Matthew 27: 27 – 66
Houston, we have a problem
27 Then the soldiers of the governor took Jesus into the Praetorium and gathered the whole garrison around Him. 28 And they stripped Him and put a scarlet robe on Him. 29 When they had twisted a crown of thorns, they put it on His head, and a reed in His right hand. And they bowed the knee before Him and mocked Him, saying, “Hail, King of the Jews!” 30 Then they spat on Him, and took the reed and struck Him on the head. 31 And when they had mocked Him, they took the robe off Him, put His own clothes on Him, and led Him away to be crucified. 32 Now as they came out, they found a man of Cyrene, Simon by name. Him they compelled to bear His cross. 33 And when they had come to a place called Golgotha, that is to say, Place of a Skull, 34 they gave Him sour wine mingled with gall to drink. But when He had tasted it, He would not drink. 35 Then they crucified Him, and divided His garments, casting lots, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet: “They divided My garments among them, And for My clothing they cast lots.” 36 Sitting down, they kept watch over Him there. 37 And they put up over His head the accusation written against Him: THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS. 38 Then two robbers were crucified with Him, one on the right and another on the left. 39 And those who passed by blasphemed Him, wagging their heads 40 and saying, “You who destroy the temple and build it in three days, save Yourself! If You are the Son of God, come down from the cross.” 41 Likewise the chief priests also, mocking with the scribes and elders, said, 42 “He saved others; Himself He cannot save. If He is the King of Israel, let Him now come down from the cross, and we will believe Him. 43 He trusted in God; let Him deliver Him now if He will have Him; for He said, ‘I am the Son of God.’?” 44 Even the robbers who were crucified with Him reviled Him with the same thing. 45 Now from the sixth hour until the ninth hour there was darkness over all the land. 46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?” that is, “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?” 47 Some of those who stood there, when they heard that, said, “This Man is calling for Elijah!” 48 Immediately one of them ran and took a sponge, filled it with sour wine and put it on a reed, and offered it to Him to drink. 49 The rest said, “Let Him alone; let us see if Elijah will come to save Him.” 50 And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice and yielded up His spirit. 51 Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth quaked, and the rocks were split, 52 and the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; 53 and coming out of the graves after His resurrection, they went into the holy city and appeared to many. 54 So when the centurion and those with him, who were guarding Jesus, saw the earthquake and the things that had happened, they feared greatly, saying, “Truly this was the Son of God!” 55 And many women who followed Jesus from Galilee, ministering to Him, were there looking on from afar, 56 among whom were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of Zebedee’s sons. 57 Now when evening had come, there came a rich man from Arimathea, named Joseph, who himself had also become a disciple of Jesus. 58 This man went to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus. Then Pilate commanded the body to be given to him. 59 When Joseph had taken the body, he wrapped it in a clean linen cloth, 60 and laid it in his new tomb which he had hewn out of the rock; and he rolled a large stone against the door of the tomb and departed. 61 And Mary Magdalene was there, and the other Mary, sitting opposite the tomb. 62 On the next day, which followed the Day of Preparation, the chief priests and Pharisees gathered together to Pilate, 63 saying, “Sir, we remember, while He was still alive, how that deceiver said, ‘After three days I will rise.’ 64 Therefore command that the tomb be made secure until the third day, lest His disciples come by night and steal Him away, and say to the people, ‘He has risen from the dead.’ So, the last deception will be worse than the first.” 65 Pilate said to them, “You have a guard; go your way, make it as secure as you know how.” 66 So they went and made the tomb secure, sealing the stone and setting the guard.
Some of the most famous words ever spoken help us relive a important event in US history. So, I want to also let you know that I have a problem. Actually, I have a few problems and they deal with this chapter. Maybe you have seen the same things as I have and have wondered for some time as to who’s who and what’s what.
Let me mention the more noticeable ones. We read in the bible that there are two resurrections. We read in chapter 20 in the book of Revelation, “4 And I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was committed to them. Then I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Jesus and for the word of God, who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received his mark on their foreheads or on their hands. And they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. 5 But the rest of the dead did not live again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection. Over such the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ and shall reign with Him a thousand years.
So, in today’s study we are going to learn that a whole bunch of people have been resurrected right after our Lord Jesus arose again from the dead. What is happening here? If the first resurrection is going to occur in the future what is happening here?
Another concern that jumps right out at me is the guards at the tomb. In every movie I have seen they are Roman guards, but I am really concerned if they were Roman guards why would they go to the Jewish priests after our Lord Jesus rose from the dead? The Romans were vicious. They would just barge in and arrest you. If you fell asleep on guard duty, no Jewish leadership is going to protect you from being taken and executed.
Now, have I peeked your interest? Let’s jump into today’s study and allow our Precious Holy Spirit to teach us.
In sober words Matthew now portrays what Jesus had to endure from the moment when He was handed over to His executioners to be mocked as ‘the King of the Jews’ to the time when He breathes His last and His executioners testify that He is ‘the Son of God’.
Having been sentenced and committed to crucifixion Jesus now became fair game. It was not often that the soldiers had a royal claimant that they could do what they liked with. So, they gathered their comrades-at-arms together, tore off his clothes, put on Him a scarlet robe and a crown of thorns, put a reed in His right hand and then mocked Him as ‘a king’. Then when they had had enough of their folly, they took back the robe, dressed Him in His own clothing, (which they would shortly be taking off Him when He needed it no longer), and took the reed which had been His ‘scepter’ and beat Him over the head with it. These were the world’s last actions towards the King of Kings, before they sent Him back to God. But it is possibly to be significant that they allowed Him to retain His crown. In God’s providence it was left there as God’s last reminder to those who would believe.
27 Then the soldiers of the governor took Jesus into the Praetorium and gathered the whole garrison around Him.
Please notice Matthew’s emphasis on ‘the soldiers of the governor’. He is determined that Pilate should not to be exonerated. He alone was finally responsible for what happened, for the final authority was in his hands. From the outside, where the judgment seat had been set up, Jesus was taken into the courtyard of the Praetorium, the governor’s residence. And there the soldiers rallied their comrades in order that they might have a good time at Jesus’ expense. This mockery of prisoners was a regular practice in the ancient world and would be inevitably indulged in by anyone who had charge of Him once He was seen to be beyond the important.
