Matthew 21
BolesMatthew 21:1-17
SECTION SIX
LAST DAYS OF JESUS’ PUBLIC
Matthew 21:1 to 26:46
- ENTRY INTO ;
SECOND OF THE TEMPLE
1-5 And when they drew nigh unto Jerusalem.—Parallel records of this incident are found in Mark 11:1-10; Luke 19:29-44; and John 12:12-19. Matthew gives little note to the time, other records give more to the time. We now come to the events of the last week of his earthly ministry and to his last visit to Jerusalem. The events of this last week are of such importance that they are carefully noted. They begin with the first day of the week (our Sunday). Jesus had spent the Sabbath (our Saturday) at Bethany, at the house of Lazarus (John 12:9), and now approaches Jerusalem; Matthew relates the events of this first day as far as verse seventeen of this chapter.
The events to verse twenty with the cursing of the fig tree occurred on the second day, or Monday; from thence to chapter twenty-six Matthew relates what occurred on the third day, or Tuesday. John 10 to 12:12 records some events which Matthew omits. It was now five days before the Passover, the tenth of the month (Exodus 12:3), the day on which the Passover lambs were driven into Jerusalem to be kept there until Thursday. The true Lamb of God chooses this day for his entrance.
And came unto Bethphage, unto the mount of Olives.—The location of Bethphage is difficult; some place it near Bethany. About one mile east from Jerusalem lay the ridge of the Mount of Olives so called from the great number of olive trees which grew upon it. (Acts 1:12.) In leaving Jerusalem one must first pass across the valley of Jehoshaphat, called at its lower end the valley of Hinnom or Gehenna. Through it ran the brook Cedron or Kidron. (John 18:1.) One then passes by the enclosure of Gethsemane (meaning the place of the oil press) which lay along the west side of the hill nearest Jerusalem;ascending the Mount of Olives one could see Jeru-salem, and trace the buildings, and especially the temple crowning Mount Moriah. Then passing over the hill or ridge, one first reached Bethphage on the eastern side, and farther still, or two miles from Jerusalem, the villge of Bethany, from which Jesus began this day’s walk. The Mount of Olives is about a mile in length from north to south and with three peaks. The road to Bethany wound around the middle peak.
Palm trees flourish on Mount Olivet, whence the name Bethany, the house of dates and figs, whence the name Bethphage, the house of figs. The oil of the olive was used in the tabernacle and temple worship. (Exodus 30:24-29.) The people were accustomed to gather the olive branches as also the palm branches in the Feast of Tabernacles. Nehemiah 8:15 and Zechariah 14:4 foretold this day’s entrance into Jerusalem.
Jesus sent two disciples . . . into the village.—He was now two miles from Jerusalem on the east side of Olivet; the village of Bethphage was between Bethany and Jerusalem; Bethany was behind him and Bethphage was before him; so he sent his two disciples into Bethphage. The roads were doubtless filled with people crowding to the city and driving thither the lambs for the approaching feast. Jesus told them that they would “find an ass tied, and a colt with her”; Mark and Luke mention only the colt, because on it this triumphal procession was made. This colt probably belonged to someone who knew Jesus and freely consented to the use of the animal.
The Jews were accustomed to riding mules, camels, and asses; the horse was forbidden. (Deuteronomy 17:16.) Kings and great men rode on the ass; it appears in the sublime vision of Jacob in connection with these very events. (Genesis 49:11; Isaiah 63:1-3.) Solomon is described as riding on a mule. (1 Kings 1:38.) Jesus, according to Jewish ideas, appeared in the proper state and dignity of the “Prince of Peace.” These two disciples were to tell the owner of the colt that “the Lord bath need of them” and that would be sufficient; he would send them. Jesus at this time assumes the name of “Lord Jehovah,” for that is the meaning of the term. (Matthew 22:44; Hebrews 1:10.) In doing this the prophecy of Isaiah (62:11) and Zechariah (9:9) were fulfilled. “The daughters of Zion” means the women of Jerusalem. (Luke 23:28.) Zion was the southern hill on which the city of Jerusalem was built, containing the royal palace and upper city. David took this city and dwelt in it and it was called “the city of David.” (2 Samuel 5:9.) Solomon caused the ark to be carried there. (1 Kings 8:1.) It was called Zion from the first. “Meek, and riding upon an ass.” Jesus came in peaceable state, not as a conquering monarch, with battle array, on a fiery charger and armed with sword and spear, but as a “prince of peace.”
