The Sword

And behold, one of them that were with Jesus stretched out his hand, and drew his sword, and smote the servant of the high priest, and struck off his ear.
Then saith Jesus unto him, “Put up again thy sword into its place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword” (Matthew 26:51-52).

The great confrontation had finally come.

The disciples had eagerly awaited the moment when they knew Jesus would inaugurate His Kingdom. They had been promised it would happen in Jerusalem; they had arrived in triumph; and now, finally, Jesus was confronted with the power of the religious authorities and the Romans. Now, they were no doubt certain, Jesus would rise up and defeat the Roman menace.

Peter was ready. He had promised Jesus he would not be offended by Jesus and would even die for Him (Matthew 26:33, 35); at his side was a sword, one of the two swords which Jesus had commended for them not long before (Luke 22:35-38).

And then all of a sudden it was not going according to the plan they had imagined. Judas had betrayed Jesus; the men with him laid hands on Jesus (Matthew 26:50). The disciples wondered: should they attack (Luke 22:49)? But then Peter then did what Peter was good at doing: he acted. Peter unsheathed the sword and cut off the ear of Malchus, the servant of the high priest; he did so perhaps to protect Jesus, or to begin the battle (Matthew 26:51, Mark 14:47, Luke 22:50, John 18:10).

Yet Jesus would have none of it. He had a cup He had to drink; the Scriptures had to be fulfilled (Matthew 26:54, Luke 22:51, John 18:11). Jesus reasoned with Peter: could He not call upon God who would send twelve legions of angels (Matthew 26:53)? Peter well knew the story of Israel: one angel struck down an Assyrian army of 185,000 men (1 Kings 19:35); a Roman legion included around 6,000 men, so how much more could an army of 72,000 angels wreak upon the earth? Jesus then healed the servant of the high priest, and was led away to trial, suffering, and execution (Luke 22:51).

But in Matthew’s Gospel, before Jesus speaks of legions of angels and the need to fulfill Scripture, Jesus stopped Peter with a powerful premise: he ought to put his sword away, for all who take the sword shall perish with the sword (Matthew 26:52). This is not just about this night and this moment. This is about the way of the world and the way of Jesus.

The sword is the way of the world. Ever since the fall of man, people have sought to gain advantage over others through coercive and violent force. Jesus and Peter understood the way of the sword very well: they lived under Roman oppression. Jesus was not wrong to point out that power gained with the sword must be maintained by the sword: He was about to experience the full force of the power of the sword at the hands of the religious authorities and the Romans (Matthew 26:55-27:50). The Romans had overcome the Macedonians; the Macedonians had overcome the Babylonians, who had overcome the Assyrians. A day would come when the Romans would finally be overcome themselves. Peter nursed the hope of many Israelites that God would grant them victory over the Romans, but it would involve that same sword, and would just as easily be lost by that sword. Within forty years of Jesus’ death the Israelites would take up the sword in a vain attempt to gain freedom from the pagan oppressor by it; they would die at the hands of Roman swords. Jesus’ warning became prophecy.

Matthew, throughout his Gospel, contrasts the way of the world, the way of the sword, with the way of Christ. The Pharisees and the Jewish establishment understood the Law in carnal terms; the way of the Kingdom of God in Christ demanded greater righteousness (Matthew 5:1-7:27). The Roman rulers lorded their authority over others; it would not be so among those serving in the Kingdom of God (Matthew 20:25-28). The Israelites would choose the Messiah of their own desire, Jesus Barabbas, an insurrectionist, over the Messiah whom God had sent them: Jesus of Nazareth (Matthew 27:17-23). Jesus’ way involved humility, service, suffering, even death (Matthew 16:24-25, 20:25-28). Jesus’ Kingdom would not be inaugurated by His servants wielding the swords against others, as so many other kingdoms had begun; Jesus’ Kingdom would be inaugurated because the sword came for Jesus Himself.

Jesus’ words to Peter ring out to faithful believers in Christ to this day. God has empowered earthly governments to render justice and wield the sword (Romans 13:1-7); they will also all go the way of all kingdoms on the earth. For the most part the people of God attempt to live by peaceful means and seek to advance God’s purposes in ways which glorify Him. But what happens when danger comes upon the people of God? What then?

Peter learned the lesson well. We have no record of Peter ever wielding the sword against another person again, even though his life was endangered on many occasions (cf. Acts 12:1-19). When threatened by the Sanhedrin, he and his fellow Apostles prayed to God for power to continue to boldly proclaim the Gospel (Acts 4:24-30). A few years before the Romans did unto him what they had done unto Jesus, Peter wrote to Christians of Asia Minor, exhorting them to suffer persecution and general evil for having done good, not to revile or repay evil for evil, but bless, because Jesus provided them an example, suffering unjustly but entrusting Himself to God who judges justly (1 Peter 2:18-25, 3:9-16, 4:1-19).

Peter and the Christians of Asia Minor found themselves in far more dangerous circumstances than most of us could even imagine. But they did not resort to violence; Peter vividly remembered what the Lord had told him, and he lived and taught accordingly. One can go far in conversation with words and acts of love and hospitality, but once one turns to the sword and violence, the affair will be decided by violence. In this way those who take the sword shall perish by it. It is not for us to trust in the ways of this world, but to follow the way of God in Christ in His Kingdom, the way of humility, service, and suffering, even, if need be, unto death (1 John 3:16, Revelation 12:11). May we, as Peter, leave the violent coercive force of the world in its sheath, and put our trust in God in Christ and follow Him!

Ethan R. Longhenry

Freedom

As free, and not using your freedom for a cloak of wickedness, but as bondservants of God (1 Peter 2:16).

If you know nothing else about Americans you know just how much they love freedom. As Lee Greenwood so famously put it, “I’m proud to be an American / where at least I know I’m free.” Liberty and freedom still prove extremely popular; they remain an important part of the American creed, a point of agreement across the various divides in the country, even if disagreement remains about how said freedom ought to be exercised.

American freedom is of a particular type: freedom from tyranny, and thus freedom to live as one wants. The caricature of the American declaring, “I’m an American, I’m free, so I am gonna do what I want” is not terribly far off the mark. Freedom in America is thus perceived as license, the ability to go and do whatever is desired; any attempt to curb or restrain such desires is seen as tyrannical, despotic, and contrary to the American ethos. Little wonder, then, how freedom has become libertinism among far too many.

