31

CHAPTER 31.

THE CLOSE OF OUR LORD'S PUBLIC MINISTRY.


A CONSPIRACY OF PHARISEES AND HERODIANS.[1106]

The Jewish authorities continued unceasingly active in their determined
efforts to tempt or beguile Jesus into some act or utterance on which
they could base a charge of offense, under either their own or Roman
law. The Pharisees counseled together as to "how they might entangle him
in his talk"; and then, laying aside their partisan prejudices, they
conspired to this end with the Herodians, a political faction whose
chief characteristic was the purpose of maintaining in power the family
of the Herods,[1107] which policy of necessity entailed the upholding of
the Roman power, upon which the Herods depended for their delegated
authority. The same incongruous association had been entered into before
in an attempt to provoke Jesus to overt speech or action in Galilee; and
the Lord had coupled the parties together in His warning to the
disciples to beware of the leaven of both.[1108] So, on the last day of
our Lord's teaching in public, Pharisees and Herodians joined forces
against Him; the one watchful for the smallest technical infringement of
the Mosaic law, the other alert to seize upon the slightest excuse for
charging Him with disloyalty to the secular powers. Their plans were
conceived in treachery, and put into operation as the living embodiment
of a lie. Choosing some of their number who had not before appeared in
personal antagonism to Jesus, and who were supposed to be unknown to
Him, the chief conspirators sent these with instructions to "feign
themselves just men, that they might take hold of his words, that so
they might deliver him unto the power and authority of the governor."

This delegation of hypocritical spies came asking a question, in
pretended sincerity, as though they were troubled in conscience and
desired counsel of the eminent Teacher. "Master," said they with fawning
duplicity, "we know that thou art true, and teachest the way of God in
truth, neither carest thou for any man: for thou regardest not the
person of men." This studied tribute to our Lord's courage and
independence of thought and action was truthful in every word; but as
uttered by those fulsome dissemblers and in their nefarious intent, it
was egregiously false. The honeyed address, however, by which the
conspirators attempted to cajole the Lord into unwariness, indicated
that the question they were about to submit was one requiring for its
proper answer just such qualities of mind as they pretendingly
attributed to Him.

"Tell us therefore," they continued, "What thinkest thou? Is it lawful
to give tribute unto Caesar, or not?" The question had been chosen with
diabolic craft; for of all acts attesting compulsory allegiance to Rome
that of having to pay the poll-tax was most offensive to the Jews. Had
Jesus answered "Yes," the guileful Pharisees might have inflamed the
multitude against Him as a disloyal son of Abraham; had His answer been
"No," the scheming Herodians could have denounced Him as a promoter of
sedition against the Roman government. Moreover the question was
unnecessary; the nation, both rulers and people had settled it, however
grudgingly, for they accepted and circulated among themselves the Roman
coinage as a common medium of exchange; and it was a criterion of
recognition among the Jews that to make current the coins of any
sovereign was to acknowledge his royal authority. "But Jesus perceived
their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye me, ye hypocrites?" All their
artful expressions of false adulation were countered by the withering
epithet "hypocrites." "Shew me the tribute money," He commanded, and
they produced a penny--a Roman denarius bearing the effigy and name of
Tiberius Caesar, emperor of Rome. "Whose is this image and
superscription?" He asked. They answered "Caesar's." "Then saith he unto
them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto
God the things that are God's."[1109]

The reply was a masterly one by whatever standard we gage it; it has
become an aphorism in literature and life. It swept away any lingering
thought or expectation that in the mind of Him who had so recently
ridden into Jerusalem as King of Israel and Prince of Peace, there was
even the semblance of aspiration for earthly power or dominion. It
established for all time the one righteous basis of relationship between
spiritual and secular duties, between church and state. The apostles in
later years builded upon this foundation and enjoined obedience to the
laws of established governments.[1110]

One may draw a lesson if he will, from the association of our Lord's
words with the occurrence of Caesar's image on the coin. It was that
effigy with its accompanying superscription that gave special point to
His memorable instruction, "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which
are Caesar's." This was followed by the further injunction: "and unto God
the things that are God's." Every human soul is stamped with the image
and superscription of God, however blurred and indistinct the lines may
have become through the corrosion or attrition of sin;[1111] and as unto
Caesar should be rendered the coins upon which his effigy appeared, so
unto God should be given the souls that bear His image. Render unto the
world the stamped pieces that are made legally current by the insignia
of worldly powers, and give unto God and His service, yourselves--the
divine mintage of His eternal realm.

