Matthew 9

Subdivision 2. (Matthew 9:27-38; Matthew 10:1-42.) The King’s Messengers.

Matthew 9:9-26

Section 3. (Matthew 9:9-26.)Opening the presence of God to men. That which follows here is in extension of such thoughts as these, and fully assures us that we are to find this spiritual meaning in what has been before us. For now the Lord openly declares His grace and justifies it, telling men too that it cannot be used to patch up the legal system, nor will the spirit of it be confined within the Mosaic ordinances. Come for the need of men He the Representative (as He has proved Himself) of God on earth, freely receives sinners, and makes faith welcome to draw upon Him at all times. Thus the presence of God is opened to men. They may refuse, but they are not refused. While, though at present only to be told in parables for the wise, the truth of Israel’s - and indeed man’s - condition is that he is dead, and needing life, and Christ’s mission needs must be, therefore, to raise the dead. This completes His manifestation; therefore; while the mystery in which it ends shows how little faith there is anywhere to receive it, and prepares us for the full rejection of Him by the mass, which is soon to appear.

1. The call of the tax-gatherer* follows immediately the cure of the paralytic; and this in the order of time, as the words show. The challenge of His authority and the grace He is showing, only makes the assertion of it more imperative, as it would have made it weakness to give way. All was in question now; and now, therefore, He will make as plain as possible what is in His heart. “Tax-gatherers and sinners” are with them in natural association; and that association He never disclaims. But who are not sinners? If He refuse men on that ground He must refuse all; Matthew the tax-gatherer, called into the circle of His immediate Mowers, is to be the witness to all men of His grace for all.
   The feast at which we find Him directly afterwards, took place in fact after His return from Gadara, as we see in Mark and Luke. The account of the healing of the paralytic and of Matthew’s call are historically parenthetical. The special purpose is maintained all through. We learn from Luke that Matthew made Him this feast. He knew well what would be that to Him, and showed it by the company he gathered. These persons had, at least, the consciousness of what they were, and grace could not offend them. At the very entrance upon fellowship with God we find it in learning to be with Him as to what we are, and the light of the first day of new creation breaks upon a barren; restless and shoreless sea. The weariness and distress and remorse of sin are witnesses for God which cannot be bribed, though they may not be listened to; while self-righteousness is lulled to sleep by its own monotone, and dreams of peace where there is no peace. Yet the light troubles these sleepers and angers them; and so we find in the questioning of the Pharisees now. They could not be indifferent to what might seem so little to concern them as where One in whom, at any rate, they did not believe, could find His company. They might have remembered, but chose rather to forget, that the Baptist also, than whom there could be no sterner preacher of righteousness, had found response to his message in just such a class (Matthew 21:32). But the Lord answers, (what indeed they had not ventured to address to Him), that He was a physician; did not, of course, come after them, who were well enough, but to the sick ones; and that they had never learnt, what they needed much to know, that God had said in the Scriptures which they acknowledged, that He would have mercy, rather than sacrifice. It was little mercy indeed that rabbinism showed to these tax-gatherers, as, indeed, “sick” enough, as a class, they were, and needing the physician. But here was One who was the perfect expression of divine mercy, not merely receiving, but actively going out after the objects of it; One who came not to call the righteous but sinners.

