Matthew 27

Matthew 27 “THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW”

Chapter Twenty-Seven Prevented by law from carrying out execution, the religious leaders sent Jesus to Pilate who condemned Him to be crucified (Matthew 27:1-2; Matthew 27:10-31). Meanwhile, Judas returned the betrayal money and hanged himself (Matthew 27:3-9). Crucified along with two thieves, Jesus expired after six hours (Matthew 27:32-56). His body was buried in Joseph’ s tomb, secured by Roman guards (Matthew 27:57-66).

POINTS TO PONDER

• The events leading to the crucifixion

• The abuse Jesus suffered prior to His actual death REVIEW

1. What are the main points of this chapter?

• Jesus before Pilate and his soldiers - Matthew 27:1-2; Matthew 27:10-31- Judas hangs himself - Matthew 27:3-9- Jesus’ crucifixion and death - Matthew 27:32-56- Jesus buried and tomb secured - Matthew 27:57-66

2. What did Judas do when he realized Jesus was condemned? (Matthew 27:3-5)

• Returned the betrayal money and then hanged himself

3. What did Jesus confess to Pilate? (Matthew 27:11)

• He was the King of the Jews

4. Who was released instead of Jesus? (Matthew 27:15-26)

• Barabbas, a notorious prisoner

5. What abuse did the Roman soldiers inflict on Jesus? (Matthew 27:26; Matthew 27:28-31)

• Scourged, stripped, crowned with thorns, mocked, spat upon, struck with a reed

6. Who helped bear Jesus’ cross? Where was Jesus crucified? (Matthew 27:32-33)

• Simon of Cyrene; Golgotha (Place of a Skull)

7. Who blasphemed and mocked Jesus as He hung on the cross? (Matthew 27:39)

• Those who passed by, including the chief priests, elders, and scribes

8. What did the guards confess after seeing the events following Jesus’ death? (Matthew 27:54)

• “Truly this was the Son of God!”

9. Where was Jesus buried? Who saw where He was buried? (Matthew 27:57-61)

• In Joseph’ s tomb; Mary Magdalene and the “other” Mary (cf. Matthew 27:56)

10. Why was a Roman guard placed at the tomb of Jesus? (Matthew 27:62-66)

• To prevent the disciples from stealing the body and saying He rose from the dead Matthew 27:1-66 Verse 1Mat 27:1-66JESUS UP TO PILATE; THE END OF JUDAS; JESUS BEFORE PILATE; THE MOCKERY; THE ; THE DEATH OF JESUS; JESUS WAS LAID IN THE TOMB; POSTING A GUARD AND SEALING THE TOMBNow when morning was come, all the chief priests and elders of the people took counsel against Jesus to put him to death: and they bound him, and led him away and delivered him up to Pilate the governor. (Matthew 27:1-2) This occurred on the morning of the day of preparation for the Passover, which had technically begun the night before at sunset. That was the day on which the paschal lambs would be ceremonially slain in the temple; but on THAT day of preparation, God himself would slay the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world and would lay upon him “the iniquity of us all.” The “counsel” mentioned in Matthew 27:1 is probably Matthew’s summary of the official trial before the Sanhedrin, held and concluded very early that same morning; but it could also refer to a caucus held shortly before confrontation with the governor in order for the priests to determine the best way to present their case to Pilate. The devious and hypocritical procedure they decided upon was unfolded in the ensuing events and only worsened the evil reputation which ever since has properly belonged to those wicked men. Pontius Pilate, the fifth procurator of Judaea, or governor as he was called, was appointed by Tiberius, 26 A.D.; and his administration was often in conflict with the Hebrews whom he doubtless despised. He insulted their traditions by bringing the Roman standards into the Holy City (the standards had images); but under threat of widespread disorder, he yielded and withdrew them. No one knew better than Pilate the hypocrisy of the Sanhedrin in professing to take Caesar’s part against Christ. A number of conflicting traditions exist relative to Pilate’s death. A 52-foot pyramid stands at Vienna on the Rhone which purports to mark the place of his suicide. He was also supposed to have drowned himself in Lake Lucerne, where an adjacent mountain is called Pilatus.

It is known that he was summoned to Rome to face charges; but when he arrived, Tiberius had been succeeded by Caligula, and Pilate was deposed. Eusebius affirmed that soon afterward Pilate, “wearied with misfortunes, killed himself.” As for his character, he was probably no better or worse than the rank and file of imperial deputies who held the sprawling empire in check; but it was his fate to be memorialized forever in the creeds of Christendom. “Suffered under Pontius Pilate” has echoed down nearly two millennia, embalming his name in perpetual infamy. There were many others who deserved the fate as much as he, and yet there can be no doubt that he deserved the odium which fell upon his name. After all, he put to death an innocent man, in full knowledge of his innocence, and did so for purely personal and expedient considerations. That he did not truly know the full identity of Christ does not mitigate his guilt.

Verse 3 Then Judas, who betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself, and brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders.The exact time Judas made that decision is not given; it has already been noted that the Sanhedrin made no use of Judas’ testimony, and if they attempted to suborn him, which it may be assumed that they did, he certainly refused; and such a speculation, if allowed, would account for their hostility when he attempted later to return the money. Even in “repentance,” Judas did the wrong thing. If he had gone to his Saviour instead of to the priests, it is possible he might have been forgiven.

Verse 4 Saying, I have sinned in that I betrayed innocent blood. But they said, What is that to us? see thou to it.How callous and bitter do the religious leaders appear in this cold and heartless exhibition of total indifference to moral and spiritual values. They could not have cared less about right or wrong, truth or falsehood, justice or injustice. The testimony of the traitor at that tragic moment is of surpassing value to the Christian gospel. Even the man who betrayed Christ confessed his innocence, not under duress but voluntarily, and not before his disciples but before his enemies.

Verse 5 And he cast down the pieces of silver into the sanctuary, and departed; and he went away and hanged himself. And the chief priests took the pieces of silver, and said, It is not lawful to put them into the treasury, since it is the price of blood.The casting of the silver into the sanctuary fulfilled Zechariah’s prophecy (Zechariah 11:12). See under Matthew 27:10, below. Other things forbidden to the treasury were the hire of a harlot and the price of a dog (Deuteronomy 23:18). The capacity of those men to “strain out the gnat and swallow” (see under Matthew 23:23 ff) is almost unbelievable. They were not above hiring perjured witnesses, bribery, plotting to murder the Son of God, or doing any other evil thing that might have seemed expedient; but to take back their own money from repentant Judas, THAT was unlawful!

Furthermore, the restriction against blood-money being placed in the treasury does not appear to be one of God’s restrictions, but one of their own! Deuteronomy 23:18, usually cited in this context, says nothing of the “price of blood.” That was probably just another instance of their having made their own traditions of more importance than God’s word.

Verse 7 And they took counsel, and bought with them the potter’s field, to bury strangers in. Wherefore, that field was called, The field of blood, unto this day. Then was fulfilled that which was spoken through Jeremiah the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was priced, whom certain of the children of Israel did price; and they gave them for the potter’s field, as the Lord hath appointed me.Still ignorant of what they were doing, the enemies of Jesus continued to fulfill Zechariah’s prophecy (Zechariah 11:12-13); Judas cast the money “in the house of the Lord,” and they made it “unto the potter.” Acts 1:19 gives the Aramaic name for the field, popularly known as Akeldama. “Jeremiah” was the name of a larger grouping of the Hebrew Scriptures which contained both Jeremiah and Zechariah, along with other books including all the minor prophets. Thus, Matthew is guilty of no error in the use of the term “Jeremiah.” An equivalent case today would be a quotation credited to “Romans” or to the “New Testament.” Some commentators believe that Matthew quoted from some of the traditional sayings of Jeremiah, since it is not said that Jeremiah wrote the saying but that he spoke it. The quotation, exhibiting several variations from the words in Zechariah, may then be understood either as an exact quotation from Jeremiah, now lost, or a paraphrase of Zechariah. In any case, the objection is not important. The exact fulfillment of Zechariah’s prophecy by the betrayal events is fully discussed under Matthew 26:15. As for the alleged contradiction between the Acts and Matthew accounts of the manner of Judas’ death and the persons purchasing the field, note the following: MATTHEW He departed and went away and hanged himself … The chief priests took the silver … and bought with them the potter’s field to bury strangers in. ACTS Now this man obtained a field with the reward of his iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out. Haley said: Neither of these statements excludes the other. Matthew does not deny that Judas, after hanging himself, fell and burst asunder; Luke does not assert that Judas did not hang himself prior to his fall. Probably the circumstances are much as follows: Judas suspended himself from a tree on the brink of the precipice overhanging the valley of Hinnom, and the limb or the rope gave way; and he fell and was mangled as described in Acts.[1] If Judas hanged himself, as plainly said, the only way he could have come down was by falling, or by tender and loving removal at the hands of others. To say that he did not fall, as plainly said, one would have to be able to affirm that some person or persons prevented it. Furthermore, if the body remained suspended until it fell of natural causes, which was likely, the bursting of the body as it fell would have been a certainty. Now, note the so-called contradiction in Acts which ascribes the obtaining of the field to JUDAS as contrasted with Matthew’s recording that the “PRIESTS bought the potter’s field.” This too is one of those artificial “contradictions” So delightful to skeptics. Since Judas provided the money to buy the field, it is highly proper to say that he “obtained” it. That the actual purchase and arranging of the legal transfer of the property was done by the priests makes it true also that they actually “bought” it. Today, on the campuses of a thousands colleges, are buildings “bought” by various donors whose names are inscribed on the buildings; yet in every case, it was the college or university which literally “bought” the building, signing all the contracts, making the legal transfers, etc. Furthermore, if a donor dies before all the legal details are completed, he is still said to have “given” or “obtained” for the school the new student center, or dormitory, or science building. That the same purchase is under consideration in both Matthew and Acts is implicit in the name “field of blood,” which is the same in both. b[1] John W. Haley, Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible (Nashville: B. C. Goodpasture, 1951), p. 349.

Verse 11 Now Jesus stood before the governor: and the governor asked him, saying, Art thou the King of the Jews? And Jesus said unto him, Thou sayest. And when he was accused by the chief priests and elders, he answered nothing.THE FOURTH TRIAL OF JESUSThose infamous hypocrites were still up to their old game of trying to get Jesus crucified for sedition and had obviously represented Christ to Pilate as a political aspirant to the non-existent throne of the Hebrews. Christ answered Pilate’s fair question just as fairly; but it was plain as daylight to Pilate that Christ’s “kingdom” was not such as to be of any concern to Caesar! The Sanhedrin was most unwilling to give Pilate their true reason for demanding the death penalty, namely that Christ had claimed to be the divine Messiah; so the first part of this fourth trial was used by them to allege all kinds of crimes against the Christ in the hope of getting him crucified on any charge except the true one. Christ’s serene composure and restraint throughout the trial infuriated them more and more, as it became increasingly evident that they would not be able to deceive Pilate. Jesus used the same strategy here as in the long trials before the Sanhedrin, maintaining silence in the face of fraudulent and unprovable charges.

Verse 13 Then saith Pilate unto him, Hearest thou not how many things they witness against thee? And he gave him no answer, not even to one word: insomuch that the governor marveled greatly.Of course, they were talking a bold case against Christ, but they had no proof; and Pilate perfectly understood the unreliability of all the wild charges they alleged against him. Moreover, Pilate’s wonder and admiration were kindled by the sublime and commanding presence of the Master, who, even in the depths of his humiliation, must have exhibited the manner and attitude of Truth incarnate. Christ’s silence in the face of all the vicious allegations of the chief priests and elders doubtless struck Pilate as a very daring and courageous evidence of confidence. Certainly the record is clear that at that point Pilate was determined to release Christ and subsequently made a number of clever and determined maneuvers to acquit him. THE FIFTH TRIAL OF CHRISTPilate’s First Effort to Release ChristThe fifth trial of Christ came about from Pilate’s seizure upon the priests’ mention of “Galilee” as an excuse to send Christ to Herod. Matthew did not record any of the “many things” they witnessed against Christ, but Luke recorded their charge of having “stirred up the people, FROM GALILEE” (Luke 23:5). Herod, like all Roman deputies, was in Jerusalem for the Passover, and Pilate did a politically clever thing by sending Christ to Herod, the tetrarch of Galilee. Herod’s curiosity was frustrated; Jesus performed no miracle; in fact, he said nothing. The Lord was mocked; and Herod, after allowing his guard to make sport of Christ, sent him back to Pilate. The Jewish leaders attended the trial before Herod and prosecuted Jesus with their usual vehemence (Luke 23:10); but in spite of their accusations, Herod found no cause of death in Christ and refused to condemn him. THE SIXTH TRIAL OF CHRISTPilate’s Second Effort to Release ChristThis second effort of the procurator to release Christ was not recorded by Matthew but is outlined in Luke 23:13-15. It came in the form of a confrontation in which Pilate summoned them and bluntly announced that both he and Herod had found “no fault” in Christ. “Behold, nothing worthy of death hath been done by him (Luke 23:15 ff). That was precisely the point at which Pilate should have broken off the trial and released Christ, ordered the legions to disperse the crowds, and announced the decision of the court in harmony with the verdict of innocence; but as Christ himself so often said, “The scriptures must be fulfilled!” Pilate’s hesitation at that critical moment allowed the initiative to pass once more to the Pharisees, and thus the second maneuver failed. The Third Effort of Pilate to Release JesusThis was an offer to impose the milder punishment of chastisement instead of the death penalty. “I will, therefore, chastise him, and release him” (Luke 23:16). Of course, there was nothing mild about the horrible Roman flagellation. In this brutal suggestion, the moral crevasses in the character of Pilate were plainly visible. This proposal to subject a man he had just declared to be innocent to the shocking and bloody chastisement practiced in those days showed plainly enough that Pilate actually had no moral scruples against crucifixion, and that proposal was probably the first indication to the Jewish leaders that they would be able to have their way with Pilate in regard to Christ. True, Pilate would not yield without further struggles to extricate himself from a distasteful involvement in the terrible business; but the end had already begun with this third effort to spare Christ’s life.

Verse 15 Now at the feast the governor was wont to release, unto the multitude one prisoner, whom they would. And they had then a notable prisoner, called Barabbas. When therefore they were gathered together, Pilate said unto them, Whom will ye that I release unto you? Barabbas, or Jesus who is called Christ?The Fourth Effort of Pilate to Release JesusNo doubt Pilate thought they would choose Christ; but he had reckoned without consideration of the fanatical hatred of the leaders against Christ. Barabbas was a notorious seditionist and robber (Mark 15:7), the leader of a group who had made an insurrection against Rome (presumably). His crimes were murder, robbery, and sedition; and Pilate’s strategy at that point was directed to forcing a choice between such a man and Christ. Under the circumstances, the choice of Barabbas would have strong overtones of disloyalty to Caesar which the Pharisees had so lately professed; but if Pilate counted on such a deterrent to the choice of Barabbas, he was mistaken. Did Barabbas know of that proposal? If so, he must have felt that he had practically no chance of being chosen over one whose reputation as a prophet, healer, and holy person was so widespread. Since the condemnation of other robbers resulted in their crucifixion, it is safe to assume that the same fate awaited Barabbas, except for Pilate’s proposal to pair him with Christ for the honor of being released for Passover.

Verse 18 For he knew that for envy they had delivered him up. And while he was sitting on the judgment-seat, his wife sent unto him, saying, Have thou nothing to do with that righteous man; for I have suffered many things this day in a dream because of him.Matthew recorded very little of the extensive conversation recorded in John 18:28-38, in which Pilate concluded by asking, “What is truth?” But the record of that conversation is in Matthew 27:18. He knew that “for envy” they had delivered him. Pilate thus knew the innocence of Christ, the hypocrisy as well as the true motives of his accusers; and he could see through the tissue of lies in their charges. There is an extensive traditional literature with reference to Claudia, Pilate’s wife, who had the courage to witness to the righteousness of Christ at the very moment of his condemnation. Fan Records, Inc., Anaheim, California, with Marjorie Lord as narrator, have produced a remarkable 27-minute recording as a “reading of Claudia’s letter.” It is not alleged here that the letter is either inspired or authentic; but it does impress the sincere student of the Bible as a possible detail of what happened and strikes the hearts of those who listen to it with an overwhelming emotional impact. The so-called “letter” reveals Claudia as a convert to Christianity, alleges that Christ had healed her son of congenital lameness, makes her a friend of the wife of Jairus and a witness of the raising of Jairus’ daughter from the dead. Records of this letter have long existed. Catherine Van Dyke of the New York Times discovered an ancient copy of it at Bruges, in a monastery, in 1929. Claudia is honored as a saint by the Greek Orthodox Church and also by the Copts.

A Christian does not need to place any reliance whatever upon such traditions as this; but the one relative to Claudia contains a remarkable degree of plausibility, and none of the “facts” it alleges are in any way incompatible with the Scriptures. They would even seem to enjoy some inferential support from the strange incident recorded in Matthew 27:19. It is significant that Pilate, a pagan, should have received just such a warning as a pagan would have been most likely to heed. Thus, just as Judas was warned by the Lord, God gave Pilate his warning also. b Verse 20 Now the chief priests and the elders persuaded the multitudes that they should ask for Barabbas, and destroy Jesus. But the governor answered and said unto them, Which of the two will ye that I release unto you? And they said, Barabbas.This shows that Pilate’s judgment relative to the popularity of Christ vs. Barabbas was correct. If left to themselves, the multitude would surely have chosen Christ; but the priests left nothing to chance, and did a “hard sell” on the multitude. That they were able to succeed in such a task was due to the general reverence and respect in which they were held. They had enough influence to accomplish their purpose. Thus, the fourth effort of Pilate to release Christ was drowned in the roar of the mob, “Give us Barabbas!” “Crucify Jesus!” How irresponsible and unruly is a mob! Let those who hold the view, “Vox populi, vox Dei” behold this case in which the “voice of the people” was the voice of Satan. It was the voice of the people that said to Aaron, “Make us gods to go before us.” It was the voice of the people that turned out the garlands and oxen to do sacrifice to Paul and Barnabas (Acts 14:11). It was the voice of the people that shouted “Hosanna to the Son of David” on Sunday, and, before the week ended, shouted, “Crucify him! crucify him!” Who o’er the herd would wish to reign? Fantastic, fickle, fierce, and vain, Vain as the leaf upon the stream, And fickle as a changeful dream, Fantastic as a woman’s mood, And fierce as frenzy’s fevered blood; Thou many headed monster thing, O, who would wish to be thy king?[2] What a triumph of evil in that horrible choice of Barabbas instead of Christ! It was not enough that the Prince of Life be rejected; such was the cunning of the evil one that the Lord’s chosen people shouted their preference for a brutal criminal instead. There is a pattern in that perverted choice that extends endlessly through man’s spiritual history. Rejection of the truth always results in the acceptance of something else. As Paul said, “They shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables” (2 Timothy 4:4). When men turn away from Christ, they accept Karl Marx, Mrs. Eddy, Joseph Smith, etc. ENDNOTE:[2] Sir Walter Scott, The Lady of the Lake, Canto V, stanza 30.

