Jesus in the Four Gospels

  • Thread starter Thread starter patrick457
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I know this question is not exactly new, but… regarding Matthew, what is the most accepted explanation as for who “Zacharias son of Barachias” is (noting that Luke doesn’t specify which Zacharias it is)?
It is my understanding that couldn’t be Zechariah, the son of Baruch because, unless this is a transcription corruption, these 2 are different names, but it could also be a transcription error if it was referring to Zechariah the son of Jehoiada, although Baruch seems closer to me to Barachias than Jehoaida 🤷
 
I’m still yet to finish reading it all, but this is an excellent piece of analysis! 👍

I hereby nominate you to the next Pontifical Biblical Commission, and invite you to re-write the introductions to all the four gospels in the next NAB (the “R-NAB-RE”, if you will!)

Seriously, this is excellent work. I’ll try to put my 2 cents in later on. God bless you, Patrick. You are in my prayers. (Do you do this for a living, or is it just a hobby?) 👍
 
farpinho said:
I know this question is not exactly new, but… regarding Matthew, what is the most accepted explanation as for who “Zacharias son of Barachias” is (noting that Luke doesn’t specify which Zacharias it is)?
It is my understanding that couldn’t be Zechariah, the son of Baruch because, unless this is a transcription corruption, these 2 are different names, but it could also be a transcription error if it was referring to Zechariah the son of Jehoiada, although Baruch seems closer to me to Barachias than Jehoaida 🤷
Click to expand...
As you know, there is an OT incident which may be what is being alluded to here: the murder of Zechariah son of Jehoiada in 2 Chronicles 24. The thing is, however, that “Zechariah son of Jehoiada” only appears in the Masoretic version of 2 Chronicles 24:20; the Septuagint gives this man’s name as “Azarias son of Iodae.”

Then the Spirit of God clothed Zechariah the son of Jehoiada the priest, and he stood above the people, and said to them, “Thus says God, ‘Why do you break the commandments of the LORD, so that you cannot prosper? Because you have forsaken the LORD, he has forsaken you.’” But they conspired against him, and by command of the king they stoned him with stones in the court of the house of the LORD. Thus Joash the king did not remember the kindness that Jehoiada, Zechariah’s father, had shown him, but killed his son. And when he was dying, he said, “May the LORD see and avenge!”

(2 Chronicles 24:20-22 ESV)

And a divine spirit entered Azarias the son of Iodae the priest, and he stood above the people and said, “This is what the Lord says: Why do you transgress the Lord’s commandments? And you will not prosper. Because you have abandoned the Lord, he will also abandon you.” And they plotted against him and stoned him by command of King Ioas in the court of the Lord’s house. And Ioas did not remember the mercy that Iodae his father had done with him, and he put his son to death. And as he was dying, he said, “May the Lord see, and let him judge.”

(2 Chronicles 24:20-22 NETS)

Josephus follows the Masoretic reading at this point (Antiquities 9.166-169):

But when he died, after having lived years, a man just and kind in all things, and was buried in the royal tombs in Hierosolyma because he had restored the kingship to the family of David, King Joas gave up his concern for God. The chiefs of the crowd degenerated together with him so that they offended against what was just and regarded as best among them. God, however, was displeased by this change on the part of the king and the others; he sent the prophets to raise their voices against what they were doing and to make them cease from vileness. They, however, had so strong a lust and terrible desire for this that, neither by what those who were before them had suffered, along with entire household, in punishment for their outrages against the ordinances nor by what the prophets kept predicting, were they persuaded to change their minds and turn away from those things to which they had turned when acting lawlessly. Rather, the king, unmindful of his father’s benefactions, even directed that Zacharias, the son of the high priest Iodas, be killed in the sacred precinct by throwing [stones]. [He did this] because God had appointed [Zacharias] to prophesy. Standing in the middle of the crowd, he advised both them and the king to do what was just, and predicted that they would undergo great punishment if they were not persuaded. But as Zacharias was dying, being put to death in a cruel and violent way, he made God the witness and avenger of what he suffered in return for his kind advice and the things his father had obtained for Joas.