Americans also maintain a fondness for Christianity, or at least a version of Christianity which is quite amenable to American philosophies and the American dream. Freedom is offered in Christianity (John 8:32, 1 Peter 2:16); Americans like freedom; therefore, they imagine that the freedom in Christianity must be the same type of freedom they believe they have as Americans. And so freedom in Christ is perceived to be license as well.

The Apostle Peter, however, has a very different conception of what freedom means, and above all things, what the Christian is to do with his or her freedom. He wrote to Christians of modern-day Turkey who lived under the power of the Roman Empire in the days of Nero (1 Peter 1:1). The Christians there were enduring suffering, most likely from some sort of persecution (1 Peter 1:6-9, 2:11-12, 4:19). He encouraged Christians to respect human authorities for the Lord’s sake and to abstain from the lusts of the world (1 Peter 2:11-15). He then expected the Christians to live as free people, not to cover up wickedness, but to live as douloi (often translated as “bondservants” or “servants,” but really “slaves”) of God (1 Peter 2:16).

What Peter meant by “live as free” involves something which we tend to take for granted today: to live as one not enslaved. Many in Peter’s audience were slaves (cf. 1 Peter 2:18), yet even they, in Christ, were to live as if free. Freedom meant freedom from oppression and bondage: freedom from sin and the Evil One (Romans 8:1-8). Even if physically enslaved they remained spiritually free.

But what did such freedom involve? Peter exhorted Christians to not use their freedom as a “cloak of wickedness” (1 Peter 2:16). Such is the dark underbelly of the clarion call to “freedom”: freedom to what end? Many who imagine their freedom to be license use that freedom to participate in hedonism and self-aggrandizement, and often to the detriment of their fellow man. The very reason many covet freedom is so they can do things they know they ought not! Almost invariably freedom is abused not long after it is obtained; most of us can give stories of what happened when we were entrusted with greater freedom, and those stories are rarely pretty.

Instead, Peter encouraged Christians to use their freedoms to serve God (1 Peter 2:16). The Apostle Paul had invited Christians to understand reality in terms of serving God in righteousness or serving the forces of sin and evil in wickedness (Romans 6:16-23). Thus we do have choice, but a very limited one: are we going to serve the right or the wrong? The Christian’s freedom is not to be used as license to do whatever he or she wishes but an opportunity purchased by the blood of the Lord and under His sovereignty in the Kingdom to serve God and His purposes. In this way Christians put to silence the ignorance of the foolish (1 Peter 2:15): doing well in serving the Lord.

We therefore do well to transform the way we view freedom. Yes, we have freedom; it is a precious and valuable freedom, purchased by our Lord at great cost to Himself. In that freedom is a bit of power over ourselves inasmuch as we have the choice to serve good or evil. Such freedom maintains personal volition since it must be a constant choice regarding whom we will serve. Nevertheless, this freedom is not as far-ranging as many would want to imagine; if we exercise our freedom to live as we choose or please, we are not living according to wisdom but folly, and will invariably serve sin and not the Lord (Proverbs 3:5-7, Romans 6:14-23). God has given us freedom in Christ out of the bondage of sin and death so that we might choose to serve the Lord Jesus and submit to His will and purposes in all things (Romans 8:1-8).

We must dismiss any notion of freedom as “license to do whatever I want.” We lived our lives in the flesh according to our desires, and what did we gain at that time but shame and condemnation (Romans 6:20-22)? In Christ we are set free from bondage to sin and death so we can be empowered to live as God would have us to live, but only if we live as free people, using our freedom to submit to the will of God in Christ. May we take Peter’s lesson to heart and serve God in Christ, becoming ever more conformed to His image!

Ethan R. Longhenry

Sinai and Jerusalem

They then that received his word were baptized: and there were added unto them in that day about three thousand souls (Acts 2:41).

Beginnings set the tone for how everything following will proceed. Not for nothing is it said that you only have one chance to make a first impression.

The beginning of the proclamation of the full Gospel of Jesus Christ by the Apostles, the beginning of the church, the manifestation of Jesus’ Kingdom on earth, is set forth in Acts 2:1-48. The Apostles are baptized with the Holy Spirit and begin to speak in the assorted languages spoken by the diaspora of Jews who have gathered in Jerusalem for Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13). Peter proclaims what it is the Jewish people are seeing: the Holy Spirit has fallen on them as a fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32, for Jesus of Nazareth, whom they had seen work miracles and had crucified, was raised from the dead by God, and of this David prophesied in the Psalms and Peter and the Apostles had personally eyewitnessed (Acts 2:14-36). About three thousand Jewish people believed, repented, and were baptized in the name of the Lord, and began devoting themselves together to the Apostles’ doctrine, fellowship, the breaking of bread, and prayer, spending time together in the Temple and from house to house, providing for each other as any had need, having favor with the people, full of joy and purpose, and many others were being added to their number (Acts 2:37-48). An auspicious beginning indeed!

St. Peter Preaching 00

But why on Pentecost? Pentecost was the festival of firstfruits of the wheat harvest, established by YHWH as fifty days after the Passover (the Feast of Weeks or Shauvot; Exodus 34:22, Deuteronomy 16:9-11). A festival for firstfruits was by its very nature a celebration; the people would have been subsisting on whatever had remained from previous harvests, and the prospect of new and bountiful food would make them glad. The Feast of Weeks also manifests their confidence in God, for if they gave the firstfruits to Him, they were trusting in Him to give plenty in the rest of the harvest. The Passover, the Feast of Unleavened Bread, and the Feast of Weeks were all in their own way a reminder of being slaves in Egypt delivered from bondage by YHWH (Deuteronomy 16:12). As one of the three festivals in which all men were to appear before YHWH in the Temple, the Feast of Weeks/Pentecost represented a convenient opportunity to proclaim the good news of Jesus of Nazareth to all Israel (cf. Deuteronomy 16:16-17).

Yet Pentecost, in Jewish memory, was not only the Feast of Weeks, an agricultural celebration; according to the oral tradition of Israel it is also the anniversary of the day on which YHWH spoke the Ten Commandments before Israel on Mount Sinai (Exodus 20:1-21).