Pharisees and Herodians were silenced by the unanswerable wisdom of the
Lord's reply to their crafty question. Try as they would, they could not
"take hold of his words," and they were put to shame before the people
who were witnesses to their humiliation. Marveling at His answer, and
unwilling to take the chance of further and possibly greater
embarrassment, they "left him, and went their way." Nevertheless these
perverted Jews persisted in their base and treacherous purpose, as
appears nowhere more glaringly evident than in their utterly false
accusation before Pilate--that Jesus was guilty of "forbidding to give
tribute to Caesar, saying that he himself is Christ a King."[1112]


SADDUCEES QUESTION ABOUT THE RESURRECTION.[1113]

Next, the Sadducees tried to discomfit Jesus by propounding what they
regarded as an involved if not indeed a very difficult question. The
Sadducees held that there could be no bodily resurrection, on which
point of doctrine as on many others, they were the avowed opponents of
the Pharisees.[1114] The question submitted by the Sadducees on this
occasion related directly to the resurrection, and was framed to
discredit the doctrine by a most unfavorable and grossly exaggerated
application thereof. "Master," said the spokesman of the party, "Moses
said, If a man die, having no children, his brother shall marry his
wife, and raise up seed unto his brother. Now there were with us seven
brethren: and the first, when he had married a wife, deceased, and,
having no issue, left his wife unto his brother: Likewise the second
also, and the third, unto the seventh. And last of all the woman died
also. Therefore in the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the
seven? for they all had her." It was beyond question that the Mosaic law
authorized and required that the living brother of a deceased and
childless husband should marry the widow with the purpose of rearing
children to the name of the dead, whose family lineage would thus be
legally continued.[1115] Such a state of affairs as that presented by
the casuistical Sadducees, in which seven brothers in succession had as
wife and left as childless widow the same woman, was possible under the
Mosaic code relating to levirate marriages; but it was a most improbable
instance.

Jesus stopped not, however, to question the elements of the problem as
presented to Him; whether the case was assumed or real mattered not,
since the question "Whose wife shall she be?" was based on an utterly
erroneous conception. "Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not
knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. For in the resurrection
they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of
God in heaven." The Lord's meaning was clear, that in the resurrected
state there can be no question among the seven brothers as to whose wife
for eternity the woman shall be, since all except the first had married
her for the duration of mortal life only, and primarily for the purpose
of perpetuating in mortality the name and family of the brother who
first died. Luke records the Lord's words as follows in part: "But they
which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the
resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage:
Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and
are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection." In the
resurrection there will be no marrying nor giving in marriage; for all
questions of marital status must be settled before that time, under the
authority of the Holy Priesthood, which holds the power to seal in
marriage for both time and eternity.[1116]

From the case presented by His treacherous questioners, Jesus turned to
the actuality of the resurrection, which was involved in and implied by
the inquiry. "But as touching the resurrection of the dead," said He,
"have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, I am
the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is
not the God of the dead, but of the living." This was a direct assault
upon the Sadducean doctrine of negation concerning the literal
resurrection of the dead. The Sadducees were distinctively the zealous
upholders of the law, wherein Jehovah affirms Himself to be the God of
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob;[1117] yet they denied the possible
resurrection of these patriarchs, and made the exalted title, under
which the Lord had revealed Himself to Moses, valid only during the
brief mortal existence of the progenitors of the Israelitish nation. The
declaration that Jehovah is not the God of the dead but of the living
was an unanswerable denunciation of the Sadducean perversion of
scripture; and with solemn finality the Lord added: "Ye therefore do
greatly err." Certain of the scribes present were impressed by the
incontrovertible demonstration of the truth, and exclaimed with
approbation: "Master, thou hast well said." The proud Sadducees were
confuted and silenced; "and after that they durst not ask him any
question at all."


THE GREAT COMMANDMENT.[1118]

The Pharisees, covertly rejoicing over the discomfiture of their rivals,
now summoned courage enough to plan another attack of their own. One of
their number, a lawyer, by which title we may understand one of the
scribes who was distinctively also a professor of ecclesiastical law,
asked: "Which is the first commandment of all?" or, as Matthew states
the question: "Master, which is the great commandment in the law?" The
reply was prompt, incisive, and so comprehensive as to cover the
requirements of the law in their entirety. With the imperative call to
attention with which Moses had summoned Israel to hear and heed,[1119]
the very words of which were written on the phylacteries[1120] which the
Pharisees wore as frontlets between their eyes, Jesus answered: "Hear, O
Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: And thou shalt love the Lord thy
God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind,
and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment. And the second
is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is
none other commandment greater than these." Matthew's wording of the
concluding declaration is: "On these two commandments hang all the law
and the prophets."

The philosophic soundness of the Lord's profound generalization and
comprehensive summarizing of the "law and the prophets"[1121] will
appeal to all students of human nature. It is a common tendency of man
to reach after, or at least to inquire after and marvel about, the
superlative. Who is the greatest poet, philosopher, scientist, preacher
or statesman? Who stands first and foremost in the community, the
nation, or even, as the apostles in their aspiring ignorance asked, in
the kingdom of heaven? Which mountain overtops all the rest? Which river
is the longest or the largest? Such queries are ever current. The Jews
had divided and subdivided the commandments of the law, and had
supplemented even the minutest subdivision with rules of their own
contriving. Now came the Pharisee asking which of all these requirements
was the greatest.[1122] To love God with all one's heart and soul and
mind is to serve Him and keep all His commandments. To love one's
neighbor as one's self is to be a brother in the broadest and, at the
same time, the most exacting sense of the term. Therefore the
commandment to love God and man is the greatest, on the basis of the
simple and mathematical truth that the whole is greater than any part.
What need of the decalog could there be if mankind would obey this first
and great and all-embracing commandment? The Lord's reply to the
question was convincing even to the learned scribe who had acted as
spokesman for his Pharisaic colleagues. The man was honest enough to
admit the righteousness and wisdom on which the reply was grounded, and
impulsively he voiced acceptance, saying, "Well, Master, thou hast said
the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he: And to
love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with
all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love his neighbour as
himself, is more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices." Jesus
was no whit less prompt than the well-intending scribe in acknowledging
merit in the words of an opponent; and to the man He gave the
encouraging assurance: "Thou art not far from the kingdom of God." As to
whether the scribe remained firm in purpose and eventually gained
entrance into that blessed abode, the scriptural record is silent.


