Matthew 22
DODDMatthew 22:1-14
Christ farther warns the Jews of the danger which would attend their rejecting the gospel, or resting in an insincere profession of it, by the parable of the marriage feast and the wedding garment. Mat. XXII. 1—14.
MAT. XXII. 1.
AND Jesus answered and spake unto them again by parables, and said,
The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king, which made a marriage for his son,
MAT. XXII. 1.
AND when the priests and scribes were retired, Jesus, being still surrounded with the multitude, answered and spake to them again in parables, suited to the present circumstances of affairs, saying, The kingdom of heaven, or the dispensation of the gospel, is like, and may be well compared to, that which happened in the case of a man [that was] a king, who made a splendid marriage feast for his son :
a The kingdom of heaven is like a king. See note 1, on Luke vii. 32, Vol. I. p. 322. It is observable that Luke does not relate this parable here, because he had given us one very much like it before, which was spoken on a different occasion. (Luke xiv.
16—24, sect. cxx.) For the same reason he omits the question of the lawyer, Mat. xxii. 35 ; most of the discourse against the Pharisees, Mat. xxiii ; and the parable of the talents, Mat. xxv. 14, & seq.
The guests not coming, others are called from th
And when all was prepared, he sent his servants to call those who had been before invited, that they might come immediately to the nuptial banquet.ᵇ But they were so rude and foolish, that they would not come upon the summons.
Again he sent other of his servants, saying, Go and tell them that were invited, that I must insist upon their coming immediately; for behold, I have prepared my dinner; my oxen and my other fatted beasts are slain and dressed,ᶜ and all things are just ready to be served up to the table; therefore come to the marriage feast without any farther delay. But such was the perverseness of the guests, that, notwithstanding this repeated invitation, they refused to come; and, not regarding [it], they went away, one of them to his field in the country, and another to his merchandise in the city. And the rest were so brutish that, laying hold on his servants who came with the message, they shamefully insulted them in a very outrageous manner, and even carried their ingratitude so far, that they slew some of them. And when the king heard [of it], he was greatly provoked; and, not long after, having sent his armies, he destroyed those murderers, and even burnt their city where they dwelt,ᵈ which, being disaffected to him, had joined with these wicked men in concerting this gross and intolerable affront.
In the mean time then, upon the king’s receiving intelligence of their insolent behaviour, he says to his servants, the marriage feast
ᵇ To call those who had been invited to the nuptial banquet.] The word γαμωδ here properly signifies a nuptial banquet, in which sense it is often used by other writers. (See Raphel. Annot. ex Polyb. p. 93, and Wolfus, in loc.) It was sometimes customary to send two messages, as in the case here supposed; which represented the condescension the greater, and suited the repeated invitations given to the Jews by Christ himself during his life, and by the apostles after his death.
ᶜ My oxen and my fatted beasts are slain.] It was agreeable to the simplicity of the ancient ages to mention these as the chief parts of a royal entertainment. Thus in Homer, and other ancient writers, we
see princes of the first rank and digni feasting each other with nothing but the flesh of oxen, sheep, and swine. Compare Isa. xxv. 6.
ᵈ And, not long after, having sent his armies, &c.] This clause must be supposed to come in by way of prolepsis or anticipation, for it is plain there could not be time, before the feast already prepared was served up, to attempt an execution of this kind. This circumstance seems to point at the slaughter of the Jews, and the burning Jerusalem and the other chief cities of their country by the Romans; who are here considered as the armies of their affronted prince, whose ambassadors they had indeed most cruelly and ungratefully murdered.
rved that had not on a wedding garment.
is prepared: but they who were first invited were not worthy of any part in it, or indeed of any invitation to it: Yet let not the provisions I have made be lost: go ye therefore to the most public ways, and particularly to the places where several streets and roads meet, and invite as many as you find there to the wedding banquet. And accordingly those servants went out, as their lord had commanded them, into the streets and other [public] ways, and assembled all that they met with, whether bad or good, without any regard to their characters or circumstances: and the feast was abundantly supplied with guests.
