jesus cleans up his house

A “House of Prayer” Defiled

However, this was not the only reason Jesus was unhappy. He was also upset that the temple’s function as “a house of prayer,” was being set aside and disturbed. In the Protestant tradition, we tend to think that the basic and perhaps only significant function of the church building is to be a place where we gather to hear the Word of God proclaimed. Certainly that is an extremely important dimension of a church building. But Jesus did not refer to the temple as a “house of preaching.” He called it a “house of prayer.”
I spoke recently with a friend who is a Roman Catholic. He makes it a practice to visit Roman Catholic churches and spend time in prayer there. He told me he had heard about the beautiful sanctuary we had built at Saint Andrew’s, so he decided to visit our church and pray there. However, when he came to Saint Andrew’s, he found the sanctuary locked. When he shared this experience, I immediately began to fumble around for an explanation. I mentioned insurance issues, concerns about theft, and so on. I even told him that he was welcome to go to the office and ask for access to the sanctuary, and the staff would unlock the doors and let him in. But even as I said those words, I knew they were hollow. I knew it was not right that the church should be kept locked all day. I decided then and there that I wanted to see our church’s doors open for prayer every day, and I really did not care how much it would cost for the insurance. I want to see our people on their way to work, on their way home from work, by themselves or in groups coming into the sanctuary and spending time in prayer, because unless that happens, we just have a pretty building. God’s people ought to come to God’s house for worship, for edification, and for instruction, but also for prayer.
I am not saying that the only legitimate place to pray is in the church. Obviously we are free to pray at home, in our prayer closets, and wherever we are. But the sanctuaries of our churches need to be known as houses of prayer.


Sproul, R. C. (2013). Matthew (pp. 603–604). Wheaton, IL: Crossway.

jesus heals the blind

5. Two Blind Men of Jericho, 20:29–34

²⁹ And as they were going out of Jericho, a great crowd followed him. ³⁰ And look, two blind men sitting by the wayside heard that Jesus was passing by, and cried out, saying, “Take pity on us, Lord, Son of David.” ³¹ But the crowd admonished them so that they should be silent; but they cried out all the more, saying, “Take pity on us, Lord, Son of David.” ³² And Jesus stood still and called them, and said, “What do you want me to do for you?” ³³ They say to him, “Lord, that our eyes may be opened.” ³⁴ And Jesus, moved with compassion, touched their eyes, and immediately they received sight and they followed him.

Matthew moves on in his account of Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem and tells the story of two blind men who received their sight as the Master was leaving Jericho. There are problems in relating this to what we read in the other Gospels. Matthew has two blind men, whereas Mark and Luke have but one, whom Mark names as Bartimaeus. Our first two Gospels have the miracle as Jesus was leaving Jericho, but Luke has it as he was arriving. We may or may not be able to reconcile the accounts, but some things should be said. If there were two men, one of them may well have been more prominent than the other and attracted more attention, so that it was possible to write the story concentrating on him. It does not seem to make a great deal of difference whether it took place as Jesus was arriving at Jericho or leaving, and in any case there is a complication in that there were two Jerichos (Josephus, War 4.459), the site of Old Testament Jericho, which had been overthrown, and the site nearby of the rebuilt Herodian Jericho. It is not impossible that the miracle was performed as Jesus was leaving one Jericho and approaching the other. We should not miss the point that this story follows immediately on the sayings about Jesus’ saving death. He used his great powers, not to save himself, but to heal a couple of apparently quite unimportant blind men.

29. Since Matthew has given us few details of Jesus’ journey, we are left wondering about his precise route. But at this point he is certainly within the borders of Judea, with Jerusalem no more than about fifteen miles away. Matthew locates the happening as they were leaving Jericho. He says that a great crowd was following Jesus (usually he uses the plural “crowds,” but here the word is singular). There would have been many pilgrims going up to Jerusalem for the Passover, and, since Jesus was known to many from Galilee, there is nothing surprising in their attaching themselves to him as they all journeyed on to the same destination.

30. Matthew’s vivid “And look” (see on 1:20) invites the reader to contemplate two blind men sitting by the wayside. It is not said that they were begging, but that is not improbable (and Luke says that was what his blind man was doing). The blind had no other way of earning a living, and with crowds of people going up to Jerusalem for the feast there was always the possibility of help coming from well-disposed worshipers. They heard from some of the crowd that Jesus was passing by. Evidently they knew something of Jesus, and specifically they knew that he had brought healing to many. So they did not waste their opportunity—they would probably never get another. They cried out; there is no indication of how far they were from Jesus, and they probably did not know. But shouting was the way to get his attention, so that was what they did. They did not specify that they wanted him to give them their sight, but asked him to take pity on them, as did the two blind men in 9:27 (which some think is a doublet of the present story), the Canaanite woman (15:22), and the man Jesus encountered at the foot of the mountain of the transfiguration (17:15). It is not certain whether we should include “Lord” as part of the true text here (as it is in v. 31), but this seems likely. They further greeted him as “Son of David,” a messianic title (see on 1:1), which Matthew records a number of times. It is of interest that Jesus does not reject it, though it was uttered loudly in the presence of a large crowd (earlier he had discouraged talk of his messiahship; cf. 9:30). He was going to Jerusalem to die, and he would die as the Messiah. The title indicates that the blind men thought highly of Jesus and saw in him someone who could deliver them from their blindness if he only would. But they realized, too, their lowly place, so they asked for his pity.

31. But has adversative force; it sets the unsympathetic crowd over against the noisy blind men. The people wanted to see and hear Jesus, not to be disturbed by these men shouting out for pity. They admonished the blind men with a view to⁵⁴ their being quiet. But they were totally unsuccessful. The blind men were highly motivated and they were persistent. When they were rebuked, they reacted by crying out all the more. They said the same words as before (this time there is no textual doubt about “Lord”; REB has “Sir,” but where the men are addressing the Son of David “Lord” is more likely than “Sir”); they wanted the Lord, the Son of David, to take pity on them, so they kept repeating their plea.

32–34. In the end they were successful; Jesus halted his progress and called them. He asked them what they wanted and received the answer, “Lord, that our eyes may be opened.” The greatest thing that could be done for them was that they be given sight. And Jesus responded. He was moved with compassion (see on 9:36 for this illuminating expression); the crowd had been ready to silence these men and keep them out of the way, but Jesus was too compassionate for such harsh treatment of people in need. He has just been teaching his followers the importance of lowly service, and he now gives an example of it. For a moment he ignores the great crowds of people thronging around him and concentrates on two insignificant men in need. He touched their eyes, as he had touched people in his healings a number of times. Thus Matthew reports him as touching a leper (8:3), Peter’s mother-in-law (8:15), and the eyes of blind men (9:29), in each case with healing following. Sometimes people touched his clothes and received healing (9:20–21; 14:36). On this occasion the immediate sequel to the touch was that the men received sight. Matthew also records that they followed him. This may mean no more than that they joined the crowd behind Jesus as he journeyed on, but it is more likely that Matthew uses the term here of a more meaningful following; he sees the two as becoming disciples. Schweizer considers this so important that he heads his discussion of the whole story, not “Two Blind Men Receive Sight” but “Two Blind Men Follow Jesus.” He expressly understands they followed him to mean “the men joined Jesus as disciples” (p. 399).

