The objectives: (1) to stress that the Pharisees confronted Jesus in an attempt to discredit him, but Jesus commonly tried to teach the Pharisees; (2) to stress that religious commitment to God can be transformed into opposition to God's purposes.
It is important to note that Jesus spoke Matthew 23 during the last week of his life. The Teacher spent much of his ministry appealing to the Pharisees in terms meaningful to their perspective. As Jesus' death approached, nothing changed in the Pharisees' perspective.
It is important to note Jesus gave his Matthew 23 statement during the last week of his life [after the triumphal entry into Jerusalem]. He made this statement after his ministry's efforts failed to alter Pharisaic perspective.
Usually it was the Pharisees who tried to confront Jesus either by direct or indirect remarks. For example, they criticized Jesus to his disciples for eating with tax collectors and sinners (Matthew 9:11). They called into question Jesus' power source for casting out demons (Matthew 9:34). They criticized Jesus' disciples for a declared Sabbath violation (Matthew 12:2). They criticized Jesus' disciples for violating accepted Jewish tradition (Matthew 15:1,2). They requested a sign to test Jesus (Matthew 16:1). They asked him what they considered an impossible question to test him (Matthew 19:3). They tried to trap him in his speech (Matthew 22:15;34-36).
Typically, the Pharisee's efforts were those of confrontation. They sought to discredit Jesus, to make his teachings meaningless, and to dominate him. The objective of their confrontation was control.
Jesus frequently appealed to the highest authority the Pharisees respected and revered--scripture. Pharisees profoundly respected scripture. It was God's voice to the ages. No matter how Jewish society changed, scripture addressed the situation. Scripture was God's authority. It answered any question. Every person belonging to God must respond to scripture's message.
Jesus' response to the Pharisees differed from their confrontation efforts toward him. He frequently appealed to the authority they respected. He challenged them on the basis of scripture to rethink their conclusions. In Matthew He rarely asked them to reconsider their conclusions because of his identity. He frequently appealed to scripture in challenging them to rethink their conclusions.
Therefore, frequently, Jesus' response to their criticisms appealed to scripture. To understand his association with tax collectors and sinners, they needed to understand Hosea 6:6. When they accused Jesus' disciples of a Sabbath violation, he referred them to David's action in 1 Samuel 21:1-6 and to Hosea 6:6. When they demanded a sign, he referred them to Jonah and to the queen who visited Solomon. When they accused his disciples of violating Jewish tradition, he referred them to Exodus 20:12; 21:17; and Isaiah 29:13.
Note Jesus' frequent use of scripture when the Pharisees criticized him or his disciples. As you read a confrontational situation initiated by the Pharisees, look for Jesus' use of scripture in his response.
This does not imply everything was cordial and congenial! It merely notes a cycle revealed in Matthew. The cycle is one of confrontation and teaching. The Pharisees confronted. Jesus responded by teaching--utilizing the authority they respected and appreciated.
Obviously some of the confrontation occasions were incidents of deep frustration. While the Pharisees represented an enormous spiritual potential [even Jesus acknowledged they knew the scriptures--Matthew 23:2,3], it frustrated Jesus to see their potential for good abused and neglected. Note the cycle.
Did the Pharisees appreciate Jesus' efforts to teach them? Absolutely not! They, not Jesus, were the teachers! They, not Jesus, understood scripture's correct meaning! The one needing understanding and change was Jesus, not them! People who must be right, who are certain they are correct, whose religious survival depends on "being right," are irritated by the suggestion they are mistaken, or need to reconsider their position, or need to learn. Matthew 12:14 states, "But the Pharisees went out and conspired against Him, as to how they might destroy Him."
Unless our hearts and minds are guided by God's purity, unless we understand the limits of our knowledge and understanding, few of us like correction. In our arrogance, we humans have an exaggerated sense of the significance of our understandings. We prefer to be teachers, not students. Others need to learn from us. We are "correct," others are either unknowing or dishonest.
