Jesus now directed His attention toward the scribes and the Pharisees in the temple courtyard (cf. v. 1). He proceeded to announce a scathing indictment of them in seven parts.838He introduced each indictment with the word "woe."Jesus spoke ofthe scribes and Pharisees, but He spoke tothe crowds and His disciples.
"No passage in the Bible is more biting, more pointed, and more severe than this pronouncement of Christ upon the Pharisees. It is significant that He singled them out, as opposed to the Sadducees, who were more liberal, and the Herodians, who were the politicians. The Pharisees, while attempting to honor the Word of God and manifesting an extreme form of religious observance, were actually the farthest from God."839
Essentially Jesus was criticizing them for their hypocrisy. As the theme of the Sermon on the Mount was righteousness, the theme of these woes was hypocrisy. There is a common strong emphasis in both addresses on the leaders' failure to understand and submit to the Scriptures. Jesus gave both addresses to contrast the true meaning of Scripture with the Pharisees' interpretation and application of it. The Pharisees professed to teach the Scriptures accurately but did not do so. They were therefore hypocrites.
The literary structure of these woes is chiastic.
ARejection of the kingdom v. 13
BEffects on others being more harm than good v. 15
CMisguided use of Scripture affecting conduct vv. 16-22
DFailure to understand Scripture vv. 23-24
C'Misguided use of Scripture affecting character vv. 25-26
B'Effects on others frustrating the desired result vv. 27-28
A'Rejection of the kingdom's heralds vv. 29-36
"But"introduces the transition from the words to the disciples that preceded (vv. 1-12). The scribes and Pharisees had taken the exact opposite position on Jesus' person than the disciples had. Consequently their futures would be radically different (cf. 16:17-28; 19:27-29).
"Woe"can be a mild exclamation of compassion (24:19), a strong expression of condemnation (11:21), or both (18:17; 26:24). In this address condemnation is in view as is clear from what Jesus said. However, we should not interpret this word as connoting vindictiveness or spitefulness here. Rather it is a judicial announcement of condemnation from Messiah, the Judge.
"Every one of the seven woes' is an exclamation like the blessed' in the Beatitudes. It does not state a wish but a fact. It is not a curse that calls down calamity but a calm, true judgment and verdict rendered by the supreme Judge himself. Hence six of these judgments have the evidence attached by means of a causal hoti[because'] clause which furnishes the full reason for the verdict woe;' and in the remaining judgment (v. 16) the varied form of expression does the same by means of an apposition."840
The leaders were hypocrites because they professed to teach God's will but kept people from entering the kingdom that was God's will for His people then to enter. They kept people from entering the kingdom by not preparing to enter it themselves and by discouraging others from doing so (cf. 18:6-7; 22:41-46).
Some interpreters believe the syntax of verse 13 assumes that the kingdom had already begun.841However the basis for this conclusion is the presupposition that it had begun more than the requirements of the Greek syntax. The syntax requires that we understand the substantival participle tous eiserchomenous("those entering") and the present finite verb oude . . . aphiete("nor . . . do you permit") as describing action happening simultaneous with the speaker's words. Both actions can and do describe what the leaders were doing in anticipation of the kingdom's beginning. Jesus consistently referred to the messianic kingdom as future, never as present. The King's presence does not equate with the kingdom's presence.
Most of the best and earliest copies of Matthew's Gospel available to us omit verse 14. Some of the manuscripts that do contain it place it before verse 13, and others place it after. Perhaps scribes inserted it later since it occurs in the parallel passages (Mark 12:40; Luke 20:47).
The scribes and Pharisees were very zealous to get Jews to subscribe to their doctrinal convictions. Some commentators stress that the Pharisees made disciples to Judaism. This may have been true, but their chief offense was bringing Jews under their corrupt theology.842Jesus did not criticize them for their zeal. He criticized them because of what they taught their converts and the effect that this "conversion"had on their converts.
As noted previously, what marked the teaching of these leaders was their giving the oral traditional interpretations and teachings of the rabbis the same authority as the Old Testament. Practically they twisted the Old Testament when it did not harmonize with the accepted teachings of the rabbis (cf. 5:21-48).
The converts to Pharisaism became more zealous for the traditions of the fathers than their teachers were. This is often the result of conversion. Students sometimes take the views of their teachers farther than their teachers do. The dynamic nature of the Pharisees' view of the authority of the fathers' interpretations increased this problem. When a person believes that Scriptural authority extends beyond the statements of Scripture there is no limit to what else may be authoritative. The Pharisees' interpretation of Messiah locked Jesus out of this role.
