Verse by Verse

23 The same day the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to Him and asked Him,

24 saying: “Teacher, Moses said that if a man dies, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife and raise up offspring for his brother.

25 Now there were with us seven brothers. The first died after he had married, and having no offspring, left his wife to his brother.

26 Likewise the second also, and the third, even to the seventh.

27 Last of all the woman died also.

28 Therefore, in the resurrection, whose wife of the seven will she be? For they all had her.”

29 Jesus answered and said to them, “You are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God.

30 For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels of God in heaven.

31 But concerning the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God, saying,

32 ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.”

33 And when the multitudes heard this, they were astonished at His teaching.

This account is also found in Mark 12:18-27 and Luke 20:27-38.

The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection — their question reflected this belief by attempting to mock it. The only accepted the Torah (Genesis to Deuteronomy).

The Sadducees were Nationalists and did not believe in angels or any invisible powers, nor in the resurrection. Their main dispute with the Pharisees was as to whether the oral tradition was binding. The Pharisees held it of equal value with the written law; the Sadducees said that everything not written might be rejected or was at least open to question. They considered the doctrine of the resurrection a mere matter of pious opinion. They said the doctrine was without authority in the written law, especially since, in their opinion, the prophets were not of equal value with the Pentateuch.

Christ showed that those who professed reverence for the law and showed their respect for it by quoting it on this occasion were really ignorant of what the law taught. Jesus quoted what God had said to Moses: “I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob” (Matthew 22:32). The force of Christ’s argument turned on the present tense of the verb “I am.” God should have said, “I was,” if Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had died, and were now dead, and there was no resurrection. But since God said, “I am” the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, He was testifying to their existence and the ultimate resurrection of their bodies. There could be no doubt but that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had died physically when God spoke these words to Moses. But God’s words indicated that they were alive and that there would be a bodily resurrection. Christ not only affirmed the fact of resurrection but indicated something of the nature of life in resurrection when He said, “People will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven” (Matthew 22:30). This statement was designed to refute the false concept of the Sadducees concerning the nature of life in resurrection that led them to repudiate the doctrine. — Pentecost, page 389.

Moses said (v.24) — Deuteronomy 25:5 — If brothers dwell together, and one of them dies and has no son, the widow of the dead man shall not be married to a stranger outside the family; her husband’s brother shall go in to her, take her as his wife, and perform the duty of a husband’s brother to her.

like angels (v.30) — a glorified body incapable of reproduction or destruction

The quote in verse 32 is from Exodus 3:6.

15 Then the Pharisees went and plotted how they might entangle Him in His talk.

16 And they sent to Him their disciples with the Herodians, saying, “Teacher, we know that You are true, and teach the way of God in truth; nor do You care about anyone, for You do not regard the person of men.

17 Tell us, therefore, what do You think? Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?”

18 But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, “Why do you test Me, you hypocrites?

19 Show Me the tax money.” So they brought Him a denarius.

20 And He said to them, “Whose image and inscription is this?”

21 They said to Him, “Caesar’s.” And He said to them, “Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.”

22 When they had heard these words, they marveled, and left Him and went their way.

disciples (v.16) — followers of the Pharisees. The Pharisees probably figured Jesus knew them and would be on His guard, so they sent others to flatter and trap Him.

Herodians (v16) — Those who supported the rule of the Herods, and, therefore, Rome. They were normally opposed by the Pharisees because of their disregard of religion.

Their question (v.17) was a trap. If Jesus said “yes,” they could accuse Him of being a traitor to Israel. If He said “no,” they could denounce Him to the Roman authorities.

By simply asking for a penny, He left them under the yoke which they were obliged to confess they had themselves adopted; and by inviting them to render to Him as God, the things that were God’s, He offered to release them from that yoke, as also from the greater yoke of their sins. — Williams, page 722.

lawful (v.17) — Is it against Jewish law?