Verse 22 Pilate saith unto them, What then shalt I do into Jesus who is called Christ? They all say, Let him be crucified.Sooner or later, every soul is confronted with the same question, “What then shall I do unto Jesus who is called Christ?” The problem will not go away. The decision cannot be avoided or transferred to another, or endlessly deferred. “What think ye of Christ? Whose son is he?” That question is the moral watershed down which the several streams of eternal life and eternal death move inexorably to the wide seas. Pilate sought to drown his conscience, the plea of his distressed wife, and the proclaimed verdict of innocence, in the cacophony of a hysterical mob; but the decision was his. Even if his mind did not fully grasp it, his lips surely admitted it. “What then shall I do …”

Verse 23 And he said, Why, what evil hath he done? But they cried out exceedingly, saying, Let him be crucified!This was the climax of the trial. None of the hundreds of thousands who ever witnessed the Passion Play at Oberammergau can ever forget the mob scene in which over nine hundred people portray the unreasoning fury of that Jerusalem rabble, shouting for the crucifixion of Christ. It is one thing to read it in the Bible, and a glorious thing; but the real-life drama re-enacted before men’s astonished eyes is choking in intensity. It is not difficult to understand how the weakling governor wilted and quailed before such a sadistic onslaught of hatred and cruelty. “In his humiliation, his judgment is taken away” (Acts 8:33). That means that the verdict of his innocence was violently thwarted. Pilate’s reference, even at that late stage, to the innocence of Christ was the prod which finally extorted from the Pharisees the REAL REASON for their demanding Christ’s execution. It is no credit to the religious hierarchy that they concealed it until the very last moment, for they were loathe to have even the Saviour’s death appear in the records upon its true foundation. Thus, at last they spat it out, reluctantly, not because of any sense of honor due the facts, but from a sudden fear that even then Pilate, insisting on Christ’s innocence, might not sign the death warrant. John recorded their final compliance with Pilate’s demand to know “Why?” “The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by that law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God” (John 19:7). The Fifth Effort of Pilate to Release JesusThis answer of the Jews (John 19:7) frightened Pilate, and, moved with fear, Pilate “sought the more to release him” (John 19:11-12). It was no regard to the moral issue of saving an innocent man’s life, but out of fear, that the procurator acted; and in the end that same fear would cause him to yield. We are not told exactly what Pilate’s efforts were at this point, but his return to Christ with the question, “Whence art thou?” (John 19:10) shows that he was searching and casting about in all directions for a possible way out of his dilemma. The Sixth Effort of Pilate to Release JesusSomewhere during the proceedings of that dark day, Pilate tried another approach. It was possibly a little earlier (John 19:6) that Pilate suggested, in view of their determination to kill Jesus, that they take him without legal process and crucify him. This would appear as an implied offer to look the other way if the priests decided to take the law into their own hands. The Jews, however, would not settle for half a loaf. Pilate had consented to the deed in principle, and they were determined to force his hand to the signature. The detestable manner in which they did it is recorded by John, “The Jews cried out, saying, If thou release this man, thou art not Caesar’s friend: every one that maketh himself a king speaketh against Caesar!” (John 19:12-13).

That was the shaft that did it, as far as Pilate was concerned. He would as readily have crucified a hundred innocent men if, in so doing, he had thought to strengthen his position with Caesar. Summarizing the efforts of Pilate to release Jesus, it is observed that:

1. Pilate sent him to Herod Antipas.
2. He gave a verdict of innocence.
3. He offered to substitute a lighter punishment.
4. He proposed a choice between Christ and Barabbas.
5. He insisted on Jesus’ innocence: “Why, what evil hath he done?”
6. He suggested that they take him and mob him.
7. He still sought to release him. Yet after all that, when the cunning enemies of Jesus injected the question of Pilate’s loyalty to Caesar, he capitulated.

Verse 24 So when Pilate saw that he prevailed nothing, but rather that a tumult was arising, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this righteous man, see ye to it.Dramatic as that gesture was, it was meaningless. It was still Pilate’s hand that must sign the death warrant, washing or no washing. Robertson said: Pilate, of course, could not escape the full legal and moral responsibility for his cowardly surrender to the Sanhedrin. The guilt of the Sanhedrin (both Pharisees and Sadducees unite in the demand for the blood of Jesus) is beyond dispute. It is impossible to make a mere political issue out of it and lay the blame on the Sadducees, who feared a revolution. The Pharisees began the attacks on Jesus on theological and ecclesiastical grounds. The Sadducees later joined the conspiracy against Christ. Judas was a mere tool of the Sanhedrin, who had his resentments and grievances to avenge. There is guilt enough for all the plotters in the greatest wrong of the ages.[3] Futile as Pilate’s gesture was, it served the Christian gospel by reaffirming the righteousness and innocence of Christ. Thus, God caused the wrath of man to praise him (Psalms 76:10). ENDNOTE:[3] A. T. Robertson, A Harmony of the Gospels (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1922), p. 225.

Verse 25 And all the people answered and said, His blood be on us and our children.This evil prayer was answered; thus people receive what they ask. All the subsequent sorrows that came upon Israel were then and there invoked by a multitude that included the highest official representatives of the nation. Of all rash things, the rashest is a rash prayer; nor was this the first time that Israel had prayed and received the answer of so rash a petition. Their ancestors had cried in the wilderness, “Would God we had died in the wilderness” (Numbers 14:2). Of course, that is exactly what that generation did; they died in the wilderness. A similar thing happened when Rachel prayed, “Give me children, or I die? (Genesis 30:1).

She died in childbirth when Benjamin was born. The petition recorded here, “His blood be on us and our children,” was also answered in the most dramatic and overwhelming manner when, according to Josephus, 30,000 young Hebrew men were crucified upon the walls of Jerusalem by the soldiers of Titus when the city fell during the summer of A.D. 70; but the full tragedy of that tragic prayer and its tragic aftermath shall never be known until eternity. Through the long centuries, the persecutions, blood-purges, and pogroms directed against Israel must surely be classed among the most astonishing social phenomena ever known; and it is not too much to say that all of them head up to a single fountain in this awful prayer.

Verse 26 Then released he unto them Barabbas; but Jesus he scourged and delivered to be crucified.Scourging was a part of execution by the cross. It came in fulfillment of the prophecy in Isaiah (Isaiah 53:5), but it may be supposed that Pilate did not know that every stripe laid upon our Lord by the scourge was a fulfillment of the word of God. The connection between chastisement and crucifixion is not often stressed, but there still exist inhumane examples of chastisement as a prelude to execution in unchristian nations. Dr. George S. Benson, long-time president of Harding College, related how he witnessed an execution in China, where he served as a missionary.

A young man was caught stealing and condemned to be beheaded. He pleaded that he did not want to die, but the cruel authority said, “Just wait, you will want to die in a few minutes!” Then they stripped him, lashed him to a tree, and beat the very flesh off his bones, knocking out his eyes and his teeth; and then, to the question, “Do you now want to die?” the unfortunate meekly nodded assent, and a moment later his head rolled in the dust. The Roman chastisement, though not as brutal as that described by Dr. Benson, was nevertheless something terrible, and it was not an unusual thing for men to die under the scourge, hence the limitation to “forty stripes, save one” as frequently mentioned in the New Testament.

Verse 27 Then the soldiers of the governor took Jesus into the Praetorium, and gathered unto him the whole band. And they stripped him, and put on him a scarlet robe.THE MOCKERYThis appears to have been a customary sport allowed the soldiery at the expense of any condemned man. Herod’s soldiers took similar liberties (Luke 23:11); and a person referred to them as a pretender to regal honors would have been an especially attractive object of such a sadistic sport as that which then engaged Pilate’s soldiers. The place of the mockery was the Praetorium, so named from the barracks of the emperor’s personal guard in Rome, being presumably, therefore, the common hall where the soldiers held their drill and other exercises, adjacent to the governor’s residence and perhaps a part of it. The “scarlet robe” mentioned in this place was called “purple” by Mark (Mark 15:17). Perhaps part of the garments placed upon him in derision were purple, the whole attire being topped off with a scarlet robe; for it is significant that Mark does not actually refer to the robe as purple, but to his clothing. However, there is another possibility which is even more attractive to this writer, and that is that the robe had both colors, and possibly even a third. This presumption derives from the following: Christ’s flesh was symbolized by the veil of the temple which hung just in front of the Holy of Holies. Now that veil, as described in Exodus 26:31, had three colors, blue, purple, and scarlet. Those three colors appropriately symbolize the heavenly nature of Christ (in the blue), the earthly nature (in the scarlet), and the perfect blending of the divine and human in Christ (in the purple).

How appropriate that during the dark drama of the crucifixion Christ should have worn the very colors of the symbolical veil. It is through the veil that is to say his flesh, that the new and living way is opened up (Hebrews 10:19-22, which see). In view of this, one cannot resist the speculation that the robe was probably three colors, blue and scarlet, with a commingling blue and scarlet to form purple in the center, after the manner of the veil of the ancient tabernacle. Certainly two of those colors are mentioned; and, had another one of the gospels mentioned it, the color might have been blue! Far from being a contradiction, the New Testament mention of two different colors opens a wide vista in which men may see Christ, throughout his passion, wearing the very colors (and surely TWO of them) of that veil which is called his flesh (Hebrews 10:20).

Verse 29 And they platted a crown of thorns and put it upon his head, and a reed in his right; and they kneeled down before him, and mocked him, saying, Hail, King of the Jews!Who but Satan himself could have sent a soldier scurrying about to prick his own hands on a thorn bush and weave such a crown for Christ? More than mortal hatred is evident in the cunning malignity of that diabolical animus which overflowed against Christ during his passion. The kneeling, and mocking salute, “Hail, King of the Jews? have lost none of their repulsiveness, though nearly two thousand years have intervened. There is more in this than the sport of soldiers accustomed to seeing men suffer. The knee bent not in sincerity, the glib salutes, proper as to form but damnable in their intention - all these things somehow ring a bell in our own hearts. Have we ever bent the knee but not in worship; have we never called him Lord, Lord, yet failed to keep his word?

Why the admonition from an apostle that men should “sing with the understanding” and “pray with the understanding”? Is it not a common practice that Christ’s disciples repeat the mockery of Pilate’s soldiers, not of his physical person, to be sure, but of his spiritual body? As to the kind of thorns used, we may safely leave that to the people who have “discovered” a hundred kinds of trees on which Christ was crucified, ranging from the dogwood with the nail-scarred petals to the quaking aspen tree, “quaking for the deed that was done”! Christ will appear in glory, crowned “with many diadems” (Revelation 19:12), crowns of everlasting life, everlasting glory, all authority in heaven and on earth; but for mortals redeemed from sin, there will always be something especially poignant and emotionally quickening in this instance of his wearing that tragic emblem of man’s shame, the thorn crown.

Verse 30 And they spat upon him, and took the reed and smote him upon the head.What an avalanche of shame and brutal treatment descended upon our Lord in those dark hours of his humiliation! Prophecies were being fulfilled every passing minute. “We did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted” (Isaiah 53:4). Yes, it was God who did this, in the sense that he allowed it. God and Christ were the architects of this awful event in which his soul was poured out as an offering for sin. Evil men had a part in it, but the cross must not be viewed as something in which Satan partly blocked and frustrated the will of God. Far from it!

The cross was the occasion when Christ did indeed bruise the head of Satan forever; or at least he did there begin to do so, a beginning which will be brought to fruition when Satan is finally overthrown in eternal punishment. If the sorrows and humiliation and agony heaped upon Christ on the cross must be viewed as merely the bruising of “his heel” (Genesis 3:15), how totally beyond human comprehension will be Satan’s final overthrow?

Verse 31 And when they had mocked him, they took off from him the robe, and put on him his garments, and led him away to crucify him.Alfred Plummer noted that in Mark’s account of this event, the “they” who mocked him were not the same as the “they” who led him away, a conclusion based on a change of the tense.[4] A special detail of soldiers, commanded by a centurion, took over the bloody and terrible business of crucifying Christ and the two robbers condemned along with him. Perhaps the “purple” or “scarlet” robe, having fulfilled its purpose, was returned to its owner; and Christ, clad in his own garments, went to the cross. Those garments included the “seamless robe,” different from the colored one; and it was upon that that the soldiers cast lots. ENDNOTE:[4] Alfred Plummer, Commentary on Matthew (London: Elliot Stock, 1909), p. 393.

Verse 32 And as they came out, they found a man of Cyrene, Simon by name: him they compelled to go with them, that he might bear his cross.Executions inside the city were forbidden (Numbers 15:35; 1 Kings 21:13; Acts 7:58; Hebrews 13:12). The necessity for having someone bear Jesus’ cross probably derived from his fainting from physical weakness induced by the scourging and long previous night of brutal abuse. Luke’s detail that Simon was coming out of Cyrene, “out of the country,” indicates that it was still only the preparation for the sabbath and that the first day of the Passover had not begun. Although from Africa, Simon’s name indicates that he was a Jew. He became a Christian. THE VIA Matthew’s gospel gives little of the details connected with the journey to the cross; the pressing of the cross upon Simon and the proffered wine and gall were not the only events which marked that epic procession. Summarizing the details from all the gospels to form a composite gives the following:

1. At first Christ carried the cross himself (John 19:17).
2. After Christ could not bear it, Simon did (Mark 15:21).
3. “Weep for yourselves” was addressed to the company of sorrowing women who followed (Luke 23:27 ff).
4. Two robbers were also in the procession (Luke 23:32).
5. The wine and gall were given as they neared the cross, or perhaps after their arrival there (Mark 15:23). The so-called seven stations of the cross are not given in the New Testament, and much of the tradition surrounding them is unhistorical. Veronica’s veil, for example, is not mentioned; and to place any credence in such stories is to “go beyond” the word of the Lord (1 Corinthians 4:6). The expression “via dolorosa,” however, is a true description of the tragic journey of our Lord to Golgotha. Yet even in that situation, Christ appears to have been thinking of the overwhelming sorrow that should come upon the daughters of Jerusalem as a result of his crucifixion (Luke 23:26-31). His own sufferings were likened to “the green tree,” theirs to “the dry.”

Verse 33 And when they were come unto a place called Golgotha, that is to say, The place of a skull, they gave him wine to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted it, he would not drink.Dummelow and others view the traditional site of the crucifixion, now marked by the church of the Holy Sepulchre, as possibly the true one, thinking it to have been beyond the ancient walls but now within the walls of the city. The name Golgotha, the place of a skull, however, favors another location: the rocky eminence northwest of the city, an extension of the Temple hill. It is rounded, with large holes, making it resemble a skull when viewed from certain positions. Also, John A. Broadus emphatically disputes the traditional Holy Sepulchre site on the basis that it most certainly does lie within the wall of the ancient city. Of course, it cannot now be determined absolutely WHERE our Lord suffered, except that it was beyond the gates of the ancient Jerusalem, and relatively near the city. The wine (and gall) was a potion designed to deaden the sensibilities of condemned men and to alleviate some of the suffering. Much questioning has arisen over the Lord’s tasting, and then refusing to drink. Did he not know, without tasting, what was in the cup? It appears that in the depths of his humiliation, Christ did not choose to know everything, although he could have done so, especially with regard to those things that could so easily be determined by human investigation. Why did he reject it? Surely not because he wanted to suffer as much as possible, else he would not have tasted it at all.

More probably, the tasting revealed that the concoction contained wine, and it has already been noted why he refused wine (see on Matthew 26:29). Though not related, that drink could have been proffered from the hands of a certain group in Jerusalem who customarily showed mercy by such acts on behalf of condemned men. Another possibility, regarding the wine and gall, is that Christ tasted it in fulfillment of the prophecy: “They gave me also gall for my food; and in my thirst, they gave me vinegar to drink” (Psalms 69:21). Christ’s tasting the drink thus constituted a most accurate fulfillment of the prophecy; and one may well believe it was for that reason he tasted it, although he already knew what was in it. Surely he who knew men’s very thoughts (Luke 6:8; Luke 11:17) also knew what was in the cup, or at least could have known if he had so desired. This view has the advantage of consistency with the Saviour’s unfailing respect for the fulfillment of the Scriptures.

Verse 35 And when they had crucified him, they parted his garments among them, casting lots.These words point to a remarkable fulfillment of Psa 22:18 which reads, “They part my garments among them, and upon my vesture do they cast lots.” Again, it was the enemies of the Lord who fulfilled the prophecy. See more on the prophecies under Matthew 27:46.

Verse 36 And they sat and watched him there.Throughout the ages these words, so richly suggestive, have made a profound impression on men’s minds. And sitting down, they watched him there, The soldiers did; There, while they played with dice, He made his sacrifice, And died upon the Cross to Rid God’s world of sin. He was a gambler too, my Christ, He took his life and threw It for a world redeemed. And ere his agony was done, Before the westering sun went down, Crowning that day with its crimson crown, He knew that he had won![5] The indifference and oblivious insensibility of his executioners to the magnitude of the deed in which they were incidental participants staggers the imagination. This is a fair example of the attitude of all men who live and die as if Christ had not died for their sins. ENDNOTE:[5] G. A. Studdart-Kennedy, The Questing Spirit, poem (New York: Coward-McCann, Inc., 1947), p. 374.