So, the world has ‘gathered together’ against Jesus. In 26.3 it was the Chief Priests and Elders who had ‘gathered together’ in order to plot His death, in 26.57 they had again ‘gathered together’ in order to ensure that He was sentenced, in 27.17 the crowds had ‘gathered together’ in order to condemn Jesus, and now the soldiers of Rome ‘gathered together’ in order to mock Him. We can compare Acts 4.26 citing Psalm 2.2 where the rulers ‘gathered together’ against the Lord’s Anointed. They will shortly ‘gather together’ to try to counter the dreadful news of His resurrection.
28 And they stripped Him and put a scarlet robe on Him. 29 When they had twisted a crown of thorns, they put it on His head, and a reed in His right hand. And they bowed the knee before Him and mocked Him, saying, “Hail, King of the Jews!”
Then began the mockery and they wanted Him dressed for the part. So, they took off His own bloodstained robe, and put on Him a scarlet robe which was intended to signify royalty. This may have been a soldier’s red robe, or it may have been an officer’s robe seen as more suitable for the part, or even one that they kept by for such occasions. Then they plaited a crown of thorns. The long thorns may well have been intended to indicate the rays of the sun, another depiction of royalty, or even of divinity. Such depictions were often seen on the coins of rulers and looked very similar to crowns of thorns. The soldiers would have a mixed-up understanding of what He had been accused of and sentenced for. The reed in His right hand was intended to indicate a scepter.
The crown made from thorn bushes would not have been put on gently. No doubt there was a general laugh when someone pressed it down hard, and we can be sure that every now and again someone sought none too gently to ensure that it stayed put. For these were men out for a good time at Jesus’ expense, and they had a cruel sense of humor.
To Christians, however, the thorns would be a reminder of God’s reward to man for his sin against Him (Genesis 3.18) and would thus be seen as an indication that Jesus was bearing on Himself the sins of the world. And they would see behind the mockery His genuine and glorious Kingship. And they would wonder, as the angels wondered, how it had been possible for their Savior and Redeemer to suffer in this way, and how men could be so cruel.
But central to it all was the desire to mock His ‘claim’ to Kingship, and the horseplay no doubt began early and continued right through to the end as different ones thrust themselves forward trying to outdo what the previous ones had done. It is summarized here in the terms ‘they knelt down before him, and mocked him, saying, “Hail, King of the Jews!” They knew after all that that was what lay behind His sentence. It was the accusation that the Chief Priests and Elders had felt was most suitable to present before Pilate, and that Pilate had brought before Jesus. It will also be paraded on His cross in order deliberately to anger the Jewish leaders. For this was how Gentiles saw the Jewish Messiah.
We need to stop and think about the contrast with the treatment by the Jewish guards in chapter 26.68. They had mocked Him as a prophet and Messianic pretender, these Roman soldiers mocked Him as a failed claimant to Kingship.
30 Then they spat on Him and took the reed and struck Him on the head.
Spitting was, as it still is, a sign of contempt, and they held nothing back, and then one of them, no doubt to the delight of his comrades seized the reed from His hand and smote Him on the head with it. After which they all felt that they wanted to have a turn.
31 And when they had mocked Him, they took the robe off Him, put His own clothes on Him, and led Him away to be crucified.
Then at last they had had their fill of mocking Him, and duty called. So, they took the robe off Him, and clothed Him in His own robe, and led Him away to crucify Him. The devilish mockery was over. The crown may well have been left in place. The soldiers were aware, from Pilate’s orders about the placard on the cross, that he was bent on angering the Jews.
Normally prisoners would be led to crucifixion naked, but the clothing was probably a concession to the Jewish hatred of nakedness. It would avoid offending the crowd. It will be noted in all this that no mention is made of how Jesus behaved under this treatment. What Matthew is concerned to bring out here is how the ‘world’ treated Him, intending by it a complete contrast with His later genuine coronation
Matthew saw the thought of the crucifixion of his Master as hard to bear comes out especially in these few short verses. There is no emphasis on the actual crucifixion. He passes quickly over the actual act of crucifying Jesus with the words ‘having crucified Him, they --’, and this becomes rather a step towards why He is there. It is because He is ‘the King of the Jews’. This last is both the accusation and His glory. This is what the whole of the Gospel has been leading up to, the suffering and humiliation of the King of the Jews. By this means he prevents the actual act of crucifixion from being central and ensures that the focus is rather on the stages of the humiliation through which He must go, and it then results in an emphasis on why He suffers. He is suffering because He Is the Expected King.
32 Now as they came out, they found a man of Cyrene, Simon by name. Him they compelled to bear His cross.
Jesus, surrounded by His four guards, would already have been trailed through the streets of Jerusalem in a kind of circular tour as a reminder to the people of what happened to rebels, and now He has come out through the gates, and presumably collapses in weakness. Thus a passing civilian is impressed for service in order to carry His crosspiece for Him. The probability is that Simon looked burly enough for the task not to be seen as too difficult for him.
However, the indication behind the words is that those who would bear Jesus’ cross must do so ‘outside Jerusalem’. Later it will be emphasized that Jesus died outside Jerusalem as a ‘bearer of reproach’ because Israel thought that they were thereby expelling Him (Hebrews 13.12-13), while the type of execution was putting Him under a curse in the eyes of all Jews (Deuteronomy 21.23; Galatians 3.13). But the point being made here is that the new Israel must be fashioned ‘outside Jerusalem’ with Him. The fact that Simon is named makes clear that he was (or became) a believer and is therefore here representative of all believers. For Jerusalem itself, and all that it means, is rejected and devoted to destruction.
The Roman soldiers took advantage of their right to impress anyone who was not a Roman citizen in order that they might make them carry their burdens for one mile. All they had to do was tap the person on the shoulder with a spear. As it was usual for the one who was to be crucified to carry his own cross-piece, the suggestion must be that Jesus was collapsing with exhaustion and suffering, while the soldiers would certainly not deign to carry it themselves. Thus, the impressment.