But that, whatever habits they had on before, they might appear worthy to sit at such a table, the king had ordered clean white garments to be delivered to each of them, and appointed servants whose province it was to see that they were decently dressed; after which, coming in to view the guests, he saw a man there who, though such habits were provided, yet was not clothed with a wedding garment; but either in contempt of the feast, or presuming his own habit might do as well as that which was offered him, had refused to accept it. And he said to him, Friend, how I canest thou in hither, not having on a wedding garment suited to the occasion? Was it not offered to thee? or hadst thou so little sense of
The most public ways, &c.] The phrase מלביש זה, signifies the ways which were most frequented; which must be such as are mentioned in the paraphrase. (See Boisius, Compar. in loc.) This intimates that the Gentiles had as little reason to expect the call of the gospel as common passengers and travellers to expect an invitation to a royal banquet.
Who, though such habits were provided, yet was not clothed with a wedding garment.] That persons making an entertainment sometimes furnished the habits in which the guests should appear, is evident from what Homer says of Ulysses being thus furnished by the Pheacians (Odyss. lib. viii. ver. 402); and from the account which Diodorus gives of the great hospitality of Gellias the Sicilian, who readily received all strangers, and at once supplied 500 horsemen with clothes, who by a violent storm were driven to take shelter with him. (Diod. Sic. lib. xiii. p. 375, Edit. Steph.) Now it was usual, more
especially at marriage feasts, for persons to appear in a sumptuous dress, adorned, as some writers tell us, with florid embroidery; (Dr. Hammond, in loc.) though many times white garments seem to have been used on such occasions. (Compare Rev. xix. 8, 9.) But as it could not be expected that travellers thus pressed in should themselves be provided with a suitable habit, we must therefore conclude, not only from the magnificence of the preparations, to which we must suppose the wardrobe of the prince corresponded, but likewise from the following circumstance of resentment against this guest, that a robe was offered, but refused by him. And this is circumstance which (as Calvin observes) is admirably suited to the method of God’s dealing with us; who indeed requires holiness in order to our receiving the benefits of the gospel, but is graciously pleased to work it in us by his Holy Spirit; an therefore may justly resent and punish one elect of so great a favour.
The king orders him to be cast into outer
decency and gratitude as to refuse to accept it in compliance with the order of my feast? And he was presently struck speechless, being confounded with the majesty of the royal presence, and conscious of his own insolence and folly. Then the king, being justly incensed at so great an affront, resolved to punish it by a severe imprisonment; and therefore said to [his] servants, Bind his hands and feet, and take him away hence, from all the joy and splendor of the guestchamber, and cast him out into the darkness which is without; and there, instead of the mirth and delight of my banquet, there shall be nothing but weeping and gnashing of the teeth for anguish and despair. (Compare Mat. viii. 12, Vol. I. p. 309.)
Nor imagine, said our Lord in the conclusion and improvement of the parable, that this will be the case of one alone; for though it be a dreadful truth, yet I must say, that even the greatest part of those to whom the gospel is offered will either openly reject or secretly disobey it; and while many indeed are called to the gospel feast, it will be manifest, by their disregarding it, there are but few chosen in such a sense as finally to partake of its blessings. (Compare Mat. xx. 16, p. 238.)
Thus did he strongly intimate to the Jews, that since they despised the rich provisions of his gospel grace, incomparably more valuable than those of a royal feast, and since they used the messengers whom God had sent to them in so ungrateful and barbarous a manner, they must expect to be cut off and destroyed by those hostile armies which Divine Providence
² He was struck speechless.] I render it [struck speechless] because the word struck is in the passive form, and is very expressive. It is applied to the muzzling of cattle, 1 Cor. ix. 9. Compare 1 Tim. v. 18, and 1 Pet. ii. 15.
³ Cast him out into the darkness which is without.] The mention of this circumstance in this connection would incline one to think, either that the word arpice (in ver. 4) may signify supper as well as dinner (which some critics have thought), or that the king is represented as visiting the
guests in the evening. But not to insist on this, which is of little moment, it is well known that banquets of this kind were generally celebrated in rooms that were finely illuminated and richly adorned. (See note ², on Mat. viii. 12, Vol. I. p. 309.) And, considering how splendid and magnificent the entertainments of eastern princes were, it cannot be thought an unnatural circumstance that such an affront as this offered to the king, his son, his bride, and the rest of the company, should be punished with such bonds, and thrown into a dungeon.
Reflections on our being called to the gospel feast.
would speedily bring upon them; but that the gospel should be embraced by the Gentiles, and vast numbers of them be converted and saved by it. And he farther intended to insinuate, by the circumstance of the wedding garment, that as God had made provision in his gospel for the sanctification of men’s hearts, and the reformation of their lives, he expected true holiness and cordial obedience from all who professed to embrace it; and would another day take a strict review of all its professors, that he might separate habitual sinners from the number and the blessings of his people, and deliver them over to perpetual darkness and misery.
cliii. Mat. xxii.14
IMPROVEMENT.