The tax they were referring to was the poll tax, a small tax levied on women aged twelve to sixty-five and men aged fourteen to sixty-five. it was a relatively small tax, as the Romans also exacted a ten-percent tax on grain and a twenty-percent tax on wine and fruit, as well as other taxes for road and bridge improvements. The Pharisees had chosen the least of the taxes, but to pay it was to recognize Roman oppression, which was most unpopular with the Jews. — Walvoord, page 166.

you hypocrites (v.18) — He saw through their flattery immediately.

denarius (v.19) — a Roman coin worth about 16 cents (according to Walvoord)

Thus Christ recognized two divinely constituted spheres of authority. In the one sphere God is supreme. In the other Caesar has delegated authority. Christ’s statement anticipated Paul’s teaching that all civil authorities are constituted by God. As such they are God’s minsters to maintain law and order and to provide an atmosphere in which righteous men may live in peace. Consequently they are to be supported by the payment of taxes (Romans 13:1-7). Christ recognized the authority given to Caesar as God’s servant, and therefore He confirmed that Caesar must be supported by the payment of taxes. This teaching did not conflict with God’s right to rule, and the payment of taxes to Caesar did not nullify the fact that ultimately God will appoint His Son as Ruler in Caesar’s place. Thus Christ recognized Caesar’s right, but He did not deny that Israel’s hope to be ruled by their Messiah will eventually be realized. — Pentecost, page 388

1 And Jesus answered and spoke to them again by parables and said:

2 “The kingdom of heaven is like a certain king who arranged a marriage for his son,

3 and sent out his servants to call those who were invited to the wedding; and they were not willing to come.

4 Again, he sent out other servants, saying, ‘Tell those who are invited, “See, I have prepared my dinner; my oxen and fatted cattle are killed, and all things are ready. Come to the wedding.”’

5 But they made light of it and went their ways, one to his own farm, another to his business.

6 And the rest seized his servants, treated them spitefully, and killed them.

7 But when the king heard about it, he was furious. And he sent out his armies, destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city.

8 Then he said to his servants, ‘The wedding is ready, but those who were invited were not worthy.

9 Therefore go into the highways, and as many as you find, invite to the wedding.’

10 So those servants went out into the highways and gathered together all whom they found, both bad and good. And the wedding hall was filled with guests.

11 “But when the king came in to see the guests, he saw a man there who did not have on a wedding garment.

12 So he said to him, ‘Friend, how did you come in here without a wedding garment?’ And he was speechless.

13 Then the king said to the servants, ‘Bind him hand and foot, take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’

14 “For many are called, but few are chosen.”

There (v.4) we find the record of the second call to Israel. The preaching of the kingdom is resumed for a brief period and with this preaching is the promise of forgiveness of sins and the times of refreshing and restitution. The invitation, which went forth after the Lord had taken His place at the right hand of the Majesty on high, is clearly stated by Peter in the third chapter of Acts. “Repent, therefore, and be converted, for the blotting out of your sins, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and He may send Jesus Christ, who was foreordained for you, whom heaven indeed must receive till the times of restoration of all things, of which God has spoken by the mouth of His holy prophets since time began” (Acts 3:19-21). No Gentile heard this message, nor was it meant for a Gentile; it was exclusively addressed to Jerusalem. — Gaebelein, page 441.

burned up their city (v.7) — a prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in AD 70.

wedding garment (v.12) — In the east, garments were provided by the host. To refuse to wear it is an insult. This guest considered his own garment good enough. (Zephaniah 1:7-8; Isaiah 61:10).

The word not in verse eleven is a different word from the not [without] in verse twelve, and it is impossible to translate the different meaning by any equivalent in our language. In the Greek language the first not was always used when referring to a matter of fact, while the second was always used in reference to a matter of thought. This is certainly the intention of the passage — there came in a man not having a wedding garment; that is the fact. But when the king looked at him and said “How camest thou in hither not having,” that is, deliberately not having, with determination not having, it is the not of thought — you did not mean to have a wedding garment, you have dared to come without a wedding garment. — Morgan, page 265.