JESUS TURNS QUESTIONER.[1123]

Sadducees, Herodians, Pharisees, lawyers, and scribes, all had in turn
met discomfiture and defeat in their efforts to entangle Jesus on
questions of doctrine or practise, and had utterly failed to incite Him
to any act or utterance on which they could lawfully charge Him with
offense. Having so effectually silenced all who had ventured to
challenge Him to debate, either covertly or with open intent, that "no
man after that durst ask him any question," Jesus in turn became the
aggressive interrogator. Turning to the Pharisees, who had clustered
together for greater facility in consultation, Jesus began a colloquy
which proceeded as follows:

"What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The son of
David. He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord,
saying, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I
make thine enemies thy footstool? If David then call him Lord, how is he
his son?" The Lord's citation of David's jubilant and worshipful song of
praise, which, as Mark avers, Jesus said was inspired by the Holy Ghost,
had reference to the Messianic psalm[1124] in which the royal singer
affirmed his own reverent allegiance, and extolled the glorious reign of
the promised King of kings, who is specifically called therein "a priest
forever after the order of Melchizedek."[1125] Puzzling as was the
unexpected question to the erudite Jews, we fail to perceive in it any
inexplicable difficulty, since to us, less prejudiced than they who
lived in expectation of a Messiah who would be David's son only in the
sense of family descent and royal succession in the splendor of temporal
rule, the eternal Godship of the Messiah is a fact demonstrated and
undeniable. Jesus the Christ is the Son of David in the physical way of
lineage by which both Jesus and David are sons of Jacob, Isaac, Abraham,
and Adam. But while Jesus was born in the flesh as late in the centuries
as the "meridian of time"[1126] He was Jehovah, Lord and God, before
David, Abraham, or Adam was known on earth.[1127]


WICKED SCRIBES AND PHARISEES DENOUNCED.[1128]

The humiliating defeat of the Pharisaic party was made all the more
memorable and bitter by the Lord's final denunciation of the system, and
His condemnation of its unworthy representatives. Addressing Himself
primarily to the disciples, yet speaking in the hearing of the
multitude, He directed the attention of all to the scribes and
Pharisees, who, He pointed out, occupied the seat of Moses as doctrinal
expounders and official administrators of the law, and who were
therefore to be obeyed in their authoritative rule; but against their
pernicious example the disciples were forcefully warned. "All therefore
whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do," said the Lord,
"but do not ye after their works; for they say, and do not." Distinction
between due observance of official precept and the personal
responsibility of following evil example, though it be that of men high
in authority, could not have been made plainer. Disobedience to law was
not to be excused because of corruption among the law's representatives,
nor was wickedness in any individual to be condoned or palliated because
of another's villainy.

In explanation of the caution He so openly blazoned against the vices of
the rulers, the Lord continued: "For they bind heavy burdens and
grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they
themselves will not move them with one of their fingers." Rabbinism had
practically superseded the law in the substitution of multitudinous
rules and exactions, with conditional penalties; the day was filled with
traditional observances by which even the trivial affairs of life were
encumbered; yet from bearing these and other grievous burdens
hypocritical officials could find excuse for personal exemption.

Their inordinate vanity and their irreverent assumption of excessive
piety were thus stigmatized: "But all their works they do for to be seen
of men: they make broad their phylacteries,[1129] and enlarge the
borders of their garments, and love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and
the chief seats in the synagogues, and greetings in the markets, and to
be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi." The high-sounding title, Rabbi,
signifying Master, Teacher, or Doctor, had eclipsed the divinely
recognized sanctity of priesthood; to be a rabbi of the Jews was
regarded as vastly superior to being a priest of the Most High
God.[1130] "But be not ye called Rabbi," said Jesus to the apostles and
the other disciples present, "for one is your Master, even Christ; and
all ye are brethren. And call no man your father upon the earth: for one
is your Father, which is in heaven. Neither be ye called masters: for
one is your Master, even Christ."[1131]

Those upon whom would rest the responsibility of building the Church He
had founded were not to aspire to worldly titles nor the honors of men;
for those chosen ones were brethren, and their sole purpose should be
the rendering of the greatest possible service to their one and only
Master. As had been so strongly impressed on earlier occasions,
excellence or supremacy in the apostolic calling, and similarly in the
duties of discipleship or membership in the Church of Christ, was and is
to be achieved through humble and devoted service alone; therefore said
the Master again, "he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.
And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall
humble himself shall be exalted."

From the mixed multitude of disciples and unbelievers, comprizing many
of the common people who listened in glad eagerness to learn,[1132]
Jesus turned to the already abashed yet angry rulers, and deluged them
with a veritable torrent of righteous indignation, through which flashed
the lightning of scorching invective, accompanied by thunder peals of
divine anathema.