The Blind Who Saw (20:29–34)

23

And as they were going out from Jericho, a great multitude followed Him. And behold, two blind men sitting by the road, hearing that Jesus was passing by, cried out, saying, “Lord, have mercy on us, Son of David!” And the multitude sternly told them to be quiet; but they cried out all the more, saying, “Lord, have mercy on us, Son of David!” And Jesus stopped and called them, and said, “What do you want Me to do for you?” They said to Him, “Lord, we want our eyes to be opened.” And moved with compassion, Jesus touched their eyes; and immediately they regained their sight and followed Him. (20:29–34)

Jesus was now on His way to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover with His disciples. Infinitely more important than that, however, He was going there to suffer and die (20:18–19). He would be celebrating the Passover for the last time and then giving Himself as the one, final, perfect Passover Lamb, sacrificed for the sins of the whole world (Heb. 7:27).

His arrest, trial, and crucifixion were but a few weeks away. Why, we may wonder, did He take time to minister to two blind beggars? In light of the disciples’ slowness to learn and believe, why did He not spend the last few days alone with them, drilling into them what He so much wanted them to understand?

The reason was His compassion (v. 34). When better could Jesus have demonstrated the depth and breadth of divine compassion than while He was on the way to His crucifixion? The Twelve would one day look back on the healing in Jericho and on all His other acts of mercy and realize that their Lord was never too preoccupied to be compassionate, never in too much of a hurry to heal the afflicted, never in too much agony Himself to be insensitive to the agony of others. That realization itself would be one of the most important lessons they would learn from their Master. In these few verses is found one of the most beautiful portrayals of the loving, compassionate heart of God.

Their Persistent Plea

And as they were going out from Jericho, a great multitude followed Him. And behold, two blind men sitting by the road, hearing that Jesus was passing by, cried out, saying, “Lord, have mercy on us, Son of David!” And the multitude sternly told them to be quiet; but they cried out all the more, saying, “Lord, have mercy on us, Son of David!” (20:29–31)

As Jesus and the disciples were going out from Jericho, a great multitude followed Him. The Lord had finished His ministry in Galilee, ministered on the east side of the Jordan in Perea, and had now recrossed the Jordan back into Judah, just above the Dead Sea near Jericho.

The city of Jericho was a jewel in the barren wilderness that surrounded the Dead Sea, an oasis of fresh water, beautiful trees, and productive crops of figs, citrus, and other fruit. Among other things, it was known as the city of the palms. Herod built a fort and winter palace there, and Josephus reports that, when there was snow in Jerusalem, only fifteen miles away, Jericho was warm and pleasant.

Jericho doubtlessly brought many memories to Jesus’ mind. It was there that Rahab the harlot lived, a very special woman in Israel’s history and in Jesus’ own ancestry. Though a prostitute and a pagan Gentile, she trusted in the God of Israel and, with her family, was spared when the Lord destroyed the ancient city. Along with Ruth, another Gentile, Rahab is one of only two women named in the genealogy of Jesus (Matt. 1:5). And it was in the wilderness hills to the west of Jericho, dearly visible from the city, that Jesus was tempted for forty days by Satan.

Whereas Matthew’s account has Jesus going out from Jericho, Mark reports that He was coming “to Jericho” (10:46) and Luke that “He was approaching Jericho” (18:35). The difficulty can be explained by the idea that Matthew was referring to the old Jericho, some of the ruins of which are still evident today, and that the other two writers were referring to the contemporary city. In that case, Jesus would have been moving out of the ruins of the old city and into the new. Or it may have been that Jesus had gone through the city to the outskirts and was now leaving. When He responded to the cries of the two blind men whom He had passed, He may have turned and gone back toward the city After that He decided to go into the city again, where He later encountered Zaccheus (Luke 19:1-2). In any case, a great multitude followed Him now, as they often did.

Behold was used to call special attention to something or someone, in this case two blind men who ordinarily would have gone unnoticed. Blind people were extremely common in the Near East, especially in the cities. Because none of them could work and few had families who could or would support them, the majority of blind people were beggars, as were these two (see Mark 10:46). Like most other beggars, they congregated outside the city gates to take advantage of travelers, who were more likely to be carrying money than the average person on the street.

A special balsam bush grew in Jericho from which a medicine was made to treat blindness. Consequently, that city had an unusually large number of blind people who came there in hope of a cure. The two blind men who cried out to Jesus were but two among perhaps hundreds in the vicinity.

Blindness was common in ancient times, as it still is today in underdeveloped areas of the world. Many people were blinded by such things as accidents or battle wounds. But many others became blind shortly after birth from gonorrheal infection of the eyes, contracted from the mother during birth. Many women carried the bacterium, although most of them were not affected by it themselves. Other infants were blinded by trachoma, a virulent form of conjunctivitis. Although it usually took several days or weeks for such diseases to cause total blindness, for all practical purposes infected babies were blind from birth. Birth eye infection is still a great danger, even in modern societies, and doctors therefore routinely place antiseptic drops in the eyes of newborns.

Mark and Luke mention only one man, whom Mark identifies as “Bartimaeus, the son of Timaeus,” and who apparently was spokesman for the two of them (see Mark 10:46; Luke 18:35). Mark touches a distinctly human chord by naming this man and even his father. Although Bartimaeus was doubtlessly unknown while he was a blind beggar, it is possible that he later became highly respected in the early church and well known to Mark and those to whom he wrote. Mark would have been saying to his readers, in effect, “And do you know who one of those blind men was? Bartimaeus, our dear friend and brother in Christ!”

Hearing that Jesus was passing by, Bartimaeus and his friend cried out, saying, “Lord, have mercy on us, Son of David!” Krazō, from which cried out is taken, is an onomatopoeic word that as used for any sort of screaming or anguished shout. It was used of the rantings of insane people and of a woman’s cries at childbirth. It was used of the Canaanite woman near Tyre and Sidon who cried out for Jesus to heal her daughter (Matt. 15:22), of the crowd’s shouting for Jesus’ crucifixion (Mark 15:13–14), and even of Jesus’ crying out from the cross (Matt. 27:50).

These two blind men were absolutely desperate, realizing that the last possible hope of their seeing would soon depart. They could hardly have known of Jesus’ impending crucifixion, but they seemed to sense that they would never encounter Him again and that this was their last chance. They were therefore shouting at the top of their voices, not caring who else heard them as long as Jesus did.

The amazing thing about these two men was not their physical blindness, which was common in their day, but their spiritual sight, which is uncommon in any day Physically they could see nothing, but spiritually they saw a great deal.

In itself, their addressing Jesus as Lord does not indicate that they considered Him to be the Messiah. Lord was a common term of honor used to address not only dignitaries but anyone due special respect. But their asking Him for mercy, and most certainly their calling Him by the messianic title Son of David, clearly shows their recognition of who He was. In announcing Jesus’ birth to Mary, the angel declared that her Son would be given “the throne of His father David” (Luke 1:32). When a few days after this incident in Jericho Jesus came into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday, He was greeted by the crowds shouting, “Hosanna to the Son of David; Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord; Hosanna in the highest!” (Matt. 21:9). It was common knowledge among all Jews that “the Scripture said that the Christ [Messiah] comes from the offspring of David” (John 7:42).

But the blind men’s knowledge of Christ and their great determination were tempered by humility. In asking for healing they acknowledged their unworthiness of help and threw themselves entirely on Jesus’ mercy. Their actions were necessarily loud and obtrusive, because that was the only way they could have been heard over the din of the multitude. But their hearts were right, because despite their great need, they knew they deserved nothing from the Son of David and that only His grace could help them. One cannot be dogmatic about the extent of their faith at this point, but they dearly recognized Jesus’ messiahship and His supernatural power to heal.