Verse 37 And they set up over his head his accusation written, THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS.In the extensive literature regarding the monumental things of this chapter, one often finds references to the inscription over Jesus’ head, as recorded variously in the four gospels, to the effect that they are “different,” “various,” or even “contradictory”! Thus, Plummer said, “No two gospels agree as to the wording of the title on the cross …” [6] But let any impartial reader read for himself: Matthew: THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS Mark: THE KING OF THE JEWS Luke: THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS John: JESUS OF THE KING OF THE JEWS THIS IS JESUS OF THE KING OF THE JEWSNow, let four independent witnesses quote the first line of the Declaration of Independence, and see the result! Each of the gospels quoted exactly from the inscription, although none of them gave all of it. This remarkable case proves, not discrepancy, but independence of the narrators. It was the custom of those days that the accusation under which men were condemned should, in every case, be posted above their heads; and under the circumstances, the inscription posted by Pilate amounted to a sadistic jest. The Jews, having been so solicitous for Pilate’s loyalty to Caesar, were treated to an exhibition of the governor’s LOYALTY that went far beyond what any of the Jews could have appreciated, Crucifying the “King of the Jews”! - that was going much too far. Ever and always it is the same story, over and over, of the wrath of man praising God (Psalms 76:10). Jesus was indeed the true King of Israel, but Pilate’s title to that effect posted on the cross outraged them (John 19:19-22). CHRIST UPON THE CROSSMost gospel harmonies place the facts of the inscription in the section of Christ’s time on the cross, but it is the view here that the superscription was affixed by Pilate before the crucifixion and at the time the cross was prepared. The gospels, however, mention it only after it became visible to all and the priests tried to get it altered or removed. A truly chronological sequence of all the events connected with the crucifixion is difficult, and certainly Matthew’s topical arrangement is not always chronological; but the commonly accepted order of events is followed here, since the exact chronological sequence is of slight consequence in many of the events recorded. During the hours ending at noon, the following events took place:

1. The first three of the seven utterances of Christ were spoken: (1) “Father forgive them”; (2) “Today shalt thou be with me in Paradise”; and (3) “Woman, behold thy son, behold thy mother” (John 19:26-27; Luke 23:34; Luke 23:43).
2. The chief priests tried to get Pilate to change the inscription.
3. The soldiers gambled for the Lord’s garments.
4. The derision and scoffing by the Sanhedrin, the multitude, the soldiers, and the robbers. Of these events, Matthew emphasized the derision and scoffing, possibly because his gospel was written from the Jewish viewpoint with strong attention focused upon the fulfillment of prophecy which, in the case of the scoffing, pinpointed the very words used. Due to the importance of the “seven words” and their widespread use in the homiletics of all religious groups, a more detailed consideration of them is given at the end of this chapter. The futile efforts of the priests to get Pilate to change the superscription, as detailed by John 19:20-22, means that Pilate had struck home with that device, which had exactly the effect he probably intended. The Jews were certainly embarrassed by it, especially since the crucifixion took place where countless numbers of the Passover throngs could see it, as they were going to or coming from the city. The dignity of those who bore the complaint to Pilate indicates the discomfiture the superscription caused the Jews. Thus, so early in the history of their crime, they wanted to change the script of the dark drama they had so rashly written; but, beginning with Pilate, there would be no fellow-conspirators to help them change it. “What I have written I have written!” was the definite and final ruling of the governor. To be sure, there comes a time when such is true for all. It was true of Israel.

What they had done was done and could not be undone. Over against every evil deed there finally appears the finality of “What I have written I have written.” The chief priests were suddenly left out in the cold with their deeds. They could no longer bend a weak and vacillating governor to their evil will. The great crime so tragically accomplished before the eyes of all generations was at that point forever beyond their slightest control. That very day, history hardened around the deed of infamy, leaving it petrified and frozen in all its ugly details and to be studied and analyzed by millions of men for thousands of years afterwards. ENDNOTE:[6] Alfred Plummer, op. cit., p. 396.

Verse 38Then are there crucified with him two robbers, one on the right hand and one on the left.Broadus supposed that these two robbers were comrades of Barabbas who would have been here between them had not Jesus taken his place. Our Lord had said the night before, “This that is written must yet be fulfilled on me, and he was reckoned among the transgressors” (Luke 23:37; Isaiah 53:12). This was substantially fulfilled by punishing him as if for transgression, but all the more strikingly by associating him with actual transgressors.[7] Another remarkable prophecy relative to these events is Isaiah 53:9, “They made his grave with the wicked and with a rich man in his death” (RSV). In the prophecy the term “wicked” is plural, there being two robbers, while the expression “rich man” is singular, there being only one Joseph of Arimathea to provide the grave. On the designation of those crucified with Jesus as “thieves” rather than robbers, a distinction noted between the King James and the Revised Version, it is clear that the correct term is “robber.” The prevalence of the term “thief” which imputes some smaller measure of guilt, however, has done little harm, especially since Barabbas, as the leader of the group, would have been held more guilty anyway. ENDNOTE:[7] John A. Broadus, Commentary on the New Testament (Philadelphia: The American Baptist Publishing Society, 1886), Vol. I, p. 571.

Verse 39And they that passed by railed on him, wagging their heads, and saying, Thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days, save thyself: if thou art the Son of God, come down from the cross. An accurate description of this railing was given in Psalms 22:1-31. For a more detailed analysis of that Psalm and its prophecy of the crucifixion see at the end of this chapter under the fourth word, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” Christ would soon do the thing they suggested, “raise up the temple (of his body) in three days. John 2:21 records the words of Christ who referred to his body as the true temple. It was a garbled distortion of those words that featured in the suborned testimony during the trial.

Verse 41In like manner also the chief priests mocking him, with the scribes and elders, said, He saved others; himself he cannot save. He is the King of Israel; let him now come down from the cross, and we will believe on him. History scarcely affords another such astonishing example of brutal and unfeeling inhumanity on the part of the judges toward the condemned. The shameful behavior of the rulers of Israel in this instance has no parallel or precedent. Their blasphemous quotations from the sacred Scriptures, being then and there fulfilled before their very eyes, only emphasize the moral blackout of their nobler natures. The taunting promise that they would believe on him if he then came down from the cross was, of course, a lie. They would have done no such thing. As a matter of fact, Christ did a more marvelous thing three days later by coming forth from the tomb, though they had it sealed and guarded, and yet they did not believe on him even after that. It was the glory of Christ that although he saved others, himself he could not save.

Verse 43He trusteth on God; let him deliver him now, if he desireth him: for he said, I am the Son of God. And the robbers also that were crucified with him cast upon him the same reproach. This entire passage in Matthew is oriented to Psalms 22:1-31 (see more on this under Matthew 27:46). It was only natural that the robbers should have joined in the railing; but later, one of them rose to immortality by recognizing Jesus as Lord and asking his remembrance. THE SECOND THREE HOURSThe first three hours on the cross had belonged to Jesus’ enemies, but the last three, in a very wonderful sense, belonged to Christ. It was in this period that there began a most astounding series of wonders, called the Six Calvary Miracles. The sun’s light failed, darkness descended upon the earth, and the remaining four words of the “Seven Utterances” were spoken by Jesus. The centurion in charge of the execution confessed him; there was an earthquake; the graves of the righteous were opened; the veil of the temple was rent in twain; and Christ died! Matthew’s account of the six miracles is by far the fullest, although he gave very slight notice of the undisturbed grave clothes. These six supporting wonders that clustered around the greater wonder of Christ’s resurrection are not usually stressed by commentators, and yet they richly deserve the minutest and most reverential observance. They constitute, in fact, a strong supporting fabric woven around the greater miracle of the resurrection which they were designed to confirm. They are somewhat of a supernatural matrix in which there lies embedded the true jewel of the supernatural Christ. This writer views those secondary wonders as so important that a special section is devoted to them under the heading “Phenomena Attending the Crucifixion and Resurrection” (see under Matthew 27:51).

Verse 45 Now from the sixth hour, there was darkness over all the land until the ninth hour.From noon until three o’clock in the afternoon; there was darkness everywhere. It was not mere eclipse, lasting far too long for that; it was not a dust storm, mist or fog; Luke added the words that the “sun’s light failed.” The gospels, therefore, clearly intended this wonder to be viewed as altogether supernatural (see more on this under Matthew 27:51).

Verse 46 And about the ninth hour, Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is, My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me? and some of them that stood there, when they heard it, said, This man calleth Elijah. And straightway one of them ran, and took a sponge, and filled it with vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave him to drink.The inconsistency in supposing that Elijah’s Lord would call upon him for aid only indicates the utter failure of the Pharisees to see in Christ the true Son of God. They were aware, of course, of Jesus’ claim to be the Son of God (see Matthew 27:40; Matthew 27:43), but they rejected it out of hand. Incidentally, their quotation of Jesus’ claim, as witnessed in Matthew 27:40 and Matthew 27:43, shows conclusively that Christ made that claim in its highest, that is, its supernatural sense. The “Son of God,” as Jesus claimed to be, was thought by the Pharisees to be capable of coming down from the cross, and in that they were right. He was capable of it, but it was not his will to do so. Note too that even at that late hour the Pharisees still did not know that John the Baptist was “that Elijah which was to come.” On Christ’s receiving the vinegar, see under Matthew 27:34. In this instance it must be viewed as an act of mercy, prompted by his saying, “I thirst.”

Verse 49 And the rest said, Let be; let us see whether Elijah cometh to save him.All this talk of Elijah sprang from Pharisaical prejudice and the propaganda they had waged, alleging that Jesus could not be the Christ “because Elijah had not yet come.” Theirs was a misinterpretation of the prophecy that “Elijah must first come.” Christ had already identified John the Baptist as that Elijah which was to come - the Elijah foretold by the prophecies. Doubtless the Pharisees were still harping on their old argument to the effect that Christ could not be the Messiah (see under Matthew 17:10-13).

Verse 50 And Jesus cried again with a loud voice, and yielded up his spirit.Matthew stressed the fact that Jesus submitted to death by personal surrender, as an act of his own volition, and well ahead of the time it could have been naturally expected. The words, “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit,” are given by Luke; Matthew gave scant attention to the “seven utterances.” The time of the Master’s death was three o’clock in the afternoon on the day of preparation for the Passover, making it occur on the afternoon, before sunset, when the actual Passover legally began. Matthew 27:51-53 relate to the Six Wonders of Calvary which received considerable attention in Matthew’s gospel and which are of such surpassing interest that a special study of them is here included. THE THE AND There are actually seven Calvary miracles, the greatest and most wonderful, of course, being the resurrection of Christ. Attending that prime wonder of all ages were six others, truly wonderful in themselves, and designed to support and confirm the greater miracle they attended. These were: The Three Hours of Darkness The Ripping of the Curtain (Veil) The Earthquake The Opening of the Graves The Undisturbed Grave Clothes The Resurrection of the Saints THE THREE HOURS OF “And it was now about the sixth hour, and a darkness came over the whole land until the ninth hour, the sun’s light failing” (Luke 23:44-45). Both in Luke’s words and in those of Matthew (Matthew 27:45), the Greek word for “earth” is used, indicating a far greater extent of the darkness than could have been the case with any local phenomenon. This could not have been an eclipse, because: (1) it came at Passover, always held at the time of the full moon when an eclipse is impossible, and (2) it was too long in duration, lasting three hours, as contrasted with the very longest of eclipses which last less than an hour, and usually only a very few minutes. Nicholson observed that “It was not such a darkness as sometimes precedes an earthquake, like that of Naples in 79, when Vesuvius became a volcano."[8] The reason for this darkness was “the sun’s light failing” (Luke 23:45). The sun itself is but a vast nuclear fire, a sustained and continuing reaction, in which the sun’s mass is being reduced at a rate of “four million tons per second.[9] That, of course, is over fourteen billion tons an hour! God halted the reaction for three hours during the crucifixion. Appropriately, while the Sun of Righteousness was suffering humiliation and death, the literal sun refused to shine. The Christian does not need the corroboration of independent witnesses, but in the case of this darkness it is available. Tertullian said: In the same hour too, the light of day was withdrawn, when the sun at the very time was in his meridian blaze. Those who were not aware that this had been predicted about Christ, no doubt thought it an eclipse. You yourselves have the account of the world portent still in your archives![10] In that quotation, Tertullian appealed to Proculus, a Roman senator; and it is certain Tertullian would not have made such an appeal to Roman records if it had not been true. Pontius Pilate sent the following report to Tiberius, emperor of Rome: And when he had been crucified, there was darkness over the whole earth, the sun having been completely hidden, and the heaven appearing dark, so that the stars appeared, but had at the same time their brightness darkened, as I suppose your reverence is not ignorant of, because in all the world they lighted lamps from the sixth hour until evening. And the moon, being like blood, did not shine the whole night, and yet she happened to be at the full.[11] From these two quotations, to which many others might be added, it is plain that one of the strong arguments used by early Christians in urging the truth of the gospel was their appeal, again and again, to persons in highest authority, to whom they invariably imputed the universal knowledge that such a wonder had indeed occurred. This manifestation of God’s power should cause the soul to tremble. Only the true God and Creator of the universe could step forth and lay his hand upon the established routine of the natural creation and bring to pass such a darkness as that which enveloped the world during three full hours of the crucifixion. Why did God do it? It was a singular witness to the power and godhead of him who was crucified. It was a signal that even the most brutal and depraved could understand. The sneers and jibes of the mockers froze on their evil faces at the onset of that supernatural gloom; and as the somber hours dragged on, the awful fact must have occurred to many that, for all any of them knew, the sun would never shine again! That awe-inspiring darkness was God’s seal upon the truth of the Lord Jesus Christ’s identity and mission upon earth. It was a sign of God’s personal presence in the crucifixion. “Thick darkness was under his feet” (Psalms 18:9). Light is also used as a symbol of God’s presence (James 1:17); but THIS darkness was also such a symbol, because God was the only possible source of it. The darkness symbolized the magnitude and effect of Jesus’ sufferings. It clothed the Saviour’s humiliation with decent privacy. No man could have gone home that night and said, “I saw the whole thing.” That darkness also marked the summary end of the sabbath day. Amos 8:9; Isaiah 13:10; Jeremiah 15:9 and Micah 3:6 are Old Testament Scriptures bearing on this significant truth.

That was the day the sun “went down at noon, and the earth was darkened in a clear sky,” as Amos prophesied. That termination also extended to the dispensation of the prophets and the entire religious economy of the Jews. It was likewise a fitting symbol of God’s wrath upon all who reject the world’s only Redeemer. [8] William R. Nicholson, The Calvary Miracles (Chicago: Moody Press, 1928), p. 6. [9] Herbert Friedman, “Our Life-Giving Star, the Sun” (Washington, D.C., The National Geographic Magazine, Vol. 128, No. 5, November, 1965), p. 720. [10] Tertullian, Apology in the Ante-Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1957), Vol. III, p. 35. [11] Pontius Pilate, To Tiberius in Ibid., Vol. III, p. 463.

Verse 51 And behold the veil of the temple was rent in two, from the top to the bottom.The Ripping of the Curtain of the TempleThe miracle in this instance, other than its timing which is a feature of all these wonders, was that a veil untouched by human hands should have fallen into two equal pieces, in a progressive rending from top to bottom, the force which parted it coming, not from beneath as if violent hands had been laid upon it, but from above as though some unseen hand had passed down the center of it. This event occurred at three o’clock in the afternoon, at a time when the priests would have been busy with the evening sacrifice, going about their tasks with lighted lamps, with a very large number of them present; and it is from this group of eyewitnesses to that remarkable wonder that we may suppose is the explanation of why such a large “company of the priests believed” (Acts 6:7), being later converted to Christ. One may only imagine the fear and awe which attended the rending of that veil, witnessed by so many priests, busy with their lanterns, apprehensive of the enveloping darkness, and eventually associating the event with the final cry of Christ as he perished on the cross. The rending of the veil, occurring simultaneously with the death of Christ, must be associated with that death; and, looking more closely, it is plain that the veil, in practically all of its functions and even in its colors, was a most instructive type of Christ. Again from Bishop Nicholson: How strong a proof of the gospel narratives is the statement of the rending of the veil. The evangelists were bold to publish their accounts in the midst of the Jews, and under the very eyes of the priests. Were they ever contradicted? How it would have been caught at and used by those acute and watchful infidels, Celsus, Porphyry, and Julian! But no! The enemies of Jesus were silenced. They could not say that never before had they heard of it. The simple statement of the evangelists proves itself. It is the true story of the veil’s destruction. [12] The meaning of the veil and its tearing is extensive: (1) Its three colors, blue, purple, and scarlet (Exodus 26:81) symbolize the nature of Christ, blue standing for his heavenly nature, the scarlet for his earthly nature, and the co-mingled blue and scarlet (purple) standing for the perfect two natures in one, Immanuel. (2) The ancient worshiper (in the person of the high priest) went through the veil to the Holy of Holies; the present-day worship has access through Christ into heaven (Hebrews 10:19). (3) It symbolizes his death on Calvary. As the veil was rent, Christ’s body was torn for the sins of the whole world. (4) The tearing also means the removal of obstructions between the worshiper and his God. No longer is there a veil. When some ecclesiastic would seek to put it upon again and hide himself behind it to hear confession or grant absolution, tear it down and trample upon it. God himself removed it. Christ’s followers have boldness, freedom, and “access” (Ephesians 2:18; Ephesians 3:12). (5) The torn veil means that the Old Testament can now be understood in the light of the New.

Out of Christ, the Old Testament is a mystery; in him it is gloriously understood (2 Corinthians 3:14-16). Christ is thus the true “key to the Scriptures.” Accept no other. (6) The rending meant that Christ has conquered death, the fear of it now, the fact of it ultimately (Isaiah 25:7-8). This figure also makes the veil a symbol of death, which of course it is: The “place” it occupied makes that certain. Squarely between the sanctuary and the Holy of Holies, it corresponds to death which lies between the church and heaven; and all who enter heaven shall pass through the veil of death, or be “changed” which is equivalent to it. Christ rent the veil of death in two ways, (a) by passing through it unharmed, and (b) by destroying it for his children. Where is death’s sting? Where, grave, thy victory? Where all the pain? Now that thy King the veil that hung o’er thee Hath rent in twain? Light of the World, we hear thee bid us come To light and love in thine eternal home![13] (7) The torn veil abolished the office of the earthly high priest. The line of demarcation between lesser priests and the high priest was removed by God’s hand. The office of the high priest on earth was no longer needed, nor is it now. All functions held and performed by earthly high priests, for a season, have now been taken over by the true high priest, Christ (Hebrews 9:11). He is the ONLY mediator (1 Timothy 2:5-6). There can be no use, then, for daily sacrifice, whether of the mass or of anything else.

The true sacrifice has already been offered once and for all in heaven. Christ offered himself ONCE (the Greek term [@hapax] means “once” without repetition) (Hebrews 9:23-28; Hebrews 7:27). All Christians are “priests” (1 Peter 2:9; Revelation 5:10). Since the only true high priest is in heaven, and all God’s children are now priests, every human being who moves into a position between one of the Lord’s children (priests) and tries to be something of a higher priest to grant absolution or perform other mediatorial functions is merely trying to patch up that old veil. But God has torn it down. Let no man, therefore, hide behind a veil to hear another’s confession, to pass sentence, demand penance, make intercession, grant absolution, or to perform any service whatsoever.

The veil has been torn in two. Do not let it come back. Take it away forever. Let it come no more between the face of the redeemed and that of the Redeemer. The access assured to the sons of God is not subject to human permission and does not derive from human authority, but is from God. Men are no longer children, hiding in the folds of an old veil.

Let them walk in the light! THE And the earth did quake; and the rocks were rent. Why was this earthquake a miracle, seeing that earthquakes are ordinary events? First, even the most ordinary of earthquakes would in this case, due to its timing, have been strongly suggestive of the supernatural; but this was far more and utterly different from any ordinary earthquake. The peculiar violence of the quake was sufficient in the vicinity of Calvary to rend the rocks, yet the great buildings of Jerusalem, not more than a mile away, were left undisturbed. Insinuations of skeptics and even some commentators that no earthquake occurred are dissolved in the plain light of the New Testament words that “the earth did quake” (Matthew 27:52) and that the people who witnessed it “feared exceedingly” (Matthew 27:54). There is a historical occurrence of just this type of earthquake within very recent times, Three-quarters of a mile northeast of the village of Novice, Texas, during the 1950’s, a violent earthquake took place in the center of a cornfield at three o’clock in the morning, while the village was asleep. My brother, David E. Coffman, was living there at the time, and I have seen the devastation wrought by that earthquake in which several hundred thousand tons of rocks, some of them ten feet in thickness, were rent and cast up from the earth in a very grotesque geological disturbance covering many acres in the heart of that field. Seismometry teams from a number of universities and colleges examined it and diagnosed it as an earthquake, having a very high epicenter, with the focus only a couple of hundred feet beneath. The strange story of that little earthquake received widespread newspaper coverage throughout the United States, especially in scientific journals; and there are many pictures of it, some of which were made by this writer, and which show the corn rows leading directly into it. Now this is related, not that it is thought to add anything to the Holy Scriptures, but because it dramatically refutes the allegations of some that an earthquake at Calvary would invariably and necessarily have wrecked the temple.