Thus Pentecost hearkens back to another beginning, the beginning of the covenant between God and Israel as mediated by the Law of Moses. This covenant was established on Mount Sinai; the people were terrified at the thunders, lightning, fire, and the voice of God, and having heard the Ten Commandments, begged for Moses to receive the Law and stand between them and God (Exodus 20:1-21). YHWH then gave Moses the Law and the provisions for the Tabernacle over a forty day period, culminating in receiving the two tables of testimony in stone written by the finger of God (Exodus 20:21-31:18). Meanwhile, the people feared that Moses had met his demise, and persuaded Aaron to make gods for them, and he made a golden calf which they served and before whom they made merry (Exodus 32:1-6). YHWH burned in anger against Israel and sought to strike them down and make of Moses a great nation; Moses talked YHWH down by reminding Him of the promises He had made to their forefathers (Exodus 32:7-14). Moses descended to the base of Mount Sinai, broke the tablets of the testimony, destroyed the golden calf, grinding it into powder, and made Israel to drink it (Exodus 32:15-25). Moses called on those who were on YHWH’s side, and his fellow Levites came to him; he commanded them to strike down their companions and neighbors, and about three thousand of the people fell (Exodus 32:26-28). Moses testified how Israel had committed great sin, and YHWH struck the people further, because of the golden calf they had made (Exodus 32:29-35). YHWH would then command Moses to lead the people away from Mount Sinai (Exodus 33:1); what was supposed to be a sanctified place had been defiled, and what was to be a holy people needed forgiveness. From then on the Levites would be called upon to stand between YHWH and the people, and the Law would be reckoned as a burden that none of the Israelites could properly bear (Exodus 19:6, Numbers 3:12, Acts 15:10). This was a less than auspicious beginning!

In this way Pentecost marks the beginning of two covenants, one in Sinai and the other in Jerusalem. On Sinai great terror came upon the people as they heard the voice of God; they sinned against God there, and about three thousand of them died. In Jerusalem great amazement came upon the people as they heard in their native languages the mighty works of God; they learned about redemption there, and about three thousand of them received salvation and the hope of eternal life. The Law from Sinai would remind them of their faults, failures, and sin; to various degrees Israel sought to live up to what God had decreed, but frequently failed and/or turned aside to other gods. The gift of the Spirit in Jerusalem would provide release from sin, deliverance from bondage, and hope for eternity in the resurrection with the Lord Jesus Christ.

Later on Paul would make a similar contrast in 2 Corinthians 3:6-18: the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life; the old is a ministration of death and condemnation, the new is a ministration of the Spirit and of righteousness. Pentecost provides a great illustration of this principle. When the Law was given, the people turned aside and about three thousand were killed; when the Spirit is given, the people repented and about three thousand found eternal life. The Law set forth right and wrong and in so doing gave life to sin and thus death (Romans 7:5-13); the Spirit set forth deliverance from sin and death through Jesus and the resurrection, and in so doing gives life (Romans 8:1-3).

We do well to praise God that we have not come to a mountain of fear and condemnation, as was Sinai, but to Jerusalem, Mount Zion, wherein life can be found through the Spirit and the message of the good news of Jesus of Nazareth (cf. Hebrews 12:18-24). May we ever live in repentance and hope in the Spirit, serving the Lord Jesus and proclaiming His good news to all nations!

Ethan R. Longhenry

Judgment at the House of God

For the time is come for judgment to begin at the house of God: and if it begin first at us, what shall be the end of them that obey not the gospel of God? (1 Peter 4:17)

A good rule of any communication is to “know your audience.” They are, after all, the ones to whom you are speaking. They are the ones to whom the message should be directed.

Those who speak in the pages of Scripture knew their audience. The prophets spoke the Word of YHWH to the Israelites of their generation, warning them about their sins and transgressions and the impending judgment to come on account of them and yet providing hope for restoration in the future. Jesus spoke to the Israelites of the first century about the impending Kingdom of God. The Apostles wrote to first century Christians about their conditions and situations and what God wanted them to do.

Peter continues in this tradition in 1 Peter 4:12-19. He is encouraging the Christians who live in what we today call Turkey regarding the persecution and suffering they are experiencing or about to experience. They should not find it at all strange that they will suffer for the Name; they should in fact glory in it (1 Peter 4:12-16). He then emphasizes that judgment is coming, but it begins at the house of God (1 Peter 4:17). Such judgment then extends to those outside the house of God, and their condemnation is understood in Peter’s rhetorical questions (1 Peter 4:17-18; cf. Proverbs 11:31). God will judge and condemn those who persecute and cause suffering for the people of God; the people of God are to entrust themselves to their faithful Creator while continuing to do good (1 Peter 4:19).

Albrecht Dürer The Last Judgment circa 1510

We can see, therefore, that God is very much interested in speaking to the condition and situation of the specific audience to which He speaks. That audience is primarily His people from beginning to end. Those who are not His people are not listening to Him; He can do nothing for them while they remain in that condition (Romans 8:1-9). In Scripture God makes it very clear that those who do not know Him and do not obey the Gospel of His Son will be condemned (Romans 1:18-32, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, 2 Thessalonians 1:5-9, Revelation 20:11-15). They need to hear the Gospel, repent of their sin, and serve the Lord (Acts 17:22-31).

So it will be that the evil, indifferent, slothful, and uncaring will get their just deserts on the final day. Yet our concern must, first and foremost, be with us as the people of God. God is speaking to us through the message of His Word: judgment begins here (1 Peter 4:17)!

As we have seen it has always been so. The people of God may want to continually point to the gross sinfulness and immorality all around them and act as if such justifies their comparatively less sinful behavior. God has never provided any such refuge; He recognizes that the wicked live in wickedness, expects it, and has given them over to their lusts (Romans 1:18-32). He expects better from His people! Many take too much comfort in passages like John 3:18, Romans 8:31-39, and similar passages, interpreting them absolutely and teaching that their salvation is fully secure no matter what. Nevermind passages like Hebrews 10:26-31, 2 Peter 2:20-22; the story of God’s involvement with Israel should disabuse everyone of the notion that being made the elect of God automatically grants salvation! God does not want to condemn us or anyone else (1 Timothy 2:4, 2 Peter 3:9); nevertheless, He has never, and will never, justify or commend any who persist in thoughts, feelings, and behaviors contrary to His will and character.

Judgment begins at the house of God, the church (1 Timothy 3:15, 1 Peter 4:17). Too many look into the pages of Scripture to find how everyone else is condemned or judged; if we would be God’s people we must be humble and chastened enough to recognize that the exhortations and warnings found in the pages of Scripture are indeed primarily directed toward us. God will handle the condemnation of those outside (1 Corinthians 5:13). If we would claim to be the people of God we must allow God to point the finger of exhortation and rebuke found in Scripture at ourselves before we dare attempt to ascertain how it may be directed at others (Matthew 7:1-4). Judgment begins at the house of God; are we ready?