When a person steps out to God on all the faith he has, even if it is incomplete and weak, the Lord will meet him at that point and lead him to redemption. As He declared through Jeremiah, “You will seek Me and find Me, when you search for Me with all your heart” (Jer. 29:13). Speaking of the two blind men of Jericho, Alfred Edersheim beautifully observed that “the faith of the blind rose to the full height of divine possibility.”

Resenting the intrusion of the two men, the multitude sternly told them to be quiet. The world, and many Christians, can often be callous and cruel. Everyone in the multitude was doubtlessly better off physically, economically, and socially than the two blind men, but they thought only of their own selfish concerns, in light of which these needy men were but an annoyance.

But as F. F. Bruce has expressed it, the two blind men “refused to be bludgeoned into silence by the indifferent crowd,” and they cried out all the more, saying again, “Lord, have mercy on us, Son of David!”

Their Supernatural Privilege

And Jesus stopped and called them, and said, “What do you want Me to do for you?” They said to Him, “Lord, we want our eyes to be opened.” And moved with compassion, Jesus touched their eyes; and immediately they regained their sight and followed Him. (20:32–34)

Jesus doubtlessly heard them the first time, but for His own reasons He waited until they cried out again before responding. He stopped and called them, and said, “What do you want Me to do for you?” Mark says that Jesus had first sent someone else to tell them, saying, “Take courage, arise! He is calling for you.” Bartimaeus was so elated at hearing those words that he cast “aside his cloak, … jumped up, and came to Jesus” (Mark 10:49–50). He apparently was so certain of being healed that he figured he could come back later and find his cloak by himself.

The men answered Jesus, “Lord, we want our eyes to be opened.” After years of blindness their one compelling desire was to see. And moved with compassion, Jesus touched their eyes; and immediately they regained their sight. As the Creator of the universe reached out to those men, He suspended the natural laws which He Himself had made. Moved with infinite divine compassion, the Son of Man, who was also the Son of God, bestowed the mercy on the physical needs for which they pleaded.

The fact that Matthew says they regained their sight, using the same verb Bartimaeus had used in his request (Mark 10:51), suggests that these men had once been able to see. If so, they were more keenly aware of what they were missing than if they never had sight.

Jesus used many different ways to perform His healing miracles. Sometimes the afflicted person was asked to do something himself. Sometimes the Lord simply spoke a word, and sometimes He performed some action, such as putting His fingers in deaf ears or making salve from mud and anointing blind eyes. In this case Jesus touched their eyes. His miracles were always complete, and usually, as here, they were instantaneous, defying natural explanation.

It is significant that among the many self-acclaimed faith healers of history, including those in our own day, there is a marked absence of restoring sight and raising the dead. Many other afflictions can be faked or can be given temporary improvement by the power of suggestion working in a desperate mind. But where are the miracles of vision given to the blind? Where is the person whose eyes are permanently damaged or completely missing who has regained his sight by the laying on of a healer’s hands? And where is the person who was dead and has been restored to life?

Even more common and tragic than physical blindness is the spiritual blindness the two men must have felt as they encountered the Son of God. And the context strongly suggests that they also sought deliverance from that kind of blindness.

Jesus was born into a world of people who, with few exceptions, were totally blind spiritually He “was the true light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man. He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him” (John 1:9–11; cf. 8:12). Men were spiritually blind then, and are spiritually blind today, because they do not want to see God’s truth. As Jesus explained to Nicodemus, “This is the judgment, that the light is come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the light; for their deeds were evil. For everyone who does evil hates the light, and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed” (John 3:19–20).

“The lamp of the body is the eye,” Jesus said in the Sermon on the Mount; “if therefore your eye is clear, your whole body will be full of light. But if your eye is bad, your whole body will be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in you is darkness, how great is the darkness!” (Matt. 6:22–23). To man’s natural spiritual blindness, Satan adds his own. “The god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving,” Paul declares, “that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God” (2 Cor. 4:4). And to that double blindness, God may add still more. When men persistently refuse to hear His Word and believe in Him, God may choose to judicially reinforce their willing hardness of heart. To Isaiah, the Lord gave the unenviable task of telling his fellow Israelites, “Keep on listening, but do not perceive; keep on looking, but do not understand.” He was, in fact, told to “render the hearts of this people insensitive, their ears dull, and their eyes dim, lest they see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts, and return and be healed” (Isa. 6:9–10).

The minds of unbelieving Jews were blinded to the full meaning of God’s Word because “their minds were hardened; for until this very day,” Paul said, “at the reading of the old covenant the same veil remains unlifted, because it is removed in Christ” (2 Cor. 3:14; cf. Rom. 11:25). The epitome of the spiritually blind were the hypocritical, unbelieving scribes and Pharisees, the leading religionists of Israel whom Jesus called “blind guides” (Matt. 23:16, 24).

Further evidence of the former blind men’s desire for spiritual as well as physical sight is the fact that, after Jesus restored their sight, they followed Him. It is true that many, and probably most, of the multitude who were following Him (v. 29) were not true disciples. But the fact that Luke says Bartimaeus, and presumably his friend, not only followed Jesus but were “glorifying God” (18:43) gives good reason to believe the men were restored spiritually as well as physically.

In addition to that, Mark reports that Jesus said to them, “Go your way; your faith has made you well” (Mark 10:52). “Made … well” is from sōz̄, which referred to any kind of rescue or deliverance, including deliverance from physical affliction or peril (see Matt. 8:25; Mark 13:20; Luke 23:35). But it is also the most common New Testament term for salvation, the deliverance from sin through Christ, and that would seem to be its meaning in Jesus’ final words to these men.

Faith was not a requirement for Jesus’ healings. He healed many people at the request of someone else, as in the case of the centurion who pleaded for the healing of his paralyzed servant (Matt. 8:5–13). The infants He healed and those He raised from the dead obviously were not able to exercise any sort of faith. Whereas the New Testament tells of countless people who were healed without faith, it reports none who were saved without faith, because it is only by God’s grace working through faith that a person can be saved (Eph. 2:8). It therefore seems that inherent in Jesus’ declaration “faith has made you well”His assurance of the men’s salvation. He spoke exactly the same words to the single leper who glorified God for his healing and came back to give Jesus thanks (Luke 17:12–19). All ten lepers had been healed physically, but only this man was “made … well” because of his faith, strongly suggesting that, whereas his cleansing (v. 14) was physical, his being made well (v. 19) was spiritual.

Three features of Jesus’ healing of physical afflictions become clear in this story. First, this powerful, dramatic demonstration of God’s compassion for men was a proof of Jesus’ messiahship. Second, it was a preview of the millennial kingdom, when there will be a thousand-year age of freedom from sickness, disease, and other physical affliction. Third, His healings were symbolic. His healing of blindness was a picture of His immeasurably more wonderful healing of spiritual blindness. What He did for blind eyes was a vivid portrayal of what He desires to do for blind sou¹

JESUS HEALS TWO BLIND MEN

And as they departed from Jericho, a great multitude followed him [Matt. 20:29].

Jesus and His disciples are going from Jericho to Jerusalem, which is the opposite direction from the man who went down from Jerusalem to Jericho and fell among thieves. The Lord is going from Jericho up to Jerusalem to die with thieves. That’s on the other side of the freeway, and on that side you and I can never go. We can only come to Him in faith, for He died in our stead.

By the way, some folk think that because at His trial He did not defend Himself, He never defended Himself, and that Christians should follow the same policy. However, at other times He did defend Himself. When He went to Jerusalem to die, He did not defend Himself because He was taking my place, and I’m guilty. Believe me, there was no defense! That is the reason He did not open His mouth at that time. He was bearing my sin, and He was bearing your sin at that time.

