Mateus 27
J.C. Ryle · Citado em PreceptAustin
Mateus 27
Ryle on remorse - This is a point which deserves special attention. It is a common saying, "that it is never too late to repent." The saying, no doubt, is true, if repentance be true; but unhappily late repentance is often not genuine. It is possible for a man to feel his sins, and be sorry for them--to be under strong convictions of guilt, and express deep remorse--to be pierced in conscience, and exhibit much distress of mind--and yet, for all this, not repent with his heart. Present danger, or the fear of death, may account for all his feelings, and the Holy Spirit may have done no work whatever in his soul. Let us beware of trusting to a late repentance. "Now is the accepted time. Today is the day of salvation." (2Co 6:2+) ONE penitent thief was saved in the hour of death, that no man might despair, but ONLY ONE, that no man might presume. Let us put off nothing that concerns our souls, and above all not put off repentance, under the vain idea that it is a thing in our own power. The words of Solomon on this subject are very fearful. "I will not answer when they cry for help. Even though they anxiously search for me, they will not find me." (Pr 1:28+) Remorse (regret, change mind) (3338) metamellomai from metá = denoting change of place or condition + mélomai, = be concerned) means feel remorse or regret (Mt 27:3), to be sorry afterwards or to think differently afterward (the sense in Heb 7:21). But mere sorrow avails nothing unless it leads to change in one's heart, mind and life (metanoia), the sorrow according to God (2 Cor. 7:9). This sorrow Peter had when he wept bitterly. It led Peter back to Christ. But Judas had only remorse that led to suicide. Zodhiates - To regret (Matt. 21:29, 32; 27:3; 2 Cor. 7:8; Heb. 7:21 quoted from Ps. 110:4). The aor. pass. metemelethēn has the meaning of changing one’s mind or purpose after having done something regrettable. Contrasted with metanoeo (3340), to repent, it expresses the mere desire that what is done may be undone, accompanied with regrets or even remorse, but with no effective change of heart. Metaméleia (which does not occur in the NT) is an ineffective repentance for which the forgiveness of sins is not promised (as it is for metanoia [3341], repentance, see Mark 1:4; Luke 3:3; Acts 2:38). Metamélomai, on the part of man, means little or nothing more than a selfish dread of the consequence of what one has done, whereas metanoeo means regret and forsaking the evil by a change of heart brought about by God’s Spirit. On the part of God in Heb. 7:21, metamélomai means His plan of salvation for man can have no improvement; He made no mistake (BORROW The complete word study dictionary : New Testament page 968) Metamellomai - 5v - Matt. 21:29; Matt. 21:32; Matt. 27:3; 2 Co. 7:8; Heb. 7:21 Advance Information - Robert Morgan Our faith in Christ isn’t based on wishful thinking, nor does it consist of blind leaps. Jesus provided “many infallible proofs,” including fulfilled Old Testament prophecy. Every phase of our Lord’s passion was predicted. Some examples: Betrayed by a friend (Ps. 41:9; 55:12–14). Sold for 30 pieces of silver, thrown on the floor of a temple and later given to a potter (Zech. 11:12–13). Accused by false witnesses (Ps. 109:2). Silent before accusers (Isa. 53:7). Mocked and Beaten (Isa. 50:6; 53:5). Pierced in hands and feet (Ps. 22:16). Crucified with thieves (Isa. 53:9, 12). Ridiculed (Ps. 22:7). Garments gambled away (Ps. 22:18). Agonized by thirst (Ps. 22:15). No bones broken (Ex. 12:46; Num. 9:12; Ps. 34:20). Pierced (Ps. 22:16; Zech. 12:10). Buried with the rich (Isa. 53:9). CONCLUSION: God told us before it happened, so that we might believe after it happened. Put your faith in Christ today, who loved you and gave Himself for you. QUESTION - Who was Judas Iscariot? ANSWER - Judas Iscariot is typically remembered for one thing: his betrayal of Jesus. He was one of the twelve disciples who lived with and followed Jesus for three years. He witnessed Jesus’ ministry, His teaching, and His many miracles. He was the treasurer for the group and used this trusted position to steal from their resources (John 12:6). Judas was a common name in that era, and there are several other Judases mentioned in the New Testament. One of the other disciples was named Judas (John 14:22), and so was one of Jesus’ own half-brothers (Mark 6:3). To differentiate, John 6:71 and John 13:26 refer to Christ’s betrayer as “Judas, son of Simon Iscariot.” Scholars have several ideas about the derivation of the surname. One is that Iscariot refers to Kerioth, a region or town in Judea. Another idea is that it refers to the Sicarii, a