"But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the
kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither
suffer ye them that are entering to go in." The Pharisaic standard of
piety was the learning of the schools; one unversed in the
technicalities of the law was accounted as unacceptable to God and
veritably accursed.[1133] By their casuistry and perverted explications
of scripture they confused and misled the "common people," and so stood
as obstacles at the entrance to the kingdom of God, refusing to go in
themselves and barring the way to others.

"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows'
houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive
the greater damnation."[1134] The avarice of the Jewish hierarchy in our
Lord's lifetime was an open scandal. By extortion and unlawful exaction
under cover of religious duty the priestly rulers had amassed an
enormous treasure,[1135] of which the contributions of the poor, and the
confiscation of property, including even the houses of dependent widows,
formed a considerable proportion; and the perfidy of the practise was
made the blacker by the outward pretense of sanctity and the
sacrilegious accompaniment of wordy prayer.

"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and
land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold
more the child of hell than yourselves." It is possible that this woe
was directed more against the effort to secure proselytes to Pharisaism
than that of converting aliens to Judaism; but as the latter was
thoroughly degraded and the former disgustingly corrupt, the application
of our Lord's denunciation to either or both is warranted. Of the Jews
who strove to make proselytes it has been said that "out of a bad
heathen they made a worse Jew." Many of their converts soon became
perverts.

"Woe unto you, ye blind guides, which say, Whosoever shall swear by the
temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the
temple, he is a debtor! Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the
gold, or the temple that sanctifieth the gold? And, Whosoever shall
swear by the altar, it is nothing; but whosoever sweareth by the gift
that is upon it, he is guilty. Ye fools and blind: for whether is
greater, the gift, or the altar that sanctifieth the gift? Whoso
therefore shall swear by the altar, sweareth by it, and by all things
thereon. And whoso shall swear by the temple, sweareth by it, and by him
that dwelleth therein. And he that shall swear by heaven, sweareth by
the throne of God, and by him that sitteth thereon." Thus did the Lord
condemn the infamous enactments of the schools and the Sanhedrin
concerning oaths and vows; for they had established or endorsed a code
of rules, inconsistent and unjust, as to technical trifles by which a
vow could be enforced or invalidated. If a man swore by the temple, the
House of Jehovah, he could obtain an indulgence for breaking his oath;
but if he vowed by the gold and treasure of the Holy House, he was bound
by the unbreakable bonds of priestly dictum. Though one should swear by
the altar of God, his oath could be annulled; but if he vowed by the
corban gift or by the gold upon the altar,[1136] his obligation was
imperative. To what depths of unreason and hopeless depravity had men
fallen, how sinfully foolish and how wilfully blind were they, who saw
not that the temple was greater than its gold, and the altar than the
gift that lay upon it! In the Sermon on the Mount the Lord had said
"Swear not at all";[1137] but upon such as would not live according to
that higher law, upon those who persisted in the use of oaths and vows,
the lesser and evidently just requirement of strict fidelity to the
terms of self-assumed obligations was to be enforced, without
unrighteous quibble or inequitable discrimination.

"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of
mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the
law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to
leave the other undone. Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and
swallow a camel." The law of the tithe had been a characteristic feature
of the theocratic requirements in Israel from the days of Moses; and the
practise really long antedated the exodus. As literally construed, the
law required the tithing of flocks and herds, fruit and grain,[1138] but
by traditional extension all products of the soil had been included. The
conscientious tithing of all one's possessions, even pot-herbs and other
garden produce, was approved by the Lord; but He denounced as rank
hypocrisy the observance of such requirements as an excuse for
neglecting the other duties of true religion. The reference to "the
weightier matters of the law" may have been an allusion to the
rabbinical classification of "light" and "heavy" requirements under the
law; though it is certain the Lord approved no such arbitrary
distinctions. To omit the tithing of small things, such as mint leaves,
and sprigs of anise and cummin, was to fall short in dutiful observance;
but to ignore the claims of judgment, mercy, and faith, was to forfeit
one's claim to blessing as a covenant child of God. By a strong simile,
the Lord stigmatized such inconsistency as comparable to one's
scrupulous straining at a gnat while figuratively willing to gulp down a
camel.[1139]

"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the
outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of
extortion and excess. Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is
within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean
also."[1140] Pharisaic scrupulosity in the ceremonial cleansing of
platters and cups, pots and brazen vessels, has been already alluded to.
Cleanliness the Lord in no wise depreciated; His shafts of
disapprobation were aimed at the hypocrisy of maintaining at once
outward spotlessness and inward corruption. Cups and platters though
cleansed to perfection were filthy before the Lord if their contents had
been bought by the gold of extortion, or were to be used in pandering to
gluttony, drunkenness or other excess.

"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto
whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within
full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness. Even so ye also
outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy
and iniquity." It was an awful figure, that of likening them to
whitewashed tombs, full of dead bones and rotting flesh. As the dogmas
of the rabbis made even the slightest contact with a corpse or its
cerements, or with the bier upon which it was borne, or the grave in
which it had been lain, a cause of personal defilement, which only
ceremonial washing and the offering of sacrifices could remove, care was
taken to make tombs conspicuously white, so that no person need be
defiled through ignorance of proximity to such unclean places; and,
moreover, the periodical whitening of sepulchres was regarded as a
memorial act of honor to the dead. But even as no amount of care or
degree of diligence in keeping bright the outside of a tomb could stay
the putrescence going on within, so no externals of pretended
righteousness could mitigate the revolting corruption of a heart reeking
with iniquity. Jesus had before compared Pharisees with unmarked graves,
over which men inadvertently walked and so became defiled though they
knew it not;[1141] on the occasion now under consideration He denounced
them as whitened tombs, flauntingly prominent, but sepulchres
nevertheless.