How rich are the provisions of the gospel! a feast indeed becoming the bounty and majesty of the King of heaven; and proportionable even to the love which he bears to his own Son, in honour of whom it is made!
Mat. xxii.2
How wonderful is the grace which calls us to the participation of these provisions; us, who were originally sinners of the Gentiles, aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenant of promise! (Eph. ii. 12.) Yet he has graciously sent his messengers to us, and invited us to his house, yea, to his table, with the additional hope of yet nobler entertainments in reserve. May none of us reject so condescending a call, lest we turn his goodness into righteous indignation, and treasure up to ourselves wrath against the day of wrath! (Rom. ii. 5.)
Let us also remember, that it is not every one who professes to accept the entertainment, not every one who talks of gospel blessings, and seems to desire a share in them, that will be admitted to it. No: in order to our partaking of an inheritance among the saints in light, it is necessary that we be made meet for it by the holiness both of our hearts and lives. (Col. i. 12.) This is the wedding garment, wrought by the Spirit of God himself, and offered to us by the freedom of his grace. And it is so necessary, that without it we must be separated from the number of his guests and friends, and even, though we had eaten and drank in his presence, must be cast out into outer darkness. (Luke xiii. 26.)
4—6
Frequently let us think of that awful day when the King will come in to see his guests; when God will take a most exact survey of every soul under a Christian profession. Let us think of that speechless confusion which will seize such as have not on the wedding garment, and of that inexorable severity with which they
VOL. 2.
The Pharisees and Herodians come to Jesus to insnare him,
will be consigned to weeping and gnashing of teeth. To have cliii. seen for a while the light of the gospel, and the fair beamings of ver.13 an eternal hope, will add deeper and more sensible horror to those gloomy caverns; to have heard those glad tidings of great joy, and to hear them, as it were, echoed back in accents of final despair, how will it wound the ear, and pierce the very heart! May God prevent it, by fulfilling in us all the good pleasure of his goodness, and the work of faith with power; that the name of our Lord Jesus Christ may be glorified in us, and we in him (2 Thess. i. 11, 12), when the marriage supper of the Lamb shall be celebrated, and all the harmony, pomp, and beauty of heaven shall aid its solemnity, its magnificence, and its joy!
Matthew 22:15-22
Our Lord confounds the Pharisees and Herodians when they hoped to have insnared him by their question relating to the lawfulness of paying the Roman tribute. Mat. XXII. 15—22; Mark XII. 13—17; Luke XX. 20—26.
MAT. XXII. 15.
THEN the Pharisees, stung with the severe cliv. but just rebukes he had been giving them Mat. in the foregoing parables, went out from his xxii.15 presence, and retiring, took counsel together how they might insnare him in [his] discourse, and find something on which they might ground Luke an accusation or complaint against him. And xx.20 they narrowly watched him in all his motions that day, and sent out spies to try if they could take him at an advantage, who should pretend themselves to be righteous men, that were come, for the ease of their consciences, to propose a scruple to him on an affair of great importance. Now those that were sent on this errand were persons of opposite sects; [even] some of the disciples of the leading men among the Pharisees, who were very solicitous for the freedom of their country from every mark of slavery; and [some] of the sect of the Herodians, a party of men (as was before observed) peculiarly attached to the family of Herod, and consequently zealous in the interest of the Roman government, which was the main support of the dignity and royalty of that family. (See note on Mark iii. 6, Vol. I. p. 287.) And these, different as their principles were, combined
MAT. XXII. 15.
THEN went the Pharisees, and took counsel how they might entangle him in his talk.
LUKE XX. 20. And they watched him, and sent forth [unto him] spies, which should feign themselves just men [MARK, even certain [disciples] of the Pharisees and of the Herodians], that
it was I ul or them to pay tribute to Cesar.
together in an attempt upon Jesus, that if an opportunity offered, they might lay hold on his words,ᵃ either to render him obnoxious to the people as an enemy to their liberties, or to deliver him up as a seditious person to the power and authority of Pontius Pilate, who was then the Roman Governor of that province.