And, behold, two blind men sitting by the way side, when they heard that Jesus passed by, cried out, saying, Have mercy on us, O Lord, thou son of David [Matt. 20:30].

I love these two fellows—no one could keep them quiet!

And the multitude rebuked them, because they should hold their peace: but they cried the more, saying, Have mercy on us, O Lord, thou son of David [Matt. 20:31].

Notice that they addressed Him accurately—“O Lord, thou son of David.” They acknowledged His kingship. The Syrophoenician at first called Him the son of David, but the Lord reminded her that she had no claim on Him in this way. These men, however, were Jews and did have a claim on Him, and they exercised their claim!

And Jesus stood still, and called them, and said, What will ye that I shall do unto you?

They say unto him, Lord, that our eyes may be opened [Matt. 20:32–33].

The problem of these men seemed so obvious. Why did the Lord ask what He could do for them? My friend, when you come to the Lord Jesus Christ, you must tell Him your need. If you are coming to Him for salvation, you must tell Him that you are a sinner and need His salvation. If you don’t, you will not be saved. That’s the offense of the Cross. Everybody would like to come to the Cross if they could bring along the perfume of their self–righteousness and good deeds. But, my friend, you and I haven’t any goodness at all, none whatsoever, to present to God. You can no more sweeten human character with training and psychology and education than you can sweeten a pile of fertilizer out in the barnyard with Chanel No. 5. We have to come to Him as sinners and receive Him as our Savior. And the blind men came to the Lord Jesus with their need, “Lord, that our eyes may be opened”!

So Jesus had compassion on them, and touched their eyes: and immediately their eyes received sight, and they followed him [Matt. 20:34].

Our Lord healed them, and they followed Him. Remember where He is going—He is on His way to the Cross.²

The healing of two blind men (20:29–34)

Leaving Jericho, on their way to Jerusalem, Jesus and his disciples, followed by a large crowd, passed two blind men on the road side. Mark’s account of this event records only one man, whom he identifies as Bartimaeus. Perhaps Bartimaeus went on to become a disciple of Christ, known to readers of Mark’s account, and so Mark omits any mention of his companion so as to concentrate on the experience of the familiar Bartimaeus, whereas Matthew tells the story of both men, neither of whom he names. These two men cried out to Jesus for mercy.

The crowd rebuked them for their impertinence, but they shouted all the louder, ‘Lord, Son of David, have mercy on us.’ Jesus stopped and asked them a question that sounds a little strange, ‘What do you want me to do for you?’ One might have thought that an unnecessary question, for the answer should be obvious. But it is of course a good question. It is possible to be wanting Jesus to do far less than his purpose would be. These blind men had asked for mercy many times from many people. If asked, ‘What do you want me to do for you?’ they might reply, ‘I want some bread’, ‘Give me a blanket to keep myself warm at night’, ‘May I have a cushion to make my begging more comfortable’, ‘I need some cold water to quench my thirst’, and all of those things may be legitimate. It is possible to ask God for lots of legitimate things which never deal with the fundamental need of our lives, that we might be whole again!

Jesus Christ did not come into the world to deal with the symptoms of people’s alienation from God, merely to cleanse them of their guilt, be on hand to answer their prayers for help in times of difficulty, or even to provide security for their future. He came to make people complete, as God intended them to be when he first created them. He came to reconcile us to God, to restore his life into human experience. At the source of all else that may be wrong in the human condition is our alienation from God, ‘separated from the life of God’ (Eph. 4:18). Whatever other pressing needs appear in our lives, this is their source, and to be reconciled to God is what it takes to be complete again. The two blind men answered the question, ‘What do you want me to do for you?’ by saying, ‘We want our sight.’ We want the fundamental problem that has made our begging necessary to be dealt with, so Jesus touched their eyes, and ‘immediately they received their sight and followed him’.

This is getting priorities right, the theme of Chapter 20! The economics of the kingdom have to do with faithfulness to God, not external profile (20:1–16). Greatness in the kingdom is found through servanthood not status (20:17–28). Satisfaction in the kingdom is found by allowing God to deal with the fundamental needs in our lives, not just their symptoms (20:29–34).³

1 MacArthur, J. F., Jr. (1985). Matthew (p. 249). Chicago: Moody Press.

2 McGee, J. V. (1991). Thru the Bible commentary: The Gospels (Matthew 14-28) (electronic ed., Vol. 35, pp. 90–91). Nashville: Thomas Nelson.

3 Price, C. (1998). Matthew: Can Anything Good Come Out of Nazareth? (pp. 255–256). Fearn, Great Britain: Christian Focus Publications.

money

I want to talk to you tonight on the things it takes to save money. I have seen so many people make so many money mistakes that just make me so mad and they say they are broke when they ought to have cash saved up. I thought about giving cash to my family but I think that I rather not because they need to learn how to keep it for themselves and be able to save it. So here is advice for them if they take it 5 years from now the money they will have will be good.

1 Cut of your kids at 18. I think this is important for parents. If you are 18 you work. Mommy and addy are no longer able to afford to feed you. If you go to school fine but you need a job and to begin to work and save your money. If you place 100 a month in a account at this age you will have tons later, If parents do not cut the kid off you are just not helping the kid to learn. If you live at home you need to learn to pay out rent if you work. About 1/3 of you make goes to your parents and rent. This is life and not to charge the rent is not right.

2 Save 20 percent of your income. If you do not have it your not going to make it. If you save this you will make it and it will add up. Not a option not to do this in my mind, People who do not save and then lose the job are not taking catr of themselves and are really stupid. Start today and put it in the bank. Everyone needs this and you need to adjust spending for this.

3 No gambling of any kind until you have at least 2000 saved up and really you need 6 months of income in the bank. No lotto no slots no casiano no card nothing. If you gamble you lose this and you will not save anything. If your broke you got no money whatsoever to spend on bingo you need to save cash.

4 live in your means,. NO cards. Burn them because they kill any hope you got. Spend cash you got because the credit is going to be stupid cause you are wasting cash. Fees are killers. Pay off your cards right now if you can and pay off your home faster if you can. If you got a loan pay it off and save interest.

5 Rent only if you cant get a home. Homes bujild money up and you can use it later for stuff.

6 Buy in cash. Save for your cash and buy things and save the interest, Pay this way then you save more and it pays off. Cash that works for you is good. Saveing is working for you credit is working to eat you.

7 Lump sums are killers if not used right. Use them to build up not tear down. DO NOT SPEND LUMP SUMS. Use them to set up a plan and build a account on them. I GOT some in the past and blew them. I think the key is to set 90 percent into a account and then use the saving plan of 50 a week. If you make 200 put 50 to 100 away.

8 No borrowing money we pay cash.

9 Give to Jesus a amount you and him set up. Give and it shal be given to you. Give to spread the Lords words. God owns it all. Give him all u can and love him. Build your account in his place

the right side of Jesus

We Must Glorify Him Completely (Matt. 20:17–34)

For the third time, Jesus announced His arrest, crucifixion, and resurrection (see Matt. 16:21; 17:22). In the previous announcements, He had not specified how He would die. But now He clearly mentioned the cross. He also clearly mentioned His resurrection, but the message did not penetrate the disciples’ hearts.

In contrast to this announcement of suffering and death, we have the request of James and John and their mother, Salome. Jesus spoke about a cross, but they were interested in a crown. They wanted reserved seats on special thrones! We get the impression that the mother, Salome, was the real inspiration behind this request, and that she was interested in promoting her sons.