If so, the chief of sinners would have chief title. But divine love, and the wondrous power of it, are strange to the heart of the legalist at any time; and then Christ must be strange. 2. It is not only the Pharisee who has question as to the Lord’s ways. The disciples of John find Him at variance with their master. But there is a notable difference between them: the disciples of John come straight to the Lord with their question, instead of assailing His followers with it: they do not find fault, but inquire. Moreover they may ask, why His disciples fast not: they could not put such a question as to the Lord Himself. Still what they needed was to know better the glory of Him whom they were addressing, as they needed also to realize the essentially secondary character of what had all its value from its being an expression simply of the spirit of the man who used it. To make it an iron or universal rule would be to degrade it really, - to make it a form from which the life has departed. Christ had come to His own: and what would be the spirit of those who realized this? The Bridegroom had come to the bride, and should the children of the bride-chamber - the invited guests - clothe themselves with the array of mourners? That would be impossible to one who knew Him aright; there would be time enough for fasting, when the Bridegroom would be ken from them; this, of course, implying His rejection: in those days fasting would be perfectly in place. But the Lord goes beyond this to speak of the change of dispensation that was now at hand, and for which they must be prepared: a change which would be still more complete and radical; not a mere patch upon an old garment. The garment of legal righteousness was in fact wearing out, and man being exhibited as the prophet had declared him, “all his righteousnesses but as filthy rags (Isaiah 64:6). What good in patching up what was so utterly gone? Between the new evangelical righteousness and the old legal one there can be only the strife of contradictory principles. There can be no fusion here: with all such attempts the rent is only made worse. Nor only this: the spirit of the gospel, the free, expansive power of Christianity, cannot be put into the old skins of ceremonial Judaism. Here both the wine will be lost, and the skins will perish. And this has been proved experimentally: the thing has happened; ritualism of every kind is just such an experiment, with the result that we have neither Judaism nor Christianity left. The living organism can only clothe itself with the tissues woven by the life itself. 3. This is already parable, and a parabolic story follows it. We have a picture of things which could not as yet be spoken out: two incidents connected together, which, different as they are, throw light upon one another, and are found, in dispensational and moral application; to continue and complete the lessons which the Lord has been enforcing. The perfect fitness of the whole here, internally, and to the place in which it stands, vouches for the reality of the meaning which we attribute to it. The truth has been coming more and more into recognition; that Israel, whom the Lord came to heal, is in fact but a corpse, like the ruler’s daughter. We have not the name of this ruler in Matthew; but in the two other Gospels which narrate the miracle, we find that his name was Jairus or Jair (Judges 10:3, see notes), the “enlightener,”* a name quite suited to those “fathers” of that generation of Israel which had, alas, become a nation of the dead, fathers through whom the enlightening Word has come down to us.
If such then be Israel’s condition; we see why the principle of law must be given up, as just now declared. Law is not for the dead, but for the living: for the dead it is useless. But “if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily, righteousness should have been by the law” (Galatians 3:21). These are the two things - life and righteousness - which we find in the Lord’s words just now, and in the narrative here, connected together. If the principle of law, then; be given up, and grace be shown by the mere goodness of God, the apostle’s question becomes an unanswerable one: “Is He the God of the Jews only? is He not also of the Gentiles?” (Romans 3:29-30,) - will such goodness confine itself within the limits of a feeble and scattered people, or much rather go out to meet the universal need? So it is, then; that while the Lord is on His way to fulfil a special declared purpose, faith in the woman with the issue claims Him, and finds answer to its claim. Again we have not in Matthew the same detail as in either Mark or Luke, and for the same reason as was noticed before, that it is with the signs which manifest Him that Matthew is occupied. Her disease, an issue of blood, is given, which was not merely a slow sapping of the life away, but, according to the law, defiling also by contact (Leviticus 15:25-27): so that here again (as with the leper) there is uncleanness, the typical reminder of the effect of sin. But in this case it is not the Lord who touches, it is faith that touches, not Him, but rather His garment. It is the activity of faith that is here seen; of course, and that lays hold, not of Himself personally, but of His robe - His character as displayed in His life down here. None the less certainly is virtue found in Him; and He pauses on His way to ratify her title to the healing and impute it to her faith. In principle it is the grace to the Gentiles during the present delay of Israel’s blessing. But He reaches the house at last, and finds the mourners busy, who mock at the quiet words which speak of the power of resurrection in His hands. But the unbelieving crowd being put forth, the maid arises: and so, in spite of her desperate condition and the unbelief that mocks at Him, will Israel, when He appears and at His word to her, arise. It is a figure we have often in the prophets, of the revival of the nation in the last days. (Isaiah 26:19; Ezekiel 37:1-28; Daniel 12:2; Hosea 6:2.) Under this dispensational application we may without difficulty discover an individual one, in which the intertwining of the two miracles, if not presenting so clear a meaning, is yet significant. In Jairus, daughter we have man’s state in its full reality discovered. The Lord is here the Life-giver: the dead hears the voice of the Son of God and lives. This is the divine side of salvation; and here man is passive and recipient merely. But there is another side, and the woman with the issue seems clearly to represent this. Her faith applies to the Saviour for its need, and the issue of blood is staunched.