The proselytes were the sons of hell (Gehenna) in the sense that that would be their destiny. Rather than leading them to heaven the Pharisees and teachers of the law led them to hell. Gehenna represented the place of eternal damnation, the lake of fire (cf. 25:51). Hades is the temporary abode of the wicked from which God will raise them for judgment at the great white throne and final damnation in the lake of fire (Rev. 20:11-15).
Jesus had dealt with the subject of taking oaths in the Sermon on the Mount (5:33-37). He had called His critics blind guides before too (15:14). Here is a specific example of what Jesus condemned in the second woe (v. 15). By differentiating between what was binding in their oaths and what was not, the Pharisees and teachers of the law were encouraging evasive oaths that amounted to lying. Jesus' point was that people should tell the truth. Jesus condemned His critics for mishandling the Scriptures that they claimed to defend and expound.
Verses 20-22 provide the rationale for 5:33-37. Whenever a Jew took an oath he connected it in some way with God. All their oaths were therefore binding. Jesus disallowed all evasive oaths. He viewed them as untruthful speech.
The Mosaic Law required the Israelites to tithe grain, wine, and oil (Deut. 14:22-29). How far they had to take this was a matter of debate. Jesus did not discourage scrupulous observance of this law. He directed His condemnation to the leaders' failure to observe more important "weightier"commands in the law while dickering over which specific plants, spices, and seeds to tithe. He went back to Micah 6:8 for the three primary duties that God requires. He probably chose the gnat and the camel as examples because of their sizes.
This judgment constitutes the center of the chiasm and the most important failure of the scribes and Pharisees. They were distorting the will of God as He had revealed it in Scripture (cf. 9:9-13; 12:1-14). This distortion resulted in erroneous doctrine (woes 3 and 5) that resulted in disastrous practice (woes 2 and 6) that resulted in kingdom postponement (woes 1 and 7).
It is important to recognize that Scripture reveals God's will and that we should never elevate the authority of human interpretations to the level of Scripture itself. However, it is also important to recognize that within Scripture some commands are more important than others and that we should observe these distinctions and not confuse them. This involves wisdom and balance in interpretation and application.
Modern teachers and preachers of God's Word can commit many of the errors that marked the Pharisees. However, we need to remember that the Pharisees did not believe that Jesus was the divine Messiah.
Jesus condemned characteristic Pharisaic superficiality with this metaphor. The vessels represent the Pharisees and those they taught. The Jews were to be clean vessels that God could use to bring spiritual nourishment and refreshment to others. The Pharisees taught the importance of being ritually clean by observing the dietary and cleansing ordinances of the law. Nevertheless they neglected internal purity. The Pharisees were erring in their emphases. They put too much importance on minor matters, especially ritual and external matters, and not enough on major matters, especially those involving spiritual reality.
The singular "Pharisee"is probably a generic reference to all Pharisees (v. 26).
The Jerusalem Jews whitewashed grave markers just before Passover to alert pilgrims to their presence. They did this so these strangers would not unknowingly touch one, become unclean, and therefore be ineligible to participate in the feast.843It was not so much the whitewashing that made them attractive as it was the monuments themselves that were attractive. Jesus compared these whitewashed monuments to the Pharisees. Both appeared attractive, but both also contaminated people who contacted them. Pharisaic contamination precluded participation in the blessings that Passover anticipated, namely kingdom blessings.
Jesus' mention of "lawlessness"is significant (v. 28). The Pharisees prided themselves on punctilious observance of the law (Gr. nomos). Ironically their failure to understand and apply the law correctly made them lawless (Gr. anomia) in Jesus' view. Anomiais a general word for wickedness in the New Testament. Jesus implied that the Pharisees' whole approach to the law was really wicked.
23:29-30 By building monuments to the prophets and other righteous people that their forefathers had martyred, the Pharisees were saying that they would not have killed them if they had been alive then. These construction projects constituted professions of their own spiritual superiority as well as honors for the dead. The Christian who naively thinks he or she would not have committed the mistakes that the early disciples of Jesus did makes the same assumption of superiority.
23:31 The "consequently"refers to the Pharisees' acknowledgment of themselves as the sons of those who killed the prophets (v. 30), not to their tomb-building (v. 29). The Pharisees were the descendants of those who killed the prophets more than they knew, not just physically but also spiritually. They were plotting to kill the greatest Prophet (21:38-39, 46).