Here’s my understanding of this passage.

The first invitation to the wedding was made to Israel in the Old Testament and during the earthly ministry of Jesus Christ. God sent the prophets who were ignored and mistreated and killed.

The second invitation to the wedding was made, again to Israel, by the apostles after the resurrection, at Pentecost and for a short time after. (See Gaebelein’s quote above.) When this was refused — the messengers during this time were also mistreated and killed (Stephen) — the Jews were attacked by the Romans and many died. Jerusalem was destroyed.

The third invitation was not to the church and doesn’t relate to this age. This is obvious because the Lord begins this parable with “The kingdom of heaven is like …”

The kingdom of heaven is the Millennial Kingdom. The bad and good, I’m guessing, are the Gentiles and the Jews. All will be blessed during the kingdom when Christ is on the throne ruling with an iron hand.

The guest without the garment is the individual who is in the kingdom but who hasn’t trusted Christ, whether Jew or Gentile.

That these people will exist is evident from Revelation 20:7-10.

Now when the thousand years have expired, Satan will be released from his prison and will go out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle, whose number is as the sand of the sea. They went up on the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city. And fire came down from God out of heaven and devoured them. The devil, who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone where the beast and the false prophet are. And they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

Note the similarity in consequences for these unbelievers in the kingdom and the wedding guest in the parable in Matthew 22.

chosen (v.14) — Vine (Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words) defines chosen as “pick out, select, to choose for oneself, not necessarily implying the rejection of what is not chosen, but choosing with the subsidiary ideas of kindness or favor or love”

So … the verse could mean, “Many are invited, but few fit in the category of those whom I favor or love.”

The idea, in context, being that anyone is invited to come to the wedding, but I have chosen to favor only those who do come and who put on the wedding garments. Those who don’t come or who come and don’t put on the garments will not be among the chosen group of those whom I favor. This view is supported by the parable itself. Many were invited who chose not to come. One came but refused, by an act of his own will, to wear the wedding garments. All of them were welcome to join the chosen group, but they chose not to.

33 “Hear another parable: There was a certain landowner who planted a vineyard and set a hedge around it, dug a winepress in it and built a tower. And he leased it to vinedressers and went into a far country.

34 Now when vintage-time drew near, he sent his servants to the vinedressers, that they might receive its fruit.

35 And the vinedressers took his servants, beat one, killed one, and stoned another.

36 Again he sent other servants, more than the first, and they did likewise to them.

37 Then last of all he sent his son to them, saying, ‘They will respect my son.’

38 But when the vinedressers saw the son, they said among themselves, ‘This is the heir. Come, let us kill him and seize his inheritance.’

39 So they took him and cast him out of the vineyard and killed him.

40 “Therefore, when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those vinedressers?”

41 They said to Him, “He will destroy those wicked men miserably, and lease his vineyard to other vinedressers who will render to him the fruits in their seasons.”

42 Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the Scriptures: ‘The stone which the builders rejected has become the chief cornerstone. This was the Lord’s doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes’?

43 “Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a nation bearing the fruits of it.

44 And whoever falls on this stone will be broken; but on whomever it falls, it will grind him to powder.”

45 Now when the chief priests and Pharisees heard His parables, they perceived that He was speaking of them.

46 But when they sought to lay hands on Him, they feared the multitudes, because they took Him for a prophet.

landowner (v.33) — picturing God

vineyard (v.33) — picturing the nation of Israel

Now let me sing to my Well-beloved a song of my Beloved regarding His vineyard: My Well-beloved has a vineyard on a very fruitful hill. He dug it up and cleared out its stones, and planted it with the choicest vine. He built a tower in its midst, and also made a winepress in it; so He expected it to bring forth good grapes, but it brought forth wild grapes. “And now, O inhabitants of Jerusalem and men of Judah, judge, please, between Me and My vineyard. What more could have been done to My vineyard that I have not done in it? Why then, when I expected it to bring forth good grapes, did it bring forth wild grapes? And now, please let Me tell you what I will do to My vineyard: I will take away its hedge, and it shall be burned; and break down its wall, and it shall be trampled down. I will lay it waste; it shall not be pruned or dug, but there shall come up briers and thorns. I will also command the clouds that they rain no rain on it.” For the vineyard of the Lord of hosts is the house of Israel, and the men of Judah are His pleasant plant. He looked for justice, but behold, oppression; for righteousness, but behold, a cry for help (Isaiah 5:1-7). (See also Jeremiah 2:21 and Psalm 80:8.)