cadre of assassins among the Jewish rebels. The possible association with the Sicarii allows for interesting speculation about Judas’ motives for his betrayal, but the fact that he made a conscious choice to betray Jesus (Luke 22:48) remains the same. The surname Iscariot is useful, if for no other reason, in that it leaves no doubt about which Judas is being referred to. Here are some of the facts we glean from key verses about Judas and his betrayal: Money was important to Judas. As already mentioned, he was a thief, and, according to Matthew 26:13–15, the chief priests paid him “thirty silver coins” to betray the Lord. Jesus knew from the very beginning what Judas Iscariot would do. Jesus told His disciples, “Have I not chosen you, the Twelve? Yet one of you is a devil!” (John 6:70). And at the Last Supper, Jesus predicted His betrayal and identified the betrayer: “Jesus answered, ‘It is the one to whom I will give this piece of bread when I have dipped it in the dish.’ Then, dipping the piece of bread, he gave it to Judas Iscariot, son of Simon” (John 13:26). Jesus said that Judas Iscariot was not “clean”; i.e., he had not been born again and was not forgiven of his sins (John 13:10–11). In fact, Judas was empowered to do what he did by the devil himself: “As soon as Judas took the bread [that Jesus had given him], Satan entered into him” (John 13:27). The other disciples had no clue that Judas Iscariot harbored treacherous thoughts. When Jesus mentioned a betrayer in their midst, the other disciples worried that it was they who would prove disloyal (John 13:22). No one suspected Judas. He was a trusted member of the Twelve. Even when Jesus told Judas, “What you are about to do, do quickly,” (John 13:27), and Judas left the Last Supper, the others at the table simply thought Judas had been sent to buy more food or to give something to charity (verses 28–29). Judas Iscariot betrayed the Lord with a kiss, perfectly in keeping with his brazen duplicity (Luke 22:47–48). After committing his atrocious act, Judas “was seized with remorse and returned the thirty silver coins to the chief priests and the elders” (Matthew 27:3). But we learn that remorse does not equal repentance—rather than make amends or seek forgiveness, “he went away and hanged himself” (Matthew 27:5). Judas Iscariot fulfilled the prophecy of Psalm 41:9, “Even my close friend, someone I trusted, one who shared my bread, has turned against me” (cf. John 13:18). Yet Judas was fully responsible for his actions. Jesus said, “The Son of Man will go just as it is written about him. But woe to that man who betrays the Son of Man! It would be better for him if he had not been born” (Matthew 26:24). Matthew 27:6–8 reports that the chief priests took the “blood money” from Judas and bought a potter’s field as a place for burying foreigners (thus fulfilling the prophecy of Zechariah 11:12–13). Acts 1:18–19 continues the story of what happened after Judas’ death and gives some additional information. Luke reports, “With the reward he got for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out. Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.” The additional detail we learn from Luke is that, after Judas hanged himself, his dead body fell into the very field purchased with his ill-gotten gains. Given the fact of Judas’ close proximity to Jesus during three years of ministry, it is hard to imagine how he could follow through on such a dastardly betrayal. Judas’ story teaches us to guard against small, gradual failings that gain strength and power in our lives and that could open the door to more deadly influences. His story is also a great reminder that appearances can be deceiving. Jesus taught, “Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’” (Matthew 7:22–23). QUESTION - What is the significance of thirty pieces of silver? | GotQuestions.org ANSWER - In Hebrew culture, thirty pieces of silver was not a lot of money. In fact, it was the exact price paid to the master of a slave if and when his slave was gored by an ox (Exodus 21:32). The slave’s death was compensated by the thirty pieces of silver. There are two other places in the Bible that specifically mention the amount of thirty pieces of silver, and they are directly linked. The first passage is in Zechariah, which contains a prophecy that is later fulfilled in the book of Matthew. Leading up to the prophecy of the thirty pieces of silver is a description of a strange episode in Zechariah’s life. God had the prophet Zechariah play the part of a shepherd and care for a flock “doomed to slaughter” (Zechariah 11:4–14). God used this to illustrate a prophetic judgment against Israel for crucifying