6-11 And the disciples went.—The two disciples promptly obeyed Jesus and found “the ass, and the colt” and brought them to Jesus. They put their clothes upon the colt (Luke 19:35) as a mark of respect, “and he sat thereon.” The crowd understood this action to symbolize that he was their king, as their ancient kings had been so treated; Jehu for instance. (2 Kings 9:13.) The news spread rapidly and reached the city and by the time that Jesus, riding in this manner, in the midst of the passing travelers, had come to Olivet, the citizens crowded out to meet him. (John 12:12.) There was a large multitude accompanying him, and now the multitude came out of Jerusalem to meet him and the triumphal procession was thus augmented. It is plain that Jesus could have been made an earthly king at this time, for the vast multitudes were ready to make him their king. (John 12:19.) The disciples did not understand the spiritual meaning of these events until after Pentecost. (John 12:16.) “The multitudes that went before him, and that followed, cried, saying, Hosanna to the son of David.” They added, “Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord; Hosanna in the highest.” At the Feast of Tabernacles the people carried branches in their hands, chanting sentences from the Messianic Psalms. (Psalms 118:25-26.) This was their way of expressing their desire for the coming of the Messiah. (Leviticus 23:40.) The multitude now by this act expressed their belief that Jesus was the Messiah. John tells us that the branches of the trees were of the palm trees. (John 12:13.) The long branches of the palm tree were strictly used during the Feast of Tabernacles. (Leviticus 23:40.) The people dwelt during this feast under booths or tabernacles; there may be a reference to this when John says, “The Word became flesh, and dwelt” or tabernacled “among us.” (John 1:14.) “Hosanna to the son of David” resembles the exclamation raised in the coronation of Solomon, the son of David. (1 Kings 1:39.) “Hosanna” was a shout of prayerful joy; it is derived from two Hebrew words meaning “be now propitious” and “save us now.” (Psalms 118:25.) “Son of David” is an admission that he is the Messiah. “Blessed is he,” that is, the one who comes in the name of the Lord was to come as his ambassador. Mark adds that they cried, “Blessed is the kingdom that cometh, the kingdom of our father David.” (Mark 11:10.) This was praising the kingdom of the Messiah which was promised to the seed of David. Luke adds that they said, “Peace in heaven, and glory in the highest.” (Luke 19:38.) The procession moved slowly into Jerusalem with these acclamations increasing on the way, and “when he was come into Jerusalem, all the city was stirred, saying, Who is this?” The rulers were in great rage and fear; the crowd filled the city with their cries; even children took up the chorus and sang it in the temple; the Pharisees were perplexed and feared for themselves; and said, “Behold how ye prevail nothing; lo, the world is gone after him.” (John 12:19.) In contrast to the sentiment expressed by the Pharisees the multitude said, “This is the prophet, Jesus, from Nazareth of Galilee.” This was said in answer to the question, “Who is this?”
12-17 And Jesus entered into the temple of God.—Mark records this event as occurring on the next day, or Monday. (Mark 11:15-17.) Another parallel record is Luke 19:45-46. He may have entered the temple twice, first on the first day and then again the next day. Jesus had entered the temple as a King; he exercised therefore an act of royal power. He came to worship, and after the usual morning prayer, he came out into the part of the temple that is called court of the Gentiles. It was outside the actual temple, though upon Mount Moriah, and surrounded by the temple wall. The temple was the house of prayer for all nations, that is, for the Gentiles as well as the Jews, on condition that they would be circumcised.
Jesus was indignant at the unholy practices of the Jews. As he stood and declared his power as the Son of God, a voice, with the sound of thunder, was heard from heaven. (John 12:28-29.) Thereupon Jesus proceeded to purify the temple of God.