And when they were come to him, in order to accomplish their design, they craftily accosted him with an air of great respect, and with flattering expressions of the highest esteem; and asked him, saying, Master, we know, and are well satisfied, that thou art true and upright; and as thou comest as a messenger from God, so, after the example of those faithful and courageous prophets who were in Israel in its better ages, thou sayest and teachest rightly, and art impartial and sincere in every thing that thou declarest; neither carest thou for the censure and applause of any man; for thou regardest not the person of men, so as to be influenced by complaisance or fear, or any private views whatever, to deviate from the strictest integrity and veracity; but plainly teachest the way of God and the path of duty in truth. We are come therefore to propose a question to thee, about which thou knowest that we Pharisees and Herodians are divided, and to which an interested man who was governed by principles of human policy might, perhaps, be unwilling to answer: tell us, we pray thee (for we have determined to submit our judgment and practice to thy sentiments in the matter), What thinkest thou? Is it lawful for us Jews, who are the peculiar people of God, and are many of us in conscience tender of acknowledging
ᵃ That they might lay hold on his words.] They hoped to have incurred him by the question they came to propose, whatever answer he could have returned. If he asserted on the one hand, that tribute was to be paid to Cesar, the Pharisees, who generally maintained (as Judas Gaulonites had done), that such a subjection to a foreign power was inconsistent with the privileges of God’s peculiar people, would have endeavoured to expose him to popular resentment, as betraying the liberties of his coun. On the other hand, had he denied
the lawfulness of this tribute, the Herodians would have had a very plausible pretence of accusing him to the Roman power, as a seditious person, which his persecutors had afterwards the assurance to do; Luke xxiii. 2, sect. clxxxvi. (Compare Acts xvii. 7.) Nay, perhaps, the very circumstance of taking upon him to determine such a question might, by these invidious inquirers, be construed as a pretence to sovereignty. See Voss. Harmon. Evang. p. 54, 55.
He bids them render to Cesar what is Cesar
any king but him, or one of our brethren appointed by his immediate delegation,ᵇ to pay the usual tribute to Cesar, the Roman Emperor, or not? What dost thou advise in this case, as right for us to do? Shall we give it to the collectors, or shall we not give it? We must beg an immediate answer, for the tribute is even now demanded of us. And here they ceased, as thinking they had him in an inextricable snare, and that he could return no answer which would not expose him to the severe resentment either of the Jewish people or of the Roman officers.
But Jesus, knowing their hypocrisy, which was indeed their reigning character, perceived their craftiness [and] wickedness in this address, however pious and respectful it appeared, and therefore said to them, Ye hypocrites, Why do ye tempt me by such an insnaring question, and seek to draw me into danger and destruction by it? Is this a proof of your regard and friendship to a faithful and impartial Teacher? But that I may return a proper answer to your question, whatever be the view that you may have in asking it, shew me the tribute money which is demanded of you; and bring me hither a penny, or denarius, that I may see it. And they brought him a Roman penny. And, looking upon it, he says to them, Whose is this image which is struck upon the coin, and whose inscription and title is this [which] it has round it? And they, without perceiving his design, immediately answered and said to him, It is Cesar’s: thereby in effect acknowledging that they were under his dominion, by their admitting his coin as current among them. And Jesus answering said unto them, Render there-
ᵇ One of our brethren, [Sc.] We are told that the grand argument which the followers of Judas Gaulionites, and others inclined to their party, urged, as decisive against the authority of the Romans, was that text which prohibited their setting a stranger to be king over them, Deut. xvii. 15. And Grotius (in his note on Mat. xxii. 16) seems to think it was this that formerly engaged them so vigorously to oppose the Chaldeans, and to refuse submitting to their government, till Jerusalem was destroyed. See note ᵃ on Luke xiii. 1, p. 126.
ᶜ Whose is this image and inscription? Dr. Lightfoot tells us (in his Hor. Heb. on Mat. xxii. 20) that the Jews have a tradition among them, that to admit of the title of any prince on their current coin, was an acknowledgment of subjection to him. It is certain, that not daring to refuse this coin, when offered them in payment, was in effect a confession that they were conquered by the Romans, and consequently that the emperor had a right to their tribute.
And they depart confounded at his answer.
fore to Cesar the things which are Cesar’s, and to God the things which are God’s, and labour so to adjust your regards and duties to both, that you may not on the one hand, under pretence of religion, do any injury to Cesar, nor on the other hand, under pretence of duty to Cesar, violate any of the commands of God, or fail of that respect to him which he requires: whereby he plainly intimated that tribute was to be paid to Cesar as due to his government; yet did it in such a manner, and with such restrictions, as prevented the inconvenience of a more express declaration.
