Jericho to the Cross – Part 2 of 4
Matthew 22:1-46
by Paul George
We have here the parable of the guests invited to
a wedding-feast. The parable of the vineyard represents the sin of the rulers
that persecuted the prophets; it shows also the sin of the people, who generally
neglected the message, while their rulers persecuted the messengers. The
wedding-feast represents the rejection of the son. This is the last
confrontation between Jesus and the Jewish authorities until His arrest in
Gethsemane (Matthew 26:47-56). The recipients of the parable are "the
multitudes" of 21:46. The Jews generally associated the concept of the wedding
feast with the future reign of the Messiah; the messianic reign is compared to a
feast or banquet.
The time had come for the wedding celebration to begin. Therefore, it is also
time for the people who had been invited to come: "And he sent his servants to
call those who had been invited to the wedding celebration" (22:3a). In
accordance with Jewish marriage customs of the day, the king sends "his
servants" to contact those who had previously been invited and to advise them to
come to the wedding celebration. Typically, at some time prior to the banquet,
invitations were sent. Then, when the time for the celebration of the marriage
arrived, the servants were sent to advise that everything was ready and it was
time to come. The previous unrecorded invitation represents the general call by
God to the messianic banquet made through the Old Testament prophets. John the
Baptist, the 12 apostles, and other early pre-Pentecost witnesses, best
interprets the recorded call to the wedding-feast for Christ, in the coming
kingdom.
Those initially invited reject the offer: "they did not wish to come" (22:3b).
They were expected to attend the royal function but refused to do so. To decline
an invitation by a commoner without a legitimate excuse would be insulting.
However, to do this to a monarch would be even more so. This refusal to attend
the wedding-feast sets the stage for the second call to the wedding-feast.
"Again he sent other servants and “Say to those who have been invited, ‘Behold,
I have prepared my dinner my oxen and fattened livestock are all butchered and
everything is ready; come to the wedding-feast’” (v. 4). The message is more
specific than before, possibly to provide added incentive for them to come. The
first part of the message concerns the nature of the wedding banquet. This meal
is now ready and waiting. The king has already prepared everything in advance,
anticipating the acceptance of his invitation to the banquet. The invitation
ends with a final plea: "Come to the wedding-feast.” The king earnestly desires
the presence of the people he had invited to the wedding celebration. He has
expended much effort in preparing the feast and has overlooked their first
rejection. The second group of servants represents the post-Pentecost
missionaries for Christ. Through these, God continued to offer to Israel a place
at the wedding celebration for His Son. The parable now turns to the second
response of those invited to the wedding-feast.
Those invited a second time respond in two ways. Some are apathetic; some are
openly antagonistic. The rejection of the first group of people is found in v 5:
"But, paying no attention, they went away, the one to his own field, the other
to his business." The attitude of these people is one of indifference. They
leave the servants and return to their own affairs. The first rejection was very
insulting to the king since the invitation to a royal function is both an honor
and a command. To do this on the grounds of routine business commitments is even
more insulting.
A second group of invitees responds with open rebellion and violence: "But the
others, after seizing his servants, mistreated and killed them" (Matthew 22:6).
The word "mistreated" denotes mistreatment that is of a violent nature and may
involve both verbal and physical abuse. This abuse went one-step further,
because they also killed the servants. The violence of the people against the
servants is representative of the persecution and martyrdom of the
post-resurrection apostles and Christian witnesses by the Jews, most
particularly by the religious authorities who are here "the others."
The second refusal of the king’s graciousness now sets the stage for the second
response of the king.
The king, who had previously responded graciously, now responds in wrath: “But
the king was enraged and he sent his armies and destroyed those murderers and
set their city on fire” (v. 7). This verse seems to be a clear reference to the
destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in A.D. 70.
The king has now issued two invitations to those he had invited to the
wedding-feast for his son and has twice been refused. The second refusal brought
to some a harsh judgment by the king. The verses as a whole depict the sad
history of the nation of Israel. God, through His servants, repeatedly offered
the people an invitation to attend the wedding-feast for His Son, the Messiah.
Their persistent refusal culminated in the Romans destroying Jerusalem.
Now the king sends out his servants with new instructions. “Then he said to his
servants, ‘The wedding-feast is ready, but those who had been invited were not
worthy. Go, therefore, to the main highways, and as many as you find there,
invite to the wedding-feast’” (Matthew 22:8-9). The third invitation represents
the extension of the invitation to the wedding-feast to all people, including
the Gentiles.
The obedience and success of the servants is reflected in verse 10, “Those
servants went out into the streets and gathered all they found, both evil and
good; and the wedding hall was filled with dinner guests." The servants obeyed
their king and went out and amassed a new collection of people to attend the
banquet. Although the text does not explicitly state that an invitation was
issued, it must be inferred that one was given and that these people responded
affirmatively.