Ethan R. Longhenry

Growing in Grace and Knowledge

But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be the glory both now and for ever. Amen (2 Peter 3:18).

Peter’s final written words continue to resonate.

The second letter of Peter features the Apostle’s reminders to his fellow Christians regarding the holiness of their conduct, the behavior and condition of false teachers, and encouragement regarding the end of time (the eschaton) and warnings regarding those who distort the Apostolic witness (2 Peter 1:1-3:17). After his departure Peter does not want his fellow Christians to be carried away by the error of the wicked, falling from their steadfastness in Jesus (2 Peter 3:17); the only way to avoid that is to grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, to whom glory belongs from now until forever (2 Peter 3:18).

Peter thus expects Christians to grow. He is not speaking merely to Christians who remain young in their faith; quite the contrary! The Christians to whom Peter wrote could recall and remember the words of the Apostles and prophets regarding the last days (2 Peter 3:2); they had a working knowledge of the faith and thus had “been around the block” for awhile. During this life there is no point at which it becomes acceptable for a Christian to stop growing! Whether we have been Christians for one day, one year, or almost a hundred years, we must continue to grow in the grace and knowledge of Jesus Christ.

Chrisme Colosseum Rome Italy

Christians must grow in the knowledge of our Lord and Savior (2 Peter 3:18). This knowledge certainly involves the facts about Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, lordship, and return as established in the New Testament. We also do well to buttress our knowledge of the Lord through gaining understanding of the story of the people of God in the Old Testament (2 Timothy 3:15-16). If we do so we are better equipped to recognize how Jesus would have us think, feel, and act in the twenty-first century as His faithful disciples (1 John 2:3-6).

Yet Christians are also to grow in the grace of Jesus Christ (2 Peter 3:18). Grace, Greek charis, is “unmerited favor,” obtaining things we do not deserve. The preeminent way in which we have received grace is through Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross for our sin, the means by which we are offered reconciliation with God (Ephesians 1:7, 2:1-10). But how can we “grow” in that grace? We know it cannot be through greater sin (Romans 6:1-23). But how can Christians grow in the gift of God in Christ?

Christians can grow in grace through more effectively manifesting the fruit of that gift and being that gift toward others. God has displayed grace toward us inasmuch as He has given His Son for our reconciliation and restoration. Yet it is not enough for us to obtain the reconciliation but remain as we are; we must manifest the transformation of the follower of Jesus, no longer walking in the ways of the world, but walking in Jesus’ ways, displaying the fruit of the Spirit (Romans 12:1-2, Galatians 5:22-24, 1 John 2:3-6). When we are transformed to not only be saved by Jesus but also to think, feel, and act like Jesus, we are able to serve others as Jesus did and they will give praise and glory to God as Jesus intends (Matthew 5:13-16, 1 Peter 2:11-12). The Body of Christ ought to be recognized as a gift of God to the world; it is incumbent upon its members to act accordingly (1 Corinthians 12:12-28, Ephesians 4:11-16)!

“Grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ”; Peter’s final words echo through the centuries (2 Peter 3:18). The Christian must recognize that while in the flesh there is always more to learn, more to do, lessons to obtain, and growth to experience. An important part of that growth involves knowledge, but there is always more to learn, and of the making of books there is no end (Ecclesiastes 12:12). We can, and should, study the Scriptures; are we bearing the fruit of that study through the demonstration of the transformed life, manifesting growth in the grace of the Lord Jesus? Are we trusting less in ourselves and more in Him? Do we continue to rely on our own strength or are we entrusting ourselves to God’s strength in Christ (Ephesians 3:14-21)? Are people better able to see Jesus reflected in us on account of our investment in study and trust in God? We must grow in the knowledge of Jesus Christ but also in His grace; let us learn more of Jesus so as to serve Him more effectively, manifesting the fruit of the Spirit, giving others reason to glorify God in Christ!

Ethan R. Longhenry

Is Christ Divided?

Now this I mean, that each one of you saith, “I am of Paul”; and “I of Apollos”; and “I of Cephas”; and “I of Christ”.
Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized into the name of Paul? (1 Corinthians 1:12-13).

If things got much worse in Corinth there might well have been the Pauline Church, the Apollonic Church, the Petrine Church, and the church of Christ, as opposed to just the singular “Church of God” (1 Corinthians 1:2).

Even though many issues were problematic in Corinth Paul begins with what he had heard from Chloe’s people: the Corinthians were contending amongst themselves and lines were being drawn around various people: Paul, Apollos, Cephas/Peter, and Christ (1 Corinthians 1:11-12). Paul will address this issue in various ways from 1 Corinthians 1:10 until 1 Corinthians 4:21, attempting to emphasize that God is the one who deserves all the glory, that such divisiveness exposes a carnal/fleshly mentality incompatible with the spiritual wisdom of Christ in the Gospel; these growing divisions indicate jealousy and strife, works of the flesh, walking after the manner of men, and not after Christ (cf. 1 Corinthians 3:1-4). The church is God’s building, God’s temple; it is not for man to divide, but, as Paul says, for all to speak the same thing in subjection to Christ (1 Corinthians 1:10, 3:9).

The New Testament is full of warnings about what would happen in the future with many false teachers attempting to lead Christians astray (e.g. Acts 20:18-35, 1 Timothy 4:1-3); while such false teachers existed even in New Testament times, by the end of the first century local churches still maintained the pattern of organization they received from the Apostles and recognized each other as fellow churches seeking to glorify the Lord and hold firm to the faith as delivered by the Apostles (Jude 1:3, Revelation 2:1-3:21). Churches in different towns were not different denominations but local congregation of the Lord’s people in different areas. Nevertheless, we do see the principle of denominationalism strongly condemned here in 1 Corinthians 1:10-13. Paul did not want to see Christians drawing lines against each other on the basis of their favorite preacher; if there were a “Pauline Church” and a “Petrine Church” in Corinth it would be a failure of God’s purposes for unity, not merely in pretense, but in substance: to have the same mind and same judgment (1 Corinthians 1:11). There may not be the “Pauline Church” and the “Petrine Church,” but there are the Lutheran Churches, Mennonite Churches, and the Wesleyan Churches, named after the men whose preaching or teaching influenced those who would follow them. Other churches are denominated by their pretense toward universalism or correctness (Catholicism, Orthodoxy), by church polity (Presbyterians, Congregationalists), or by geographical origins (Anglicans). While many such groups have come to understand the need for unity based in John 17:20-23 none have yet proven willing to uphold Paul’s standard in 1 Corinthians 1:10 to not be divided by party or names of past preachers but instead to be of the same mind and judgment, to be part of the Temple of God, His one church, where Christians work together according to the truth of the Gospel to advance His purposes. In the end, if Paul chastised the Corinthians for their jealousy and strife manifest in following particular preachers, how can such practices and denominations be justified today?