The description of the preparation of the vineyard in verse 33 is, I think, to show that God created Israel, cared for Israel, and gave Israel everything the nation needed to succeed. (But the priests and rulers He appointed to govern treated it like it was their own.)

servants (v.34) — picturing the prophets sent to Israel

son (v.37) — picturing Christ

It is probably true that no person would send his son into a situation where servants had previously killed his other representatives but would immediately call the authorities. The contrast is between what men would do and what God had done. God did send His Son, even though Israel had rejected His prophets earlier and killed them and had rejected John the Baptist. — Walvoord, page 162.

__________

What will he do? (v.40) —  He had made them find the verdict (v.31); He now made them pass the sentence. He who compelled them to be the jury, finding the verdict in the case of their own wrong, now compelled them to be the judge, passing sentence upon their own iniquity. And they were quite vehement about it, and their very vehemence is the evidence of the tremendous force with which Jesus spoke the words, that searching intensity that stirred the conscience, and compelled attention, and made the chief priests forget their quarrel with Him and speak out the truth. — Morgan, page 261.

The quote in verse 42 is from Psalm 118:22-23. (See also Acts 4:11 and 1 Peter 2:7.)

The figure of a stone is found often in Scripture, Jesus being referred to both as the foundation stone and the head of the corner (1 Corinthians 3:11; Ephesians 2:20-22; 1 Peter 2:4-5). To Israel, Jesus was a stumbling stone and a rock of offense (Isaiah 8:14-15; Romans 9:32-33; 1 Corinthians 1:23; 1 Peter 2:8). At the time of His second coming, He will be a smiting stone of destruction (Daniel 2:34). — Walvoord, page 162.

A nation (v.43) — in the original, there is no “a” — it’s just “nation,” so it’s not referring to a specific nation but to those who bring forth fruit—believing Israel. It can’t be the church (see Gaebelein’s quote below). And it certainly can’t be Gentiles in general because in no way can they be said to be bringing forth fruit. It can only refer to the believing remnant in the Tribulation who will enter the kingdom.

The nation to whom the Lord promises the kingdom is not the Church. The Church is called the Body of Christ, the Bride of Christ, the Habitation of God by the Spirit … but never a nation. The nation is Israel still, but that believing remnant of the nation, living when the Lord comes. — Gaebelein, page 437

broken (v.44) — Some commentaries say this is speaking of the brokenness necessary to receive salvation but that didn’t make sense to me. Gaebelein has another take (below).

The Lord in these few words predicts the coming judgment of the Jews and the Gentiles. The one sentence has been carried out and the other is still to be executed. The Jews have fallen on this stone and they have been broken. How it has become true! The stone is yet to fall and strike the world-powers, the Gentiles, and grind them to powder. [Turn to] Daniel 2 and read Nebuchadnezzar’s dream and the divinely given interpretation. The stone cut out without hands, falling out of heaven, smiting the great image at its feet, is the Lord Jesus Christ in His second coming. The Lord refers to this here. As truly as He broke the Jews who fell on Him, so will He pulverize Gentile world power and dominion, when He is revealed from heaven. The nations are ripe for their judgment. — Gaebelein, page 437-438.

I e-mailed Ricky Kurth and got this response:

If your question is about “broken,” the right cross reference is Isaiah 8:14-15. Those are the verses the Lord is thinking of.

He will be as a sanctuary, but a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense to both the houses of Israel, as a trap and a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem. And many among them shall stumble; they shall fall and be broken, be snared and taken.