33 And when they had come to a place called Golgotha, that is to say, Place of a Skull,
Humanly speaking it was a coincidence that the place where Jesus died was called ‘the place of a Skull’ (Kraniou topos). It had a name given because a skull had once been discovered there. The repetition of ‘was called’ suggests that this is not just an interpretation but that it was called (or came to be called) this in both Aramaic as ‘Gulgolta’ (where it simply means ‘Skull’) and in Greek as ‘Kraniou topos’ (‘place of a skull’). It certainly would be called this ever afterwards, even if not before this time. A skull represented death and corruption.
We find in our bibles whose skull it was. Can you guess? Turn to the book of 1 Samuel chapter 17. Look at what the verse says after David killed Goliath, “54 And David took the head of the Philistine and brought it to Jerusalem, but he put his armor in his tent.”
David took Goliath’s head and buried it on its highest hill as a memorial to the God of Israel. Guess which hill is the highest? – Calvary.
34 they gave Him sour wine mingled with gall to drink. But when He had tasted it, He would not drink.
The soldiers then gave him ‘wine mingled with gall’. If meant literally this might mean wine which had been mixed with wormwood mingled with gall (a bitter secretion from the liver), or something equally bitter which could be described as gall, as a kind of crude joke. This would tie in with Psalm 69.21, ‘they gave me also gall for my food, and in my thirst, they gave me vinegar to drink’.
35 Then they crucified Him, and divided His garments, casting lots, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet: “They divided My garments among them, And for My clothing they cast lots.” 36 Sitting down, they kept watch over Him there.
Matthew quickly passes over the actual crucifixion is passed over. In many cases it indicated the beginning of hours and days of suffering, as the stretched but distorted body of the victim fought to survive the paroxysms that constantly seized it, first as the victim relaxed his pain torn arms, and then as he relaxed his pain torn legs. But in this case it involved more. It indicated the bearing of a curse for the sins of mankind. ‘He was made sin for us, He Who knew no sin --’ (2 Corinthians 5.21). ‘He bore our sins in His own body on the tree’ (1 Peter 2.24). His person was being offered as a guilt offering for sin (Isaiah 53.10). That was why He was here.
The idea of ‘They parted His clothes among them, casting lots, and they sat and watched Him there’ here is to bring out the callousness of the soldiers, and of the world, as they gazed on what they had done to Him, and the resultant increase in His suffering because of the shame of it all. Here, having stripped Him, they would share out His robe, His inner garment, His belt, His shoes and His turban. By this they would render Him naked, and then, regardless of His shame, they would in front of Him divide up his clothing, that is, all that He possessed, casting lots for who received what, and gambling for the robe which could not be divided. (The sharing out of the clothing of the executed man was a perquisite of the soldiers). After this they then sat there and continually but casually gazed at Him in His nakedness and shame. To a sensitive Jew public nakedness was a disgrace, and Jesus would never have been gazed on by others in a such a state. It must have added to the horror which was possessing His soul.
This would also recall the words of Psalm 22.18, ‘they look and stare on me, they part my clothing among them, and for my vesture they cast lots’. This includes the ‘watching Him’ in His shame, the ‘parting of His clothes’ among them, and the ‘casting of lots’. Matthew is constantly indicating by inferences that all that is happening to Jesus is making full all that the Scriptures have spoken of.
‘And they sat and watched him there.’ Note how it is personalized and therefore goes beyond just guard duty (they were guarding all three. but only Jesus is mentioned). All the attention as far as Matthew is concerned is on Him. They are gazing at His shame, they are shrugging their shoulders at His suffering, and all the while they are intending to ensure that no one tries to rescue Him. (They had not, of course, reckoned with God). They and the world were determined that Jesus would suffer to the end.
37 And they put up over His head the accusation written against Him: THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS.
Then we come to the climax of the passage, ‘they set up over His head His accusation written, THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS’. This would have taken place as soon as He was crucified but is described here for emphasis. It sums up the whole. To Pilate this was an act of mockery at the Jews, and had become a way of getting back at the Jewish rulers, a piece of revengeful irony; to the Chief Priests it was the charge that they had brought against Him which they now had thrown back in their unhappy faces; to the world it was a joke and a warning as they looked on that bloodied and naked figure hanging twisted on the cross; but to Matthew’s readers it was a reminder of Who He is. Here is the One Who has come to save His people from their sins (1.21). Here is the Messiah Who was expected and Who has come on behalf of the whole world (2.2). Here is the One of Whom God had said, ‘This is My beloved Son’ (3.17). Here is the One Who as King has brought hope to mankind (21.5; 22.42-45). Here is the One Who has commissioned His Apostles to oversee His people as they sit on their ‘sub-thrones’ (19.28). Here is the One Who will one day judge the world from His glorious throne (25.31). Here is the One to Whom all authority in Heaven and on earth is to be given (28.18). And it is because He is all these things that He has to suffer in these ways. He Who could not even bear His own cross will bear the whole weight of the sins of His people (1.21), He Who would not drink drugged wine will drink to the full the cup that the Father has given Him (26.42), He Who was stripped of His clothing and was rendered naked will provide men with righteousness for their clothing and cover their nakedness (22.11), He Who was watched by others will stand guard over His own (28.20).
The fact that the superscription was put over His head probably indicates that Jesus died on a traditional cross, rather than a T shaped one. The fact that He had been carrying a crosspiece indicates that it was not just a stake on which He hung. (The main stakes would have been implanted there long before the prisoners got there). The placing of an inscription indicating the victim’s crime was a recognized element in Roman justice. It acted as a warning to others. It may well have been carried before Him as He was paraded through the city, or even have been hung around His neck. (The full inscription was probably ‘this is Jesus the Nazorean, the King of the Jews’).