The prophet Zechariah is indeed identified as “son of Berechiah, son of Iddo” in two places in the opening verses of the prophetic book (1:1, 7). Ezra 5:1 and 6:14 refer to Haggai and Zechariah son of Iddo the Seer. Nehemiah 12:16 includes Zechariah son of Iddo in a list of priests and Levites, but it is not certain that this Zechariah is the same as the prophet. Neither Ezra nor Nehemiah identifies Zechariah as son of Berechiah, although a Berechiah is named in Nehemiah 3:4, 30; 6:18. Also of note is the reference in Isaiah 8:2 (Masoretic) to a Zechariah who is called “son of Jeberechiah:” for some reason, he is identified as “Zacharias son of Barachias” in the Septuagint version.

So the questions are: why does Matthew include “son of Barachias” without “son of Iddo” contra Zechariah 1:1, 7? Is the “son of Barachias” a gloss? Did Matthew (or someone else) conflate the different Zechariahs of the OT? Is “son of Barachias” meant to refer to the “Zechariah” of Isaiah 8:2, Zechariah 1:1, 7, or 2 Chronicles 24:20-22?

(And yes, I know I didn’t give you an answer, simply because the consensus is that there is no consensus. 😛 BTW, there’s actually a book dedicated specifically to this topic: Charlene McAfee Moss’s The Zechariah Tradition and the Gospel of Matthew.)
 
RPRPsych said:
I’m still yet to finish reading it all, but this is an excellent piece of analysis! 👍

I hereby nominate you to the next Pontifical Biblical Commission, and invite you to re-write the introductions to all the four gospels in the next NAB (the “R-NAB-RE”, if you will!)

Seriously, this is excellent work. I’ll try to put my 2 cents in later on. God bless you, Patrick. You are in my prayers. (Do you do this for a living, or is it just a hobby?) 👍
Click to expand...
This is just something I do in my spare time. Which, as of late, is almost non-existent.
 
(Y’know, folks, for some reason I have the odd feeling that I’m looking at Matthew in a more in-depth way than Mark. Is it because the other gospels aren’t too much of a ‘familiar territory’ for me? Anyways, this Matthaean passion thing will perhaps take a bit of time. 🤷)

Then Judas Iscariot, who was one of the twelve, went to the chief priests in order to betray him to them. And when they heard it, they were glad and promised to give him money. And he sought an opportunity to betray him.

(Mark 14:10-11)

Then one of the twelve, whose name was Judas Iscariot, went to the chief priests and said, “What will you give me if I deliver him over to you?” And they paid him thirty pieces of silver. And from that moment he sought an opportunity to betray him.

(Matthew 26:14-16)

Matthew shifts the course of the narrative sharply once again to concentrate on Judas. Again we see Matthew’s typical style of providing dialogue contrasting with Mark’s straight, bald narrative. In Matthew, one of Judas’ motivations for handing Jesus over is apparently money, as is implied by his question: “What will you give me if I hand Him over to you?” Earlier in the gospel, Jesus has already spoken about the corrupting power of wealth (6:19-21, 24):

“Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal, but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.
“No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and money.”

Here again we see Matthew’s ‘good’ disciples gradually starting to fall away in the eve of the Passion. For Matthew, Judas represents the wrong side of discipleship: his greed led him to abandon the treasure worthy of life’s commitment in exchange for thirty silver pieces, the equivalent price of a slave (Exodus 21:32 “If the ox gores a slave, male or female, the owner shall give to their master thirty shekels of silver, and the ox shall be stoned”). There also might be another allusion here, this time to Zechariah 11, which as we’ll see plays a huge part in Matthew’s treatment of Judas:

So it was annulled on that day, and the sheep traders, who were watching me, knew that it was the word of the LORD. Then I said to them, “If it seems good to you, give me my wages; but if not, keep them.” And they weighed out as my wages thirty pieces of silver. Then the LORD said to me, “Throw it to the potter”—the lordly price at which I was priced by them. So I took the thirty pieces of silver and threw them into the house of the LORD, to the potter.