Jesus cast out those who “sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the money-changers, and the seats of them that sold the doves.” The only coin received in the sacred treasury was the Levitical shekel or half shekel; these money-changers were men who took pains to buy up all the legal coins and sold them again to the Jews, who had come to worship; they charged a high price for the exchange. “Them that sold the doves” were those who kept doves to sell to those who should make a sacrifice. They were used in sacrifice by the poor. (Leviticus 14:22; Luke 2:21.) All animals for the sacrifices were sought for in the city of Jerusalem by the Jews who came from a distance. Mark adds that Jesus “would not suffer that any man should carry a vessel through the temple.” (Mark 11:16.) These Jews took advantage of their foreign brethren and practiced extortion. Jesus showed his power by cleansing the temple and showed his relation to God when he said, “My house shall be called a house of prayer:but ye make it a den of robbers.” Isaiah 56:7 gives this prophecy; Isaiah had spoken thus of the times of the Messiah , the latter part of the quotation seems to refer to Jeremiah 6:11. “House of prayer” is a vivid description of the true design of the worship in the temple. God had recorded his name there; it was called holy, and only those who worshiped God according to his law should have entered the temple. It is not strange that Jesus, who had been hounded by his enemies, would now come and take possession of the temple in this fearless way; it is another token to them that he was what he claimed to be, the Son of God. “Den of robbers” is a strong accusation against these Jews for their evil practices. “Den of robbers” is a terrible antithesis to “the house of God,” or “house of prayer.” This was a serious charge against the Jewish religious leaders.
And the blind and the lame came to him in the temple.—He is still in the court of the temple and the unfortunate come to him, “and he healed them.” No one ever came to Jesus humbly seeking help that did not receive it. There was a wide contrast in what Jesus did in the temple and what the Jews were doing; they were practicing extortion on the people for their own selfish gains; he was healing the diseased and distressed among them;they were working for themselves, he for others. “But when the chief priests and the scribes saw the wonderful things that he did and the children that were crying in the temple and saying, Hosanna to the son of David; they were moved with indignation.” The rulers were angry and perplexed; they were angry with the innocent children, who had caught the echo of the praises of their parents. These chief priests and scribes said to Jesus, “Hearest thou what these are saying?” Evidently they wanted him to cause the children to cease; he had exercised his authority in cleansing the temple, now he should rebuke these children for their praises. Evidently they were jealous of Jesus and did not want to hear the children praise him, and they sought to arouse enmity against him from the parents by his rebuking these children. Again he had taken upon himself to cleanse the temple, and he ought not to permit this to continue. Jesus replied to them, “Yea,” that is, he heard the praise of the children and quoted the word of God as authority.
He said have you never read, “Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise?” This was taken from Psalms 8:2. These chief priests and scribes seem to be astonished that Jesus, a meek Galilean, should allow them to proclaim his praises as the Messiah. Jesus stood in their midst meek and lowly, only seeking to do good and to heal the diseases of body and soul , he received the praises of the multitude, hut showed no signs of any intention of seizing the supreme power and setting the Jews free from the Romans, but now of the perfect praise, praise which came from the purity and innocency of the hearts of the children. Jesus said, in reply to the Pharisees when they rebuked the multitude, “I tell you that, if these shall hold their peace, the stones will cry out.” (Luke 19:40.) Jesus left them to their own evil thoughts and intentions, “and went forth out of the city to Bethany, and lodged there.” Bethany was about two miles from Jerusalem. He “lodged there” each night during his last week on earth, except the night of his betrayal.