Having been mocked by the soldiers prior to His crucifixion Jesus must now face the mockery of His own nation. It begins with ‘those who pass by’, it continues with the Chief Priests and Scribes and Elders, and it ends with the two insurrectionists between whom He hangs. All are involved, apart from the faithful few who in their agony gaze on their beloved Master in His shame.
38 Then two robbers were crucified with Him, one on the right and another on the left.
The whole picture has been centralized on Jesus, but now we learn of the two men who were crucified with Him, one on the right and the other on the left. He is truly ‘numbered among the transgressors’ (Isaiah 53.12). Earth could not distinguish between them, only Heaven could tell the difference. The figure in the center appeared to be equally a helpless target for their scorn. It is noteworthy and ironic that these two men have received the place that the sons of Zebedee had sought, the place of suffering on the right hand and the left of the King of the Jews (20.21). God’s ways are not our ways. (It is a reminder that those who would enjoy such a privilege must share His cross as well).
39 And those who passed by blasphemed Him, wagging their heads 40 and saying, “You who destroy the temple and build it in three days, save Yourself! If You are the Son of God, come down from the cross.”
The first who mocked at Him and railed at Him were the passers-by. But the words they spoke reveal that these passers-by were aware of what had taken place at His trial. These were not general pilgrims to the Feast, for they mocked Him with one of the charges that had been laid against Him there (26.61). Here was a show being put on for the people by the supporters of the Sanhedrin. This was the true blasphemy.
So He will destroy the Temple and then rebuild it in three days, will He? Then let Him now rebuild His own destroyed life. If He truly is the Son of God let Him come down from the cross. Let boasting prove itself by actions. Even here Satan was tempting Him to accomplish His Messianic task in a forbidden way, by extraordinary signs and wonders. But these men did not believe that it would happen, and they wagged their head in the greatness of their wisdom. Little did they think that they were ‘filling to the full’ the Psalm where it was written, ‘All those who see me laugh me to scorn. They shoot out the lip, they wag their heads saying, “Commit yourself to the Lord, let Him deliver Him” ’ (Psalm 22.7-8).
Please note the significance of the words ‘If you are the Son of God.’ We are taken right back to the language of 4.3, 6. Matthew probably intends us to see Satan’s influence again at work here.
41 Likewise the chief priests also, mocking with the scribes and elders, said, 42 “He saved others; Himself He cannot save. If He is the King of Israel, let Him now come down from the cross, and we will believe Him.
Furthermore, the Chief Priests and the Elders were back again, and this time with them were the Pharisaic Scribes. Here was the whole Sanhedrin with its supporters. And they too mocked Him to one another and cried, “He saved others, Himself He cannot save.” His boasts about what He could do had been great. This may refer to His ‘saving’ of others from their diseases and afflictions (9.12), and from evil spirits (12.28), by His healing power. Or it may refer to the fact that He had claimed to be able to forgive sins (9.2). Or indeed both, for it may refer to His whole Messianic ministry. But with all His boasts and claims, and especially the one that He had made at His trial (26.64), in their view He could now do nothing for Himself.
Why, He had had the nerve to claim to be the King of Israel (the Jewish equivalent of the ‘King of the Jews’), the Messiah, and the title was even placarded above His head (they were taking out on Him their spite for what Pilate had written). Well, if He was, the solution was easy. Let Him demonstrate His Messianic powers, let Him descend from the cross, and then they would believe on Him. (All kinds of wonderful things had been said about the Messiah in popular literature and tradition. And while crucifixion had not been in mind, deliverance from death certainly had).
There is. of course, an irony at work here. Every Christian reading these words longs to shout out, ‘No, you are wrong. He could have come down from the cross. He can only deliver us because He did not deliver Himself’. That was where the Jewish leaders had gone wrong in not understanding the Scriptures which had spoken of this (e.g. Isaiah 53). For without Jesus’ death there could be no healing from their afflictions and diseases (8.17), no new covenant in His blood for the forgiveness of sins (26.28), no redemption in the place of many (20.28), no salvation of His people from their sins (1.21), and the Scriptures would not then be fulfilled.
43 He trusted in God; let Him deliver Him now if He will have Him; for He said, ‘I am the Son of God.’?”
Then they also raised the question of His claim to be the Son of God. As such surely, He trusted in God? Well, if He did, let God reveal it by delivering Him now. If He is really His Son, and if God truly has any desire for Him, let Him demonstrate the fact by delivering Him. There is again an echo here of Psalm 22.8, ‘Commit yourself to the Lord, let Him deliver Him, let Him deliver Him seeing He delights in Him’ (The Septuagint has, ‘let Him deliver Him if He wants Him’.
It should be noted that we would expect members of the Sanhedrin to be present at the cross, not only because they would want to gloat, but also because they could hardly allow such a prominent figure, whom they had caused to be crucified, to hang in public without being themselves there to defend their position. And we would also expect the kinds of comments made here, for they were still sore at what Jesus had said to them in the High Priests’ palace, and at the inscription that had been placed above Jesus’ head. These comments are therefore exactly what we would expect.
44 Even the robbers who were crucified with Him reviled Him with the same thing.
The third of the trio which mocked Jesus were the insurrectionists who had been crucified along with Him. These were men who had rebelled against the Roman rule and had probably committed murder in doing so. But in the eyes of many they were true patriots. Whatever evils they might have done they had given their lives in the fight against the Romans. But in Jesus’ eyes they had done it in the wrong way, in the same way as He in their eyes had gone about it in the wrong way. No wonder then that when they listened to what the onlookers were saying about Jesus, and about His claim to be the Messiah, and about Him being the Son of God, they felt bitter. They had probably had such hopes when they had first heard of Him, as had many of the people, especially in the face of His wonders, but in their view, He had turned out to be merely a failed expectation. Thus they too cast in His face all that others were saying. They were dying because of their hopes of a Messiah. If He was the Messiah, let Him save Himself, and them at the same time.
However, as we know from Luke’s Gospel, one of them would continue to watch Jesus, and what he saw would make him finally come to Him in repentance. But that is not the message that Matthew is seeking to get across. He is seeking to portray the fact that every element of Jewish life was against Jesus while He hung on His cross, for they all thought that they had won and had proved once and for all that He was a deceiver.
