Gentiles were "attached" to Synagogues. Called "God Fearers" they we drawn by the ethical demands of Judaism as well as the novel idea of monotheism in a polytheistic culture.

vss.16-22: These verses have to do with the practice of taking oaths. In MT 5:33-37 Jesus has already rejected the taking of oaths. When an oath was taken it would be taken on the value of something that guaranteed the oath's truth, in much the same way as a Bible may be used in taking the oath of office. The Bible supposedly guarantees the truth of the words of the oath. The same is true of the use of rings in a wedding. We swear an oath to one another with the rings as the guarantee of the truth of our promises to one another. Technically, if one person broke the wedding oath (vows) the other could take back the ring. The text appears to be speaking to the issue of fraudulent oaths. In the case of the Altar and the gift upon it, one could swear an oath (make a promise) on the Altar upon which a gift has been placed; but the oath would not be binding (guaranteed) because in the case of a default the Altar can't be taken and the gift could not be taken in payment because it is not the guarantor of the oath. What the text says is that the gift is also liable to be taken in payment because the sacred Altar makes everything on it sacred. After you read this you will understand why we have Lawyers!

vss. 24-25: Marty Murray addressed this text in her online devotional this week. In a supposed keeping of the Law of Lev. 27:30; Deut. 14:22,  the Pharisees were meticulous in their tithing of the increase of all crops for the support of the Priests and Levites, for which they receive at least faint praise, even though such garden herbs as mentioned were not covered in the Law. Their over-the-top tithes given to be sure they had  been fully obedient is not duplicated in the practice of the "weightier matters of the Law: justice and mercy and faithfulness," all of which have to do with relationships with others. Matthew puts that in a rather comical light; the Pharisees strain out the ritually unclean gnats (the little matters of the Law are faithfully taken care of) while swallowing the ritually unclean camel. They are obsessively concerned with the minor points of the Law but ignore the greater through their imposition of untenable demands of super-righteousness.

vss. 25-26; 27-28: The meaning of both of these woes is obvious when seen in light of MT 15:10-20. It is not the appearance or the cleanliness of the outside (whitewashed tombs. washed cups and plates look good but are full of corruption), it is what is within. As in the cited text, good works, righteousness, acts of piety (MT 5:1-8) come from the good heart; evil works arise from the evil heart. I remember as I am typing, the line inPsalm 51:10, "Create in me a clean heart, O God, and put a new and right spirit within me," and the Beatitude of MT 5:8,"Blessed are the pure of heart, for they will see God." In brief, the truly good arises from a good heart.

vss. 29-36: The Scribes and Pharisees consider themselves as repenting for the sins of their ancestors (Greek reads "fathers") in their building and decorating the tombs and graves of the Prophets of old and the righteous. They denounce the actions of their "fathers," asserting they would not have taken part in such violence had they been there. However, they are not innocent since claiming to be "sons" of those who did shed the blood of the Prophets, they are of the same kind as their fathers, killers of the Prophets and they are as guilty as their "fathers." More than that, they kill, crucify, flog and chase  those who are sent to them (Matthew's Christian missionaries). Their evil is so great that all the blood shed since Cain slew Abel until now will come upon them. Some of the reasoning may be convoluted, but we cannot doubt the intensity of how Matthew sees the division between Church and Synagogue. They represent two Kingdoms, that of God's (the Church) and that of Satan (the Synagogue).

Matthew Chapter 23:37-39 A Lament over Jerusalem

This last section serves as something of a sorrow-filled epitaph on a city already destroyed in the time of Matthew's writing, as verse 38 confirms. The words collect all the wrongs captured in the 7 woes pronounced against the Scribes and Pharisees, the very same leaders of the Synagogue who have persecuted the Church represented by Matthew's community, and all its ancestors to the time of Jesus and his first followers. Those who followed Jesus, who became the evangelists, prophets and missionaries sought out the "children" of the scattered Jerusalem, but the children were not willing. In the mind of the early church it was for that persecution and that unwillingness that Jerusalem is desolate.