(Zechariah 11:11-13)

Matthew caps off the episode with a comment that Judas started seeking ways to hand Jesus over apo tote, “from that time.” This phrase appears two other crucial moments within the gospel: when Jesus commences preaching (4:17 “From that time Jesus began to preach…”) and when Jesus becomes fixated on His death (16:21 “From that time Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things…”). The final segment of the gospel is about to start. The word for “opportunity” here is eukairia (compare Mark 14:11 “he began to look for an opportune time/way (eukairōs) to hand him over”), the root of which is kairos (that word again!). Kairos is the word which is used in Matthew to refer both to the endtimes (24:45; cf. Mark 13:33) when God’s salvific act is about to take place, and to Jesus’ own death (26:18). So ironically, Judas and Jesus seek the same kairos, but whereas one does it for monetary gain, the other does it to give up His life for the many.
 
http://www.welcometohosanna.com/LIFE_OF_JESUS/JESUS_LIFE_PIX/lastSupperArrangement.jpg

And on the first day of Unleavened Bread, when they sacrificed the Passover lamb, his disciples said to him, “Where will you have us go and prepare for you to eat the Passover?” And he sent two of his disciples and said to them, “Go into the city, and a man carrying a jar of water will meet you. Follow him, and wherever he enters, say to the master of the house, ‘The Teacher says, Where is my guest room, where I may eat the Passover with my disciples?’ And he will show you a large upper room furnished and ready; there prepare for us.” And the disciples set out and went to the city and found it just as he had told them, and they prepared the Passover.

And when it was evening, he came with the twelve. And as they were reclining at table and eating, Jesus said, “Truly, I say to you, one of you will betray me, one who is eating with me.” They began to be sorrowful and to say to him one after another, “Is it I?” He said to them, “It is one of the twelve, one who is dipping bread into the dish with me. For the Son of Man goes as it is written of him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been better for that man if he had not been born.”

And as they were eating, he took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to them, and said, “Take; this is my body.” And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, and they all drank of it. And he said to them, “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many. Truly, I say to you, I will not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God.”

(Mark 14:12-25)

Now on the first day of Unleavened Bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying, “Where will you have us prepare for you to eat the Passover?” He said, “Go into the city to a certain man and say to him, ‘The Teacher says, My time is at hand. I will keep the Passover at your house with my disciples.’” And the disciples did as Jesus had directed them, and they prepared the Passover.

When it was evening, he reclined at table with the twelve. And as they were eating, he said, “Truly, I say to you, one of you will betray me.” And they were very sorrowful and began to say to him one after another, “Is it I, Lord?” He answered, “He who has dipped his hand in the dish with me will betray me. The Son of Man goes as it is written of him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been better for that man if he had not been born.” Judas, who would betray him, answered, “Is it I, Rabbi?” He said to him, “You have said so.”

Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.” And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. I tell you I will not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.”

(Matthew 26:17-29)

It is the eve of the Passover, and Jesus commands His disciples to find a place for them in the city. Again, Matthew focuses only on the necessary details. The most striking difference Matthew has with Mark on this point is that while Mark chooses to illustrate Jesus’ prophetic knowledge by having Him give a detailed description of the man the disciples need to find, Matthew here chooses to portray Jesus’ authority, and with it, the disciples’ obedience. “And the disciples did as Jesus had directed them.”