By now Jesus had been on the cross about three hours, and around noon an extraordinary event took place. For over the whole land there came gross darkness. As it was the time of the full moon it could not have been an eclipse.
Amos 8.9 said, ‘and it will come about in that day, says the Lord YHWH, that I will cause the sun to go down at noon, and I will darken the earth in clear day’. That was to be a day when judgment came on Israel. Their feasts would become feasts of mourning (Amos 8.10), and there would be a famine of hearing the word of the Lord (Amos 8.11), while it would also be a time of ‘mourning like that for an only son’ (Amos 8.10). In other words, Israel as such would be rejected.
45 Now from the sixth hour until the ninth hour there was darkness over all the land. 46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?” that is, “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?”
In Scripture darkness represents several things. It is regularly the picture of judgment, the wrath of God and the withdrawal of God’s face. It is a symbol of the shadow of death. And yet it is also paradoxically the place where God is found, and it is out of darkness that He regularly establishes His covenant, including the covenant with Abraham (Genesis 15), the covenant of the Passover (Exodus 10-12), and the covenant of Sinai (Deuteronomy 4.11). But above all darkness at noonday is a symbol of God’s rejection of Israel (Amos 8.9). It would, however, issue in a new dawn (Amos 9.11-15).
The cry of Jesus is beyond understanding. As it has been well expressed, ‘God forsaken of God, who can understand it?’ But it certainly indicated a forsakenness of soul that we, who are far too used to being separate from God, cannot hope to comprehend. And the wonder of it is that it was for us. ‘He was forsaken, that we might never be forsaken’.
47 Some of those who stood there, when they heard that, said, “This Man is calling for Elijah!” 48 Immediately one of them ran and took a sponge, filled it with sour wine and put it on a reed, and offered it to Him to drink. 49 The rest said, “Let Him alone; let us see if Elijah will come to save Him.”
The cry that rent the sky was not literally understood by many. His physical condition might well have slurred His words. They may well only dimly have caught on to what He had said, and the words ‘Eli, Eli’ thus struck them as being a call to Elijah.
The result of the cry is that someone responded speedily to the cry, which was possibly the first indication for some time that Jesus was still conscious and mentally active and running to collect a sponge he filled it with sour wine, put it on a reed and held it up to Jesus’ mouth. This was a further ‘filling full’ of Scripture, ‘they gave me sour wine to drink’ (Psalm 69.21). It was an act of compassion, and Jesus partook of it. This may well have been an indication to Matthew that the Kingly Rule of Heaven was seen to have triumphed (26.29). But the callous crowd was more interested in seeing whether Elijah would come than in the welfare of the victim, and said, “Let be, let us see whether Elijah is coming to save him.”
50 And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice and yielded up His spirit.
The loud cry was ‘it is finished’, followed by the quieter, “Father, into your hands I commend my Spirit.” (John 19.30; Luke 23.46). The loud cry was remembered by all, contributing to the eeriness of the occasion. It is possible that ‘it is finished’ represented the final words of Psalm 22 ‘He has done it’. Certainly, it was a cry of triumph that God’s purposes had been accomplished. Its importance here is that it indicates that Jesus did not die defeated.
From beginning to end Jesus was in control, even to the timing of His death. A work had to be done, a sacrifice offered, a battle fought, a price paid, but once it was done He did not linger. He committed His ‘spirit’ into the hands of His Father. Compare Ecclesiastes 12.7, ‘and the dust return to the earth as it was and the spirit return to God Who gave it’. Jesus saw the spirit as the essential surviving part of man. We should note that there may be an indication in His quick death of just how much He had suffered beforehand.
51 Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth quaked, and the rocks were split,
His death was followed by amazing activity. The first activity was in the Temple where the veil of the Temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The tearing of the veil was almost certainly intended by the evangelists to indicate that the way into the presence of God was being laid open (compare Hebrews 10.19-20). Alternately it might have been intended to signify that God had deserted the Holy of Holies (compare Ezekiel 11.22-23), or have indicated the equivalent of His having ‘rent His garment’, or have been the earnest (sample and guarantee) of the Temple’s later destruction, an indication that its relevance had now ceased because God was no longer there.
Not only was the veil torn in two but ‘the earth quaked, and the rocks were torn asunder’. This might indicate that the rending’s were intended to indicate strong reaction on the part of God, similar to the rending of garments, or that God was acting to reveal His anger at what had been man’s response to His Son. This would tie in with 2 Samuel 22.7-8 (also Psalm 18.6-7), ‘in my distress I called on YHWH, I called to my God. From His Temple He heard my voice, and my cry came to His ears. Then the earth reeled and rocked, the foundations of the Heaven trembled and quaked because He was angry.’
52 and the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; 53 and coming out of the graves after His resurrection, they went into the holy city and appeared to many.
The third ‘rending’ was in respect of the tearing open of the tombs of God’s chosen ones who had been buried in Jerusalem, preparatory to their resurrection. Nothing could have appalled people more, and no Jew would want to approach these tombs lest they themselves be defiled during the Feast. They might well have seen in it the anger of God, or alternately that it was symbolic of the last day.
The description ‘saints’ (holy ones), a regular Old Testament description of God’s believing people, would indicate those who were pleasing to God. It was the ‘saints of the Most High’ who formed a part of the corporate son of man in Daniel 7. It is right therefore that they should join with the Son of Man in His triumph.
While the rending open of the tombs might have occurred at the same time as the earthquake and the rending of the veil, we are specifically informed that this raising of the holy ones did not, for it occurred ‘after His resurrection’ and was a resurrection of the body. What Jesus had accomplished caused many to come forth. Many rose to bear testimony to Him, and all connected with their own holy city.
