Matteo 23:20 Commento

Then spake Jesus to the multitude,.... To the common people that were about him in the temple; the high priests and elders, Scribes, Pharisees, and Sadducees, having left him, being all nonplussed and silenced by him: and now, lest on the one hand, the people seeing the ignorance and errors of these men detected by Christ, should be tempted to conclude there was nothing in religion, and to neglect the word and worship of God, on account of the concern these men had in it; and on the other hand, because of their great authority and influence, being in Moses's chair, lest the people should be led into bad principles and practices by them, he directs them in what they should observe them, and in what not: that they were not altogether to be rejected, nor in everything to be attended to; and warns them against their ostentation, pride, hypocrisy, covetousness, and cruelty; and, at the same time, removes an objection against himself, proving that he was no enemy to Moses, and the law, rightly explained and practised: and to his disciples; not only the twelve, but to all that believed in him, and were followers of him.

And whoso shall swear by the temple,.... As we have before seen they used to do, and as appears from what the poet says (w): Ecce negas, jurasque mihi per templa tonantis Non credo: jura, verpe, per Anchialum. In which he intimates, that if the Jew swore by the temple, he would not believe him; as well he might not, since such an oath was accounted nothing; but bids him swear by Anchialus, that is, by "Chi Eloah", or , "Chi Alon", or "Elion, the living God", or , "Chi Haolam, he that lives for ever" (x); and suggests, that he should then believe him. Now our Lord, though he did not allow of such swearing, yet justly argues, that he that sweareth by the temple, not only "sweareth by it", which could not be a witness of what was swore; but he must be interpreted to swear by the inhabitant of it, and by him that dwelleth in it; that is, God, for whom it was built, to whom it was dedicated; where he was worshipped, and where he vouchsafed to reside; taking up his dwelling between the cherubim upon the mercy seat, in the most holy place; from whence he communed with men, and gave tokens of his presence; and who only could be the proper witness of the truth, or falsehood, of what was swore; and therefore an oath, by the temple, ought to be looked upon as if made by God himself, and so to be sacred and binding. (w) Martial. Epigr. l. 11. Ep. 60. (x) Vid. Selden. Prolegomena ad lib. de Successionibus.

Now an oath is in confirmation of somewhat that has been spoken. The oath here then may signify testimony of Scripture which we produce in confirmation of that word which we speak. So that Divine Scripture is the temple of God, the gold is the meaning which it contains. As the gold which is outside the Temple is not sanctified, so all thoughts which are without divine Scripture, however admirable they may seem, are not hallowed. We ought not therefore to bring any speculations of our own for the confirmation of doctrine, unless such as we can show are hallowed by being contained in divine Scripture. The altar is the human heart, which is the chief thing in man. The offerings and gifts that are hid upon the altar, are every thing which are done in the heart, as to pray, to sing, to do alms, to fast. Every offering of a man then is sanctified by his heart, by which the offering is made. There cannot therefore be a more honourable offering than the heart of man, out of which the offering proceeds. If then one's conscience does not smite him, he has confidence towards God, not by reason of his gifts, but so to speak because he has rightly ordered the altar of his heart. Thirdly, we may say that over the temple, that is over every Scripture, and over the altar, that is over every heart, there is a certain meaning which is called the Heaven, the throne of God Himself, in which we shall be able to see the things that are revealed face to face, when that which is perfect is come.

One of the Pharisaical traditions regarded oath taking. Some were swearing by the temple, others by the gold of the temple; some by the altar, others by the gifts of the altar. The Pharisees were teaching that one who swore by the gold of the altar or by the gift of the altar was obligated, whereas one who swore by the temple or by the altar was not under obligation. Our Savior spoke against these traditions. He wished to call them back from human traditions to divine revelation. Those who hand on such traditions are blind and foolish. They do not see that what is placed in the temple is not sanctified through itself but through the Lord of the temple. That which is placed on the altar is judged already as a gift of God, which is why it is placed on the altar. It seems foolish to argue that one who swears in one way is bound and one who swears in another way is not bound. This assumes that what is sanctified is above the one who sanctifies. It seems foolish to argue that one who swears by heaven is less vulnerable than one who swears by God himself. Jesus showed them that it was equally as absurd to swear by heaven as to swear by the temple or by the altar. It is irrational to assume that one avoids punishment because he is not swearing by God but by the throne of God. Thus he spoke to the Jews prohibiting them to follow the Pharisaic tradition. Moreover, he clearly rejected the whole business of swearing at all, as if it were a superior way.

He calls them blind for not wanting to teach what was right, but instead valuing what was of lesser importance, and giving second place to that which was worthy of honor. For they valued the gold in the temple, the images of the Cherubim and the golden urn, more highly than they did the temple itself. Therefore they taught the people that it was of no consequence to swear by the temple, and instead they taught them to swear by the gold which is in the temple. This gold, however, was precious precisely because it was in the temple. And the Pharisees said that the gifts placed on the altar were more valuable than the altar itself. So the Pharisees even taught that if someone swore by the golden vessel, or the ox, or the sheep brought for sacrifice, and then broke his oath, he was sentenced to pay an equal amount. The Pharisees put a higher value on the gift upon the altar because of the profit they derived from sacrifices. But if some one swore by the temple and then broke his oath, he was absolved [and owed nothing, the Pharisees would say], as it was not possible to build [and pay] anything equal to the temple. And so the oath by the temple was considered to be of lesser consequence because of the Pharisees' love of money. Under the Old Covenant, Christ does not permit the gift to be greater than the altar, but for us it is just the opposite: the altar is sanctified by the gifts, for the loaves are changed by divine grace into the very Body of the Lord Himself. Therefore the altar is sanctified by them.

(non occ.) And lest their infatuation should go so far, that they should affirm that the gold was more holy than the temple, and the gift than the altar, He argues on another ground, that in the oath which is sworn by the temple and the altar is contained the oath by the gold or by the gift.

He therefore that swears by the altar, swears by it and by all things that are upon it. Here he sets forth another reason. The temple contains the gold, and not conversely; similarly, the altar contains the gift, and not conversely. Hence he who swears by the temple swears by the gold that is in the temple; and he who swears by the altar, i.e., by the altar, swears by what is on it.

DENUNCIATION OF THE SCRIBES AND PHARISEES--LAMENTATION OVER JERUSALEM, AND FAREWELL TO THE TEMPLE. ( = Mar 12:38-40; Luk 20:45-47). (Mat. 23:1-39) Then spake Jesus to the multitude--to the multitudes, "and to his disciples."

Whose therefore shall swear by the altar, &c.--See on Mat 5:33-37.