"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the
tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous, And
say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been
partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. Wherefore ye be
witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed
the prophets." National pride, not wholly unlike patriotism, had for
centuries expressed itself in formal regard for the burial crypts of the
ancient prophets, many of whom had been slain because of their righteous
and fearless zeal. Those modern Jews were voluble to disavow all
sympathy with the murderous deeds of their progenitors, who had martyred
the prophets, and ostentatiously averred that if they had lived in the
times of those martyrdoms they would have been no participators therein,
yet by such avouchment they proclaimed themselves the offspring of those
who had shed innocent blood.

With scorching maledictions the Lord thus consigned them to their fate:
"Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. Ye serpents, ye generation
of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell? Wherefore, behold, I
send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye
shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your
synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: That upon you may come
all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous
Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between
the temple and the altar. Verily I say unto you, All these things shall
come upon this generation." To their sanctimonious asseverations of
superiority over their fathers who had slain Jehovah's envoys, Jehovah
Himself replied by predicting that they would dye their hands in the
blood of prophets, wise men, and righteous scribes, whom He would send
amongst them; and thus would they prove themselves literal sons of
murderers, and murderers themselves, so that upon them should rest the
burden of all the righteous blood that had been shed for a testimony of
God, from righteous Abel to the martyred Zacharias.[1142] That dread
fate, outlined with such awful realism, was to be no eventuality of the
distant future; every one of the frightful woes the Lord had uttered was
to be realized in that generation.


THE LORD'S LAMENTATION OVER JERUSALEM.[1143]

Concerning scribes, Pharisees, and Pharisaism, Jesus had uttered His
last word. Looking from the temple heights out over the city of the
great King, soon to be abandoned to destruction, the Lord was obsessed
by emotions of profound sorrow. With the undying eloquence of anguish He
broke forth in such a lamentation as no mortal father ever voiced over
the most unfilial and recreant of sons.

"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest
them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy
children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings,
and ye would not! Behold, your house is left unto you desolate. For I
say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed
is he that cometh in the name of the Lord." Had Israel but received her
King, the world's history of post-meridian time would never have been
what it is. The children of Israel had spurned the proffered safety of a
protecting paternal wing; soon the Roman eagle would swoop down upon
them and slay. The stupendous temple, which but a day before the Lord
had called "My house," was now no longer specifically His; "Your house,"
said He, "is left unto you desolate." He was about to withdraw from both
temple and nation; and by the Jews His face was not again to be seen,
until, through the discipline of centuries of suffering they shall be
prepared to acclaim in accents of abiding faith, as some of them had
shouted but the Sunday before under the impulse of an erroneous
conception, "Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord."


A WIDOW'S GIFT.[1144]

From the open courts Jesus moved over toward the colonnaded treasury of
the temple, and there He sat, seemingly absorbed in a revery of sorrow.
Within that space were thirteen chests, each provided with a
trumpet-shaped receptacle; and into these the people dropped their
contributions for the several purposes indicated by inscriptions on the
boxes. Looking up, Jesus observed the lines of donors, of all ranks and
degrees of affluence and poverty, some depositing their gifts with
evident devoutness and sincerity of purpose, others ostentatiously
casting in great sums of silver and gold, primarily to be seen of men.
Among the many was a poor widow, who with probable effort to escape
observation dropped into one of the treasure-chests two small bronze
coins known as mites; her contribution amounted to less than half a cent
in American money. The Lord called His disciples about Him, directed
their attention to the poverty-stricken widow and her deed, and said:
"Verily I say unto you, That this poor widow hath cast more in, than all
they which have cast into the treasury: For all they did cast in of
their abundance; but she of her want did cast in all that she had, even
all her living."

In the accounts kept by the recording angels, figured out according to
the arithmetic of heaven, entries are made in terms of quality rather
than of quantity, and values are determined termined on the basis of
capability and intent. The rich gave much yet kept back more; the
widow's gift was her all. It was not the smallness of her offering that
made it especially acceptable, but the spirit of sacrifice and devout
intent with which she gave. On the books of the heavenly accountants
that widow's contribution was entered as a munificent gift, surpassing
in worth the largess of kings. "For if there be first a willing mind, it
is accepted according to that a man hath, and not according to that he
hath not."[1145]


CHRIST'S FINAL WITHDRAWAL FROM THE TEMPLE.