Such “cults of personality”, jealousy, and strife are not limited to “those denominations.” Many more are recognizing that the divided heritage of Christendom is an embarrassment to Christ and the faith, the opposite of the unification of mankind in His blood as was God’s eternal plan (John 17:20-23, Ephesians 2:1-18, 3:10-11). Yet even then many will follow a particular preacher. Among churches of Christ many have spoken strongly against denominationalism and for unity in the Lord’s church in the truth yet delineated themselves along the lines of various publications or movements or trends. In the end “I follow this paper” or “I follow this school” is no better than “I follow Peter” or “I follow Luther”; they are all evidence of division and strife in the church which ought not be!

It is interesting, however, that Paul includes among the various “divisions” or “sects” those who say “I follow Christ.” Some have speculated that these last people were the ones who truly understood God’s purposes, yet the text provides no such indication. Paul identifies these four as the various “sects” developing in Corinth (Paul, Apollos, Cephas, Christ), and then immediately asks, “is Christ divided” (1 Corinthians 1:12-13a)?

One can imagine what those of the “Christ-sect” were thinking as the letter was read aloud. They, after all, could give all the “right” answers. “Was Paul crucified for you” (1 Corinthians 1:13)? No, of course not; neither were Cephas or Apollos. But Christ was (1 Corinthians 1:23). “Were ye baptized into the name of Paul” (1 Corinthians 1:13)? No, nor into Cephas or Apollos, but they were all baptized into Christ (1 Corinthians 1:14-15, Galatians 3:27). So the “Christ-sect” had all the right answers. So how could they be condemned?

The problem is not their answers; the problem is not really in being “of Christ.” The problem is the jealousy, strife, and contention for which Paul chastises all the Corinthians (1 Corinthians 1:11, 3:1-4). The sectarian mindset and attitude is the problem: you can have the “right name” and the “right answers” but maintain the wrong attitude.

This is an important warning for members of churches of Christ. We do well to seek to be of the same mind and the same judgment, one in the faith in the truth as Paul exhorts in 1 Corinthians 1:10. Yet the danger of denominating remains ever present, to consider oneself “Church of Christ” as another considers himself a “Baptist” or another a “Lutheran.” If, in the end, the Restoration Movement simply created new denominations, then its energizing spirit has failed and proved a lie. If the Restoration Movement has merely spawned some new denominations it proves little better than that against which it arose.

At its best the Restoration Movement emphasized both unity and truth. Truth without unity is sectarianism headed toward Pharisaism and even Gnosticism, the “enlightened” clearly superior to the “ignorant” masses. Unity without truth is what we can find in the modern ecumenical movement, an attempt to declare victory in failure, seeking to affirm all they agree upon while dismissing the very real remaining divisions as irrelevant, and the goal of 1 Corinthians 1:10 as stated to be a pipe dream. Meanwhile Jesus is the truth and has prayed for unity among those in the truth (John 14:6, 17:20-23). Christians do well to call themselves Christians or believers and to speak of churches in ways seen in the New Testament, honoring God in Christ and not named after men or church polity. Christians do well to follow God according to the New Testament and not the creeds and cults of personality of men as Paul well describes in 1 Corinthians 1:10-4:21. Yet it must always be remembered that sectarianism is a work of the flesh; all division is the result of jealousy and strife, and for good reason all three are reckoned as works of the flesh (Galatians 5:19-21). When such things take place it hardly matters who is “right” and who is “wrong” doctrinally; the division is wrong, the sectarianism is wrong, and we must do all we can to encourage all who believe in Christ to fully reflect the unity He desires, not merely in pretense, but in truth, having the same mind and judgment, one in Christ. Let us be one as God is one and thus testify to His great power!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The Longsuffering of the Lord

The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some count slackness; but is longsuffering to you-ward, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9).

If after thirty years people were already asking, “where is the promise of His coming?” (2 Peter 3:4), how much more so after 1,980 years?

These days you might still hear the phrase, “slower than the second coming,” to describe someone or something that is not moving very quickly. That type of phrase says much about people’s attitudes toward the Lord’s return: it’s taking a very long time. It seems slow! To many it has become almost a joke. Many believers have come to experience “apocalyptic fervor burnout” on account of the continual drumming up of the expectation of the Lord’s imminent return only for time to continue on yet again. Some have come to discount the eventual return of Jesus completely; some suggest it happened in a “spiritual” way in the past, while others think of it as a relic of an earlier, more eschatologically-minded age. Even among those who do look forward to the day of the Lord’s return, it seems remote, something not highly likely to happen within our lifetimes. The Lord’s return, therefore, becomes a very abstract and almost academic matter.

The Apostles expected this kind of mockery and fatigue. Paul warns the Thessalonians about staying awake, ever ready and vigilant for His coming, as it will be like a thief in the night (1 Thessalonians 5:1-10). Peter, in 2 Peter 3:1-14, also speaks directly regarding the expectation of the Lord’s return, especially in light of those who mock and deride the suggestion that the Lord would return. He wishes to remind such people about the great Flood of Genesis 6:9-8:22: it came with plenty of warning and yet happened suddenly (2 Peter 3:5-7).

Yet Peter’s very potent argument involves a challenge to our expectations: why do we think that the second coming is “slow” to happen? Why do we consider the 1,980 and counting years as a reason to doubt God’s faithfulness? Peter quotes Psalm 90:4 in 2 Peter 3:8 to underscore the challenge: to God a thousand years is as one day, and one day as a thousand years. God transcends the space-time continuum; time does not matter to God. A thousand years, which is a long time to humans, is likened to a very short time in God’s estimation (one day). And one day, which we consider a short amount of time, can yet be understood as a long time, a thousand years, in God’s sight. 1,980 years? Simultaneously like less than two days or as much as 723 million years. Time, therefore, is irrelevant when discussing God and what He is doing. Nevertheless, why is it that the Lord has yet to return?

