The MacArthur Study Bible, NKJV

by John MacArthur

  20:29 out of Jericho. See note on v. 30.

  20:30 two blind men. Mark 10:46 and Luke 18:35 mention only one blind man, and Luke says this encounter took place as Christ was approaching Jericho rather than when He was leaving (v. 29). The difficulties are fairly simple to reconcile: there were two blind men, but Bartimaeus (Mark 10:46) was the spokesman of the two and was, therefore, the sole focus of both Luke’s and Mark’s accounts (see note on 8:28). It is also a fact that there were two Jerichos—one the mound of the ancient city (the ruins of which may still be seen today), and the other, the inhabited city of Jericho, close by. Jesus may have been going “out of” old Jericho and entering new Jericho. Or it may also be that the events are telescoped for us, so that Christ first encountered the blind men on His way into the city, but the healing took place as He was departing. Son of David. See note on 1:1.

  Matthew 21

  21:1 Bethphage. A small town near Bethany, on the SE slope of the Mt. of Olives. It is mentioned nowhere else in Scripture except in connection with Christ’s triumphal entry (Mark 11:1; Luke 19:29).

  21:3 if anyone says anything to you. Mark recorded that this was in fact exactly what happened (Mark 11:5, 6). Having just arrived in Bethphage (v. 1), Jesus would have had no opportunity to make arrangements for the use of these animals. Yet He knew precisely the location of the animals and the disposition of the owners. Such detailed foreknowledge reveals His divine omniscience.

  21:5 A colt, the foal of a donkey. An exact quotation from Zech. 9:9 (cf. Is. 62:11). The precise fulfillment of this messianic prophecy would not have escaped the Jewish multitudes, who responded with titles and accolades fit only for the Messiah (see note on v. 9).

  21:7 the donkey and the colt. Matthew is the only gospel writer who mentions the mare donkey. But all mention the young age of the donkey (John 12:14), or state that no man had ever sat on him (Mark 11:2; Luke 19:30). The mare was brought along, possibly to induce the colt to cooperate. set Him on them. I.e., on the clothes. Christ rode on the young colt (Mark 11:7).

  21:8 spread their clothes on the road. Spreading one’s garments on the street was an ancient act of homage reserved for high royalty (cf. 2 Kin. 9:13), suggesting that they recognized His claim to be King of the Jews.

  21:9 Hosanna. This transliterates the Heb. expression which is translated “Save now” in Ps. 118:25. Blessed is He. This is an exact quotation from v. 26 of the same psalm. This, along with the messianic title “Son of David,” make it clear that the crowd was acknowledging Christ’s messianic claim (see note on 1:1). The date of this entry was Sunday, 9 Nisan, A.D. 30, exactly 483 years after the decree of Artaxerxes mentioned in Dan. 9:24–26 (see note there).

  21:12 drove out. This was the second time Jesus had cleansed the temple. John 2:14–16 describes a similar incident at the beginning of Christ’s public ministry. There are distinct differences in the two incidents. In the first cleansing, temple officials confronted Christ immediately afterward (see note on v. 23; cf. John 2:18); none of the accounts of this second cleansing mention any such confrontation. Instead, the synoptics all describe how Jesus addressed all present (v. 13) and even made the incident an occasion for public teaching (Mark 11:17; Luke 19:46, 47). those who bought and sold. He regarded both merchants and customers guilty of desecrating the temple. Items being bought and sold included “doves” and other animals for sacrifice (cf. John 2:14). money changers. Currency-exchange agents, present in droves, were needed because Roman coins and other forms of currency were deemed unacceptable for temple offerings. Evidently, both merchants and money changers were charging such excessive rates that the temple marketplace took on the atmosphere of a thieves’ den (v. 13). This kind of commerce took place in the court of the Gentiles, a large area covering several acres on the temple mount.

  21:13 It is written. Jesus conflates two OT prophecies, Is. 56:7 (“My house shall be called a house of prayer for all nations”) and Jer. 7:11 (“Has this house, which is called by My name, become a den of thieves in your eyes?”).

  21:15 children. Lit. “boys.” The crowd in Jerusalem for the Passover would have included a large number of 12-year-olds, who were there to celebrate their first Passover, just as Jesus Himself had done.