These are the two sides of a common history, to adjust which fully may transcend our power: and yet each has its place. It is Mark, however, especially, who brings out this individual view, as Matthew the dispensational; but the double application, with the place in which we find these in the different Gospels, confirms the whole. The signs which manifest the King are here complete. We see how truly He is no merely human King, but One “marked out Son of God with power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by resurrection of the dead” (Romans 1:4, Gk.) And such the fore-ordained King of Israel was to be. He is now, therefore, ready to be proclaimed as this over the land; and accordingly we find provision made for this proclamation now by the commission given to the twelve apostles.

Matthew 9:27-34

Section 1. (Matthew 9:27-34.)The King indeed. (1) In all that we have hitherto had before us, the Lord has not once yet been owned as Son of David; nor, since the day of the magi, as the King. The question is first as to His higher title. The Father’s voice is the first to own Him as the Son of God; and this is surely in due order. Afterwards, and as taught of Him, the Baptist does so (John 1:33-34); but it is not Matthew who records this, nor have we heard it yet in Matthew upon the lips of men. The devils own it and tremble. Men call Him Master (i.e.

Teacher) and Lord: and this He accepts, taking naturally and as of full right the highest place. Of Himself He ordinarily speaks as Son of man, a title which prophecy had given Him indeed, but with some indistinctness, and which claimed more than might at first sight appear: for why should one who was simply and only that, assume what is universal among men, as if it were unique in Him? The grace and tenderness of the title are what strike us most. With all this, we have not heard Him here as yet openly claim to be the Christ or King. He seems to wait for human lips to pronounce this, and indeed pointedly asks the disciples the question at a later time, who do they say that He, the Son of man is? And when Peter answers, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,” He refers this acknowledgment of Him to the Father’s revelation of Him (Matthew 16:16). In none of the synoptics does such a confession come before this but in John; Andrew owns Him at the beginning to be Messias (John 1:41), and to the woman of Samaria (John 4:25-26) He openly declares Himself. Still, upon the whole, we may say, He waits for faith to acknowledge Him, and always, in connection with the Kingdom, His divine Sonship is the first question. The manifestation of Himself in this way is now complete, and now we have the testimony, humble enough though it be, to the King of Israel. Two* blind men appeal to Him on His way from the ruler’s house, as Son of David: a testimony confirmed by Him with the miracle by which they receive their sight, when once it is seen that it is faith that speaks in it. Blindness indeed was upon Israel, for which there could be no remedy until in the sense of it they should cry to Him. Here, as with the leper, He heals by touch, and forbids them to make it known: an injunction which could not have been; as at a later time, because of His rejection by the people, for as yet the decisive rejection had not come - He was Himself going to send out a testimony far and wide among them. One would say that it must have been because the testimony to the Son of David was peculiarly liable to abuse among a carnal people who could be attracted by miracles and the display of power, while their hearts were far away from God. For this reason the acknowledgment of the Son of God must come before that of the Son of David. The latter title indeed He Himself never uses, though He could not but own it, where as here true faith expressed itself in it.
(2) Linked directly with this miracle we have another. A dumb demoniac is brought to Him, and when the demon is cast out, the dumb speaks. Here again surely, we have Israel’s miserable enslavement to the prince of this world, which they showed in their rejection of the true King. The dumb will speak, only when the demon is cast out, and then it will be indeed to the praise of their Deliverer. But now the miracle is only provocative of blasphemy from the Pharisees, which they repeat more boldly at an after-time, and which then brings out the Lord’s warning words as to blasphemy against the Spirit. It was a sign of hearts that were hardening themselves against all that divine love could do. But it was yet to be seen whether Israel as a whole were going with such leaders. The pity of the Lord is only roused by it now to more importunate appeal to the people to whom He had come, - His people and the sheep of His pasture, - to listen to His voice.