Matthew’s Jesus says, “My time (kairos) is at hand.” There’s that little word again. Clearly, for Matthew, Jesus’ death is the ‘endtime’ of the old age and the beginning of the new. The event also serves as a sort of proleptic preview of the actual end of days. There’s a common mistake which assumes that the abbreviation AD (Anno Domini ‘the year of the Lord’) stands for ‘after (the) death’ of Jesus. Funny enough, that’s what Matthew seems to envision: he sees the death of Jesus as the turning point of history.
 
It might be worth reposting the very first post on Matthew I wrote in this context:

In Matthew’s version of the Last Supper, when Jesus announces to His disciples that one of them will hand Him over, they begin to ask Him: “Is it I, Lord?” After giving a clue as to who the betrayer would be, it is Judas’ turn to ask. “Is it I, Rabbi?” Jesus then gives an oblique answer to Judas (“You have said so”), abruptly ending the scene. (26:20-25)

This is a unique characteristic of Matthew: he has different characters address Jesus using different titles, depending on whether they have a positive or negative role in the story. Those who willingly follow Jesus address Him almost always as Kyrios, “Lord” (8:2-8; 9:27-31; 14:28; 17:4; 20:30), which emphasizes the authority of Jesus and the divine power at work in Him. By contrast, those antagonistic to Jesus address Him as “teacher,” which in Matthew is a designation never used by Jesus’ followers (8:19; 12:38; 17:24; 19:16; 22:16). Indeed, Matthew has Peter and the two blind men address Jesus as “Lord” when Mark has Peter and Bartimaeus saying “Rabbi” (17:4; 20:33; cf. Mark 9:5; 10:51); the other instance where Peter calls Jesus “Rabbi” in Mark (when he finds the fig tree withered; 10:51), meanwhile, is simply not found in Matthew’s gospel.

Matthew has thus provided a clue for his audience as to where a given character’s loyalty lies. To a discerning ear, Judas has basically ‘outed’ himself by his noun choice: “Rabbi,” which also happens to be one of the titles for which Matthew’s Jesus has condemned the scribes and the Pharisees (23:7-8). The following episode in Gethsemane is thus highly ironic:

While he was still speaking, Judas came, one of the twelve, and with him a great crowd with swords and clubs, from the chief priests and the elders of the people. Now the betrayer had given them a sign, saying, “The one I will kiss is the man; seize him.” And he came up to Jesus at once and said, “Greetings, Rabbi!” And he kissed him. Jesus said to him, “Friend, do what you came to do.” Then they came up and laid hands on Jesus and seized him.

It is as if Matthew’s Jesus doesn’t need to exercise any supernatural ability to read Judas’ intentions; his words serve as code language that signifies his treachery. To the arrest party, Judas gives a kiss as an agreed-upon sign, but for Jesus (and by extension, the audience) he gives no less a sign - the word “Rabbi.” Judas is the only character in Matthew to use either one. In other words, Judas speaks like the enemies of Jesus, failing to perceive his Master’s true identity.​

In Matthew, Jesus’ “woe” to Judas takes on a whole new level, precisely because of his emphasis on reward and judgment. Judas was entirely reponsible for his decisions: to reject Jesus for money dooms Judas to a terrible fate. For Matthew, Judas was not just guilty of avarice, but also (as his calling Jesus “Rabbi” shows) broken faith.

Jesus answers Judas’ question: “You have said so.” He also answers Caiaphas and Pilate using these same words. In all of these cases the questioner has stated the truth in question form; Jesus’ reply confirms that truth. All in all, in a matter of speaking, Judas has condemned himself with his own words.
 
We go over to the Last Supper proper. Matthew’s version is more or less close to Mark’s; the difference lies mainly in stylistic choices (Matthew explicitly includes the imperatives “eat” and “drink” where Mark presupposes the actions) and theological perspectives.