Matthew 21:18-32
- BARREN FIG TREE CURSED;
HIS ,
PARABLE OF THE TWO SONS
18-22 Now in the morning as he returned to the city.—This was Monday morning, or the second day of the week; he probably left Bethany before breakfast that he might attend the morning service at the temple; at any rate, “he hungered.” Our Lord was the bread of life, yet he hungered; he was the water of life, but thirsted. As they went along the way from Bethany to Jerusalem, they saw “a fig tree by the wayside,” and when they came to it they “found nothing thereon, but leaves only.” He saw this fig tree afar off; it probably stood alone by the roadside, and was in a sense public property. (Deuteronomy 23:24-25.) It was in full leaf, but when he came near to it no fruit was found on it. Jesus, of course, knew that there was no fruit there; he came to it to make it a parable of the great truth which was to be impressed on his disciples at that time. In Palestine the fig tree puts out its fruit first, afterward the leaves; by the time that the tree is in full foliage the fruit ought to be ripe. This tree was an exception; a perversion of the laws of its nature; it deceived the eye, was to all appearance fruitful, but only cumbered the ground. Jesus said, “Let there be no fruit from thee henceforward for ever.” This is the only miracle that apparently cursed anything.
The Jewish nation was like this fig tree; it had apparently luxurious foliage in all the outward forms of holiness, but there was no “fruit to the glory of God as was seen in their rejection of Jesus. The tree of the Jewish nation had been selected of God, pruned, and kept intact for the coming of the Messiah, the fruit of the nation; they were now rejecting him for whom the nation had existed from the days of Abraham.
Jesus pronounced a malediction on the tree, not from any ill will to it for not bearing fruit, since it had no choice in the case, but as a parable acted before the disciples, to impress on their memories, in the most striking manner, the destiny of the city of Jerusalem and the Jewish race. The tree withered, not immediately, but by the next day; it may have begun to wither at once. Some have criticized this act of Jesus in destroying this tree , those who do overlook entirely the lesson that he taught. He caused a tree to die to teach the lesson of the disastrous fall of a nation. It is a rule of human reason that examples may be made for instruction upon worthless objects.
And when the disciples saw it, they marvelled.—It seems that the disciples saw the tree the next morning as they spent the night at Bethany, and were again returning when they discovered that the tree had withered and remarked about its “immediately” withering away. Mark leaves the impression that it was the next day that they saw it, and that Peter called the attention of Jesus to it and expressed wonder. (Mark 11 19, 20.) This furnished Jesus the occasion to say, “If ye have faith, and doubt not, ye shall not only do what is done to the fig tree, but even if ye shall say unto this mountain, Be thou taken up and cast into the sea, it shall be done.” The disciples needed to be strengthened in their faith at this time because great events were to occur within that week. Jesus was preparing them for those momentous events. This verse has puzzled commentators as to whether to take it figuratively or literally. If a literal interpretation is given to it, it would still have its value in teaching them the importance of faith , if a spiritual interpretation is given to it, it would still have its value in impressing the importance of faith. Jesus did not explain the symbolical meaning of either the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, the cleansing of the temple, or the withering of the fig tree.
This lesson of faith is here impressed from the miracle because Jesus is soon to leave his apostles to their own moral strength, amid the state of surrounding ruin in the destruction of Jerusalem as prefigured by the withered tree. Probably Jesus had reference to the Mount of Olives when he said “this mountain” as they were passing over that mountain to Jerusalem that morning. Jesus then drew the lesson of faith when he said, “All things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive.” This promise belonged to his disciples in their ministry; they should have all things which they needed to confirm the Father’s will which he had taught them; it also means that God will furnish everything to his people today that they may need to live faithful Christian lives. It is not a promise that God will satisfy all of the wants of people, nor answer every prayer that is made to him. There are conditions of acceptable prayer and these conditions must be met before one has any right to expect an answer. Prayers are offered in the name of Jesus, in faith, and according to the will of God. (1 John 3:22; 1 John 5:14.) God will not grant blessings to those who are in persistent rebellion to his will, neither to those who do not believe in him, nor to those who will not honor his Son by praying in his name.