Matthew 9:35-10

Section 2. (Matthew 9:35-38; Matthew 10:1-42.)His Messengers. The Lord refuses, then, the leaders of the people as representing the people themselves. They are mere misleaders, shepherds not feeding the flock, but injuring and rending them. As He goes up and down Galilee, constantly bearing testimony of the Kingdom at hand, and doing every where the mighty deeds which were the demonstration of the power of God already among them to bring it in, His heart is moved with the misery of their condition. Yet the sheltering wings of divine mercy were manifestly ready to be folded over them. It depended but upon themselves whether they would welcome the love that was seeking them. The abundant miracles, appealing as they did to the very senses of men; by the relief of need in every form and however desperate, could not but appeal to every legitimate self-interest on man’s part.

And, however it might be with the nation at large, He is assured of the harvest that will reward labor in these beckoning fields. But the laborers, where are they? He bids His disciples, therefore supplicate the Lord of the harvest that He would thrust forth laborers into His harvest - not merely “send” but impel them to go out and then He turns these praying ones into laborers themselves. He gives them authority to do the works that He is doing - power over the whole power of the enemy and every outward consequence of sin; and sends them out to testify thus by word and work of the Kingdom drawing nigh. The messengers thus sent out are themselves significant. We are familiar with their manifest deficiencies from a mere human point of view, deficiencies which made them only the more dependent upon that divine power which worked in them and through them. The apostle of the Gentiles afterwards, himself a man of very different up-bringing from these Galilean fishermen; and just when addressing himself to the vain and luxurious inhabitants of a wealthy pagan city, expressly stripped himself of any natural advantages that he might have, and “came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto them the testimony of God.” And this was expressly that his speech and his preaching might not be with enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power” (1 Corinthians 2:1; 1 Corinthians 2:4). It is certain that these rude instruments, as we should call them, yet moulded and energized by the Spirit of God, did a work such as has never since been done. Doubtless there was a fitness so given to them, transcending all the power of the schools to accomplish since. It is remarkable, with but an exception or two, how little we know of this or of them.

In the Gospels themselves we much more often have them held up as warnings to us, than for our imitation. In the Acts, where most we should expect to find them, only one or two - fewer than in the Gospels - are at all prominent. And even these soon pass from our sight, and scarcely even a fragment of tradition of them remains. The “Acts” are, as has been well said, rather the acts of the Spirit of God, sovereignly using any that He will, than the “Acts of the Apostles,” as they have come without warrant to be called; though Paul the apostle - not any of the twelve - is the principal figure in the latter half of the book. It is to the Spirit of God, evidently, that we are commended, and to practise the same utter dependence upon Him as they did. No doubt, what we have of these earliest workmen should reveal to us much more than we have ever found in it. Even their names and their number should be significant. The Lord Himself connects them with the twelve tribes of Israel, over whom they are to rule in the day of the earth’s “regeneration” (Matthew 19:28). And on the foundations of the heavenly city their names are also found (Revelation 21:14). Twelve is indeed the number of manifest divine rule, as we have often seen, and these twelve names should have lessons for us in such connection. Their ministry is specially connected with the Kingdom, as Paul’s is eminently with the Church (Colossians 1:25*), and thus, probably, it is that their names are on the foundations of the city of God, which is the centre of divine government in that scene to which the book of Revelation carries us forward.
But we have here only a preparatory testimony addressed to Israel, and the names are in pairs, six pairs, as they were sent out by the Lord, two and two, not disregarding apparently in this the natural or spiritual ties which link men together. Simon and Andrew are brothers, and Simon had been led by his brother to Jesus: here there were both links. The sons of Zebedee come next. Then Philip and Bartholomew, the latter supposed to be that Nathanael, whom Philip had brought to the Lord. Beyond this we are not able to go in realizing such connection, and as to the names and persons had better leave what can be said of them to develop naturally from the history. Here they are upon a special mission to the “lost sheep” - already that -“of the house of Israel,” and are strictly forbidden to go whether to Gentiles or Samaritans. It is not at all an evangelization after the Christian pattern; and the directions given to them are only in part applicable to the present time. They were to proclaim the Kingdom as at hand, accompanying the proclamation with what the apostle calls, because of their connection with this, the “powers of the age” (not “world”) “to come” (Hebrews 6:5). Sickness and death would yield to them; leprosy, (which had to do also with defilement before God,) and the power of the enemy: blessings to be scattered far and wide, as manifesting the grace which they themselves also had received. They were to take no supply, whether of money or clothing, as not going out into a heathen world but among those professedly owning God, with whose message they came, and as under the guardianship of the King their Master, - having a right, therefore, to expect the sustenance due to His laborers. Referring to this afterwards, and appealing to their own experience of how this expectation had been fulfilled to them, He distinctly recalls this commandment, in view of their going out into die world after His rejection (Luke 22:35-36); and the laborers of an after-time are distinctly commended by the apostle, “because that for His Name’s sake they went forth, taking nothing of the Gentiles” (3 John 1:7).