Christ, predicting the fall of Israel in AD 70 and the subsequent scattering of the nation. There are several elements in this passage that point to it as a prophecy about Jesus. First, Zechariah says he “got rid of the three shepherds” of the doomed flock (Zech 11:8). The “three shepherds” are probably a reference to the three religious offices during Jesus’ day that worked to condemn Jesus: the elders, the scribes, and the chief priests (Matthew 16:21). Second, Zechariah breaks his two shepherding staffs. One is named Favor and is broken to symbolize the breaking of the Mosaic Covenant by the disobedient people and God’s setting aside His favor or providential care to allow judgment to come upon them (Zechariah 11:10). The second staff, named Union, is broken to represent the breaking up of the nation by the Romans. Another prophetic reference is found in the thirty pieces of silver given to Zechariah after his work as a shepherd. He went to those he worked for and asked them to pay him what they thought he was worth. They gave him thirty pieces of silver, which he sarcastically calls a “handsome price” because it was such a small amount (Zechariah 11:13)—the price paid for a slave’s accidental death. The employers meant to insult Zechariah with this amount of money. Returning the insult, God tells Zechariah to “throw it to the potter,” and Zechariah tossed the money into the house of the Lord to be given to the potter. These actions are a shockingly accurate and detailed prophecy, for when Judas Iscariot bargained with the leaders of Israel to betray the Lord Jesus, he asked, “What are you willing to give me if I deliver him over to you?” The murderous cabal then counted out for Judas “thirty pieces of silver” (Matthew 26:15). That’s all they considered Jesus to be worth. Later, Judas was overcome with guilt for betraying Jesus, and, fulfilling Zechariah’s vivid prophecy, he threw the thirty silver coins into the temple (Matthew 27:3–5). The Jewish leaders used the thirty pieces of silver to buy a field from a potter, again as Zechariah had predicted (Matthew 27:6–10). It was in that field that Judas hanged himself. Matthew 27:4 saying, “I have sinned by betraying innocent blood.” But they said, “What is that to us? See to that yourself!” I have sinned: Ge 42:21,22 Ex 9:27 10:16,17 12:31 1Sa 15:24,30 1Ki 21:27 Ro 3:19 innocent: Mt 27:19,23,24,54 2Ki 24:4 Jer 26:15 Jon 1:14 Lu 23:22,41,47 Jn 19:7 Ac 13:28 Heb 7:26 1Pe 1:19 What: Mt 27:25 Ac 18:15-17 1Ti 4:2 Titus 1:16 1Jn 3:12 Rev 11:10 see: 1Sa 28:16-20 Job 13:4 16:2 Lu 16:25,26 See James Stalker's chapter on Judas Iscariot Matthew 27 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries JUDAS' VERDICT JESUS NOT GUILTY! Saying, “I have sinned (hamartano) - Sinned means in simple terms Judas missed the mark, which is an understatement in his case. If one were to classify severity of sins, this would probably be the greatest sin ever committed. Clearly, the Holy Spirit was at work, for Jesus taught that one of His roles was to convict of sin (John 16:8+). Convicted in his conscience, Judas now confesses. But the idiom "too little, too late" aptly applies to Judas' feeble, futile confession. By betraying (paradidomi) innocent (athoos) blood (haima).” - Judas confesses to the Sanhedrin but not to God and does not exhibit repentance. His declaration serves as a first hand testimony to the sinless life of Jesus, for he had been intimately associated with Him for 3 years. Here is a man who knew exactly Who Jesus was and yet he still rejected Him. THOUGHT - There is surely a lesson here -- one can have all the truth in the world presented to them about Jesus and even ostensibly receive it, but still be eternally lost because they refuse to bow their knee and surrender their will to Him in simple childlike faith (Mk 10:15+). And like Judas such individuals who are exposed to greater spiritual light will tragically experience a greater degree of eternal punishment! See Jesus' stern warning in Mt 11:21-24+. "Nothing in my hand I bring, Simply to the cross I cling; Naked, come to Thee for dress, Helpless, look to Thee for grace." The Sanhedrin ignore Judas assessment of Jesus' having innocent blood. The religious leaders could care less that Jesus is innocent, for their hearts are hardened and the necks stiffened to follow through with their murder of Jesus. Sin brings fear. Confession brings freedom. While this saying is certainly true for believers as John writes in 1Jn 1:9+, Judas demonstrates that confession without repentance does not bring freedom! I suppose this begs the question - Can a genuine believe confess and yet not repent? What has your personal experience been beloved?