23-27 And when he was come into the temple.—On this day as he went into the temple his authority was challenged. “The chief priests and the elders” came to him “as he was teaching, and said, By what authority doest thou these things?” The “chief priests” were the heads of the twenty-four courses or classes of priests. David had divided the priests into twenty-four classes, and had selected one from each class as the head; this one was called a “chief priest.” “Elders” were the rulers of the cities. Mark and Luke add “the scribes,” who were the authorized teachers and helped to constitute the Sanhedrin. These chief priests, elders, and scribes may have represented the Sanhedrin; they asked for his authority for doing “these things.” They wanted to know his authority for entering Jerusalem as he did, his expulsion of the traders and brokers, and his teaching in the temple. They knew by what authority he did “these things,” but they were unwilling to acknowledge that authority. To acknowledge God as his authority would have been to acknowledge him as the Son of God and the Messiah; this they were determined not to do.
Jesus replied to them by asking them a question, with the proposition that if they would answer him he would answer their question. He then asked them concerning John’s baptism whether it was “from heaven or from men.” They withdrew aside and began to reason “with themselves” and said, “If we shall say, From heaven; he will say unto us, Why then did ye not believe him?
But if we shall say, From men; we fear the multitude.” They were in a dilemma; they saw that Jesus had put them in this plight, so they finally decided that they would say, “We know not.” This they thought was the easiest way out; they did not want the truth, and would not accept it if presented; so Jesus said, “Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things.” These teachers who were the professed guides of the people, and prepared to decide upon all questions, are now put in the ridiculous attitude of saying that they are unable to answer a simple question put to them by this despised man of Galilee. How humiliating it must have been to them! Yet they chose to suffer this humiliation rather than confess the truth which was clear to them. They attempted to evade the dilemma by falsehood. Jesus did not say that he could not answer their question, but that he would not.
28-32 But what think ye?—Jesus now exposes the hearts of his enemies by a series of parables; in them he lays bare the evil thoughts which they had against him at this time. They had fully determined to destroy him, and had set themselves in opposition to the common people. (John 7:49.) These common people, publicans and sinners as they were, would be saved before the scribes and Pharisees. He gives to them the parable of the two sons; these two sons represent two great classes of people today as well as then. The father commanded his first son to go and work in the vineyard and the son rebelled and flatly told his father that he would not go, “but afterward he repented himself, and went.” He regretted his lack of respect to his father and returned to his duty. “The second” son was instructed to go and work in the vineyard, and he very politely said that he would go, but “went not.” Jesus now put the question directly to them and asked, “Which of the two did the will of his father?” They could not profess inability to answer his question (verse 27); they were obliged to answer, though their answer condemned themselves. Hence they replied, “The first.” The first did the will of his father not in his first refusal, but in his subsequent repentance and obedience.
Jesus then replied to them, “Verily I say unto you, that the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of God before you.” These chief priests, elders, and scribes among the Jews looked upon “publicans and the harlots” as the vilest of earth and beneath their attention; they would not do anything to help them. What a stinging rebuke Jesus gave them when he said “the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of God before you.” It is often true that many notorious sinners repent and turn to Christ before a good moral man does. A course of sin in early life is to be regretted and the sinner must suffer the consequences, but when that one realizes his lost condition, he will come to Christ, while the moral character may rely upon early piety and remain away from Christ and be lost. Jesus makes application when he tells them that John came to them “in the way of righteousness, and ye believed him not.” Some of them may have accepted John’s teachings, but refused to accept the Christ when he came; they were apostate disciples of John. While they did not accept John, yet “the publicans and the harlots believed him.” These adversaries of Jesus saw what those who were vile in their own sight were doing, but “did not even repent yourselves afterward, that ye might believe him.” They had not only, some of them, rejected John but afterwards, when his preaching bore manifest proof, they would not repent or turn from their evil course, and believe in John nor the Christ whom John represented. John came as a Jew and a prophet of the strictest and purest type; he did the very righteousness which the law demanded, and that for which the Pharisees boasted in their own self-righteous claims; yet they had rejected him.
They could not detect in John the slightest departure from the law, still they rejected his message. They could not fail to see Jesus’ application.