Until Jesus was raised, resurrection for others was not possible, thus it could not have happened prior to His resurrection. These then are the first fruits of His resurrection. The language may have in mind Ezekiel 37.12-13, ‘behold I will open your graves, and raise you from your graves, O my people --- and you will know that I am the Lord, when I open your graves and raise you from your graves, O my people’, stressing that it is an activity intended to convince men and women that He Is YHWH, and it is noteworthy that in Ezekiel this leads on to the establishing of the Kingly Rule of the coming shepherd king David (Ezekiel 37.24). The description reminds us also of John 5.28-29, ‘the hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear His voice and will come forth ---.’ Thus, we are probably intended to see this as a genuine and permanent resurrection rather than simply a display for witness purposes. We know nothing of what happened to these resurrected saints subsequently, unless Paul is referring to them in 1 Corinthians 15.20, 23. The assumption was probably that like Him they rose to the Father.
For the other evangelists it was the resurrection of Jesus Himself that took central place and must not be overshadowed. But Matthew may well have been one who was visited and had never forgotten it. And he would consider that such an event had special significance for Jews. He may well have seen it as indicating what was to happen to Jerusalem, for in Isaiah 26.19-20 the resurrection of bodies from the dust was to be followed by great tribulation for God’s people as God visited the world in wrath. Here then was a first fruit of that day, a resurrection that was an indication that God would soon visit Jerusalem in wrath.
Please notice the sequence of the resurrection and then the earthquake. People argue about the ‘Rapture’. I believe the Scripture teaches us when this will happen and will be a repeat of what just happened here.
1 Thessalonians chapter 4, “For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first.”:
Look with me at the book of Revelation chapter 11. The two witnesses are killed and are resurrected and ascend into heaven. This then is followed by a severe earthquake.
“1 Now after the three-and-a-half days the breath of life from God entered them, and they stood on their feet, and great fear fell on those who saw them. 12 And they heard a loud voice from heaven saying to them, “Come up here.” And they ascended to heaven in a cloud, and their enemies saw them. 13 In the same hour there was a great earthquake, and a tenth of the city fell. In the earthquake seven thousand people were killed, and the rest were afraid and gave glory to the God of heaven. 14 The second woe is past. Behold, the third woe is coming quickly.”
54 So when the centurion and those with him, who were guarding Jesus, saw the earthquake and the things that had happened, they feared greatly, saying, “Truly this was the Son of God!”
When the centurion and his colleagues saw the earthquake and the rending of the rocks, following the unnatural period of darkness, they were awe-stricken. They had never experienced anything like this before at a crucifixion, and it was made even more eerie by the fact that the victim had died so quickly as though He oversaw the situation. Here was proof indeed that this man was something unusual, ‘the Son of God’ just as the onlookers had been half suggesting. They would not think in terms of the Son of God as we do, but they clearly recognised divinity in Him, or at least close connections with divinity. (In their view the gods could have half human sons). Matthew makes clear that their words have got it right. This is the true Son of God.
Having come to this conclusion they were very much afraid. Perhaps they remembered back to how they had mocked Him, and they must certainly have thought that He would surely remember who had crucified Him. From their point of view the future was probably beginning to look very black indeed.
Matthew now brings out that God had made His own funeral arrangements for His Son, as He had revealed beforehand. As Isaiah had said, ‘They made His grave with the wicked, and with a rich man in His death’ (Isaiah 53.9). And while the faithful women disciples watched from afar (they would not have been under the same threat as the Apostles), waiting for an opportunity to pay their respects to Jesus’ body, ‘a rich man’ from Arimathea came to Pilate to ask for the body of Jesus. Normally the bodies of crucified criminals would be tossed onto the burning rubbish dump in the Valley of Hinnom outside Jerusalem (compare Isaiah 66.24), for they were seen as accursed, but Pilate had the last say in what happened to the bodies of men subjected to Rome’s jurisdiction, and he gave permission for the body of Jesus to be put at Joseph’s disposal. We learn in Luke 23.50 that Joseph was a respected councilor, a member of the Sanhedrin, one who had not consented to the verdict against Jesus, although whether he was present at the final morning trial we do not know. And Joseph laid Jesus’ body in his new family tomb which had not yet been used. The fact that it had not been used previously would be seen by many Christian Jews as important, for it demonstrated the unique holiness of the body of Jesus. For it was ‘holy things’ that must not be subjected to what was previously used. Compare the donkey’s unused colt on which Jesus entered Jerusalem (Luke 19.30), and the ‘new cart’ that bore the Ark of the Covenant of YHWH (2 Samuel 6.3). See also 1 Samuel 6.7.
55 And many women who followed Jesus from Galilee, ministering to Him, were there looking on from afar,
Among those who had been observers of the crucifixion were ‘many women’ from Galilee, who had been followers of Jesus and had ministered to His needs. We are given more details of these women in Luke 8.2-3. They watched proceedings from afar, thus complying with the thought in Psalm 38.11, ‘those who love me, and my friends, stand aloof from my plague, and my kinsmen stand afar off’
56 among whom were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of Zebedee’s sons.
From among the Apostles we only hear of John as being present at the crucifixion. He seemingly had connections with the High Priest’s family and knew that he was relatively safe, and the fact that he was there as a support for Jesus’ mother would take attention off him (John 18.15). The remainder were keeping out of the way. They knew that round the cross was very much where they would be looked for by anyone who was seeking to arrest them. And in fact we should recognize that had a party of brawny men who were known to be followers of Jesus appeared there it would unquestionably have raised alarm bells, if not more decisive action. They may well have been a threat. No one, however, would be concerned about the presence of the women.
57 Now when evening had come, there came a rich man from Arimathea, named Joseph, who himself had also become a disciple of Jesus.
‘When evening was come.’ This is probably simply indicating that it was becoming dark. In Jewish eyes it was necessary for the bodies of the three to be taken down from their crosses before nightfall and disposed of to prevent bringing a curse on the land (Deuteronomy 21.23 was applying to crucifixion). It was also necessary to do it before the Sabbath. This man knew this and sought to preempt the normal course of events.
The most obvious reason for describing Joseph specifically as ‘a rich man’ would be in order to connect him with the prophecy in Isaiah 53.9, ‘with the rich in His death’, although it may also have been as a contrast to the ‘rich young man’ who refused discipleship.
58 This man went to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus. Then Pilate commanded the body to be given to him.