Mateus 27
Ryle - Sin is, in truth, the hardest of all masters. In its service there is plenty of fair promises, but an utter dearth of performance. Its pleasures are but for a season. Its wages are sorrow, remorse, self-accusation, and too often death. Those who sow to the flesh, do indeed reap corruption. Are we tempted to commit sin? Let us remember the words of Scripture, "Your sin will find you out," and resist the temptation. Let us be sure that sooner or later, in this life or in the life to come, in this world or in the judgment-day, sin and the sinner will meet face to face, and have a bitter reckoning. Let us be sure that of all trades, sin is the most unprofitable. Judas, Achan, Gehazi, Ananias and Sapphira, all found it so to their cost. Well might Paul say, "What fruit had you in those things whereof you are now ashamed?" (Ro 6:21.) QUESTION - How did Judas die? ANSWER - The death of Judas Iscariot was a suicide committed after he was filled with remorse (but not repentance) for his betrayal of Jesus. Matthew and Luke (in the book of Acts) both mention some details of Judas’s death, and reconciling the details between the two accounts has presented some difficulties. Matthew says that Judas died by hanging. Here is the account in Matthew’s Gospel: "So Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself. The chief priests picked up the coins and said, ‘It is against the law to put this into the treasury, since it is blood money.’ So they decided to use the money to buy the potter’s field as a burial place for foreigners. That is why it has been called the Field of Blood to this day" (Matthew 27:5–8). Luke says that Judas fell into a field and that his body ruptured. Here is the account in Acts: "With the reward he got for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out. Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood" (Acts 1:18–19). Which account is correct? Did Judas die by hanging, or did he die by falling? Or are both true? A related question is, Did Judas buy the field, or did the priests buy the field? Concerning how Judas died, here is a simple reconciliation of the facts: Judas hanged himself in the potter’s field (Matthew 27:5), and that is how he died. Then, after his body had begun to decay and bloat, the rope broke, or the branch of the tree he was using broke, and his body fell, bursting open on the land of the potter’s field (Acts 1:18–19). Note that Luke does not say that Judas died from the fall, only that his body fell. The Acts passage presumes Judas’s hanging, as a man falling down in a field does not normally result in his body bursting open. Only decomposition and a fall from a height could cause a body to burst open. So Matthew mentions the actual cause of death, and Luke focuses more on the horror surrounding it. Concerning who paid for the field, here are two possible ways to reconcile the facts: 1) Judas was promised the thirty pieces of silver several days before Jesus’ arrest (Mark 14:11). Sometime during the days leading up to his betrayal of Jesus, Judas made arrangements to purchase a field, although no money had yet been transferred. After the deed was done, Judas was paid, but he then returned the money to the chief priests. The priests, who considered the silver to be blood money, completed the transaction that Judas had begun and bought the field. 2) When Judas threw the thirty pieces of silver down, the priests took the money and used it to buy the potter’s field (Matthew 27:7). Judas may not have purchased the field personally, but he provided the money for the transaction and could then be said to be the purchaser. Related Resources: Was Judas Iscariot forgiven / saved? Was Matthias or Paul God’s choice to replace Judas as the 12th apostle? Does the Bible record the death of the apostles? How did each of the apostles die?Why did Judas betray Jesus? Norman Geisler - Mt 27:5 (cf. Acts 1:18)—Did Judas die by hanging or by falling on rocks? PROBLEM: Matthew declares that Judas hanged himself. However, the Book of Acts says that he fell and his body burst open. SOLUTION: These accounts are not contradictory, but mutually complementary. Judas hung himself exactly as Matthew affirms that he did. The account in Acts simply adds that Judas fell, and his body opened up at the middle and his intestines gushed out. This is the very thing one would expect of someone who hanged himself from a tree over a cliff and fell on sharp rocks below. (When Critics Ask page 307) Walter Kaiser, et al - How Did Judas Die? Acts 1:18, Mt 27:5 While Luke’s description of Judas’s death is rather gory, Acts 1:18 would not be a problem were it not that Matthew seemingly has a different story. In Matthew’s account, “Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself” (Mt 27:5). Matthew also reports that the chief priests used the money “to buy the potter’s field as a burial place for foreigners.” Aren’t the two accounts contradictory? It is clear that Matthew and Luke have different concerns in mentioning the incident. Matthew is more interested in the purchase of the field, which he sees as a fulfillment of Scripture. He combines Zechariah 11:12–13 (the thirty pieces of silver and the potter) and Jeremiah 32:6–12 (buying a field), perhaps with overtones of Jeremiah 18:1–4 (going to the potter’s house), and links them all under Jeremiah’s name (see comment on Mt 27:9–10). Luke has another concern, which