Let’s start first with the similarities. In both Matthew and Mark, Jesus’ gestures harken back to the two feeding stories (14:13-21; 15:32-19; cf. Mark 6:31-44; 8:1-9). In all these instances, Jesus is said to “take” bread, and after “blessing” it, “breaks” and “gives” it to the disciples. The two feeding pericopes in the two gospels are rich in biblical symbolism: the “wilderness” setting recalls God’s feeding the sons of Israel with manna in the desert (Exodus 16); the multiplication of food brings to mind similar events in Elijah’s (1 Kings 17) and Elisha’s (2 Kings 4:42-44) life. There is also a subtle reference here to the image of future salvation as a great banquet which God prepares (Isaiah 26:6-9). These two stories take place in Jewish and gentile territory, respectively, perhaps indicating the universality of Jesus’ mission.

In Mark, the feeding stories seem to be a sort of summary of Jesus’ entire mission - to gather and nourish both Israel and the gentiles. For Mark, to fail to grasp the event’s meaning is tantamount to failing to understand Jesus Himself. Notably, Mark mentions that the disciples, blind as they are, do not understand “the loaves.” (Mark 6:52; 8:17-21) Matthew meanwhile seems to emphasize more how the feedings were acts of compassion: throughout the gospel, Matthew’s Jesus is led to act due to His compassion over the people. This is what triggers His healing activity (4:23-5:1) and what leads Him to call disciples to share in His work (9:36-38).

In any case, Jesus’ actions over the bread and wine state the reality of His impending death: the bread is His body which will be broken and the wine is His blood which will be poured out. The “cup” was already used earlier in the gospel as a symbol of Jesus’ death (20:22; cf. Mark 10:45), and will be used again in Gethsemane (26:39; cf. Mark 14:36). In both gospels, Jesus speaks of the wine as “my blood of the covenant,” which harkens back to the ratification of the Mosaic covenant:

Moses came and told the people all the words of the LORD and all the rules. And all the people answered with one voice and said, “All the words that the LORD has spoken we will do.” And Moses wrote down all the words of the LORD. He rose early in the morning and built an altar at the foot of the mountain, and twelve pillars, according to the twelve tribes of Israel. And he sent young men of the people of Israel, who offered burnt offerings and sacrificed peace offerings of oxen to the LORD. And Moses took half of the blood and put it in basins, and half of the blood he threw against the altar. Then he took the Book of the Covenant and read it in the hearing of the people. And they said, “All that the LORD has spoken we will do, and we will be obedient.” And Moses took the blood and threw it on the people and said, “Behold the blood of the covenant that the LORD has made with you in accordance with all these words.”

(Exodus 24:3-8)

Matthew thus sees the covenant renewed and embodied in the person of Jesus. For the author, Jesus, the living bond between God and His people, lives up to the name that the angel has given Him at the beginning of the gospel: “God with us.” Throughout Matthew’s gospel this bond is repeatedly affirmed. Jesus is there whenever two or three are gathered in His name (18:20); giving a cup of water to a “little one” equals giving it to Jesus, who is in solidarity with them (10:42); an act of compassion or hospitality offered to “the least” is thereby done to Jesus (25:31-46). Most importantly, Jesus at the end of the gospel promises to be with His disciples “until the end of the age” (28:20). Covenant, there, is in the gospel an important symbol of redemption. By giving His body and blood to His disciples, Jesus forges with them a new covenant in which the disciples are to participate.

The blood is said to be poured out “for the many.” There’s something here that gets lost in translation: Matthew uses the word peri, while Mark uses yper. Both words essentially mean the same thing (‘for’), but Matthew’s version highlights the OT allusion more clearly by using the same word used in Isaiah 53:4, 10 in the Septuagint where the Servant is said to atone for the sins of the many. As we see, Matthew is very big on the identification of Jesus as the Servant of God who atones the sins of His people: the angel at the beginning of the gospel gives the infant the name ‘Jesus’ (from Hebrew/Aramaic Yēšūă‘, a contraction of Yəhōšu‘a “Yh(wh) is salvation”; cf. ‘Joshua’), “for he will save his people from their sins.” (1:21) Matthew quotes Isaiah’s Servant texts and applies them to Jesus at least twice in the gospel (8:17, cf. Isaiah 53:4; 12:17-21, cf. Isaiah 42:1-4). In both cases Jesus is presented as the Servant who liberates His people by taking away their burdens and healing them of their infirmities.
 