Before we criticize what they did, let’s notice some commendable features in this event. For one thing, they did believe in prayer, and they dared to believe the promise Jesus had given about sitting on thrones (Matt. 19:28). The word “regeneration” in that verse means “new birth,” and refers to the new world over which Jesus and His followers will reign when He returns to earth. It must have taken faith on their part to believe He would establish these thrones, because He had just told them that He was going to die.

But there were several things wrong with their request. To begin with, it was born in ignorance. “Ye know not what ye ask,” Jesus replied. Little did Salome realize that the path to the throne is a difficult one. James was the first of the disciples to be martyred, and John had to endure hard days on the Isle of Patmos. These three believers wanted their will, not God’s will, and they wanted it their way.

Another factor was their lack of heavenly direction. They were thinking like the world: James and John wanted to “lord it over” the other disciples the way the unsaved Gentile rulers lorded it over their subjects. Their request was fleshly (sensual), because they were selfishly asking for glory for themselves, not for the Lord. No doubt they felt relieved that they had gotten to Jesus with this request before Peter did!

Finally, the request was not only of the world and the flesh, but it was of the devil. It was motivated by pride. Satan had sought a throne (Isa. 14:12–15) and had been cast down. Satan had offered Jesus a throne and had been refused (Matt. 4:8–11). Satan magnifies the end (a throne) but not the means to that end. Jesus warned Salome and her sons that the special thrones were available to those who were worthy of them. There are no shortcuts in the kingdom of God.

The result of this request was “indignation” on the part of the other disciples—probably because they had not thought of it first! The wisdom from above always leads to peace; the wisdom of this world leads to war (James 3:13–4:3). Selfishness will only result in dissension and division.

This disagreement gave Jesus the opportunity to teach a practical lesson on leadership. In His kingdom, we must not follow the examples of the world. Our example is Jesus, not some corporation president or wealthy celebrity. Jesus came as a servant; therefore, we should serve one another. He came to give His life; therefore, we should give our lives in service to Him and others.

The word minister in Matthew 20:26 means “a servant.” Our English word “deacon” comes from it. The word servant in Matthew 20:27 means “a slave.” Not every servant was a slave, but every slave was a servant. It is sad to note in the church today that we have many celebrities, but very few servants. There are many who want to “exercise authority” (Matt. 20:25), but few who want to take the towel and basin and wash feet.

The key to greatness is not found in position or power, but in character. We get a throne by paying with our lives, not by praying with our lips. We must identify with Jesus Christ in His service and suffering, for even He could not reach the throne except by way of the cross. The best commentary on this is Philippians 2:1–18.

To improve our praying we must improve our serving. If we are serving Him and others, then we will not be praying selfishly. If we honestly can say, “Speak, Lord, for Thy servant heareth,” then He will say to us, “Speak, servant, for thy Lord heareth.” If our prayers do not make us better servants, then there is something wrong with them.

Do our prayers make us easier to live with? The two disciples prayed selfishly and threw the fellowship into an uproar! Do our prayers make us more like Jesus Christ? Do our prayers cost us anything? Prayer in the will of God does not mean escape; it means involvement. If our prayers do not bring us nearer to the cross, they are out of God’s will.

Salome learned her lesson. When Jesus was crucified, she was standing near the cross (John 19:25, “his mother’s sister”) and sharing in His sorrow and pain. She did not see two thrones on either side of her Lord—she saw two thieves on two crosses. And she heard Jesus give her son, John, to His mother Mary. Salome’s selfishness was rebuked, and she meekly accepted it.

The closing event of Matthew 20 is the healing of Bartimaeus and his friend, both of whom were blind (see Mark 10:46–52). Here Jesus put into practice what He had just taught the disciples. He became a servant to two rejected blind beggars. The crowds around Jesus tried to silence the two men. After all, what claim did they have on the great Teacher? But Jesus had compassion on them and healed them. He was the servant even of beggars.

This chapter contains some hard things for us to receive and practice. If we love the things of this world, we cannot love God supremely. If we are not yielded completely to His will, we cannot obey Him unreservedly. If we seek glory for ourselves, or if we compare ourselves with other believers, then we cannot glorify Him.

We cannot acknowledge Jesus as our King unless we love Him supremely, obey Him unreservedly, and glorify Him completely. But if we do these things, we will share in His life and joy, and one day reign with Him!¹

17–28. See Mark 10:32–34; Luke 18:31–34. The journey to Jerusalem is now resumed after the stay in Peraea. As the final events of His life draw nearer, our Lord again seeks to enlighten His disciples. Again they failed to understand, as is evidenced by the request of Zebedee’s sons which immediately followed. But the fulfillment of these detailed predictions would strengthen their faith when the time came. Zebedee’s children. From Matthew 4:21 we know that the two sons were the apostles James and John. Grant, better, “command.” The request and the indignation of the others which followed show that the disciples were still thinking in terms of the setting up of an earthly kingdom, in spite of the clear prediction of suffering and death which our Lord had just made. Some texts omit the last part of our Lord’s question in verse 22 and it may have been inserted from the parallel passage in Mark 10:38. The same is true of verse 23. The cup and the baptism both refer, of course, to our Lord’s suffering and death. To be ministered unto. It is not wrong to accept ministry. Christ accepted it. But it was not the purpose of His life and should not be the purpose of ours. His life (Gr psychē) literally “his soul.” A ransom. This important phrase provides one of the few occasions on which the doctrine of substitutionary atonement is mentioned in the Synoptic Gospels. It implies a price paid for the deliverance of captives. The price lay in the necessity for His life to be laid down. His life thus became the cost of our redemption. Many does not necessarily restrict the extent of His death (as contrasted to “all”), but it does indicate that not all would receive His offer of salvation.²

1 Wiersbe, W. W. (1996). The Bible exposition commentary (Vol. 1, pp. 74–75). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.

2 Hindson, E. E., & Kroll, W. M. (Eds.). (1994). KJV Bible Commentary (pp. 1936–1937). Nashville: Thomas Nelson.

jesus is going to die

¹⁷ And as Jesus was going up to Jerusalem, he took the twelve disciples apart privately and said to them on the way, ¹⁸ “Look, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of man will be delivered up to the high priests and scribes, and they will condemn him to death, ¹⁹ and they will deliver him up to the Gentiles to mock and to flog and to crucify, and on the third day he will be raised.”

Commentators routinely copy from one another the statement that this is Jesus’ third prediction of his passion, but Matthew has already recorded three such predictions (16:21; 17:12, 22–23; cf. 10:38); this is his fourth. An exception is Plummer, who notes that this is the fourth and thinks that there may have been others (p. 275). The repeated predictions show that Jesus had no doubts about what awaited him in Jerusalem as the culmination of his mission and the climax of the opposition of those who rejected him. And his inclusion of the resurrection in this prediction shows his firm conviction that the Father would ensure his ultimate triumph. On this occasion there is greater detail regarding what will happen to Jesus: he will be condemned by the Jewish leaders, he will be handed over to the Gentiles, he will be mocked and flogged and crucified (only Matthew records Jesus’ explicit prediction that his death will be by crucifixion).

17. Matthew locates this prediction on the journey to Jerusalem, but he gives no indication as to just where it took place, nor of any happening that may have called it forth. He simply says it took place as Jesus was going up to Jerusalem. The whole band of disciples were, of course, going up to the city, as were multitudes of pilgrims; but when Matthew says simply that Jesus was going up, he puts emphasis on the leader. Mark has a striking picture of Jesus striding ahead and of the disciples following amazed and afraid. Matthew says nothing of this, but clearly he envisaged unusual circumstances such that taking the disciples apart was a significant action. Evidently others were traveling along the way (there would be pilgrims going up to observe the Passover in the capital city), but Jesus did not want his prediction to become public property. He took the twelve disciples apart privately. Matthew says explicitly that this happened on the way (the others do not mention this). It was as they were going to Jerusalem that this prediction was made.