As a matter of comparison, none of the houses in Novice was damaged by that violent little earthquake so near to it, although the shock was sufficient to rouse people from their slumbers for many miles in all directions. In the light of this, how unpardonable is the question of Plummer, “We seem to have here a tradition with a legendary element in it."[14] Any traveler to Golgotha needs only to consult his eyes to see that it happened. Alford took note of this, saying, “To this day, Golgotha is a proof of it, where the rocks were rent on account of Christ."[15] If this extraordinary earthquake was of the type described above, its miraculous element would consist of its extreme rarity and timing; but there is the strongest evidence that it was far more than that. Again from Nicholson: Now we say that this earthquake was not only supernatural, but non-natural as well that is, miraculous. It was supernatural in that it was an interference of God, and non-natural, in that it was not the result of any of the natural causes of earthquakes, or any combination of them.[16] Note that the earthquake did not disturb the cross, that it discriminated among the graves of Calvary, opening those of the righteous but not the others; and, from these considerations, one would be hard pressed indeed to explain it as an ordinary earthquake, however timed! The meaning of the earthquake does not lie solely in the opening of the grave but bears an independent testimony of its own. It was Calvary answering to Sinai. There was a great earthquake at Sinai (Exodus 19:18) when the Law was given; and that Law, so long associated with sin and death (Romans 8:2), was being removed and replaced by the law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus. Appropriately, the earth itself should have borne witness to the event that mercy had triumphed over justice, and grace had superseded law. Also, there was prefigured and symbolized the earth-shaking consequences of Christ’s redemptive death and the gospel which would be preached and which was destined to shatter ancient empires and destroy the power of the devil himself (Hebrews 2:14). [12] William R. Nicholson, op. cit., p. 24. [13] Mrs. Chant, Hymn No. 137, The Great Songs of the Church (Chicago: Great Songs Press, 1960). [14] Alfred Plummer, op. cit., p. 402. [15] Alford, as quoted by J. R. Dummelow, One Volume Commentary (New York: Macmillan Company, 1937), p. 718. [16] William R. Nicholson, op. cit., p. 32.

Verse 52 And the tombs were opened; and many bodies of the saints that had fallen asleep were raised. THE OPENING OF THE GRAVES OF THE The implication that only the graves of the righteous were opened comes from the immediate connection with what followed, the resurrection of the saints. At first it seems those two events occurred simultaneously; but the next verse notes that it was “after his resurrection” that they actually came out of their graves and appeared in the city, thus the mention of the saints in Matthew 27:52 is for the purpose of revealing which graves were opened. This, of course, is a great miracle of discrimination. Incredulous scholars have sought in vain for evidence of an interpolation here, but none exists. Plummer said, “There is no textual evidence that the passage is an interpolation."[17] Accepting the amazing fact recorded here by Matthew, one naturally turns to a consideration of its meaning: (1) It means that God knows the location of every grave where his redeemed ones are at rest. Matthew’s use of “sleep” for “death” suggests that death is a sleep only for the righteous: Death, like sleep, is only temporary and shall be followed by an awakening. Jesus used the same figure when speaking of the death of Lazarus (John 11:11). (2) It means that all the dead shall eventually rise from the tomb; and, although this resurrection was but a few compared to the numberless millions of the dead, it is a pledge of much more wonderful things to come when “all that are in their tombs” shall come forth (John 5:28). (3) The resurrection of the “bodies of the saints” indicates a bodily resurrection for all. The opened graves had to be left open over Passover, since it would have been unlawful for anyone to have filled a grave during that holy week; it would have been unlawful even to touch one. While the graves were exposed for three days and nights, a period was provided during which the identity of the graves as belonging to “the righteous” could have been made and verified. No record is left of the awe and wonder that doubtless accompanied the events connected with so strange and supernatural a phenomenon. THE GRAVE CLOTHESMatthew made a very slight reference to the PLACE where the Lord lay (Matthew 28:6), but John gave a full account of this miracle, as follows: John 20:6-8, “Simon Peter therefore also cometh, following him, and entered into the tomb; and he beheld the linen cloths lying, and the napkin, that was upon his head, not lying with the linen cloths; but rolled up in a place by itself. Then entered in therefore the other disciple also, who came first to the tomb, and he saw, and believed. For as yet they knew not the Scripture, that he must rise again from the dead.” Matthew’s words attributed to the angel, “Behold the place where he lay” (Matthew 28:6), have meaning only in the light of what was there. Thus it may be said that Matthew recorded all of the Seven Wonders. Precisely what was the wonder here? It was the FORM of the grave clothes as they remained after our Lord’s resurrection. They were not folded but were “lying”! The implication of that word is plainer if the verb is changed to “standing” or “walking.” Those clothes were “lying,” having exactly the same form they had when Christ was within them. Even the napkin, uncollapsed, appeared appropriately where his head had been. Thus Jesus rose “through his clothes” just as he rose through the tomb.

The angel did not roll away the stone to let the Lord out but to let the witnesses in! The tomb remained as it was, and so did his grave garments. These deductions are mandatory in view of the fact that John devoted no less than ten verses to a description of this wonder, and to the fact that it was upon that evidence that John was said to have ! This emphasizes the difference between the resurrection of Christ and that of the “saints.” They came out of their graves horizontally; Jesus “rose” from his. Whereas their graves had to be opened, Christ’s did not, except to provide access for the witnesses. They were subject to death a second time, as was Lazarus, presumably, whereas Christ rose from the dead never to die again. They revived and came out; Christ arose! ENDNOTE:[17] Alfred Plummer, op. cit., p. 403.

Verse 53 And coming forth out of the tombs after his resurrection they entered into the holy city and appeared unto many.THE OF THE SAINTSEmil Von Ludwig’s blasphemous biography of Christ, The Son of Man, contains a vigorous denial that any such thing as this could have taken place, based entirely upon the paucity of reference to it in the gospel narratives. Only Matthew recorded it. In the summary below, it will be further emphasized that so little reference to these wonders was a natural consequence of the greater wonder of the resurrection of Christ in which they were swallowed up and overshadowed. The unaided mind of man finds this event a matter of the very greatest curiosity; and it may be certain that if men, unaided by the Holy Spirit, had written the New Testament, we should have had volumes about those risen saints and what they did and the complications they encountered on such an astounding occurrence as their returning from the dead. Again, Nicholson’s words are appropriate: By the suffrages of universal scholarship - and in some instances reluctant suffrages - these words are not an interpolation, but a part of the genuine words of the Bible. And if there be in all the world a document more absolutely historical than the Bible, it is yet to be discovered.[18] There are eight resurrections recorded in Scripture, besides the resurrection of Christ which is uniquely different. The other seven are: (1) son of the widow of Sarepta (1 Kings 17:1-24); (2) son of the Shunamite (2 Kings 4:1-44); (3) the man raised by the bones of Elijah (2 Kings 13:1-25); (4) daughter of Jairus (Matthew 9:1-38); (5) son of the widow of Nain (Luke 7:1-50); (6) Lazarus (John 11:1-57); and (7) Dorcas (Acts 9:41). One might also include Eutychus (Acts 20:9). The resurrection of the saints (above) would thus make nine in all, besides that of Christ. The meaning of this amazing event is (1) that Christ is the true Redeemer and Lord of all men; (2) as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive (1 Corinthians 15:22). (3) Christ has the keys of death and of the grave (Revelation 1:18); (4) Christ’s work on the cross was the center and climax of his saving mission to man. All our salvation and our only hope of eternal life find their fountainhead in him and in his death upon the cross. The reticence of the holy writers in giving so little space to this resurrection is a warning against prying into secrets that are not revealed. All questions relative to how those risen saints were recognized, what they did, what they ate, what became of them afterwards, etc., remain unanswered from the sacred page; and no expositor should intrude where the inspired evangelists have purposefully covered with silence those facts which, however they might stimulate or satisfy man’s curiosity, could not possibly add to the knowledge which is necessary to the salvation of the soul. The seven miracles, the six treated here and the greater one, Christ’s resurrection, are actually one, knit together in absolute unity: That they comprise the number seven, a sacred or perfect number in the thinking of the Hebrews, is of deep interest. Seven is a perfect number because it is divisible only by itself and by unity; moreover the derivative, as in the accompanying diagram, reveals the most common pattern in nature. The honeycomb, the snowflake, the carbon and other crystals, all exhibit this “footprint” of the Eternal. Appropriately, therefore, these miracles arrange themselves in this strange universal pattern, two from above, two from beneath, and two from the surface of the earth, to form one perfect support for the greater miracle they surround, identify, support, and confirm. As for the cavil that very little emphasis is placed upon them in the New Testament, it is a positive fact such is in keeping with human nature and common practice to this very day. For example, how many men, even in the most intellectual circles, know anything about Lhotse, Makalu, South Col, Nuptse, Changtse, Baruntse, and Cho Polu? Those are only THE HIGHEST ON EARTH, except Mount Everest.[19] Why have so few people ever heard of those great mountains, none of which is less than 21,000 feet high, and some of which are 27,000 feet in altitude?

They are overshadowed and minimized by the greater Mount Everest which towers above them and of which they are merely the adjacent and supporting peaks. Similarly, those mighty “Foothills of Calvary” which we have noted here are overshadowed and cast into the background by the far greater wonder of that highest peak of all, the resurrection of Christ. Viewed as separate wonders, each one of them is of surpassing magnitude and interest; yet in the glorious context where they lie embedded in that greater wonder, they are often overlooked.

1. Christ’s resurrection 2. The darkness 3. The ripping of the veil 4. Resurrection of saints 5. Undisturbed grave clothes 6. Opening of the grave of the righteous 7. The earthquake Taken together, these wonderful events are the most remarkable ever to be recorded in history. [18] William R. Nicholson, op. cit., p. 63. [19] James Ramsey Ullman, Americans on Everest (New York: J. B. Lippincott, 1964), frontispiece.

Verse 54 Now the centurion, and they that were with him watching Jesus, when they saw the earthquake, and the things that were done, feared exceedingly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God.Practically all beings with anything to do with Christ confessed him in one way or another: (1) The angels confessed him (Luke 2:11). (2) The demons confessed him (Matthew 8:29). (3) Almighty God confessed him three times,, at his baptism, on the mount of transfiguration, and in a voice resembling thunder (John 12:28). (4) Simeon (Luke 2:30). (5) Anna (Luke 2:36). (6) Nicodemus (John 3:2). (7) Nathaniel (John 1:49). (8) John the Baptist (John 1:29). (9) Peter (Matthew 16:16). (10) Pilate (Matthew 27:24). (11) Pilate’s wife (Matthew 27:19). (12) Judas Iscariot (Matthew 27:4). (13) The centurion and the people with him (Matthew 27:54). Christ confessed himself under oath and was put to death for it (John 19:7). Some have made a great deal of the fact that only Matthew recorded the phenomena accompanying the crucifixion, but Mark’s account of the confession of the centurion implies just as much as Matthew relates. Certainly the loud cry of a dying man was no such a phenomenon as to have moved a hardened soldier, doubtless accustomed to the bloody business that engaged him, to confess Christ as the Son of God. Here again, it was not one of the friends of Jesus but an unwilling participant in the dark drama and one whose normal indifference can be assumed, who rose to cry the truth, confess the Christ and smite his breast.

Verse 55 And many women were there beholding from afar, who had followed Jesus from Galilee, ministering unto him among whom was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee.Mark recorded the name of the mother of Zebedee’s sons as Salome (Mark 15:41). The women were the last to wait upon Jesus at the cross and the first to whom he revealed himself after the resurrection. Spiritual leadership naturally belongs to women. The disciples fled, but the women waited to watch and did not forsake the Lord even in the depth of his humiliation. The names of those women were introduced because they aided Joseph of Arimathea in preparing the Lord’s body for burial. THE ORDER OF PILATE TO BREAK HIS LEGSBefore moving to consider the next event recorded by Matthew, which was the burial, there was another extremely important event, recorded by John. To hasten the death of the condemned and to prevent their remaining upon their crosses over the Passover, the Jews begged Pilate for a detail to break the legs of the condemned. Such an order was given the soldiers by Pilate, and, in obedience, the soldiers broke the legs of the two robbers; but they came to Christ and found him already dead, they disobeyed their orders, thrust a spear into his side without orders, and thus fulfilled two prophecies at one time (John 19:31-37). Psalms 34:20 prophesied of the Messiah that “He keepeth all his bones; not one of them is broken.” Zechariah prophesied, “They shall look upon me whom they have pierced” (Zechariah 12:10). The manner of fulfillment of those prophecies, one that Christ would be pierced, another that none of his bones should be broken, is an amazing demonstration of the providence of God working at Calvary. The order from Pilate required that one of those prophecies should be broken, in the breaking of his legs; but there was not enough power in the Roman army to have broken the little finger of Jesus. The order under which the soldiers moved to break his legs was countermanded from on high; how else could a Roman soldier have violated his orders to fulfill one prophecy, and then, acting without orders, thrust a spear and fulfill another? Surely God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself (2 Corinthians 5:19).

Verse 57 And when even was come, there came a rich man from Arimathea, named Joseph, who also himself was Jesus’ disciple. Isaiah 53:9 was fulfilled by this. In the common version, the word “rich” in Isaiah’s prophecy would appear as either singular or plural, but it is in reality singular, as evidenced by the more accurate translation in the English Revised Version (1885) and RSV as “a rich man.” From John 19:38 it is evident that he followed Jesus “secretly for fear of the Jews,” and that Nicodemus was a member of the burial party. Mark added that he was a “councilor of honorable estate” (Mark 15:43). Luke mentioned that he “was a good man and a righteous man (Luke 23:50-51). Along with Barnabas, Joseph of Arimathea ranks with a very select few who, in the Scriptures, are called good men. All four gospels record this event, thus emphasizing its importance. In times of distress and danger; God has frequently raised up a Joseph. When Israel was threatened with famine, when Herod the Great would have slain the infant Christ, and then again when the helpless body of our Lord was upon the cross, there stepped forth upon the stage JOSEPH. The awful storm was at the full, the enemies glorying in their triumph, supposing Christ was out of the way forever; but in that hour came JOSEPH! There is a well of consolation in the fact that God always raises up a man at the required time. Peter and Thomas might flee, but Joseph will appear. The few remaining women may gaze helplessly from afar, but an honorable councilor will rise up. The darkness may obscure the sun, but stars hitherto unseen will brightly shine. As for the reason why Joseph was a “secret” disciple, enough facts are available to suggest a number of things which might have caused that to be: (1) One thing is certain: he was afraid of the Jews (John 19:38). The deads of cowardice is seen in that it could, for a season, hide so noble a light as that of Joseph. That was the trouble with the parents of the man born blind (John 9:20-23). The Bible warns against the “fear of man” (Proverbs 29:25). (2) Joseph might also have been naturally timid, and that does not necessarily mean lack of loyalty. From Foxe’s Book of Martyrs it is told that in the martyr days, some who professed great willingness to die for Christ turned tail and recanted when they came in sight of the stake, while others who in prison shuddered even to think of it and exhibited the most solemn fears, behaved themselves with true manhood when the terrible moment came.[20] The divine antidote for all timidity is faith (Romans 9:33; Romans 10:11). (3) Joseph’s wealth might also have been a consideration in making him a secret follower instead of an avowed disciple (Mark 10:23-24). Wealth has always been one of the things capable of choking the word of God out of men’s hearts (Matthew 13:22; 1 Timothy 6:9-11; 1 Timothy 6:17; 1 Timothy 6:19). (4) Public office might also have hindered.

Such usually leads men to over-prudent caution and tunes the ear of the public man to the applause of the multitudes rather than to truth. Spurgeon said: What is there in the applause of a thoughtless multitude? The approbation of good men, if it be gained by persevering virtue, is better to be desired than great riches; but even then it may become a temptation; for the man may begin to question, What will people say? rather than, What will God say. And the moment he falls into that mood, he has introduced a weakening element into his life. The “Well done, good and faithful servant” of the Master’s own lips is worth more than ten thousand thunders of applause from senators and princes.[21] Why, then, did Joseph appear at that particular hour of Christ’s death to perform such noble and honored service for our Lord? (1) Surely it was the power of the cross. Yes, Christ was right (John 12:32) in that it was not the miracles but the cross that would draw all men unto himself. (2) It was the revelation of the true ugs of sin. Joseph, as a member of the Sanhedrin, had not concurred in the dark deeds of that body; but, in the beginning of the Pharisees’ opposition to Christ, they had been able to hide their envy, spite, jealousy, and the covetousness in their rotten souls, masking their hatred under such respectable disguises as respect for the sabbath day, regard for the law of Moses, reverence for the prophets, or zeal for the God of Abraham; but then it was no longer possible to do so. “Sin when it is finished bringeth forth death” (James 1:15). On the cross, Joseph saw as plain as daylight the ugs of the sin that nailed him there. (3) The action of Christ’s followers who forsook him and fled might also have had a part in urging Joseph to step forward. The conduct of such men as Peter made it a time of the direst necessity. It has often been noted that when the church is confronted with some unusual or extraordinary crisis, there is always one who, seemingly indifferent to that hour, steps forth to shoulder the burden and make himself known. Every minister of the word of God has observed such events. (4) Again, Joseph and Nicodemus were at last compromised by the Sanhedrin, of which they were members, and the shameful and grossly wicked conduct of that body forced upon its nobler sons the utmost necessity to separate from it and take an opposite stand. Many disciples since that ancient day have discovered that their place outside the ranks of the openly confessed and redeemed finally becomes absolutely untenable. OUTSIDE are the infidels, blasphemers, dogs, whoremongers, scoffers, profane murderers, and robbers.

As long as a believer is OUTSIDE the church, he is a member of the world’s Sanhedrin. Joseph and Nicodemus learned, as may all of us, that “secret” discipleship must at last break with the forces of evil. Since it must be eventually, why not now? It is not wise to leave this consideration without inquiring, “What are the costs of secret discipleship?” In the case of Joseph, it probably cost him a place among the Twelve; it surely cost him the privilege of long association with Christ; and it could have cost him his soul. His example as a “secret follower” affords no worthy example for any man to follow. His conduct on the occasion before us was surely noble, however, and is in that instance most worthy of emulation. (1) He placed himself under personal risk for Christ. It was a dangerous act to beg the body of Jesus. (2) He accepted ceremonial defilement for himself by touching the body of Jesus and was in consequence forbidden to eat the Passover. Many today become “untouchables” in the eyes of the world when they truly become disciples of Jesus. (3) He spent a large sum upon the burial. He might have excused himself by saying, “Well, since he is dead, I cannot do him any good now.” [20] Foxe’s Book of Martyrs, traditional. [21] Charles Haddon Spurgeon, Sermons (New York: Funk and Wagnalls Company, 1884), Vol. 15, p. 124.