But now the King’s messengers were not to go as strangers: in every city or village those worthy were to be sought out, and with these they were to abide till they went forth from the city. The “peace” with which they greeted a house, made good, if it were worthy, with substantial blessing, would more than recompense all that they might receive. If it were not worthy, then the blessing would be as if it were not uttered. Finally, against house or city that would not receive them, they were to shake off the dust of their feet, as not willing to carry with them the least particle of that which belonged to those in hostility to their Lord. It would be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment than for that city. (2) Invitation and warning thus went hand in hand; but the Lord does not hide from the disciples the fact that the nation, nay, the world, would reject Him, and therefore them. He puts this indeed fully before them, to prepare them for it and encourage them in view of it: He was sending them forth as sheep in the midst of wolves, - a hopeless thing to natural expectation; they were therefore to be as prudent - or wary - as serpents, but pure as doves, - without the serpent’s deceit. Men would deliver them up to councils, or sanhedrim, spiritual courts connected with the synagogues themselves. But beyond this they would bring them before governors and kings, the secular Gentile powers, as we see in the Lord’s case, necessarily under a different charge, and with a malice which He would turn to a testimony in the highest places and to the Gentiles at large, whom grace was content to seek even in such a manner. Paul’s case illustrates all this fully at a later day. But they need not be careful as to their defence at such times. They would not be left to mere unaided wisdom. As the cause of Christ the Spirit of their Father would take it up and give them words fitted. Yet the hatred of them would be so intense as to break through all natural ties, and change the strongest affections into bitterest enmity. Brother would rise against brother, father against child, children against parents: they must endure, and at the end would come deliverance. Fleeing from one city to another, they would not have gone over the cities of Israel till the Son of man was come. These last words make it plain that the mission of the twelve, while a mission to Israel only, and necessarily broken off by the judgment upon Jerusalem and the dispersion of the people, if not before, yet is not in the Lord’s mind at an end even now. It will be taken up again under similar circumstances, but in the face of bitterer persecution; and continued until the actual coming of the Son of man from heaven and the consequent deliverance of His own at a time yet future. No doubt the Lord’s words could not as yet be understood by those to whom He spoke; and they have been a cause of great perplexity to commentators, and variously interpreted by them in consequence. Had they not mostly confounded this testimony to Israel alone with the general publication of the gospel since, they would have had their perplexity increased. The occurrence of the same exhortation and encouragement with the distinct and detailed prophecy of the coming of the Son of man; in the twenty-fourth chapter, assures us as to the meaning here. Again there we are told that “he that endureth to the end shall be saved,” the special troubles of the last days are put before us, and the Lord’s coming at the end “with all His holy angels with Him.” But even as to the meaning of this, many have gone quite astray; while the lack of understanding of the parenthetical nature of the present Christian time has necessarily confounded things which should have been kept far apart.