18.“Look” (see on 1:20) is Matthew’s way of drawing attention to what follows. Jesus reminds his followers that their destination was Jerusalem. They were going up at the time of one of the great festivals of the Jewish liturgical year, and the expectation would be that they were facing a time of celebration and rejoicing. But Jesus says that “the Son of man” (his name for himself in the fulfilment of his messianic vocation) “will be delivered up to the high priests and scribes.” Both terms have particular meanings (see on 2:4), but the combination (with no article before scribes so that the two are something of a unity), together with the reference to a judicial condemnation, shows that the Sanhedrin, the highest court of the Jews, is in mind. Not only will Jesus appear before them, but these people, the religious leaders of the nation, will condemn him to death, where the verb points to the exercise of judicial power, not to a lynching. Under Roman domination the Sanhedrin had no power to put anyone to death, but that did not stop them sentencing people to this punishment. They would then hand over to the Romans those they held to be guilty, and these rulers of the nation would decide whether the sentence would be carried out or not. Jesus is speaking here of the part the Jewish authorities would play in bringing about his death.

19. He moves to the next stage in the drama. The Jewish leaders will deliver him up (the same verb as in v. 18) to the Gentiles. Jesus does not specify which Gentiles, but in the circumstances of the time there could be no doubt but that he meant the Romans. He goes on to specify three things these people will do. They will mock, which fits the practices of the day (there was no tradition that a prisoner should be treated kindly), but it was not an invariable accompaniment of condemnation and it speaks of another piece of bitterness in the sufferings Jesus would undergo. Flogging was the normal prelude to crucifixion, though it could, of course, be used as the proper and adequate punishment for some offenses. Since it was a very brutal practice, it was no light punishment in itself. But here it is the prelude to execution, as the addition to crucify him³¹ shows. Jesus leaves no doubt that he was facing the ultimate in rejection by his people and in suffering at the hands of the Gentiles who ruled them. Matthew is the only one of the Evangelists who tells us that Jesus specifically prophesied that he would be crucified. This was a form of death normally reserved for slaves, criminals, and other despised people (a Roman citizen could not be crucified).

But that is not the whole story. As he has done before, Jesus goes on to predict his resurrection. This will take place on the third day (for this expression see on 12:40; it was the third day according to the Jewish method of counting, even if some modern people have difficulty with the expression). Jesus does not say that he will rise, but that he will be raised. As is the normal (though not invariable) way of putting it, the resurrection is attributed to the activity of the Father. He will set his seal on the saving death of the Son of man by raising him from the dead.¹

The Sufferings of Christ

(20:17–19)

21

And as Jesus was about to go up to Jerusalem, He took the twelve disciples aside by themselves, and on the way He said to them. “Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem; and the Son of Man will be delivered to the chief priests and scribes, and they will condemn Him to death, and will deliver Him to the Gentiles to mock and scourge and crucify Him, and on the third day He will be raised up.” (20:17–19)

In this passage Jesus gives the third (see 16:21; 17:22–23) and last prediction of His impending suffering, death, and resurrection. Both His words and the truths they convey are simple, clear, and explicit. He was not speaking in a parable or in figures of speech but in very ordinary, unambiguous terms. He was not revealing a mystery or explaining deep theological truths. He was simply stating what would soon become historical facts.

The death and resurrection of Jesus Christ form the central events of biblical revelation in both the Old and New Testaments. It is those two historical events, and certain others surrounding them, that Jesus now again predicts to the Twelve as being imminent.

Throughout history, some people have portrayed Jesus as a well-meaning, loving, gentle, peaceful, but naive visionary who somehow got caught in a hostile world and accidentally wound up being crucified. Others have less generously pictured Him as a self-styled, would-be conqueror who tried to pull off a coup of sorts and became a victim of His own ambition.

But such views do not reflect at all the biblical record. The suffering and death of Christ were no miscalculation or accident. They were not the least surprising to Jesus. On the contrary, He knew about them even before His murderers had thought of their evil plans. The Messiah’s suffering and death were planned by our holy God ages before they were plotted in the minds of evil men. Jesus’ first recorded words were, “I must be about My Father’s business” (Luke 2:49, KJV), and among His last words before His death were, “It is finished!” (John 19:30). Jesus knew why He was on earth, including every detail of His life and ministry. And because He had that divine foreknowledge, He must have endured many sufferings a thousand times in His mind before they transpired in His life.

Clearly the Lord wanted the disciples to understand what He would soon face, as well as prepare them for what would also be a time of severe suffering and danger for them. More than that, He wanted them to understand that these things, evil as they were, were nevertheless a part of God’s great redemptive plan and were the very reason He had come to earth.

Jesus knew how difficult it was for the disciples to comprehend what He was trying to tell them. They were so attuned to the popular Jewish concepts of the glorious, conquering, reigning Messiah that anything He taught to the contrary seemed to go by them. To most Jews of that day, just as to most Jews of our own time, the idea of a suffering and dying Messiah was unthinkable, an absolute self-contradiction. Like their fellow Jews, the disciples were looking for a lion, not a lamb.

So for the third time it is recorded that the Lord calls them aside and seeks to impress on them the reality of what is about to happen to Him. First He assures them that these events are a part of God’s revealed plan. Then He gives detailed predictions of the particular events, and finally an idea of the proportion and power of the sufferings He would endure.

The Plan of His Suffering

And as Jesus was about to go up to Jerusalem, He took the twelve disciples aside by themselves, and on the way He said to them. “Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem; (20:17–18a)

Jesus had finished His Galilean ministry and had crossed into Perea, on the other side of the Jordan River (19:1). As Jewish travelers from Galilee often did in order to avoid going through Samaria, Jesus traveled down the east side of the Jordan and crossed over to Jericho (20:29). From there He would go up to Jerusalem.

Jericho is near the northern end of the Dead Sea, which is over 1,000 feet below sea level. Although Jerusalem is only 14 miles due west of the Dead Sea, it is at an elevation of 2,500 feet above sea level, making the trip up from Jericho quite steep.

The fact that Jesus took the twelve disciples aside by themselves indicates they were traveling in the company of others, probably a large crowd. Some of the group doubtlessly had been following Jesus for some time (cf. v. 29), and others were part of the thousands of Jews making the yearly Passover pilgrimage to Jerusalem who found themselves in the company of this astounding Teacher and Healer. But His public ministry was nearing an end, and He devoted the great majority of His time to private instruction of the disciples.

Behold was a common exclamation, a means of calling special attention to something of importance. In this context it also carried the idea of resolution and conviction. Even more than on the earlier occasion that Luke describes, Jesus now “resolutely set His face to go to Jerusalem” (Luke 9:51). He did not plan to go alone, but told the Twelve, “We are going up to Jerusalem.”

As already noted, they still had great difficulty accepting the idea of a suffering and dying Messiah, and it was common knowledge that the Jewish leaders in Jerusalem sought to kill Him. Therefore the disciples “were amazed, and those who followed were fearful” (Mark 10:32). They thought it not only unnecessary but foolhardy for Jesus even to think of going to Jerusalem.

The Greek word behind amazed is thambeō, which refers to great astonishment or bewilderment, and sometimes even carried the idea of immobility because of fright. It denoted complete inability to correctly comprehend and react to an idea or event. The disciples had witnessed nearly three years of Jesus’ divine, miraculous power and of heating His authoritative teaching. They had left everything for Him and had put themselves completely into His care. Now everything seemed hopeless and pointless, and they could make no sense at all of what was happening.