Verse 58 This man went to Pilate, and asked for the body of Jesus. Then Pilate commanded it to be given up.Assisting Joseph were the women mentioned in Matthew 27:55-56, and also Nicodemus. However, it was “this man” who took the official and leading part. He provided the tomb, laid out the expense money, obtained permission, and took the body down from the cross.

Verse 59 And Joseph took the body, and wrapped it in a clean linen cloth, and laid it in his own new tomb, which he had hewn out in the rock: and he rolled a great stone to the door of the tomb, and departed.Thomas Jefferson composed an abbreviated New Testament and closed it with this verse. A deist, Jefferson did not believe in the resurrection of Christ. In 1959, this writer visited Monticello, historic residence of Jefferson, an engraving of which appears on the reverse side of the nickel. It was about 3:00 p.m. and some thirty or forty tourists filed into the north dining room, as the afternoon sun was shining on the western windows and producing a perfect luminous cross in the large center panel of glass. That phenomenon was due to the long action of sunlight on that ancient glass, refraction having been produced by structural changes in the glass itself. One spoke up and said, “Well, it seems as if Mr.

Jefferson did not really get rid of Christ, after all!” That remark made a profound impression upon those present. Silence fell upon the little company; and the guide, after some hesitation, remarked that she had not noticed it before. From John it is learned that Christ was buried in a new tomb, that of Joseph, wherein never before had man lain, and that it was situated in a garden near the site of the cross. In giving his tomb to Christ, Joseph had every reason to believe that his gift was final and that his own burial in it was thus precluded. However, as is invariably true, nothing was ever lost by its being given to Christ. Joseph received his grave again! See under Matthew 14:20.

Verse 61 And Mary Magdalene was there, and the other Mary, sitting over against the sepulchre.The “other Mary” is the mother of James and Joses (Matthew 27:56). That those women were described as “there” shows that they had taken up a watch by the tomb, and were thus the last lingerers to remain mourning the death of the Son of God. This could well have been one of the reasons why Christ first appeared to Mary Magdalene after he came forth from the grave (John 20:11-18).

Verse 62 Now on the morrow, which is the day after the preparation, the chief priests and the Pharisees were gathered together unto Pilate.The old enemies of Jesus were badgered by second thoughts. The request for a guard of the tomb shows that they were fully aware of the prophecy that Christ would rise again. Instigated by Satan, their request could serve no purpose except that of the evil one. The day after the preparation indicates that this request was made on the Passover itself. For more on the difficult question regarding the day of the week on which these events took place, see under Matthew 26:17.

Verse 63 Saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver said while he was yet alive, After three days I rise again.For a summary of Pharisaical criticism of Christ, see under Matthew 11:19. The statement of the Pharisees quoting Jesus as promising to rise again “after three days” is viewed by some as evidence for a 72-hour period in the grave. On this complicated question, the near-unanimous opinion of scholars holds the traditional Friday crucifixion and Sunday resurrection to be correct and views the traditional days of those events as harmonizing with the word of God. A. T. Robertson is very firm in that position, as indeed are most of the others; and yet it is absolutely certain that a strong case can be made out for the longer period. This expositor finds no fault with either view, inasmuch as the whole question is irrelevant anyway, provided only that whatever view is held, it should be grounded upon a faithful acceptance of all that the sacred Scriptures have revealed (see under Matthew 12:40).

Verse 64 Command therefore that the sepulchre be made sure until the third day, lest haply his disciples come and steal him away, and say unto the people, He is risen from the dead: and the last error will be worse than the first.In all history, where is there another case of a posted guard and sealed tomb to prevent reports of a resurrection? True, graves have been sealed and guarded many times, but never before or since for such an ostensible purpose as this. The profound implications of this request of the Pharisees are astonishing. It shows that they anticipated the preaching of the apostles that “He is risen from the dead!” Their supposition, however, that the apostles would do so, even if it was a lie, can be explained only on the basis that the Pharisees imputed to the apostles of Christ the same hypocrisy and falsity they had in themselves. Yet it must appear that no group of men ever born could have preached a falsehood of such dimensions (if it had been a falsehood), sealing it with their blood, and going to prison and to death shouting “His is risen from the dead,” and demonstrating the most passionate and emotional dedication to such a gospel. The behavior of those faithful men who preached the truth removes every suspicion that it was anything other than the truth and gives a solid ground on which two thousand years of believing disciples of Christ have founded their conviction that those wonderful things, including the resurrection of the Christ, did actually occur. We gazed not in the open tomb, Where once thy mangled body lay; Nor saw Thee in that upper room, Nor met Thee on the open way; But we believe that angels said, “Why seek the living with the dead?” But we believe that angels said, “Why seek the living with the dead?” - Ann Richter’s words for Knowles Shaw’s great hymn, “We Saw Thee Not!” (Great Songs of the Church, No. 404) There is also an admission of the Pharisees in this verse that the crucifixion was an “error,” although they probably did not intend such an admission. The fact that even so mild an admission of “error” fell from their lips can be understood only in the light of the marvels that attended the death of our Lord. The earthquake, the darkness, the rending of the veil, etc., along with the confession of the centurion, had produced the most overwhelming demonstration that “the Holy One” indeed had been upon the cross; and as a result, those pious hypocrites were at last willing to admit, quite piously and indirectly of course, that perhaps it was an “error”! Satanic instigation of the request for the sealing of the grave and posting of a guard is evidenced by the following: The Lord’s disciples were scattered, discouraged, and, for the most part, disbelieving that any resurrection would occur. There was not the slightest possibility that any of them would have stolen the body, nor could any of them, not even Judas, have been capable of such futile and unrewarding fraud as that suggested by the Pharisees. Why then was the watch set? It is the view here that Satan anticipated the resurrection, knowing that it would occur perfectly on schedule; and the devil desired such a watch in order to provide suborned liars to deny it after the fact. That such was actually his purpose is manifest in the use that was quickly made of it. Not even the devil thought that the resurrection could be prevented by so naive and futile a device.

Verse 65 Pilate said unto them, Ye have a guard: go, make it as sure as ye can.Whether intended or not is unknown, but Pilate’s words bear the interpretation that he was doubtful if the resurrection could be prevented! It seems that Pilate half-expected the Lord to rise from the dead, an attitude of mind which is fully in harmony with all the tremendous events of that great day in human history. Verse 66 So they went, and made the sepulchres sure, sealing the stone, the guard being with them.Thus Christ was sealed in the grave, the guard posted, and the Pharisees settled down to enjoy their imagined triumph. The sabbath, whether the high sabbath of the Passover or the ordinary weekly sabbath, would find the Lord sleeping in his grave. The victory of evil was apparently complete and irrevocable. The sadness and discouragement that descended upon the disciples can only be imagined. The entire sabbath, by whatever reckoning, would be wholly spent by Jesus in “the heart of the earth”! And this makes it positively impossible that the sabbath should ever be reckoned as “the Lord’s day.” By what perversion of terminology could that awful day of his residence in the tomb be called “his day”? The presumption that would make it so is offensive to the emotions and contrary to reason. THE SEVEN WORDS FROM THE CROSSThese were:

1. “Father forgive them, for they know not what they do” (Luke 23:34).
2. “Verily, I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:43).
3. “Woman, behold thy son … Behold thy mother” (John 19:26-27).
4. “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46).
5. “I thirst!” (John 19:28).
6. “It is finished” (John 19:30).
7. “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit” (Luke 23:46) I. “Father forgive them …“The chief business of the cross was forgiveness, and Christ moved quickly to get on with it. Were those men, then and there, forgiven? No! Forgiveness has two centers, human and divine; and on the human level, Christ forgave those men without either request or repentance on their part. Their forgiveness in heaven took place when they repented and obeyed the gospel (Acts 2:36-38). That forgiveness of Christ on the personal level, even while they were crucifying him, was in line with his command that men must forgive if they are to be forgiven (Matthew 6:14-15).

Luke 17:3 is not a permit to withhold forgiveness pending others’ repentance, but is an admonition against the withholding of it even after they repent. Thus, Stephen forgave Saul of Tarsus on the human level, even while Saul stood by consenting to his death (Acts 7:60); but Paul was forgiven in heaven when he had “obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine” (Romans 6:17). Therefore, it appears that even with Christ himself praying for a person, as in the case here, that person will be truly forgiven in heaven only when he obeys the gospel. To view this otherwise would be to make a special case of the soldiers who crucified Jesus. Some of those, at least, who were guilty of his crucifixion (Acts 2:36) were forgiven when they repented and were baptized; to suppose that those soldiers did not need to do so, merely because Christ prayed for them, is to set aside the plain word of Scripture that all must believe, repent, and be baptized unto the remission of sins. Thus, we view the prayer of Christ in this first solemn word from the cross as an example for his disciples in their behavior toward those who sin against them, and not as an abatement of the Scriptural terms of redemption. II. “Today shalt thou be with me in paradise.“Was the thief on the cross saved? Assuredly, yes! Granted the premise that there is a separation of the righteous and the wicked in death, there can be no doubt of it. Efforts to prove he was not saved rise from a mistaken zeal to defend a religious position, some fearing that the salvation of the thief on the cross negates such commands as baptism, but such is not the case. The thief died BEFORE any of the distinctive obligations of the Christian life were published. He was dead and buried nearly two months before the Great Commission was given; he was never commanded to be baptized; and no person on earth today may claim any such status as that which pertained to the thief. Baptism, for example, is mandatory upon all men, “even to as many as the Lord our God shall call unto him” (Acts 2:39). Furthermore, all efforts to disassociate oneself from the commandments and obligations of the Christian gospel, on the basis of the robber’s salvation, arise from a total disregard of the truly remarkable exhibition of faith on his part. Any thought that the robber was saved in some easy and perfunctory fashion disappears in the contemplation of what he actually did: (1) He believed on the Lord at a time when even his staunchest disciples had forsaken him and fled. Of all the men on earth, that greater thief alone stands in glorious isolation as the unique witness of our Lord’s passion who appreciated it and moved to appropriate the blessing. (2) He believed on him and confessed him as “Lord” while others were reviling him. (3) He made that amazing confession when he himself was in an agony of nakedness, suffering, death, and humiliation. Can anyone fail to see the difference in his confession, under those circumstances, and the ordinary profession of faith today, when one is all dressed up in his Sunday best and encouraged by a whole church singing and praying to urge him forward? (4) The robber confessed Christ in the presence of Christ’s bitterest foes in the exact moment of their triumph, those foes being none other than the leaders and most influential men in all Israel. (5) He confessed Christ in the moment of Christ’s deepest humiliation, but those who confess today do so with the concurrent testimony of nineteen centuries affirming his glorification! (6) The robber gave evidence that he indeed had seen “God,” by his humble acceptance of the horrible death by crucifixion as a “just” reward of his deeds. In the light of these and many other considerations, it must be clear that those who would either claim for themselves or extend to others the promise of salvation without obeying the gospel, using the salvation of that ancient robber as a basis for it, are not worthy to be named in the same breath with that robber. Where in the history of the world was there ever a more daring exhibition of faith, or nobler confession made under more difficult circumstances than was his? The thief died before the Lord’s will for all mankind was put in force (Hebrews 9:16) and was saved even before Christ died on the cross. Therefore, his salvation cannot possibly contain any precedent for redemption under the New Covenant; and as for the insistence that, after all, he was not baptized, we have already noted that no such command had yet gone out to all mankind; but even if it had, that thief had nails in his hands and feet and was in a position making it absolutely impossible for him to have been baptized. The nails were holding him, but what is holding men today? Pride, prejudice, the opinions of divines, and an obstinate unwillingness to obey the Lord - these are the impediments now. As for the meaning of this marvelous incident, it shows that at the very moment of our Lord’s deepest humiliation, his power to inspire men unto eternal life was undiminished. The confession of that thief, and the Lord’s reply, constitute a divine prophecy that the Son of God will have his worshipers and men their salvation under every possible circumstance forever! III. “Woman, behold thy son … Behold thy mother!“The words addressed to Mary the mother of Jesus and to John the beloved disciple were for the purpose of providing for the earthly care of Mary. Why did Christ wait until the agony was upon him before taking care of that detail? In the light of all that has intervened, we may conclude that it was deliberately done in order to bring into sharp focus, in the light that should forever beat down upon the cross, the true status of that blessed person who was privileged to be our Lord’s earthly mother. Note that Christ called her “Woman,” certainly not “Mother of God”! If such a title had been her due, Christ would have honored it and would not have withheld it on that occasion. Mary was not the mother of God, nor a perpetual virgin, but bore four sons and an unnamed number of daughters after the birth of Jesus (see under Matthew 1:25 and Matthew 13:55). In view of all the superstitions that have arisen around the blessed name of Mary, how charged with divine wisdom was the action of our Lord upon the cross in bringing her into view on that occasion, not as a female deity to whom men might have recourse for spiritual aid, but as a broken-hearted sufferer, herself in need of the tender care of John! IV. “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?“The awful depths of those words are unfathomable. What sorrow flows from that pleading cry! What can it truly mean? Should men believe that God forsook Christ on the cross? If so, why? Was it that he could not physically die until that occurred?

None may dare to give a dogmatic answer. Some believe Christ was quoting Psalms 22:1-31 which has these exact words in its first verse. If that was the case, it would have been in perfect keeping with the constant example of his whole life in meeting every crisis with a quotation from the Holy Scriptures. “It is written; it is written; and again it is written” (Matthew 4:4-7). In support of this view is the remarkable number of specific prophecies relative to the crucifixion which are contained in Psalms 22:1-31, and which were at that very moment being fulfilled so graphically before all. Psalms 22:1-31 My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me? Psalms 22:1A reproach of men, and despised of the people. Psalms 22:6 They … laugh me to scorn. Psalms 22:7 They shake the head. Psalms 22:7 Let him rescue him. Psalms 22:8 Seeing he delighteth in him.

Psalms 22:8 For there is none to help. Psalms 22:11 Many bulls have compassed me. Psalms 22:12I am poured out like water. Psalms 22:14 My bones are out of joint. Psalms 22:14 My strength is dried up. Psalms 22:14 My tongue cleaveth to my jaws.

Psalms 22:15 Into the dust of death. Psalms 22:15 Dogs have encompassed me. Psalms 22:16A company of evil doers have enclosed me. Psalms 22:16 They pierced my hands. Psalms 22:16 And they pierced my feet. Psalms 22:16I may count all my bones.

Psalms 22:17 They look and stare upon me. Psalms 22:17 They part my garments among them. Psalms 22:18 And upon my vesture do they cast lots. Psalms 22:18 This remarkable word picture of the crucifixion contains at least twenty specific details, some of which are not even found in the gospels. For example, only in Psalms 22:16 above do the Scriptures reveal that Jesus’ feet were pierced. As divine prophecy, written centuries before the fact, Psalms 22:1-31 portrays a more vivid picture of the Lord’s death on Calvary than a man can write today, with the literature of nineteen centuries at his fingertips. No infidel can scoff this away. The crucifixion of our Lord fulfilled to the very letter the marvelous prophecies which foretold it. In view of the remarkable detail of this great prophecy, it is not unthinkable that Christ was calling attention to it by quoting its opening . Still, the “why” of this passage haunts men. It echoes down the centuries. There was no immediate reply. Angels did not descend and take him down from the cross, or smite the Pharisees blind, or compel Caiaphas to kneel before him! Christ simply died with that awful question seemingly unanswered. Of course, there WAS an answer!

It came in the form of an empty tomb and an angel of God announcing, “He is not here; he is risen!” Yes, there was an answer, but not of the kind men would probably have expected, nor did it come at once, but afterward. From this, it is learned that answers to life’s most perplexing questions do not appear immediately, but afterwards. The iron entered into the soul of Joseph, and there were long years when the answer did not come; but it did come when Pharaoh lifted him up to the throne to preserve Israel. John the Baptist heard the grating of the prison door as the executioner came to behead him, but Herod heard only the music and dancing. Why? The answer came not to John, but God will surely speak his golden answer when the herald is summoned on high. V. “I thirst.“The last three utterances are shorter, possibly due to the Saviour’s ebbing life (see under Matthew 26:29). What a paradox is this scene! He who upholds all things by the word of his power (Hebrews 1:3) is here himself upheld upon the rude and torturing beams of the cross. He who changed eighty gallons of water into wine is here athirst! He who is the Prince of Life must taste death for every man! The thirst was prophesied in Psalms 22:15. VI. “It is finished.“What was finished? The law of Moses (Colossians 2:14-16), the sabbath institution (Amos 8:5-9), the works of his personal ministry, the power of Satan (Hebrews 2:14), the atonement for the sins of the whole world (Hebrews 9:26), the purchase price for the church (Acts 20:28), and the remission of sins prior to Calvary, as well as the remission of whatever sins will be remitted for all eternity - these are among the things finished that day on the cross of Christ. George Fredrick Handel finished the “Messiah” after working for many hours in feverish exertion, then bowed his head and said, “It is finished.” But only the score was finished. All the joy of that great oratorio would have perished forever unless other hands had taken it up and other voices had sung its glorious harmonies. In like manner, the finished work of Jesus leaves ample place for others to take up the cross daily and follow him. Other hands must do his work; other lips must preach his word; and other hearts must warm to his great love. Indeed, “it is finished”; but man’s work is before him. “Save yourselves from this crooked generation!” Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling!” VII. “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit.“What an argument for immortality is this! In a moment the body of Christ would fail, but that would not be the end. He made an appointment for the Father to take his spirit, and did so with the calm assurance of one who might make an appointment to meet a friend after lunch. Man has a body, but he is a soul. No wonder an apostle said that Jesus “brought life and immortality to light through the gospel” (2 Timothy 1:10). Happy are the followers of Jesus, who, as the end nears, may feel the Father’s nearness as did Jesus, and commend their souls to his eternal safekeeping. This last utterance is synchronized with the major thesis of Christianity involving the immortality of the soul and man’s spiritual nature and accountability to God for all his deeds. J.W. McGarvey Commentary For Matthew Chapter Twenty-SevenThe Final Counsel, Matthew 27:1-2. (Mark 15:1; Luke 23:1; John 18:28)

1. took counsel.—The counsel now taken was different from that described in the previous chapter. They had then pronounced him worthy of death; they now take counsel “to put him to death.” It was not lawful for the Sanhedrim to put any one to death (John 18:31), that power having been taken away by the Romans and lodged in the Roman governor. The question now discussed was the best method of obtaining Pilate’s consent to the execution of Jesus. Doubtless the course which they proceeded to take before Pilate was the one which they now agreed upon.
2. when they had bound him.—He was bound when he was first arrested (John 18:12), and the fact that he was now bound again shows either that his bonds had been loosed while in the presence of the Sanhedrim, or that he was now bound more securely on account of the greater danger of his being rescued by his friends. The latter is the more probable supposition Pontius Pilate the governor.—After Archelaus, son of Herod the Great (Matthew 2:22), had reigned over Judea ten years, he was deposed by the Roman government, and Judea was placed under Procurators sent out from Rome. Pilate was the sixth of these, and was appointed in the twelfth year of Tiberius Cæsar, or about three years before the beginning of John’s ministry. (Comp. Luke 3:1.) He had now been in office about six years. His character is sufficiently indicated by the incidents connected with the death of Jesus. His official career is fully described in Josephus, and a very succinct account of it is given in Smith’s Dictionary.