  21:16 Yes. Have you never read. Jesus’ reply to the “indignant” chief priests and scribes amounted to an inescapable assertion of His deity. He quoted from Ps. 8:2, which speaks of “praise” offered to God. By employing that verse in defense of the worship God had ordained “out of the mouth of babes” on His behalf, He was claiming the right to receive worship as God.

  21:19 Immediately. This is a relative term; the tree may have died at once, but Mark 11:14, 20 (see notes there) suggested that the withering was not visible until the following day. Jesus’ cursing of the tree was a purposeful divine object lesson, not an impetuous act of frustration. The fig tree is often employed in Scripture as a symbol of Israel (Hos. 9:10; Joel 1:7)—and the barren fig tree often symbolizes divine judgment on Israel because of her spiritual fruitlessness (see note on 3:8) despite an abundance of spiritual advantages (Jer. 8:13; Joel 1:12). Jesus’ act therefore illustrates God’s judgment against earthly Israel for shameful fruitlessness, exemplified in the rejection of their Messiah. One of Christ’s parables taught a similar lesson (Luke 13:6–9).

  21:21 if you have faith and do not doubt. This presupposes that the thing requested is actually God’s will (see note on 17:20)—for only God-given faith is so doubt-free (cf. Mark 9:24). it will be done. A miracle on such a cosmic scale was precisely what the scribes and Pharisees wanted Christ to do, but He always declined (see note on 12:38). Here, He was speaking figuratively about the immeasurable power of God, unleashed in the lives of those with true faith.

  21:23 these things. I.e., both His public teaching and miracles. They may have also had in mind His act of cleansing the temple on the day before (see note on v. 12). who gave You this authority? They were forced to acknowledge that He had some source of indisputable authority. His miracles were too obvious and too numerous to be fraudulent. Even His teaching was with such force and clarity that it was obvious to all that there was authority in His words (see note on 7:29).

  21:25 The baptism of John—where was it from? Jesus caught the Jewish leaders in their own trap. They had no doubt hoped that He would answer by asserting that His authority came directly from God (as He had many times before—cf. John 5:19–23; 10:18). They then accused Him of blasphemy and used the charge as an excuse to kill Him—as they had also attempted to do before (John 5:18; 10:31–33). Here, however, He asked a question that placed them in an impossible dilemma, because John was widely revered by the people. They could not affirm John’s ministry without condemning themselves. And if they denied John’s legitimacy, they feared the response of the people (v. 26). In effect, Jesus exposed their own lack of any authority to examine Him. See note on Luke 20:5.

  21:31 Which of the two did the will of his father? Jesus forced them to testify against themselves. The point of the parable was that doing is more important than saying (cf. 7:21–27; James 1:22). They had to acknowledge this, yet in doing so they condemned themselves. The idea that repentant tax collectors and harlots would enter the kingdom before outwardly religious hypocrites was a recurring theme in His ministry (see note on 5:20), and this infuriated the Jewish leaders.

  21:32 the way of righteousness. I.e., the repentance and faith that results in the imputation of God’s righteousness (see note on Rom. 3:21). tax collectors and harlots. See notes on 5:46; 9:9; Mark 2:15. The pariahs of Jewish society, most publicly despised by the chief priests and elders, had found salvation while the self-righteous leaders had not. Cf. Rom. 10:3.

  21:33 a vineyard…a winepress. See Is. 5:2. Jesus was clearly alluding to this OT passage, which would have been familiar to the Jewish leaders. The “vineyard” is a common symbol for the Jewish nation in Scripture. Here the landowner, representing God, developed the vineyard with great care, then leased it to vinedressers, rep
resenting the Jewish leaders.

  21:34 his servants. I.e., the OT prophets.

  21:35 beat one, killed one, and stoned another. Matthew often blends and simplifies details (see notes on v. 19; 8:28; 20:30). From Mark’s account we learn that in Jesus’ telling of this story, 3 different servants came individually. The tenants “beat” the first one, “stoned” the second, and “killed” the third (Mark 12:2–5). This corresponds to the Jewish rulers’ treatment of many of the OT prophets (1 Kin. 22:24; 2 Chr. 24:20, 21; 36:15, 16; Neh. 9:26; Jer. 2:30).

  21:37 my son. This person represents the Lord Jesus Christ, whom they killed (vv. 38, 39) and thereby incurred divine judgement (v. 41).