Jesus spent his ministry challenging the Pharisees to reflect on their conclusions, to rethink their positions on scripture, to come to new insights and understandings. Yet, they would not. They increased their resentment of him, his actions, and his teachings. Their resentment grew to this conviction: they were serving God's purposes by destroying Jesus! During the last week of Jesus' earthly life, Matthew 26:3-5 says this: "Then the chief priests and the elders of the people were gathered together in the court of the high priest, named Caiaphas; and they plotted together to seize Jesus by stealth and kill Him. But they were saying, 'Not during the festival, otherwise a riot might occur among the people.'"
In spite of his numerous efforts, Jesus did not alter the common perspective of most Pharisees. The result of his efforts to teach the Pharisees only caused their resentment of him to grow.
"The chief priests and elders" was a Jewish way of noting the leadership of the Jewish nation. It included prominent Pharisees. In Jesus' use of hypocrites, this group represented the core of hypocrisy. Note the words Matthew used: "plotted," "seize," "stealth," and "kill." They reflect a calculating, covert intent to destroy. The only way they could "defuse" the "crisis" created by Jesus' presence, actions, and teaching was to destroy him. Consider the irony: God's people thought they could champion God's cause by destroying God's son!
When people devoted to scripture are unwilling to allow scripture to teach them, they can and do justify any of their actions. It becomes inconceivable that "our conclusions" do anything but advance "God's will and purposes." The ultimate hypocrisy is to justify our convictions as God's declarations when our convictions oppose God's nature.
In that irony is the core of the Pharisaic hypocrisy. As trained as they were in scripture, they concluded the appropriate way to preserve God's values was to murder Jesus. They so misunderstood God, God's word, and God's purposes that they misrepresented who God was and what God was about. To them, it was consistent with their understanding of God to destroy someone they could not control. Thus in a determination to "defend God's interest" they in good conscience could destroy God's son--never realizing he was God's son! The hypocrisy: they were convinced they represented God while their minds, emotions, motives, and actions opposed God.
We should carefully note the fact that those who were the religious authority for the first century Jewish people used their knowledge to oppose God's purposes. Their conviction that they were right was so strong, so absolute that they did not even recognize God's own son! "Doing what was expedient and right for the situation" led them to defy God's Own character and nature.
Thought Questions:
You were asked to note that Jesus' Matthew 23 statement came during the last week of his earthly life.
They typically reacted with criticism and confrontation.
Evil was the source of Jesus' power--whether misrepresenting God, demonic influences, or Satan himself.
The Pharisees recognized scripture as God's authority in every situation and age. To them, nothing was more authoritative than a "thus says the Lord."
Jesus frequently responded to their criticisms by calling their attention to something recorded by scripture. The answer to "why" will be expressions of individual observations and insights. At the core of those responses should be the understanding that Jesus attempted to teach the Pharisees by using an authority they respected.
He often used Hosea 6:6. In today's lesson he also used 1 Samuel 21:1-6; Jonah 1,2; 1 Kings 10:1-13 [also 2 Chronicles 9:1-12]; Exodus 20:12, 21:17; and Isaiah 29:13.
The cycle of critical confrontation and teaching. The Pharisees frequently criticized and confronted. Jesus frequently responded by teaching.
The Pharisees did not appreciate Jesus' efforts to teach them. They regarded themselves to be the qualified teachers and Jesus to be the unqualified one in need of learning.
They conspired to destroy Jesus. Jesus' view of Sabbath breaking and their view of Sabbath breaking could not coexist.
The words are "plotted", "seize", "stealth", and "kill."
God's people thought they could champion God's cause by killing God's son.
Israel was God's nation. Jesus' teachings and influence would destroy God's nation. It was in the best interest of the preservation of God's nation to destroy one man, Jesus.
Interaction question:
When they interpret God's will in ways that violate God's nature, they become God's enemy. Christians must never turn away from pursuing a better understanding of God's nature. If they do, they will misrepresent God.
Link to Student Guide
Lesson 2