[This principle is frequently manifested in Bible history. Those favorably situated for knowing and doing the will of God give but little attention to God and his will; those less favorably situated more readily seek for and practice the truth. There are many examples of this given in the scriptures and many illustrations of it in God’s dealings with the people in the patriarchal and Jewish dispensation. No clearer example of it is found in the New Testament than in the case of the publicans and sinners and the scribes and Pharisees. There is no sin of which man is more frequently guilty than that of self-righteousness; none is more clearly and frequently condemned of God. Self-righteousness, self-sufficiency, a satisfaction with oneself has never commended men to God. He has placed before us a divine model in Christ Jesus; with much help and many blessings to encourage us in the work, we can never feel we have come up to the model.]
Matthew 21:33-46
- PARABLE OF THE WICKED
33-41 Hear another parable.—A record of this will be found in Mark 12:1-12 and Luke 20:9-19. This parable has as its chief point the future act of God in taking from the Jews their privileges and giving them to the Gentiles; this act of God was made necessary by the sins and ingratitude of the Jews. “A householder” is one who had possession or owned a vineyard. (Matthew 21.) “A vineyard” was a plot of ground planted with grapevines which were common in Palestine. (Deuteronomy 32:32; Isaiah 5:1-7.) The grape was the most important fruit of Judea. A very minute description is given here of the preparation and protection of the vineyard. The householder had planted his vineyard “and set a hedge about it, and digged a winepress in it, and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen, and went into another country.” They built hedges of wild aloe and other thorny shrubs to keep out the foxes and wild hogs and human intruders. The wall which enclosed it guarded it from intruders. (Exodus 23:22; Numbers 23:9; Eph. 2 14.) “A winepress” was a vat which was prepared to hold the wine when pressed out; these vats were hollow places dug in the earth and lined with stone, or sometimes cut out of the solid rock. The grapes were placed on an open floor above and trodden by the feet of men, when the juice ran through and was collected in the vat. (Judges 9:27; Nehemiah 13:5.) “A tower” was usually built in the middle of the vineyard in which the keepers were to watch the vineyard in the season of vintage. “Husbandmen” were those who leased the vineyard and cultivated it for a certain per cent of its yield.
The owner of the vineyard went into a far country, presumably to live there, and “when the season of the fruits drew near, he sent his servants to the husbandmen, to receive his fruits”; that is, he sent to collect his part of the wine and other products of the vine. It was common to let vineyards out in this manner, and after the fruit was ripe or the wine made, the owner sent for his rent which was a part of the products. (Luke 16:6-7.) “The servants” here represent those special messengers and prophets who were sent to the Israelites from time to time to recall them to the service of God. (2 Kings 17:13.) The husbandmen killed the servants and cruelly treated them. The prophets were, many of them, martyrs , Jeremiah was stoned, Isaiah sawn asunder. (1 Kings 19:10 , 2 Chron. 24 20, 21; 36:16; Hebrews 11:36-37.) Stoning was the legal punishment for blasphemy and impiety. (Leviticus 20:2; Leviticus 24:16; Deuteronomy 13:10.) It was sometimes resorted to by a mob without any particular idea of its meaning; it was strange that the crime which the prophets came to prevent should have been falsely laid to their charge. (John 8:59;Acts 7:58.)
Finally, after the owner had repeatedly sent his servants to collect the rent from his vineyard, and they had been rejected and some of them killed, the owner sent his son, “a beloved son” and an only son (Mark 12:6) , he said that surely they will “reverence my son.” This was his last resource to collect his rent and to see if any gratitude was left. Some have said that no one would act as did these wicked husbandmen, but such evil deeds have been practiced all down through the ages. However when the husbandmen “saw the son,” they began to reason among themselves, and said, “This is the heir”; they decided if they should kill him that they would receive his inheritance. So they took him and cast him out of the vineyard and “killed him.” The chief point of the parable is here made; those wicked husbandmen, conspiring against the innocent heir, were a picture of the deep treachery which these, who were standing before Jesus, were at that very time plotting. (John 11:47-53.) They were at that time desiring his destruction, in order that they might not be disturbed in their own evil ways and doctrines. Mark and Luke are both particular to mention this incident. Jesus “suffered without the gate.” (John 19:17; Hebrews 13:12-13.) There is an illustration of this feature of the parable of one dying for his vineyard in the case of Naboth. (1 Kings 21:13.) After relating the parable Jesus then asked another direct question of them, “What will he do unto those husbandmen?” That is, what will the owner of the vineyard do to those wicked husbandmen who killed his servants, and had now reached the climax of wickedness by killing his only and beloved son?