Isaiah 8:14 speaks of “both the houses of Israel” and “the inhabitants of Jerusalem,” and then says “many among them shall stumble, and fall, and be broken…” The Lord is speaking to “the chief priests and elders” (Matthew 21:23), so we know that He is talking about what will happen to them if they “fall” or “stumble” on the rock of Christ. Even the chief priests knew He was talking about them (Matthew 21:45; Luke 20:18-19). It is always Israel that is said to have “stumbled at that stumblingstone” (Romans 9:32).

The rest of the verse, the part about the stone grinding them to powder, I think concerns the Gentiles (Psalm 2:8-9; Daniel 2:34-35, 44-45).

²⁸ “But what do you think? A man had two sons, and he came to the first and said, ‘Son, go, work today in my vineyard.’

²⁹ He answered and said, ‘I will not,’ but afterward he regretted it and went.

³⁰ Then he came to the second and said likewise. And he answered and said, ‘I go, sir,’ but he did not go.

³¹ Which of the two did the will of his father?” They said to Him, “The first.” Jesus said to them, “Assuredly, I say to you that tax collectors and harlots enter the kingdom of God before you.

³² For John came to you in the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him; but tax collectors and harlots believed him; and when you saw it, you did not afterward relent and believe him.

regretted (v.29) = lit. “to care for” (care about), repented himself

I go, sir (v.30) = lit. “I, sir” — to contrast himself with the other son

For the purpose of this contrast, He had taken them back to John’s ministry. They had heard him, and professing obedience had been disobedient. The publicans and harlots had heard him, and they who had said, We will not go, had repented … There is no question as to what Christ thought of those men; He knew perfectly well that they were sure John’s ministry was from heaven. John came in the way of righteousness, and they knew that they, the exponents of the ethic of Judaism, could not quarrel with the great ethic he declared; they knew it was the way of righteousness; and yet when he pronounced the way of righteousness they did not obey; they who affirmed their loyalty to God, would not obey the ethic through John.  And it was not merely true that the publicans and harlots believed and obeyed, and they did not; the truth was that they refused to believe, even though they saw the signs of the publicans and harlots entering into the way of righteousness. They not only refused to be persuaded by John himself, but when they saw the effect of John’s preaching, that those men and women whom they despised, and would not help, were helped, and lifted, and healed they still refused.  — Morgan, page 260

__________

By their spoken word Israel’s leaders professed to be sons, but by their disobedience to the Father’s word they proved they were not sons. When John had come appealing to them for repentance, they had professed to repent but had not, for they had not produced fruits of righteousness. Tax collectors and others of similar character were changed and brought forth fruits of righteousness (cf. Luke 5:27-29; 7:36-50). Christ demonstrated that He was willing to accept sinners, but the leaders would not admit that they were sinners; and they therefore refused to come to Him for salvation. Thus in this parable Christ had shown that those who claimed to be sons of the kingdom were not sons; their disobedience to His word revealed that fact. — Pentecost, page 384.

23 Now when He came into the temple, the chief priests and the elders of the people confronted Him as He was teaching, and said, “By what authority are You doing these things? And who gave You this authority?”

24 But Jesus answered and said to them, “I also will ask you one thing, which if you tell Me, I likewise will tell you by what authority I do these things:

25 The baptism of John—where was it from? From heaven or from men?” And they reasoned among themselves, saying, “If we say, ‘From heaven,’ He will say to us, ‘Why then did you not believe him?’

26 But if we say, ‘From men,’ we fear the multitude, for all count John as a prophet.”

27 So they answered Jesus and said, “We do not know.” And He said to them, “Neither will I tell you by what authority I do these things.

This probably took place on Tuesday.

elders (v.23) — scribes and other laymen who served on the high court

authority (v.23) — They considered the things He taught about to be under their authority. He had also taken it upon Himself to clear the temple the day before. They attempted to trap Him into blasphemy by saying He was from God.