The disciples were so disbelieving and confused that they had perhaps given up, emotionally if not intellectually, on the idea of an immediate inauguration of the kingdom. Yet they could not imagine what the alternative might be. Jesus was doing nothing to establish a political following and certainly was not raising up an army. If He was powerless against the Jewish establishment, He was totally insignificant as far as the Roman government was concerned. To go to Jerusalem was certain death, and “Thomas therefore, who is called Didymus, said to his fellow disciples. ‘Let us also go, that we may die with Him”’ (John 11:16). The most positive attitude they could muster was a heroic but hopeless resignation to go and die with their Master.

Mark reports that Jesus was walking ahead of the disciples and the crowd (Mark 10:32). It was as if He were a military commander going into battle at the head of his troops, bravely putting himself in the most dangerous and vulnerable position. But Jesus had no troops and no weapons, only a small band of confused, helpless disciples and a thrill-seeking multitude that would flee at the first sign of danger.

Yet it was the divine plan that Jesus go to Jerusalem in order that “all things which are written through the prophets about the Son of Man will be accomplished” (Luke 18:31). Going to Jerusalem was no accident, no quirk of fate. Jesus would not be caught off guard and unexpectedly trapped there by His enemies. The Lord not only knew of but foretold those events through His prophets. Now He moved resolutely toward their fulfillment. They were, indeed, the very culmination of the redemptive plan of God.

Through Moses, God had predicted that none of the Messiah’s bones would be broken (Ex. 12:46). Through the psalmists, He predicted that, on the cross, the Messiah would be pierced (22:16), that lots would be cast for His garments (22:18), that He would be given vinegar to drink (69:21), that He would cry out in pain (22:1), that He would rise from the dead (16:10), and that He would ascend into heaven (110:1). Zechariah predicted the Messiah’s entering Jerusalem on a colt (Zech. 9:9), His betrayal for 30 pieces of silver (11:12), His desertion by His friends (13:7), and His being pierced (12:10).

The whole sweep and flow of the Old Testament in its types and symbols demanded that the Messiah, the Lord’s Anointed, die for the sins of a world that could never itself atone for those sins. The death of Christ has been called the scarlet thread of Scripture, the supreme truth around which all others are woven.

When Adam and Eve sinned, they immediately became aware of their nakedness, and to provide them clothing of skins, animals had to be killed. From the beginning, guilt and shame had to be covered by sacrifice. That was the first great principle of redemption taught in Scripture. But those skins, like all the countless sacrifices thereafter, were only symbolic. They could cover man’s nakedness but not his sin.

The second great principle of redemption that God revealed is that He Himself will provide the necessary sacrifice for man. God commanded Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, his only son through whom the divine promise could be fulfilled. Abraham was able to raise the knife and be willing to plunge it into Isaac’s heart because of his sure belief that God could raise his son from the dead (Heb. 11:19). When the Lord stayed Abraham’s hand and provided a ram to take Isaac’s place on the altar, Abraham named that place of sacrifice, “The Lord Will Provide” (Gen. 22:14).

The third great principle of redemption God revealed was that acceptable sacrifice had to be unblemished. When the death angel was about to pass over Egypt, striking dead all the first-born, God provided for the Israelites to be protected by smearing the blood of an unblemished lamb on their doorposts and lintels (Ex. 12:5–7).

During the wilderness wanderings, God revealed to Moses the fourth great principle of sacrifice: that it is the central act of acceptable worship. In the details of the intricate sacrificial system, God showed Israel that sacrifice would be inherent in every act of true worship, because it opened the way to God.

But in the requirements and rituals of the Old Testament, those principles were only pictured. No sacrifice offered by man could cover sin, provide a substitute for himself, be morally and spiritually unblemished, or become an acceptable act of worship to God. Only God Himself could present such a sacrifice, and it is that divine sacrifice to whom all the other sacrifices pointed. And when that perfect sacrifice was made, the others no longer had significance. When Jesus died on the cross, the veil of the Temple was torn in two and the validity of the sacrificial system ended. Less than forty years later, with the total destruction of the Temple in a.d. 70, even the possibility of other Old Testament sacrifices ended.

The disciples knew they were going to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover with Jesus, but they did not know that Jesus was Himself God’s ultimate and only true Passover Lamb. They were still thinking lion, but He was thinking Lamb. They were thinking kingdom, but He was thinking sacrifice. They were thinking glory, but He was thinking suffering and death.

The disciples did not fully understand what the Old Testament taught about the Messiah, and they did not understand what Jesus Himself repeatedly told them about Himself. Even after the resurrection He rebuked two of the disciples for their lack of comprehension of what Scripture had long before revealed. “O foolish men and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! Was it not necessary for the Christ to suffer these things and to enter into His glory?” (Luke 24:25–26). A short while later He told the eleven and some other believers gathered with them in Jerusalem, “Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and rise again from the dead the third day” (v. 46).

Paul had to remind the Corinthian Christians of the central truth he had taught them many times before: that “Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor. 15:3–4). Many years later, Peter reminded the believers to whom he wrote that “As to this salvation, the prophets who prophesied of the grace that would come to you made careful search and inquiry, seeking to know what person or time the Spirit of Christ within them was indicating as He predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories to follow” (1 Pet. 1:10–11).

Jesus’ suffering and death were always in God’s plan. When Jesus was only a few weeks old and was brought by His parents to the Temple to be presented to the Lord, the godly Simeon told Mary, “Behold, this Child is appointed for the fall and rise of many in Israel, and for a sign to be opposed-and a sword will pierce even your own soul” (Luke 2:34–35). John the Baptist announced Jesus’ ministry by declaring, “Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!” (John 1:29), and every Jew who heard that message knew John was speaking of a sacrificed lamb. In his great vision on the Island of Patmos, the apostle John saw “a Lamb standing, as if slain,” and heard a great host of angels “saying with a loud voice, ‘Worthy is the Lamb that was slain’ ” (Rev. 5:6, 12).

Jesus was going to Jerusalem because that is where He was to sacrifice Himself for the sins of the world, in perfect accordance with God’s revealed plan.

The Predictions Of His Suffering

and the Son of Man will be delivered to the chief priests and scribes, and they will condemn Him to death, and will deliver Him to the Gentiles (20:18–19)

By His own divine omniscience, Jesus knew how many husbands the woman at Sychar had, although He had never met or heard of her before (John 4:16–18). He told the disciples exactly what they would find when He sent them into Jerusalem to find a colt (Matt. 21:2). He forecast the destruction of Jerusalem nearly forty years before it would occur (Matt. 24:1–2). Now Jesus omnisciently adds additional details of His suffering and death to the many prophecies of the Old Testament.

Jesus referred to Himself or was referred to by the gospel writers some eighty times as the Son of Man, an Old Testament title that connoted the Messiah’s divinity but emphasized His incarnation and humiliation. As the divine/human Son of Man, Jesus declared that He would be delivered to the chief priests and scribes.

The Lord made no mention of the one by whom. He would be delivered, although He knew it would be Judas. That is why some translators have chosen to render the verb as “betrayed,” instead of the more literal delivered or “handed over.”

The Jewish priesthood was composed of several ranks and levels. The Levites were the lowest level and numbered in the many thousands. They did not perform priestly functions as such but were responsible for serving the priests. The ordinary priests served in various capacities in the Tabernacle and later the Temple. By New Testament times a group had developed called the chief priests, who were the hereditary aristocracy of the priesthood. The highest position within that group was that of the high priest, an office handed down from father to son.