Jesus asked this question to make them condemn themselves. The chief priests saw the application of the parable (verse 45) and were angry, but were too shrewd to let the people know their intense anger. So eventually they have answered their own question when they asked Jesus by what authority he did “these things.” Jesus appeared before them as the Son of God and the heir of all things, against whom they were seeking a charge, when they asked a question. The parable has a close connection with the events of the succeeding days of the Passion Week. They sought to draw from Jesus a claim to be the Son of God, so that they could condemn him for blasphemy. They condemned themselves when they answered Jesus’ question by saying, “He will miserably destroy those miserable men, and will let out the vineyard unto other husbandmen.”
42-46 Jesus saith unto them.—Jesus confused and condemned his adversaries with the scriptures. The parable which he had given them about the wicked husbandmen was so simple and clear that they could not misunderstand his meaning , it pictured their wicked thoughts and plots to them even better than they could have done it themselves. In the parable the son is killed, and cannot punish the husbandmen himself; but, as the Son of God, he is to be raised from the dead and will inflict the punishment. The “rejecting the stone,” or “the stone which the builders rejected,” was done in casting out the Son and killing him;now the same Son, under the similitude of a stone, becomes the destruction of his enemies. “The stone” in this quotation refers to Christ. (Psalms 118:22-25.) It is a figure taken from the choosing of stones for a building. (Daniel 2:45; Acts 4:11; Ephesians 2:20; 1 Peter 2:7.) The husbandmen have become the builders of the spiritual temple; they refuse to lay a foundation on faith in Christ , they reject him, and hope to go on in their work without them. “The head of the corner,” the cornerstone, is the principal one in the foundation. It has been supposed by many that it here means the keystone of an arch, which holds up the arch; but it is more simple in the common sense of the chief stone at the angle of the building and is a part of the foundation of the building. Christ is called the foundation because on him rests and in him unites the old and the new covenants. “This was from the Lord”; that is, it was not the wish of the builders; they had no idea that in killing the Son of God they were actually carrying out the divine pattern, and making him by the very cross upon which he suffered the foundation of the kingdom or church. (Acts 2:22-24; Acts 3:17-18.) It was beyond all human expectations and was a mystery which they did not understand.
43-44 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken away from you.—This is one of the clearest prophecies of the change of covenant to be found in any of the records of the gospel. The kingdom of God, the church, the vineyard, the cornerstone, all these represent the idea of the gospel economy. It should be taken from the Jews, who so persistently rejected Jesus and was to be given to the Gentiles who would bring “forth the fruits thereof.” The Jews were God’s chosen people because they had all the advantages and rejected them, these advantages are to be given to the Gentiles. Hence, the Gentiles become the chosen people of God. (1 Peter 2:4-10.) There is a double action and solemn warning given here. “And he that falleth on this stone shall be broken to pieces”; this represents one action; those who stumble at this cornerstone, who stumble at the humility of Christ, “shall be broken to pieces,” but not utterly destroyed. On the other hand, the second action is that “on whomsoever it shall fall, it will scatter him as dust.” This allows no escape. Those who stumble at Christ “shall be broken to pieces,” but those upon whom the judgment of Christ shall fall shall be utterly destroyed. His judgment fell on the Jewish nation at the fall of Jerusalem and caused a ruin deplorable beyond all other similar events, and his judgment will ultimately and finally rest upon the wicked at the judgment.
45-46 And when the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they perceived that he spake of them.—They had no trouble in understanding that Jesus referred to them. They were incensed, angry, and revengeful, but “they feared the multitudes, because they took him for a prophet.” They saw not only the impilication of these parables; namely, that they were spoken against themselves. It is important to note that though they can not have fully comprehended the import of either parable, they saw and heard enough to enrage them. If it were not for the people, they would have laid their hands upon Him.