Anyone got any figurative tomatoes or cabbages they’d to throw at me?
 


The supper ends with a promise of hope: “Now I tell you, from now on I will not drink of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it anew with you in the kingdom of my Father.” It is, in essence, another passion prediction, but one which does not give details of the actual circumstances, and one which uses the classical images of the biblical tradition: “drinking of the fruit of the vine” and sharing in the “kingdom” of God. Matthew’s version has some slight difference from Mark’s (Mark 14:25 “Amen, I tell you that I will never drink of the fruit of the vine anymore until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God”). Matthew has the phrase ap’ arti “from hence,” which intensifies Jesus’ awareness of the impending moment. He also includes the words “with you,” which once again ties in with his positive view of the disciples: the disciples who shared the Passover with Jesus will eat and drink with Him again in the glory of the kingdom of “[His] Father” (another Matthaean touch there).
 
And when they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives. And Jesus said to them, “You will all fall away, for it is written, ‘I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered.’ But after I am raised up, I will go before you to Galilee.” Peter said to him, “Even though they all fall away, I will not.” And Jesus said to him, “Truly, I tell you, this very night, before the rooster crows twice, you will deny me three times.” But he said emphatically, “If I must die with you, I will not deny you.” And they all said the same.

(Mark 14:26-31)

And when they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives. Then Jesus said to them, “You will all fall away because of me this night. For it is written, ‘I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock will be scattered.’ But after I am raised up, I will go before you to Galilee.” Peter answered him, “Though they all fall away because of you, I will never fall away.” Jesus said to him, “Truly, I tell you, this very night, before the rooster crows, you will deny me three times.” Peter said to him, “Even if I must die with you, I will not deny you!” And all the disciples said the same.

(Matthew 26:30-35)

There isn’t much difference between the two at this point. Matthew has the words “because of me” in Jesus’ prediction, which emphasizes the bond between Jesus and His disciples. This bond is ironically reaffirmed by Peter: “Though they all fall away because of you, I will never fall away.” As in Mark, the cross proves to be the stumbling-block, the skandalon, which causes Peter to “fall away” (skandalizomai). Matthew’s Jesus had already condemned Peter’s words of concern (“Far be it from you, Lord! This shall never happen to you,” 16:22) as a rejection of His stated notion of messiahsip, as a “stumbling-block.” Matthew connects the Caesarea Philippi scene and this scene together, in that in both instances Peter directly contradicts Jesus’ own prophetic words. While insisting on his determination to remain with Jesus, Peter uses words reminiscent of Jesus’ own teaching on discipleship (“Even if I must die with you…”, cf. 10:38-39; 16:24-25 “Whoever finds his life will lose it…”).

As an aside, let’s compare how the Caesarea Philippi pericope plays out in Mark and Matthew:

And Jesus went on with his disciples to the villages of Caesarea Philippi. And on the way he asked his disciples, “Who do people say that I am?” And they told him, “John the Baptist; and others say, Elijah; and others, one of the prophets.” And he asked them, “But who do you say that I am?” Peter answered him, “You are the Christ.” And he strictly charged them to tell no one about him.

And he began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes and be killed, and after three days rise again. And he said this plainly. And Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. But turning and seeing his disciples, he rebuked Peter and said, “Get behind me, Satan! For you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on the things of man.”

And calling the crowd to him with his disciples, he said to them, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake and the gospel’s will save it. For what does it profit a man to gain the whole world and forfeit his soul? For what can a man give in return for his soul? For whoever is ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him will the Son of Man also be ashamed when he comes in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.” And he said to them, “Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God after it has come with power.”