They dared not directly oppose Him, but endeavored, by attacking Him on the one point where He seemed to lay Himself open to it, to arrogate to themselves the appearance  of strict legality, and so to turn popular feeling against Him.

For, there was no principle more firmly established by universal consent that that authoritative teaching required previous authorization. Indeed, this logically followed from the principle of Rabbinism. All teaching must be authoritative, since it was traditional — approved by authority.

And, to decide differently from authority, was either the mark of ignorant assumption or the outcome of daring rebellion, in either case to be visited with “the ban.” — Pentecost, pages 382-383.

__________

If they were unable to determine the authority behind John, they would be unable to determine the authority behind Christ, even though He demonstrated that authority to them. Consequently He refused to answer (v.34). His silence did not deny that His authority had come from God. Rather, He was withholding any further evidence from these leaders, though in view of their rejection they would be held responsible. — Pentecost, page 383.

18 Now in the morning, as He returned to the city, He was hungry.

19 And seeing a fig tree by the road, He came to it and found nothing on it but leaves, and said to it, “Let no fruit grow on you ever again.” Immediately the fig tree withered away.

20 And when the disciples saw it, they marveled, saying, “How did the fig tree wither away so soon?”

21 So Jesus answered and said to them, “Assuredly, I say to you, if you have faith and do not doubt, you will not only do what was done to the fig tree, but also if you say to this mountain, ‘Be removed and be cast into the sea,’ it will be done.

22 And whatever things you ask in prayer, believing, you will receive.”

This account is also found in Mark 11:12-14, 20-26.

There are three fig-tree passages that are definitely linked together and give us a dispensational picture of God’s dealings with the Jews: Luke 13:6-9; Matthew 21:17-20; Matthew 24:32-33. — Ironside, page 271

The fig tree is used in Scripture as a symbol of Israel (Hosea 9:10; Joel 1:7)

 At a distance in front of Him Jesus caught sight of a solitary fig tree, and although the ordinary season at which figs ripened had not yet arrived, yet, as it was clad with verdure, and as the fruit of a fig sets before the leaves unfold, this tree looked more than usually promising. Its rich large leaves seemed to show that it was fruitful, and their unusually early growth that it was not only fruitful but precociously vigorous. There was every chance, therefore, of finding upon it either the late violet-colored kermouses, or autumn figs, that often remained hanging on the trees all through the winter, and even until the new spring leaves had come; or the delicious bakkooroth, the first ripe fruit on the fig tree, of which Orientals are particularly fond.

It was not indeed the season for figs, but that tree, perhaps because its soil and situation were good, had matured early. Since it was in leaf, it was reasonable to expect fruit upon its boughs; but, when Jesus approached, He found nothing but leaves. In that fig tree so advantageously situated, so abundant in promise, yet fruitless, Jesus saw an emblem of Israel.

In this incident, then, we find Christ pronouncing judgment on that generation which John had exhorted, “Produce fruit in keeping with repentance” (Matthew 3:8). Like the leafy tree, they had given external evidence of being fruitful but on examination they were seen to be barren and fruitless. Therefore judgment had to come on that generation. — Pentecost, pages 377-378.

So far, so good. The jump from the fig tree to Christ’s words on prayer seems abrupt. Pentecost takes a stab at it that makes sense — that faith was called on in light of the coming judgment on Israel —  but might be a bit of a reach. I post it here as my position pending further study and with the caveat that Christ did, in fact, forgive Israel while He was hanging on the cross. He offered the kingdom to this generation at Pentecost, and it was only after their continued rejection in Acts 7 that the judgment was set into motion.

In the morning Peter discovered that the fig tree cursed by the Lord had withered away. Peter expressed surprise that withering had taken place so quickly (Mark 11:21). This sudden withering was significant, for it revealed that the judgment pronounced on that generation would fall quickly and suddenly.