Next in importance among the Jewish religious leaders were the scribes, who gained their positions not by heredity but by learning. They were authorities on the Old Testament, especially the Mosaic law, as well as on the thousands of rabbinical traditions they had developed over the past several hundred years since the return from Babylon. Scribes were often called lawyers, rabbis, or doctors and, as is abundantly evident from the gospels, were closely associated with the Pharisees.

The chief priests and scribes therefore respectively comprised the hereditary and the intellectual aristocracy of Judaism. That elite group of religious leaders came to vehemently hate and oppose Jesus because He threatened their hypocritical and ungodly system of power. And as the executive body of the high Jewish council, the Sanhedrin, they would soon condemn Him to death.

Because Rome did not allow subject nations to impose the death penalty, the Jewish religious leaders could condemn Jesus to death but could not execute Him without Roman approval. It was therefore necessary for them to deliver Him to the pagan Roman Gentiles in order to carry out their murderous scheme. And because they could not convince Pilate, the Roman governor, that Jesus’ religious offenses deserved the death penalty, they resorted to blackmail. “If you release this Man,” they told the governor, “you are no friend of Caesar; everyone who makes himself out to be a king opposes Caesar” (John 19:12).

The Proportion and Power of His Suffering

to mock and scourge and crucify Him, and on the third day He will be raised up. (20:19b)

The first phrase describes what might be called the proportion of Jesus’ suffering, the degree of agony to which He was unjustly but willingly condemned.

While Jesus was being held by the Gentile Roman authorities, they proceeded to mock and scourge Him, as the custom was with prisoners who were not Roman citizens, even if they had not been convicted of a crime. First Pilate had Jesus scourged with leather whips in which sharp pieces of bone and metal were embedded. Then his soldiers “took Jesus into the Praetorium and gathered the whole Roman cohort around Him. And they stripped Him, and put a scarlet robe on Him. And after weaving a crown of thorns, they put it on His head, and a reed in His right hand; and they kneeled down before Him and mocked Him, saying, ‘Hail, King of the Jews!’ And they spat on Him, and took the reed and began to beat Him on the head” (Matt. 27:26–30). Only after that painful humiliation did they take Him away and crucify Him.

It is significant that, when referring to Christ’s sufferings before and during His crucifixion, the New Testament always uses the plural (see 2 Cor. 1:5; Phil. 3:10; Heb. 2:10; 1 Pet. 1:11; 4:13). His pain was not one dimensional, but involved sufferings of many sorts.

The physical pain of crucifixion was excruciating, which was the reason why it was Rome’s preferred means of execution for enemies of the state. But by itself it was not always fatal, and there are numerous historical records of men surviving it. When they wanted death to be certain, the victim was scourged beforehand. The great loss of blood, as well as frequent exposure of internal organs, not only greatly increased suffering but assured death.

Jesus’ physical sufferings cannot be minimized. He felt every sting of the reed and every cut of the lash. He felt the agony of His bruised and lacerated muscles trying to carry the heavy cross out of the city and up to Golgotha. He felt the surges of pain as the nails were driven through His hands and feet and He was hoisted to an upright position so that the entire weight of his body rested on those nails. He suffered great thirst, which was yet exceeded by the suffocating pull of His body against His lungs.

But the greatest sufferings He endured were not physical but emotional and spiritual, just as Isaiah had vividly predicted.

He has no stately form or majesty that we should look upon Him, nor appearance that we should be attracted to Him. He was despised and forsaken of men, a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief; and like one from whom men hide their face, He was despised, and we did not esteem Him. Surely our griefs He Himself bore, and our sorrows He carried; yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. But He was pierced through for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities; the chastening for our well-being fell upon Him, and by His scourging we are healed. … The Lord has caused the iniquity of us all to fall on Him. He was oppressed and He was afflicted, yet He did not open His mouth. … He was cut off out of the land of the living, for the transgression of my people to whom the stroke was due. (Isa. 53:2–8)

As the prophet makes clear, Jesus’ sufferings went much deeper than the physical. The Messiah would endure inner sufferings far more devastating than the pain in His body He had to suffer as a sinless Man for the offenses of sinful men who despised and rejected Him. He was, indeed, stricken even by His own heavenly Father in order that He could bear the penalty that fallen man deserved but could not survive. “The Lord was pleased to crush Him, putting Him to grief; if He would render Himself as a guilt offering. … He poured out Himself to death, and was numbered with the transgressors; yet He Himself bore the sin of many, and interceded for the transgressors” (Isa. 53:10, 12).

Jesus suffered the pain of disloyalty It was one of His own disciples, one of the specially chosen Twelve, who betrayed Him to the chief priests. He could declare with the psalmist, “Even my close friend, in whom I trusted, who ate my bread, has lifted up his heel against me” (Ps. 41:9). One whom He had called, taught, and loved had turned against Him and delivered Him into the hands of His enemies. The anguish of betrayal must have cut deeply into Jesus’ heart many times before the night when the wicked deed was actually committed. He not only was betrayed by a friend but with a kiss. There can be little human suffering more overwhelming than that caused by someone close and dear who violates the intimacy and trust of friendship even to the point of treachery.

Jesus also suffered the pain of rejection. He was turned over to the chief priests and scribes, who, in the name of all Israel, God’s own chosen people, rejected His messiahship and treated Him instead as a criminal worthy of death. He was the Stone the builders rejected. The Redeemer of Israel “came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him” (John 1:11). His disciples fled from Him, ashamed even to be called His friends, much less His servants. He had to endure the rejection even of His own Father, who could not look upon the sin borne in the body of the Son.

Jesus suffered the pain of humiliation. He was mocked by the leaders of His own people and then mocked by the Gentiles to whom they sent Him. Those pagans humiliated Him with a mock crown, a mock scepter, a mock robe of royalty, and mock obeisance. They scorned Him, spat on His face, and nailed Him naked to a cross for the world to behold.

Jesus suffered the pain of unjust guilt. The guilt He took upon Himself and for which He suffered and died was not His own. It was for the sins of others that He paid the penalty. All the guilt of all the people who had ever lived and who would ever live was placed on Him. It was perhaps the prospect of bearing that guilt and shame that caused the sin-despising Christ to sweat great drops of blood as He prayed that last night in Gethsemane.

Jesus suffered the pain of injury As already noted, Roman scourging was done with a whip tipped with sharp bits of bone and metal that tore deep gashes into the flesh and even into the organs and bones of the victim. The customary ordeal consisted of forty lashes, administered with such intensity that it often required a second man to finish the beating. Because of the extreme shock and profuse bleeding, victims frequently died before the full number of lashes could be applied.

Finally, Jesus suffered the pain of death itself. Physiologically, it may have been from suffocation that He died. But the most painful suffering that killed Him was the cumulative grief He had to endure as penalty for the sins of mankind. To save the lost whom He loved with infinite love, He had to become for them the sin He hated with infinite hatred. God “made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Cor. 5:21).

But contrary to what both His friends and His enemies thought, Jesus’ death was not the end. The Father would never allow His “Holy One to undergo decay” (Ps. 16:10). Therefore, on the third day Jesus would be raised up, never to face suffering or death again. He died to conquer sin and its penalty, which is death. He died that those who believe in Him would never have to di²

1 Morris, L. (1992). The Gospel according to Matthew (pp. 505–508). Grand Rapids, MI; Leicester, England: W.B. Eerdmans; Inter-Varsity Press.

2 MacArthur, J. F., Jr. (1985). Matthew (Mt 20:17–19). Chicago: Moody Press.