23:32 The Old Testament idea behind this verse is that God will tolerate only so much sin. Then He will act in judgment (cf. Gen. 6:3, 7; 15:16; cf. 1 Thess. 2:14-16). Here Jesus meant that Israel had committed many sins by killing the prophets. When the Pharisees killed Jesus and His disciples (cf. v. 34) the cup of God's wrath would be full, and He would respond in wrath. The destruction of Jerusalem and the worldwide dispersion of the Jews happened in 70 A.D.
23:33 Jesus repeated epithets that He had used before to announce His critics' condemnation (cf. 3:7; 12:34). They would perish in hell for their failure to accept Jesus (cf. 5:22; 23:15).
"There is today only one proper Christian use of the woe saying of this pericope. It is found not primarily in the application of the passage to the historical Pharisees, and even less to modern Judaism as a religion, but in the application of the passage to members of the church. Hypocrisy is the real enemy of this pericope, not the scribes, the Pharisees, or the Jews. If, on the model of this pericope, a bitter woe is to be pronounced against anyone today, it must be directed solelyagainst hypocrisy in the church (cf. 1 Peter 2:1)."844
23:34 The antecedent of "therefore"(Gr. dia touto) is the Jews' execution of the prophets that God had sent them in the past (vv. 29-30; cf. 22:3-10). Because the Jews had rejected the former prophets Jesus would send them additional prophets, wise men, and teachers. These the Jews would also reject, filling up the measure of their guilt to the full. This is probably a reference to the witnesses that followed Jesus and appealed to the Jews to believe in Him (Acts 3:19-21; 7:2-53; cf. Matt. 5:10-12; 9:37-38; 28:18-20).
Jesus would not establish His kingdom then because Israel rejected Him as her Messiah. However, now Jesus revealed that God would punish the generation of Israelites that rejected Him and the apostles who would follow Him in an additional way. This included the destruction of Jerusalem and the dispersion of the Jews from the Promised Land. Jesus clarified these events in the Olivet Discourse that follows (chs. 24-25).
Since the Jews did not have the authority to crucify people, we should probably understand Jesus' reference to them crucifying some of these witnesses in a causative sense. They would cause others, notably the Romans, to crucify them (cf. 10:24-25).
23:35 Jesus was not saying that the Jews who rejected Him were responsible for the deaths of all the righteous martyrs throughout biblical history. They simply were the ones who would add the last measure of guilt that would result in the outpouring of God's wrath for all those murders.
"In the case of the Jews, the limit of misbehavior had been almost reached, and with the murder of the Messiah and His Apostles would be transgressed."845
Abel was the first righteous person murdered that Scripture records (Gen. 4:8). We do not know exactly when Zechariah the prophet, the son of Berechiah, died, but he began prophesying as a young man in 520 B.C. and delivered some prophecies in 518 B.C. He was evidently the last martyr in Old Testament history.846
Many students of Scripture believe that the Zechariah to whom Jesus referred was the priest whom the Jews stoned in the temple courtyard (2 Chron. 24:20-22). However, that man died hundreds of years earlier than Zechariah the prophet, and Jesus seems to have been summarizing all the righteous people the Jews had slain throughout Old Testament history. Zechariah ben Jehoiada was the last martyr in the last book of the Hebrew Bible, so Jesus may have been saying the equivalent of "all the martyrs from Genesis to Revelation."Nevertheless that Zechariah was the son of Jehoiada, not Berechiah, and Jesus mentioned Berechiah as the father of the Zechariah He meant (cf. 2 Chron. 24:22).
23:36 With a strong assertion of certainty Jesus predicted that God's judgment would fall on the generation of Jews that rejected Him. This is Jesus' formal rejection of Israel for rejecting Him as her Messiah. "These things"refer to the outpouring of God's wrath just revealed (vv. 33, 35). That generation would lose the privilege of witnessing Messiah's establishment of the kingdom and the privilege of being the first to enter it by faith in Jesus. Instead they would suffer the destruction of their capital city and the scattering of their population from the Promised Land in 70 A.D. The whole generation would suffer because the leaders acted for the people, and the people did not abandon their leaders to embrace Jesus as their Messiah (cf. Num. 13-14).
"The perversity of the religious leaders of Israel does not excuse the people of Israel. They were guilty of willfully following blind guides."847
However notice that it is only that generation that Jesus so cursed. It was not the entire Jewish race. God is not finished with Israel (Rom. 11:1). God postponed the kingdom. He did not cancel it.
Jesus' mention of the suffering of the present generation led Him to lament the coming condition of Jerusalem (vv. 37-39).