The people described as “evil and good” signifies the varying moral states of
those who accepted the invitation to the banquet. The servants did not
discriminate as to whom they invited. All who were willing to come were welcome.
The desire of the king to have many people in attendance at the wedding-feast
for his son is finally realized.
The scene now shifts to the banquet itself (v 11): “But when the king came in to
look over the dinner guests, he saw a man there who was not dressed in wedding
clothes” The wedding-fest is now in progress and the king enters the palace to
observe the guests. He immediately notices a man dressed unsuitably for a
wedding. It was customary for each person who would attend such an affair to
clothe himself appropriately before going. The man obviously did not prepare
himself in a fitting way for a royal banquet. This man was not naked, or in rags
but he did not put on the wedding garment. The king did not rebuke his servants
for letting this man into the wedding feast. The king rebukes the man for coming
into the wedding feast inappropriately dressed.
When the king questioned the man, he was speechless, being convicted and
condemned by his own conscience. They who live within the church, and die
without Christ, will not have one word to say for themselves in the judgment of
the great day, they will be without excuse. Those who never heard a word of this
wedding feast will have more to say for themselves; their sin will be more
excusable, and their condemnation more tolerable, than those who came to the
feast without the wedding garment.
The king orders his servants to bind the man hand and foot and cast him into
“that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth” (v. 13). When the
wickedness of hypocrites appears, they are to be taken away from the communion
of the faithful, to be cut of as withered branches, taken away from the king,
from the kingdom, from the wedding feast. Those that walk unworthy of their
calling, forfeit all the happiness they presumptuously laid claim to.
Jesus ends the parable with the statement, “For many are called, but few are
chosen” (v. 14). If you consider all those that make light of the invitation to
the wedding-feast, prefer other things before it. If you consider all that make
a profession of religion, but their lives are a constant contradiction to it. If
you consider all the profane, and hypocritical, you will find that there are
few, very few, that are chosen.
Prior to Matthew 22:15, those who opposed Jesus had been mostly the chief
priests and the elders. Jesus will now face opposition from another quarter the
Pharisees. They will try to trap Jesus using the interpretation of the law. This
has been an old practice of Satan and his agents; it began in the Garden of
Eden.
The Pharisees send their disciples and the Herodians to Jesus with a question
they believe the Romans will accept as a conspiracy against Rome. The Herodians
were the pacifist of the first century. They advocated a peace at any price and
the appeasement of Rome. Some historians believe the Herodians were the
collectors of the land tax, as the publicans were of the customs. In this plot
against Jesus, we have two opposing parities joining in a common cause, the
destruction of Jesus. The Herodians demanded the tax, and the Pharisees denied
it. Herod being obliged, by the charter of the sovereignty, to take care of the
tribute, these Herodians, by assisting him in that, helped to endear him to his
great friends at Rome. The Pharisees, on the other hand, were zealous for the
liberty of the Jews, and did what they could to resist the Roman yoke. Now, if
Jesus agrees with the Herodians the Pharisees cam use this to prove Jesus does
not have the interest of the people in what He does and teaches. If Jesus agrees
with the Pharisees, the Herodians can convince Jesus is an enemy of Rome.
Listen to how the enemy lays the groundwork in the plot to trap Jesus into
saying something to discredit Himself (Matthew 22:16). If they had come to Jesus
with a serious enquiry, and the most sincere intention, they could not have
expressed themselves better. What they said to Jesus was right, even if they did
not believe it. Jesus is a faithful Teacher, He the Truth itself. As for His
doctrine, the matter of his teaching was the way of God, the way that God
requires us to walk in, the way of duty that leads to happiness. The manner of
it was in truth; He showed people the right way, they way in which they should
go. He was a skilful Teacher, and knew the way of God. He is a faithful Teacher
that would be sure to let us know it what is the right way and the way we should
go.
This is the character of a good teacher, to preach the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth, and not to suppress, pervert, or stretch, any truth,
for favor or affection, hatred or good will, either out of a desire to please,
or a fear to offend, any man.
Jesus, in preaching, He did not seek the approval of man, He did not dread the
most powerful of His enemies. He did not turn from the truth to please man nor
from his work, for fear of the most formidable and He showed partiality.
Even though what the enemy’s agent said was true, yet there was nothing but
flattery and treachery in the intention of it. They called Jesus, Master, when
they were contriving to treat Him as the worst of criminals. They pretended
respect for Him, yet their hearts were filled with hatred. They showed their
hatred and disrespect when they questioned His wisdom, His omniscience as God,
of which he had so often given undeniable proofs, when they imagined that He
could not see through them and their pretense.