And when they had heard [his] wise and unexceptionable [answer], they plainly found that they could not take hold of his words before the people, so as to incense and stir them up against him, as no friend to their liberties; and they were equally unable to accuse him to the Romans of sedition, on account of any thing he had then said as derogating from the rights of Cesar. They therefore wondered at the prudence and address of his reply, by which he had effectually disentangled himself from what they thought must unavoidably have insured him; and were so perfectly confounded, that they held their peace, and left him; and deeply sensible of the disgrace, as well as disappointment they had met with, they went away amazed and ashamed.
IMPROVEMENT.
AGAIN does our Lord renew the repeated lesson he had before given us, both by precept and example, of uniting wisdom and innocence. How admirable was this mixture of prudence and integrity with which he confounded these Pharisees and Herodians, who, contrary as their principles and interests were, conspired against him! For of a truth, O Lord, against thine holy Child Jesus, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, and the people of Israel, were gathered together (Acts iv. 27); and their words
And to God the things which are God’s.] Diodate, Raphelius, and some other commentators, interpret this as a caution against omitting the sacred tribute, on pretence of answering the demands of Cesar, who (they say) had claimed it to himself. But I apprehend our Lord had a more extensive view; and that as he cautions the Pharisees against us in religion as a re- tence to justify sedition, so he also warns the Herodians, that they should not, as they were too inclinable to do, make a compliment of their religion to the Romans, by complying with those things which were forbidden by the Divine law, that they might ingratiate themselves with Cesar’s party. See Prideaux Connection, Vol. II. 366-368.
Reflections on the duties we owe to God and the king.
SECT. were softer than oil, when war and murder was in their hearts. cliv. (Psal. lv. 21.)
ver.21 Let us not, with the simple, believe every flattering word (Prov. xiv. 15), since sometimes the highest encomiums may be designed as the instruments of mischief: and too often they prove so, when they are not treacherously intended.
Mat. Our Lord was indeed the Person whom these artful hypocrites described; and was in that respect an excellent Pattern to all his followers, and especially to his ministers. He knew no man in the discharge of his office; but, without regarding the persons of any, neither seeking their favour nor fearing their resentment, he taught the way of God in truth, and declared the whole of his counsel.
Let us particularly attend to his decision in the present case, and learn with the utmost readiness to render unto Cesar the things which are Cesar’s, and unto God the things which are God’s. Our civil magistrates, by virtue of their office, justly claim our reverent regard; and tribute is most reasonably due to those who attend continually to the service of the public, and are, under God, the pillars of our common tranquillity and happiness. (Rom. xiii. 6, 7.) Let that tribute therefore be justly and freely rendered with honour, and with cheerfulness; as he is surely unworthy to share in the benefits of government who will not contribute his part towards its necessary expense. But let it also be remembered that the rights of God are sacred and inviolable: he, and he alone, is the Lord of conscience; and when that is invaded, it is easy to judge whether man or God is to be obeyed. (Acts iv. 19.) Let us be daily thankful that in our own age and country these rights are so happily united. May a guardian Providence continue to watch over both! and may we seriously consider how impossible it is, under such a government, to be good Christians, without being obedient subjects, or to fear God, if we do not honour the king! (1 Pet. ii. 17.)
Matthew 22:34
Christ discourses of the first and great command of the law, and confounds the Pharisees with a question relating to David’s calling the Messiah his Lord. Mat. XXII. 34, to the end. Mark XII. 28—37. Luke XX. 41—44.
MAT. XXII. 34.
THUS Jesus defended the great doctrine of clvi. the resurrection from the vain cavils which Mat. were brought against it. But the debates of xxii. 34 the day ended not here; for when the Pharisees MAT. XXII. 34. BUT when the Pharisees had
and great commandment is to love God.
heard that he had thus silenced and confounded the Sadducees, they were soon gathered together again, with a malicious view of carrying on the same design, to try if they could any way expose him to the people, and to make their remarks upon what he might say.
And one of the learned scribes, [who was] also a doctor of the law, came with the rest; and having attended to the discourse between Jesus and the Sadducees, and heard them reasoning together, perceiving that he had answered them well, asked him a farther question; intending to make another trial of him as to his understanding in the sacred books; and said to him, Master, I desire thou wouldst inform me which is the first [and] great commandment of all that are contained in the whole law?² Is it a ceremonial, or a moral precept, that is the most important, and deserves the preference?