Our Lord's public discourses and the open colloquies in which He had
participated with professionals and priestly officials, in the course of
His daily visits to the temple during the first half of Passion week,
had caused many of the chief rulers, beside others, to believe on Him as
the veritable Son of God; but the fear of Pharisaic persecution and the
dread of excommunication from the synagog[1146] deterred them from
confessing the allegiance they felt, and from accepting the means of
salvation so freely offered. "They loved the praise of men more than the
praise of God."[1147]

It may have been while Jesus directed His course for the last time
toward the exit portal of the one-time holy place that He uttered the
solemn testimony of His divinity recorded by John.[1148] Crying with a
loud voice to priestly rulers and the multitude generally, He said: "He
that believeth on me, believeth not on me, but on him that sent me. And
he that seeth me seeth him that sent me." Allegiance to Himself was
allegiance to God; the people were plainly told that to accept Him was
in no degree a weakening of their adherence to Jehovah, but on the
contrary a confirmation thereof. Repeating precepts of earlier
utterance, He again proclaimed Himself the light of the world, by whose
rays alone mankind might be delivered from the enveloping darkness of
spiritual unbelief. The testimony He left with the people would be the
means of judgment and condemnation to all who wilfully rejected it.
"For," said He in solemn finality, "I have not spoken of myself; but the
Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and
what I should speak. And I know that his commandment is life
everlasting; whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto
me, so I speak."


DESTRUCTION OF THE TEMPLE PREDICTED.[1149]

As Jesus was departing from the enclosure wherein stood what once had
been the House of the Lord, one or more of the disciples called His
attention to the magnificent structures, the massive stones, the
colossal columns, and the lavish and costly adornment of the several
buildings. The Lord's answering comment was an unqualified prophecy of
the utter destruction of the temple and everything pertaining to it.
"Verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon
another, that shall not be thrown down." Such was the definite and dire
prediction. Those who heard were dumbfounded; neither by question nor
other response did they attempt to elicit more. The literal fulfilment
of that awful portent was but an incident in the annihilation of the
city less than forty years later.

With the Lord's final departure from the temple, which probably occurred
in the afternoon of the Tuesday of that last week, His public ministry
was brought to its solemn ending. Whatever of discourse, parable, or
ordinance was to follow, would be directed only to the further
instruction and investiture of the apostles.


NOTES TO CHAPTER 31.

1. The Image on the Coin.--The Jews had an aversion for images or
effigies in general, the use of which they professed to hold as a
violation of the second commandment. Their scruples, however, did not
deter them from accepting coins bearing the effigies of kings, even
though these monarchs were pagans. Their own coins bore other devices,
such as plants, fruits, etc., in place of a human head; and the Romans
had condescendingly permitted the issue of a special coinage for Jewish
use, each piece bearing the name but not the effigy of the monarch. The
ordinary coinage of Rome was current in Palestine, however.

2. Submission to Secular Authority.--Governments are instituted of God,
sometimes by His direct interposition, sometimes by His permission. When
the Jews had been brought into subjection by Nebuchadnezzar, king of
Babylon, the Lord commanded through the prophet Jeremiah (27:4-8) that
the people render obedience to their conqueror, whom He called His
servant; for verily the Lord had used the pagan king to chastize the
recreant and unfaithful children of the covenant. The obedience so
enjoined included the payment of taxes and extended to complete
submission. After the death of Christ the apostles taught obedience to
the powers that be, which powers, Paul declared "are ordained of God."
See Rom. 13:1-7; Titus 3:1; 1 Tim. 2:1-3; see also 1 Peter 2:13, 14.
Through the medium of modern revelation, the Lord has required of His
people in the present dispensation, obedience to and loyal support of
the duly established and existing governments in all lands. See Doc. and
Cov. 58:21-22; 98:4-6; and section 134 throughout. The restored Church
proclaims as an essential part of its belief and practise: "We believe
in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in
obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law." See _Articles of Faith_,
xxiii.

3. Marriage for Eternity.--Divine revelation in the dispensation of the
fulness of times has made plain the fact, that contracts of marriage, as
indeed all other agreements between parties in mortality, are of no
validity beyond the grave, except such contracts be ratified and
validated by the duly established ordinances of the Holy Priesthood.
Sealing in the marriage covenant for time and eternity, which has come
to be known as celestial marriage, is an ordinance established by divine
authority in the restored Church of Jesus Christ. See the author's
treatment of this subject in _Articles of Faith_, xxiv, 18-24; and
_House of the Lord_, under "Sealing in Marriage," pp. 101-109.

4. Divisions and Subdivisions of the Law.--"The Rabbinical schools, in
their meddling, carnal, superficial spirit of word-weaving and
letter-worship, had spun large accumulations of worthless subtlety all
over the Mosaic law. Among other things they had wasted their idleness
in fantastic attempts to count, and classify, and weigh, and measure all
the separate commandments of the ceremonial and moral law. They had come
to the sapient conclusion that there were 248 affirmative precepts,
being as many as the members in the human body, and 365 negative
precepts, being as many as the arteries and veins, or the days of the
year: the total being 613, which was also the number of letters in the
decalog. They arrived at the same result from the fact that the Jews
were commanded (Numb. 15:38) to wear fringes (_tsitsith_) on the corners
of their _tallith_, bound with a thread of blue; and as each fringe had
eight threads and five knots, and the letters of the word _tsitsith_
make 600, the total number of commandments was, as before 613. Now
surely, out of such a large number of precepts and prohibitions, _all_
could not be of quite the same value; some were 'light' (_kal_), and
some were 'heavy' (_kobhed_). But which? and what was the greatest
commandment of all? According to some Rabbis, the most important of all
is that about the _tephillin_ and the _tsitsith_, the fringes and
phylacteries; and 'he who diligently observes it is regarded in the same
light as if he had kept the whole Law.'