is that Judas got what he deserved, a horrible death. (A similar situation is reported in Acts 12:21–24, where the author narrates the story of Herod Agrippa I’s death.) The focus is not on the purchase of the field (which would have appeared a reward, especially to Jews for whom landowning in Palestine was important), but on his death in the field (which was ghastly). Both authors want to point out that the field was called “The Field of Blood,” thus memorializing the deed. Acts appears to connect the title to Judas’s blood in his death, while Matthew ties it to the fact that the blood money paid for the field. It is hardly surprising that the same name might mean different things to different people. A closer look at the two stories highlights gaps in the narrative that raise questions about the events. But the accounts are not necessarily contradictory. Acts is concerned that Judas’s money and name were connected to a field. Whether or not the chief priests actually purchased it, perhaps some time after Judas’s death, would not be a detail of concern to the author. His point was the general knowledge that Judas’s money went to the purchase, which resulted in the title “Field of Blood” being attached to the field. Another possible reason for the name, also a concern of Acts, was that Judas split open and his intestines poured out. Such a defacing of the body, probably with the concomitant result of the corpse being at least partially eaten by vultures and dogs, was horrible in the view of the Jews, for whom proper burial was important. In fact, they even valued forms of execution that did not deface the outside of the body (such as strangulation) over forms that defaced the body (such as stoning, the worst form in their eyes). Matthew points out that it was a guilt-motivated suicide, accomplished by the most common means, hanging. Suicide in Jewish literature is most often connected to shame or failure. (So 2 Sam 17:23; compare the other accounts of suicide in Old Testament history, which were normally to avoid a more shameful death.) However, since suicide by hanging was usually accomplished (at least by poorer people) by jumping out of a tree with a rope around one’s neck, it was not unusual (nor is it uncommon in India today) for the body to be ripped open in the process.1 I hesitate to say that this was exactly what happened, but it is certainly a plausible explanation. Therefore, we will never be fully certain about what happened at the death of Judas. What I have shown is that there are certainly credible explanations as to how the two accounts fit together. I have shown how it may well have happened, not how it must have happened. In doing so we see that there is no necessary contradiction. Yet what is important in reading these narratives is to focus on the points they are making, not on the horrible death. With Matthew we see that Scripture is fulfilled even while those fulfilling it are driven by guilt and shame to their own self-destruction. And with Acts we see that sin does have consequences: Judas not only lost his office through his treachery, but came to a shameful end as well, an end memorialized in the place near Jerusalem named “Field of Blood.” (Hard Saying of the Bible page 475) Matthew 27:6 The chief priests took the pieces of silver and said, “It is not lawful to put them into the temple treasury, since it is the price of blood.” It is not: Mt 23:24 Lu 6:7-9 Jn 18:28 to put: De 23:18 Isa 61:8 because: The Jews considered it was strictly forbidden by the Divine law to bring any filthy or iniquitous gain into the temple. For this reason they now refused to allow this money to be placed in the chest in the temple, amongst the former contributions for its repairs. In this, they were right enough, but by the very act of refusing this money, they proved themselves to be gross perverters of the spirit of God's requirements: they saw not that it was much less lawful for them, who had hired Judas to this sordid action, to be employed in the service of the temple. Those that "bear the vessels of the Lord," ought to be holy. Thus our Lord's words, "Ye blind guides! ye strain at a gnat and swallow a camel." See James Stalker's chapter on Judas Iscariot Matthew 27 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries BLOOD MONEY TAINTED MONEY The chief priests (archiereus) took the pieces of silver and said, “It is not lawful (exesti) to put them into the temple treasury (korban), since it is the price of blood (haima)” - Ever the religious legalistic hypocrites, the chief priests are more concerned with their ceremonial rules (possibly related to Dt. 23:18) then with the true letter of the law. They are not about to put tainted "blood money" in the temple treasury! Note that the fact that they would not put the silver in the temple treasury was essentially an admission that they had paid money in order to bring about Jesus’ death. Talk about hypocrisy "on steroids." They would not break their ceremonial rules but were willing to break the law (Do not murder Ex 20:13) to put Jesus to death! The chief priests had Christ's blood all over their hands! Spurgeon Base hypocrites. They had a qualmish conscience about the harmless pieces of money, but none concerning you murder they had perpetrated! They remind us of those who are zealous for their church, and yet continue in sin. Bob
Mateus 27