The question, “Tell us then what do you think?” (v. 17a). In other words, we
knew what our religious and political leaders and the common man has answered
the question, “Is it lawful to give a poll tax to Caesar, or not?” (v. 17b), but
you are a truthful Teacher and teach the way of God and fear no man, what do you
believe? This question implies two question they enemy’s agents did not ask,
“Does Caesar have the right to impose a tax upon the people, is it lawful to pay
the tax? However, by this question they hoped to entangle Jesus and expose Him
to the fury either of the jealous Jews, or of the jealous Romans.
Jesus’ question, “Why are you testing Me, you hypocrites” does not imply Jesus
did not know the purpose of the questions they enemy’s agents asked Him. Our
Lord Jesus knew why they asked Him the questions they asked. He saw all the
wickedness in the hearts of these pretenders. He was letting them know they
could not sway Him with their flatteries and pretences. He that searches the
heart can call hypocrites by their own name. Those that presume to tempt Jesus
will certainly find He knows what is hidden in the deepest recesses of the
heart. He sees the hate and wickedness of hypocrites that use flattery and
pretense to hide their true motives.
In verses 19 and 20 Jesus forced the pretenders to confess the authority of
Caesar over them. In dealing with those that look for and point out faults and
defects in others, it is good to give our reasons, and, if possible, our point
of view, we give our conclusions. This can catch those who are looking for and
pointing out faults and defects in others off guard because they were prepared
to oppose the truth and not against the reason of it. Jesus told those who were
testing Him, “Show Me the coin used for the poll tax (v. 19). They gave Jesus a
denarius and Jesus asked them, “Whose likeness and inscription is this?” (v.
20). They said “Caesar” v. 21). Jesus told them to “render to Caesar the things
that are Caesar’s; and to God the things that are God’s” (v. 21).
Christianity is no enemy to civil government, but a friend to it. However, the
same cannot be said of civil government. Christ's kingdom does not clash or
interfere with the kingdoms of the earth. The kingdoms of the earth clash with
Christ’s kingdom. It is the duty of subjects to render to the civil government
that which, according to the laws of their country, is their due. The civil
government being entrusted with the public welfare, the protection of the
subject, and the conservation of the peace, are entitled to a just proportion of
the public wealth (Romans 13:6).When we render to Caesar the things that are
Caesar’s we must remember to render to God the things that are God's, out of our
time and resources. However, if Caesar’s commands interfere with God's we must
obey God rather than man.
In Matthew 22:23-33, we have the question concerning the resurrection.
The Sadducees were the fewest in number of all the sects among the Jews, but
generally persons of some rank. They maintained, that, except God, there is not
spirit (Acts 23:8), nothing but matter and motion. They would not own the divine
inspiration of the prophets, nor any revelation from heaven, but what God
himself spoke upon Mount Sinai. Now the doctrine of Christ carried that great
truth of the resurrection and a future state much further than it had yet been
revealed, and therefore the Sadducees in a particular manner set themselves
against it. The Pharisees and Sadducees were contrary to each other, and yet
joined in the plot to destroy Jesus.
The Sadducees open the question concerning the resurrection quoting Deuteronomy
25:5 (v. 24). The purpose of the law was to preserve the distinction of families
and inheritances. The question involves seven brothers and their obedience of
the law. The woman also dies. The question, if there is a resurrection, which of
the seven would be her husband, the first or the last brother.
Jesus told the Sadducees their problem was they did not understand the
Scriptures that affirm that there shall be a resurrection and a future state.
The scriptures speak plainly, that the soul is immortal, and that there shall be
a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust. Job knew there would be
a resurrection (Job 19:26). Those who deny the resurrection of the just and
unjust do not understand what is written in the Scriptures or do not believe
them, or do not take the true sense and meaning of them.
Jesus corrects the Sadducees error in verso 30. When the resurrection occurs, we
will not live in the state we are now in upon earth. In our present state
marriage is necessary; it was instituted in innocency; whatever intermission or
neglect there has been of other institutions, this was never laid aside, nor
will be until the end of time. All civilized nations understand the marriage
covenant; and it is requisite for the gratifying of the desires, and recruiting
the deficiencies, of the human nature. However, the resurrection, there is no
occasion for marriage. In the glorified bodies, there will not be any
distinction of sexes and there will be in it no carnal desires to be gratified.
When the mystical body is completed, there will be no further occasion to seek a
godly seed, which was one purpose of the institution of marriage Malachi (2:15).
In heaven, we will live in the same state the angels live in. Man in his
creation was made a little lower than angels (Psalm 8:5) but in his complete
redemption he will be as the angels; pure and spiritual, knowing and loving as
the angels, ever praising God like them and with them. Our bodies will be
incorruptible and glorious. We should therefore desire and endeavor to do the
will of God now as the angels do it in heaven, because we hope we will soon be
like the angels who always behold our Father's face. Jesus said nothing of the
state of the wicked in the resurrection; but, by consequence, they shall be like
the demons, whose will they have done.