"Some thought the omission of ablutions as bad as homicide; some that
the precepts of the Mishna were all 'heavy'; those of the Law were some
'heavy' and some 'light.' Others considered the _third_ to be the
greatest commandment. None of them had realized the great principle,
that the wilful violation of one commandment is the transgression of all
(James 2:10), because the object of the entire Law is the spirit of
_obedience to God_. On the question proposed by the lawyer the
Shammaites and Hillelites were in disaccord, and, as usual, both schools
were wrong: the Shammaites, in thinking that mere trivial external
observances were valuable, apart from the spirit in which they were
performed, and the principle which they exemplified; the Hillelites, in
thinking that _any_ positive command could in itself be unimportant, and
in not seeing that great principles are essential to the due performance
of even the slightest duties."--Farrar, _Life of Christ_, chap. 52.

5. Phylacteries and Borders.--Through a traditional interpretation of
Exo. 13:9 and Deut. 6:8, the Hebrews adopted the custom of wearing
phylacteries, which consisted essentially of strips of parchment on
which were inscribed in whole or in part the following texts: Exo.
13:2-10 and 11-17; Deut. 6:4-9, and 11:13-21. Phylacteries were worn on
the head and arm. The parchment strips for the head were four, on each
of which one of the texts cited above was written. These were placed in
a cubical box of leather measuring from 1/2 inch to 1-1/2 inches along
the edge; the box was divided into four compartments and one of the
little parchment rolls was placed in each. Thongs held the box in place
on the forehead between the eyes of the wearer. The arm phylactery
comprized but a single roll of parchment on which the four prescribed
texts were written; this was placed in a little box which was bound by
thongs to the inside of the left arm so as to be brought close to the
heart when the hands were placed together in the attitude of devotion.
The Pharisees wore the arm phylactery above the elbow, while their
rivals, the Sadducees, fastened it to the palm of the hand (see Exo.
13:9). The common people wore phylacteries only at prayer time; but the
Pharisees were said to display them throughout the day. Our Lord's
reference to the Pharisees' custom of making broad their phylacteries
had reference to the enlarging of the containing box, particularly the
frontlet. The size of the parchment strips was fixed by rigid rule.

The Lord had required of Israel through Moses (Numb. 15:38) that the
people attach to the border of their garment a fringe with a ribbon of
blue. In ostentatious display of assumed piety, the scribes and
Pharisees delighted to wear enlarged borders to attract public
attention. It was another manifestation of hypocritical
sanctimoniousness.

6. Ecclesiastical Titles.--Our Lord severely condemned the seeking after
titles as insignia of rank in His service. Nevertheless He named the
Twelve whom He chose, Apostles; and in the Church founded by Himself the
offices of Evangelist, High Priest, Pastor, Elder, Bishop, Priest,
Teacher, and Deacon were established (see _Articles of Faith_, xi:1-4).
It was the empty man-made title that attached to the individual, not the
authorized title of office to which men were called through
authoritative ordination, to which the Lord affixed the seal of His
disapproval. Titles of office in the Holy Priesthood are of too sacred a
character to be used as marks of distinction among men. In the restored
Church in the current dispensation, men are ordained to the Priesthood
and to the several offices comprized within both the Lesser or Aaronic,
and the Higher or Melchizedek Priesthood; but though one be thus made an
Elder, a Seventy, a High Priest, a Patriarch or an Apostle, he should
not court the usage of the title as a mere embellishment of his name.
(See "The Honor and Dignity of Priesthood" by the author in _Improvement
Era_, Salt Lake City, March, 1914.)

Chas. F. Deems, in _The Light of the Nations_, pp. 583-4, says in
speaking of the irreverent use of ecclesiastical titles: "The Pharisees
loved also the highest places in the synagogs, and it gratified their
vanity to be called Teacher, Doctor, Rabbi. Against these Jesus warned
His disciples. They were not to love to be called Rabbi, a title which
occurs in three forms, _Rab_, Teacher, Doctor; _Rabbi_, My Doctor or
Teacher; _Rabboni_, My great Doctor. Nor were they to call any man
'Father,' in the sense of granting him any infallibility of judgment or
power over their consciences.... 'Papa,' as the simple Moravians call
their great man, Count Zinzendorf: 'Founder,' as Methodists denominate
good John Wesley; 'Holy Father in God,' as bishops are sometimes called;
'Pope,' which is the same as 'Papa'; 'Doctor of Divinity,' the Christian
equivalent of the Jewish 'Rabbi,' are all dangerous titles. But it is
not the employment of a name which Jesus denounces, it is the spirit of
vanity which animated the Pharisees, and the servile spirit which the
employment of titles is apt to engender. Paul and Peter spoke of
themselves as spiritual fathers. Jesus teaches that positions in the
societies of his followers, such as should afterward be formed, were not
to be regarded as dignities, but rather as services; that no man should
seek them for the honor they might confer, but for the field of
usefulness they might afford; and that no man should lead off a sect,
there being but one leader; and that the whole body of believers are
brethren, of whom God is the Father."

The writer last quoted very properly disparages aspirations, stimulated
by vanity and self-righteous assumption, to the use of the title
"Reverend" as applied to men.