In 2 Peter 3:9, Peter makes it clear that it is not a matter of time. God is not slow; the return of Jesus is not “delayed”; the Lord’s return should not be used by us as a marker for someone or something’s lack of speed. Instead, He is patient, “longsuffering” toward us, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.

Peter will go on to warn everyone that just as the Flood came upon people quickly, so Jesus will come like a thief in the night, and that is a good warning to heed: when the Lord returns, it will be very fast, and there will not be time for any more second chances (2 Peter 3:10). In light of all this, believers should live holy lives, waiting earnestly for the day of God, ever prepared and vigilant whether He comes or not (2 Peter 3:11-14). And then he encourages believers to consider the longsuffering of the Lord as salvation (2 Peter 3:15).

It is for our benefit, then, that the Lord has yet to return. We can certainly personalize this truth: if you are a believer in Christ, and have submitted to the Lord through belief, confession, repentance, and baptism, and walk with the Lord as His follower, when did you come to that faith and obtain your salvation? Now ask yourself: what would my fate have been if the Lord had returned the day before? God facilitated your salvation through His patience; why now would you impose on that patience? Perhaps today is the “day before” or the “day of” the obtaining of salvation for another, and that person has as much a right and access to God’s patience as you.

The Lord, therefore, has been longsuffering toward the world for 1,980 years. It is good for us to consider the longsuffering of Jesus toward us: how many times have we grieved Him because of our sins, weaknesses, and immaturity? What if the Lord were not as patient and longsuffering toward us as He is? What would our fate be? And, God forbid, what if the Lord was as patient with us as we are with our fellow human beings? If God were only as patient as we are, the world would have ended a very long time ago!

Peter well defines the longsuffering of the Lord as salvation: if the Lord were not patient with the creation, we might never have enjoyed the opportunity to live, or, in a darker light, perhaps would live in sin and be condemned before we might have turned in repentance back to the Living God. God’s longsuffering has allowed for our rescue, and how many times do we continue to depend on the longsuffering of God as we seek to grow in maturity? As it is with us, so it is with others. The world continues because the Lord is showing longsuffering toward them as well. As God has been patient with us, and that patience allows for our salvation, so we do well to be patient with others, both within and without the household of faith. We needed some time and wherewithal to recognize our challenges and to come to the Lord for healing; so do others. We have needed our time to grow in the faith and come to understand many of its precepts in greater clarity and understanding; so do others. We may have gotten further on the path of Jesus than others, but just as we needed to cross that terrain, so do they, and we do well to seek to truly build them up and strengthen them through that process just as we were, or at least should have been, built up and strengthened at that stage ourselves.

God is faithful to His promises. Jesus will return. Until then, let us not think of Jesus as slow or delayed; let us recognize that God is patient and longsuffering toward us, and be thankful that we have been able to obtain salvation through that patience of God. Let us account the longsuffering of God as salvation and praise and glorify Him in Christ in all things!

Ethan R. Longhenry

Time and God

But forget not this one thing, beloved, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day (2 Peter 3:8).

To say that we live in a fast-paced world might be one of the greatest understatements of the age. Technological advances allow us to get things done more quickly and efficiently than ever; communication can happen instantaneously. We now expect things to be done already; we have very little patience to wait for anything that we feel takes too long. A package may take a week to ship; a website might require a few additional seconds to load; we chafe and chomp at the bit, wanting to have it or to see it already.

Meanwhile, Jesus died, was raised in power, and ascended on high almost two thousand years ago. For two thousand years we have been waiting for His return and for the consummation of all things (cf. Romans 8:17-24, 2 Peter 3:1-14). And to think that even within a hundred years of Jesus’ death people were scoffing, wondering when He would return (2 Peter 3:4)!

Peter wants to encourage Christians regarding this dilemma: why is God taking so long to accomplish His purposes? But before he can provide an answer, he must first establish the proper perspective on all of these matters.

Peter declares that one day is as a thousand years to God, and a thousand years as one day (2 Peter 3:8). It has been tempting for people to emphasize one half of this verse over the other half, suggesting that one “Biblical day” is really a thousand year period; from the second century until today people attempt to hypothesize how much longer we will be around on the earth based on this suggestion. But Peter’s statement is not that one day is a thousand years, or, for that matter, that a thousand years is one day. Peter uses a simile: to God, a thousand years is like a day; a day is like a thousand years.

Such a statement, on its surface, seems ridiculous. It is ridiculous only when one seeks to literalize the statements or try to use the statements to make some declaration about the nature of time in the Bible. Peter is not providing a cipher with which one can unlock the numerological mysteries of the Bible; instead, he uses a simile to communicate how God transcends time. A day, a thousand years; it does not matter with God. God is above time, eternal in nature, from everlasting to everlasting (Romans 16:26, Psalm 41:13).

Therefore, even though we are bound by the constraints of time, spending our few decades up to perhaps a century on the earth, we should not impose such constraints upon God. Sure, to humans, two thousand years seems like a long time; yet, on the divine scale, one could compare it to two days. Then again, humans believe that two days is a short period of time; yet, on the divine scale, one can compare it to two thousand years! God cannot be so easily compressed and fit into the boxes that dictate our existence!

Peter says this in order for us to take comfort and be encouraged. The fact that two thousand years have transpired between the momentous events of the first century and the present day does not mean that God has neglected or abandoned us. It does not mean that God is slow as humans would consider slowness. Time is meaningless to Him; He has His purposes, He is carrying them out, and when His purpose has been fully accomplished to His satisfaction, the end will come and we will understand better.

God promised Abraham that his descendants would inherit the land of Canaan; 500 or so years later, they obtained it (Genesis 17:1-14, Joshua). God promised Israel through Moses that He would raise up a prophet like Moses for the people; 1,450 years later, Jesus of Nazareth fulfilled the promise (Deuteronomy 18:15-19). When God cursed mankind, He provided the promise of the One who would bruise the head of the serpent (Genesis 3:15); it took no less than 4,500 years before Jesus’ death and resurrection allowed anyone to be freed from the law of sin and death (Romans 8:1-4). God will do what God does according to His purposes, and He is not limited to our time-frame or our scale of time. Let us therefore be patient and maintain our trust in God and His purposes for us in Jesus Christ!

Ethan R. Longhenry

Jesus and the Tax

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received the half-shekel came to Peter, and said, “Doth not your teacher pay the half-shekel?”
He saith, “Yea.”
And when he came into the house, Jesus spake first to him, saying, “What thinkest thou, Simon? The kings of the earth, from whom do they receive toll or tribute? From their sons, or from strangers?”
And when he said, “From strangers,” Jesus said unto him, “Therefore the sons are free. But, lest we cause them to stumble, go thou to the sea, and cast a hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a shekel: that take, and give unto them for me and thee” (Matthew 17:24-27).