  21:41 lease his vineyard to other vinedressers. Again the Jewish leaders pronounced their own judgment (see note on v. 31). Their verdict against the evil vinedressers was also Christ’s judgment against them (v. 43). The kingdom and all the spiritual advantages given to Israel would now be given to “other vinedressers,” symbolizing the church (v. 43), which consists primarily of Gentiles (cf. Rom. 11:11).

  21:42 The stone…rejected. This refers to His crucifixion; and the restoration of “the chief cornerstone” anticipates His resurrection. the chief cornerstone. To the superficial eye, this quotation from Ps. 118:22, 23 is irrelevant to the parable that precedes it. But it is taken from a messianic psalm. Jesus cited it to suggest that the Son who was killed and thrown out of the vineyard was also “the chief cornerstone” in God’s redemptive plan.

  21:43 a nation bearing the fruits of it. The church. See note on v. 41. Peter spoke of the church as “a holy nation” (1 Pet. 2:9).

  21:44 this stone. Christ is “a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense” to unbelievers (Is. 8:14; 1 Pet. 2:9). And the prophet Daniel pictured Him as a great stone “cut out of the mountain without hands,” which falls on the kingdoms of the world and crushes them (Dan. 2:44, 45). Whether a ceramic vessel “falls on” a rock, or the rock “falls” on the vessel, the result is the same. The saying suggests that both enmity and apathy are wrong responses to Christ, and those guilty of either are in danger of judgment.

  21:45 they perceived that He was speaking of them. By evoking so much familiar messianic imagery (vv. 42–44), Christ made His meaning inescapable to the chief priests and Pharisees.

  Matthew 22

  22:2 like a certain king who arranged a marriage. Jesus told a similar, but different, parable in Luke 14:16–23. Here, the banquet was a wedding feast for the king’s own son, making the apathy (v. 5) and rejection (v. 6) of those invited much more of a personal slight against the king. Also, here they actually mistreated and killed the king’s messengers—an unthinkable affront to the king’s goodness.

  22:4 Again, he sent out other servants. This illustrates God’s patience and forbearance with those who deliberately spurn Him. He continues to extend the invitation even after His goodness has been ignored or rebuffed.

  22:7 he was furious. His vast patience finally exhausted, He judges them. burned up their city. The judgment Jesus described anticipated the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. Even the massive stone temple was destroyed by fire and reduced to rubble in that conflagration. See notes on 23:36; 24:2; Luke 19:43.

  22:9 as many as you find, invite to the wedding. This illustrates the free offer of the gospel, which is extended to all indiscriminately (cf. Rev. 22:17).

  22:11 a wedding garment. All without exception were invited to the banquet, so this man is not to be viewed as a common party-crasher. In fact, all the guests were rounded up hastily from “the highways” and therefore none could be expected to come with proper attire. That means the wedding garments were supplied by the king himself. So this man’s lack of a proper garment indicates he had purposely rejected the king’s own gracious provision. His affront to the king was actually a greater insult than those who refused to come at all, because he committed his impertinence in the very presence of the king. The imagery seems to represent those who identify with the kingdom externally, profess to be Christians, belong to the church in a visible sense—yet spurn the garment of righteousness Christ offers (cf. Is. 61:10) by seeking to establish a righteousness of their own (cf. Rom. 10:3; Phil. 3:8, 9). Ashamed to admit their own spiritual poverty (see note on 5:3), they refuse the better garment the King graciously offers—and thus they are guilty of a horrible sin against His goodness.

  22:12 And he was speechless. I.e., he had no excuse.

  22:13 outer darkness. This would describe the darkness farthest from the light, i.e., outer darkness. weeping and gnashing of teeth. This speaks of inconsolable grief and unremitting torment. Jesus commonly used the phrases in this verse to describe hell (cf. 13:42, 50; 24:51).

  22:14 many are called, but few are chosen. The call spoken of here is sometimes referred to as the “general call” (or the “external” call)—a summons to repentance and faith that is inherent in the gospel message. This call extends to all who hear the gospel. “Many” hear it; “few” respond (see the many-few comparison in 7:13, 14). Those who respond are the “chosen,” the elect. In the Pauline writings, the word “call” usually refers to God’s irresistible calling extended to the elect alone (Rom. 8:30)—known as the “effectual call” (or the “internal” call). The effectual call is the supernatural drawing of God which Jesus speaks of in John 6:44. Here a general call is in view, and this call extends to all who hear the gospel—this call is the great “whosoever will” of the gospel (cf. Rev. 22:17). Here, then, is the proper balance between human responsibility and divine sovereignty: the “called” who reject the invitation do so willingly, and therefore their exclusion from the kingdom is perfectly just. The “chosen” enter the kingdom only because of the grace of God in choosing and drawing them.