Remorse and Death of Judas, Matthew 27:3-103. saw that he was condemned.—The condemnation is that by Pilate, not that by the Sanhedrim. This appears from the fact that when Judas came to the chief priests to return the money, they were in the temple (Matthew 27:5); but after the condemnation by the Sanhedrim “the whole multitude of them arose and led him to Pilate” (Luke 23:1), and they remained about the hall of Pilate until he pronounced the desired sentence of death. It was now time for them to be at their posts in the temple to execute the morning service, and there Judas found them. The incident is introduced in advance of its chronological order so as not to interrupt the subsequent narration. repented himself.—The word here rendered repented (μεταμλομαι) means, as we have already stated under Matthew 21:29 Matthew 21:32, not to repent, but to regret. In this place the regret was most intense, amounting to remorse. 4. the innocent blood.—Not the innocent blood; the article is not in the original, and is not needed in English. This confession has been rightly regarded as forcible testimony in favor of Jesus. If Judas could have named as an excuse for himself any wrongdoing in the life of his victim, he would surely have done so, and have saved himself the mortification of making this confession. But Judas had enjoyed every possible opportunity of knowing the private life of Jesus, and if he pronounced him innocent he must have been so. It is the unwilling testimony of an enemy whose every interest prompted him to withhold it. The only escape from the argument would be to deny the credibility of the story; but this is prevented by the naturalness of the description, and by the exceeding improbability that just such a story could have been invented. What is that to us?—This reply of the priests was both hypocritical and cruel. If Jesus was innocent, it concerned them as much as it did Judas, and now that they had used him as a tool, it was the extreme of meanness to try to throw the entire responsibility on him. 5. he cast down the pieces.—Bad as Judas was, there is one point in which he compares favorably with many men who consider themselves his superiors. How many there are possessed of ill-gotten gain who never think, of returning it, but cling to it with desperation until death loosens their grasp! But Judas could not do this: he offers to return it, and when the offer is refused he dashes it on the ground as a thing that he hates. While in pursuit of that money it glittered in his eyes; but now that he has it he spurns it as a thing accursed. went and hanged himself.—The extreme remorse of Judas is hardly reconcilable with the idea that he had been moved by malice toward Jesus, and it shows that in all probability he had not expected a fatal result. He had seen Jesus escape from death too often to think that he would now allow himself to be slain. He had been instigated to the foul deed of betrayal by love of money alone, and never has that overmastering passion displayed its power more strikingly. Jesus had said every thing to him that had a tendency to shake his purpose. He had told the disciples that one of them would betray him, and by the announcement had drawn from them an expression of horror against such an act. He had then pointed out Judas as the man, and had said in his hearing that it were better for him that he had never been born than that he should do the deed.

At last, when he was about to depart from the supper to fulfill his contract, Jesus had said, with reproachful sadness, “That thou doest, do quickly.” Deaf to all these warnings, and untouched by sympathy for his unresentful victim, he had doggedly and stolidly maintained his purpose. It was not until his purpose was gained, and consequences against which he had deliberately shut his eyes began to show themselves, that he realized how worthless was his prize and how villainous the means by which he had won it. So it is with every man who comes under the dominion of this base passion: it blinds his eyes and blunts his sensibilities while in the pursuit of gold, only to show him at last that he has bartered his soul for a price which, even while he holds it in his hands, becomes an object of loathing and disgust. 6. It is not lawful.—It would be almost incredible, did not thousands of other examples present themselves, that men could be as blind and inconsistent as these chief priests and elders; too conscientious to put this blood money into the Lord’s treasury, but not at all scrupulous about paying it out as the price of innocent blood.

Well did Jesus charge them with straining out gnats and swallowing camels. In the present instance, too, the gnat was one of their own making; for it was their own tradition and not the law which forbade the putting of such money into the treasury. They are not the only men in history who have been less scrupulous about shedding innocent blood than about the observance of their own traditions.

7. the potter’s field.—The definite article shows that it was some well known potter’s field, and the low price indicates that it was but a small piece of ground, or one of little value. The strangers, for whose burial-place it was purchased, were of course poor strangers, and hence the modern application of the name “potter’s field” to all burial-grounds for the poor.
8. unto this day.—This remark shows that Matthew wrote a considerable length of time after the transaction— long enough for it to be worthy of remark that the field still retained its name, “The field of blood.“9, 10. spoken by Jeremy the prophet.—No such passage as the one here quoted is found in the extant writings of Jeremiah; but the following passage from Zechariah bears a striking resemblance to it: “And I said to them, If you think good, give me my price; and if not, forbear. So they weighed for my price thirty pieces of silver. And the Lord said to me, Cast it unto the potter: a goodly price that I was prized at of them. And I took the thirty pieces of silver and cast them to the potter in the house of the Lord.” (Zechariah 11:12-13.) It is altogether probable that the quotation in the text is a free rendering of this passage, and that the name Jeremiah has been substituted by transcribers for that of Zechariah. It may be, however, that the quotation is made from some passage of Jeremiah’s prophecies not now extant. This is a question for future investigation by critical scholars.

Silence of Jesus before Pilate, Matthew 27:11-14. (Mark 15:2-5) 11. the King of the Jews.—Pilate understood the cause of Jesus better than the Pharisees pretended to understand it: for although in answer to his question Jesus admitted that he claimed to be King of the Jews, Pilate so construed this claim that he found no fault in Jesus. He knew that the kingdom in question was not to be a rival of Cæsar’s. 12-14. he answered nothing.—It was to the accusations of the priests and elders that he answered nothing. He left Pilate to discover from the words and actions of his accusers themselves that their accusations were false and malicious. There is no vindication so complete as that which is found in the proofs presented by the accuser: this vindication was accorded to Jesus by Pilate. marveled greatly.—Pilate had never before known a prisoner, accused of a capital crime, and prosecuted by powerful enemies, appear so indifferent to the result of his trial. He marveled greatly, because he felt sure that Jesus could vindicate himself, and yet he was making no effort to do so.

Barabbas Preferred, and the Message from Pilate’s Wife, Matthew 27:15-23. (Mark 15:6-15; Luke 23:18-23; John 18:39-40) 15. to release… a prisoner.—Under the ordinary and just administration of government the people do not desire the release of prisoners; but Judea was a conquered country, and the Jews naturally sympathized with their own countrymen who were prisoners in the hands of the Romans, even when the imprisonment was just; and especially was this the case in regard to political prisoners. It added, therefore, to the general good feeling prevalent during the Passover, and rendered the governor himself more popular, to release to the people such a prisoner as the majority of them would call for: hence the custom here stated. 16. a notable prisoner.—For what he was notable, Matthew does not say; but Mark and John incidentally supplement his account by supplying the needed information. (See John 18:40, and note on Mark 15:7.) Hero again the narratives furnish incidental proofs of each other’s fidelity to the truth. 18. for envy.—Nothing had transpired during that morning to convince Pilate that they were moved with envy toward Jesus, except as he connected it with what he had known of their feelings before. This shows that he was familiar with the issues between the parties. 19. his wife sent to him.—The statements concerning Barabbas, and the people’s preference for him, are interrupted in order to mention this message from Pilate’s wife, and from this we infer that the message was received at this juncture. He had probably left her in bed, and the early arousing of her husband to hear the case of Jesus had caused her, when falling asleep again, to have the dream in question. She, too, it seems, was already convinced that Jesus was a “just man.“20. persuaded the multitude.—The common people who had by this time assembled about Pilate’s pretorium, were not of themselves go disaffected toward Jesus as to prefer Barabbas; on the contrary, Pilate made the proposal to them in the expectation that they would call for Jesus, and that he would thus get rid of the case; but “the chief priests and elders persuaded the multitude,” and their persuasions prevailed. They doubtless represented to the people that Jesus had been guilty of blasphemy, and that he had already been tried and convicted by the highest tribunal of their nation. This story, strongly supported by the most influential men of the city, produced a sudden revolution in public sentiment, so that the multitude whose friendship for Jesus had two days ago made the Pharisees afraid to arrest him (Matthew 26:4-5), were now persuaded to cry out for his crucifixion. This was doubtless a part of the plan agreed upon at the counsel before they brought Jesus to Pilate. (Verse 1.) 22, 23. what evil hath he done?—Pilate’s question was pertinent and demanded an answer; but in the response we see nothing but the unreasoning spirit of a mob: no argument; no answer to objections; no patience with opposition; no attention to entreaties; nothing but an insane clamor for the one thing desired.

Pilate Yields to the People, Matthew 27:24-26. (Mark 15:15; Luke 23:24-25) 24. and washed his hands.—Pilate could have done nothing to more forcibly declare the innocence of Jesus. If the people had not been phrensied, when they saw him solemnly washing his hands, and declaring himself free from the innocent blood about to be shed, they would surely have been deterred from their purpose. But while Pilate’s act had this significance, it also displayed his own weakness and hypocrisy. He was there with his men of war to execute justice among the people, and to restrain them when tempted to deeds of lawlessness; but instead of this he consents to the murder of a man in the same breath in which he pronounces him innocent, and he hypocritically pretends to wash away a responsibility which rested more on him than on any other man. For this act his name must ever stand intimately associated with that of Judas Iscariot, and the world scarcely knows which to look upon with greater loathing the timeserving politician, or the money loving traitor. 25. His blood be on us.—With the same desperation which prompted the cry, “Crucify him!” the people accepted the blood guiltiness thrown upon them by Pilate. Little did they think what fate they were bringing down on themselves and their children. 26. released Barabbas.—We know not what afterward became of Barabbas. If he lived to know more of Jesus, he must have experienced strange reflections in reference to his own escape from crucifixion. The sentence of death pronounced against Jesus released one man from a similar death, and the execution of the sentence opened for every man a way of escape from death eternal. The innocent suffered that the guilty might go free, Barabbas being the first man saved by the death of Jesus. scourged Jesus.— It was customary to scourge men just before crucifying them, and Pilate made no exception in favor of “this just person.

Argument of Section 8The evidence which the foregoing section furnishes in behalf of Jesus is very striking. It shows that a court organized to convict, and resorting to the most unscrupulous measures to effect their purpose, utterly failed to find in his conduct any thing worthy of censure, much less any thing worthy of death. His condemnation was based on his confession of that which he had always openly proclaimed, and which he had substantiated by his life and his miracles. The man who betrayed him into the hands of his enemies declared him innocent, and the judge who pronounced the sentence of death declared him, in the same breath, a just person. Never did such circumstances attend the death of any other man. They attest with a force which no honest mind can resist, the unspotted character of Jesus, and thereby they attest the truthfulness of his claim to be the Christ, the Son of the living God. Moreover, his demeanor throughout these iniquitous proceedings, so perfectly in harmony with his exalted pretensions, affords no mean support to the argument in his favor.Death, Burial, and Resurrection of Jesus, Matthew 27:27-66 and Matthew 28:1-20 Mocked and Led away by the Soldiers, Matthew 27:27-32. (Mark 15:16-21; Luke 23:26-32; John 19:1-3) 27-29. Mocked him.—It seems that after the scourging, Jesus was given up for a few moments to the pleasure of the heathen soldiery. More amused than offended at his pretensions to be a king, they began their mocking in a spirit of levity. 30. spit upon him.—The scene which commenced in sportive mockery terminated in more serious feeling and more contemptuous conduct. Exasperated, perhaps, by the meek demeanor of Jesus, the soldiers turned their mockery into indecency and violence. Next to the crucifixion itself, here was the greatest extreme of the world’s cruelty to its Maker and its Benefactor. This was a strange sight to the angels. It can not be contemplated by men without a shudder. 31. took the robe off.—Before leading him away to the crucifixion they restored to him his own raiment, but not till Pilate had led him forth to the people wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe, and said, “Behold the man.” (John 19:5.) 32. a man of Cyrene.—Cyrene was a flourishing city in the north of Africa, but Simon, as his name indicates, was a Jew. They compelled him to carry the cross merely because he was a stranger, and they met him at the moment that a man was needed for the purpose, Jesus himself having borne it thus far (John 19:17), and being in all probability exhausted by the effort Simon, like all of us when called on to bear the cross, took it up reluctantly, no doubt, but like us when we have borne it faithfully, he was brought to Calvary and to the blood of atonement. There were many Cyrenians afterward engaged in spreading the gospel (Acts 2:10 Acts 11:20 Acts 13:1), and we may indulge the thought that in all probability Simon was one of them.

The Crucifixion, Matthew 27:33-38. (Mark 15:22-28; Luke 23:33-34; John 19:16-24) 33. Golgotha.—A Syro-Chaldaic word, meaning, as translated in the text, “a place of a skull.” The spot was so called, no doubt, from some circumstance of which we know nothing, and in reference to which conjectures are in vain. All that we certainly know of the locality is that it was outside of the city (Hebrews 13:12), and yet “nigh to the city” (John 19:20). 34. he would not drink.—The mixture of vinegar (sour wine) and gall was intended to render him less susceptible to pain; but Jesus, having resolved to suffer, declined any such relief. 35. casting lots.—Here again Matthew states a fact needing explanation, and John incidentally furnishes the explanation needed. There appears from Matthew’s account no reason why they should have cast lots in order to divide the garments; but we learn from John that the coat, which was the principal garment, was seamless, so that the goods in it could not be divided, and that it was on this the lots were cast. (John 19:23-24.) The reference to the prophet in this verse is interpolated from John 19:24. 36. they watched him.—That is, they kept guard over him to prevent his being removed from the cross. 37. his accusation.—That is, the ground or cause of his accusation, which was the title that he claimed as King of the Jews. 38. two thieves.—Not (κλεπται) thieves, but (λησται) robbers. They had been condemned to death for robbery, and were executed at this time probably to save the trouble of a separate execution; but the circumstance, whether so intended or not, added materially to the indignity heaped upon Jesus.

Revilings of the People, Matthew 27:39-44. (Mark 15:29-32; Luke 23:35-43.) 39, 40. that destroyest the temple.—It is strange how tenaciously the minds of the people clung to the old slander that Jesus threatened to destroy the temple and build it again in three days. The remark from which it sprang was made during his first visit to Jerusalem after his baptism (John 2:18-22), and yet it is now thrown in his teeth while he hangs on the cross, as though it were the most boastful speech that he had ever made. 41, 42. He saved others.—The chief priests, with the scribes and elders, mock him with reference not to his boast of power, but to his exercise of it. They had doubtless feared that he would save himself, and they were now exulting in the thought that he could not do so. 43. He trusted in God.—As he seemed unable to save himself, they now taunt him with his profession of trust in God, and assume that he can not be the Son of God, or the Father himself would deliver him. All of these revilings are indicative of guilty fear mingled with cruel exultation. 44. The thieves also.—They felt exasperated, perhaps, because his execution hastened their own. We learn from Luke, however, that one of them repented (Luke 23:35-43), and rebuked his companion for reviling Jesus. Matthew, therefore, either uses the plural indefinitely here, as he does in 26:8, 9, or he states what both the robbers did at the beginning, and omits the subsequent repentance of one of them.

The Darkness and the End, Matthew 27:45-56. (Mark 15:33-41; Luke 23:44-49; John 19:28-30) 45. there was darkness.—This darkness, as Alford well remarks, can not have been caused by an eclipse of the sun, because the moon was full at the time, as it always was on the first day of the Passover. Whether the darkness was over “all the earth,” in our sense of the terms, or only over the small portion of it to which the Jews often applied these words, is uncertain. It came suddenly at noon, and passed away at three o’clock; consequently it prevailed during the three hours in which the sun has usually its greatest heat and brilliancy. 46. why hast thou forsaken me?—The depth of meaning contained in this bitter outcry can never, we suppose, be fathomed by human thought, yet the word “forsaken” directs our thought in the right channel. If a good man who has long trusted in God and delighted in his favor could suddenly realize that God had forsaken him, he would enter, at least partly, into the Savior’s feeling. But the peculiar relation which Jesus sustained to the Father rendered this feeling more intense than human hearts can experience, and at the same time it renders most mysterious to us the forsaking itself. It is enough to know that in it lay the chief bitterness of the Savior’s death. 47. calleth for Elias.—I am constrained to think, notwithstanding various opinions of commentators to the contrary (see Lange and Alford), that the persons who made this remark misunderstood Jesus, and took the word Eli for Elias. The mistake arose, not from ignorance of the language, but from the indistinct articulation of Jesus. He had now been on the cross about six hours, and the feverish thirst produced by his intense suffering and some loss of blood, together with the great strain on the muscles of his chest, which resulted from hanging on his outstretched hands, must have rendered articulation difficult and indistinct. 48. gave him to drink.—The drink of vinegar was to remove the painful dryness of the throat which his articulation betrayed. We learn from John also that he said, “I thirst.” (John 19:28-29.) 49. The rest said.—The rest of those who thought that he called for Elias. On the import of their remark, see the note, Mark 15:36. 50. yielded up the ghost.—An obsolete expression for “gave up the spirit.” It contemplates the body as the man, and the spirit as being released that it may depart. The thought is utterly inconsistent with Materialism. Luke reports that Jesus said, “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit,” and that “having said thus, he gave up the spirit.” (Luke 23:46.) 51. the veil of the temple.—This is the heavy curtain which hung between the holy and most holy places within the temple. By shutting out from the most holy place all persons except the high priest, who alone was permitted to pass through it, and this only once in the year, it signified that the way into the holiest— that is, into heaven— was not yet made manifest while the first tabernacle was standing. (Hebrews 9:7-8.) But the moment that Jesus died, thus making the way manifest, the veil was appropriately rent in twain from top to bottom, disclosing the most holy place to the priests who were at that time offering the evening incense in the holy place. 52, 53. arose, and came out.—The earthquake, the rending of the rooks (Matthew 27:51), and the consequent opening of graves, occurred at the moment that Jesus died; while the resurrection and visible appearance in the city of the bodies of the saints occurred “after his resurrection.” Matthew chooses to mention the last event here because of its association with the rending of the rocks, which opened the rock-hewn sepulchers in which the saints had slept. There has been much speculation as to what became of these resurrected saints. We have no positive information, but the natural presumption is that they ascended to heaven. The fact that this very singular incident is mentioned by Matthew alone, does not detract from its credibility. 54. this was the Son of God.—From the fact that the centurion was of heathen education, and that the words Son and God are without the article in Greek, some have understood him as meaning, “This was a son of a god.” (See George Campbell’s notes on Matthew.) But the expression Son of God, with both words anarthrous, occurs frequently in connections which show that it means the same as when the article is used. (Matthew 27:43; Luke 1:35; John 19:7.) It must be remembered also that these Roman officers, while resident in Judea, made it a part of their business to study the peculiarities of the people with whom they had to deal, and that sometimes, as in the case of Cornelius and the centurion of Capernaum (Matthew 8:8-10), they became converts to the Jewish religion. This man lived in Jerusalem in the midst of the excitement about Jesus; he had this very day heard him charged with blasphemy for claiming to be the Son of God; and he had heard the same idea expressed concerning him since he was suspended on the cross (Matthew 27:43); and therefore he must have been stupid indeed if he did not know what was meant by the expression. it is almost certain that he knew what Jesus claimed to be, and that when he saw the miracles accompanying his death, he was convinced that the claim was just. 55, 56. many women.—These women, “who had followed Jesus from Galilee, ministering to him,” are represented as “beholding afar off.” This accounts for the fact that the mother of Jesus, though present, is not mentioned among them; for she, with the apostle John, was standing nearer, near enough for Jesus to point her out by a look (his only way of doing so) as the one whom John was henceforth to regard as his own mother. (John 19:25-27.) 56. among which.—Matthew names only three of the “many women” (Matthew 27:55) who were “beholding afar off.” (For a brief account of Mary Magdalene, see note on Mark 16:9.) “Mary the mother of James and Joses “is called by John the wife of Cleophas (John 19:25), another form of the name Alpheus; consequently the James here mentioned as her son is “James the son of Alpheus” (Matthew 10:3), who was one of the apostles. “The mother of Zebedee’s children” was so called because of the celebrity of her two sons, James and John, and probably also because of the death of her husband. (Comp. 20:20.) Her name was Salome. (Mark 16:1.)