(Mark 8:27-38, 9:1)

Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?” And they said, “Some say John the Baptist, others say Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” Then he strictly charged the disciples to tell no one that he was the Christ.

From that time Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day be raised. And Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him, saying, “Far be it from you, Lord! This shall never happen to you.” But he turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are a hindrance to me. For you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on the things of man.”

Then Jesus told his disciples, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what shall a man give in return for his soul? For the Son of Man is going to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay each person according to what he has done. Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.”

(Matthew 16:13-28)
 
And they went to a place called Gethsemane. And he said to his disciples, “Sit here while I pray.” And he took with him Peter and James and John, and began to be greatly distressed and troubled. And he said to them, “My soul is very sorrowful, even to death. Remain here and watch.” And going a little farther, he fell on the ground and prayed that, if it were possible, the hour might pass from him. And he said, “Abba, Father, all things are possible for you. Remove this cup from me. Yet not what I will, but what you will.” And he came and found them sleeping, and he said to Peter, “Simon, are you asleep? Could you not watch one hour? Watch and pray that you may not enter into temptation. The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.” And again he went away and prayed, saying the same words. And again he came and found them sleeping, for their eyes were very heavy, and they did not know what to answer him. And he came the third time and said to them, “Are you still sleeping and taking your rest? It is enough; the hour has come. The Son of Man is betrayed into the hands of sinners. Rise, let us be going; see, my betrayer is at hand.”

(Mark 14:32-42)

Then Jesus went with them to a place called Gethsemane, and he said to his disciples, “Sit here, while I go over there and pray.” And taking with him Peter and the two sons of Zebedee, he began to be sorrowful and troubled. Then he said to them, “My soul is very sorrowful, even to death; remain here, and watch with me.” And going a little farther he fell on his face and prayed, saying, “My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as you will.” And he came to the disciples and found them sleeping. And he said to Peter, “So, could you not watch with me one hour? Watch and pray that you may not enter into temptation. The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.” Again, for the second time, he went away and prayed, “My Father, if this cannot pass unless I drink it, your will be done.” And again he came and found them sleeping, for their eyes were heavy. So, leaving them again, he went away and prayed for the third time, saying the same words again. Then he came to the disciples and said to them, “Sleep and take your rest later on. See, the hour is at hand, and the Son of Man is betrayed into the hands of sinners. Rise, let us be going; see, my betrayer is at hand.”

(Matthew 26:36-46)

Matthew highlights once again the bond between Jesus and His disciples: “Jesus went with them.” His instructions to the disciples may be an allusion to the instruction Abraham gives upon arriving at the place for the sacrifice of Isaac ( “Stay here with the donkey; I and the boy will go over there and worship and come again to you,” Genesis 22:5).
 
patrick457 said:
Matthew highlights once again the bond between Jesus and His disciples: “Jesus went with them.” His instructions to the disciples may be an allusion to the instruction Abraham gives upon arriving at the place for the sacrifice of Isaac ( “Stay here with the donkey; I and the boy will go over there and worship and come again to you,” Genesis 22:5).
Click to expand...
The bond is also emphasized in Jesus’ words: “remain here, and watch with me.” (Compare Mark’s “remain here and watch.”) The command to “watch,” or literally, “stay awake,” recalls Jesus’ urgent instructions to “watch…for you know neither the day nor the hour.” (25:13) The connection between the Passion and the end of an age is again being made here: the kairos is drawing near.

Jesus prays, doing Himself what He taught others to do. (A strong Matthaean motif here. Remember Jesus condemning the scribes and the Pharisees for not performing what they preach?) He “[falls] on his face” (a phrase connoting intense adoration and respect, cf. Genesis 17:3, 17: Numbers 14:5; 2 Samuel 9:6; 1 Kings 18:39; cf. Mark’s “he fell on the ground,” 14:35) and asks that the cup be removed - “nevertheless, not as I will, but as you will.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top