The bodies of criminals, apart from those guilty of high treason, were the property of the state, but would usually be made available to any relatives who requested them. Otherwise the bodies would normally be left to hang on the cross as a warning or would be ‘thrown to the vultures.’ In Palestine, however, things would be different because the peculiarities of the Jews were catered for. In Jewish eyes it was necessary for the bodies of the three to be taken down from their crosses before nightfall and disposed of to prevent bringing a curse on the land (Deuteronomy 21.23 was applying to crucifixion). We are not told what happened to the bodies of the insurrectionists, but they may have been given to relatives, buried in a public plot or tossed onto the burning rubbish heaps outside Jerusalem. Jewish Law forbade convicted criminals being buried in a family tomb.
Here, however, it is rather a prestigious councilor who asks for the body. He would be known to Pilate, and probably respected by him. He would explain his purpose to him, and possibly points out that as a Galilean Jesus was far from home. Pilate was seemingly content with the idea and gave orders that the body be put at Joseph’s disposal.
59 When Joseph had taken the body, he wrapped it in a clean linen cloth, 60 and laid it in his new tomb which he had hewn out of the rock; and he rolled a large stone against the door of the tomb and departed.
Joseph (no doubt along with his servants) treated the body with all reverence. He wrapped it in a clean linen cloth and laid it in his own new tomb. Note again the stress on ‘clean’ and ‘new’. His body was being treated as ‘holy’ and as set apart to God. Then once this was done to his satisfaction Joseph had a great stone rolled across the entrance of the tomb and returned home. He had paid his final respects to the One he had seen as a Prophet. So, having died as One Who was ‘numbered with the transgressors’ Jesus’ holiness is now being brought out in his burial. All this would be done rapidly so as not unnecessarily to infringe on the Sabbath. It was a generous gesture on Joseph’s part, for the burial of a criminal in the tomb rendered it unusable by the family.
The great stone may have been a boulder, but it was more likely a shaped stone in circular form like a wheel, which could be rolled across the entrance, for it would seem that the entrance to the tomb was relatively large (Peter only had to stoop to look in, not go down on his knees - John 20.5). Such stones were common in the case of expensive tombs.
It should possibly be noted that official mourning was not allowed for an executed criminal which helps to explain why there is no indication of it.
61 And Mary Magdalene was there, and the other Mary, sitting opposite the tomb.
Meanwhile two of the women, probably delegated by the others, had followed the burial party, and were now sat down opposite the tomb. ‘The other Mary’ is probably the mother of James and Joses. Thus, the care and love of the women is watching over their dead Master from the cross to the tomb (verse 56, 61). Mary had brought Him into the world. Mary would care for His body as well as they could as they saw Him out of the world. It was all that they could do.
There is nothing that reveals the truth about people more than their interpretation of the anticipated action of others. That is why you ‘set a thief to catch a thief’. It is because they both think in the same way. And sadly, that is why these particular Pharisees who came to the Chief Priests, and then to Pilate, thought as they did.
The disciples were in fact locked away for fear of the Jews (no one would have invented such an idea), because they thought that those who had taken and crucified their Master would undoubtedly follow up their action by seeking to do the same to them. That is how they thought. It was what they would have done themselves in the circumstances because they were not astute politicians. They thus saw themselves as being a danger by the Jewish leaders.
But they had misinterpreted the aims and attitudes of their opponents. They simply judged by what they themselves would have done in the same situation because they had a higher opinion of themselves than they should have had, and did not see things from a position of long experience of such things. They had not realized that in fact to their opponents everything had hinged on the presence of Jesus. The disciples had thought that they too would be a danger. But no one else saw them like that (the leaders in Jerusalem may well not have known much about their ministry in Galilee). For their opponents were confident that with Jesus out of the way the bubble would burst. They had seen it all before, and they were not worried about the disciples.
Thus, the Apostles were in hiding when they need not have been, because no one was looking for them, and that was why everything was being left to the women. We can be sure therefore that they would not have had the remotest thought of stealing Jesus’ body to practice a deception. People who do that kind of thing seek to present a brave face to the world. They reveal a confidence that they hope will cover up their deceit. They do not hide away like disillusioned men. But the disciples were disillusioned men (just as their opponents had expected), and their concern was therefore for survival. To them there was no expectancy of a resurrection, and they were totally devastated by what had happened. All their hopes had gone. They were not men with great influence who could extend that influence by deception. They were men who had lost their way, and whose influence had collapsed with the death of Jesus. They would have seen no point in stealing the body.
Can anyone really suggest that men who had stolen a body as a deception, or had perpetrated a deception, would then have been willing to face persecution, imprisonment and even torture in order to maintain their deception. What would have been the point? At that stage becoming a Christian was not the ladder to wealth and success, it was the road to the cross, it was the way of ignominy and shame. It was the way to being despised and rejected by their fellows. Would men then choose that way based on a lie?
And by the time that Matthew wrote his Gospel Christianity was spreading rapidly and being successful. There was no need to resort to lies, especially as part of their success depended on the fact that they had brought a new level of morality into the world. It is quite incredible to think that Matthew and the early church could have brought us the Sermon on the Mount with its huge emphasis on truth and then have bolstered it with what they knew to be a lie.
But how do we know that the story about the guards being there was not an invention with the aim of demonstrating that the body was not tampered with? The answer lies in the details of the story. For it in fact proved nothing of the kind, because the guards are said to have been asleep (28.13). Now what kind of person practices a great deception to prove something and then immediately appends an explanation that could be invalidating the deception? When you practice a deception, you keep quiet about anything which might throw doubt on the deception. You do not immediately suggest possible holes in it. The only reason for mentioning this incident in this way is that everyone knew that the tomb had been guarded, and that therefore the Jews had given this as an explanation for their failure to prevent the body disappearing. It is further evidence that the body had unexpectedly disappeared.