7. Seven or Eight Woes?--Some of the early Mss. of the Gospels omit
verse 14 from Matt. 23. Such omission reduces the number of specific
utterances beginning "Woe unto you" from eight to seven. There is no
question as to the appearance in the original of the passages in Mark
12:40 and Luke 20:47, which are one in meaning with Matt. 23:14.

8. The Temple Treasure.--In connection with the incident of the widow's
mites, Edersheim (vol. ii, pp. 387-8) writes: "Some might come with
appearance of self-righteousness, some even with ostentation, some as
cheerfully performing a happy duty. 'Many that were rich cast in
much'--yes, very much, for such was the tendency that a law had to be
enacted forbidding the gift to the Temple of more than a certain
proportion of one's possessions. And the amount of such contributions
may be inferred by recalling the circumstance, that at the time of
Pompey and Crassus, the Temple treasury, after having lavishly defrayed
every possible expenditure, contained in money nearly half a million,
and precious vessels to the value of nearly two millions sterling." See
also Josephus, Antiquities xiv, 4:4; 7:1, 2.

9. Zacharias the Martyr.--In referring to the martyrs of ante-meridian
time the Lord is recorded as having used the expression "from the blood
of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye
slew between the temple and the altar" (Matt. 23:35). The Old Testament
as at present compiled, contains no mention of a martyr named Zacharias
son of Barachias, but does chronicle the martyrdom of Zechariah son of
Jehoiada (2 Chron. 24:20-22). "Zechariah" and "Zacharias" are equivalent
names. It is the opinion of most Bible scholars that the Zacharias
referred to in Matthew's record is Zechariah son of Jehoiada. In the
Jewish compilation of Old Testament scriptures, the murder of Zechariah
appears as the last recorded martyrdom; and the Lord's reference to the
righteous men who had been slain, from Abel to Zechariah or Zacharias,
may have been a sweeping inclusion of all the martyrs down to that time,
from first to last. However, we have a record of Zechariah son of
Berechiah (Zech. 1:1, 7), and this Berechiah was the son of Iddo. Then
again, Zechariah son of Iddo is mentioned (Ezra 5:1); but, as is
elsewhere found in the older scriptures, the grandson is called the son.
The Old Testament does not number this Zechariah among the martyrs, but
traditional accounts (Whitby's citation of the Targum) say that he was
killed "in the day of propitiation." That the Lord referred to a late
and probably the latest of the recorded martyrdoms is probable; and it
is equally evident that the case was well known among the Jews. It is
likely that a fuller account appeared in scriptures current among the
Jews at the time of Christ but since lost. See Note 4, page 119.

10. Destruction of the Temple.--"For thirty or more years after the
death of Christ, the Jews continued the work of adding to and
embellishing the temple buildings. The elaborate design conceived and
projected by Herod had been practically completed; the Temple was
well-nigh finished, and, as soon afterward appeared, was ready for
destruction. Its fate had been definitely foretold by the Savior
Himself. Commenting on a remark by one of the disciples concerning the
great stones and the splendid buildings on the Temple hill, Jesus had
said, 'Seest thou these great buildings? There shall not be left one
stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.' (Mark 13:1, 2; see
also Matt. 24:1, 2; Luke 21:5, 6.) This dire prediction soon found its
literal fulfilment. In the great conflict with the Roman legions under
Titus, many of the Jews had taken refuge within the Temple courts,
seemingly hoping that there the Lord would again fight the battles of
His people and give them victory. But the protecting presence of Jehovah
had long since departed therefrom and Israel was left a prey to the foe.
Though Titus would have spared the Temple, his legionaries, maddened by
the lust of conflict, started the conflagration and everything that
could be burned was burned. The slaughter of the Jews was appalling;
thousands of men, women and children were ruthlessly butchered within
the walls, and the temple courts were literally flooded with human
blood. This event occurred in the year 70 A.D.; and according to
Josephus, in the same month and on the same day of the month as that on
which the once glorious Temple of Solomon had fallen a prey to the
flames kindled by the king of Babylon. (Josephus, Wars of the Jews, vi,
4:5, 8. For a detailed and graphic account of the destruction of the
Temple see chapters 4 and 5 in their entirety.) Of the Temple furniture
the golden candlestick and the table of shewbread from the Holy Place
were carried by Titus to Rome as trophies of war; and representations of
these sacred pieces are to be seen on the arch erected to the name of
the victorious general. Since the destruction of the splendid Temple of
Herod no other structure of the kind, no Temple, no House of the Lord as
the terms are used distinctively, has been reared on the eastern
hemisphere."--_The House of the Lord_, pp. 61, 62.

Josephus ascribes the destruction of the Temple of Herod to the anger of
God, and states that the devouring flames "took their rise from the Jews
themselves, and were occasioned by them." The soldier who applied the
torch to the Holy House, which had remained intact while fire raged in
the courts, is regarded by the historian as an instrument of divine
vengeance. We read (Wars, vi, 4:5): "One of the soldiers, without
staying for any orders, and without any concern or dread upon him at so
great an undertaking, and being hurried on by a certain divine fury,
snatched somewhat out of the materials that were on fire, and being
lifted up by another soldier, he set fire to a golden window, through
which there was a passage to the rooms that were round the Holy House,
on the north side of it. As the flames went upward the Jews made a great
clamor, such as so mighty an affliction required."