  22:16 Herodians. A party of the Jews who supported the Roman-backed Herodian dynasty. The Herodians were not a religious party, like the Pharisees, but a political party, probably consisting largely of Sadducees (including the rulers of the temple). By contrast, the Pharisees hated Roman rule and the Herodian influence. The fact that these groups would conspire together to entrap Jesus reveals how seriously both groups viewed Him as a threat. Herod himself wanted Jesus dead (Luke 13:31), and the Pharisees were already plotting to kill Him as well (John 11:53). So they joined efforts to seek their common goal.

  22:17 Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not? At issue was the poll tax, an annual fee of one denarius (see note on v. 19) per person. Such “taxes” were part of the heavy taxation Rome assessed. Since these funds were used to finance the occupying armies, all Roman taxes were hated by the people. But the poll tax was the most hated of all because it suggested that Rome owned even the people, while they viewed themselves and their nation as possessions of God. It was therefore significant that they questioned Christ about the poll tax in particular. If He answered no to their question, the Herodians would charge Him with treason against Rome. If He said yes, the Pharisees would accuse Him of disloyalty to the Jewish nation, and He would lose the support of the multitudes.

  22:19 denarius. See note on Mark 12:16. A silver coin, the value of a day’s wage for a Roman soldier. The coins were minted under the emperor’s authority since only he could issue gold or silver coins. The “denarius” of Jesus’ day was minted by Tiberius. One side bore an image of his face; the other featured an engraving of him sitting on his throne in priestly robes. The Jews considered such images idolatry, forbidden by the second commandment (Ex. 20:4), which made this tax and these coins doubly offensive.

  Matt. 22:19

  Christ’s Trials, Crucifixion, and Resurrection

  22:21 Caesar’s…God’s. Caesar’s image is stamped on the coin; God’s image is stamped on the person (Gen 1:26, 27). The Christian must “render” obedience to Caesar in Caesar’s realm (Rom. 13:1–7; 1 Pet. 2:13–17), but “the things that are God’s” are things that do not belong to Caesar and should be given only to God. Christ thus acknowledged Caesar’s right to assess and collect taxes, and He made it th
e duty of Christians to pay them. But He did not suggest (as some suppose) that Caesar had sole or ultimate authority in the social or political realms. Ultimately, all things are God’s (Rom. 11:36; 2 Cor. 5:18; Rev. 4:11)—including the realm in which Caesar or any other earthly ruler exercises authority.

  22:23 no resurrection. See note on 3:7.

  22:24 his brother shall marry his wife. This refers to the law of levirate marriage, found in Deut. 25:5–10 (see note there). This was a provision to ensure that family lines were kept intact and widows were cared for.

  22:30 like angels of God in heaven. The Sadducees did not believe in angels (see note on 3:7)—so here Jesus was exposing another of their false beliefs. Angels are deathless creatures who do not propagate and therefore have no need for marriage. “In the resurrection,” the saints will have those same characteristics.

  22:32 not the God of the dead. Jesus’ argument (taken from the Pentateuch, because the Sadducees recognized only Moses’ authority—see note on 3:7) was based on the emphatic present tense “I AM” of Ex. 3:6. This subtle but effective argument utterly silenced the Sadducees (v. 34). See note on Mark 12:26.

  22:35 a lawyer. A scribe whose specialty was interpreting the law. See notes on 2:4; Luke 10:25.

  22:36 See note on Mark 12:28.

  22:37 heart…soul…mind. Mark 12:30 adds “strength.” The quote is from Deut. 6:5, part of the shema, (Heb. for “hear”—Deut. 6:4). That verse says “heart…soul…strength.” Some LXX manuscripts added “mind.” The use of the various terms is not meant to delineate distinct human faculties, but to underscore the completeness of the kind of love that is called for.

  22:39 love your neighbor as yourself. This is a quotation from Lev. 19:18. Contrary to some contemporary interpretations, it is not a mandate for self-love. Rather, it contains in different words the very same idea as the Golden Rule (see note on 7:12). It prompts believers to measure their love for others by what they wish for themselves.