Ryle says: “They little thought what they were doing. They little thought that unwittingly they were providing the most complete evidence of the truth of Christ’s coming resurrection. They were actually making it impossible to prove that any deception or imposition had occurred. Their seal, their guard, their precautions were all to become witnesses. In just a few hours that Christ has risen, their own devices became instruments to show forth God’s glory.” . . . II. God, in His providence, lays the groundwork for defending His Son’s truthfulness and His persecutor’s deceitfulness. So once again God’s providence deploys the insults and the schemes of Jesus avowed enemies in order to vindicate Him, to confirm His teaching and to bring Him glory. See, their words were shown to be false and their deceitfulness was revealed while Christ truthfulness was doubly vindicated and confirmed. All the extra measures that they took to secure Jesus’ burial ended up drawing attention to His resurrection. And friends, you wouldn’t make up a story like this. You’d never make up a story about the disciples not caring enough about the Lord Jesus to take His body down and give it a decent burial. You’d never make up a story about a member of the Sanhedrin coming to bury the Lord Jesus Christ. And Matthew will later on mention the story that was being spread by the Jewish leaders that Jesus had been stolen by His disciples. That very fact lets you know that that was the main way of explaining what had happened to the Lord Jesus Christ. And that fact lets you know that the tomb was indisputably empty. The Jewish leaders would not have made up a story that the tomb was empty if they could have proved it in any other way that it was not. And so the very fact that Matthew includes the story lets you know that the Jewish leaders admitted the emptiness of the tomb, but everything they had done precluded the disciples being the ones who had rescued Jesus. Matthew is showing you the irony of God’s providence here. That all the designs of men are used for the glory of Christ. Matthew 27:58 This man went to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus. Then Pilate ordered it to be given to him. Mk 15:44-46 Lu 23:52,53 See Trial and Crucifixion of Jesus - Parallel Passages Matthew 27 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Related Passages: Deuteronomy 21:22-23+ If a man has committed a sin worthy of death and he is put to death, and you hang him on a tree, 23 his corpse shall not hang all night on the tree, but you shall surely bury him on the same day (for he who is hanged is accursed of God), so that you do not defile your land which the LORD your God gives you as an inheritance. A SECRET DISCIPLE'S NEW FOUND BOLDNESS This man went to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus. Then Pilate ordered it to be given to him - Joseph sought to give Jesus a proper burial. Notice that John 19:38+ described "Joseph of Arimathea, (as) being a disciple of Jesus, but a secret one for fear of the Jews." This bold and potentially dangerous action by Joseph is clear indication that he no longer is a secret disciple. He counted the cost (Mk 8:34-36+). Mark 15:43+ adds some detail - "Joseph of Arimathea came, a prominent member of the Council (Sanhedrin - sunedrion), who himself was waiting (prosdechomai) for the kingdom of God; and he gathered up courage (tolmao) and went in before Pilate, and asked for the body of Jesus." Pulpit Commentary comments: “It was the Roman custom to leave criminals hanging on the cross for days, till their bodies were devoured by birds and wild animals; the Jewish Law enacted that when bodies were penally suspended, they should be taken down and buried before night (… Deuteronomy 21:22, 23), that the land might not be defiled. Tomorrow (beginning at sunset), being a specially solemn day, as combining the sabbath and the Passover celebration, the Jews were particularly anxious that the crucified bodies of our Lord and the two robbers should be taken away and put out of sight before the sabbath began.....We must remember that this act of Joseph and his friends was not only a bold proceeding, but an act of great self-denial. Contact with a corpse caused ceremonial defilement of seven days’ duration, and thus they would be debarred from taking their part in the great Paschal solemnity, with its solemn and joyful observances. But the love of Jesus and the unselfish desire to render him honor enabled them to rise superior to religious prejudices, and willingly to make the required sacrifice.”” David Turner points out that "The bodies of those who had died by crucifixion were often not given a proper burial, but left on the crosses to disintegrate or thrown on the ground to be disposed of by scavengers and natural decay. But Jewish piety objected to any body being left unburied (Deut 21:22–23), and so there was provision there for the burial of those executed (Josephus, War 4.317) in a common burial plot rather than in a family tomb. To provide proper burial for someone otherwise unprovided for was a valued act of charity (Tob 1:16–18); cf. the provision for the burial of “strangers” in 27:7. But the provision of a new, rock-cut tomb for Jesus was quite exceptional, and indicates that Joseph was motivated by more than conventional piety. It is, like the act of the woman who anointed Jesus in 26:6–13, a quite extravagant act of devotion. (Quoted by Paul Apple) Bob