In the Old Testament prophecy the present time of grace to the Gentiles never appears; and to this character the words of the Lord here conform. The new dispensation was not yet in view, and could not be while yet the testimony to Israel was going on. But this is, on this very account, not yet the place to consider what will necessarily be before us a little further on. (See Matthew 13:35.) (3) The Lord urges now upon His disciples their necessary identification with Himself, so that they can expect no better treatment than He Himself received. If they had called the Master of the house Beelzebul,* how much more those of his household. Beelzebul means the “lord of the dwelling,” - the Satanic “master of the house,” who made the demon-possessed his habitation. They called Him this who was the lawful Master, the One stronger than the strong, who set the poor captives free (Matthew 12:29). What, then; would they call the men of His household? But then from such raving there was nothing to fear. All would one day be unveiled and brought to light; and in that confidence they might proclaim upon the house-tops whatever they had heard of Him in greatest privacy.
It was true that in their enmity to it men might kill the body: this was their limit; by doing so they would only deprive themselves of further power. The soul would survive beyond their reach. God could destroy both body and soul in hell,* and He who has this power is the One only to be feared. We cannot but remember, in view of the Lord’s words here, that there was a Judas already among this little band of witnesses for Christ, - a man whose surname was “Iscariot,”** and who “from the beginning” was known by Him to be the traitor (John 6:64). Solemn words of our Lord in the presence of such an one; and surely for his ears.
*The surname “Iscariot” has had many interpretations: commentators in general having pretty well settled down now into the belief that it means “Ish Kerioth,” or the “man of Kerioth.” If so, he was the one Judean among the disciples, who otherwise were of Galilee; and some see much significance in this. But is it not much more probable that it is from the same root with, and akin to Issachar, “there is reward,” or “hire,” too near identity being naturally avoided with one of the fathers of Israel? There seems to have been a form of the word, shacar, from which is derived the word eshcar (Ezekiel 27:15) of similar meaning. Iscariot might mean even thus the “trafficker,” more closely connected with his crime than “hireling” would be. Notice how we are reminded of this surname (which may have been given him afterwards) at the very time when he puts himself into Satan’s hands for the betrayal of the Lord (Luke 22:3). But He goes on to encourage them with the blessed thought of being in relation to such an one as Father, without whom not one of those sparrows which men sold two for a penny, could fall to the ground, and whose tender care had numbered every hair of His children’s heads. They were of more account, then, than many sparrows.
But they must confess Christ before men: whoso confessed Him before men He also would confess before His Father in heaven; and whoso denied Him, He also would deny before His Father - He could not now say their Father - in heaven. Grace never sets aside the holiness of God, but conforms us to its conditions; while divine holiness does not set aside the grace, which always receives the penitent: and the chief of the apostles furnishes us with the illustration of this. (4)
The test of true discipleship is found then in the preference of Christ to all things whatsoever else. The Prince of peace had come into the world, and yet the effect of His presence would not be to produce peace as between man and man; but on the contrary to bring out all the opposition of the heart to Him. For this they must be prepared. Variance would be introduced into families, - an effect with which the truths has been invariably reproached. Professing disciples would have to take their choice, therefore, between Himself and all else, were it father, mother, son or daughter: the inmates of a man’s house would be his foes. No one would be fit to be a disciple of His who did not accept this, and take up his cross to follow Him.

Here for the first time He intimates the death before Him, - the shame which He has turned to glory: a dread word now for those whom He is sending out as heralds of His Kingdom, but with all the intimation of sorrow and rejection. Humbling Himself to all that the enmity of man can do, His language is that of serenest, fullest consciousness of a title far more than royal - a divine title. With the world thus against Him, He putting forth no power to subdue it, nor even to shelter His people from the vindictive hatred which He predicts, He claims from all that will be His disciples the most perfect devotedness that could be shown by man. He is to be dearer than the dearest, nearer than those bound by the closest of ties. And under such constraint they are to follow Him as the perfect, supreme example of all that is highest to be attained: to be “worthy of Him” their whole ambition! How His glory shines out here from the depth of self-abasement. (5) He goes on to declare the recompense, connecting it with the conditions already laid down. “He that findeth his life shall lose it, and he who has lost his life” - not simply as having done this, but - “for My sake, shall find it.” This is no principle of asceticism, or anything like that: it is His love governing in the face of a hostile world. Then He identifies Himself in the fullest way with those sent forth by Him: “he that receiveth you receiveth Me, and he that receiveth Me receiveth Him that sent Me.” This principle He now extends beyond those He is addressing: “He that receiveth a prophet in the name of a prophet shall receive a prophet’s reward; and he that receiveth a righteous man in the name of a righteous man shall receive a righteous man’s reward.” That is, where mind and heart identify one with the prophet or the righteous man; God will identify him: the receiver of a prophet shall be blessed with the prophet. And divine love will forget nothing that is done for love’s sake: “whosoever shall give to one of these little ones a cup of cold water only in the name of a disciple, he shall in no wise lose his reward.”