And Jesus answered him, The question thou hast put may easily be resolved; for surely the first, that is, the most comprehensive and important of all the commandments of the law, [is] that which is contained in Deut. vi. 4, 5; x. 12; “Hear, O Israel, Jehovah our God is the one great and only Lord; And upon all occasions thou shalt regard and honour him as such, and love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength;” that is, thou shalt consecrate to him all the united powers and faculties of thy nature; and thy understanding and will, thine affections and executive powers, shall be all in the most vigorous manner employed in his service. (See note on Luke x. 27, sect. cvii.) This is the first and great commandment, the principal and fundamental
² Which is the first and great commandment, &c.] This was a point that often was disputed by the Jewish doctors; some contending for the law of circumcision, others for that of sacrifices, and others for that of the phylacteries. And though it was a rule among them, that the law of the sabbath was to give place to that of circumcision, yet they were not agreed as to the rest, which was the principal and most important precept, only in general
they were inclined to give the preference to the ceremonial part. Dr. Lightfoot remarks (in his Hor. Heb. on Mark xii. 28), that Christ answers the scribe out of a sentence which was written in the phylacteries; in which he avoided all occasion of offence, and plainly shewed (as the scribe afterwards observes, Mark xii. 33) that the observance of the moral law was more acceptable to God than all the sacrifices they could offer to him.
The next is the love of our neighbour
precept of the law, and there is no other which may not be considered in its degree as subordinate to this, and reducible to it. And the second, in its sublime and comprehensive nature, [is] much like unto it, as well as given by the same authority,ᵇ [even] this contained in Lev. xix. 18: “Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.” For all the duties you owe to your fellowcreatures may be reduced to this; and where this undissembled and generous principle of love is, the rest will easily and naturally follow. On the whole, therefore, there is no other commandment greater than these. And indeed I may say, that all the law and the prophets depend upon these two commandments; that is, it is the design of the whole revelation, in its different periods and circumstances, to promote that virtuous and holy temper which may be expressed by the love of God and our neighbour.
*And the scribe who had proposed the question with a design to try him, was struck with the solidity and spirit of his answer, and said to him, Truly thou deservest to be owned as a Master in Israel; for thou hast spoken to this important question excellently well:*ᶜ for there is indeed one God, and there is no other beside him: And to love him, as thou hast said, with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength, to consecrate all the intellectual and active powers of our whole nature to him; and for a man to love [his] neighbour as himself, from a sense of piety to God, as well as benevolence to man, is far more important than all the burnt offerings and sacrifices which the greatest prince could present at his altar; nor could the most exact and pompous ritual observances be acceptable without such virtues and graces as these.
ᵇ The second is like unto it.] By quoting this with the former he sufficiently guarded against a foolish notion, which some say the Pharisees had, that the observation of one excellent precept of the law would excuse the transgression of many others. It is certain the Pharisees were ready to magnify duties of the first
table, to the neglect of those of the second; on which account it was exceedingly proper to use such language as this.
ᶜ Excellently well.] It is in the original καλοε, beautifully, or finely, which expresses his high satisfaction in the reply much more strongly than the word well.
Jesus asks how the Messiah is the Son and yet the Lord of David. 345
And Jesus, seeing that he answered thus wisely, said unto him, It appears from these just sentiments of thine on this important head, that thou art not far from the kingdom of God; and such views of religion as these may be the happy means of preparing thee to receive the gospel in that fuller manifestation of it which is now approaching.
And while the Pharisees were gathered together during this conference, expecting to have found an opportunity to insnare him, as he was still teaching the people in the temple, Jesus, turned to the scribes and doctors of the law who were present, and asked them, saying, How say the scribes so commonly as they do, that the Messiah is the Son of David? Let me ask you of that profession who are now here, What think ye concerning the Messiah in this respect? Whose Son is he? They say unto him, Nothing can be plainer than what thou representest as the general opinion; he is undoubtedly to be [the Son] of David. He saith unto them, How then does David himself, speaking by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, in the book of Psalms, acknowledge him to be superior to himself, and call him Lord?ᵈ for you cannot but know that there is a passage expressly to this purpose (Psal. cx. 1), which you readily allow to refer to the Messiah, in which you find David saying, “The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand in exalted power and glory, with all the majesty and honour of a King, till I make all thine enemies thy footstool, and cause thee to trample upon them at pleasure.” If David himself therefore call him Lord, and speak of him as his superior, as you see he doth, how is he then his Son?ᵉ
ᵈ How then does David himself by the Holy Spirit, &c.] Our Lord, we see, always takes it for granted, in his arguments with the Jews, that the writers of the Old Testament were under such an extraordinary guidance of the Holy Spirit as to express themselves with the strictest propriety on all occasions. (Compare John x. 35, sect. xxxiv.) And I look on this as no incompatible argument for the inspiration of the New Testament; for we can never think
the apostles of Christ to have been less assisted by the Divine Spirit in their writings, when they were in other respects so much more powerfully endowed with it.