Jesus’ argument to confirm this great truth of the resurrection and a future
state backed the truth with a solid argument. In verse 31 Jesus asked the
Sadducees, “have you not read what was spoken to you by God?” What the scripture
speaks God speaks. What God spoke to Moses was spoken to us; it was spoken and
written for our benefit. This is why we should read and hear what God hath
spoken, because it is spoken to us. It was spoken to the Jews in the first
place, because to them were committed the oracles of God.
The question answered, the Sadducees silenced (v. 34), the people amazed and
astonished by the teachings of Jesus (v. 33) one of the Pharisee, a lawyer asked
Jesus, “which is the great commandment in the Law?” (v. 36). The testing of
Jesus has not been laid to rest. The lawyers were students in, and teachers of,
the Law of Moses, as the scribes were; but some think that they differed,
because they dealt more in practical questions than the scribes did. The purpose
of the question was to test Jesus’ knowledge of the law.
The question “What is great commandment of the law” (v. 36) was one greatly
debated by the scribes and lawyers. Some claimed the law of circumcision was the
great commandment. Others said, the law of the Sabbath was the great
commandment, others the law of sacrifices. Which these commandment (vv. 37-39),
could be consider the greatest?
All the law is fulfilled in one word, and that is “love” (Romans 13:10).All
obedience begins in the affections, and nothing in religion is done right, that
is not done there first. Love is the leading affection, which gives law, and
gives ground, to the rest; and therefore love is the foundation of the law. Man
is a creature created for love; therefore, the law written in the heart is the
law of love.
The love of God is the first and great commandment of all, and the summary of
all the commands of the first table God wrote the Ten Commandments on. God,
being infinitely good and eternally, is to be loved in the first place, and
nothing loved beside Him. We are to love Him with all our heart, soul, and
mind. Our love of God must be a sincere love, and not in word only, it must be
a strong love. We must love Him more than any thing else. All our love is too
little to bestow upon Him, therefore all the powers of the soul must be
involved.
The second great command, love our neighbor as we love ourselves (v. 39), this
implies we should do nothing to our neighbor we do not want our neighbor to do
to us. When Jesus said we are to love our neighbor as we love our self He was
not referring to a self-love which is corrupt, and the root of the greatest
sins. A love we must mortify. We must love ourselves, that is, we must have a
due regard to the dignity of our own natures, and a due concern for the welfare
of our own souls and bodies.
The love of love is the sum and substance of all those precepts written in men's
hearts by nature, revived by Moses, and backed and enforced by the preaching and
writing of the prophets. All hang upon the law of love; take away this, and all
falls to the ground, and comes to nothing. Rituals and ceremonials must give way
to these, as must all spiritual gifts, for love is the excellent way.
The many questions the Pharisees asked Jesus were intended to discredit Him, but
now let him ask them a question; and he will do it when they are gathered
together (v. 41). He did not take some of them apart from the rest to shame
them. He questioned them when they were all together, when they were consulting
against Him. In verse 42, Jesus asked the Pharisees a question that they could
easily answer. They asked Jesus questions about the law, but He asks a question
about the promise. There are many who are so concerned about keeping the law
they forget Christ, as if their duties would save them without His merit and
grace. It concerns each of us seriously to ask ourselves, what think we of
Christ? Some seldom think about Him, He is not in all, not in any, of their
thoughts.
When the Pharisees answered Jesus’ question (v. 42) Jesus asked two questions in
response to the Pharisees answer (vv 43-45). The Pharisees were probably proud
of the knowledge they possessed that enabled them to answer Jesus’ question.
However, when they are called to confirm the truth, and to vindicate and defend
it, they reveal their lack of knowledge concerning what is written in the
Scriptures. Jesus’ purpose in asking the questions He asked the Pharisees was
not to entrap as they were trying to do to Jesus. Jesus’ purpose was to instruct
them in a truth they were rejecting the expected Messiah is God.
The question, if the Christ, the Messiah is the son of David, why does David
call Him Lord? The Holy Spirit inspired David to write verse 1 of Psalm 110,
which the scribes understood to be a reference to the Messiah. Psalm 110 verse 1
is a prophetical summary of the doctrine of Christ; it describes him executing
the offices of a Prophet, Priest, and King, both in his humiliation and in his
exaltation.
It is not easy for those who do not believe in the Godhead of the Messiah, to
see Psalm 110 verse 1 as a reference to the Messiah. It is difficult to explain
why the father, David the king, would call his Son Lord. There can be only one
reason why David would call his son Lord, he was not referring to the one who
would replace him on the throne after his death, he was referring to one who
come from the lineage of the house of David and one day take His place on
David’s throne.
No man was able to answer Jesus’ questions or from that day on ask Jesus another
question (v. 46).
In Matthew chapter 23, Jesus turns His attention toward the crowds and His
disciples.
Read Part
3
To top of
page |