The lesson from Christ that Israel would be brought under judgment called for the response of faith. The judgment on Israel seemed to signify the termination of God’s program for that people. But the covenant given to Abraham was unconditional and eternal; and so Peter could not understand how the nation to whom the covenant was given could be brought under such a judgment. But Christ encouraged Peter to trust God — to have faith in God for the fulfillment of the promises even thought the nation had been brought under judgment (Mark 11:22). In view of the judgment that had been announced, it took faith to believe that there was a future for Israel and that God would fulfill the covenant.

The Lord used Peter’s exclamation as an occasion to instruct him in the nature of prayer. He said, “Whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours” (v.24). As Christ had forgiven the nation that had rejected Him, so must those who pray forgive those who have injured them. Thus Christ demonstrated His right to judge and His right to occupy and rule over God’s house. This latter is significant in light of the fact that Ezekiel predicted (Ezekiel 43:1-7) that the Messiah would rule His kingdom from the temple to be erected following His advent. — Pentecost, pages 381-382.

12 Then Jesus went into the temple of God and drove out all those who bought and sold in the temple, and overturned the tables of the money changers and the seats of those who sold doves.

13 And He said to them, “It is written, ‘My house shall be called a house of prayer,’ but you have made it a ‘den of thieves.’”

14 Then the blind and the lame came to Him in the temple, and He healed them.

15 But when the chief priests and scribes saw the wonderful things that He did, and the children crying out in the temple and saying, “Hosanna to the Son of David!” they were indignant

16 and said to Him, “Do You hear what these are saying?” And Jesus said to them, “Yes. Have you never read, ‘Out of the mouth of babes and nursing infants
You have perfected praise’?”

17 Then He left them and went out of the city to Bethany, and He lodged there.

This account is also found in Mark 11:15-19 and Luke 19:45-47.

This (v.12) is the second time Jesus cleared the temple. The first was at the beginning of His ministry as recorded in  John 2:13-22.

money-changers (v.12) — the people were required to exchange Roman money for temple money at a rate advantageous to the temple authorities.

It is written (v.13) — from Isaiah 56:7 and Jeremiah 7:11 in the Septuagint

Do You hear what these are saying? (v.16) — The crowd, which apparently included young boys just beginning their religious training, was calling Jesus “Son of David,” which is the same as calling Him Messiah.

Have you never read (v.16) — from Psalm 8:2

Bethany (v.17) — a village on the eastern side of the Mount of Olives about a mile east of Jerusalem — where Lazarus and his sisters lived.

This took place on Monday.

According to Jewish tradition, this was the day the lamb was selected to be slain and eaten for the Passover. Christ, then, was presenting Himself at the time that the Jews were selecting a Passover lamb for themselves. — Pentecost, page 140.

⁸ And a very great multitude spread their clothes on the road; others cut down branches from the trees and spread them on the road.

⁹ Then the multitudes who went before and those who followed cried out, saying: “Hosanna to the Son of David! ‘Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord!’ Hosanna in the highest!”

¹⁰ And when He had come into Jerusalem, all the city was moved, saying, “Who is this?”

¹¹ So the multitudes said, “This is Jesus, the prophet from Nazareth of Galilee.”

This was Messiah’s official presentation of Himself to Israel as the Great King, the Son of David. On this day, the sixty-ninth week of Daniel’s prediction was completed (Daniel 9:27). — Williams, page 720

Hosanna (v.9) = please save (2 Samuel 14:4; Psalm 118:25) — used here as an expression of praise

Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord (v.9) — from Psalm 118:26. The Jews recognized this as a Messianic Psalm.

moved (v.10) — from the Greek word from which we get the word “seismic”

said (v.11) = lit. “said over and over” in response to the general excitement all over the city caused by Christ’s arrival

Galilee (v.11) — many in the crowd were from Galilee (a huge majority of the entire population of Judea would have been around Jerusalem for Passover) and they were claiming Him.

Zechariah’s Prophecy — It is interesting to note how the two advents of our Lord are linked together in this passage (Zechariah 9:9-10). In verse 9 we see the King riding into His earthly capitol, presenting Himself to the people as their rightful Ruler. But although verse 10 follows this so closely, the events depicted in it will not be completely fulfilled until He comes again. It is then that He will speak peace unto the nations, and His dominion be set up over all the earth.