ᵉ If David himself therefore call him Lord, how is he then his Son?] This implies both the existence of David in a future state, and the authority of the Messiah over that invisible world into which that prince was removed by death. Else, how great a
They are unable to reply, and dare not question
Now as the scribes and Pharisees were ignorant of the great doctrine of the Divine nature of the Messiah, with respect to which, even before his incarnation, he was the Lord of David, and of the whole church, they were quite confounded with the question. And the vast crowd of common people that was about him heard him with great pleasure. And all his adversaries were at such a loss, that no man could answer him so much as a word; neither did any one presume, from that day forward, to ask him any more such insnaring questions as those by which they had now contrived to assault, and, if possible, to confound him.
IMPROVEMENT.
WHATEVER might be the design of the scribium of the question to Christ again, (which was in effect the another had proposed before, Luke x. 25, see reason to rejoice in the repetition of so important.) Oh that it might be inscribed on our hearts as a diamond!
The first and great commandment requires us our God with all our heart, and soul, and mind, and the second, which is like unto it, to love our neignity. But alas, what reason have we to complain of our own both these heads! and how much need of be given even these first principles of the oracles of God!
Can we say, with regard to the first, that the whole of our hearts? Is the utmost vigor exerted in his service? Do we make him the actions, of all our wishes, of all our pursuits? And such equitable judges between ourselves and one of these great commandments would require; own particular interests no farther than they made to, or at least consistent with, the good of the
Monarch soever the Messiah might have been, he could not have been properly called David’s Lord, any more than Julius Cesar could have been called the lord of Romulus, because he reigned in Rome seven hundred years after his death, and vastly extended the bounds of that empire which Romulus founded. Munster’s note on this text shews, in a very forcible manner, the wretched expedients of some modern Jews to evade the force of that
interpretation of the ex Psalm which refers it to the Messiah.
Presume from that day forward to ask him any more questions. The plain meaning is, they asked him no more such captious questions; for the memory of this confusion impressed their minds during the short remainder of Christ’s continuance among them; and he was soon removed from them, so that they had no farther opportunities of doing it when that impression wore off.
Reflections on the command to love God and our neighbour.
make all those allowances for others which we expect or desire they should make for us? Surely we must own we are far from having yet attained, or from being already perfect. (Phil. iii. 12.) But if this be not in the main the prevailing and governing temper of our minds, in vain are our burnt offerings and our sacrifices; in vain are all the solemnities of public worship, or the forms of domestic and secret devotion; and by all our most pathetic expressions of duty to God, and friendship to men, we do but add one degree of guilt to another. Let us then most earnestly entreat that God would have mercy upon us, and by his Holy Spirit write these laws in our hearts.
On these subjects let scribes instructed to the kingdom of heaven insist, lest they be condemned by this expositor of the Jewish law. And let those whose notions are thus wisely regulated, take heed, lest, while they seem near to the kingdom of God, by resting in mere notions, they come short of it, and sink into a ruin aggravated by their near approach to the confines of salvation and glory.
As for that question of Christ with which the Pharisees were perplexed, the gospel has given us a key to it. Well might David, in spirit, call him Lord, who according to the flesh was to descend from his loins: for before David or Abraham was, he is. (John viii. 58.) Let us adore this mysterious union of the Divine and human natures in the person of our glorious Emmanuel; and be very careful that we do not oppose him, if we would not be found fighters against God. Already is he exalted at the right hand of the Father: let his friends rejoice in his dignity and glory, and with pleasure wait the day of his complete triumph, when all his enemies shall be put under his feet, and even the last of them be swallowed up in victory. (1 Cor. xv. 25, 54.)
sact. clvi. ver.33
Mat. xxii. 41-43