Jesus is often described as a radical and a revolutionary, someone who seeks to actively disrupt the system. And, in many ways, Jesus is radical and revolutionary. He is living and preaching the message of the Gospel of the Kingdom, and that proclamation is radically opposed to the aims and actions of the world. He is constantly at odds with the religious authorities, partly regarding their teachings, and partly regarding their hypocrisy.

But Jesus is not radical for the sake of being radical; He is not revolutionary just to stir things up. There are times when Jesus, despite having an opportunity to further challenge aspects of the system, instead demurs. One such incident is recorded in Matthew 17:24-27.

The Jewish collector of the half-shekel Temple tax was in Capernaum. The tax was commanded in Exodus 30:11-16 to provide for sacrifices for atonement. The collector asked Peter if Jesus paid the tax; the tax, and Peter indicated that yes, He did.

Jesus then takes an opportunity to teach Peter. He asks if kings receive toll or tribute from their children or from strangers. The answer is easy enough: from strangers. Kings are not in habit of taxing themselves or their family members, but they receive money from taxes levied on his subjects, tribute from conquered nations, and/or tolls from transportation of commerce. The king’s family, however, remains free from taxation.

The implication is evident: since Jesus is the Son of God, which Peter recently confessed (Matthew 16:16), He is not under compulsion to pay the tax. He would be in the right to refuse payment and to declare why. Yet He does not want to cause offense; He provides, through money to be found in a fish, the shekel to pay the tax for both Peter and Himself.

That Jesus handled the situation through miraculous means is noteworthy; did He not have a shekel on Him, or could He not have found one in another way? We cannot be sure; it is possible that He was just out of money at that particular moment and that was a convenient way of handling the circumstance. Yet that seems rather unlikely; Jesus could have come up with the money in much easier ways. Perhaps since Jesus, as a Son, has no need to pay the tax, and no need for atonement anyway, that He has no need to expend the effort to obtain the money for the tax; Peter, who is liable, should at least do some work in his own profession (fishing) to pay the tax.

But this should not distract us from the thrust of the story. Does Jesus have confidence in the Temple system? Absolutely not; He will soon go to Jerusalem, will ritually cleanse the Temple, and then set forth the prophecy of its condemnation (Matthew 21:12-16, 24:1-36). The chief priests will use the Temple money first to pay Jesus’ betrayer, and then to pay off the soldiers in an attempt to deny His resurrection (Matthew 26:14-16, 28:11-15). Even its ability to atone has been bankrupted; the curtain between the holy place and the most holy place will tear when Jesus dies (Matthew 27:51).

But does that challenge really concern the Jewish men who collects the Temple tax? Jesus does as He does to not cause them to stumble (Matthew 17:27). Regardless of the state of the Temple system and those making the sacrifices, the tax is lawful under the Law of Moses, and this is not an issue where Jesus believes it is worth it to challenge for His right or to make a stink regarding the system. Therefore, even though He does not need any sacrifice made for His atonement, and even though He is free as God’s Son from the tax, He pays it anyway. It does not hurt, and making it an issue causes more difficulty than it is worth. Furthermore, the explanation is more for Peter’s benefit than anyone else’s– Peter blithely assumed that Jesus paid the tax, but Jesus wanted to make sure that Peter understood that it was not because He was somehow responsible to pay the tax, but in order to not cause offense.

This lesson is important for us as well. There are times when insisting on liberties and rights is simply not worth it; to cause any fuss may make people stumble in ways that are unnecessary (cf. Romans 14:1-23). The Gospel of Jesus Christ is a stumbling-block for many people because of its essential truths and what it takes in order to conform to the image of Jesus; we should not add any more stumbling-blocks. Like Jesus, we must think about the ultimate goal for ourselves and those with whom we interact in life. Is our stand really honoring Jesus or is it just to assert our own rights? Is this really going to help someone become better acquainted with the path of Jesus or not?

Jesus, even though His message and work were radical and often revolutionary, always had the goal in mind. He wanted people to change their hearts and minds and return back to God (cf. Matthew 4:17). Many times that demanded strong stands and strong words; other times it demanded to go along with some things so as to not cause unnecessary offense. He was not radical for the sake of being radical, nor revolutionary just to keep the pot stirred. And so it should be with ourselves: we should not insist on things just because we can, but only when it is necessary for the advancement of God’s purposes. Let us seek to glorify God in all we do, learning when to take the stand and when to not provide a cause for stumbling!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The Betrayer, Betrayed

Then Judas, who betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself, and brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, saying, “I have sinned in that I betrayed innocent blood.”
But they said, “What is that to us? See thou to it.”
And he cast down the pieces of silver into the sanctuary, and departed; and he went away and hanged himself.
And the chief priests took the pieces of silver, and said, “It is not lawful to put them into the treasury, since it is the price of blood.”
And they took counsel, and bought with them the potter’s field, to bury strangers in. Wherefore that field was called, the field of blood, unto this day.
Then was fulfilled that which was spoken through Jeremiah the prophet, saying, “And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was priced, whom certain of the children of Israel did price; and they gave them for the potter’s field, as the Lord appointed me” (Matthew 27:3-10).

Judas Iscariot is a good reminder to us that people tend to be more complicated than we often imagine. As the betrayer of Jesus (Matthew 26:14-16), and a greedy man who was known for stealing (cf. John 12:6), it would be easy to just write Judas off as purely evil. It would be easy to have no compassion on him whatsoever; it would be easy, as Dante did, to relegate him to the complete bottom of hell, as one of the most evil people to ever walk the earth.

Yet Judas is not a psychopath. He is not pure evil. Yes, he does terrible and sinful things; yes, he is rightly deemed an adversary, or devil, by Jesus (cf. John 6:70). But when the realization came upon him that Jesus was not getting away this time, that he really had just betrayed an innocent man, Judas acutely felt his guilt. He was deeply sorrowful for his actions (Matthew 27:3). He tried to return the thirty pieces of silver he was given to betray Jesus; to us, this may not seem like a significant act of repentance, considering what he has done, but let us remember that he is known for being covetous and a thief. After being spurned by the religious authorities, he went off and took his own life (Matthew 27:4-5). He perceived what he had done: he had betrayed the Christ of God into the hands of the men who would kill Him. The weight of guilt and pain proved too much for him.