The 118th Psalm — This Psalm deals largely with the time when the Lord will arise for the deliverance of Israel, when all their trials will be ended and they shall enter into the blessedness of that rejoicing and salvation which will then be found in the tabernacles of the righteous (v.15). But all this blessing depends upon the One who was first to be bound as  a sacrifice to the horns of the altar. It was settled in the purpose of God from eternity that there could be no Kingdom till after the work of the cross was accomplished. While the welcome that Jesus received was quite in keeping with the divine plans, those who would have crowned Him as king at that time had to learn that He must first suffer many things, be crucified and rise from the dead. In God’s due time the remainder of the prophecy will have a glorious fulfillment. — Ironside, pages 267-268.

__________

Luke was so sensitive to the heart of the Son of Man that he alone recorded Christ’s response as He approached the city of Jerusalem. It seems as though Christ’s ears were deaf to the Hosannas of the multitude, for instead of seeing momentary recognition of His person, He saw, rather, the rejection of His person by the nation. Moved to tears, “He wept over it” (Luke 19:41).

Chris said most significantly, “If you, even you, had only known on this day what would bring you peace — but now it is hidden from your eyes” (Luke 19:42). The important phrase in the Lord’s words was “this day.” In Daniel’s great prophecy of the “seventy sevens” (Daniel 9:24-27), God had revealed the specific time in which Messiah would be presented to the nation Israel. While the nation was mindful of the divine timetable, Christ was obviously conscious that this day in which He made His entry into Jerusalem was the specific day foretold by Daniel for Messiah to be presented to Israel.

Messiah as the Prince of Peace came on the appointed day to bring peace to the nation. This, then, was the day of Christ’s official presentation of Himself as Messiah to Israel. Christ was identified before the nation as Messiah at His baptism. He was authenticated as Messiah at His temptation. His glory as Messiah was revealed at His transfiguration. But it was at His triumphal entry that Christ made an official presentation of Himself as Messiah to the nation. Such was the significance of our Lord’s statement, “If you, even you, had only known on this day what would bring you peace” (Luke 19:42). As John anticipated, “The Light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it” (John 1:5). Jesus Wept over the city because the people received none of the blessings that He had come to provide for them. Luke described the judgment that was to come on that generation in place of blessing. Their city would be attacked and besieged (Luke 19:43). The people would be killed and the city totally destroyed (v.44). And this judgment was to come “because you did not recognize the time of God’s coming to you.” — Pentecost, pages 373, 374, 376.

1 Now when they drew near Jerusalem, and came to Bethphage, at the Mount of Olives, then Jesus sent two disciples,

² saying to them, “Go into the village opposite you, and immediately you will find a donkey tied, and a colt with her. Loose them and bring them to Me.

³ And if anyone says anything to you, you shall say, ‘The Lord has need of them,’ and immediately he will send them.”

⁴ All this was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying:

⁵ “Tell the daughter of Zion, ‘Behold, your King is coming to you, Lowly, and sitting on a donkey, A colt, the foal of a donkey.’”

⁶ So the disciples went and did as Jesus commanded them.

⁷ They brought the donkey and the colt, laid their clothes on them, and set Him on them.

This begins the final six days before Christ’s crucifixion.

This account also appears in Mark 11:1-10; Luke 19:29-38; John 12:12-19.

Bethphage (v.1) — a village near Bethany, a mile east of Jerusalem, on the eastern side of the Mount of Olives. The name means “house of unripe figs.”

two disciples (v.1) — Mark’s details may indicate that Peter was one (because Mark’s account came from Peter), so the other one may have been John.

The quote in verse 5 is from Isaiah 62:11 and Zechariah 9:9, from the Septuagint.

on a donkey (v.5) — probably on the colt as it says in the other gospels. Kings come riding horses (Revelation 6:2; 19:11)