The Burial, Matthew 27:57-61. (Mark 15:42-47; Luke 23:50-56; John 19:31-42) 57, 58. and begged the body.—It was seldom that persona who were crucified had friends to care for their remains; bat Pilate knew too well the popularity of Jesus to be surprised that even a man in Joseph’s position should propose to give him a decent burial, and having no malice to gratify, he readily granted the request. 59, 60. in his own new tomb.—The circumstance that Joseph had a new tomb near the spot, in all probability suggested to him the thought of burying the body. That he rolled a stone to the door of it, indicates that it was a vault hewn horizontally into the rock. He undertook the task alone, aided of course by servants, but Nicodemus joined him ere he had completed his task. (John 19:38-41.) 61. sitting over against.—The two Marys had remained near the cross till the body was taken down, and had followed the men, who were probably strangers to them, as they bore the body to the tomb. No doubt it had been their own purpose to have it cared for as best they could, and now that they see all needful attention given to it by others, they quietly sit down opposite the sepulcher and watch the proceedings.

Precaution of the Pharisees, Matthew 27:62-6662. the next day.—How early the next day is not stated, but as the purpose was to prevent the disciples from stealing the body away (Matthew 27:64), the earlier the better. The next day commenced at sunset, and the probability is that the guard was stationed at the tomb before dark. 63, 64. After three days.—It should be observed that although the Pharisees quote Jesus as saying that he would rise “after three days,” they ask that the sepulcher be guarded only “until the third day,” showing that they regarded the time designated by “after three days” as terminating “on the third day.” (For a full discussion of this peculiar usage, see note under Matthew 12:40.) lest his disciples.—Nothing was farther from the minds of the disciples than the resurrection of Jesus, and the fact that when the resurrection took place, they knew not till fifty days had passed what use to make of the fact, is sufficient proof that they could not have planned a pretended resurrection. The singular fact that the enemies of Jesus were more apprehensive of his resurrection than his friends, is accounted for by the consideration that the latter, with their present conceptions, had little to hope for in his resurrection, while the former had much to dread from either the fact itself or a belief of it among the people. A guilty fear makes men more watchful than a languid hope. 65. Ye have a watch.—Not that they had a watch already, for in that case they would not have applied to him for one, but Pilate used this formula to place one at their disposal. 66. sealing the stone.—This was to prevent any one from removing the stone, taking away the body, then replacing the stone and pretending that Jesus had arisen. The stone could not be removed without breaking the seal, and the seal at once would tell the story.

Questions by E.M. Zerr For Matthew 271. When was the next movement against Jesus made ? 2. Who were the actors? 3. Tell what they counciled to do. 4. What did they first do to Jesus? 5. To whom did they deliver him? 6. What office did this man have? 7. Who is the second “ he** in third verse ? 8. Who observed this fact of condemnation? 9. Of what precaution of his does this remind us? 10. What did he then bring to the priests ? 11. Tell what he confessed. 12. What was their reply? 13. How did he dispose of the money? 14. He then did what? 15. What was the money spent for? 16. Why was it thus used? 17. This gave what name to the field? 18. What was fulfilled by this? 19. Before whom did Jesus stand? 20. Repeat the question of the governor. 21. And the answer. 22. On what was Jesus silent? 23. Who was caused to marvel by it? 24. Relate a custom of that time. 25. Who were to select the prisoner to be favored 26. Tell whom Pilate proposed? 27. Give the record of Barabbas. 28. Who is meant by “they” in verse eighteen ? 29. Did “they” have anything in the choice now? 30. Who came to Pilate as he sat in judgment? 31. State her request. 32. What was the cause of her concern? 33. Who influenced the multitude in their choice? 34. State his inquiry about Christ. 35. Give their answer. 36. What was Pilate’ s next question? 37. And their answer? 38. Tell of Pilate’ s next move. 39. What statement did he make? 40. Upon this what did all the people say? 41. Pilate then released whom? 42. What did he do to Jesus? 43. To what place did the soldiers take Jesus? 44. What gathering was made there? 45. What was done about the attire of Jesus ? 46. Tell the significance of the scarlet robe. 47. How was he crowned ? 48. In what manner did they insult him ? 49. With what words did they mock him ? 50. What other indignities did they put on him ? 51. In what raiment did they lead him away? 52. What was Simon compelled to do ? 53. To what place did they come? 54. What does the word mean? 55. Tell what they offered him to drink. 56. How much of it did he drink? 57. After crucifying him what did they divide? 58. With what method did they do this? 59. This fulfilled what? 60. Why did they then become seated? 61. State the accusation placed above him. 62. Who were crucified with Jesus? 63. How did the passers by revile him? 64. With what did they deride him ? 65. What did they say about saving himself ? 66. And about destroying the temple? 67. In whom had he trusted ? 68. What challenge did they suggest about this? 69. What did the thieves do? 70. How long was it dark ? 71. Repeat the cry. 72. Who predicted this? 73. What misunderstanding did this cry cause? 74. Tell what was given him to drink. 75. What did they then expect? 76. In what condition did Jesus die? 77. What happened in the temple ? 78. Also to the earth and rocks? 79. What were opened? 80. Tell what the saints did. 81. When did they do this? 82. What impressed the centurion and others? 83. State their confession. 84. What women were there? 85. Tell what service they had done for Jesus. 86. Who came to Pilate that evening? 87. State his financial condition. 88. What religious standing did he have? 89. Tell what he desired. 90. Was it granted? 91. How did he prepare the body? 92. Where did he place it? 93. How had this been provided ? 94. In what manner was it closed ? 95. Who sat by the grave ? 96. Who came to Pilate next day? 97. What was troubling them? 98. By what name did they refer to Jesus? 99. To what did Pilate refer them ? 100. At this what was done?

Matthew 27:1

27:1 Verse 1. The Sanhedrin pronounced the death sentence against Jesus and that was as far as it could go under the power that the Roman government granted to it. The members of the court then consulted or planned the next move they would have to make to get this sentence affirmed by the officer who had the necessary power.

Matthew 27:2

27:2 They bound him which was unnecessary as far as security of the prisoner was concerned, for Jesus had not given any indication of even wishing to escape. But it was customary to put some kind of shackle on a man who was a prisoner, and the feeling of this mob was such that it would certainly not make any exception of Jesus. Pilate the governor was an officer appointed by the Romans to represent the empire in parts of Palestine. His presence in Jerusalem at this time, and also some other useful information will be explained by a quotation from Smith’s Bible Dictionary. “He was appointed A. D. 25-6, in the twelfth year of Tiberius. His arbitrary administration nearly drove the Jews to insurrection on two or three occasions.

One of the first acts was to remove the headquarters of the army from Caesarea to Jerusalem…. It was the custom for the procurator [governor or agent] to reside at Jerusalem during the great feasts, to preserve order, and accordingly, at the time of our Lord’s last Passover, Pilate was occupying his official residence in Herod’s palace. Caesarea was the official headquarters for the Roman government in Palestine, which accounts for the mention of Pilate’s temporary presence in Jerusalem at this time.

Matthew 27:3

27:3 Condemn is a legal and judicial term as used in this place. Thayer defines the original, “To give judgment against one, to judge worthy of punishment, to condemn.” The word is stronger than a mere accusation and means that the case had been decided officially against Jesus and that no way could be used for him to escape death. Judas had not expected this to happen; see the comments on this subject at chapter 26:48. The pronouns are to be understood as follows: “When he [Judas] saw that he [Jesus] was condemned.” Repented himself does not mean that Judas had repented in the sense of “repentance unto salvation” (2 Corinthians 7:10), for in that case his conduct afterward would have been righteous. Instead, it means he reversed the money part of the transaction by returning the pieces of silver.

Matthew 27:4

27:4 Judas knew from the start that Jesus was innocent, but expected him to resort to his miraculous power to escape from the hands of the mob. He had a guilty conscience but it was overruled by the effect of his disappointment so that he did not have the moral courage to do the right thing. What is that to us means they were not concerned about the affairs of his conscience.

Matthew 27:5

27:5 Casting the pieces of silver down in the temple indicated that Judas was offering the money to the sacred service as “conscience money.”

Matthew 27:6

27:6 The priests understood the purpose of Judas to be that the money was to be put into the treasury. They pretended to have great respect for the sacredness of the temple, notwithstanding they had treated the one who was “greater than the temple” (chapter 12:6) with the deepest disrespect.

Matthew 27:7

27:7 Potter’s field. After all the clay suitable for the making of pottery has been taken from a field, the land is of little use and hence very cheap commercially. A plot of such land was bought with this money and devoted to the burying of strangers or persons unknown to the community. From this circumstance comes the name “potter’s field” today, a portion of cemetery grounds where poor people may bury their dead. free of charge for the ground.

Matthew 27:8

27:8 The field of blood was so called because it was purchased with the money that had been paid to Judas for his betrayal of Jesus. The priests had called it the price of blood (verse 6), and thought it was not fitting to put such “tainted money” into the treasury of the temple.

Matthew 27:9

27:9 Was spoken by Jeremy [Jeremiah] the prophet. This prophecy is actually in the book of Zechariah, chapter 11:13. Various explanations have been offered for this apparent contradiction, but I consider the most reasonable one to be that which is based on the outstanding prominence of Jeremiah. He was so highly respected that he was looked upon as a sort of “dean of prophets,” and hence the prophecy was accredited to him in a complimentary or honorary sense.

Matthew 27:10

7:10 Lord appointed me. The first person of the pronoun is used because the passage represents Christ as the speaker, and the Lord would be the Father who had appointed him to suffer this shame.

Matthew 27:11

7:11 Thou sayest is equivalent to giving an affirmative answer. This conversation is referred to by Paul in 1 Timothy 6:13 in which it is called “a good confession.” This indicates that the confession required of men may be made in any form of speech that amounts to such a profession of faith.

Matthew 27:12

7:12 He answereth nothing. This fulfilled Isaiah 53:7, “As a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.”

Matthew 27:13-14

3-14 Pilate was surprised at the silence of Juses in the face of accusations made by the chief priests. This was the same thing that happened in the presence of the high priest (Matthew 26:62).

Matthew 27:15

7:15 Governor was wont to release means it was customary for him to do so. The feast of the pass-over was celebrated on the part of the civil powers by releasing a prisoner. There is little or no information available today as to when or how the custom started. Selection of the one to be favored was left to the. voice of the people or unofficial crowd, not to the chief priests or other officers.

Matthew 27:16

7:16 They means the people who had this prisoner in confinement for the security of the public. He is said to have been a notable prisoner. Thayer says this word means “notorious, infamous” [of bad report]. This bad name is explained in Mark 15:7 which says he had committed murder and insurrection in connection with others.

Matthew 27:17

7:17 All of the pronouns in this verse refer to the people, described in verse 15. Since they were the ones who must name the prisoner to be released, it was necessary for Pilate to ask them this question. Barabbas or Jesus. Pilate believed that Jesus was innocent of the accusations being made against him, but he was powerless to make any decision in the matter. However, as a suggestion which he thought would influence the crowd in their decision, he named Barabbas and Jesus. This prisoner was such a wicked character that surely they would not want him turned loose upon society.

He thought they would reason that “of two evils it is better to choose the lesser.” If they would do this it would result in the discharge of Jesus without any responsibility on his (Pilate’s) part. It is possible they would have done as Pilate expected had it not been for the fact that will be explained at verse 20.

Matthew 27:18

7:18 They in this verse means the chief priests (Mark 15:10) who had been responsible for the arrest of Jesus. Since that was the case Pilate thought the people would not be so prejudiced against him and would certainly vote in favor of his release rather than such a dangerous character as Barabbas.

Matthew 27:19

7:19 There is nothing to indicate this to have been a miraculous dream. It is natural for the exciting events occurring in one’s presence to make an impression on the mind, and that in turn would cause dreams to come in sleep. The innocence of Jesus was so evident that even this pagan wife of the governor was concerned about what might come to her husband if he should have any part in persecuting such a just man.

Matthew 27:20

7:20 While Pilate was waiting for the decision of the crowd, the chief priests and elders were busy among them, using their persuasive powers to influence the decision. They were not permitted to have any public voice in the selection, hence they accomplished their wicked purpose by working on the people who did have such a voice.

Matthew 27:21

7:21 Pilate repeated his question to the people. Acting upon the influence of the chief priests and elders, the crowd named Barabbas as the one to be released.

Matthew 27:22

7:22 If such a notorious criminal as Barabbas was to be given his freedom, surely as just a man as Jesus would not be dealt with very severely, hence the somewhat challenging question was asked as to what should be done with the man who was called Christ. Their answer that he was to be crucified, was to carry out the sentence imposed by the Sanhedrin but which it did not have the authority to execute.

Matthew 27:23

7:23 There is nothing in the text that indicates any knowledge on the part of Pilate as to the charge upon which Jesus had been brought into his court. It is true the crowd accused him of perverting the nation (Luke 23:2), but that was not any authoritative testimony for it was made by this mob at the moment. According to Matthew 26:64-66 the point at which the Sanhedrin voted Jesus guilty was when he claimed to be the Son of God. Pilate, however, did not know anything about that (as far as we know), hence it was logical for him to ask the crowd the question stated. They refused to answer Pilate’s question although they knew the pretense the Sanhedrin used in rendering its verdict. But they also knew that such a decision would not have much weight in a secular court, hence they ignored the question of the governor and repeated their wicked demand instead.

Matthew 27:24

7:24 Although Pilate was a Roman official, he was somewhat acquainted with the Jewish history because of the frequent appearances of the leading men of that nation in Roman affairs. In Deuteronomy 21 is a provision in the law to dispose formally of a case of death for which it was not known who was responsible. The elders of the city nearest the body that was found were technically held to be guilty, or at least to have guilty knowledge thereof. The Lord knew that in some cases this would be unjust toward innocent persons, so a ceremony was ordained that included the washing of the hands which settled the case and cleared them of all responsibility. Pilate thought he could use that ceremony and thus avoid all responsibility for the death of Jesus. He failed to consider, however, that the Mosaic ceremony was in force only in cases where the elders actually were innocent or did not know anything about the case, while Pilate did have knowledge of the merits of the case and even had pronounced Jesus not guilty (Luke 23:4). He therefore could not escape responsibility by this misuse of the law intended only for the protection of the innocent.

Matthew 27:25

7:25 The people understood from this performance of Pilate that he was hesitating because of a conscientious regard for the possible results of turning Jesus over to crucifixion. In order to remove that obstacle and secure the desired decree, they uttered the awful statement, His blood be on us, and on our children. This rash sentence proved to be a prediction that was fulfilled forty years later. In the year 70 A. D. the city of Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans and the Jewish people suffered untold miseries in the siege. That event was a part of the Roman military strategy, but God caused it to come upon the Jews because they had slain His own Son.

Matthew 27:26

7:26 It was a custom with the Romans to scourge a prisoner who was to be executed. There were various methods of administering this punishment. Luke 23:22 reveals that Pilate proposed to chastice Jesus and let him go. That would have been a compromise with the hopes of pacifying the Jews and yet not being so harsh upon Jesus. But the mob would not accept it, so Pilate followed the cruel practice and scourged Jesus, after which he turned him over to the mob to have him crucified.

Matthew 27:27

7:27 Of course the people of the Jews could not personally perform this execution since they were not officers of the Roman government. That action was to be done by the soldiers, who took the victim into the common hall which the margin correctly renders “governor’s house”; here they brought the entire band of soldiers. There was no need for such a military display for Jesus was not showing any disposition to resist. It was done through pomp and to humiliate the doomed man by their show of power.

Matthew 27:28

7:28 They stripped him. This was after Jesus had been scourged, for that operation required that his clothing be removed first according to Smith’s Bible Dictionary. This denotes that after the scourging was performed his clothing was replaced upon his wounded body. Scarlet was one of the royal colors of Rome, and the placing of this robe on the body of Jesus after it had been stripped the second time, was in mockery because he had said he was a king.

Matthew 27:29

7:29 The actions of this verse also were done in mockery of the claim of Jesus that he was a king of the Jews. For a crown they used thorns, which comes from the same Greek word as that used in chapter 13:7. Thayer defines the word, “A thorn, bramble-bush, brier.” It means something that was not visible at the time the sowing was done, for it was afterward that the thorns “sprang up.” The plant used as a mocking as well as a painful article was the kind that could be platted or woven into a crown and then pressed down upon the head of Jesus. Kings usually hold a baton or rod in their hand which was called a scepter when so used, indicating the authority of the throne. For that purpose a reed was placed in his hand in mockery of his claim as king. Smith’s Bible Dictionary gives the following information on the reed that grew in Palestine. “A stronger reed, Arundo donax, the true reed of Egypt and Palestine, which grows 8 or 10 feet high, and is thicker than a man’s thumb.

It has a jointed stalk like a bamboo, and is very abundant on the Nile.” There is something very pathetic about this item of the mocking ceremony. The placing of a crown on the head would require only that Jesus would not resist, but to put a reed in his right hand would be possible only by his cooperation, for an object like that would have to be grasped in order for the act to be a success. All of this was in keeping with the prediction of nonresistance that was made in Isaiah 53:7 and Acts 8:32-33. It is fitting that a king would be saluted respectfully in the manner described in this verse, but these wicked men did it in mockery.