So why did he do it? The text never says. Certain possibilities come to mind. He is most likely called Judas Iscariot because he hails from Kerioth, a village in Judea (Joshua 15:25). Jesus’ Galilean disciples were ready for Jesus to go to Jerusalem, defeat the Romans, and restore Israel’s political fortunes; how much more so would Judas, a native of Judea itself? Perhaps Judas thought that by betraying Jesus he would spur the Lord and Messiah into finally standing up to His adversaries and to establish that Kingdom about which He kept talking. Perhaps he was hurt by Jesus’ rebuke regarding Judas’ criticism of the waste of Mary’s ointment (cf. John 12:1-8), and he wanted to get a little even. Perhaps the money was the motivation: he wanted to know how much the chief priests would give him in order to hand Jesus over (Matthew 26:15), and perhaps he just saw an opportunity to make a quick buck. Perhaps it was just the voice of Satan tempting him and he proved unable to resist (Luke 22:3-6). Or perhaps, as with the rest of Judas’ character issues, it is a mixture of some of all of these reasons.

Regardless of why Judas did it, based on his reaction, it does not seem that Judas really thought that it would lead to Jesus’ death. Judas was there to see Jesus escape from the crowd in Nazareth (Luke 4:28-30) and in Jerusalem (John 10:31-39). At least one of these events involved miraculous action. Judas most likely surmised that Jesus would either escape His enemies or defeat them outright. Judas believed, after all, that Jesus was the Christ; he saw the power Jesus manifested; he knew that the soldiers coming to get Jesus were really no match for Him.

But Judas did not know that Jesus was submitting to the plan of God, and that he was the catalyst, however willingly, of the terrible sufferings that Jesus would experience. When that realization came upon him, he saw the horror of what he had done.

Matthew has set up two very intentional parallels regarding Judas in his account of these events. The first is with Simon Peter. In Matthew 26:69-75, Matthew describes how Peter denies Jesus three times. Peter feels immense guilt for doing so; he goes off and wept bitterly. He had let Jesus down. And then, a few verses later, in Matthew 27:3-10, Matthew relates how Judas felt guilt for what he had done. Both Peter and Judas felt guilt. Both proved repentant at their actions– they were both very sorrowful. But Peter’s repentance led him to turn back to Jesus, receive forgiveness, and to change from a denier of the Lord to a full confessor and witness of Jesus before the Jews and the nations (cf. John 21:15-19, Acts 2:14-36, 3:11-4:22). We have little doubt that Peter, despite having denied Jesus, entered into His glory. Judas, however, did not turn to Jesus. He did not wait to see what would happen, to beg for forgiveness before the Risen Lord. Had he done so, is there any doubt that Jesus would have forgiven him if he was truly repentant? Instead, his guilt led him to seek atonement from the very ones who gave him the money, those who also had Jesus’ blood on their hands, and was spurned even by them. Drowning in guilt, Judas kills himself. Despite repenting of what he had done, Judas did not turn back to God in Christ for forgiveness. Crushed by worldly guilt, he takes his own life, and what hope can we have for him in eternity on account of it? Thus Paul will later teach the Corinthians that there are two forms of guilt– worldly guilt that leads to death, and godly guilt that leads to true repentance (2 Corinthians 7:8-10).

Yet it is the second parallel that Matthew is making that is often missed if we are only focusing on Judas and his character. Judas is not the only actor here; we also have the example of the chief priests and elders.

We have declared that Judas feels great sorrow for what he has done. This sorrow is very deep because he knows who Jesus is and therefore the enormity of the transgression he has committed. He wants to make good in some small way, and so he takes the money back to the Temple (Matthew 27:3). He desperately seeks atonement for what he has done.

One would think that he has done wisely in heading to the Temple. After all, according to the covenant between God and Israel, the Temple is where God dwells and where sacrifices are to be offered for sin (cf. Leviticus). Atonement and forgiveness of sins are to be found by bringing one’s sacrifice to the Temple and having it offered before God. One of the most important reason for the Temple’s existence is to facilitate this atonement, and the chief priests are the very ones who have been given this task (cf. Leviticus 16).

Yet Judas does not receive any such comfort. Judas confesses to them that he has sinned by betraying innocent blood (Matthew 27:4). What do they tell him? “What is that to us? See thou to it” (Matthew 27:4). The very priests who are to minister to God on behalf of the people, offering the sacrifices brought by contrite Israelites, show complete disinterest in Judas’ problem. They declare that he has to see to his own atonement himself.

As it relates to Judas himself, we see that the betrayer is now betrayed. Jesus put trust in Judas, allowing him to maintain the money bag even though he pilfered from it, establishing him as one of the select Twelve, and Judas betrayed him. Now, the religious authorities to whom Judas entrusted himself, getting their money for handing Jesus over, whose “day job” it is to facilitate atonement for sin, refuse to do anything for him. They do not deny his claim; they “piously” refuse to put the money back into the treasury, for they know it is the price of blood, and that is why they buy a field with it (Matthew 27:6-10). If Judas’ claim of betraying innocent blood is true, than their guilt is not much less than his own. But they are content– regardless of Jesus’ conduct, He was a threat to the “system,” and that threat was being removed. The show would go on. The chief priests and elders maintained their authority and stature among the people.

Yet, in reality, they have just sold themselves out. As this relates to Jesus and the office of the Temple, Matthew is making it clear that the Temple and its authorities are being superseded. The chief priests and elders are more right than they imagine when they cast Judas off, for in reality, their sacrifices and their attempts toward atonement now prove insufficient. Salvation and forgiveness are coming through Jesus who is being crucified; the sad irony is that the cost of Judas’ atonement was being paid for as he was going through these actions. The Temple system, with its corrupted chief priests, was morally bankrupt. Within forty years, the Romans put an end to the whole pretense. Matthew is showing that God’s sentence against them was just.

The betrayer is betrayed; in the process, the whole system proves its own condemnation. At that moment it was hard to imagine that their machinations were really leading to the opportunity for all men to receive salvation through the redemption for which Jesus was paying with His life. The great tragedy is that, as far as we can tell, none of them proved willing to receive true forgiveness. Judas was repentant but directed it wrongly; he took his own life. The chief priests and elders, as a whole, never seemed to humble themselves, and the Romans would do it for them. Let us learn from their examples. Let us repent with godly grief, turning to the Lord, seeking His forgiveness, and changing our ways for the better!

Ethan R. Longhenry