These particular Pharisees on the other hand were convinced that deceit was precisely what the disciples would practice as a short-term expedient. (But even they would have acknowledged that a movement based on such a lie would not have lasted long). They genuinely saw Jesus as a deceiver, for how could He not be when He disagreed with them? And they therefore assumed that His disciples would be deceivers too. Having learned to paper over the truth about their own ideas, they assumed that others would do the same. For they were the later exponents of a position which had initially started out with such enthusiastic promise, but which had become bogged down by ritual and artifice, (even the later Rabbis drew attention to the fact that this was so), and they now feared that it was not gaining in popularity as it should. People were beginning to discover that there were holes in it. That was one reason why they had hated Jesus so much. He had kept on pointing out those holes. They thought in terms of cover up and deception, and then assumed it of others.
The situation has a certain humor to it. The Apostles were in hiding from a danger that was never going to materialize, and with no thought of trickery, and the Chief Priests and Pharisees were setting a guard against a possibility which was never going to happen and did it because they themselves were essentially tricksters. Such is what happens when men judge others by themselves.
62 On the next day, which followed the Day of Preparation, the chief priests and Pharisees gathered together to Pilate, 63 saying, “Sir, we remember, while He was still alive, how that deceiver said, ‘After three days I will rise.’
The unusual concurrence of the Chief Priests and the Pharisees suggests that the prime movers here were certain of the Pharisees. They had possibly gathered in their synagogue full of satisfaction at what they had ‘accomplished’ and had suddenly been faced up with a disturbing possibility, that those wretched disciples of Jesus would steal the body of Jesus and then pretend that He had risen. It revealed something about the state of their own minds that they took it seriously. Had they thought about it they must have known that such an action would not, of course, deceive most people but they were men with a guilty conscience (Jesus had that effect on people), and were clearly worried that something unusual might happen (compare Herod’s fear about the rising of John the Baptist). It is doubtful if they were worried that it might deceive a few fanatics among those unreliable Galileans. So they went to the Chief Priests who had been responsible for all the negotiations with Pilate, and put the matter to them, and managed to convince them of the danger. And then together they went to Pilate. It was such an absurd idea that we can only assume that they believed it because of the state of their consciences and because of their fear of the power of Jesus and of what He had said during His trial. It is quite likely that they had an uneasy feeling that something unusual might happen that they could not explain. And as they knew that Jesus could not possibly rise before the Last Day all that they could think was that it might involve the disciples.
Arriving at Pilate’s palace they spoke these memorable words “Sir, we remember that that deceiver said while he was yet alive, ‘After three days I rise again’.” Pilate must have been amazed. He would hardly have taken the idea seriously. To him people just did not rise again, especially when they had been crucified. He could probably hardly believe what he was hearing. This is, however, testimony to the fact that Jesus had in fact said these words, or something similar (all their actions had been based on distorted words of Jesus). Note their description of Jesus as ‘that deceiver’. This may have been a reaction to precisely what He had accused them of when He had accused them of being deceivers like the Devil (John 8.41-47). But it was also sowing in Pilate’s mind the idea of deceit, and of some grand deception. They wanted him to think that Jesus’ followers (cowering away behind locked doors) had no scruples and could get up to anything.
64 Therefore command that the tomb be made secure until the third day, lest His disciples come by night and steal Him away, and say to the people, ‘He has risen from the dead.’ So, the last deception will be worse than the first.”
So they requested that Pilate, who had overall responsibility for the body, should secure the tomb in which Jesus’ body was lying, guarding it for three days in case His disciples came to steal it away and then tried to pretend that He had risen. Once the three days was over they could then if necessary prove that such a thing had not happened by producing the body. Let him consider what the disciples would be able to do if they were able to steal the body. They would be able to claim, ‘He is risen from the dead’. And that would simply compound the ‘deceptive error’ that Jesus had been declaring, that He was the Messiah Who would arise from the dead.
The Chief Priests would have known that they had no right themselves to set their own guard over what was Roman property (the body of Jesus), at least, not without permission. It would have made Pilate look as though he was being incompetent. And the tomb itself was a privately owned one, belonging to a respectable councilor. They would not themselves therefore have wished to cause offence by putting on an unofficial guard.
65 Pilate said to them, “You have a guard; go your way, make it as secure as you know how.”
It is difficult to believe that Pilate would have taken them too seriously, even if he was still disturbed by his encounter with Jesus. He would certainly have been cynical about the idea of a crucified man rising from the dead. Such a thing had never happened before to his knowledge. And besides, once a man had been crucified even if he survived, he would be a hopeless cripple. Pilate would also indeed certainly be cynical about the idea of anyone rising from the dead. He would probably have seen the idea that someone would steal the body and make such a claim as so fantastic that it could not really be taken seriously. And if he did think about his encounter with Jesus at all and considered that it might just be possible that He might rise from the dead, he would probably have rather wanted to see what did happen, not have tried to prevent it. So, it is difficult to see how he could have taken the whole idea too seriously or have considered that anyone else would take it seriously. Remember, he had washed his hands from the whole affair earlier. Thus, we should almost certainly see Pilate’s words as being in the indicative as indicating that they should set their own guard. He would not want Rome to become a laughingstock. This would also explain why the guard which was set later reported back to the Chief Priests (28.11).
Many teachers see this as Pilate telling them to take a Roman guard for the purpose. Remember that Pilate is so angry at the Jews for setting him up that he posted the sign on the cross that Jesus Is the King of the Jews, then why would he now allow these people who he hated to take his soldiers and use them for their purposes? Others declare that the guards are later called ‘soldiers ‘so they must be Roman soldiers. But it must be quite probable that the Chief Priests loosely considered that some of their own guards could be ‘soldiers’. They would see it as prestigious to have their own ‘soldiers’.
What is more important is that the guard was set. But even without it no one could seriously suggest that the disciples had stolen the body and then gone out into the wider world and convinced every one of the resurrections, and even less established a movement that changed the world. Anyone who could believe that could believe anything.
66 So they went and made the tomb secure, sealing the stone and setting the guard.
The consequence was that the guard was set. And to make sure that there was no funny business a seal was placed on the stone in such a way that if it was moved it would be apparent to all. Thus, the tomb was made as sure as it could possibly be.