Matthew 27:30

7:30 Isaiah 53:3 predicts that Jesus was to be “despised” which means to be treated with contempt or belittled. That was fulfilled when they spit upon him, which was done also when he was in the high priest’s house (chapter 26:67). They next took the reed out of his hand and struck him on the head. That indicated that he was to be dispossessed of the authority he claimed to have, and then be punished by the very authority he claimed to represent as king.

Matthew 27:31

7:31 After completing their shameful mockery, they replaced the robe with his own clothing and started the “last mile” of his life toward the place of crucifixion.

Matthew 27:32

7:32 Simon did not “bear the cross alone,” but helped Jesus with the burden. See the comments on this subject with the reference cited at chapter 16:24.

Matthew 27:33

7:33 No genuine believer in Christ would wish to lessen the respect that is so universally held for “the scenes of Calvary,” yet it should be understood that most of the sentimental expressions on the subject are prompted by the general facts connected with the crucifixion. Even the poetic term “Mount Calvary” is not justified except figuratively as may be seen by the information now to be offered to the reader. Golgotha, rendered “Calvary” in Luke 23:33,” is from the Greek word KRANION which Thayer and Robinson define by the simple term “a skull.” Smith’s Bible Dictionary says the following in an article entitled Golgotha. “The Hebrew name of the spot at which our Lord was crucified. Matthew 27:33; Mark 15:22; John 19:17. By these three evangelists it is interpreted to mean the ‘place of a skull.’ Two explanations of the name are given: (1) that it was a spot where executions ordinarily took place, and therefore abounded in skulls; or (2) it may come from the look or form of the spot itself, bald, round and skull-like, and therefore a mound or hillock in accordance with the common phrase–for which there is no direct authority –‘Mount Calvary.’ Whichever of these is correct, Golgotha seems to have been a known spot.”

In his comments on the word “Calvary,” Robert Young, author of the Analytical Concordance to the Bible, says the following: “This name occurs only in Luke 23:33, and is not a proper name, but arises from the translators having literally adopted the word Calvaria (i. e., “a bare skull”) the Latin word by which the Greek word is rendered in the Vulgate [a Latin version of the Scriptures]. This Kranion is simply the Greek translation of the Chaldee Golgotha. The place of crucifixion is by each of the four evangelists called Kranion, and is in every case translated Calvaria in the Vulgate, and in every place but that in Luke the English version translates the word by ‘scull.’ There is no sanction for the expression ‘Mount Calvary,’ for it is only 18 feet high.”

Matthew 27:34

7:34 According to both Smith’s Bible Dictionary, and Funk and Wag-nails Standard Bible Dictionary, this gall was made from the poppy plant which grew in abundance in Palestine. That, combined with the vinegar which would be somewhat alcoholic, composed a stupifying product that would act as an easement from pain. Jesus would not drink it because he was not willing to do anything to make his sufferings any less severe. Incidentally, we have an important bit of information as to what the verb “drink” means. The passage says that Jesus “tasted” of the mixture but would not “drink,” which shows there is a difference between the two. Christians are commanded to “drink” of the fruit of the vine, not just taste of it.

There is no need to consume a regular serving of it as one would to quench thirst, but we are expected to partake of it enough that it can be said we drink and not merely taste as is commonly done. Most churches do not provide enough of the fruit of the vine in the Lord’s supper to meet the requirement of the ordinance.

Matthew 27:35

7:35 The crucifixion of Jesus forms so important a part of the plan of human salvation, that I believe the reader should have some information on the manner of performing the act itself. I shall quote a description of it as may be found in Smith’s Bible Dictionary. “The one to be crucified was stripped naked of all his clothes, and then followed the most awful moment of all. He was laid down upon the implement of torture. His arms were stretched along the cross-beams, and at the center of the open palms the point of a huge nail was placed, which, by the blow of a mallet, was driven home into the wood. Then through either foot separately, or possibly through both together, as they were placed one over the other, another huge nail tore its way through the quivering flesh. Whether the suf-ferer was also bound to the cross we a not know; but, to prevent the hands and feet being torn away by the weight of the body, which could ‘rest upon nothing but four great wounds,’ there was, about the centre of the cross, a wooden projection strong enough to support, at least in part, a human body, which soon became a weight of Agony.

Then the ‘accursed tree’ with its living human burden was slowly heaved up and the end fixed firmly in a hole in the ground. The feet were but a little raised above the earth.

The victim was in full reach of every hand that might choose to strike. A death by crucifixion seems to include all that pain and death can have of the horrible and ghastly,–dizziness, cramp, thirst, starvation, sleeplessness, traumatic [shock from a wound] fever, tetanus, publicity of shame, long continuance of torment, horror of anticipation, mortification of unattended wounds, all intensified just up to the point at which they can be endured at all, but all stopping just short of the point which would give to the sufferer the relief of unconsciousness. The unnatural position made every movement painful; the lacerated veins and crushed tendons throbbed with incessant anguish; the wounds, inflamed by exposure, gradually gangrened; the arteries, especially of the head and stomach, became swollen and oppressed with surcharged blood; and, while each variety of misery went on gradually increasing, there was added to them the intolerable pang of burning and raging thirst. Such was the death to which Christ was doomed. The crucified was watched, according to custom, by a party of four soldiers, John 19:23, with their centurion, Matthew 27:54, whose express office was to prevent the stealing of the body. This was necessary from the lingering character of the death, which sometimes did not supervene even for three days, and was at last the result of gradual benumbing and starvation.

But for this guard, the persons might have been taken down and recovered as was actually done in the case of a friend of Josephus. Fracture of the legs was especially adopted by the Jews to hasten death, John 19:31.

In most cases the body was suffered to rot on the cross by the action of sun and rain, or to be devoured by birds and beasts. Sepulture [burial] was generally therefore forbidden; but in consequence of Deu 21:22-23, au express national exception was made in favor of the Jews. Matthew 27:58. This accursed and awful mode of punishment was happily abolished by Constantine.”

Parted his garments. We learn from the aforesaid quotation that the victim to be crucified was stripped of his clothing before the crucifixion. It was a custom that the soldiers performing the execution should have this raiment as extra pay in addition to their wages as soldiers. According to John 19:23 there were four of them, corresponding to the four parts to be nailed, the two hands and two feet, and hence there would be four parts to be shared by them. Casting lots. Most of the garments were so made that they could be divided into parts without any damage to them.

But John 19:23-24 says the coat was made by weaving into one piece without any seams, and therefore it could not be divided without ruining it. Accordingly, the soldiers agreed to decide the question by casting lots for the garment. This action fulfilled the prediction in Psalms 22:18. That it might be fulfilled. The bearing on this kind of phrase is explained in the comments on Matthew 4:14.

Matthew 27:36

7:36 Consult the preceding verse for the reason why they watched him.

Matthew 27:37

7:37 Accusation written. It was a custom of the Romans to place a tablet on the cross over the head of the victim on which was written the accusation for which he was crucified. In the present case the “crime” was that he was Jesus the king of the Jews. According to John’s account (John 19:21) the chief priests objected to the wording of this inscription, which will be commented upon at that place.

Matthew 27:38

7:38 The scripture does not tell us the motive of the Romans for crucifying these thieves at this particular time and in the position with Jesus as stated. But we can understand the part the Lord had in it, for it fulfilled a prediction in Isaiah 53:12 that “he was numbered with the transgressors.”

Matthew 27:39

7:39 Thayer says this wagging of the head was “expressive of derision.” A similar movement is recorded in Job 16:4 and Psalms 109:25. Reviled is a stronger term and comes from the same Greek word as “blaspheme.” Thus by the movement of their body and their word of mouth, these cruel people showed their contempt for the Lamb of God who was at that very hour making the supreme sacrifice that creatures like them might have an opportunity of being saved.

Matthew 27:40

7:40 To blaspheme means to speak evil, whether in direct falsehood or otherwise. The preceding verse says they reviled him which means to blaspheme, and the present verse tells us some of the false things they said. Jesus never said he would destroy the temple (John 2:19), hence this was one of the blasphemous falsehoods they uttered against him. IF thou be the Son of God denotes they understood what was the real issue between Jesus and his enemies. It was not about his personal life nor his knowledge, but it was his identity. That is why the devil dwelt on that question in the temptations (chapter 4:3, 6), and why Jesus asked the question stated in chapter 16:13, 15 and 22:42. All the other questions and facts in the life of Christ are important only in so far as they pertain to the fundamental claim that he is God’s Son.

Matthew 27:41

7:41 The reproachful sayings in the preceding verse were from the crowd in general. This verse specifies the chief priests and scribes as the ones who were mocking Jesus. They had been against him all through his public work, so it is not surprising that they would join in the mob clamor at this time.

Matthew 27:42

7:42 Saved others refers to the miraculous cures that Jesus did for people. Himself he cannot save means he cannot deliver himself from the cross. This was another falsehood, and it ignored the incident in the garden when Peter thought to defend him against bodily attack (chapter 26:51-54). They professed that they would believe in him if he would come down from the cross. This was a hypocritical claim for Jesus had done many works in their presence that were as great as this would have been, yet they refused to acknowledge him as the Lord.

Matthew 27:43

7:43 Let him deliver him means for God to deliver his Son from the cross. This was as insincere as the statement of the preceding verse. They must have known that God would have the same reason for not interfering with the crucifixion as Jesus had for not resisting it.

Matthew 27:44

7:44 This reproach from the thieves- was as much out of place as any such a thing could be. There was no honorable reason why they were in the difficulty of the hour, for they could have avoided it by the right conduct. But Jesus was so situated from the fact that his conduct was righteous. We are glad that one of them did see the situation in the proper light and so expressed himself. (Luke 23:39-43.)

Matthew 27:45

7:45 The sixth and ninth hours corresponds with our noon and three In the afternoon. This darkness is pre dicted in Joe 2:30-31 and is referred to by Peter in Acts 2:19-20. It seems that nature was draped in mourning during the last hours of this human-divine sacrifice. And to add to the gloom, the Father withdrew his comforting grace so that Jesus made a strong outcry, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” In order that the Son of God might make a complete sacrifice, that he might “pour out his soul unto death” (Isaiah 53:12), he was left unattended in his painful solitude, no soothing hand to calm the nervous agitation with a caressing touch, but, deserted by all his friends and mocked by his enemies, compelled to die for the unjust.

Matthew 27:46

7:46 Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani is from Hebrew words as Jesus uttered them. Then Matthew translates them into Greek, which the translators of King James render in English for us, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken met This bewailing sentence is recorded as a prophecy in Psalms 22:1.

Matthew 27:47

7:47 The Hebrew word that Jesus used is similar in sound to the Greek for Elias, and that misled the bystanders to think he was calling for Elias who had been predicted to come into the world as his forerunner (Malachi 4:5).

Matthew 27:48

7:48 In John 19:28-29 where this part of the event is recorded, Jesus is reported to have said he was thirsty.. Thus in our present verse we are told that a person standing near offered him a drink of vinega (sour wine), serving it with a sponge on .a reed. That was the most convenient way either of serving or receiving it under the circumstances. This was done merely to quench his dying thirst and not as an opiate since it did not have the gall mixed with it which he had refused (verse 34).

Matthew 27:49

7:49 Others, with less sympathy with Jesus in his distress, were willing to let him linger on in pain to see if his friend Elias (as they supposed) would come to his rescue and take him down from the cross.

Matthew 27:50

7:50 When a human being is at the point of death from exhaustion, he is generally unconscious, or if not, he is very weak and would not be expected to make a strong cry. An exception to this would be when the patient is in delirium and hence acting with abnormal energy and without intelligent expression. No part of this description can apply to Jesus at this point. He not only was conscious, but his mind had not entered that stage where it would be acting mechanically, for according to Luke 23:46 this “loud voice” was immediately followed by the all impressive words, “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit.” Our present verse says he yielded up the ghost, which comes from the same Greek word as spirit. So this outcry was evidently the final expression of one who, though ready to die, being “crucified through weakness” (2 Corinthians 13:4), was able by the force of the will to make a triumphant shout as he was ready to leave the scenes of death and go to his Father.

Matthew 27:51

7:51 This veil separated between the holy and most holy rooms in the temple. Through it the high priest went on the day of atonement to offer a service of blood for the sins of the people (Leviticus 16:29-30). Jesus died at the hour that the animal was slain for the sacrifices, and hence it was fitting that this veil be rent at the same time, signifying that the great High Priest was ready to offer himself as a ransom for all. The quaking of the earth and rending of the rocks was God’s method of opening the graves, the significance of which will be explained in the next two verses.

Matthew 27:52

7:52. raves were opened. The tombs are meant which were in the form of caves that either were natural or were hewn out of a rock (verse 60), and another stone placed at the entrance to close the burial place. The earthquake loosened these stones and made them roll away thus opening the graves or tombs. A saint is anyone who is devoted to the service of God. These could not have been Christians because the church had not been set up. They were persons from one or all of the following groups of servants of God; those who had lived and died under the Patriarchal or Jewish dispensations, or disciples who had been called by the preaching of John or Christ, and who had died within the three years of their personal ministry.

The rising of these saints forms a link in a very important chain of thought, which will be dealt with at Romans 8:29-30. For the present, however, I will state that these saints never died again.

Matthew 27:53

7:53 One thing that is often overlooked in referring to this event, and that is that it was after his resur rection. that the saints arose. That was in order to make Christ the first one to come from the dead to die no more (Acts 13:34; Acts 26:23). Also, it was necessary for it to occur this close to the resurrection of Jesus in order that he could be the first “among many brethren” (Romans 8:29). The holy city means Jerusalem because it was the capital of the Jewish nation in its religious system.

Matthew 27:54

7:54 The centurion and the other watchers were filled with awe by the demonstration. It was. not at the resurrection of anyone for that had not taken place yet. But they saw and felt the shaking of the earth at the same time that Jesus died, and knew that some supernatural power was the cause of it. They were pagans and did not know God as Christians know him, but they did know that Christ claimed to be His son, and the demonstration convinced them that he was what he claimed to be.

Matthew 27:55

7:55 These women were faithful to the last, but with feminine timidity they stood some distance away watching. They had come from the same district where .Jesus was brought up, Galilee, and had served him on various occasions.

Matthew 27:56

7:56 Mary Magdalene was the woman whom Jesus cured of demons (Mark 16:9) Mary the mother of James and Joses was the mother of Jesus (Mark 6:3); the mother of Zebedee’s children was the mother of James and John (Mark 10:35).

Matthew 27:57

7:57 Luke 23:50-51 says that Joseph was a counsellor which means that he was a member of the Sanhedrin. That passage states also that he “had not consented to the counsel and deed of them,” meaning the Sanhedrin. Decisions of that body were made by the voice of the members (Matthew 26:65-66), and when the case of Jesus was presented, Joseph did not vote with those who condemned him. It should be noted that Joseph was a rich man, also that he was “a good man and a just,” and that he was a disciple of Jesus. All of this disproves the teaching of some that a man cannot be a true disciple of Jesus and still be a rich man. It is the trusting in riches that will condemn a man (Mark 10:24; 1 Timothy 6:17-18).

But if he will “do good” with his riches he will thereby lay up for himself a good foundation against the time to come, and lay hold upon eternal life. Had Joseph not been a rich man he might not -have been able to purchase the burial place that was used to give the body of Jesus the respect that even any human body deserves, much more that of the Son of God. Another thing, by the fact of this man’s being rich it fulfilled the prediction that Christ “made his grave with the rich” (Isaiah 53:9). That same prophecy includes a grave with the wicked which means the people of the world from whom Joseph purchased the place.

Matthew 27:58

7:58 Joseph knew he would have to make special provisions and obtain a legal permit in order to take charge of the Lord’s body. As an explanation of that subject I shall quote again a part of the statement from Smith’s Bible Dictionary. “In most cases the body was suffered to rot on the cross by the action of sun and rain, or be devoured by birds and beasts. Sepulture [burial] was generally therefore forbidden.” The statement that Pilate commanded the body to be delivered shows that a considerable amount of “red tape” was necessary in procuring the body of one who had been crucified.

Matthew 27:59

7:59 Joseph wrapped the body in a winding sheet of clean linen. In the comments at verse 35 it is shown that a person to be crucified was stripped of all his clothing, hence the immediate need for using this linen cloth, for under the circumstances there was no opportunity for getting a burial shroud.

Matthew 27:60

7:60 John 19:38-40 says that Joseph had a helper in this loving service, the man who came to Jesus by night (John 3:1-2). This gives us the information that Nicodemus became friendly with Jesus at least, and was willing not only to assist in the work of burying the Lord, but contributed a substantial amount of valuable products to be used in the burying according to the Jewish manner of such a ceremony. The tomb was hewn out of the rock and might well be compared to the burial chambers that are made in the walls of modern mausolems in the public cemeteries. The body was borne by these two men and laid in this cavity as it would be deposited on a couch. To close it a great stone was rolled up against the opening.

Matthew 27:61

7:61 The other Mary was the mother of Jesus (verse 56). These women found a seat opposite where Jesus was buried and “beheld where he was laid” (Mark 15:47), which explains their concern about the stone when they were coming the day after the sabbath with spices, intending to anoint his body (Mark 16:1-3).

Matthew 27:62

7:62 The day before any holy or sabbath day was called a preparation (Mark 15:42), and this would apply to every holy day, not only the regular weekly sabbath. The day of the passover was a holy day (Leviticus 23:4-5), hence the day before it would be a preparation. The passover came on Friday the 14th, thus it would naturally be a day that followed the day of preparation, and also the day following the crucifixion. On that day the leading Jews came to Pilate with their request.

Matthew 27:63

7:63 The Jews reminded the governor of the claim of Jesus that he would rise from the dead after three days. Yes, Jesus did declare such a thing, and the Jews had no misunderstanding of the words. But when they had a wicked motive prompting them, they perverted them to serve their hypocrisy (chapter 26:61).

Matthew 27:64

7:64 I do not believe these Jews actually feared the disciples would steal the dead body of their Lord; what could they do with it? Besides, they were discouraged and in no mood for trying any rash means of what at best could only have been propaganda that would soon have been exposed. But these Jews were foolish enough to think that a seal over the tomb would prevent Jesus from breaking it, just as there are people today foolish enough to think that by having their bodies cremated they can escape the lake of fire. Error and deceiver are from Greek words with virtually the same meaning. The last error means the last deception, and the thought was that if they let the disciples succeed in their plan, then they (the Jews) would be worse beaten at the game than they were the first time.

Matthew 27:65

7:65 Pilate reminded them of the watch in existence already, which consisted of various regulations as to the number of men to be on the watch at a time and the number of hours each group was required to be on duty. In addition to this, Pilate authorized them to make the tomb as secure as possible.

Matthew 27:66

7:66. Acting upon the authority of Pilate, they put a Roman seal on the tomb and appointed the watchmen to bA on duty at the grave.